Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Authority 2015.pdf
Toronto and Region onserwation Authority MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY Annual #1/15 January 30, 2015 The Authority Meeting Annual #1/15, was held in Weston Rooms A & B, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, January 30, 2015. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to order at 10:35 a.m. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Maria Augimeri Jack Ballinger David Barrow Ben Cachola Ronald Chopowick Vincent Crisanti Glenn De Baeremaeker Michael Di Biase Justin Di Ciano Chris Fonseca Rob Ford Jack Heath Jennifer Innis Mujeeb Khan Colleen Jordan Matt Mahoney Giorgio Mammoliti Glenn Mason Mike Mattos Ron Moeser Jennifer O'Connell Gerri Lynn O'Connor Linda Pabst Anthony Perruzza Gino Rosati John Sprovieri Cynthia Thorburn Jim Tovey 1 Member Vice Chair & Chair Elect Member Member Member Member Member Member Vice Chair Elect Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Outgoing Chair Member Member Member Member Member Member ANNUAL MEETING O Canada was performed by the Grade 3 class of Shoreham Public School. APPOINTMENTS TO TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY FOR 2015 -2016 The Secretary- Treasurer advised that all the persons listed below have been duly appointed and are entitled to sit as Members of this Authority for the 2015 -2016 year, or until their successors are appointed. ADJALA- TOSORONTIO /MONO Glenn Mason DURHAM Jack Ballinger Colleen Jordan Jennifer O'Connell TORONTO Paul Ainslie Maria Augimeri Ben Cachola Ronald Chopowick Vincent Crisanti Glenn De Baeremaeker Justin J. Di Ciano Rob Ford Mujeeb Khan Giorgio Mammoliti Mike Mattos Ron Moeser Anthony Perruzza Cynthia Thorburn PEEL Chris Fonseca Jennifer Innis Matt Mahoney John Sprovieri Jim Tovey YORK David Barrow Michael Di Biase Jack Heath Linda Pabst Gino Rosati 2 The meeting was turned over to Brian Denney, Secretary- Treasurer, to conduct the elections. RES. #A1 /15 - APPOINTMENT OF SCRUTINEERS Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Ben Cachola THAT Mr. Paul Speck, Senior Vice President, March Canada Ltd. and Mr. Jonathan Wigley, Partner, Gardiner Roberts LLP, be appointed as scrutineers for the election of officers, if required. CARRIED CHAIR OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Maria Augimeri was nominated by Glenn De Baeremaeker. RES. #A2 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT nominations for the office of Chair of the Authority be closed. CARRIED Maria Augimeri was declared elected by acclamation as Chair of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. VICE CHAIR OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Michael Di Biase was nominated by David Barrow. Jack Heath was nominated by Ron Moeser. RES. #A3 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Maria Augimeri Seconded by: Ben Cachola THAT nominations for the office of Vice Chair of the Authority be closed. Cd_1:7TI�7 Michael Di Blase was declared elected as Vice Chair of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. 3 REGION OF DURHAM REPRESENTATIVE ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Colleen Jordan was nominated by Jack Heath. Jennifer O'Connell was nominated by Colleen Jordan. RES. #A4 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Mujeeb Khan THAT nominations for the Region of Durham representative on the Executive Committee be closed. CARRIED Colleen Jordan and Jennifer O'Connell were declared elected by acclamation as a Region of Durham representatives on the Executive Committee, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1/15. REGION OF PEEL REPRESENTATIVES ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Jennifer Innis was nominated by John Sprovieri. John Sprovieri was nominated by Michael Di Biase but declined to sit for the position. Chris Fonseca was nominated by John Sprovieri. Jim Tovey was nominated by Glenn De Baeremaeker but declined to sit for the position. RES. #A5 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT nominations for the Region of Peel representatives on the Executive Committee be closed. CARRIED Jennifer Innis and Chris Fonseca were declared elected by acclamation as the Region of Peel representatives on the Executive Committee, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1/17. REGION OF YORK REPRESENTATIVES ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE David Barrow was nominated by Michael Di Blase. Jack Heath was nominated by Colleen Jordan but declined to sit for the position. E RES. #A6 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT nominations for the Region of York representatives on the Executive Committee be closed. CARRIED David Barrow was declared elected by acclamation as the Region of York representative on the Executive Committee, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1 /17. CITY OF TORONTO REPRESENTATIVES ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Glenn De Baeremaeker was nominated by Ron Moeser. Ron Moeser was nominated by Glenn De Baeremaeker. Giorgio Mammoliti was nominated by Maria Augimeri. Vincent Crisanti was nominated by Michael Di Biase. Mike Mattos was nominated by Vincent Crisanti. Ronald Chopowick was nominated by Cynthia Thorburn. Justin Di Ciano was nominated by Michael Di Blase. Anthony Perruzza was nominated by Michael Di Biase. Paul Ainslie was nominated by Maria Augimeri but declined to sit for the position. RES. #A7 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT nominations for the City of Toronto representatives on the Executive Committee be closed. CARRIED Glenn De Baeremaeker, Giorgio Mammoliti, Mike Mattos, Ronald Chopowick and Vincent Crisanti were declared elected by vote as City of Toronto representatives on the Executive Committee, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1 /17. REGION OF DURHAM REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BUDGET /AUDIT ADVISORY BOARD Colleen Jordan was nominated by Jennifer O'Connell. 5 RES. #A8/15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Maria Augimeri Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick THAT nominations for the Region of Durham representative on the Budget/Audit Advisory Board be closed. CARRIED Colleen Jordan was declared elected by acclamation as the Region of Durham representative on the Budget /Audit Advisory Board, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1/17. REGION OF PEEL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BUDGET /AUDIT ADVISORY BOARD John Sprovieri was nominated by Jim Tovey. RES. #A9 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT nominations for the Region of Peel representative on the Budget /Audit Advisory Board be closed. CARRIED John Sprovieri was declared elected by acclamation as the Region of Peel representative on the Budget /Audit Advisory Board, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1/17. REGION OF YORK REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BUDGET /AUDIT ADVISORY BOARD Gino Rosati was nominated by Michael Di Biase. RES. #A10 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Mujeeb Khan THAT nominations for the Region of York representative on the Budget/Audit Advisory Board be closed. CARRIED Gino Rosati was declared elected by acclamation as the Region of York representative on the Budget /Audit Advisory Board, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1/17. CITY OF TORONTO REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BUDGET /AUDIT ADVISORY BOARD Rob Ford was nominated by Giorgio Mammoliti. RES. #A11 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT nominations for the City of Toronto representative on the Budget/Audit Advisory Board be closed. CARRIED Rob Ford was declared elected by acclamation as the City of Toronto representative on the Budget /Audit Advisory Board, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1/17. RES. #Al2 /15 - DESTRUCTION OF BALLOTS Moved by: Glenn Mason Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT any ballots used in the election of officers at Annual Meeting #1/15, be destroyed. CARRIED BUSINESS MEETING The meeting was turned over to the new Chair, Maria Augimeri, to conduct the business meeting. RES. #A13 /15 - MINUTES Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT the Minutes of Meeting #10/14, held on January 9, 2015, be approved. CARRIED 7 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #A14/15 - APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS The Conservation Authorities Act requires each conservation authority to undergo an annual external audit of its accounts and transactions. Moved by: Glenn Mason Seconded by: Mujeeb Khan THAT Grant Thornton LLP be appointed auditors of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for the year 2015, in accordance with section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act. CARRIED BACKGROUND Section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act reads as follows: 38. (1) Every authority shall cause its accounts and transactions to be audited annually by a person licensed under the Public Accountancy Act. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38(l). (2) No person shall be appointed as auditor of an authority who is or during the preceding year was a member of the authority or who has or during the preceding year had any direct or indirect interest in any contract or any employment with the authority other than for services within his or her professional capacity. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (2). (3) An authority shall, upon receipt of the auditors report of the examination of its accounts and transactions, forthwith forward a copy of the report to each participating municipality and to the Minister. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (3). At Authority Meeting #8/10, held on October 29, 2010, Resolution #At 82/10 was approved, in part, as follows: THAT the contract for Audit Services be awarded to Grant Thornton at an initial annual cost not to exceed $46,725.00, plus applicable taxes for 2010 and an annual increase of two to four per cent for the following four years, for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto (CFGT); THAT, pursuant to Section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act, the firm of Grant Thornton be appointed auditors of TRCA, effective November 1, 2010; THAT the term of the engagement be for five years subject to annual appointments by the Authority based on satisfactory performance; ... i RATIONALE Grant Thornton LLP has been appointed TRCA's auditor since 2004, following a competition for audit services conducted in the summer of 2004 and in the summer of 2010. Although the contract period is for five years starting with 2010, the annual reappointment is subject to performance satisfactory to TRCA. Staff is pleased to report that the most recent audit was completed to our satisfaction and anticipates similar performance for the 2014 audit, which will conclude in June 2015. Staff recommends the reappointment of Grant Thornton LLP for the 2015 audit year. Staff is planning to conduct a new competition for audit services during 2015, resulting with the appointment of auditors for the 2016 audit year. Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca Date: January 20, 2015 ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED RES. #A15 /15 - APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, items EX10.1 - EX10.5, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #11/14, held on January 16, 2015, be received. CARRIED NEW BUSINESS RES. #A16 /15 - NAMING OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY ASSET Moved by: Jack Ballinger Seconded by: Giorgio Mammoliti WHEREAS Gerri Lynn O'Connor O'Connor has served as a political representative for the Township of Uxbridge for over 30 years, over 25 years of which as Mayor; P1 AND WHEREAS Mayor O'Connor has been an appointee to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) representing the Regional Municipality of Durham for 23 years; AND WHEREAS Mayor O'Connor dedicated eight years as Chair of TRCA from February 2007 until January 2015; AND WHEREAS the Township of Uxbridge has provided a letter of support for the naming of the trail after Gerri Lynn O'Connor; AND WHEREAS the proposed name meets the Naming of TRCA Assets policy in terms of the name of a major individual, an individual prominent in the environmental or conservation community, and a relevant historical name associated with the geographic area or community; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the trail located at Glen Major Forest, between Concession 6 and Concession 7, known as the TRCA East Duffins Headwaters property, Township of Uxbridge be given the name of " Gerri Lynn O'Connor Trail'; THAT East Duffins Headwaters Stewardship Committee and the Township of Uxbridge be so advised; AND FURTHER THAT Gerri Lynn O'Connor be thanked for her years of service to TRCA. CARRIED INAUGURAL MEETING 1. GREETINGS FROM OUR PARTNERS 2. PRESENTATIONS 1. Service Recognition Awards to Members 2. The Living City Circle Awards 3. YEAR IN REVIEW SLIDESHOW 4. CEO REMARKS - HIGHLIGHTS OF 2015 MAJOR PROJECTS 5. CHAIR'S CLOSING REMARKS 10 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:57 p.m., on Friday, January 30, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 11 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer Toronto and Region O)A� C onserwation Authority MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #2/15 February 27, 2015 The Authority Meeting #2/15, was held in Weston Rooms A & B, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, February 27, 2015. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:39 a.m. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Member Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member David Barrow Member Ben Cachola Member Ronald Chopowick Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Jennifer Innis Member Mujeeb Khan Member Matt Mahoney Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Mike Mattos Member Anthony Perruzza Member Gino Rosati Member John Sprovieri Member Cynthia Thorburn Member ABSENT Vincent Crisanti Member Justin Di Ciano Member Chris Fonseca Member Rob Ford Member Jack Heath Member Colleen Jordan Member Glenn Mason Member Ron Moeser Member Jennifer O'Connell Member Linda Pabst Member Jim Tovey Member 12 RES. #A17 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Ronald Chopowick Michael Di Blase THAT the Minutes of Meeting #1/15, held on January 30, 2015, be approved. CARRIED (a) A presentation by Brian Moyle, Senior Manager, Enforcement and Compliance, TRCA, in regard to the tunnel located on TRCA -owned land at 5 Shoreham Drive. (b) A presentation by Joe Lobko, Partner, DTAH, in regard to items AUTH7.1 and EX7.1 - Long Term Office Accommodation Project. RES. #A18 /15 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. RES. #A19 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS David Barrow Paul Ainslie THAT above -noted presentation (b) be received. CARRIED CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #A20 /15 - LONG TERM OFFICE ACCOMMODATION PROJECT Award of Contract for Architectural Services for Master Plan Design. Award of contract for architectural services for development of a master plan for the Black Creek Pioneer Village parking lot site, and the schematic design and costing of a new corporate headquarters building on 5 Shoreham Drive. Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Paul Ainslie 13 THAT the contract for architectural services for development of a master plan for the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) parking lot site, and the schematic design and costing of a new Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) corporate headquarters building on 5 Shoreham Drive be awarded on a preferred source basis to DTAH, and Halsall, Blackwell and Integral Group with SCS + BA Group + A.W. Hooker & Associates at a total cost not to exceed $235,000, plus approximately $5,000 in disbursements, plus 10% contingency, plus HST. RECORDED VOTE Paul Ainslie Yea Maria Augimeri Yea Jack Ballinger Yea David Barrow Yea Ben Cachola Yea Ronald Chopowick Yea Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea Michael Di Biase Yea Jennifer Innis Yea Mujeeb Khan Yea Matt Mahoney Yea Giorgio Mammoliti Nay Mike Mattos Yea Anthony Perruzza Nay Gino Rosati Yea John Sprovieri Yea Cynthia Thorburn Yea THE MOTION WAS CARRIED CONTRARY MOTION Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Anthony Perruzza THAT the contract not include preliminary design, but rather just a description. NOT VOTED ON RATIONALE TRCA staff has been studying possibilities for a new or expanded head office for a number of years now under the direction of the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group, and with the assistance of multi - disciplinary landscape architecture, architecture and urban design firm DTAH, led by Principal, Joe Lobko. 14 In 2013, DTAH was awarded a $22,000 preferred source contract by TRCA's Chief Executive Officer as per TRCA's Purchasing Policy, as the design team to prepare integrated conceptual development plans for the parking lot at Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV). Various international case studies were analyzed, and options for the development of the site were prepared and presented to the Working Group in December 2013. At that meeting, the Working Group directed staff to investigate alternative methods of financing the proposals, and to refine a preferred alternative, with direction to examine the existing Shoreham office site further. In 2014, DTAH in partnership with N. Barry Lyon Consulting, was awarded a $22,500 preferred source contract by TRCA's Director, Planning and Development as per TRCA's Purchasing Policy, to examine finance options and begin refining the preferred alternative. The work under the two projects was completed on time and on budget. During this time, pressures about TRCA's lease at the Downsview Office rose to the forefront, and the opportunity to lease a temporary interim Head Office facility at 101 Exchange Avenue for a six year term came forward. A new leasing arrangement at 101 Exchange was approved at Authority Meeting #2/14, held on March 28, 2014. Staff from the Downsview Office has been relocated to the interim Head Office and staff from the 5 Shoreham Drive office will be relocated in March /April, as well as some groups from other TRCA office locations. The relocation of staff to 101 Exchange Avenue provides efficiencies, a better working environment, and changes the options and time available for developing TRCA's new, permanent headquarters. After examining the existing planning and zoning permissions on both sites, it became apparent that developing a new headquarters building on the BCPV parking lot site will involve more challenging planning approvals and involvement of as yet undetermined partnerships with other organizations supportive of TRCA's mandate, and it would not be possible to construct a new headquarters within the six year term of the 101 Exchange lease. Given this, staff recommends that a two - phased approach be taken to the planning of both sites. Phase 1 is to establish a master plan for both sites north and south of Shoreham Drive. This will build on the existing conceptual development framework completed by DTAH in 2013 / 2014 and will examine options to accommodate a future development partner that could include an office user, residential development or other institutional and community uses while considering the ongoing operational needs of Black Creek Pioneer Village. Phase 2 is to develop a schematic design and construction cost estimate for a new +/- 80,000 square foot headquarters on the 5 Shoreham Drive site. Phase 2 would put TRCA in a position to pursue funding options, site plan approval and building permits, and construct a new headquarters prior to the expiry of the lease at 101 Exchange Avenue. At Executive Committee Meeting #1/15, held on February 6, 2015, the Executive recommended to the Authority appointment of new members to the Working Group and selecting the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive as the preferred site for the new headquarters. The Executive Committee also recommended that staff bring forward this report for consideration at the Authority for award of a preferred source contract to DTAH for the development of a Master Plan for the BCPV parking lot site, and the schematic design and costing of a new corporate headquarters building on 5 Shoreham Drive. The Executive Committee resolution is as follows: 15 THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT the Chair of the Authority (Maria Augimeri), Jack Heath, Ron Moeser, Jim Tovey, Michael Di Biase, Giorgio Mammoliti, Colleen Jordan, Anthony Perruzza and any another other TRCA Members who are interested, be appointed to the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group (LTOAWG) until the end of their current term of appointment to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) or until their successor is appointed, THAT the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive be selected as the preferred site for TRCA's new headquarters building, AND FURTHER THAT staff prepare a report for consideration at Authority Meeting #2115, scheduled to be held on February 27, 2015 for award of a preferred source contract to DTAH for the development of a Master Plan for the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) parking lot site, and the schematic design and costing of a new corporate headquarters building on the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive. Staff has developed an excellent working relationship with the DTAH team lead by Joe Lobko through the process to date. DTAH is an award - winning landscape architecture / architecture / urban design firm that focuses on sustainable development, mostly for public and non - profit sector clients including the City of Toronto, Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation, Evergreen and Parc Downsview Park. Examples of their successful projects include the Evergreen Brick Works, the Black Creek Urban Farm on Jane Street, Wychwood Barns and master plans /visioning study for elements of Parc Downsview Park, the first two of which are owned by TRCA but managed by partners. DTAH has been able to complete their projects on budget except in cases where there was a change in the scope of the work or unforeseen site conditions were encountered. The DTAH team has also been recently involved in the design of the Woodgreen Corporate Headquarters and park, employing passive heating, cooling and ventilation strategies for a non - profit social service agency. Given this and the knowledge DTAH has of the project due to work completed under the previous two contracts, staff asked DTAH to identify at their cost a suitable team and to provide a proposal to implement the planning and design process. In their proposal, DTAH has built an interdisciplinary team of six qualified firms specifically for TRCA's project that includes leaders in the green design industry with experience on projects where innovative thinking around sustainable design was a defining characteristic. Many of the proposed team members are actively involved in the Canada Green Building Council and other innovative green building organizations, and the team is committed to bringing forth a cutting edge, world -class green building project that will demonstrate The Living City objectives within the fiscal constraints of a public sector / non - profit agency. These consultants include Doug Webber, Managing Partner of Halsall Inc., who is the Honorary Director of the Toronto Chapter of the Canada Green Building Counsel and J. David Bowick, Partner -in- Charge of Blackwell Inc., who has many years of experience in designing innovative wood and concrete structural solutions. The proposal includes: 1. coordination and review of site information, the building program and project objectives; 2. engagement with York University, Tennis Canada, TRCA staff and Ward99 Architects who is the relocation architect to 101 Exchange Avenue; 16 3. preparation of precedent studies and implementation of four intensive design workshops to evolve a preferred master plan for both sites and a preliminary building design for a new headquarters; 4. preparation of a construction cost estimate for the headquarters building; and 5. presentations to the Working Group and the Authority. This work will provide the basis for moving forward to detailed design, and approvals of a new headquarters building. The authorization of an agreement for professional services for the final design, tender specifications, construction supervision, and building commissioning will be the subject of a further report for consideration by the Authority following the successful completion fo this phase of planning. The contract for the construction fo the project will be subject to a competitive bid process at a later date as per TRCA's Purchasing Policy. TRCA's goal is two -fold: 1) to provide functional contemporary office space for its growing staffing and program needs; 2) and to establish an office and site planning environment that provides industry leadership and a model in green technologies and urban conservation design. Developing on TRCA lands provides an opportunity that is cost effective, and one which aligns with TRCA's sustainability mission and mandate. The Authority has approved this general direction. The details of managing through this process requires careful consideration of implementation with a tailored team of specialists that bring: • award winning experience in integrated architecture and landscape design, inclusive of campus master planning, public- sector and community projects, and civic projects of national profile; • demonstrated state of the art research and design in architecture, site planning and engineering utilizing green water and energy technologies, structural and materials innovation, etc.; • extensive knowledge of TRCA programs and a track record of working relationship with the TRCA team to build a thoughtful, managed project together for the future; • knowledge of the Black Creek Pioneer Village site and broader community from previous projects.; and, • proven track record of projects that provide significant community benefit under constrained budgets, with creativity in managing construction finance and implementation costs. Staff believes that DTAH has brought together a customized team that can bring this unique project into realization. Staff therefore recommends the award of the contract on a preferred source basis as per Section 9.3.3 of TRCA's Purchasing Policy as follows: The required goods and services are to be supplied by a vendor or supplier having specialized knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be reasonably provided by any other supplier. FINANCIAL DETAILS The upset limit for this project is $235,000, plus approximately $5,000 in disbursements and 10% contingency, plus HST. Funds are identified in TRCA's 2015 Long Term Office Accommodation budget 006 -50. 17 Report prepared by: Steven Heuchert, extension 5311 Emails: sheuchert @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Steven Heuchert, extension 5311 Emails: sheuchert @trca.on.ca Date: February 09, 2015 RES. #A21/15 - WILKET CREEK REHABILITATION PROJECT Contract No.10000250 - Bypass Pumping Works. Award of Contract No.10000250 for supply of all labour, materials and equipment necessary for bypass pumping works at Wilket Creek, Site 3 Phase 2, in the City of Toronto. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT Contract No.10000250 for supply of all labour, materials and equipment necessary for bypass pumping works at Wilket Creek, Site 3, Phase 2, in the City of Toronto be awarded to Aquatech Pump and Power at a total cost not to exceed $227,304.00, plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 10% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractors that submitted tenders, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take all necessary actions to implement the foregoing, including the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND Watercourses and adjacent park areas within the City of Toronto sustained a significant amount of damage as the result of the August 19, 2005 storm event. In response to the damage caused, City of Toronto Parks Forestry and Recreation (PF &R) entered into an agreement with TRCA in February of 2007 to complete the repairs required to return the damaged areas to a state of good repair in order to ensure protection of life and property within the City of Toronto parks systems while funding for long term rehabilitation of key sites was sought. The Wilket Creek tributary of the East Don River was one of the watercourses that suffered a significant amount of damage as the result of the August 19, 2005 storm event. In 2007/8 TRCA staff undertook large scale restoration works within Edwards Gardens, and a series of 10 state of good repair projects within Wilket Creek Park, as part of the aforementioned agreement entered into by the City of Toronto and TRCA in February of 2007. im Following the completion of the State of Good Repairs work, TRCA entered into a multi -year agreement with Toronto Water and PF &R of the City of Toronto to undertake the completion of additional repair works within Wilket Creek Park, and a Geomorphic Systems Master Plan for the entire Wilket Creek subwatershed. To date works have been completed at Sites 6, 7 (2011/12) and Site 3 Phase 1; which was completed in May 2013. The works for Site 3 Phase 2 will be completed during the first half of 2015 and include the protection of at -risk sanitary sewer infrastructure and associated channel works downstream. RATIONALE This project is aligned with leadership strategy number two in TRCA's new strategic plan. The restoration work done within Wilket Creek Site 3, Phase 2 will assist in the successful management of our regional water resources for current and future generations. Tender No.10000250 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo( http: / /www.biddingo.comn on Thursday, January 15, 2015. Tender packages were sent to five contractors as follows: • Aquatech Pump and Power; • Atlas Dewatering Corporation; • Hertz Service Pump and Compressor; • Rain for Rent; and • Xylem Inc. The Procurement Opening Committee opened the Tenders on Thursday, January 29, 2015 with the following results: Tender No.10000250 Wilket Creek Rehabilitation Project — Site 3, Phase 2 — Bypass Pumping Works BIDDERS TOTAL (Plus HST) Aquatech Pump and Power $227,304.00 Hertz Service Pump and Compressor $228,888.00 Xylem Inc. $252,000.00 Atlas Dewatering Corporation $510,000.00 Staff reviewed the bid received from Aquatech Pump and Power against its own cost estimate and has determined that the bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements and deliverables as outlined in the contract documents. Further assessment by TRCA staff of Aquatech Pump and Power's experience and ability to undertake similar projects was conducted through reference checks which resulted in positive feedback that Aquatech Pump and Power is capable of undertaking the scope of work. 19 Based on the evaluation of the bids received, staff recommend that Aquatech Pump and Power be awarded Contract No.10000250 for the supply of all labour, materials and equipment necessary for bypass pumping works at Wilket Creek Site 3, Phase 2, in the City of Toronto for a total amount not to exceed $227,304.00, to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus a 10% contingency, plus HST, it being the lowest bid that meets TRCA specifications. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding is 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto within account 185 -09. Report prepared by: Craig Eden, 647 - 633 -8406 Emails: creden @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416 - 392 -9690 Emails: pnewland @trca.on.ca Date: February 04, 2015 RES. #A22/15 - DUFFINS MARSH RESTORATION PROJECT UPDATE Update on Duffins Marsh Restoration Project under Memorandum of Understanding with Ontario Power Generation. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Ontario Power Generation (OPG) Pickering Nuclear Station; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA continue to work with OPG for the restoration of the southwest lagoon, known as Simcoe Point Marsh, within Duffins Marsh Complex; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any action necessary to continue the partnership including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 2000, TRCA completed the Duffins Marsh Restoration Action Plan. This plan was developed with the assistance of the Town of Ajax, City of Pickering, provincial and federal agencies, the general public and a number of environmental non - governmental organizations. The Action Plan focused on forest restoration, fish and wildlife habitat, meadow enhancement, and trail and interpretive infrastructure. Over the past 13 years, many aspects of the original plan have been implemented or partially implemented with funding support from OPG, Ministry of Natural Resources and Durham Region. Since the beginning of this restoration effort, OPG has contributed funding to this Action Plan and to other TRCA projects. 20 In 2006, TRCA began the restoration of Corner Marsh, the largest lagoon (17 hectares) within the Duffins Marsh wetland complex. This lagoon was isolated from Lake Ontario and Duffins Creek through the installation of a fish control (common carp) and water level control structure. Corner Marsh was temporarily dewatered and allowed to regenerate naturally. To date, the emergent plant community has been restored to the extent found in the mid- 1960s, submergent aquatic plants now are found throughout the open water zone, and the site provides significant habitat for fish and wildlife. Control of water levels and undesirable fish are continuing in order to maintain the healthy condition of Corner Marsh. Based on the outstanding success of Corner Marsh, staff detailed and developed restoration plans for the remaining three lagoons within the Duffins Marsh Complex. At Authority Meeting #3/13, held on April 26, 2013, Resolution #A58/13 was approved as follows: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into an Memorandum of Understanding and funding agreement with the Ontario Power Generation Pickering Nuclear Storage Station to restore the southwest lagoon of Duffins Marsh Complex at a cost not to exceed $500,000, starting in 2014; THAT staff report to the Authority the details of the project and implementation schedule; THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may be required to implement the agreement, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the signing and executions of any documents; AND FURTHER THAT Ontario Power Generation Pickering Nuclear Station be so advised. The OPG Pickering Nuclear Station has been directed by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to restore three hectares of wetlands to offset plant operations. Simcoe Point Marsh (southwest lagoon) is approximately 4.6 hectares in size. The restoration project to be implemented will be similar to Corner Marsh (northwest lagoon) and will include the construction of an earth dyke and water control structure that excludes undesirable fish species (i.e., common carp) and controls water levels. OPG's three hectares of restoration efforts at Simcoe Point Marsh will contribute to the total restoration of the 4.6 hectare lagoon. At this time, the other 1.6 hectares remains available for future compensation work. During the spring and summer of 2014, TRCA drafted and finalized the Memorandum of Understanding /Funding Agreement with OPG. TRCA has secured funds from OPG to commence the planning and detail design stages of the project. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The table below summarizes the project phases and timelines of the Funding Agreement. 21 Expected Date Project Phase Amount Fall 2014 Phase 1: Design and Planning $250,000 Winter /Spring 2015 Phase 2: Implementation $150,000 Spring 2015 to Spring 2025 Phase 3: Monitoring $100,000 In the fall of 2014, TRCA posted a Request for Proposal for Engineering and Design Services for Simcoe Point Marsh Restoration Project (Contract #10000097). It was awarded to Cole Engineering Group Ltd. at a total cost not to exceed $13,345.00. The engineering assessment and services to be completed by Cole Engineering Group Ltd. over the winter 2014/2015 include: • geotechnical investigation; • hydraulic assessment; • design work and drawings for the proposed dyke alignment, water control structure; • cost estimate and calculation quantities to be used by TRCA in tendering the project. FINANCIAL DETAILS OPG has agreed to provide $500,000 over a three year period. Funds are available in account 230 -56. Report prepared by: Danny Moro, extension 5372 Emails: dmoro @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Danny Moro, extension 5372 Emails: dmoro @trca.on.ca Date: January 23, 2015 RES. #A23/15 - LONG TERM OFFICE ACCOMMODATION PROJECT Recommendation on appointment of members to the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group and preferred site identification for TRCA's new headquarters building. Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT the Chair of the Authority (Maria Augimeri), Jack Heath, Ron Moeser, Jim Tovey, Michael Di Blase, Giorgio Mammoliti, Colleen Jordan, Anthony Perruzza, Ben Cachola, Glenn De Baeremaeker and any another other TRCA Members who are interested, be appointed to the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group (LTOAWG) until the end of their current term of appointment to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) or until their successor is appointed; THAT the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive be selected as the preferred site for TRCA's new headquarters building; 22 AND FURTHER THAT staff prepare a report for consideration at Authority Meeting #2/15, scheduled to be held on February 27, 2015 for award of a preferred source contract to DTAH for the development of a Master Plan for the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) parking lot site, and the schematic design and costing of a new corporate headquarters building on the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive. CARRIED SECTION II - ITEMS FOR EXECUTIVE ACTION RES. #A24 /15 - SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Cynthia Thorburn THAT Section II item EX8.1 - Lower Don 1 D -2D Flood Model, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #1/15, held on February 6, 2015, be received. CARRIED SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #A25 /15 - SUMMARY OF PROCUREMENTS 2014 Annual Summary. Receipt of the 2014 end of year summary of procurements approved by the Chief Executive Officer or his designate. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: David Barrow THAT the summary of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) procurements approved by the Chief Executive Officer or designates for 2014, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/05, held on June 24, 2005, staff was requested to report to the Authority on purchases which were approved by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or designate. This report provides that overview of approvals that are subject to the Purchasing Policy, with the exception of Schedule'B' items (Attachment 1) as they are exempt from the approval requirements of the Purchasing Policy. Pursuant to the resolution quoted above, the summaries of awarded contracts of $10,000 or greater, within the approval limits of the CEO or designate (Attachment 3) for 2014, are found in Attachment 4. The report includes approvals of $10,000 or greater, approved by the Chief Executive Officer or his designate. 23 At Authority Meeting #6/13, held on July 26, 2013, a new Purchasing Policy was approved, with changes in approval thresholds and purchasing methods, which are reflected in the Attachments. Attachment 2 includes the criteria as to why non - competitive procurement was appropriate for the particular goods or services procured, as per Sections 9.2 & 9.3 of TRCA's Purchasing Policy. As permitted under the approved policy, the Chief Executive Officer has designated senior staff, generally including director and manager level positions, approval authority for purchases up to $10,000 (exclusive of applicable taxes), which are not captured in this report. For the information of the members, staff undertook a review of purchases approved by the Authority and Executive Committee in 2014 (including contingencies). The following is a summary of purchases approved by the Authority and Executive Committee combined (Board) and Chief Executive Officer /designate in 2014. Attachment 4 is a detailed listing of purchases of $10,000 or greater approved by the Chief Executive Officer /designate in 2014. Total 2014 Purchases of Minimum Value of $10,000 Purchase Type CEO & Designates (Plus HST) Board (Plus HST) Competitive 10,581,514.04 20,319,055.23 Sole Source 64,790.00 0.00 Preferred Source 1,139,936.07 1,237,650.75 Not Lowest Bid 38,180.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 11,824,420.12 21,556,705.98 GRAND TOTAL 2014 33,381,126.10 The total purchases for TRCA in 2014 of $10,000 or greater, approved by the Authority, Executive Committee or Chief Executive Officer /designate was approximately $33.4 million, including contingencies, excluding HST. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Email: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Email: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: February 9, 2015 Attachments: 4 24 Attachment 1 SCHEDULE 'B' GOODS AND SERVICES EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF SCHEDULE'A' The following purchases and payments are not subject to the approval and reporting requirements of Schedule'A', unless otherwise directed by the CEO or designate or as provided in other TRCA policies. The CEO or designate shall establish procedures and approval thresholds applicable to Schedule 'B' items. Utilities • Electricity • Water and sewage charges • Natural gas, fuel oil, propane • Basic telephone /data /internet /service • Basic television cable service Training and Education • Membership and association fees, as permitted by TRCA policy • Magazine and periodical subscriptions • Staff development (except where bulk training is arranged through a bidding process) • Conferences and seminars • Tuition reimbursement in accordance with TRCA personnel policies 3. Refundable Employee Expenses • Meal allowances • Travel and transportation expenses • Accommodations • Mileage • Other employee expenses incurred on TRCA business 4. General Expenses • Property taxes • Postage • Licenses e.g. vehicles, software, municipal, etc. • Land purchases, including expropriation costs and land registry fees • Customer refunds • Insurance deductibles • Legal settlements • Grievance payments 5. Petty Cash Replenishment 6. Payments to Current and Past Employees • Salaries, wages and benefits due to any person in the employ of TRCA • Retirement allowances, settlements and other payments due to a person previously in the employ of TRCA 25 7. Government Payments • Fees, levies and taxes payable to federal, provincial or municipal governments, or to any agency, board or commission thereof 8. Debt • All accounts for payments of principal or interest on debentures, loans or overdrafts, including foreign exchange 9. Pension Deductions, Contributions and Employee Benefit Plan Payments • Employee pension deductions and employer pension contributions • Payments to the providers of employee benefit plans. 10. Grants and Contributions • Research grants for special projects undertaken by qualified college or university staff and /or students acting on behalf of their respective institution • Payments made to landowners and similar groups under a granting program as approved by the Authority. • Grants to community groups and public service bodies to assist with research or knowledge gathering which is of particular interest to TRCA 11. Goods and Services Purchased for Resale 12. Paid advertising 26 Attachment 2 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY PURCHASING POLICY Section 1.14 Non - Competitive Procurement Process A non - competitive procurement process shall only be used if one or more of the following conditions apply and a process of negotiation is undertaken to obtain the best value in the circumstances for the TRCA. Authorized Buyers are authorized to enter into negotiations without formal competitive bids, under the following circumstances: The goods and services are only available from one source or one supplier by reason of: • A statutory or market based monopoly • A fluctuating market prevents the TRCA from obtaining price protection or owing to market conditions, required goods or services are in short supply • Existence of exclusive rights (patent, copyright or licence) • Need for compatibility with goods and services previously acquired and there are no reasonable alternatives, substitutes or accommodations • Need to avoid violating warranties and guarantees where service is required An attempt to purchase the required goods and services has been made in good faith using a competitive method and has failed to identify a successful supplier. 3. When the extension or reinstatement of an existing contract would prove most cost - effective or beneficial. The extension shall not exceed one year. 4. The goods and services are required as a result of an emergency, which would not reasonably permit the use of the other methods permitted. 5. The required goods and services are to be supplied by a particular vendor or supplier having special knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be provided by any other supplier. 6. Any other sole or single source purchase permitted under the provisions of this policy including those noted in Schedule 'B'. 27 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY PURCHASING POLICY 9.2 Sole Source - A sole source purchase occurs only when there is one supplier of a particular good or service that meets the requirements of TRCA by reason of: 1. a statutory or market -based monopoly; 2. scarcity of supply in the market; 3. the goods or services are unique to one supplier and no practical alternatives or substitutes exist. 9.3 Preferred Source - A preferred source purchase shall only be used if one or more of the following conditions applies and a process of negotiation has been undertaken to obtain the best value in the circumstances for TRCA: 1. The goods and services are only available from one source or one supplier by reason of: a. need for compatibility with goods and services previously acquired and there are no reasonable alternatives, substitutes or accommodations; b. desire to avoid violating warranties and guarantees where service is required. 2. The goods and services are required as a result of an emergency, which would not reasonably permit the use of the regular procurement methods. 3. The required goods and services are to be supplied by a vendor or supplier having specialized knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be reasonably provided by any other supplier. 4. The required goods and services meet TRCA's sustainability criteria and guidelines defined in the Policy and could not be reasonable met through regular procurement methods. 5. Special research and development projects with academic institutions, government bodies, industry organizations and similar bodies. i Attachment SCHEDULE `A' PURCHASING METHODS, LIMITS AND AUTHORIZATION Method of Procurement Total Value of Procurement (Before Applicable Taxes ) Authorization to Award Low Dollar Value Less than $2,500 Authorized Buyer RFQ /Tender (Low Bid), RFP (Highest Ranked), or Sole Source $2,500 to less than $100,000 CEO or designate $100,000 to less than $200,000 Executive Committee $200,000 or higher Authority Preferred Source See Section 9.3 above $2,500 to less than $50,000 CEO or designate $50,000 to less than $200,000 Executive Committee $200,000 or higher Authority Award to Other than the Low Bid or Highest Ranked $2,500 to less than $25,000 CEO or designate $25,000 to less than $200,000 Executive Committee $200,000 or higher Authority PATI Attachment 4 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Development of 3D Rendered Presentation Drawings for Small Levitt Goodman 12,900.00 5/5 Arms Building Adaptive Reuse Architects Project Horse Drawn Wagon Rides for Sugarbush Maple Syrup Lionel's Farm 32,657.00 3,265.70 7/2 Festival Paper Purchases S icers 75,000.00 7,500.00 Toronto Process Skylight Repairs at Arsenal Meridian Construction 8,970.00 2,500.00 3/3 Building Hydraulic Analysis & Detailed Design to Replace mcVean AECOM Canada 34,670.00 7,000.00 8/3 Farm Culvert Carpet Replacement at BCPV Mayhew 23,995.00 4,799.00 4/3 Administrative Office Planning & Feasibility Study for Paul Didur Architect 22,150.00 3,322.50 biddingo /7 Boyd Centre Inc. Humber Bay EA Assessment W.F. Baird & Scoping Associates Coastal 51,872.00 51,872.00 2/2 Engineers Ltd. Software Consulting, Design, Development & Photography for Rtraction Inc. 55,560.00 biddingo(32) /3 Web -based Virtual Tour of The Living City Campus at Kortright New Computer Equipment & Software License for Eastville SHI Canada 15,009.60 1,500.96 3/3 Office Staff BCPV Dishwasher & Booster Magic White 12,346.00 1,234.60 4/4 Development of Recruitment, Mentorship & Alumni Cooper Web Design 19,200.00 biddingo(6) /1 Community Website fo Bridge r Trainina Pro rams Pool Supplies and Chemicals Aquatech Logistics 20,363.25 2,036.33 3/2 Inc. Website & Application Support Mojility Inc. 46,000.00 biddingo(49) /2 & Development Services Heart Lake Dragon Boat Great White North Festival Event Delivery & Dragon Boat 34,521.00 3,452.10 2/1 Equipment Rentals Solid Waste & Recycling Removal Services for April 2014 Waste Reduction 55,170.00 5,517.00 biddingo /10 -April 2015 Wristbands for use at TRCA Push Promotional Aquatic Facilities Products and Design 10,938.40 1,093.84 6/6 Inc. July 8th Extreme Rainfall Event AMEC Earth and 59,846.00 5,984.60 3/3 Climatological Report Environmental Development of Summary & AMEC Environment Analysis Report of the July 8th, and infrastructure 54,950.00 5,495.00 6/4 2013 Storm Event Undertake Detailed Design Drawings & Cost Estimates for a Pedestrian Bridge for Bob Dillon Consulting 73,009.00 10,951.35 6/4 Hunter Memorial Park Trail Link Over Little Rouge Creek 30 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Roundup for Weed Control at Claireville Conservation Area, Gatineau Hydro Corridor, TTP Leuschner's Lawn and 30,450.00 3,045.00 3/3 and Cherrywood Property Cleaning and Washroom Supplies for Public Use Mister Chemical 48,523.66 4,852.37 7/3 Facilities & Field Centres Golf Cart Rentals for Bathurst Bennett Golf Carts 16,000.00 1,600.00 3/3 Glen Golf Course Fuel for Bathurst Glen Golf Armstrong Petroleum Course and Bruce's Mill 20,000.00 2,000.00 3/3 Conservation Area Ltd. Engineering Services of a Gated Parking System at the South Entrance of the Parking Kaysky Engineering 9,440.00 Contract Extension Lot at BCPV Engineering Inspections During Construction of Infrastructure Grech and Associates Protection Works Located on a Ltd. 3,000.00 1.000.00 Contract Extension Section of the West Don River Steel Fabrication to Produce Grating and Fish Gates for use on the structures at Tommy Rio Welding Limited 11,410.00 1,141.00 4/3 Thompson Park, Humber River Marsh and Duffins Creek Marsh Undertake a Materiality Assessment Using the Global Quinn and Partners Reporting Initiative Framework Inc. 48,500.00 2/2 & Prepare the 2012/2013 Corporate Sustainability Report Detailed Design of Replacement Bank Stabilization & Erosion Control Works along Aquafor Beech Ltd. 9,860.00 9,050.00 7/5 the East Don River at Yonge Street 16 Steel Road Plates United Rental 25,800.00 2,600.00 3/3 Asphalt Pathway Paving Works at Highland Creek Downstream Appco Paving Ltd. 32,506.25 6,500.00 6/5 of Morningside Road Erosion Control Project Pedestrian Handrails at Clearwater Structures 56,080.00 11,216.00 22/3 Claireville Dam Inc. Reference Plan /Survey Work Ivan B. Wallace for 13 Properties Along Ontario Land Surveyor 11,800.00 3/2 Riverhead Drive & 1 Katrine trine Road, Toronto Ltd. Reference Plan/Survey Work Kremer Surveryors 11 000.00 4/2 Picnic Tables Precision Welding Inc. 23,662.50 2,366.25 5/4 Complete Detailed Design for Protection of Sanitary Infrastructure, & a Geomorphic Greek and Associates 19 860.00 10,000.00 8/5 Analysis & Erosion Risk Limited Assessment of a Portion of Albion Creek 31 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Geotechnical Investigations for Multipel Watercourse Crossings DBA Engineering Ltd. 30,083.00 6,016.60 biddingo /7 Construction Projects Undertake Engineering Services in Support of the Brampton Humber Valley Lands GEO Morphix Ltd. 12,930.00 2,586.00 4/3 William Hostrawser Structure Removal Project Appraisal Services of 3 D. Bottero & Properties - Highfeld Farms, 14,350.00 5/4 Plus Disbursements Snider, Milne Associates Limited Supply of Petticoat Creek Aveco Pools 22,575.00 2,257.50 6/3 Outdoor Pool Paint 110, 20 -25 cm DBH Cedar Tree Rootwads to Landstaff Works TBG Landscape Inc. 55,000.00 5,500.00 7/3 Yard Plumbing & Mechanical Services at Albion Hills Field Newline Mechanical 49,000.00 3/1 Centre Co. Ltd. Wastewater Collection & Smith Excavating, Dumping Services for TRCA Grading and Septic 73,364.00 7,336.40 3/1 Public Use Facilities - 2 Years Services Approximately 400 Tonnes of 150mm -300mm Gabion Stone Natural Stone Source 11,100.00 1,110.00 18/8 to Black Creek Flood Control Ontario Channel 2014 Floodplain Mapping Cole Engineering 40,000.00 5/5 Update Limited 2014 Etobicoke Creek Aquafor Beech 59,950.00 12,000.00 6/6 Flood lain Mapping Update Limited Approximately 150 Tonnes of 100mm -200mm Gabion Stone for 1 -048: West Don River Near Strada Aggregates 4,312.50 contract extension Dufferin & Centre Street Sanitary Infrastructure Protection Project Slope Stability & Stormwater Management Analysis at 255 Terraprobe Inc. 70,865.00 7,000.00 5/1 Wicksteed Avenue, Toronto Detailed Design for Major Maintenance Works Below Aquafor Beech Ltd. 34,888.00 10,000.00 7/4 3030 -3068 Weston Road, Toronto Compact Digital Cameras & Accessories for Environmental Downtown Camera 11,093.00 6/2 Leaders of Tomorrow Program Ltd. Removal & Disposal of Existing Fencing, & Supply & Installation of 722m of Page Wire Farm Leone Fence Co. Ltd. 14,692.70 biddingo /1 Fence Along Sideline 16, Pickering Third Party Facilitator Services for the Scarborough Waterfront Dillon Consulting 80,915.00 16,183.00 biddingo /7 Project Environmental Limited Assessment 32 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Leftershoping Work Related to Swiss Print 2014 TRCA Education International 11,122.00 1,112.20 3/2 Programs Direct Mail Campaign Stone Pillars & Fencing at the Simcoe Point Cemetery & Melfer Construction Railing at the Duffins Creek Inc. 29,400.00 2,940.00 3/3 Canoe Launch in the Town of Ajax's Rotary Park Bruce's Mill Conservation Area PCI Mechanical 19,490.00 3,898.00 3/3 Washroom Upgrades Contracting Approximately 300 Tonnes of 600mm — 800mm Rip Rap to the Highland Creek Below Natural Stone Source 11,580.00 1,158.00 18/4 Kingston Road (HC21) — Major Ontario Maintenance Project in the City of Toronto Slope Stability Analysis & Erosion Risk Assessment along Terraprobe Inc. 17,398.00 5,000.00 7/3 the Rouge River at 70 Main Street South Detailed Designs for Interim Protection of At -risk Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure, German Cole Engineering 9,075.00 3,000.00 4/4 Mills Creek Near Don Mills Group Limited Road and John Street, City of Markham Slope Stability Analysis at Stantec Consulting 31,945.00 3,000.00 7/5 Norther Ede of Gaffney Park Ltd. BCPV & Kortright Rental of Faster Linene Service 40,433.08 4,043.31 8/4 Linen Products Inc. Detailed Designs for Interim Protection of At -risk Sanitary Greck and Associates Sewer Infrastructure Located Ltd. 9,880.00 3,000.00 4/1 Along the West Don River ear Bradwick Drive, Vaughan Slope Stability Analysis Near 7284 Islington Avenue, Terraprobe Inc. 24,835.00 4,000.00 7/3 Vaughan Supply, Delivery & Installation of High Density Mobile Filing TAB Products Canada 58,946.00 5,894.60 4/4 System at the Interim Head Office Shredded Pine Mulch for Tree & 2014 Shrub Plantings be Greenside Gardens 'N 24,000.00 2,400.00 3/3 awarded to for a total cost not More to exceed $24,000.00 Swan Lake Landscape Elephant Construction 67,908.00 6,790.80 3/2 Improvements and Landscaping Third Party Evaluation Services E -Nova Consulting 13,230.00 biddingo (5)/2 for the PAIE Program Approximately 680 Tonnes of 800mm- 1200mm Rip Rap to Brock Aggregates 24,820.00 2,482.00 18/4 Markie Curtis Bank Stabilization Project 33 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Data Collection & Analysis of 4DM M d Synthesis an Food & Farming Assets in the an Network AD 40,000.00 biddingo /1 Golden Horseshoe Approximately 17,064 Units of St. Williams Nursery Aquatic Plant Propogation and Ecology Centre 15,865.00 1,586.50 5/4 Materials Approximately 14,930 Units of Connon (NVK) Aquatic Plant Propogation Nurseries Ltd. 28,532.50 2,853.25 5/4 Materials Construction Demonstration Elephant Construction Residential Rain Garden at and Landscaping 11,165.00 21/1 Milliken Park Installation of Pedestrian Handrail within Marie Curtis Leone Fence Co. Ltd. 10,500.00 1,050.00 8/3 Park, Toronto Professional Consulting Paul Didur Architects Services for G.Ross Lord Dam Incorporated 13,440.00 3,360.00 3/3 Control Building Slope Re- construction & Paving Hilton Construction 47,600.00 4,760.00 13/5 at 2191 Kipling Avenue, Toronto Corporation Engineering & Design Services Cole Engineering in Support of the Simcoe Point Group Ltd. 13,345.00 2,669.00 4/3 Marsh Restoration Project Dell SonicWALL Firewall Dell Canada 12,191.30 1,219.13 3/3 Polymer for Dredging of High Ground Force Park Stormwater Management Environmental Inc. 78,400.00 11,760.00 3/3 Ponds Pre & Post Construction Inspections for the Properties at AECOM Canada Ltd. 12,730.00 5,000.00 8/2 Nos. 1 Katrina Road — 53 Riverhead Drive, City of Toronto Decommissioning Pool at 134 Superior Disposal 20,000.00 2,000.00 8/2 Ravendale Court, Vaughan Construct a Nature Trail at Oak Ridges Corridor Conservation TBG Landscape Inc. 15,484.50 contract extension Reserve Multi -Use Trail Phase 2 Project Installation & Rental of a Temporary Bridge at McPherson Andrews 56,392.66 contract extension Frenchman's Bay Harbour Contracting Entrance Project Disposal of Stormwater Management Pond Dredgeate RAFAT General 42,860.00 10,715.00 biddingo /3 for Centennial Pond, in the City Contractors Inc. of Toronto Engineering Services for Phase 2 Update of the 1 D /2D Hydraulic Model & Engineered Floodline Mapping for the Spring Creek Tributary from the MMM Group Limited 72,125.00 7,200.00 5/3 Peel Centre Area in the City of Brampton Downstream Through the Avondale Special Policy Area 34 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Bruce's Mill Chalet Washroom Upgrades PCI Contracting Mach $23,350.00 $2,000.00 3/3 Website Develo ment Services Resolution Interactive $82,151.00 $16,430.20 5/4 Minutes & Agendas Software eScribe 14,437.20 2,000.00 3/3 ETIENNE BRULE PARK PROJECT Approximately 1,700 Tonnes of J.C. Rock Limited 57,154.00 5,715.40 20/5 600mm - 800mm Ri Ra Approximately 600 Tonnes of BOT Aggregates Ltd. 17,172.00 1,717.20 21/9 100mm- 200mm Gabion Stone Approximately 400 Tonnes of 2- 3 Tonne Uniform Stackable B -Town Group 24,100.00 2,410.00 20/2 Armourstone Green Cleaning Services for Clean -Slate Janitorial 16,500.00 5/4 Boyd Centre Services Green Cleaning Services for Allcare Maintenance Restoration Services Centre Services 11,820.00 5/4 Construct Gribwall along R &M Construction 55,085.00 5,508.50 17/9 Humber River, Va ughan INDIAN LINE CAMPGROUND Upgrade of Poplar & Humber Sky High Roofing and Washroom Buildings Exterior Sheet Metal Incl. 53,000.00 5,300.00 biddingo /6 Siding Windows and Doors Replacement Canadian Choice Wind $17,864.00 $3,572.80 3/2 FRENCHMAN'S BAY HARBOUR ENTRANCE PROJECT Approximately 3,800 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 90,630.00 20/5 100 -200mm Gabion Stone Trucking Approximately 2,500 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 81,250.00 16,250.00 5/3 300 -600mm Rip Rap Stone Trucking Rental of Temporary Chain Link The Fence People 6,219.00 contract extension Fencing Approximately 2,000 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 50,960.00 5,096.00 18/5 100 -200mm Gabion Stone Trucking Approximately 600 Tonnes of 2- J.C. Rock Ltd. 28,200.00 2,820.00 18/5 4 Tonne Armour Stone SVE Portable 8 Mud Mats Roadway Systems 12,210.96 1,800.00 5/1 Inc. Approximately 2,000 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 22,932.00 contract extension 100 -200mm Gabion Stone Trucking Tub Grinding Services Tom LaRue 33,500.00 4,000.00 3/3 Installation of a Chain Link Leone Fence Co. Ltd. 12,065.00 1,206.50 7/2 Fence Restoration of Two Navigation McPherson - Andrews 24,598.00 2,459.80 8/5 Light Towers Contracting Ltd. Wood Removal & Recycling Tuff Recycling Inc. 9,434.80 contract extension TRCA RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PROPERTIES Replace Primary Hydro Line Sturdy Power Lines Servicing at 7702 14th Avenue, Ltd 14,725.36 1,472.54 3/2 Markham 35 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Installation of Underground Holding Tank to Supply Potable Water & Decommissioning an Roger Boadway 15,133.30 1,513.33 5/3 Existing Well at 8327 Steeles Enterprises Ltd. Avenue East, Toronto Roof & Eaves Replacement at 9260 Pine Valley Drive, Tony K. Roofing Inc. 21,300.00 2,130.00 6/2 Woodbridge Repair of Radiator System at 11741 Huntington Road, Spectrum Mechanical 31,500.00 4,725.00 3/3 Kleinbur 203 Ice Storm Tree Clean UP in Eco Quality Tree Care Markham, Pickering & Toronto Inc. 26,250.00 2/2 contract extension 203 Ice Storm Tree Clean UP in ACME Tree Services 17,800.00 2/2 contract extension Vaughan, Brampton & Caledon Roof Repairs at 7959 Steeles Avenue, Toronto, 7450 Reeser Road, Markham, 7629 Reeser Tony K. Roofing Inc. 32,250.00 4,837.50 5/1 Road, Markham & 7754 14th Avenue, Markham VALLEYWOOD TRAIL Engineering Services for Pedestrian Bridge for MMM Group 39,310.00 5,896.50 8/4 Valleywood Trail Link Approximately 700 Tonnes of ILaF ar a North 10 360.00 2 072.00 7/4 PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN License Sustainability Employee Engagement Mobile Software,& Greengage Mobile 20,040.00 2,004.00 3/2 Develop Supporting Campaign - PPG People Power Challenge Software Platform & Database Second Cycle 9,960.00 1,494.00 3/2 Service Centre Feasibility Study 4/2 Consulting Services Ideovation 41,265.00 4,126.50 Social Media Campaign Brown & Cohen 37,855.001 7,571.00 5/2 BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE Pest Control & Hygiene Cannon Services 10,728.00 1,072.80 3/3 Services Research Trip Preparation & Museum Planning 11,600.00 1,160.00 4/1 Post Visit Analysis Partners Horse Drawn Wagon Rides Lionel's Farm 10,500.00 1,050.00 411 Cleaning & Washroom Supplies Mister Chemical 30 457.26 3,045.73 7/1 LAKEVIEW WATERFRONT CONNECTION PROJECT Detailed Designs & Construction Drawings for GHD 70,570.00 21,171.00 5/3 Applewood & Serson Creeks Drilling of Ten Boreholes and linstallation Ten Monitoring Atcost Soil Drilling Inc. 10,935.00 1,093.50 3/3 Wells AMBERLEA CREEK EROSION CONTROL PROJECT Rental of Temporary Chain Link The Fence People 9,078.00 2,204.00 3/3 Fencing Limited Approximately 845 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem Granular B — Type II Trucking / 1035477 12,280.50 2,456.10 biddingo /4 Ontario Ltd. 36 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Approximately 420 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 300 mm — 600 mm Rip Rap Trucking / 1035477 15,540.00 3,108.00 biddingo /3 Stone Ontario Ltd. Approximately 435 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 600 mm — 900 mm Rip Rap Trucking / 1035477 17,182.50 3,436.50 biddingo /2 Stone Ontario Ltd. Approximately 635 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 75 mm — 200 mm Round Stone Trucking / 1035477 22,860.00 4,572.00 biddingo /2 Ontario Ltd. Approximately 2,740 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 100 mm - 150 mm Gabion Trucking / 1035477 80,830.00 16,166.00 biddingo /2 Stone Ontario Ltd. Undertake Construction Inspections & Monitoring During Inspec -Sol Inc. 89,208.00 8,920.80 6/2 Construction of Remedial Works 300 mm - 600 mm Round Stone Glenn Windrem Trucki $150,350.00 $30,070.00 9/2 4- 6 Tonne Armourstone C.D.R. Young's Aggrel $239,712.50 $47,942.50 9/2 Erosion & Sediment Control Nilex Inc. 24,741.641 4,948.33 3/3 KORTRIGHT CENTRE FOR CONSERVATION Exhibit Plan Development The Science Centre 33,441.00 3,344.10 biddin o 9 / 3 Running Power to the Dilisado Enterprises 14,350.00 2,870.00 3/3 Greenhouse Erosion Protection Works Around North and West Sides of Kortright Visitor Centre and Installation of a Wood Staircase TBG Landscaping Inc. $60,771.16 $9,115.67 5/2 Emergency Generator Improvements Summit Engineering In $7,450.001 $1,117.50 3/3 Roof Replacment for Bee Building Tony K 1 $9,718.00 $971.80 3/3 ALBION HILLS CONSERVATION AREA AND FIELD CENTRE Consulting Services for Visitor Services Gatehouse Paul Didur Architect 16,030.86 1,600.00 contract extension Construction Disposal of 2,300 Cubic Metres of Stockpiled Soils, Albion Hills Iron Trio Inc. 60,451.00 6,500.00 27/7 Drainage Improvement Project Supply of Pyrotechnics Display for Caledon Canada Day Pyro World 13,000.00 1,300.00 13/1 Celebration 2014 at Albion Hills Conservation Area Four Seasons Site Emergency Roadway Repairs Development 35,010.00 7,002.00 4/3 Road Base Repairs Diamond Earthworks 81,724.32 8,172.43 5/4 Corporation Limited Upgrade Existing Hydro Service Dilisado Enterprises 24,900.00 9,960.00 5/2 Repair of Roof Trusses at McPherson - Andrews 38,786.00 5,817.90 6/3 Albion Hills Ski Chalet Contracting Limited Repair of Roof Trusses at McPherson- Andrews 16,855.00 contract extension Albion Hills Ski Chalet Contractin Limited Fire Alarm System Upgrades at Simplex Grinnell 37,200.00 3,720.00 3/2 Albion Hills Field Centre 37 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Washroom Tiling Work Berkim Construction 93,765.00 5,000.00 3/3 Inc. Installation of Fire Alarm System Upgrades at Albion Hills Field Dilisado Enterprises 70,970.00 7,097.00 414 Centre BOLTON CAMP Architechtural & Engineering Cool Earth Services for Structure 79,820.00 8,000.00 9/5 Assessment of 21 Buildings Architecture Inc. Bolton Camp Fire Damaged Inflector Environmental 24,950.00 2,495.00 4/3 Building Asbestos Abatement Services ACQUISITION OF VEHCILES & EQUIPMENT One New Utility Vehicle Kooy Brothers 14,900.00 13/2 Equipment New Out -front Mower Green Tractors Inc. 19,325.00 11/3 Nobleton New 4 Seat Utility Vehicle Ed Stewarts 16,000.00 9/3 Equipment Heavy Duty Construction Strongco Equipment 84,700.00 8/2 Loader Mini Skid Steer Vermeer Canada Inc. 32,740.00 12/1 80 PTO Horsepower Utility Kooy Brothers 45,490.00 14/4 Tractor Equipment 60 PTO Horsepower Utility Green Tractors Inc. 33,195.00 12/5 Tractor Nobleton 6" Diesel Water Pump Atlas Dewatering 44,050.00 8/4 Corporation Upfltting Equipment for 2 RAM Hitch City 15,219.90 1,521.99 3/3 350 Pick-up Trucks 40 PTO hp Compact Utility Kooy Brothers Lawn 47,497.00 biddingo (7)/3 Tractor 1 Eg ui ment Tow - behind Brush Chipper Nortrax Canada Inc. 48,990.00 biddin o/4 NEWTONBROOK CREEK BRIDGE PROJECT Construction of Bridge Cedar Springs Abutments & Installation of 79,100.00 19,800.00 19/10 Pedestrian Bridge Components Landscape Group Ltd. Installation of Granular Base Four Seasons Site 53,600.00 5,400.00 4/2 Development SNELGROVE DRAINAGE CHANNEL MAINTENANCE Manhole Maintenance Work at Lakeside Contracting Snelgrove Drainage Channel, Company Ltd. 12,750.00 2,000.00 6/3 City of Bra m ton Temporary Bypass Pumping Xylem 29,536.00 3,000.00 4/3 System Works HEART LAKE CONSERVATION AREA Upgrade of Birchview & Beach Arc General 40,426.82 4,042.68 biddingo /14 Centre Washrooms Contracting Inc. Design -build Services for Ameresco Canada Administration & Workshop Inc. 144,769.35 contract extension Centre Installation of Chain Link Security Fence Around Leone Fence 25,470.00 2,600.00 5/4 Administration & Workshop Centre njLej LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Supply, Delivery & Rental of Five 8'x 20' Metal Storage Moore Equipment Ltd. 1,032.00 contract extension Containers DON VALLEY BRICK WORKS Approximately 750 tonnes of 5 mm Limestone Screenings for Lafarge Canada 14,595.00 2,919.00 7/7 the Quarry Trails Approximately 11750 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 19 mm Crusher Run Limestone 35,595.00 7,119.00 7/7 for the Quarry Trails Trucking MARIGOLD CREEK STREAM RESTORATION AND ROAD CROSSING ENHANCEMENT PROJECT Approximately 400 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 250 mm — 600 mm Round Trucking 17,840.00 1,784.00 4/2 Stone Approximately 300 Tonnes of 150 mm — 300 mm Round Glenn Windrem 13,380.00 1,338.00 4/2 Stone Trucking DUFFINS CREEK CANOE DOCK INSTALLATION AND SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECT Approximately 390 Tonnes of Natural Stone Source 22,912.00 2,291.20 biddingo /3 Armour Stone Two Tonne Ontario Approximately 653 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 100 mm — 200 mm Gabion 17,794.25 1,779.43 biddingo /3 Stone Trucking Wooden Framed Floating Dock Premium Dock and with Aluminum Ramps & 15,927.00 1,592.70 4/4 Railings at Ajax's Rotary Park Marine Systems KENNEDY VALLEY WEST BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT Engineering Services Cole Engineering 18,280.00 3,656.00 6/5 Group Ltd. Approximately 350 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 250 mm — 450 mm Round Trucking 15,610.00 3,122.00 19/1 Stone Approximately 575 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 450 mm — 650 mm Round 28,117.50 5,623.50 19/1 Stone Trucking FLOOD PLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM Digital Topographic Base Mapping in Caledon, Vaughan First Base Solutions 18,464.00 4/3 & Whitchurch- Stouffville Digital Topographic Base Airborne Imaging 14,341.74 4/3 MaDDinq in Toronto BOYD CONSERVATION AREA Washroom Upgrades GTA General 64,525.00 12,905.00 5/3 Contractors Ltd. Washroom Pathways GTA General 29,700.00 5,940.00 5/4 Accessibility Upgrades Contractors Ltd. Geomorphic & Hydrotechnical Assessment & Preliminary Ecosystem Recovery Design Alternatives for At -risk Inc. 18,145.00 2,000.00 7/5 Low Flow Crossing at East Humber River WARWICK NURSERY EXPANSION Approximately 750 Tonnes of James Dick 18,637.50 3,727.50 7/6 19 mm Clear Limestone Construction Ltd. 39 LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Approximately 3,300 Tonnes of Lafarge Canada 39,270.00 7/6 Granular Pit Source Approximately 1,350 Tonnes of James Dick 22,167.00 7/6 19 mm Crusher Run Limestone Construction Ltd. Canadian Irrigation Equipment H d rd Ltd. ro aens 18,331.50 3,666.30 6/1 JENNIFER - WHITBURN POST -STORM EMERGENCY WORKS Approximately 250 Tonnes of 2- C.D.R Young's 4 Tonne Uniform Stackable Aggregates Inc. 13,200.00 6,600.00 18/3 Armourstone Approximately 250 Tonnes of Nelson Aggregates 8,330.00 4,165.00 18/4 400mm- 600mm Rip Rap Approximately 550 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 16,225.00 8,112.50 18/4 100mm- 200mm Gabion Stone Trucking Limited EAST HUMBER RIVER AT LANGSTAFF ROAD REHABILITATION PROJECT Approximately 355 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 600mm — 800mm Natural Trucking 17,217.50 6,887.00 Round Stone Approximately 220 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 400mm — 600mm Natural 10,670.00 4,268.00 Round Stone Trucking FINCH HYDRO CORRIDOR MULTI -USE TRAIL Approximately 1,000 Tonnes of James Dick 19mm Crusher Run Limestone Construction Limited 18,820.00 1,882.00 18/9 Approximately 1,100 Tonnes of James Dick 20,702.00 2,070.20 18/9 50mm Crusher Run Limestone Construction Limited Terraseeding Services King Hydroseeding 12,120.00 1,200.00 312 Tipping Fees to Dispose of 2,200 Cubic Metres of TBG Landscape Inc. 14,300.00 1,430.00 4/4 Stockpiled Clean Fill Material MUD CREEK RESTORATION Approximately 800 Tonnes of 2- Glenn Windrem 4 Tonne Uniform Stackable 46,400.00 4,640.00 18/3 Armourstone Trucking Limited Creek Bypass Pumping Works Xylem Water Solutions 76,050.00 15,210.00 411 Approximately 297 Tonnes of C.D.R Young's 10 400.94 1,040.09 18/2 Approximately 305 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 10,675.00 1,067.50 12/3 150 -300mm Gabion Stone Trucking Rental of Temporary Chain Link The Fence People 10,280.00 2,056.00 4/1 Fencin Limited Approximately 874 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 18,834.70 1,883.47 12/3 50mm Crusher Run Limestone Trucking VALLEYFARM ROAD TRAIL Approximately 2,000 Tonnes of James Dick 33,440.00 6,688.00 7/6 19 mm Crusher Run Limestone Construction Ltd. 700 Tonnes of 19 mm Crusher James Dick Run Limestone Construction Ltd. 11,704.00 2,340.80 contract extension CHERRY BEACH PARKING LOT AND DRAINAGE ENHANCEMENT PROJECT Approximately 1,200 Tonnes of Glenn Windrem 26,220.00 2,622.00 10/3 19mm Crusher Run Truckin Approximately 160 Tonnes of 2 INatural Stone Source Tonne Armourstone 10n tario 9,200.00 920.00 10/3 i ' LOWEST BID & HIGHEST RANKED APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received SNOW REMOVAL Six Residential /Leased Cyrstal Lawn and Properties & Vacant Residential Snow Removal Inc. 23,360.00 2,336.00 12/3 Rental Pro erties 950 and 1229 Bethesda Griffith Property 12,235.00 1,223.50 4/3 Sideroad, Richmond Hill Services Inc. Snow Removal Services for Bruce's Mill Conservation Area A.l, Roadtech Services $12,950.00 $1,295.00 3/2 Snow Removal Services for G.Ross Lord Dam and Claireville Dam Crystal Lawn & Snow $6,505.001 $650.50 3/3 Snow Removal Services for Head Office and Black Creek Pioneer Villa a A.I. Roadtech Services $10,340.00 $1,034.00 3/3 HIGHLAND CREEK NEAR 15 COLONEL DANFORTH TRAIL MAJOR MAINTENANCE PROJECT Detailed Design of Replacement Bank Stabilization Greck and Associates & Erosion Control Works Near Ltd. 18,635.00 15,000.00 6/4 15 Colonel Danforth Trail, Toronto Approximately 500 Tonnes of TBG Landscape Inc. 13,390.00 1,339.00 20/6 300mm - 600mm Rip Rap Stone Approximately 1,900 Tonnes of TBG Landscape Inc. 41,705.00 4,170.50 20/5 100mm -200mm Gabion stone Approximately 1,500 Tonnes of TBG Landscape Inc. 85,875.00 8,587.50 20/6 3-4 Tonne Armourstone TRCA INTERM HEAD OFFICE PROJECT - INTERIOR RENOVATION PROJECT Consulting Services for Office Relocation, Space Planning & Ward99 Architects 84,000.00 12,600.00 6/4 Design Struct -Con Awarded by Chair & Interior Alterations 1,287,000.00 193,050.00 13/11 CEO under Authority Construction Ltd. Resolution #A119/14 Awarded by Chair & Office Furniture POI Business Interiors 957,152.10 143,572.82 3/2 CEO under Authority Resolution #A119/14 SUBTOTAL 9,325,338.06 1,256,175.98 GRAND TOTAL LOWEST BID 10,581,514.04 41 SOLE SOURCE APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Sole Source Cost not to Criteria Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency (Section 9.2 of Comments Plus HST TRCA's Purchasing Policy) 30 Acoustic Telemetry Fish Transmitters & 6 Range Test VEMCO (AMIRIX 19,964.00 3 Includes shipping Tags Systems Inc.) Supply of 25 Litres of "TreeAzin" BioForest Inc. 13,725.00 3 No. 9 Contemporary Imagine My Sustainable City Art and The 10,000.00 3 No HST Exhibition Environment Four Season Preceipitation Hoskin Scientific Gauges & Logging Equipment Ltd. 21,101.00 3 SUBTOTAL 64,790.00 0.00 GRAND TOTAL SOLE SOURCE 64,790.00 42 PREFERRED SOURCE APPROVALS 2014 calendar fear Preferred Cost not to Source Criteria Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency (Section 9.3 of Comments Plus HST TRCA's Purchasing Polmcyi Undertake Asset Mapping for Greater Toronto Area 4DM Inc. 30,000.00 3 Agriculture Action Committee Development of Financial DTAH & N. Barry Feasibility Strategy of New Lyons Consulting 22,500.00 3 TRCA Headquarters Ltd. Humber River Watershed Hydrology Model (Phases 1 & Civica Infrastructure 40,000.00 3 2 Preliminary Slope Stabilization Contract Design Alternatives - 441 - 449 Sarafinchin Associa 6,557.44 Extension Guildwood Parkway, Toronto University /College Partnership Mohawk College of Supporting the LDC Tomorrow Applied Arts and 20,000.00 5 Fund Technology A ualab Re airs Bristol Marine 11,167.12 3 Update the 1 D /2D Hydraulic Model & Engineered Floodline DHI Group 12,670.00 3 Mapping for Spring Creek Tributary Update the 1 D /2D Hydraulic Model & Engineered Floodline DHI Group 6,340.00 Contract Mapping for Spring Creek Extension Tributary Professional Property Valuation & Realty Consulting Services 2 for Purchase or Lease of 101 Exchange Way D. Bottero & Associ 13,560.00 Detailed Designs to Protect Sanitary Sewer Line at 4 Parish Geomorphic 1 28,000.00 4,000.00 3 Locations in Patterson Creek Fish Food for Glen Haffy Martin Mills Inc. 18,164.60 1,816.46 4 Conservation Area Social Media Campaign and Contest Services in support of the 2014 Let Your Green Show iRise- Media.com (IR 42,700.00 3 Climate Change Communications Initiative in Peel Region Detailed Designs to Protect the Sanitary Sewer Line - 2180 Langstaff Road (P -127) Parish Geomorphic 1 15,330.00 6,000.00 3 Sanitary Infrastructure Protection Protect CTD75M Water Sampler Sea and Sun Technj 34,179.20 1 Consulting Services to Develop a Potable Water Management Gamsby and Manne 15,000.00 1,500.00 3 Strategy 43 Bypass Pump System to Divert Flows Around Isolated Work Area to Allow Encasement of an Exposed Sanitary Pipe, I- Rain for Rent 28,159.72 6,000.00 2 048: West Don River Near Dufferin & Centre Street Sanitary Infrastructure Protection Protect Head Office Server Equipment Dell Canada 42,399.00 4,239.90 1 CCTV Scan of Existing Storm Sewer Infrastructure & the Cut & Removal of an Existing Root Blockage to Faciliate the CCTV Braywood Services 12,480.00 3,120.00 2 scan at the Jennifer - Whitburn Post -Storm Emergency Works, Toronto Electrical Work to Restore Power to Black Creek Pioneer Ainsworth Inc. 15,720.00 3,144.00 2 Village Detailed Designs to Protect the Sanitary Sewer Line & Previous Ecosystem Recover 14,400.00 2,000.00 3 Bank Protection Works in the Humber River Watershed Metal Screen to be Constructed Around the Staff Booth Lane Metal Installati 48,500.00 3 Windows at Tommy Thompson Park Emergency Water Line Repairs Clearway Constructi 11,527.66 2 at Lake St. George Field Centre Attend & Participate in the Chorley Park Trail Design - R.V. Anderson and 18,000.00 3,600.00 3 Stakeholder Working Group Meetings as Technical Expert Install a Filtrexx EdgeSaver System to Provide Low- impact Organic Express 17,605.00 2,000.00 3 Temporary Protection of 34 Garden Avenue, Richmond Hill Technical Support Services to Original contract Acoustic Doppler Current approved by Executive Profiler Program in Humber Bay AS[ Global Limited 76,600.00 15,320.00 Contract Committee so CEO Extension can approve any contract extensions Engineering Support for The Municipal Designs & Studies in Progress Infrastructure 20,000.00 4,500.00 3 SNAP Performance Survey Environics Researct 10,000.00 3 Eight Steel Road Plates for United Rentals 23,600.00 1 Construction Bridges Emergency Hydro Reparis /Reconnects for Multiple Sturdy Power Lines 21,041.53 2 Rental Properties Undertake Water Quality & Circulation Modeling at Modelling Surface 8,000.00 2,400.00 3 Lakeview Waterfront Connection Protect Amberlea Creek Erosion Control Project - Construction Inspections and As- Builts A uafor Beech Limi $54,955.00 $13,738.75 3 i i BCPV Boiler Room Equipment I Maintenance Canadian Air Techn $6,090.00 $609.00 3 cquisition of ne New Plus customs /border Material Spreader J. Pyott &Associate 19,931.54 1,993.15 3 fees BOLTON CAMP REDEVELOPMENT Consulting, Coordinating & George Brown Executing a Charrette Re: College: Institute 30,320.00 3,032.00 5 Repurposing Bolton Camp without Boundaries Consulting, Coordinating & George Brown Executing a 2nd Charrette Re: College: Institute 16,040.00 contract Repurposing Bolton Camp without Boundaries extension JULY 8TH, 2013 STORM DAMAGE Detailed Design of Stabilization Terraprobe Inc. 37,405.00 4,000.00 2&3 Works for 2 -4 Jennifer Court Detailed Design of Stabilization Terraprobe Inc. 44,045.00 4,500.00 2&3 Works at 111, 117, 137 and 139 Whitburn Crescent Detailed Design of Stabilization Terraprobe Inc. 23,770.00 5,000.00 2&3 Works for 5 Old Yonge Street Detailed Design of Stabilization Works at 114 Cambome Terraprobe Inc. 18,665.00 2,000.00 3 Avenue Detailed Design of Stabilization Works at 24 Bennington Terraprobe Inc. 22,000.00 2,000.00 3 Heights Detailed Design of Stabilization Terraprobe Inc. 7,000.00 contract Works for 2-4 Jennifer Court I I I extension ENHANCING RESILIENCE TO SEVERE WEATHER AND CLIMATE CHANGE Professional Services Pertaining to Climate Change Nodelcorp Consultin 30,000.00 3&5 Risk Assessment & Application of PIEVC Protocol Professional Services Pertaining to Climate Change Risk Assessment, Production of Risk Sciences Interr 49,000.00 3&5 Climate Data & Analysis, & Development of Climate Ada tation O bons TOTAL 1,043,422.81 96,513.26 GRAND TOTAL 1,139,936.07 45 NOT LOWEST BID APPROVALS 2014 calendar year Number of Cost not to Quotations Project/Product Awarded Bidder Exceed ($) Contingency Requested/ Comments Plus HST Complete Bids Received Roof & Eaves Replacement at 2272 Meadowvale Road, Tony K. Roofing Inc. 22,400.00 2,240.00 6/2 Scarborough Albion Hills Dam Hydraulic Greck and Associates Analysis & Fluvial Geomorphic 13,540.00 3/3 Assessment Limited SUBTOTAL 35,940.00 2,240.00 GRAND TOTAL NOT LOWEST BID 1 38,180.001 1 M RES. #A26/15 - GOOD NEWS STORIES Overview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities from October - December, 2014. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: David Barrow THAT the summary of Good News Stories from October - December, 2014 be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND As per Authority direction during 2006, a report covering highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) activities is provided to the Authority every few months. The stories for October - December, 2014 are as follows: October • TRCA, together with a number of researcher partners, including the University of British Columbia, University of Ottawa, Trent University and Ministry of Natural Resources, has received a Strategic NSERC (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council) grant of approximately $600,000 over three years to undertake research into the cumulative effects of headwater alteration on watershed health. Conservation authorities extensive datasets will be used in this study, and this work also has excellent opportunities to link to other studies TRCA is collaborating on relating to stream connectivity and urban stream flow /sediment transport processes. • Albion Hills Field Centre celebrated its 50th anniversary. • Annual salmon run in Highland Creek was attended by 675 people. • Research collaborative including TRCA and two Ontario universities received $650,000 over three years from NSERC to assess success of stormwater management and restoration in mitigating the impacts of development on rivers and streams. • Partners in Project Green (PPG) 2014 People Power Challenge Winners are: Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, Colliers International, Velcro & Kuehne + Nagel. Collectively 16 teams achieved over 34,000 pledges and 2,700 suggestions resulting in 1,708 conservation projects. • Partners in Project Green hosted a networking event - the Duke Out. 174 businesses were there and attendees said "it surpassed all expectations" and that they "made some new connections and hopefully some more business ". • Partners in Project Green supported Bosch for their internal waste audit. Results will be used to create a learning video guide to help other organizations conduct their own waste audit. • Lange Transportation in Mississauga became the first business to complete their charging station installation under the PPG EV (electric vehicle) Network Pilot Project, installing two publicly accessible, networked Level II stations. • Work has begun at Calstone Inc. to install a rooftop rainwater harvesting system, custom infiltration pond and permeable pavement walkway to offset 3.2 million litres of water per year by spring 2015. Through Partners in Project Green's collaboration with XCG Inc., Grounds Covered, and Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP), effective on -site stormwater management can be achieved despite limited available greenspace. 47 • TRCA helped develop and present an Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol training course in Thunder Bay in partnership with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. This was the first course of its kind to be offered in Northern Ontario. Based on its success, another course is proposed in Sault Ste. Marie next year. • 100 Intact Insurance employees participated in a planting initiative at Alfred Khuene channel naturalization project in the Region of Peel delivered in partnership with University of Waterloo, Canada Climate Project, TRCA, The Living City Foundation (LCF) and Intact Insurance. • Ontario Climate Consortium received a grant of $50,000 from Great Lakes Integrated Science Assessment Program, University of Michigan to undertake climate risk assessment work with the Regional Municipality of York and its local municipalities. • MP Bernard Trottier representing Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) announced $40,000 for shoreline naturalization work currently being constructed by Restoration Services on Toronto Islands. The DFO funds are provided by the Recreational Fisheries Conservation Partnerships Program. • Spirited Affair fundraising dinner for Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) was attended by 135 people and raised $18,800. • National Wetland Conservation Fund providing $30,000 to Carruthers Creek Coastal Marsh Wetland Restoration for $30,000 and $59,938 for Turtle Habitat Re- creation, Toronto Zoo. • 80 people attended the Designing Infiltration Practices Workshop. November • The Living City Policies unanimously approved by the Authority, with positive support from stakeholders and the building industry. • The Living City Environmental Dinner was a success with 400 people attending and net revenue of nearly $100,000. • Secured $5,000 from the Durham Community Foundation for Claremont Field Centre, the maximum grant they can award and LCF's first gift from this donor. • Direct mail campaign has started successfully with letters going to LCF previous and lapsed donors. • Albion Hills Conservation Area secured three year contracts for both Mud Hero Adventure Race and Summer Solstice 24 Hour Mountain Bike Race. Hosting these two events will result in $500,000 in revenue for TRCA. • Capping began at Cell 2 at Tommy Thompson Park, putting the project ahead of schedule. • Town of Ajax has requested TRCA to do pond clean out at two ponds at about $300,000, and help them to manage their inventory of ponds. • Ajax completed construction of three rain gardens in the vicinity of Lake Driveway to treat stormwater runoff and improve water quality to Lake Ontario. • Trees for Life has approved funding to plant and maintain 20 new caliper trees at Heart Lake Conservation Area. These first 20 trees are part of a larger proposal that, when approved, would see up to 200 trees planted at various TRCA conservation parks that experienced December 2013 ice storm damage and associated shade and canopy tree losses. • TRCA's Restoration Services Centre is sporting a newly installed solar photovoltaic (PV) system. As of December 19, 2014, the PV panels are generating power and feeding back into the local grid. Through the New Independent Electricity System Operator's (IESO) Feed -In Tariff (FIT 2.0) program, TRCA will receive payments for power generated and supplied to the grid for a period of 20 years. It is anticipated that the 46.15kW PV system will generate an annual revenue stream of $28,000- 30,000. i • WaterTAP media tour stopped at the PPG collective infrastructure project at Calstone Inc. Representatives from the Ministry of Economic Development, the Ministry of Research and Innovation, as well as three trade publications witnessed the innovation introduced at this rainwater harvesting and infiltration project site, which aims to offset 3.2 million litres of water annually. • TRCA staff at Downsview Office diverted a total of 14,835 kg of materials away from landfill (95% diversion rate) as part of TRCA's office cleanup. • Greater Toronto Airports Authority renewed their support for the PPG program. The commitment adds up to over $1 million over five years. • Downsview transportation team is the recipient of the 2014 Champion of the Year award from Smart Commute, North Toronto, Vaughan. December • The Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Reconstruction Project is substantially complete -- the official opening will take place in June 2015. • The amended Source Protection Plan for the CTC Source Protection Region was submitted to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change on December 15th. This document, when approved, will constitute the policies to protect our current and future sources of drinking water. It represents the penultimate achievement of the CTC Source Protection Committee, which has worked with our municipal partners, staff, consultants, stakeholders, and watershed residents since 2006 to assess potential threats to drinking water sources and develop policies to mitigate those threats. • Bentall Kennedy working with PPG to convert 22 parking stalls into permeable pavement at their RBC site on Financial Drive in Mississauga. A preliminary site assessment was completed and construction is scheduled to take place in the spring of 2015. • PPG facilitates the exchange of 146 unused gaylords of resin (46,355 kgs) between Velcro and Greensolutions Industries. • A generous donation of 20.21 hectares (49.94 acres) of ecologically sensitive land from Lorna Ann Milne was completed on December 30, 2014; the acquisition was completed in accordance with Environment Canada's Ecological Gifts Program. The securement of the Milne property will ensure the long term protection of the ecologically sensitive attributes of the site which are of limited representation within the TRCA watersheds. • BCPV had lots of Christmas programming and its very popular "Christmas By Lamplight " evening events on December 6, 13 and 20. Members of the public turned up to enjoy live music, take part in ballroom dancing, engage in old- fashioned taffy pulls and enjoy chestnuts roasted over an open fire. • On December 17th, BCPV was the setting for a play of Charles Dickens' famous story "A Christmas Carol." This wonderful story was presented by the Humber River Shakespeare Company in cooperation with BCPV. • The Swan Lake Centre renovation was completed and TRCA's new tenant, York Region District School Board, moved in to begin preparations for their outdoor education program that will operate out of the building. • Renovations began on TRCA's new Interim Head Office in Vaughan. F119-1 • Construction of the Amberlea Creek Erosion Control Project was initiated in Pickering, with substantial completion expected by the end of March 2015. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: February 4, 2015 RES. #A27/15 - IN THE NEWS Overview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities from October to December, 2014. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: David Barrow THAT the summary of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) media coverage from October to December, 2014 be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND As per Authority direction during 2006, a report covering highlights of TRCA's news coverage for the preceding few months is provided to the Authority on a quarterly basis. Media Coverage Highlights There were 42 media mentions located through a news archives database (FP Infomart) for the period from October through December, 2014 of TRCA or TRCA properties and programs (example: Tommy Thompson Park). The media hits resulted in a total circulation /reach of approximately 5.1 million with a total advertising value of $163,000. These results only reflect a portion of media coverage since the database does not monitor on -line media, event listings, broadcast radio /tv interviews, smaller community papers and trade publications. The highlights below are examples of noteworthy media coverage received during the period: October 0 October 6: North York Mirror "Path beyond pioneer village leads to more remote north property" — a "behind- the - scenes" look at the north property of Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) including a description of its history, current uses and structures. 0 October 10: Toronto Star (News) "Wild in the City" — a story about the upsurge of the cottontail rabbit population. TRCA staff explained how constant moisture over the growing period has led to successful plant growth, thereby creating a regular food source for the rabbits. The article goes on to discuss threats to the population by predators and the rabbits' well -known proclivity to reproduce. 50 • October 10 - Etobicoke Guardian (News) "Recalling the power of Mother Nature, 60 years after Hurricane Hazel" - a story about the lessons learned and preventative actions taken 60 years after Hurricane Hazel. TRCA staff figured prominently in this piece, discussing the historical significance the hurricane had on flood plain management and how we still need to respect Mother Nature. • October 10 - North York Mirror "Pre- Thanksgiving at pioneer village does holiday proud" - article describing Thanksgiving programming at BCPV, including an overview of the history of the holiday. • October 10 - Stouffville Sun - Tribune 'Trek through Stouffville's trees to help Autism Ontario" - information about an initiative by Treetop Trekking to raise funds for Autism Ontario by donating a portion of revenues from public treks at its Bruce's Mill Conservation Area location on October 19. • October 12 - Beach Mirror (News) "5 Things you should know about Hurricane Hazel" - a five -point story on Hurricane Hazel with facts supplied by TRCA. • October 16 - Etobicoke Guardian (News) "Model boaters wade through bureaucratic red tape trying to clean sailing pond" - a story about the sailing pond at Humber Bay Park East and how one user group is frustrated by the weed and algae growth on the pond they have used since 1958. TRCA staff explains the funding challenges and why aquatic herbicides cannot be used there. A revitalization plan will examine the pond's use in the future. • October 22 - Caledon Enterprise (Opinion) "Hurricane Hazel was a wake -up call" - an editorial looking back at the lessons learned in the aftermath of Hurricane Hazel, 60 years ago. MTRCA mentioned as being formed in 1957, spurring flood plain management and regulation in the Toronto region. • October 22 - North York Mirror "Water sustainability workshop at pioneer village" - a description of the sustainable rainwater management workshop presented by Water Sustainability British Columbia at BCPV. • October 24 - Scarborough Mirror (News) "Future of Guild Inn, fire trucks among issue in Scarborough East Council race" - $3 million allocated through TRCA for an environmental assessment along the Guild shoreline. • October 27 - Caledon Enterprise (Opinion) "Black- crowned night heron" - a column on a sighting of these rare birds and how their numbers are declining in comparison to those of the double- crested cormorants. TRCA supplied statistics on nests of each. • October 29 - Beach Mirror (News) "Enjoy a free guided tour of Riverdale's rain gardens" - event listing of TRCA's Walk the Don Riverdale Rain Gardens tour. • October 29 - Mississauga News (Sports) "Runners go the distance in cross country championships" - results of the Region of Peel cross country championships held at Heart Lake Conservation Area. November • November 9 - Toronto Star (Insight) "Raucous Blue Jay on the Rebound; Vulnerable to the West Nile virus, the noisy thieves' numbers seem to be rebounding around town" TRCA staff offers opinion that there appear to be more blue jays recently. Tommy Thompson Park bird research station coordinator estimates he has observed about 10,000 of them flying over the station during peak migration. • November 12 - Pickering News Advertiser (Letter to the editor) "Cell Tower Placement in Pickering" - two Pickering residents express their dismay that a cell phone tower is planned to be erected in Petticoat Creek Conservation Area. They hope to raise the issue with the City of Pickering. 51 • November 14 - CBC News (online) "As snow looms tell us why you love winter" - cross country skiing at Albion Hills Conservation Area is mentioned as one of the reasons to love winter in the Toronto region. • November 14- thestar.com (Life) "GTA landlords, developers, discover value in planting, nurturing" and November 15 - Toronto Star (New in Homes) "Community gardens grow on landlords; tree programs can build long -term viability into developments" - a story about how Toronto landlords and developers are buying in to the value of planting trees, flowers and vegetable gardens because of the way these create `community'. TRCA fact used in the piece: 33% of people asked who live in the Jane /Finch corridor what would make their neighborhood feel safer said, the planting of more trees. • November 16 - thestar.com (Business News) "Overhaul of Don River mouth could spur Port Lands development" - a story on how the plan to naturalize the mouth of the Don River may yield both environmental and financial benefits. TRCA staff discusses how the work being done to the Keating Channel will encourage fish habitats, the same that are found in Lake Ontario presently, as well as birds who will keep the insect population controlled in the area. • November 21 - Stouffville Sun - Tribune (News) "Stouffville mayor packing for uncertain future" - in an interview with outgoing Stouffville Mayor Wayne Emerson, he lists the development of the BMX track at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area as one of the things he is proud to have been a part of. • November 25 - Ontario Farmer (News) "Headwaters Horse Country: Let the Pan -Am Games begin! 830 people prepare their town for the most excitement since the filming of The Incredible Journey" - a story about preparations being made at the Caledon Equestrian Park for Pan -Am equestrian competition. TRCA mentioned as a contributing partner and owner of the land. • November 29 - Toronto Star "25 great ways to celebrate the season: From markets to food tours - even a cruise with Santa - Toronto has plenty of events" - information about all Christmas programming at BCPV. December • December 1 - East York - Riverdale - Leaside Mirror (News) "Sisters of the St. Joseph and Notre Dame and Shim - Sutcliffe Architects win Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Award" - a story on the St. Joseph residence, whose renovation was completed in March of 2013, has won a TRCA award for protecting and including nature's beauty and diversity in its scope. • December 6 - The Globe and Mail "Holiday Events" - information about Christmas by Lamplight at BCPV. • December 11 - The Weekly Gleener (News) "A Christmas Carol to Ring in Christmas" - description of the Humber River Shakespeare Company's production of "A Christmas Carol" visiting locations including two performances at BCPV. • December 15 - Bloor West Villager (News) "High Park ponds restoration underway by City of Toronto, TRCA" - a story on the partnership between the City of Toronto and TRCA to undertake a pond clean -out and restoration project at Wendigo Pond. Howard Pond and Rideout Pond will be cleaned out when work is completed at Wendigo. • December 17 - Toronto Star (Greater Toronto) "Toronto's Real Divide isn't Yonge Street: East and west are both great south of Bloor, but the north end has issues we must address" - an opinion piece arguing that areas of the City of Toronto north of Highway 401 do not get the same attention as areas to the south. BCPV is mentioned as one of only a handful of attractions in the north. 52 December 22 - Mississauga News (News) "City wins award for urban forestry planning" - a story on Mississauga winning a Communities in Bloom award for Urban Forestry for its Natural Heritage and Urban Forest Strategy and Urban Forest Management Plan. Partners mentioned include TRCA. December 24 - Toronto Star (Greater Toronto) "Celebrating Christmas in the Warm Glow of Lamplight: Black Creek Pioneer Village Takes us Back to the 1860s" - description of the reporters visit to Christmas By Lamplight, emphasizing how different Christmas was in the 19th century. December 30 - thespec.com (News) "Invasion of snowy owls in Toronto a concern for airports" and December 31 - Toronto Star (Greater Toronto) "Influx of snowy owls a concern at Pearson; Spike in numbers of five -pound raptors, seeking food next to runways, poses a challenge for wildlife managers" - a story on how the influx of snowy owls to the GTA is a safety concern for aircraft and how both Pearson and Billy Bishop airports are coping. TRCA staff explained how the migration of snowy owls into the Toronto region (and out of their own normal range) is due to a shortage of their primary food source of lemmings. Report prepared by: Rick Sikorski, extension 5414 Emails: rsikorski @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rick Sikorski, extension 5414 Emails: rsikorski @trca.on.ca Date: February 18, 2015 RES. #A28 /15 - SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD Moved by: Michael Di Blase Seconded by: Mike Mattos THAT Section IV item EX9.1 - 2015 Budget Process, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #1/15, held on February 6, 2015, be received. CARRIED ONTARIO REGULATION 166/16, AS AMENDED RES. #A29 /15 - APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick 53 THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, items EX10.1 - EX10.12, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #1/15, held on February 6, 2015, be received. CARRIED TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:40 a.m., on Friday, February 27, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 54 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer DON MOUTH NATURALIZATION AND PORT LANDS FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 78 FOREST HEALTH AND EMERALD ASH BORER Annual Update m STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR CONSERVATION OF TRCA CULTURAL HERITAGE PROPERTIES IN THE HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED 90 2015 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS City of Toronto 105 BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP WITH ENERLIFE CONSULTING INC. 109 VALLEYWOOD TRAIL AND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PROJECT PHASE 1 Award of Contract for Engineering Services 111 SUPPLY OF OPERATED HEAVY CONSTRUCTION AND SPECIALTY EQUIPMENT Contract #10000235 114 WILD WATER KINGDOM Upgrade and Revitalization of the Water Park 120 137 WHITBURN CRESCENT EMERGENCY WORKS Contract RSD14 -195 — Construction of Shoring Wall Project 120 GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed, Bayview Ravine Estates Limited 124 YORK UNIVERSITY PROPOSAL FOR LEASE OF LAND 9741 Canada Company Avenue City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York Humber River Watershed 124 ORCHARD RIDGE (PICKERING) G.P. INC. Request for a Permanent Easement for a New Storm Sewer Outfall, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Lake Ontario Waterfront 126 LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS Meadowbrook Golf and Country Club Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River Watershed 127 LEASE EXTENSION FOR BRUCE'S MILL CONSERVATION AREA Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River Watershed 128 ACQUISITION OF VEHICLES ROUGE NATIONAL URBAN PARK FREEDOM OF INFORMATION Summary of 2014 Requests SENIOR STAFF EXPENSES ALBION HILLS FIELD CENTRE PHASE 5 RETROFIT PROJECT Extension of Contract RSD14 -199 128 128 136 137 142 Toronto and Region 40 C onserwation Authority MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #3/15 March 27, 2015 The Authority Meeting #3/15, was held in Weston Room B, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, March 27, 2015. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:47 a.m. PRESENT Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member David Barrow Member Ronald Chopowick Member Vincent Crisanti Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Chris Fonseca Member Rob Ford Member Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Mujeeb Khan Member Matt Mahoney Member Glenn Mason Member Mike Mattos Member Ron Moeser Member Anthony Perruzza Member Gino Rosati Member Cynthia Thorburn Member Jim Tovey Member ABSENT Paul Ainslie Member Ben Cachola Member Justin Di Ciano Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Jennifer O'Connell Member Linda Pabst Member John Sprovieri Member 55 RES. #A30 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Ron Moeser Mujeeb Khan THAT the Minutes of Meeting #2/15, held on February 27, 2015, be approved. CARRIED (a) A delegation by Mr. Jim Robb, General Manager, Friends of the Rouge Watershed, in regard to update on Rouge National Urban Park in the context of the Greenbelt Plan and Rouge Watershed Plan. (b) A delegation by Alan Latourelle, CEO, Parks Canada and Pam Veinotte, Field Unit Superintendent, Rouge National Urban Park, in regard to the Rouge National Urban Park Initiative. (c) A delegation by Alan Wells, Past Chair, Rouge Park Alliance, in regard to Progress on the Rouge National Urban Park Initiative. RES. #A31 /15 - DELEGATIONS Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT The Honourable Peter Kent, MP, Thornhill and The Honourable Pauline Browes be added to the agenda as delegations (d) and (e) in regard to the Rouge National Urban Park Initiative. CARRIED RES. #A32 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: DELEGATIONS David Barrow Ronald Chopowick THAT above -noted delegations (a) - (e) be received. CARRIED (a) A presentation by David Burnett, Senior Manager, Provincial and Regional Policy, TRCA, in regard to item AUTH7.1 - Oak Ridges Moraine Report Card. 56 RES. #A33 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Ron Moeser Ronald Chopowick THAT above -noted presentation (a) be received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #A34 /15 - OAK RIDGES MORAINE AND ADJACENT GREENBELT LANDS Report Card on the Environmental Health. Report Card results on the environmental health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and adjacent Greenbelt lands. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick WHEREAS a key program of conservation authorities is the monitoring of and reporting on watershed environmental conditions; AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has partnered with eight other conservation authorities since 2000 to advance the science and understanding of the Oak Ridges Moraine through the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC); THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Report Card on the Environmental Health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands be received; THAT TRCA staff promote the Report Card results and recommendations at provincial workshops, through the commenting process and at other opportunities during the coordinated review of the four provincial plans; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority on the creation of an action plan to implement the recommendations of the Report Card. CARRIED BACKGROUND In preparation for the 2015 provincial review of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) and the Greenbelt Plan (GP), the nine conservation authorities (CA) that form CAMC developed the Report Card on the Environmental Health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands (copies will be available at the meeting). The purpose of the Report Card is threefold: • To provide science -based monitoring data and analysis to help inform the 10 -year review of the provincial land use plans for the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) and Greenbelt. • To report on the environmental health of the ORM and adjacent Greenbelt lands (i.e., the study area). 57 • To recommend on- the - ground actions and additional tools needed to maintain, improve or restore the environmental health of these important lands. The CAMC is a group of nine CAs with watersheds on the ORM. The CAMC was formed in 2000, two years prior to the ORMCP, in response to the need for a comprehensive policy, planning and management approach geared to sustaining the health of the entire ORM. The CAMC is a partnership organization, collaborating with numerous groups and individuals to achieve common objectives which include undertaking science -based research on the ORM, providing opportunities for recreation across the ORM, taking action for the protection and restoration of the ORM, and providing expert advice for environmental planning and policy matters to support a robust and resilient environment across the ORM landscape. TRCA staff act as the secretariat to coordinate the work of the CAMC. The ORM and Greenbelt lands provide essential ecosystem services that the residents of south central Ontario rely on every day. Forested areas reduce soil erosion, clean the air, moderate temperature and provide wildlife habitat. Wetlands and other greenspaces absorb rain and snow, replenish drinking water aquifers, regulate stream flow, protect aquatic habitat and prevent downstream flooding. Farmlands provide healthy foods and economic value to local communities, while the scenic natural landscape offers numerous recreational opportunities. The continued protection and enhancement of these lands, and their links to local natural heritage systems in the urban landscape, is also a key strategy for climate change mitigation and resilience for all lands included within the provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Report Card Development The ORMCP and GP are implemented through decisions on matters and applications made under the Planning Act (e.g., official plan and zoning by -law amendments, plans of subdivision and severances). The indicators were selected to determine if the following environmental goals and objectives of the two plans were being met through Planning Act applications: • protect, maintain and enhance natural heritage and hydrologic features and functions; • restore linkages between and among these features; and • protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of ground and surface water and the hydrological integrity of watersheds. The indicators selected and methodologies used for this Report Card were based on two prior projects: 1) Conservation Ontario's province -wide watershed report card project launched in 2013; and 2) the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation (ORMF) and CAMC joint document "Measuring Success on the Oak Ridges Moraine" released in 2011. A team of technical experts from the nine CAs selected nine key indicators to assess the environmental health of the study area lands and waters, grouped into four categories: • Forest Conditions (includes Percent Forest Cover, Percent Forest Interior and Percent Riparian Zone Forested); • Surface Water Quality (includes Total Phosphorus and Benthic Macroinvertebrates); • Groundwater Quality (includes Nitrate and Chloride); and • Coldwater Fish and Stream Temperature, which was added as a new indicator to assess trends of potential future cumulative impacts from climate change and land use changes or activities. RM Majority funding support for the Report Card was provided by the Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation, with additional contributions by the CAMC and the ORMF. The Report Card is considered to provide a baseline against which future report cards using the same indicators and methodology can be assessed for trends. Trend information is necessary for assessing the effectiveness of the plans over time. To prepare for the Province of Ontario's formal announcement of the plan review process, a communications strategy was developed with the help of Conservation Ontario to guide the rollout of the Report Card. Upon the formal announcement, the Report Card, a one page backgrounder and cover letter, were mailed out to ORM municipalities, MPs, MPPs and relevant ENGOs across the ORM. A press release was also sent out to newspapers across the ORM to announce the launch of the Report Card. In addition to the printed copy of the Report Card each of the nine CAs developed a local web -based report card with more specific information about their watersheds which can be found on the CAMC and local CA websites. A methodology document was also prepared so that the methodology could be duplicated for future iterations of the report card. For more details on the provincial plan review see the staff report included in this agenda entitled "2015 Review of the Four Provincial Plans." Summary of Report Card Findings The Report Card findings show that the implementation of the ORMCP and GP through Planning Act applications is generally satisfactory to maintain existing forested areas, aquatic habitat and groundwater resources. However, the Report Card concludes that implementation through the Planning Act alone is not sufficient to achieve the plans' other goals and objectives to restore and enhance the environmental health and integrity of these environmentally significant lands. Other tools are needed. Data compiled from 2008 -2013 revealed the following results on a study area basis for each of the four indicators: • The Forest Conditions overall grade across the study area is "B" or "good conditions." This indicates that large amounts of forest cover in critical areas of the ORM are being maintained. However, few large patches of undisturbed forest exist except in the core area with little evidence of improvement or restoration of forest cover in other plan designation areas. • Surface Water Quality overall grade across the study area is "C" or "fair conditions" with almost half of the subwatersheds assessed assigned grades of "fair," "poor" or "very poor." Subwatersheds with better surface water quality appear to be associated with a greater extent of forest/riparian cover and more protective plan designations. • Groundwater Quality is considered locally good across the study area, with the majority of samples collected showing background levels of chloride and /or nitrate. It was found that chloride levels in nearly 30% of samples along roadsides and in urban areas are trending upward. • Coldwater Fish communities (brook trout and sculpin) and coldwater Stream Temperatures are found evenly distributed across the ORM and adjacent Greenbelt lands. This indicates suitable habitat conditions are found across the study area and that these lands provide a strong foundation for fish habitat management related to rich groundwater resources and good natural cover. 59 The TRCA local web -based report card shows that Forest Conditions within TRCA subwatersheds on the ORM and adjacent Greenbelt lands score a "C" grade. In contrast, Forest Conditions for TRCA's entire jurisdiction score a poorer "D" grade (Toronto and Region Watersheds Report Card 2013). This difference in scores highlights the importance of the ORM and Greenbelt lands as a key area of forest habitat within TRCA watersheds. Surface Water Quality in TRCA's subwatersheds within the study area scored a "D" grade as compared to the "C" grade scored for this indicator over the entire study area. This result is attributed in part to the lesser degree of forest cover and forested riparian area within TRCA watersheds on the ORM, as well as by surface runoff from adjacent land uses such as rural settlement areas, roads and agriculture. Groundwater Quality, as well as Coldwater Fish and Stream Temperature results for TRCA subwatersheds aligned with the Report Card results for the entire study area. The Report Card identifies that further work is vital to ensure the preservation of this significant natural heritage landscape. Further stewardship activities, new administrative tools and secure funding are needed to fully restore and enhance the environmental health of these lands and build on the progress made to date. Planned development, infrastructure projects and the impacts of climate change will place increasing pressure on the ORM in the years ahead. Additional restoration and enhancement work must begin almost immediately if we are to preserve the progress made to date and sustain a natural environment that is resilient to the pressures of growth and climate change. Recommended Actions The Report Card recommends a number of stewardship projects that the Province, CAs, municipalities, environmental groups, local farmers, business and residents could undertake. Based on the detailed scientific data in the Report Card, together with the watershed plans developed by individual CAs, CAMC and its partners can target exactly where this restoration work should be done. • Strategic planting of trees, shrubs and other native vegetation is needed to expand and connect forest patches and other habitats, control invasive species and protect coldwater streams. • Marginal farmlands and areas along the banks of rivers and streams should be re- naturalized to improve water quality and moderate stream flows. • All new development, site alteration and infrastructure projects on the ORM should meet strict standards to control erosion, ensure the use of uncontaminated fill and minimize the release of sediment into streams. In addition, tree cutting and fill by -laws should be vigorously enforced. • Municipalities and /or provincial agencies should implement source protection plan policies as soon as possible to better manage road salt, commercial fertilizers and livestock manure. • Stable funding to encourage greater uptake of environmental farm plans and private land stewardship initiatives would reduce environmental pressures and help achieve restoration objectives. • • Ongoing monitoring of environmental conditions should be expanded in order to fill gaps in the data, reveal developing problems, and gauge whether restoration activities have been successful. NEXT STEPS Conservation authority staff will promote the findings and the recommendations of the Report Card during the 2015 review of the four provincial plans. Additionally, CAMC will begin to focus on creating an action plan to build on the findings of the Report Card to develop strategies around land securement, stewardship and implementation of Report Card recommendations. TRCA staff will advise the Authority on the progress of the action plan at a future meeting. Report prepared by: Kathy Padgett, extension 5687 Emails: kpadgett @trca.on.ca For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca Date: March 09, 2015 RES. #A35/15 - 2015 REVIEW OF THE FOUR PROVINCIAL PLANS Formulating TRCA comments on the four provincial plans included in the 2015 review. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Ron Moeser WHEREAS the Province of Ontario is undertaking a coordinated review of the Greenbelt Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has mandated roles and responsibilities in the land use planning and development process; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff provide a formal response to the Province on the first phase public consultation questions contained in Attachment 1 by May 28, 2015; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report back to the Authority on comments submitted and progress of the review. CARRIED 61 BACKGROUND On February 27, 2015, the Province of Ontario formally announced the coordinated review of the Greenbelt Plan (GP), the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP), the Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP) and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan), and to merge all future 10 -year reviews of these plans. An advisory panel consisting of David Crombie (former Toronto Mayor), John MacKenzie (Vaughan planning commissioner), Keith Currie (Ontario Federation of Agriculture), Rae Horst (formerly of Credit Valley Conservation), Leith Moore (Urban Fieldgate Homes), and Debbie Zimmerman (Grape Growers of Ontario) will lead consultation with public and stakeholders to provide input to Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) Minister Ted McMeekin and Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) Minister Bill Mauro. The ministries are seeking public feedback through a series of Regional Town Hall public consultation sessions and written comments submitted through the Environmental Registry by May 28, 2015. This first phase of consultation seeks input to inform the development of amendments to the plans while the second phase will be to consult on the proposed amendments, if any. A background document entitled "Our Region, Our Community, Our Home" ( http:// www .mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx ?did= 10759) was developed by MMAH to help inform and guide discussions and describes the plans and their objectives, highlights important policy issues and sets out questions (see Attachment 1 for list of questions) to be considered in the review. TRCA planning staff in the Planning, Greenspace and Communications Division will consult with other staff to formulate a TRCA response to the provincial consultation process. TRCA staff will also take the lead in developing the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC) position during the review process. TRCA has been the coordinator /secretariat of CAMC since 2001. The CAMC is a group of nine conservation authorities (CAs) with watersheds on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM). The CAMC was formed in 2000, two years prior to the ORMCP, in response to the need for a comprehensive policy, planning and management approach geared to sustaining the health of the entire ORM. TRCA and CAMC Previous Positioning on the Provincial Lands TRCA and CAMC have been actively involved in preparing for the coordinated review of the plans and developing a consistent position over the last few years through various opportunities: In 2013 the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation (ORMF) hired a consultant to conduct interviews with CA staff to explore potential changes to permitted uses in the ORMCP. The process involved internal meetings with relevant TRCA staff to provide a TRCA perspective and inform TRCA positioning. A separate process coordinated the comments made by the nine CAMC conservation authorities to develop a consolidated CAMC position. As a result of this process, CA staff wanted to see the Natural Core and Linkage Area designation policies remain strict while allowing for a little more flexibility outside of these areas, especially with respect to agricultural uses. • In the spring of 2014 the CAMC provided formal comments to the regions of Durham and York and Town of Caledon in response to their call for comments on the 2015 Provincial Plan review. A TRCA representative also sat on Durham's project working group to provide input at key stages of the consultation process. 62 CAMC indicated in their comments that both the ORMCP and GP have been largely effective in achieving their respective purposes of landform and landscape protection and offered a number of recommended improvements to increase the effectiveness of the plans, such as: harmonizing terminology and interpretations in the plans to reduce inconsistencies in policy interpretation and application; enhancing flexibility for rural uses in both plans; and improving plan implementation support. In addition to these high level recommendations, the CAMC also suggested a number of specific ORMCP policy revisions, such as: providing greater direction on "no reasonable alternative" with respect to infrastructure policies; developing policies related to green energy; adding a sunset clause to the Section 48 transition provision; and ensuring the relevant sections of the ORMCP are updated to align with source water protection science and policies. TRCA staff participated in a process to inform the development of Conservation Ontario's positioning on the upcoming provincial review of the GP, NEP and ORMCP. The position paper released in the summer of 2014 outlines key issues that CA staff would like to see included in the provincial review process, such as: including watershed planning in the GP and NEP, similar to the ORMCP; promoting the use of green infrastructure whenever possible; harmonizing terminology and interpretations between the three plans; and developing a broader definition of agriculture and its activities to encourage innovation while maintaining the plans' integrity with regard to protection of water resources and natural heritage. Additionally, since January 2013 TRCA Chief Executive Officer, Brian Denney has participated in a multi - stakeholder roundtable hosted by the Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation to discuss Areas of Agreement on the three plans. The 2015 Review Summit Group provides a forum for a cross section of agricultural, environmental and conservation groups to identify common interests for the coordinated review and provides an opportunity to hear other stakeholders positioning. Key principles include: enabling the long -term economic viability of agriculture; supporting a prosperous rural economy; preventing fragmentation and degradation; enhancement and restoration of natural heritage and biodiversity; and consistent implementation and interpretation of the plans. TRCA staff participated in a process to inform the development of Conservation Ontario positioning on the upcoming provincial review of the Growth Plan. The position paper released in the fall of 2014 outlines key issues that CAs would like to see included in the provincial review process. Comments include: Growth Plan intensification targets appear to be in conflict with the natural hazard policies of the Provincial Policy Statement and that intensification should only take place outside of natural hazard areas; intensification targets should be set within the lens of complete sustainability and must do more to protect our water resources; and that the end product of the planning process should be one that maximizes the use of development lands while avoiding impacts on natural systems. 63 Report Card on the Environmental Health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands In preparation for the 2015 Provincial review process, CAMC developed the up -to -date, science -based Report Card on the Environmental Health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands to evaluate the environmental health of these landscapes. The Report Card recommends on- the - ground actions, by -laws and other administrative tools, and additional resources needed to maintain, improve and restore these important lands. Additionally, each of the nine CAs developed web -based report cards detailing more specific information about their own subwatersheds. For more details on the Report Card see the staff report on this agenda entitled "Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands Report Card on the Environmental Health." TRCA and CAMC Involvement in the Review Process TRCA will be involved in the review process by attending provincial workshops, ENGO sessions, etc. as they arise and will distribute Report Cards and promote its recommendations and results as appropriate. Additionally, CAMC members and TRCA staff have already made presentations on the Report Card to the Greenbelt Council and at a workshop hosted by the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation and will make future presentations as we are invited to do so. TRCA staff will work to formulate strategic recommendations by canvassing senior management, planning and technical staff for their input and any'lessons learned' from their experience using the plans. It is anticipated that TRCA recommendations will address a number of emerging issues, such as: suggesting criteria to evaluate and recommend new lands that should be added to the Greenbelt; raising concerns about some developments in the middle to upper reaches of the watersheds being dependant upon permanent dewatering of the aquifer; compensation for natural features lost to infrastructure development; strong requirements to address hazards during development, especially in intensification areas; and stronger policies to address water management in the newly developing greenfield areas to address flooding hazards and the potential need for regional controls. TRCA staff will advise the Authority of comments made. Report prepared by: Kathy Padgett, extension 5687 Emails: kpadgett @trca.on.ca For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: dburnett @trca.on.ca Date: March 09, 2015 Attachments: 1 • Attachment 1 Consultation Questions on the Four Provincial Plans Question 1: How can the plans better support the long -term protection of agricultural lands, water, and natural areas? a. How can the plans better direct urban development to areas already developed? b. Where are the opportunities to expand the Greenbelt both within urban areas, such as urban river valleys, and in rural areas beyond the Greater Toronto Area? c. What new approaches or tools could be used to protect agricultural land, water and natural areas? d. How can we grow and strengthen the region's network of open spaces to provide for recreational opportunities? e. How can the agricultural protection that the plans provide enhance the impact of agriculture on Ontario's economy? Question 2: How can the plans be strengthened to ensure our communities make best use of key infrastructure such as transit, roads, sewers and water? a. How can the plans better leverage transit investments across the region? b. How can the plans better promote livable, walkable communities that use new and existing infrastructure in the most cost - effective way? c. How can the plans align long -term infrastructure planning with planning for growth? d. How can the plans better support goods movement by all modes of transportation? e. How can the plans identify and better protect the strategic infrastructure corridors needed over the long term? f. How can the plans better balance the need for critical infrastructure to support economic growth with environmental protection? Question 3: How can the plans continue to support the design of attractive, liveable and healthy communities that are accessible to all Ontarians at all stages of life? a. How can the plans provide more direction on designing: i. Communities that have the right layout and mix of parks, natural areas, public spaces and people- focused streets? ii. A safe and interconnected network of streets that support walking and cycling, and that are connected to our transit networks and key destinations? b. How can the plans better support the development of a mix of housing that meets the needs of the region's growing population, including affordable housing? c. How can the plans better protect heritage buildings, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources? Question 4: How can the plans better support the development of communities that attract workers and the businesses that employ them? a. How can the plans better support the development of vibrant office and mixed -use employment areas near existing and planned transit, as well as the protection of industrial and commercial uses, particularly those near critical transportation infrastructure? b. What is the role of retail in building vibrant communities and how can the plans support or direct retail development? 65 c. How can the plans balance the need for resource -based employment, including the agri -food and mineral aggregates resource sectors, with protecting the natural environment? d. How can the plans' policies better support and foster vibrant rural economies while taking into account the character of rural areas and communities? Question 5: How can the plans help address climate change? a. How can the plans contribute to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions? b. How can the plans provide more direction on building resilient communities that can withstand extreme weather events related to climate change? c. Is there a need to consider new policy approaches in the plans to increase the resiliency of our communities by reducing the development pressures on natural areas, open spaces and flood prone areas? Questions 6: How can the implementation of the plans be improved? a. Are there opportunities to better align key components of the plans with each other, and with other provincial initiatives? Are there ways to reduce overlap and duplication? b. What policies of the plans do you feel have been successful and should be retained? c. Should the province develop any additional tools or guidance materials to help support implementation? d. Are there any opportunities to better facilitate implementation? e. Do the plans appropriately distinguish the differences between urban and rural communities? • • RES. #A36/15 - CANADA - ONTARIO AGREEMENT ON GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY AND ECOSYSTEM HEALTH Renewal of Agreement, 2014 -2019. Comments of support regarding the Canada - Ontario Agreement on Great Lakes Water Quality and Ecosystem Health. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase WHEREAS the 2014 -2019 Canada - Ontario Agreement on Great Lakes Water Quality and Ecosystem Health (COA) was signed by the federal and provincial governments on December 18, 2014; WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) acknowledges its support to the governments of Canada and Ontario for the signing of the Canada - Ontario Agreement on Great Lakes Water Quality and Ecosystem Health; WHEREAS, in its comments on the last working draft of the COA, TRCA called for a commitment to increasing the scale and intensity of watershed actions that result in Great Lakes water quality and ecosystem improvements; additional emphasis on addressing urban threats to the Great Lakes by developing a comprehensive approach to addressing the major threat to nearshore water quality and biodiversity posed by the urbanized and urbanizing landscape; WHEREAS the western end of Lake Ontario is recognized as the fastest growing Great Lakes region and one of the fastest growing areas in North America, yet, there is no recognition of this ongoing stress to the Great Lakes in COA and no mention of proactive measures to prevent or mitigate the impacts the growth will have; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the provincial and federal governments be requested to work together with municipalities and conservation authorities (CA) within the western end of Lake Ontario to address this urban threat in a holistic and innovative manner; THAT the provincial and federal governments be requested to commit to engaging municipalities, CAs and others in the western basin of Lake Ontario to develop an informed and visionary strategy to proactively manage urban growth and retrofit our urbanized landscapes within this basin; THAT TRCA staff continue with their delivery of stewardship and conservation actions, monitoring and science, and continue to be leaders in implementation of climate change adaptation techniques to meet the COA objectives; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff provide comments to the Province of Ontario encouraging them to recognize the important contributions of CAs to the protection of the Great Lakes in its review of the Conservation Authorities Act and implementation of the Great Lakes Protection Act. CARRIED 67 BACKGROUND The Canada - Ontario Agreement on Great Lakes Water Quality and Ecosystem Health came into effect on December 18, 2014, with a five year commitment from both the governments of Canada and Ontario. COA assists the Government of Canada in meeting commitments under the Canada - United States Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). The purpose of COA is Yo restore, protect and conserve Great Lakes water quality and ecosystem health in order to assist in achieving the vision of a healthy, prosperous and sustainable region for present and future generations'. The COA agreement establishes 14 Annexes that address environmental issues or management functions which are priorities to the COA Parties and will benefit from cooperative and coordinated action. The Annexes are: I. Nutrients II. Harmful Pollutants III. Discharge from Vessels IV. Areas of Concern V. Lakewide Management VI. Aquatic Invasive Species VII. Habitat and Species VIII. Groundwater Quality IX. Climate Change Impacts X. Science XI. Promoting Innovation XII. Engaging Communities XIII. Engaging First Nations XIV. Engaging Metis Each of the Annexes specifies: 0 goals for the Great Lakes specific to the subject of the Annex, and that, in the opinion of the Parties, are the long -term articulation of what both Parties will strive to achieve; 0 results that the Parties will pursue in order to contribute towards the achievement of the stated goals; and commitments that each of the Parties will deliver jointly or separately for the duration of the Annex in order to contribute to the achievement of the stated goals and results. TRCA submitted comments on the draft COA on June 27th 2014 through the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) #011 -9290. In addition to comments specific to each Annex, TRCA encouragec the Parties to formally acknowledge the role CA play in delivering their COA commitments. While the role of CA was not formally recognized in the final COA, their role is formally recognized in the Great Lakes Protection Act which is currently in front of the Ontario legislature. Conservation Ontario also submitted comments on the draft COA on June 26th through the EBR posting. TRCA continues to play a substantial role in helping the governments of Canada and Ontario meet the goals of a number of the Annexes. Below is a brief overview of some of the goals and results under COA that are advanced by TRCA projects and programs: Olt Annex 1, Nutrients, includes several goals and objectives that are currently being undertaken through TRCA's Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program (STEP). For example, the 2014 COA calls for a reduction in contaminant loads from stormwater runoff through monitoring and the implementation of green infrastructure practices, also known as Low Impact Development (LID). Since its initiation in 2005, STEP has completed over 20 detailed monitoring evaluations of green infrastructure practices. The Program has also prepared design guidance documents, produced literature reviews and developed life cycle costing tools to help accelerate adoption of the technologies. Results of the research are shared through the STEP website, an annual two day conference, e- learning courses on LID and several professional training events delivered across Ontario every year. Effective management of nutrients from human activities is another topic given special emphasis in the 2014 COA. STEP has been actively working to find methods to reduce nutrient releases through green infrastructure and reactive media that will help retain phosphorous and thereby reduce nutrient loading to surface waters. A project planned for 2015 will evaluate the effectiveness of a reactive media incorporated within the soil media of a bioretention system to help better retain nutrients in stormwater runoff and prevent leaching of nutrients from soil media. Earlier research has shown this to be a common problem with bioretention systems. Various other projects aimed at reducing sediment discharges from construction sites provide guidance and support to ensure existing and future stormwater infrastructure are appropriately maintained; these projects also help to fulfill the COA goals of protecting aquatic life and reducing nutrient loading to area streams and water bodies. Annex 4, Areas of Concern, applies directly to the Toronto Area which was designated as one of the original 44 Areas of Concern. Under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between the United States and Canada, each Area of Concern must implement a Remedial Action Plan (RAP). TRCA, through an agreement with each of the Parties, leads the administration of the Toronto and Region RAP. The RAP team consists of representatives from Environment Canada (EC), Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), and TRCA. The RAP team is currently developing a five year work plan and communications strategy with the goal of delisting Toronto and Region as an area of concern by 2020. Annex 4 also speaks specifically to the implementation of the Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy (TWAHRS), which is administered through TRCA under Aquatic Habitat Toronto (AHT). AHT is a consensus based partnership consisting of representatives from all three levels of government who work with both the public and private sector to facilitate projects along the Toronto waterfront. • • TRCA staff has recently completed the public consultation on the final draft of the'Lake Ontario North Shore Urban Recreational Fisheries Plan'. This plan was developed in consultation with CA partners to the east and west of TRCA's jurisdiction and assists in meeting goals under Annex 5, Lakewide Management. Many of TRCA's other restoration projects help to fulfill the overarching purpose of this Annex, which is to'advance restoration, protection and conservation of the Great Lakes through collaboration among jurisdictions domestically and binationally and with the Great Lakes community on a lake -by -lake basis'. This Annex also includes commitments to assess and address threats to drinking water. TRCA is the lead agency of the CTC Source Protection Region (Credit Valley, Toronto and Region, and Central Lake Ontario) which collectively oversees the protection of drinking water for this region. TRCA staff, along with many other CAs participate on coordinating committees for the Lake Ontario Management Plan and other Great Lake initiatives. The emphasis of Annex 6, Aquatic Invasive Species, is on the reduction of threats of aquatic invasive species to the great lakes. Through an agreement with Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), TRCA assists the sea lamprey control program wherein sea lamprey are actively managed and prevented from accessing the upper reaches of the Humber and Duff ins watersheds. The creation of wetlands at Tommy Thompson Park is one of many examples of projects at TRCA that contribute to the overarching purpose of Annex 7, Habitat and Species, which focuses on the restoration, protection and conservation of Great Lakes native species and their habitats. Research has shown that temperature sensitive fish are able to take refuge in the cells and embayments over winter as well as during upwelling events in the lake. The sheltered, warmer water of the cells and embayments provide nursery habitat for fish, enabling Tommy Thompson Park to act as a source of fish for the harbour. Under Annex 8, Groundwater Quality, TRCA has worked with the regional municipalities of York, Peel, Durham and the City of Toronto on the YPDT groundwater studies for many years. The YPDT staff is housed at TRCA and share their expertise and knowledge of groundwater aquifers and groundwater movement and travel times with their colleagues around the Great Lakes to help address COA objectives for groundwater linkages to the Great Lakes. The Ontario Regional Climate Change Consortium (ORCCC) which TRCA administers works towards all of the goals outlined under Annex 9, Climate Change Impacts. Specifically they recently drafted a report in collaboration with McMaster University, MNRF and EC called "The State of Climate Change Science in the Great Lakes Basin - 2015 ". This report is currently being reviewed by the Annex 9 subcommittee and will be guiding research and science priorities in support of Annex 9 directly over the next few years. MNRF is using it to prioritize their climate change programming and the hope is that others will also make use of it. The ORCCC, in conjunction with McMaster, EC and the International Join Commission, is also currently leading a process to develop information on "Confidence Gaps in Climate Change Science" that the Annex 9 subcommittee, and the Great Lakes Adaptive Management Committee, will use to guide their work over the next few years. 70 TRCA's waterfront acoustic tagging project is a perfect example of the overall objective of Annex 10, Science: 'enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of Great Lakes science activities through planning, cooperation, coordination and communication'. Acoustic receivers are deployed throughout the harbour, and in the surrounding area. Tags that emit a signal are implanted in fish, and the receivers pick up the signal allowing researchers to estimate the location of the fish, as well as their depth and the temperature of the water. The results from this project are used to direct restoration activities, as well as providing important information on movement and over wintering behaviour of the fish. The project is being undertaken collaboratively with DFO, EC, MNRF, Carleton University and the University of Toronto. Also under Annex 10, TRCA staff is also involved in a number of collaborative science initiativeE focused primarily on the flow of nutrients and pathogens from the watersheds, through the nearshore areas and reaching the offshore environments in Lake Ontario. Understanding the transport and fate of nutrients along this pathway is critical for addressing residents' concerns with rotting cladophora (algae) and beach postings. TRCA nearshore water quality studies across the Pickering and Ajax waterfronts are supporting agencies and municipalities in their regulatory responsibilities for the provision of safe drinking water and cost effective wastewater treatment. Annex 12, Engaging Communities stresses the need for opportunities for individuals and groups W to enjoy and help take care of the Great Lakes. The Yellow Fish Road program and Aquatic Plants Program, both delivered by TRCA engage school children. Additionally, TRCA's Education staff has engaged in four initiatives that support teacher and student learning about the Great Lakes: • development of a Great Lakes teacher resource; • development of delivery of workshops that offer various Specialist High Skills Major certificates through a Great Lakes lens; • preparation of a dossier outlining teacher experiences on or around Lake Ontario which familiarizes them with Great Lakes issues; • development and execution of a student conference to enlighten high school students about Lake Ontario issues and introduce them to career opportunities related to the Great Lakes. TRCA, through its administrative role for the Toronto Remedial Action Plan has hosted "Lake Ontario Evenings ", a seminar series held in Toronto providing opportunities for the public to engage with Great Lakes experts on many topics. The above is a brief highlight of projects and programs undertaken by TRCA that meet the COA goals and results, it is by no means exhaustive and is meant to give an overview of the many ways in which TRCA contributes to the COA. A copy of the COA can be found electronically at http: / /www.ec.gc.ca/grandslacs- greatlakes Report prepared by: Meg St John, 647 - 298 -4422 Email: mstjohn @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, 416 - 258 -1409 Email: ngaffney @trca.on.ca Date: March 09, 2015 71 RES. #A37/15 - COMMUNITY FOCUSED WATERSHED AND WATERFRONT ENGAGEMENT MODEL Update on TRCA's Approach. Approval to initiate the process to update Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's community focused watershed and waterfront engagement model. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has almost 60 years of experience and extensive expertise in collaborating with stakeholders and grassroots organizations in all aspects of watershed and waterfront management; AND WHEREAS TRCA recognizes the important role watershed and waterfront engagement (including Duff ins- Carruthers Watershed Resource Group, Rouge Park Alliance, Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Humber Watershed Alliance and Etobicoke - Mimico Watersheds Coalition and their predecessors) has played for over two decades in building community stewardship capacity to help TRCA meet The Living City objectives, planning and implementation priorities of watersheds and waterfront plans /priorities; AND WHEREAS the existing two year term of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Humber Watershed Alliance and Etobicoke - Mimico Watersheds Coalition sub - committees of the Authority will end in spring - summer 2015; AND WHEREAS TRCA's Strategic Plan (2013 - 2022) calls for engagement of a broad cross - section of the population employing unique outreach tools and collaboration models to capitalize on TRCA's current strengths and avail new opportunities; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff undertake a review of TRCA -wide public engagement and new opportunities for community and stakeholder activities and involvement, in light of recent trends and opportunities in civic engagement; THAT TRCA staff, current members of community -based subcommittees, community leaders and other stakeholders be consulted throughout the process as appropriate; THAT the current members of watershed committees in the Don, Humber and Etobicoke - Mimico be recognized and thanked at the end of their current term in 2015, for their outstanding contribution to the work of TRCA with an appropriate recognition event; AND FURTHER THAT a report on the proposed model be brought back to the Authority. CARRIED 72 BACKGROUND Watershed and Waterfront Committees TRCA watershed and waterfront committees, community action sites and task forces have been instrumental in supporting TRCA watershed and waterfront based approaches, including the Rouge Comprehensive Basin Management Strategy (1988), where TRCA formed a citizen based "public committee" and the 1989, Greenspace Strategy, which committed to a program of watershed strategy development for each of TRCA's watersheds in cooperation with a public advisory committee for each. When the Don Watershed Task Force was formed in 1992 to develop a watershed plan for the Don River, it marked an evolution to multi - stakeholder group empowered with the responsibility of guiding the development of a plan. The efforts of the Don Watershed Task Force resulted in the publication of Forty Steps to a New Don in 1994. This was followed by the establishment of the Humber Watershed Task Force in 1994, which produced Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber and A Call to Action, both published in 1997. The Etobicoke - Mimico Watersheds Task Force developed Greening our Watersheds in 2002. The three above -noted watershed management plans received numerous planning awards. Following the completion of each of the watershed management plans, implementation committees were established. These committees included watershed residents and representatives from businesses, academia, agencies and local groups. Elected officials and municipal staff have also been part of these committees, directed by a TRCA watershed specialist and other TRCA staff, all working to address the issues identified in the watershed plans, report cards and municipal priorities. These different implementation models demonstrated a tailored approach to the needs of each watershed and the waterfront. In the early years of watershed planning, TRCA's community engagement approach was both unique and effective in addressing the needs of collaborative watershed and waterfront management work. Each watershed and waterfront committee was established with a formal community -based structure and was responsible for reporting to the Authority on a regular basis. In 20 years of operation, some of the greatest accomplishments of these committees include: development and implementation of watershed plans and report cards for the Don, Humber and Etobicoke - Mimico watersheds including: • Forty Steps to a New Don (1994) • Legacy. A Strategy for a Healthy Humber (1997) • Turning the Corner - The Don River Watershed Report Card (1997) • Time for Bold Steps - The Don River Watershed Report Card (2000) • A Report Card on the Health of the Humber River Watershed (2000) • Greening Our Watersheds (2002) • Breathing New Life Into The Don - The Don River Watershed Report Card (2003) • Turning Over a New Leaf - The Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks Watersheds Report Card (2006) • Forging A New Deal For the Don - The Don River Watershed Report Card (2006) • Listen to Your River - A Report on the Health of the Humber River Watershed (2007) • Pathways to a Healthy Humber - Humber Watershed Plan (2008) • Beyond Forty Steps - Don River Watershed Plan (2009) • Etobicoke - Mimico Creeks Watersheds Technical Update Report (2010) • Watershed Report Cards (2013) 73 • engagement of the community and partners, including First Nations, in the designation of the Humber as a Canadian Heritage River in 1999; • publication of a trail guides, fact sheets, a heritage bridge inventory, Humber River. The Carrying Place (2009), as well as other education and stewardship based material; • securing support and resources for trails and restoration projects; • inception and support of business outreach initiatives such as Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco- Business Zone (PPG) (this program engages over 600 business on an annual basis); • support of TRCA's Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Program (SNAP); • facilitating collaborations and partnerships to advance The Living City objectives; • delivering projects and activities to help meet Remedial Action Plan (RAP) and Canada Ontario Agreement goals; • advocacy and support of environmental policies; • development and implementation of conservation area management plans through participation on conservation area stewardship committees; • development of urban agricultural initiatives on TRCA lands; • implementation of fishways to restore migratory fish populations; • heritage appreciation through hikes, monuments and building restoration; • habitat restoration including reforestation, wetland creation and invasive species removal; and • community mobilization and engagement of approximately 500,000 residents through restoration projects, shoreline clean -up's and celebration events such as Paddle the Don; Bike the Creek; Sunny Days; and Heart Lake Dragon Boat festival. A Sampling of Other Community Engagement Activities at TRCA Watershed and waterfront residents and stakeholders are also engaged in TRCA activities through various other programs including: 1) Conservation Lands Stewardship Committees: These committees have been established to help with the implementation of conservation land management plans and trail plans for TRCA properties. TRCA's current stewardship committees include: • Palgrave Trail Stewardship Committee; • Heart Lake Committee; • Altona Forest Stewardship Committee; • Glen Major Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. 2) TRCA Conservation Parks Community Engagement Activities: TRCA provides sustainable and accessible nature -based recreation and adventure tourism experiences for residents through events throughout the year. For example, events such as the maple syrup festivals draw more than 40,000 people annually. Black Creek Pioneer Village events and activities engage an average of 50,000 people annually. 74 3) TRCA Stewardship and Outreach Education Programs: TRCA provides nature -based education in schools and in the community. Residents are engaged through tree, shrub and wildflower planting, litter clean up events, nature walks and homeowner workshops with a focus on landscaping for water conservation. A total of 12,000 individuals participated in 200 of these events in 2014. The Multicultural Connections program focuses on outreach to new Canadians at their place of worship, through outdoor events and during their English as a Second Language classes. A total of 4,000 newcomers participated in TRCA's outreach programs over the past year. Through curriculum linked, mobile, environmental education programs, TRCA visits elementary and high schools across the GTA to deliver the Watershed on Wheels program, the TM Aquatic Plants program and the Yellow Fish Road program. In 2014, a total of 28,400 students were engaged through these three programs. 4) Integrated /multi- objective or sector -based programs including SNAP, PPG and community transformation programs that aim to find ways to overcome barriers to sustainable approaches. A variety of innovative engagement techniques are being tested to address barriers associated with community and stakeholder participation and to address technical, financial and policy barriers. These engagement activities will continue to inform the watershed and waterfront engagement approach going forward. RATIONALE For 20 years, TRCA's watershed and waterfront committees, working closely with conservation lands stewardship committees and stewardship programs, among others, have achieved success in the implementation of key TRCA and municipal priorities. While this approach has been very successful in leveraging selected groups of committed supporters, it may have been limited in advancing broader and deeper mobilization to build community capacity. TRCA's Strategic Plan (2013 - 2022), Building The Living City, lays out the strategic directions the organization intends to pursue for the ten year period from 2013 to 2022. The Plan calls for " engagement of a broad cross - section of the population employing unique outreach tools and collaboration models to capitalize on our current strengths and avail new opportunities." To support the implementation of current watershed strategies and associated initiatives, and to prepare for the periodic updates of watershed and waterfront strategies, staff need to consider a broader approach to engagement of watershed and waterfront communities. There is a growing trend in civic engagement that strives to marry organization, technology and a culture of developing citizen leadership to advance important issues and scaling up innovative projects across jurisdictions. In light of these trends, TRCA needs to broaden its community engagement approach to continue to build community capacity towards achieving our Strategic Plan objectives. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The current term of TRCA's watershed committees ends in the spring of 2015. Staff seek approval to initiate the process of updating the current engagement model immediately after the current term of watershed committees. The proposed process will include the following activities: 75 a) background research into trends and opportunities in civic engagement and community mobilization; b) internal consultation with TRCA divisions and teams; c) external consultation with TRCA's current watershed, waterfront and stewardship committees, Parks Canada, First Nations, municipal partners and relevant stakeholders; d) an interim engagement plan to continue support for existing signature projects and community -based watershed and waterfront initiatives throughout 2015. e) final report on the proposed engagement model to be presented to the Authority in the summer of 2016. 2015 -2016 Interim Watershed Engagement Activities Throughout the development of the new community- focused watershed and waterfront engagement model, it is important to continue to provide opportunities for the community to take active roles in the protection and conservation of the watersheds and the waterfront and to build momentum on community -based signature projects across watersheds. To accomplish this, the following initiatives, and many others, will continue to be supported by TRCA's watershed and waterfront teams during the interim period. 1) Manulite Paddle the Don Target Dates: 02115 to 05115 Experience a natural adventure in an urban environment. Once a year TRCA provides a unique opportunity for people to paddle the Don River. The event is all about having fun, enjoying nature, and celebrating the Don River watershed. The trip also provides a time for reflection on all the benefits we derive from the natural environment - air, water, resources, recreation and spiritual renewal - that are integral to the health and function of the city and the surrounding region. The Don Watershed Regeneration Council is a vital part of the event's success, and this event would provide a meaningful engagement opportunity for this watershed committee during the interim planning and development period. 2) The Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival Target Dates: 05115 to 09115 The Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival is an event that was developed to celebrate the Etobicoke and Mimico creeks watersheds. Funds raised from the Festival will go towards the naturalization and restoration work being done by TRCA within the two watersheds. Complementing the action on the water is the natural beauty of what is one of Peel's favorite and most frequented public parks. Within the distinctive setting of Heart Lake Conservation Area, the Festival will deliver a day of fun that will be the highlight of the fall. With significant support from the Etobicoke - Mimico Watersheds Coalition, this project will provide a perfect opportunity for volunteers to maintain involvement in community- focused engagement activities during the interim period. 76 3) Interactive Watershed Application "Your Watershed as it Happens" Target Dates: 02115 to 03116 An online and interactive web -based tool will be developed as an opportunity to explore more robust online engagement with watershed and waterfront communities, partners and stakeholders. The first phase of this project scheduled to take place between 02/15 and 03/16 will focus on the development of key elements of functionality for the interactive platform, and will involve the collection of user stories from the community to build the foundation for this signature watershed project. 4) Other Community Driven or Municipal Events TRCA will continue to support events across the watersheds and waterfront, primarily led by TRCA municipal partners and /or community groups such as Bike the Creek Brampton, Heart Lake Water Festival, Friends of the Pan Am Path and Canadian Heritage River Systems events supporting the designation of the Humber as a Canadian Heritage River. 5) TRCA Stewardship Workshops, Parks and Conservation Lands Events Engagement activities will continue to be developed and delivered as scheduled. These include, but are not limited to, watershed and waterfront stewardship and education, conservation lands stewardship committees, conservation area events and stewardship workshops, trail user surveys and other citizen -TRCA interactions. CONCLUSION TRCA's watershed and waterfront committees, conservation area stewardship committees and stewardship programs have achieved success in the implementation of key TRCA and municipal priorities. Ongoing engagement through the process of reviewing the watershed and waterfront engagement approach will continue to provide opportunities for residents, stakeholders, municipal partners and staff to be engaged over 2015 and into 2016. A new watershed and waterfront focused engagement approach in 2016 will allow for broader engagement and deeper mobilization to build on community interest, capacity and advocacy in order to continue the restoration, protection and enhancement of watersheds and the waterfront and rally behind regional sustainability issues. FINANCIAL DETAILS The cost of this work will be recovered within the Watershed Strategies budget. Report prepared by: Victoria McGrath, extension 5211, Arlen Leeming, extension 5283 Emails: vmcgrath @trca.on.ca, aleeming @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Chandra Sharma, extension 5237 Emails: csharma @trca.on.ca Date: February 05, 2015 77 RES. #A38 /15 - DON MOUTH NATURALIZATION AND PORT LANDS FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Direction to proceed with preliminary design and due diligence for the Port Lands Flood Protection Project. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase WHEREAS on October 26, 2012, Resolution #A186/12 at Authority Meeting #8/12 directed, in part, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff to revise the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Environmental Assessment (DMNP EA) on the basis of the 2012 Port Lands Acceleration Initiative and submit the DMNP EA to the Ministry of the Environment; AND WHEREAS on January 28, 2015 the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change approved the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Environmental Assessment; AND WHEREAS on March 10, 2015, RES #EX 3.4 was adopted by Toronto City Council which included the authorization of $5 million to be made available to City, Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC) and TRCA staff to proceed with preliminary design and due diligence for the Port Lands Flood Protection Project; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to work in conjunction with the City of Toronto, TWRC, Toronto Port Lands Company and other stakeholders and agencies, in order to further develop project schedules, budgets, and the planning approach for preliminary design and due diligence related to the Lower Don Lands and Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project, referenced in the Toronto 2015 Budget as the Port Lands Flood Protection Project, which includes, but may not be limited to: • TRCA management and oversight of a dredging and dewatering technology pilot study in the Keating Channel; • TRCA refinement of the Delft3D hydraulic model for the Port Lands to a higher level of resolution to allow for scenario testing and detailed design; • TRCA collection of detailed flood flow information near the mouth of the Don to further refine hydraulic and sediment transport models in advance of the detailed design process; • TRCA -led collection of physical surveys related to structures, topography, utilities and property boundaries in support of the hydraulic model refinements, soil and groundwater data collection efforts, and detailed design efforts; • TRCA continued participation in all necessary planning and collaborative efforts related to the broader Port Lands planning initiatives identified on October 26, 2012, in Resolution #A186/12 at Authority Meeting #8/12; and W7 • TRCA participation in any current and future major projects that may influence Regulatory, planning and EA approvals in the Port Lands not directly associated with the Port Lands Acceleration Initiative, such as, but not necessarily limited to, the Don and Central Waterfront Project, the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) Relief Subway Project, the Gardiner Expressway Environmental Assessment and Lake Ontario Park; THAT TRCA staff continue to work with the City of Toronto and TWRC to develop a delivery agreement that clearly outlines TRCA's scope of work and budget breakdown of the $5 million currently available by the City of Toronto in 2015; THAT TRCA engage with other private planning initiatives within the Port Lands Flood Protection Project area, based on a fee for service basis to ensure private permit application compliance with DMNP EA approvals, as applicable; THAT the authorized officials be directed to take the necessary actions including executions of documents and funding instruments pursuant to the identified activities; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report back to the Authority early in 2016 on the outcomes of the preliminary design and due diligence activities undertaken in 2015 and next steps related to the detailed design process for the Port Lands Flood Protection Project. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #8/12, held on October 26, 2012, Resolution #A186/12 was approved, in part, as follows: ...THAT TRCA staff be directed to revise the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Environment Assessment (DMNP EA) on the basis of the 2012 "4WS Re- aligned" option generated through the Port Lands Acceleration Initiative and submit the amended DMNP EA to the Ministry of the Environment (as per City Council RES.EX22.1 #2); THAT TRCA staff work with provincial ministries (including the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Ministry of Natural Resources) to approve the revised phasing strategy and planning framework (Special Policy Area) for the implementation of the DMNP EA as outlined in the "Port Lands Acceleration Initiative - Final Report' (August 24, 2012) from the Deputy City Manager, Cluster B and to include the Don Greenway in the first phase of implementation (as per City Council RES. EX22.1 #3);... ...THAT TRCA staff assist TWRC, the City and TTC, as necessary, in their revisions to the Lower Don Lands Class EA Infrastructure Master Plan (May 2010) and Keating Channel Precinct Class EA Environmental Study Report (May 2010) as it relates to the DMNP EA, TRCA regulations and other associated issues (as per City Council RES. EX22.1 # 7);... 79 ...THAT TRCA staff assist the City with the creation of a high -level planning framework for the entire Port Lands consistent with the Central Waterfront Secondary Plan, as applicable (as per City Council RES. EX22.1 # 12); THAT TRCA staff report back to the Authority on the outcomes of the revisions to the DMNP EA and other required planning instruments or processes that has implications on flood plain management and naturalization and /or other matters based on the findings of the review and business plans, and that this reporting back be coordinated with the reports to City Council and the TWRC Board;... On March 3, 2014, TRCA submitted the amended DMNP EA and received approval from the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change on January 28, 2015. The approvals of the Lower Don Lands Environmental Assessment Master Plan Addendum and Environmental Study Report, which was completed in September 2014, were contingent upon the approvals of the DMNP EA. With the approval of the DMNP EA on January 28, 2015, the Lower Don Lands Environmental Assessment Master Plan Addendum is also now in effect. On March 10, 2015, the 2015 Toronto Budget was approved with the authorization of Res. #EX3.4. Included in this resolution was Item 57 which includes authorization of $5.0 million to be allocated to the Waterfront Revitalization Initiative, and specifically, towards preliminary design and due diligence for the Lower Don Flood Protection Project. The Port Lands Flood Protection Project includes the DMNP EA and those elements of the Lower Don Lands Environmental Assessment Master Plan pertaining to infrastructure crossings of the future river valley system. Staff from TRCA, the City of Toronto, TWRC and the Toronto Port Lands Company are undertaking the initial planning to proceed with the preliminary design process for the Port Lands Flood Protection Project. These works include the development of technical pilot studies, surveys, strategies and systems to proceed with the design work, as well as due diligence related to soil and groundwater management, as well as project costs. The work would also include, but may not be limited to, the continued coordination with parallel planning activities undertaken by TWRC and the City of Toronto associated with the high -level planning framework for the entire Port Lands, Gardiner Expressway EA, and TTC Subway Relief. To ensure that a streamlined approach for the other major infrastructure planning initiatives, TRCA staff continue to provide the City of Toronto and TWRC with technical support related to Port lands Flood Protection Project and regulatory issues. It is anticipated that certain components of the detailed design will commence in 2016 with quick starts for construction potentially starting as early as late 2016 or early 2017. FINANCIAL DETAILS Given that the comprehensive work plans, schedules, budgets and contribution agreements have not yet been completed for this first phase of the detailed design for the Port Lands Flood Protection Project, a full analysis of costs required for TRCA staff involvement has not yet been completed. It is anticipated that of the 2015 work program of $5 million initially approved by the City of Toronto, between $1 million and $2 million will be allocated to TRCA, depending on the specific task breakdown that is currently in development. Costs will be charged to the 191 series of accounts dedicated to the detailed design stage for the Port Lands Flood Protection Project. . , It is anticipated that additional funding and budget approvals will be required beyond the 2015 work plan process. Overall, it is anticipated that the overall costs for the Port Lands Flood Protection Project will be of an order of $975 million. Matching funding will be sought with each level of government. Report prepared by: Kenneth Dion, extension 5230 Emails: kdion @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kenneth Dion, extension 5230 Emails: kdion @trca.on.ca Date: February 12, 2015 RES. #A39/15 - FOREST HEALTH AND EMERALD ASH BORER Annual Update. To provide an update on the status of significant or new forest health pests /threats for 2014 within the TRCA jurisdiction, and an update on the TRCA management to address the threat posed by the emerald ash borer to ash trees within the TRCA jurisdiction. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Ron Moeser WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) owns and manages numerous forests and conservation areas and is engaged in numerous forest management initiatives on both private lands and TRCA -owned lands; AND WHEREAS emerald ash borer (EAB) is an invasive insect species that poses a serious threat to all ash (Fraxinus spp) trees within the TRCA jurisdiction, affecting forest biodiversity, public safety and TRCA operations; AND WHEREAS TRCA has the ability and responsibility to lessen the impact from forest pests and invasive species including EAB by developing effective management approaches; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff continue to work with all levels of government to monitor trends and conditions of current forest insect and invasive plant populations and to formulate appropriate strategies to manage or eliminate those threats; THAT staff continue to integrate an appropriate EAB management approach into all relevant TRCA actions and initiatives; THAT staff continue to engage with TRCA's partners in the coordinated and effective management of EAB, including providing expertise and advice to TRCA's municipal partners and neighbouring conservation authorities (CA) as they develop and implement their respective EAB management plans; AND FURTHER THAT the forest health working group continue to report back annually to the Authority regarding issues and threats, including EAB, their implications and recommended responses. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #4/11, held on April 29, 2011, Resolution #A70/11 was approved as follows: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff continue to work with all levels of government to monitor trends and conditions of current forest insect and invasive plant populations and to formulate appropriate strategies to manage or eliminate those threats; THAT the forest health working group continue to report back annually to the Authority regarding issues and threats, their implications and recommended responses; AND FURTHER THAT staff will be monitoring for the ice storm effects on forested tracts across the TRCA jurisdiction and will report back in early 2015 with regard to findings as part of the next Forest Health Update report. The TRCA Forest Health Working Group was established in January 2010 to monitor forest health issues, facilitate coordination and improve efficiencies between internal departments and programs. The objectives of this report are to provide: 1) a summary of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) Silvicultural Forest Health Report, which outlines the status of significant or new forest health pests for 2014; 2) a status report on TRCA's EAB management activities; and 3) to provide an update to the status of both rural and urban forests within TRCA's jurisdiction as a result of the December 2013 ice storm. 2014 Silvicultural Forest Health Report The OMNR, with the assistance of the Canadian Forest Service (CFS) and local agencies, monitors potentially harmful forest pest populations and forest damage caused by pest outbreaks and abiotic disturbances across Ontario. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) works to prevent the initial introduction and spread of non- native forest pests and diseases such as E46 and Asian long- horned beetle (ALHB). This report is intended to update the Authority on the newest and most pressing pest and disease concerns; it is not intended to provide a comprehensive summary of these concerns. In general, 2014 showed continuing declines in most forest pests, as was the case in both 2013 and 2012. With the exception of the EAB and ALHB, there have been very minor changes in population numbers. Gypsy moth continues to be an isolated problem, with populations being kept in check by cold and wet weather. No large outbreaks are expected in the Greater Toronto Area. The larch casebearer has been found in isolated areas near Highway 11 in southern Ontario, with spotty outbreaks across the province. As there are very few larch or tamarack forest stands within the TRCA watersheds, overall ecological impact would be minor should an outbreak occur here. LOT-1A As part of TRCA's Regional Watershed Monitoring Program, TRCA's Terrestrial Fixed Plot Monitoring is one of the tools used to monitor forest health. This program was initiated in 2008 to detect spatial and temporal trends in the vegetation, breeding bird, amphibian and red -back salamander communities in select areas within the TRCA jurisdiction. Findings to date suggest that regionally, forest communities are relatively healthy, but that urbanization is having negative effects on both flora and fauna. Urban forests have more invasive plant species, fewer sensitive plant species and fewer sensitive forest birds than rural forests. Temporal analysis is showing that forest birds are declining in rural zones, which is a signal of emerging problems in our rural forests. Regionally, the number of snags (standing dead trees) is well below the threshold set to determine healthy forests. Snags are important in providing habitat for birds, insects and fungi. TRCA continues to monitor these trends and report back annually on any significant findings. Ice Storm December 2013 The ice storm in late December 2013 impacted forests across southwestern Ontario. The immediate impacts from the ice storm were reported to the Authority on January 31, 2014 and are excerpted as follows: "Although forest edges sustained significant damages due to the ice, this will not result in major long -term damages to forests as a whole. TRCA's Forest Hazard Management Program is effective and no changes are proposed to the program (or to the TRCA Hazard Tree Policy) as a result of recent weather event. Impacts to trees are much more significant on urban streets or in manicured parks and parking lots. Overall, the most damage to forested areas was seen on the edges of forest stands. These areas included the sides of lakes, ponds, marshes and meadows, where the trees generally were growing on an angle out towards the openings. The cumulative effect of trees not growing vertically and the general nature of the species of trees growing on the edges combined to create the observed damages. Early successional species, which tend to grow fastest and with the lowest structural integrity, incurred the most damage overall. Affected species were primarily Manitoba maple and willows, and to a lesser extent silver and red maple. The slower growing, stronger trees found inside of the woodlots have, for the most part, shown very little damage. Coniferous tree species showed surprisingly little damage, unless there had been defects present prior to the storm event. There has been almost no damage noted within areas of young reforestation, with overall survival and success of these not being negatively affected. Managing of TRCA forests for biodiversity and overall forest health has kept the damage levels to a minimum. Therefore, no additional immediate costs have been incurred to remediate the impacts of the ice storm to forested areas. The damage occurring to the woodlots in the short term was very erratic. While most properties north of King Road had very little damage, some of the TRCA properties were impacted more than others. Four of the hardest hit properties were Boyd Conservation Area, Heart Lake Conservation Area, Albion Hills Conservation Area and Lake St. George Field Centre. Management plans for these areas will need to be revisited to ensure future resiliency of the lands in the face of more frequent severe weather events. One cannot discount the potential impacts of increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events on forests. Long term impacts may include altered species compositions, greater potential for disease and pests due to tree injuries and reductions in age classes . Diminished leaf area and increases in disease and pests may cause heightened levels of tree mortality and a general decline in ecosystem services." In an effort to better understand the impacts to TRCA forest assets, additional inspections have occurred to determine specific levels of damage. Survival assessments evaluating young plantations varying in age from one to five years have shown no significant impacts, despite the initial fears of tree form and structure damage as a result of the weight of the ice on the relatively weak seedlings. Inspections of older pine and spruce plantations have shown similar impacts. Only the suppressed or dying trees seem to have been impacted. The tops of these weaker individuals, in some cases, were snapped off from the increased loading. These branch failures can modify stand structure in such a way that allows for improved growth and vigour of the remaining trees. Thus, this form of disturbance can mimic the results of a prescribed thinning operation. Asian Long- horned Beetle (ALHB) On April 5, 2013, the ALHB infestation first detected in 2003 within the jurisdictions of the City of Toronto and the City of Vaughan was declared eradicated. Unfortunately, on August 13, 2013, a telephone call from a private landowner, and subsequent investigations by CFIA revealed a second unrelated infestation in an industrial area near Pearson International Airport. Intense ground and aerial surveys were conducted within 800m of the initial find. Ground surveys were conducted in the immediate 800m to 2,400m radius, along with an area grid survey extending to a 10 km radius from the known point of infestation. CFIA officially launched a new eradication program to address this infestation of ALHB in the municipalities of Mississauga and Toronto, and the community of Malton. Genetic testing has determined that this infestation is not linked to the original insect population found in 2003. The initial find of two Norway maples was shortly followed by the discovery of three Manitoba maples also affected. In total 25 infested trees were found within the survey area. A 46 square kilometre Regulation Area was implemented, with 7,500 potential host trees removed between February and May 2014, within 800m of the initial find. The removed material went through two grinding processes before material could be issued a removal certificate. The yard where the wood was stored and ground was guarded 24 hours a day to ensure no material was illegally removed. For more information regarding this infestation and the ministerial ordered ALHB regulated area, visit www.inspection.gc.ca. Hemlock Woolly Adelgid (HWA) HWA is a non - native insect that has been present in North America for quite some time. First detected in British Columbia in the 1920's where it has a minor impact on western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla), the recent infestations in Ontario are an extension of an infestation first reported in Virginia in 1951. Unfortunately eastern hemlock ( Tsuga canadensis), indigenous to eastern Canada and TRCA's watersheds, is not nearly as resistant to this pest as its western counterpart, and consequently very few trees survive an infestation. In the summer of 2012 HWA was detected for the first time in Ontario and within TRCA's jurisdiction. Four young eastern hemlock trees on a residential property in Etobicoke were found to be infested with HWA. These trees were removed and surveys by the CFIA in the surrounding area did not find any additional infestations. CFIA tracked these four infested trees to the Ontario nursery from which they were purchased and their suspect origin to a nursery in Pennsylvania. On May 30, 2013 one eastern hemlock tree at Niagara Glen Park (on the Niagara River), Ontario was confirmed infested with HWA by CFIA. The delimitation surveys conducted covered a 500m radius around the infestation and no additional infested trees were found. The infested tree was removed and incinerated on June 26, 2013. CFIA collaborated with local and provincial partners in the removal and disposal of the infested tree on the property. TRCA is actively participating in a Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Working group in an effort to help coordinate research and information dissemination in Ontario. Some of the updates of note include the possible discovery of a stand in the United States that may be resistant to HWA (more research needed), the discovery that Imidacloprid (pesticide) may give seven years of protection, and the early success of limited biocontrol efforts established by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Current understanding of the HWA and potential control methods would see the use of chemical to protect genetically important infested trees until bio- control populations have become established. There are no known infestations currently in TRCA's jurisdiction. Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Management Update EAB, which was first detected in the Windsor \Detroit area in 2002, is now present in Ontario, Quebec and 18 U.S. states. Some reports now place the number of ash trees killed by EAB at over 100 million, with up to 10 billion trees at risk. Several insecticides are registered in Canada for individual tree injections. The long term prospect of controlling this insect in North America is dependent on finding an effective biological control agent or on the emergence of a natural ecosystem response. Current estimates for the total number of ash trees on TRCA managed property put the number at approximately 350,000. This estimate is based on standard forest inventory data collected for TRCA managed forest properties and extrapolated to cover all of TRCA -owned and managed parcels. EAB was first detected in TRCA's jurisdiction in the City of Toronto in 2007. EAB has now been detected in most TRCA municipalities; however, its presence is still sporadic in many areas, especially rural regions of TRCA's jurisdiction. Areas in Toronto and Vaughan are experiencing significant ash mortality; this trend will likely be observed throughout the TRCA jurisdiction over the next six to 10 years. Staff has conducted inspections utilizing the EAB branch sampling protocol to confirm infestations throughout most of TRCA's properties located south of Stouffville Road in the east and King Road in the west. It is anticipated that the impacts will be visible throughout TRCA watersheds by 2016. Of special note in 2014 was the discovery that the infestation is much more wide spread and advanced than first forecast. Properties that had not been identified as infested in 2012 were possibly in the third or fourth year of infestation when confirmed in 2013. These findings are consistent with those of other local and regional municipalities. TRCA initiated targeted stem injection treatments in June 2012, focusing on high value trees and the protection of selected seed source trees of all indigenous ash species. TreeAzin® treatments will continue in 2015. There are no signs of EAB present in trees previously protected. Unfortunately the ice storm of December 2013 damaged several of the ash trees previously treated. Trees that were damaged too extensively to be saved will be removed in accordance with the TRCA Hazard Tree Policy, and will result in overall treatment numbers being lower than the original 474 stems. Approximately six trees treated in 2012 were lost due to ice storm damage. Two trees located within the Glen Rouge Campground that had been treated in 2013, were removed in January 2015 by City of Toronto Forestry crews, due to damage sustained. The remaining treated trees appear to be in good health and show no outward signs of infestation. As a result of the intense pressure currently facing the injected trees in the GTA, BioForest, the developer and supplier of the ash tree protection regime, is recommending completing two consecutive annual TreeAzin® treatments. to ensure adequate protection. TRCA has proposed to follow these recommendations this year in areas south of Stouffville Road to the east, and King Road to the west. As the infestation continues to move northward, treatments may be done consecutively in areas of Caledon, where the pest is currently found in relatively low numbers. This will create challenges to both TRCA staff and its budget as the window of time available for injections is limited, resulting in the need to use more staff to do injections concurrently. The question of long term EAB population levels is becoming better understood as a result of forest sampling in southwestern Ontario. Ten years after infestation, vigorous ash regeneration has become established, thus providing a continuing food source for the beetle. The greater the regeneration, the higher the infestation levels. Generally once the ash seedlings reach a size of about 8 cm in diameter and are able to produce seed, 75% of these trees are infested. Long term implications point to the necessity of continuing to treat significant trees until bio- control measures become established. Initial projections of EAB population levels have proven to be somewhat optimistic. It is the general consensus that tree mortality and infestation conditions point to the GTA being approximately three years further into the mortality cycle than initially predicted. While ultimately the same number of trees will be affected, there is an urgency to remove trees before mortality is higher than anticipated. TRCA removals have been completed at the TRCA Head Office, Black Creek Pioneer Village and the majority of smaller properties south of Major MacKenzie Avenue. Removals have begun at Boyd and Heart Lake conservation areas, and should be completed by the end of March 2015. Petticoat Creek removals are underway with Altona Forest being the next location for abatement in Durham Region, once funding has been secured. Without support for removals of ash trees in Durham Region, properties will have to be closed until a solution can be found. Dog Strangling Vine Initial trials have begun using bio- control methods to try and control the invasive dog strangling vine (DSV) (Vincetoxicum sp). A moth species Hypena opulenta, was discovered in 2006 feeding on DSV in its native range in Ukraine. The first release site north of Toronto was used to determine if the insect could survive in open vs. forest conditions, and in the Canadian climate. 750 caterpillars were released at 10 plots sequentially, with post release results showing heaving feeding on DSV within one week. While the research is still in its infancy, and many questions have yet to be answered, it is hoped that a population will become established so that spread rates and long term impacts can be studied. Urban Forest Health Update TRCA remains committed to strategic urban forest strategic planning at a regional and provincial scale through its involvement as a steering committee member of the Green Infrastructure Ontario Coalition (GIO), as well as an active member of GIO's urban forest subcommittee. GIO committee members include representatives from local municipalities, provincial government, academic institutions, community organizations and industry members. In June of 2013, TRCA was awarded a three year Ontario Trillium Foundation grant on behalf of GIO. This funding has been used to support a full -time staff member as well as capacity building efforts, the development of communication and outreach tools, and targeted member recruitment. TRCA is leading a number of applied urban forest research initiatives that will support efforts to mitigate the impacts of disturbance and enhance the provision of ecosystem services by the urban forest in TRCA's jurisdiction. Several notable initiatives are as follows: • Together with its partner municipalities and neighbouring CAs, TRCA is conducting urban forest studies that quantify the structure and function of the urban forest and establish baselines for future monitoring. The results of these studies are used by municipal staff to inform urban forest planning and management. In 2014, TRCA completed the Town of Aurora Urban Forest Study, in partnership with staff from York Region, the Town of Aurora and Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority. • As a member of the Peel Region Urban Forest Working Group, TRCA is co- developing a decision support tool that can guide strategic tree planting and establishment efforts in Peel and potentially across the GTA. This mapping tool will allow municipal staff to target specific locations at which trees ought to be established in order to address human health and wellbeing objectives, including urban heat island mitigation and air quality improvement. • In partnership with the Region of Peel, the cities of Brampton and Mississauga, the Town of Caledon, Credit Valley Conservation, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Ontario Centre for Climate Impacts and Adaptation Resources, and the University of Waterloo, TRCA is undertaking a climate change risk and vulnerability assessment that will evaluate the potential impacts of future climate trends on the urban forest and the natural system across Peel Region. WORK COMPLETED TO DATE Staff has completed an ash tree inventory for trees (tree diameter at breast height > 15cm) on TRCA -owned and managed properties with the potential to become hazards. The hazard potential is related to the position and size of trees in respect of property boundaries, adjacent infrastructure /buildings and formalized public trails. Total TRCA ash resources inventoried includes 29,049 trees that meet the hazard potential criteria. These stems are distributed as follows: Region No. of Ash Trees Peel 10,922 York 6,080 Durham 6,931 Toronto 264'" Rouge Park (York) 1,653 Rouge Park (Durham) 668 Rouge Park (Toronto) 2,531 TOTAL 29,049 ' (1) - Includes trees at Head Office and Black Creek Pioneer Village only. All other TRCA lands in the City of Toronto are under management agreement with the City. (2) - Includes trees on all TRCA managed property and represents less than 10% of the total estimate for all of TRCA owned ash trees. Trees less than 15 cm in diameter are not considered to be hazardous. Other notable 2014 achievements include: • EAB monitoring completed for 2014 across jurisdiction to determine spread and extent of infestation in TRCA watersheds; • TreeAzin® treatments completed on 474 ash trees during 2013 and 2014. Treatments to continue biennially, with trees under the highest insect pressure receiving one additional annual treatment; • preliminary discussions held with Parks Canada in regard to determining EAB management activities for Rouge National Urban Park lands and TRCA's role; • discussions with other CA's (Central Lake Ontario, Kawartha Region, Ganaraska Region, Lake Simcoe Region) servicing Durham Region regarding EAB issues and sharing of TRCA's management approach; • ongoing participation on the York Region EAB Technical Working Group (regional, municipal, provincial, federal and CA representation); • providing technical and logistical support to CFIA as part of the recent ALHB eradication efforts; • removals completed at TRCA Head Office, Black Creek Urban Farm and Black Creek Pioneer Village totalling approximately 575 trees; • 1,485 removals completed at Claireville Conservation Area, Foster Woods, TRCA Nursery, Granger Greenway Trail, Indian Line Campground and numerous smaller properties in Vaughan. To date in 2015, removals have begun at Heart Lake and Boyd conservation areas, and will be starting shortly at the Kortright Centre for Conservation. Foxe] DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA has taken significant steps toward developing and implementing an effective plan for the management of EAB. In order to ensure effective implementation, management plans have been finalized that help to relate and incorporate the approved EAB management approach into existing forest health initiatives undertaken by TRCA. The regional municipalities of Peel and York have supported TRCA's requests for additional budget allocations to address EAB management on TRCA -owned and managed lands within their respective regions for 2015. Staff will continue liaise with municipal staff on the progress of TRCA's efforts, and to discuss the availability of funding for future management options. Significant funding challenges still remain in Durham Region where the infested ash trees are expected to start failing, putting trails and private property at risk. Through ongoing Managed Forest Program activities and the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program, staff will be monitoring forest insects and pests, and implementing projects aimed to limit the impact of these agents on forest health and habitat. FINANCIAL DETAILS It is estimated that TRCA's 2015 EAB management implementation activities excluding the Rouge National Urban Park will cost in the order of $883,000 as follows: FUNDING PARTNER (Region /Agency) 2015 EAB Budget Estimate 2015 Approved Funding Peel $370,000 $360,000 York $150,000 $150,000 Durham $363,000 $25,000 Toronto $0 ") $0 Rouge Park /Parks Canada $243,000 2) pending (1) Head Office and Black Creek Pioneer Village costs are being covered through facility operating budgets, with the remainder of TRCA owned ash it Toronto being managed by City staff. (2) Rouge National Urban Park figures cover ash trees in York and Durham regions and exclude costs within the City of Toronto. It is anticipated that those costs would be carried by the City of Toronto under the current land management agreement with TRCA/Parks Canada. (3) Durham EAB budget reflects funds that have been re- allocated from within Durham budget funds to cover some of the EAB management costs. Staff continue to investigate funding opportunities as they relate to potential future ash management options. The above costs reflect the relative distribution of ash tree assets on TRCA -owned and managed properties and are predicated on assumptions of ash tree mortality rates and associated abatements. Funding is allocated within the 2015 capital budget from the regions of Peel and York to address TRCA's approved EAB management approach. A limited amount of capital funding is available from the Region of Durham to support EAB implementation. These funds will assist TRCA in addressing priority EAB abatement issues in concert with Durham Hazard Tree Abatement work. TRCA's regular Managed Forest Program and hazard tree abatement programming are continuing and are budgeted within the 2015 operating and capital budgets respectively and delivered across the watersheds on a priority basis in accordance with forest management plans and Hazard Tree policy. Report prepared by: Tom Hildebrand, extension 5379 Emails: thildebrand @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Tom Hildebrand, extension 5379 Emails: thildebrand @trca.on.ca Date: January 13, 2015 RES. #A40/15 - STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR CONSERVATION OF TRCA CULTURAL HERITAGE PROPERTIES IN THE HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED Standards and guidelines that apply to TRCA -owned or managed properties within the Humber River watershed which have cultural heritage value or interest. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT the Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of TRCA Cultural Heritage Properties in the Humber Watershed, dated February 2015, developed by the Humber Watershed Alliance Heritage Subcommittee, be received and referred to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff for review in order to determine how the standards and guidelines may be integrated and applied across the TRCA jurisdiction; AND FURTHER THAT the Humber Watershed Alliance Heritage Subcommittee be thanked for developing the Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of TRCA Cultural Heritage Properties in the Humber Watershed. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Humber River Watershed Plan Pathways to a Healthy Humber, 2008, supports protection and adaptive re -use of cultural heritage features on TRCA property. The Humber Watershed Plan Implementation Guide includes opportunities for interpretation and celebration of natural and cultural heritage and recognizes that cultural heritage features and landscapes are increasingly playing a role in recreation and should be integrated within the regional open space system. The Implementation Guide provides a ten -year work plan of implementation opportunities, including those related to cultural heritage. As a result, the Humber Watershed Alliance Heritage Subcommittee has proposed standards and guidelines to apply to TRCA properties that have cultural heritage value or interest. • ' The Humber Watershed Alliance is comprised of interested members of the community and municipal elected representatives from within the Humber watershed. The current term of the Humber Watershed Alliance is from 2013 to 2015. The Humber Watershed Alliance Heritage Subcommittee (HWAHSC) is a subcommittee of the Humber Watershed Alliance interested in the history and cultural heritage of the Humber watershed. The HWAHSC has contributed to the designation of the Humber as a Canadian Heritage River, a heritage bridge inventory and the celebration and designation of cultural heritage in the Humber watershed. The HSWHSC proposed Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of TRCA Cultural Heritage Properties in the Humber Watershed in 2014, and they were endorsed by the Humber Watershed Alliance in June 2014. The standards and guidelines include built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological sites on TRCA property. The purpose of the standards and guidelines is the conservation and management of TRCA cultural heritage properties in the Humber River watershed by setting out criteria and processes for identifying and setting standards for protection, maintenance, use and disposal. RATIONALE In addition to including cultural heritage studies and master plans in watershed management plans, TRCA recognizes cultural heritage resources through a number of programs and initiatives supporting their protection, including being the only conservation authority to require archaeological surveys on its own property. TRCA works with municipal partners to protect heritage resources on site, for example, during development, and on public lands. In addition, TRCA has restored a number of heritage buildings for use in TRCA programming, such as the Swan Lake office in York Region. Cultural heritage resources are recognized in The Living City Policies for Planning and Development in TRCA's watersheds. Section 6.9 outlines the legislative framework within which cultural heritage plays a key role in building sustainable communities. The Ontario Heritage Act includes conservation measures such as property listing and designation on municipal and provincial heritage registers, easements, architectural design guidelines and grants for heritage conservation. In addition, the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport has published an on -line guide to "Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process" that explains how the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement direct municipalities to conserve cultural heritage. In addition, municipalities can include heritage guidelines within Official Plans, via the Planning Act, and can be guided by the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Parks Canada). This protection may include: designation under the Ontario Heritage Act; heritage easements agreements; heritage conservation district plan; and, retention of resources in situ. For properties in heritage conservation districts, municipalities can use district plan policies and guidelines. 91 CONCLUSION TRCA staff has reviewed the proposed Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of TRCA Cultural Heritage Properties in the Humber Watershed and recommends that partner municipalities, Parks Canada and other interested stakeholders, including members of the Humber Watershed Alliance, be consulted in the process of reviewing how the standards and guidelines could apply jurisdiction -wide and be a model for other watersheds. A TRCA -led consultation process, to undertake the review, will occur in 2015. Further, TRCA staff recommends that the Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of TRCA Cultural Heritage Properties in the Humber Watershed be considered for inclusion in the next guidelines update. Report prepared by: Vicky McGrath, extension 5211 Emails: vmcgrath@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Vicky McGrath, extension 5211 Emails: vmcgrath @trca.on.ca Date: February 03, 2015 Attachments: 1 &,A Attachment 1 Standards & Guidelines for Conservation of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Cultural Heritage Properties in the Humber River Watershed Draft February 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS • Introduction and Purpose • Application and Scope • Principles • Standards and Guidelines A. General Provisions B. Identification and Evaluation C. Protection D. Maintenance E. Use F. Disposal • Responsibilities • Transition and Phase -In • Glossary • Appendix A — Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest • (Ontario Regulation 9/06) 93 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE These Standards and Guidelines apply to properties the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) owns or controls within the Humber River watershed that have cultural heritage value or interest - TRCA cultural heritage properties. Ontario's identity and character are rooted in our rich and diverse cultural heritage. Cultural heritage enhances our quality of life and sense of place and is important to the social, economic, and cultural well -being of Ontario communities. Many TRCA properties within the Humber River watershed are often of cultural heritage value to a community. The following are some examples: • conservation area field centres and out buildings • bridges • cemeteries • archaeological sites • natural heritage resources that also have cultural heritage value • pathways and trails The 2008 Humber River Watershed Plan: Pathways to a Healthy Humber provides the framework for the protection and adaptive re -use of cultural heritage features on TRCA property. TRCA Resolution #A137/08 adopted the Humber River Watershed Plan - Implementation Guide and its three strategic management directions for the protection and enhancement of the watershed. The third management direction, Recognize the Humber's distinctive heritage through an enhanced regional open space system , targets the creating of new opportunities for interpretation and celebration of natural and cultural heritage, states that cultural heritage features and landscapes are increasingly playing a role in recreation (e.g. rural heritage settings, adaptive re -use of heritage buildings) and that opportunities to integrate them with the regional open space system should be considered. The Implementation Guide outlines a 10 year work plan of implementation projects addressing all recommendations of the Watershed Plan, and is organized according to 7 primary implementation mechanisms. Cultural heritage elements are included in 4 of these: • Policy and Related Special Studies • Regeneration • Land Securement • Stewardship and Education As a result, the TRCA has the responsibility to establish a standard and guidelines for the identification, protection and care for cultural heritage properties it owns or controls within the Humber River watershed. TRCA's cultural heritage resources belong to present and future generations of the communities within the Humber River watershed. Managing these TRCA cultural heritage properties wisely is in the best interest of the people of these communities. By following these Standards and Guidelines, TRCA will show that it values the cultural heritage resources in its care and leads by example in conservation and responsible stewardship. It will provide greater consistency and transparency in TRCA decisions affecting cultural heritage and further build capacity and self - reliance for cultural heritage conservation across the TRCA. APPLICATION AND SCOPE All property management departments of the TRCA must comply with these Standards and Guidelines in the management of properties within the Humber River watershed owned or under the control of the TRCA. Activities of these Standards and Guidelines will not undermine the authority over properties provided under the Ontario Heritage Act, including: • properties designated under Part IV and Part V • properties listed under Section 27 • properties subject to an easement or covenant under Section 37 • properties under another jurisdiction, e.g. Ontario Heritage Trust, provincial crown and its prescribed agencies • properties with archaeological sites subject to Part VI TRCA cultural heritage properties include three types of cultural heritage resources: built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes, and archaeological sites. Built heritage resources means one or more significant buildings (including fixtures or equipment located in or forming part of a building), structures, earthworks, monuments, installations, or remains that have cultural heritage value. Cultural heritage landscape means a defined geographical area that human activity has modified and that has cultural heritage value. Such an area involves one or more groupings of individual heritage features, such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites, and natural elements, which together form a significant type of heritage form distinct from that of its constituent elements or parts. Villages, parks, gardens, battlefields, main streets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries, trails, and industrial complexes of cultural heritage value are some examples. Archaeological site means any property that contains an artifact or any other physical evidence of past human use or activity that is of cultural heritage value or interest. PRINCIPLES The purpose of these Standards and Guidelines is the appropriate conservation and management of TRCA cultural heritage properties in the Humber River watershed by setting out the criteria and process for identifying them and to set standards for their protection, maintenance, use, and disposal. They are rooted in the following principles: Accountability and Transparency Decisions about TRCA cultural heritage properties will be made in an open, accountable way, taking into account the views of interested persons and communities. Identification and Evaluation TRCA cultural heritage properties will be identified and evaluated based on research and documentary evidence. Continuing Care Sustaining the cultural heritage value of TRCA cultural heritage properties for long term benefit 95 Impact Assessment Assessment of the impact of proposed activities on the cultural heritage value and the heritage attributes of TRCA cultural heritage properties will inform the decisions that may affect them. Use and Reuse TRCA cultural heritage properties in active will continue to be used, or will be adaptively reused, but uses that threaten a property's cultural heritage value will be avoided. Where no use of a property is possible, appropriate, timely disposal will take place. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES (Note: Refer to the Glossary, for definitions of italicized term .) A. General Provisions TRCA Property Management shall: A.1. Recognize, manage, and use TRCA cultural heritage properties as assets that can support TRCA mandates and contribute to the social and economic well -being of Humber River watershed communities. A.2. Be accountable for all decisions affecting the cultural heritage value of property in their care and shall integrate provisions for conserving TRCA cultural heritage properties into decision - making processes in property planning and asset management. A.3. Base decisions affecting a TRCA cultural heritage property on appropriate studies and research (including analysis of physical, documentary, and oral evidence), aimed at understanding the property's cultural heritage value, including its level of significance (e.g., local, provincial, etc.), the impact of proposed activities on its cultural heritage value and heritage attributes , and measures to mitigate these impacts. A.4. Engage groups and individuals with associations to a TRCA cultural heritage property by providing them with opportunities to participate in understanding and articulating the property's cultural heritage value and in making decisions about its future. A.S. Establish and maintain a cultural heritage conservation policy and procedure(s) for identifying and managing TRCA cultural heritage properties , including objectives and targets and a commitment to continual improvement. The policy and procedure(s) should be available for review by the public. A.6. Follow their cultural heritage policy and procedure(s) in complying with these Standards and Guidelines. B. Identification and Evaluation TRCA Property Management shall: B.1. Apply the "Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest' set out in Ontario Regulation 9/06 under the Ontario Heritage Act as amended or replaced from time to time (see Appendix A) to determine the cultural heritage value or interest of a property. e B.2. Develop an evaluation process to identify TRCA cultural heritage properties , consisting of the general sequence of events and actions set out below, and submit the process to the Humber Watershed Alliance for comment. a) Prepare a description of the property. b) Gather and record information about the property sufficient to understand and substantiate its heritage value. c) Determine cultural heritage value or interest based on the advice of qualified persons and with appropriate community input. If the property meets the criteria in Ontario Regulation 9/06, it is a TRCA cultural heritage property . d) Document the identification process with a written account of the research and the evaluation. e) For each TRCA cultural heritage property , prepare a Statement of Cultural Heritage Value and a description of its heritage attributes . B.3. As they are identified, add properties to the list of TRCA cultural heritage properties it order to ensure that decision - makers, asset managers, and the public know the extent and nature of the TRCA cultural heritage properties . B.4. If TRCA property management has not evaluated a property in its care or control, and if that property contains a building or structure that is 40 or more years old, then TRCA property management shall: a) prevent the building or structure from undergoing demolition by neglect ; and b) obtain comment of the Humber Watershed Alliance before removing or demolishing the building or structure, or before transferring the property from TRCA control. C. Protection TRCA Property Management shall: C.1. For identified TRCA cultural heritage properties , prepare a Strategic Conservation Plan to provide guidance on conserving, maintaining, using and disposing of them and submit the Strategic Conservation Plan to the Humber Watershed Alliance for comment. C.2. Place records associated with identifying and conserving a TRCA cultural heritage property in a permanent archive and make information about TRCA cultural heritage property publicly accessible, observing security, privacy and other requirements. C.3. Protect archaeological sites by conserving them in their original location or through archaeological fieldwork . Endeavour to conserve significant archaeological resources in their original location through documentation, protection, and avoidance of impacts. Where activities could disturb significant archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential , take appropriate measures to mitigate impacts. CA. Ensure that only archaeologists licensed under Part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act will conduct archaeological fieldwork on TRCA cultural heritage property . 97 D. Maintenance TRCA Property Management shall: D.1. Maintain TRCA cultural heritage properties through continuous care, guided by the property's Statement of Cultural Heritage Value and Strategic Conservation Plan . D.2. Repair or conserve , rather than replace, building materials and finishes and other components that are part of a TRCA cultural heritage property's heritage attributes . Apply a minimum intervention approach that protects the cultural heritage value of the property. D.3. Retain and maintain the visual settings and other physical relationships that contribute to the cultural heritage value of a TRCA cultural heritage property . Ensure that new construction, visual intrusions, or other interventions do not adversely affect the heritage attributes of the property. DA. If changes that may adversely affect a TRCA cultural heritage property's cultural heritage value are proposed for purposes of compliance with health and safety requirements , obtain advice from qualified persons on compliance alternatives or reasonable variances that protect cultural heritage value while satisfying health and safety objectives. D.5. In maintaining TRCA cultural heritage properties , consider energy - efficiency technologies and energy- saving practices and incorporate them in ways that do not adversely affect cultural heritage value. Make decisions on energy saving measures based on the total environmental cost of proposed changes compared to the total environmental cost of retaining existing features. E. Use TRCA Property Management shall: E.1. Where the use of a TRCA cultural heritage property is significant or of long standing, and the property has cultural value or interest because of that use, apply best efforts to continuing that use. E.2. When an existing use of a TRCA cultural heritage property ends, or the property is no longer fully used, or any part of the property becomes surplus to the needs of the occupant, apply best efforts to arrange for an alternate use of the property that requires minimal or no change to its heritage attributes (adaptive reuse ). E.3. Apply best efforts to avoid uses which adversely affect the cultural heritage value of a TRCA cultural heritage property . EA. Give preference to using existing built heritage resources over constructing or leasing new space for accommodation needs, if those needs can be met without adverse impact on the cultural heritage value of a TRCA cultural heritage property . In accommodation design and space planning, respect and reinforce the heritage attributes of the property. r • E.S. In implemcenting accessibility standards made pursuant to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 , balance accessibility needs with the need to conserve the cultural heritage value of TRCA cultural heritage properties , with the objective of providing the highest degree of access with the lowest level of impact on the heritage attributes of the property. Determine appropriate solutions by consulting qualified persons as well as affected users. E.6. Ensure that the cultural heritage value or interest of a TRCA cultural heritage property is appropriately interpreted and presented to communicate its meaning and to enhance public understanding and enjoyment. F. Disposal TRCA Property Management shall: F.1. Where an adaptive reuse cannot be found within a reasonable period, take timely steps to mothball or otherwise dispose of the property. F.2. If a TRCA cultural heritage property is to leave TRCA control, use best efforts to the extent possible in law to ensure the ongoing, legally binding protection of the property's cultural heritage value (such as designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act , heritage conservation easement, etc.) in any sale or other disposal agreement. The level of protection should be appropriate to the cultural heritage value of the property. F.3. Make provisions for effective protection of heritage attributes when granting leases, licences, rights, or operating agreements affecting TRCA cultural heritage property . FA. All other alternatives having been considered, consider removal or demolition as a last resort, subject to a heritage impact assessment and public engagement. Use best efforts to mitigate loss of cultural heritage value. F.S. Obtain the comment of the Humber Watershed Alliance before removing or demolishing buildings or structures on TRCA cultural heritage property , or before transferring the property from TRCA control. F.6. When disposing of property considered to contain an area of archaeological potential, take appropriate measures to notify future owners, tenants or licensees of the existence of archaeological potential. RESPONSIBILITIES Humber Watershed Alliance a) Reviews the Standards and Guidelines and recommends their approval to the TRCA Board of Directors. b) Contributes to the creation of the Standards and Guidelines. c) Monitors and reviews the effectiveness of the Standards and Guidelines and compliance with them. d) Reports to the TRCA Board and the public on the effectiveness of the Standards and Guidelines and on compliance with them. e) Provides guidance and advice on the application of the Standards and Guidelines. f) Reviews and comments on: i. the process TRCA property management use to evaluate property of cultural heritage value or interest, ii. Strategic Conservation Plans for TRCA cultural heritage properties iii. Heritage Impact Assessments for TRCA cultural heritage properties, and iv. proposals for the removal, demolition or transfer from TRCA control any TRCA cultural heritage properties g) Proposes properties for evaluation of cultural heritage value. TRCA Property Management a) Develop and implement a cultural heritage conservation policy and procedure(s) to identify and manage TRCA cultural heritage properties consistent with these Standards and Guidelines. b) Establish heritage conservation objectives and plans for management of TRCA cultural heritage properties consistent with these Standards and Guidelines. c) Make strategic plans and decisions that conform to their cultural heritage conservation policies and objectives. d) Include measures for conserving TRCA cultural heritage properties as an integral part of overall business planning, decision - making and resource requests to the TRCA Board. e) Ensure that the Humber Watershed Alliance is consulted and its comment obtained for: L the process TRCA property management use to evaluate property of cultural heritage value or interest, ii. Strategic Conservation Plans for TRCA cultural heritage properties iii. Heritage Impact Assessments for TRCA cultural heritage properties, and iv. proposals for the removal, demolition or transfer from TRCA control any TRCA cultural heritage properties f) Ensure that staff responsible for giving advice, making decisions, and undertaking activities that may affect TRCA cultural heritage properties are aware of and adhere to these Standards and Guidelines and any other approved cultural heritage conservation policies and procedures. g) Report on progress in implementation of their heritage policies, plans and procedures. h) Maintains a publically available record of TRCA cultural heritage properties TRANSITION AND PHASE -IN It is recognized that some TRCA Conservation Areas and properties already have cultural heritage management plans in place. It is also recognized that on the date when these Standards and Guidelines take effect, planning and other activities affecting TRCA properties may be underway following those existing policies or processes. The provisions below are intended to facilitate a smooth transition between those existing policies or processes and the requirements of these Standards and Guidelines. 1. Until the evaluation process required under section B.2. has been developed and approved by the TRCA Board, TRCA property management may continue to use their existing evaluation processes. Properties evaluated and identified as cultural heritage properties under those processes shall be subject to the requirements of section B.3. and parts C, D, E and F of these Standards and Guidelines. 2. The requirements of section BA. apply in all cases. 100 TRCA property management shall consult with the Humber Watershed Alliance to obtain comments on a mutually agreeable timeframe, no later than one year of the date of approval of these Standards and Guidelines, for the comments on the evaluation process required under section B.2. If, before the date when these Standards and Guidelines take effect, TRCA property management has completed an existing cultural heritage management plan process where the preferred outcome is demolition of a cultural heritage property, the requirement for comment from the Humber Watershed Alliance under section F.5. does not apply. 101 Adaptive reuse means the alteration of heritage buildings and structures to fit new uses or circumstances while retaining their heritage attributes. Alter means to change in any manner and includes to restore, renovate, repair, or disturb. "Alteration" has a corresponding meaning. Archaeological fieldwork means any activity carried out on, above or under land or water for the purpose of obtaining and documenting data, recovering artifacts and remains or altering an archaeological site and includes monitoring, assessing, exploring, surveying, recovering and excavating. (Ontario Heritage Act, O.Reg. 170/04) Archaeological resources include artifacts, archaeological sites , and marine archaeological sites . The identification and evaluation of such resources are based upon archaeological fieldwork undertaken in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act. Archaeological site means any property that contains an artifact or any other physical evidence of past human use or activity that is of cultural heritage value or interest. (Ontario Heritage Act, O.Reg. 170/04) Areas of archaeological potential means areas with the likelihood of containing archaeological resources . Criteria for determining archaeological potential are established by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport. Archaeological potential is confirmed through archaeological fieldwork undertaken in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act. Built heritage means one or more significant buildings (including fixtures or equipment located in or forming part of a building), structures, monuments, installations, or remains associated with architectural, cultural, social, political, economic, or military history and identified as being important to a community. Conserve means identifying, protecting, using, and /or managing cultural heritage resources in such a way that retains their heritage value. "Conserving" and "conservation" have corresponding meanings. Cultural heritage landscape means a defined geographical area of heritage significance that human activity has modified and that a community values. Such an area involves a grouping(s) of individual heritage features, such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites , and natural elements, which together form a significant type of heritage form distinct from that of its constituent elements or parts. Heritage conservation districts designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, villages, parks, gardens, battlefields, mainstreets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries, trails, and industrial complexes of cultural heritage value are some examples. Demolition by neglect occurs when preventative actions are not taken with the result that a building or structure is allowed to undergo change, through natural action, arson or vandalism, to the point of severe deterioration or collapse, often beyond repair. Development means the construction or placing of buildings or structures on land; the addition to or alteration of existing buildings or structures; site alteration, including but not limited to, alteration of the grade of land, and placing or dumping fill; or the removal of vegetation. 102 Dispose means transferring control to another ministry or prescribed public body, granting licences or rights, entering into operating agreements, or leasing or selling the property. "Disposal" has a corresponding meaning. Health and safety requirements include public health, occupational health and safety, life safety, fire code /safety, and electrical, seismic, structural, and building codes. Heritage attributes means the physical features or elements that contribute to a property's cultural heritage value or interest, and may include the property's built or manufactured elements, as well as natural landforms, vegetation, water features, and its visual setting . Heritage impact assessment is a study to determine if any cultural heritage resources are impacted by a specific proposed development or site alteration, and how the cultural heritage resource will be conserved in the context of redevelopment or site alteration. Maintenance generally includes routine, cyclical, anticipatory actions necessary to keep a property's heritage attributes in sound condition and to retard deterioration, and remedial or reactive actions that are intended to retain the integrity of a resource. "Maintain" has a corresponding meaning. Maintenance may include minor repair and refinishing operations; replacement of damaged, broken, or deteriorated materials that are impractical to save (e.g., broken window glass); rust removal; and cyclical horticultural activities such as pruning, planting, etc. Minimum intervention approach means the course of action that applies the most benign physical effects to achieve the longest -term protection of heritage attributes while allowing compatible functional goals to be met. Mothball means to remove a resource from active use and apply long -term stabilization intended to safeguard it from deterioration or damage over an extended period. Mothballing should provide for adequate safety, security, and regular monitoring. Qualified persons means individuals — professional engineers, architects, archaeologists, etc. — having relevant, recent experience in the conservation of cultural heritage resources. Statement of Cultural Heritage Value means a concise statement explaining why a property is of heritage interest; this statement should reflect one or more of the criteria found in Ontario Heritage Act O.Reg. 9/06. Strategic Conservation Plan means a document detailing how the property will be conserved in accordance with these Standards and Guidelines. TRCA cultural heritage property means real property, including buildings and structures on the property, that has cultural heritage value or interest and that is owned or leased by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority within the Humber River watershed. Visual setting includes significant views or vistas to or from a heritage property. 103 Appendix A — REGULATION: Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest Ontario Heritage Act ONTARIO REGULATION 9106 CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST Criteria 1. (1) The criteria set out in subsection (2) are prescribed for the purposes of clause 29 (1) (a) of the Act. O. Reg. 9/06, s. 1 (1). (2) A property may be designated under section 29 of the Act if it meets one or more of the following criteria for determining whether it is of cultural heritage value or interest: 1. The property has design value or physical value because it, i. is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method, ii. displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, or iii. demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 2. The property has historical value or associative value because it, i. has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or iii. demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. 3. The property has contextual value because it, i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area, ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings, or iii. is a landmark. O. Reg. 9/06, s. 1 (2). 104 RES. #A41/15 - 2015 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS City of Toronto. Undertake natural environment and infrastructure improvement projects for the City of Toronto. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be authorized to proceed with the implementation of 2015 natural environment projects and infrastructure improvements as approved and funded by the City of Toronto; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to take such action as is necessary, including tendering of work and signing of contracts, to assist the City of Toronto in completing the approved 2015 projects. CARRIED BACKGROUND For many years TRCA has partnered with the City of Toronto to provide project design, coordination of approvals and implementation services in support of City-led natural environment projects throughout the City and across the Toronto waterfront. Since 2006, the City of Toronto has continued to work in partnership with TRCA to design and deliver these priority parkland naturalization, habitat protection and natural open space enhancement projects at their request and on a cost recovery basis. The City of Toronto has again requested TRCA's assistance in the planning and implementation of a number of priority natural environment and trail infrastructure improvement projects. A list of approved 2015 projects and budgets is outlined in Attachment 1. Staff continues to work cooperatively with City of Toronto staff from Parks, Forestry and Recreation and Transportation - Cycling Infrastructure to facilitate project planning and approvals in preparation for implementation. RATIONALE TRCA and the City of Toronto have a long history of working together on a number of regeneration, public access and habitat enhancement projects. Many of these projects are on TRCA -owned lands of which the City is responsible for management. TRCA is recognized by the City of Toronto as being able to provide cost - effective management of watershed - related projects due to highly specialized expertise, the ability to expedite required approvals and permits, facilitate community involvement and meet tight timelines. FINANCIAL DETAILS All expenditures made in the delivery and management of these approved projects are fully reimbursable from the City of Toronto. 105 Tendering and purchases of goods and services will be conducted in accordance with TRCNs Purchasing Policy and procurement management processes. Report prepared by: Dave Rogalsky, extension 5378 Emails: drogalsky @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Dave Rogalsky, extension 5378 Emails: drogalsky @trca.on.ca Date: March 10, 2015 Attachments: 1 106 Attachment 1 LOCATION AND FEATURE DESCRIPTION OF WORK PROJECT BUDGET (Plus HST) Sun Valley Trail repair of erosion on granular trail and $15,000 improvements including a new trailhead kiosk installation in Lower Don Valley. Cottonwood Flats Building on Phase 1 deliverables (2014), undertake $25,000 Regeneration - Phase 2 detailed design and approvals of wetland feature as part of ongoing naturalization and parkland improvements. Phase 2 construction is proposed for 2016 - estimated budget $750,000. Hanlan's Point Boardwalk Re- alignment of existing boardwalk to reduce sand S100.000 accumulation and protect ecologically sensitive dune area on Toronto Islands. Chorley Park Switchback Revised design of a multi -use trail connection $50,000 Trail between Chorley Park and the Beltline Trail /Don Valley Brick Works based on prioritized advice from the Chorley Stakeholder Working Group. Lower Don River Lookouts Feasibility and design of potential pedestrian $15,000 lookouts along the Lower Don Trail. Colonel Samuel Smith Park Removal and re- construction of wetland lookout $175,000. Lookout originally constructed by TRCA. Installation of turtle basking logs in strategic locations of wetland. Nordheimer Ravine Trail Implement drainage and tread surface $175,000. improvements in proximity to wetland habitat features. Williamson Ravine Staircase Construction of staircase and associated trails in $175,000. and Newbold Trail - Smalls Williamson Ravine. Trail improvements in Newbold Creek Ravine. Morningside Park Trail improvements to natural surface access trail at $50,000. Galloway Road, across from West Hill Park as identified in Natural Environment Trail Strategy. Cedar Ridge Trail Trail improvements to existing natural surface trail S75,000. system through ravine area of Cedar Ridge Park, as outlined in the Cedar Ridge Trail Concept Plan. Forest Valley Outdoor Minor trail improvements, such as additional $5,000. Education Centre granular trail at A -frame buildings to compliment previous years work at outdoor education facility. 107 LOCATION AND FEATURE DESCRIPTION OF WORK PROJECT BUDGET (Plus HST) Humber Arboretum Design access trail from paved Humber River Trail $10,000. into natural surface trail system at Arboretum. The Guild Assess and address priority trail improvements to $50,000. protect sensitive environmental areas and avoid hazards; may include trail closures, rerouting and boardwalks as required. Trail Counters and Install trail counters and monitor trail counters at $10,000 Monitoring various locations across Toronto, including: • The Guild Park and Gardens, • North Etobicoke Creek at Eglinton, • Crothers Woods, • South Humber informal trails by the Sewage Treatment Plant, • Bestview Park trails, • Beltline Trail. Additional trail counters may be installed at Sunnyside Bike Park and Burke Brook Ravine. TOTAL 1 $930,000 flm RES. #A42/15 - BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP WITH ENERLIFE CONSULTING INC. Renewal of consulting agreement for energy management programs. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT the agreement for the development and delivery of sector based energy management programs with Enerlife Consulting Inc. be renewed for the period, April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2016; AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the necessary action to implement the agreement including the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/07, held on June 22, 2007, Resolution #At 45/07 was approved, in part, as follows: THAT approval be granted for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Enerlife Consulting for the development and delivery of key programs for The Living City, including Mayors' Megawatt Challenge, Greening Health Care, Sustainable Schools, Home Energy Clinic and the Community Scorecard;... TRCA began working with Enerlife Consulting in 2002 when they were contracted to assist in the development of programs for The Living City Centre. Between 2002 and 2007 TRCA staff worked closely with Enerlife Consulting to develop a new approach to achieving deep savings in energy conservation for buildings. In 2007 TRCA entered into a business agreement with Enerlife Consulting to deliver the sector based energy programs including, Mayors' Megawatt Challenge; Greening Health Care; Sustainable Schools; Home Energy Clinic and Community Scorecard. Three of these programs are still active: Greening Health Care, Mayors' Megawatt Challenge and Sustainable Schools. Greening Health Care has continued to expand and now engages with 55 hospitals, 42 in Ontario and 13 in Alberta. The Mayors' Megawatt Challenge also expanded with 11 participating municipalities in Ontario including, City of Toronto, Region of Peel, cities of Mississauga, Brampton, Markham, Oshawa, Barrie and Windsor, and the towns of Caledon and Richmond Hill. In addition, two municipalities outside Ontario are also participating, Ville de Gatineau, Quebec and Moncton, New Brunswick. In total, the Mayors' Megawatt Challenge has enrolled 116 municipal buildings. Sustainable Schools has continued to benchmark energy intensity in schools and has reported on top performing schools across Canada. In 2015 Sustainable Schools will quantify energy conservation potential of school boards in Ontario and challenge utility companies to help the school boards achieve these deep energy and cost savings. 109 The working relationship with Enerlife has been quite successful as the approach to building performance management developed through this partnership has influenced the development of other significant initiatives. These include the Canada Green Building Councils GREENUP program, the Real Property Association of Canada's "20 by 15" national energy consumption target for office buildings, as well as the Greening Greater Toronto "Race to Reduce" for building landlords and tenants. RATIONALE Each year the business agreement with Enerlife is reviewed to ensure that the relationship is continuing to achieve the objectives of The Living City and more specifically, achieve measurable change in the sustainability of the city region. Last year, hospitals that saved energy in Greening Health Care reduced energy use by 132,378 giga - joules (GJ), and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by 7,221 tonnes for a cost savings of over $1.5 million. Municipalities in Mayors' Megawatt Challenge last year reduced energy use by 9,124 GJ and reduced GHG emissions by 322 tonnes for a cost savings of $229,200. In addition, through the Green Energy Act, energy benchmarking data is available for most municipalities in Ontario. Using this data, staff was able to compare the energy use of municipal town halls enrolled in Mayors' Megawatt Challenge to the energy intensity of town halls not in the program. Staff found that town halls in Mayors' Megawatt Challenge used nearly 25% less energy per square foot than their counterparts in other municipalities. Based on energy data available for 2011 and 2012, the Sustainable Schools program estimates that three of the public school boards in the Toronto region have a combined energy savings potential of nearly $15 million. In 2015 the program will update the savings with current data and work with the utilities to assist the school boards in achieving these cost savings. Overall the business partnership with Enerlife Consulting has continued to produce measurable impacts on communities. The Performance Based Conservation approach to energy savings is gaining momentum with more and more organizations using actual energy data to identify and report on savings. The programs continue to help communities in TRCA's jurisdiction achieve measurable savings in energy, GHG emissions and operating costs. These programs support the sustainable communities objective of The Living City and act to mitigate climate change, supporting municipal climate objectives. 167 =1 IF-11 14 4 91 41,'16 1.1: ` (*J - 1 =1 6101 L, I The agreement is due to expire on March 31, 2015. With Authority direction, staff will renew the agreement for an additional year. 110 FINANCIAL DETAILS Revenues for the program are derived from membership fees charged to municipal and hospital participants and utility companies that pay to sponsor the programs. TRCA manages the program while Enerlife provides the technical content and support. TRCA collects all revenues generated and pays Enerlife monthly for their portion of the work. In 2015 the programs have total budgeted revenues of $300,480 of which budgeted payments to Enerlife are $250,400 if program membership and sponsorship projections are met. Under the agreement, Enerlife billing cannot exceed a specific proportion of the program revenue received. Thus, if revenue projections are not met, Enerlife billing would be reduced accordingly. TRCA keeps a portion of the revenue to defray program marketing and management expenses. Report prepared by: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326 Emails: bmcintyre @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326 Emails: bmcintyre @trca.on.ca Date: March 02, 2015 RES. #A43/15 - VALLEYWOOD TRAIL AND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PROJECT PHASE Award of Contract for Engineering Services. Award of Contract #10000289 for supply and installation of a pedestrian bridge over the Etobicoke Creek as part of a new trail connection from Old Kennedy Road to the existing pedestrian trail off of Cliffview Court, in the Town of Caledon. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Blase THAT Contract #10000289 for the supply and installation of one, 30 metre long, pre- engineered pedestrian bridge over the Etobicoke Creek be awarded to R &M Construction at a total cost not to exceed $160,675.75, plus HST, it being the lowest bid meeting Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 20% of the total cost of the contract for eligible disbursements and as a contingency allowance, if deemed necessary; AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the action necessary to implement the contract including obtain any approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 111 BACKGROUND TRCA is working in partnership with the Town of Caledon and a local developer (Moscorp VII Development Inc.) to coordinate the design and implementation of a multi -year restoration plan and two trail connections linking new communities to the Etobicoke Creek trail system within the valleylands surrounding the newly developed Mayfield West Community. The new trail connections have been long supported by both Town of Caledon and TRCA which will provide a key function to the area, linking the developing neighborhoods to the existing municipal trail network, developed neighbourhoods, residential parklands and open spaces along the Etobicoke Creek valley. The new trails will be implemented in two phases to create approximately 900 metres of new trail and include two new pedestrian bridges over the Etobicoke Creek. TRCA staff will manage the planning and construction of the trail links, as well as the valleyland habitat and restoration works. The Phase 1 Valleywood Trail Link and Pedestrian Bridge Project is located west of Kennedy Road and north of Highway 410, in the Town of Caledon. The pedestrian bridge is a key feature of the project which will create a new trail connection approximately 500 metres in length from Old Kennedy Road to the existing pedestrian trail off of Cliffview Court along the Etobicoke Creek. This project is tentatively scheduled to be completed in spring 2015. Staff is also working with Town of Caledon staff and the local developers to coordinate the design and implementation of the Phase 2 trail connection from Pinebrook Circle to the new residential development on the west side of the Etobicoke Creek. Construction on the second phase trail and pedestrian bridge project is tentatively scheduled to begin in fall 2015. TRCA staff has initiated the implementation of the multi -year restoration plan and is working with project partners to reach out and engage the local community in the implementation of the restoration opportunities which includes riparian plantings; bank stabilization; meadow habitat creation; installation of small scale habitat structures and interpretive signage. The restoration works will be completed by 2017. RATIONALE Request for Tender #10000289 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http: / /www.biddingo.com) on Friday, January 30, 2015. A mandatory site meeting was held on Friday, February 6, 2015. A total of 19 contractors attended the mandatory site meeting with 13 contractors submitting bids as per below. Bids were reviewed by TRCA staff (Vince D'Elia, Mark Lowe and Chris Ulcar) on February 20th with the following results: 112 Bids for Tender #10000289 CONTRACTORS BID (Plus HST) R &M Construction $160,675.75 Esposito Bros Construction Ltd. $163,058.97 Rutherford Contracting Ltd. $167,077.91 Serve Construction $168,823.50 Bronte Construction $170,090.00 Seawaves Development Services Inc. $170,145.00 MN Dynamic Construction Ltd. $173,423.85 Torbridge Construction Ltd. $178,020.00 MJX Construction Inc. $181,298.00 Joe Pace & Sons Contracting Inc. $189,378.00 Bomar Landscaping Inc. $199,919.25 Tascan Corp. $202,474.00 McPherson - Andrews Contracting Limited $228,354.00 Restoration Services and Watershed Management staff reviewed the bid received from R &M Construction, against its own cost estimate and has determined that the bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements and deliverables as outlined in the contract documents. Further assessment by TRCA staff of R &M Construction's experiences and ability to undertake similar projects was conducted through a review of information provided by the contractor, which resulted in the conclusion that R &M Construction is capable of undertaking the scope of work. Based on the bids received, staff recommend that the Contract #10000289 be awarded to R &M Construction for the installation of one, 30 metre long, pre- engineered pedestrian bridge across the Etobicoke Creek, in the Town of Caledon, for a total amount not to exceed $160,675.75, plus 20% contingency to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bid that meets TRCA specifications. FINANCIAL DETAILS A total of $306,735 has been secured through Monarch VII Development Inc. to support the construction of the trail and installation of the pedestrian bridge as part of the Phase 1 Valleywood Trail and Pedestrian Bridge. Funds to undertake this project are available within account #117 -32. Funding for valley restoration is available in Peel Capital account 129 -59 and compensation funding secured from the Mayfield West Development through the TRCA planning and approval process. Funding for the Phase 2 trail construction and second pedestrian bridge will also be secured through local developers. 113 Report prepared by: Vince D'Elia, extension 5667 Emails: vdelia @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Mark Lowe, extension 5388 Emails: mlowe @trca.on.ca Date: March 5, 2015 RES. #A44/15 - SUPPLY OF OPERATED HEAVY CONSTRUCTION AND SPECIALTY EQUIPMENT Contract #10000235. Award of Contract #10000235 for the supply of operated heavy construction and associated specialty equipment from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2016. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is engaged in a variety of environmental initiatives that require the utilization of operated heavy and specialty construction equipment; AND WHEREAS in January 2015, TRCA pre - qualified seven contractors through a publicly advertised process based on experience with a range of environmental construction and restoration works; AND WHEREAS the pre - qualified contractors were invited to submit tenders for various pieces of heavy construction and specialty equipment that was subsequently evaluated based on price, availability of equipment, key personnel and relevant experience; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Sartor and Susin Limited and TMI Contracting Limited be recognized as the primary and secondary supplier, respectively, for operated heavy construction equipment during the contract period, being the two highest ranking suppliers meeting TRCA's requirements; THAT where the primary and secondary suppliers of record are not available, staff be authorized to use the next highest ranked suppliers; THAT specialty operated equipment in Schedule B be awarded on an as- needed basis when required, beginning with the most competitively priced first; AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the necessary action to implement the contract including the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RATIONALE Request for Pre - Qualification (RFPQ) for suppliers for Contract #10000235 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http: / /www.biddingo.com /) on Monday, January 12th, 2015. Suppliers interested in being pre - qualified were advised that they would be evaluated based on the following in order to receive a tender package: 114 • completeness of submission; • contractor's experience with bank, slope and shoreline stabilization projects, waterfront development, habitat enhancement and regeneration projects, infrastructure protection, and site remediation and reclamation projects; • ability to meet current Occupational Health and Safety standards; Pre - qualification documentation was submitted by the following 16 suppliers: • Diamond Earthworks Corporation; • Four Seasons Site Development; • Hawkins Construction Services Ltd; • Joe Pace & Sons; • J -Rock Inc.; • Marcus Contracting; • Multi Bobcat Services Ltd; • Pacific Paving Ltd; • Sartor and Susin Ltd; • Superior Disposal; • TBG Landscape Inc.; • TDI International Ag Inc.; • Tedescon Infrastructure Ltd; • TMI Contracting Ltd; • Trisan Construction; and • Valefield Contracting Inc. The pre - qualification documents were reviewed by TRCA staff, whose evaluation was based on the previously defined criteria and reference checks. Request for Tender documents required the pre - qualified suppliers to submit prices for two schedules of operated equipment. Schedule A is comprised of the traditional heavy operated equipment most commonly required for TRCA projects; Schedule B is comprised of specialty equipment that is required less frequently, and which is often rented or subcontracted at a higher cost. The purpose of separating this equipment into two Schedules is to allow TRCA to obtain the most competitive pricing for all its equipment needs, by awarding the work involving specialty equipment on as needed - basis, to the most competitively priced pre - qualified bidder when required. Along with rates for Schedule A and B equipment, a detailed proposal describing key personnel and relevant work experience was also listed as a requirement of the tender process Request for Tender documents were subsequently made available to the following seven suppliers: • Four Seasons Site Development; • Hawkins Construction Services Ltd; • Sartor and Susin Ltd; • TBG Landscape Inc.; • TMI Contracting Ltd; • Trisan Construction; and • Valefield Contracting Inc. 115 The Procurement Opening Committee opened the Tenders on February 20, 2015; the unit rates submitted by each bidder for Schedule A and B are presented in Attachment 1. The results show that based on price alone, TMI Contracting Limited is the most competitively priced for Schedule A at a total hourly cost of $942.50 for all operated equipment listed; and that Sartor and Susin Limited is the second most competitively priced at $1,066.50 per hour for the same operated equipment. Assuming all equipment is rented for 8 hours per day, 5 days per week for 52 weeks, TMI Contracting Limited would offer a maximum annual savings of $257,920 over Sartor and Susin Limited. It is also noted, however, that Sartor and Susin Limited carries two additional pieces of equipment over TMI Contracting Limited, and that for this equipment, Sartor and Susin Limited is the most competitively priced amongst all seven bidders. Therefore, assuming an average cost of $92.75 per hour and $164.00 per hour for TMI Contracting Limited to rent these two pieces of equipment based on the bids submitted, Sartor and Susin Limited would offer an annual maximum savings of $238,680 over TMI Contracting Limited. Therefore, from an overall perspective, TMI Contracting Limited and Sartor and Susin Limited offer comparable, competitive pricing for all Schedule A operated equipment. For Schedule B equipment, it can be seen in Attachment 1 that when it is a discrete service (i.e., where the equipment is not required in conjunction with Schedule A equipment), it is most financially advantageous to award this work on as- needed basis to the most competitively priced pre - qualified bidder. For example, where only Gradall is required, Four Seasons Site Development offers the most competitive pricing. Members of the Selection Committee, consisting of TRCA staff (James Dickie, John DiRocco, Moranne McDonnell, Chris O'Neil and Mike Puusa) reviewed the bidders detailed proposals and evaluated them using a weighted scoring system with 25% of the total weighted score based on reasonableness of cost derived from the unit rates presented in Attachment 1; 25% based on the availability and quantity of requested equipment; another 25% based on the expertise and availability of key personnel; and the remaining 25% based on the bidders' experience with the following types of TRCA projects and project requirements: • bank /slope /channel stabilization projects, including armourstone retaining walls, mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) slopes, drainage channels, revetments and buttresses (5 %); • waterfront development and remedial shoreline protection, including lakefilling, placement of rip rap, armourstone headlands, groynes and breakwaters (5 %); • habitat enhancement and regeneration projects, including wetlands, meadows, natural channels, trail development (5 %); • infrastructure construction and protection works including bridge removal /installation, sanitary sewer encasement, headwall construction /repair (5 %); and • site remediation and reclamation including building demolitions and large soil excavation and filling operations (5 %). 116 The results of the evaluation are as follows: Supplier Weighted Score (out of 1000) Sartor and Susin Ltd. 792 TMI Contracting Ltd. 783 Four Seasons Site Development 693 TBG Landscape Inc. 655 Trisan 485 Hawkins Construction 475 Through the proposal evaluation process, it was determined that the Sartor and Susin Limited and TMI Contracting Limited are the highest and second highest ranking suppliers, respectively. Sartor and Susin Limited has completed numerous successful environmental projects with TRCA over the past 40 years, and staff is confident in their ability to supply skilled operators and equipment, however based on the volume of work for 2015 and 2016, it is unlikely that they will be able to supply equipment and operators for all TRCA projects. TMI Contracting Limited has had the opportunity to work with TRCA on select projects over the past two years, and has demonstrated that they possess the skills and equipment to meet the remainder of TRCAs needs during the contract period. Staff therefore recommend awarding Contract #10000235 to Sartor and Susin Ltd. as the primary supplier of operated heavy construction equipment, and to TMI Contracting Ltd. as the secondary supplier of heavy operated construction equipment, they being the two suppliers that best meet TRCA's requirements at a competitive cost. In the event that neither supplier can provide operated equipment at the required time, TRCA requests authorization to solicit services from the next highest ranked suppliers, and where specialized equipment in Schedule B is required, staff request authorization to award such work based on the unit rates provided, beginning with the most competitively priced supplier first. To ensure consistency in technique and quality, and to avoid additional project costs associated with changing suppliers on April 1, 2015, staff will work with TBG Landscape Inc. to continue supplying operated heavy construction equipment and dump trucks to projects already in progress prior to March 31, 2015 until completion. At the time this staff report was prepared, TBG Landscape Inc. was supplying operated equipment to the following five projects, and has confirmed in writing that the current hourly rates will be held until these projects are completed: 1. 26 - 30 Livingston Road Erosion Control Project; 2. Black Creek between 111 Whitburn and 2 Jennifer Court Erosion Damage Restoration Project; 3. Etobicoke Valley Park Erosion Control Maintenance Project; 4. Mud Creek Restoration Reach 5 (Phase 2); and 5. Mud Creek Restoration Reach 2. 117 FINANCIAL DETAILS The total value of this contract is estimated to be approximately $4,500,000 based upon a review of projects scheduled for implementation during the contract period. Based on each suppliers available resources, the work is anticipated to be awarded roughly equally between both suppliers with Sartor and Susin Limited being given first opportunity to supply for waterfront projects where the evaluation process has demonstrated significant experience over TMI Contracting Limited. An increase or decrease in workload will have an impact on the value of this contract. All pre - qualified suppliers understand both the potential cost and resource implications associated with changes in workload. The operated equipment is rented on an 'as required' basis with no minimum hours guaranteed. Funds for the contract are identified in TRCA's 2015 and 2016 capital budgets. Report prepared by: Michelle Guy, 647 - 808 -5809, Moranne McDonnell, 416 - 392 -9725 Emails: mguy @trca.on.ca, mmcdonnell @trca.on.ca For Information contact: James Dickie, 416 - 844 -3987 Moranne McDonnell, 416 - 392 -9725 Emails: jdickie@trca.on.ca, mmcdonnell@trca.on.ca Date: March 13, 2015 Attachments: 1 118 Attachment I 119 - �( \ / o L \ /Q 0 0 �s;s�EE|2 !§ ;mrrl� \ƒ | ■s�s.l - | \ 0 M - - ( | - ! § ) § k ) § k ) | | \ ( § �f 119 - �( \ ( | \ M - - ( | - ! § ) § k ) ( 0 R | ) ) k � f ! 2 ; ■ ■ § ! 2 � 119 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE RES. #A45 /15 Moved by: Cynthia Thorburn Seconded by: Mike Mattos THAT the Committee move into closed session to discuss item AUTH7.12 - Wild Water Kingdom, as it pertains to ongoing property negotiations. CARRIED ARISE AND REPORT RES. #A46 /15 Moved by: Cynthia Thorburn Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT the Committee arise and report from closed session. CARRIED RES. #A47 /15 - WILD WATER KINGDOM Upgrade and Revitalization of the Water Park. Transferring and amending the existing lease to upgrade and revitalize the water park at Claireville Conservation Area. Moved by: Cynthia Thorburn Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT confidential item AUTH7.12 - Wild Water Kingdom, as amended, be approved. CARRIED RES. #A48 /15 - 137 WHITBURN CRESCENT EMERGENCY WORKS Contract RSD14 -195 - Construction of Shoring Wall Project. Award of Contract RSD14 -195 for supply of all labour, equipment and materials necessary for construction of a shoring wall at 137 Whitburn Crescent, in the City of Toronto. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff reported on the management of erosion and slope stability hazards related to the July 8, 2013 severe weather event at Authority Meeting #10/14, January 9, 2015; AND WHEREAS TRCA staff was directed at Authority Meeting #10/14 under Resolution #A210/14 to continue with the implementation of several priority projects including the emergency works along Black Creek below Whitburn Crescent; 120 THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Contract RSD14 -195 for the supply of all labour, equipment and materials necessary for construction of a shoring wall at 137 Whitburn Crescent, in the City of Toronto be awarded to Hobden Construction Ltd. at a total cost not to exceed $551,270.53, plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 10% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractors that submitted tenders, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as is necessary to implement the contract, including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND On July 8, 2013 an intense downpour rolled through the Toronto area, causing wide - spread flooding, surcharges of water infrastructure, and significant damage to the river and valley systems including extensive damage to park trails and pedestrian bridges, numerous debris jams, and an unprecedented number of slope failures on hundreds of private properties that border these natural areas. TRCA Restoration Services staff became the first responders to flood and erosion related damage following this event, inventorying and assessing more than 500 sites over the course of several months. The Downsview Dells area of Black Creek was one of the hardest hit areas of Toronto during the July 8th 2013 storm, putting homes, sanitary and storm infrastructure at risk from erosion and slope instability. In accordance with TRCA's approved process for remedial flood and erosion control projects, staff initiated a Class Environmental Assessment (EA) on May 8, 2014 to develop the preferred solution to address all of the sites identified at risk in the area, under one streamlined process. Over the summer of 2014 the project was in the early planning and design process, however on July 21, 2014 following a site visit by Toronto Water, staff expressed concern over the ongoing exposure of the sanitary sewer line crossing the creek at several sections between 4 Jennifer Court and 117 Whitburn Crescent, and requested that TRCA escalate the project to emergency works status. Staff immediately issued a Declaration of Emergency Works to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, providing notice that work needed to proceed as soon as possible to protect essential infrastructure and public safety. 121 TRCA forces mobilized the week of July 21, 2014 and have completed sanitary sewer protection work at two sites along Black Creek, major slope reconstruction work below two private properties at 2 and 4 Jennifer Court and 139 Whitburn Crescent, and a major storm sewer extension at the rear of Jennifer Court. The next phase of emergency works is the slope stabilization work to protect the residence at 137 Whitburn Crescent through the installation of a shoring wall at the top of slope, which was selected as the preferred measure for its lower impact to the surrounding valley slope and tableland, as well as its ability to transition well into the recently completed work at 139 Whitburn Crescent. On January 9, 2015 staff brought a year end update to the Authority, providing an overview of all erosion restoration to be work completed or in progress as of December 31, 2014 with 2014 Critical Erosion and Floodworks funding from the City of Toronto, and 2014 core erosion management funding from the Region of Peel related to the July 8, 2013 storm. Also brought forward was a request for approval of the proposed 2015 workplan, where staff identified the ongoing work along Whitburn Crescent to protect the residences at No. 135 and 137. It is noted that the owners of 135 Whitburn Crescent ultimately declined TRCA's assistance with the proposed slope stabilization work due to the limitations and conditions of the erosion control agreement, which requires private landowners to convey the portion of the lands where the erosion control works are located into public ownership. Failing that, they must pay a portion of the project costs roughly equaling 10% of the total cost, in accordance with TRCAs Private Landowner Contribution for Erosion Control policy, as approved at Authority Meeting #7/09 under Resolution #A159. As it is understood that the owners would not agree to either of these conditions, TRCA has provided these owners with a letter confirming that they have opted out of the erosion control assistance program despite the risk of future failure and property damage that has been identified at their property, and with the understanding that future assistance may not be available. The question of liability has been raised if the homeowners refuse to enter into agreement with TRCA, and it is TRCA's understanding that as this assistance program is voluntary and there is no legal requirement to undertake this work, delaying or not undertaking projects should not result in any additional potential liability to TRCA or its funding partners. Terraprobe Inc. originally developed the detailed design for the proposed shoring wall for the properties at 135 and 137 Whitburn Crescent, while staff were negotiating the erosion control agreements. As 135 Whitburn Crescent opted out of the project after the initial issuance of the Tender package, Terraprobe was required to modify the design which resulted in delays during the procurement phase, with the revised design not being received until February 2015. TRCA staff now requires the services of a qualified contractor to carry out construction of a shoring wall at 137 Whitburn Crescent. The intention of this project is to provide a cost - effective, long -term and low maintenance protection to the property at 137 Whitburn Crescent, with minimal impact to the environment due to the relatively small construction footprint required for installation. RATIONALE Request for Tenders (RIFT) were issued to contractors on mandatory site information meeting held on Wednesday, were sent to the following nine contractors: o Anchor Shoreline; i EBS Engineering; Geo Foundations; 122 Monday, November 3, 2014 with a November 5, 2014. Tender packages • Hobden Construction; • Keller Foundations; • McPherson- Andrews Contracting Ltd.; • Rumble Foundations; • TBG Landscape; and • Technopost. The Procurement Opening Committee opened the Tenders on March 10, 2015, with the following results: Tender RSD14 -195 135 -137 Whitburn Crescent Construction of Shoring Wall Project BIDDERS TOTAL TENDER AMOUNT (Plus HST) Hobden Construction $551,270.53 McPherson Andrews Contracting Limited $551,374.00 TBG Landscape Inc. $568,753.13 Restoration Services staff conducted a thorough investigation of the bids received from Hobden Construction, McPherson Andrews Contracting Ltd. and TBG Landscape Inc. It was determined that the bid submitted by Hobden Construction was the most cost effective and meets the requirements and deliverables as outlined in detailed design drawings by Terraprobe. Further assessment by TRCA staff of Hobden Construction's experience and ability to undertake similar projects was conducted through reference checks which resulted in positive feedback that Hobden Construction is capable of undertaking the scope of work. Based on the bids received, staff recommend that Contract RSD14 -195 for the supply of all labour, equipment and materials necessary for construction of a shoring wall at 137 Whitburn Crescent, in the City of Toronto be awarded to Hobden Construction for a total amount not to exceed $551,270.53, plus 10% contingency allowance if deemed necessary to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bid that meets TRCA specifications. This project is aligned with leadership strategy number two in TRCA's new strategic plan. Through the stabilization of the eroding bank, the adjacent property will be restored and public safety will be protected. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for this contract is available from TRCA's Critical Erosion and Flood Works capital budget, within account 133 -02. Report prepared by: Michelle Guy, 647 - 808 -5809 Emails: mguy @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416 - 392 -9690 Emails: pnewland @trca.on.ca Date: March 24, 2015 123 RES. #A49 /15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed, Bayview Ravine Estates Limited, CFN 52820. Acquisition of property located to the west of Bayview Avenue, and north of 19th Avenue, in the Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015 ", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River watershed. (Executive Res. #813115) Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT 1.544 hectares (3.815 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 57, Concession 1 East of Yonge Street and designated as Blocks 6, 7 and 8 on a draft plan of survey prepared by Schaeffer Dzaldov Bennett LTD Ontario Land Surveyors, dated 14 August 2013 being Job. No. 07- 087 -04D, in the Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River watershed located to the west of Bayview Avenue and north of 19th Avenue be purchased from Bayview Ravine Estates Limited; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A50 /15 - YORK UNIVERSITY PROPOSAL FOR LEASE OF LAND 9741 Canada Company Avenue City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York Humber River Watershed, CFN 43700. Proposal to lease Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned lands for the purpose of operation and monitoring of an apiary located at 9741 Canada Company Avenue, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #814115) Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jack Heath 124 WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has been requested by York University (York) to enter into a lease agreement for lands located adjacent to the Restoration Services Centre at 9741 Canada Company Avenue, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed; AND WHEREAS it is the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interested of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with York in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a lease with York for approximately 0.4 hectares (1 acre), more or less, together with an access right -of -way, to operate and monitor an apiary, inclusive of a 30 foot (30') trailer and associated equipment, said land being Part of Lot 18, Concession 7, located in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed; AND FURTHER THAT the lease with York be premised on the following general terms and conditions: (i) the initial term of the lease shall be five years, with an additional two five year renewal period at TRCA's sole option; (ii) the lease rate shall be a nominal sum of $50.00 per annum plus HST, $75.00 per annum plus HST for the first renewal period, and $100.00 per annum plus HST for the second renewal period; (iii) York shall be responsible for any and all approvals required for monitoring and operation of the apiary; (iv) York shall be solely responsible for any and all costs associated with the apiary; (v) the lease be subject to relocation of the apiary to a mutually agreeable location, at TRCA's option; (vi) any further terms or conditions as deemed necessary TRCA staff and solicitor; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action may be required to implement the lease, including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 125 RES. #A51/15 - ORCHARD RIDGE (PICKERING) G.P. INC. Request for a Permanent Easement for a New Storm Sewer Outfall, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Lake Ontario Waterfront, CFN 52741. Receipt of a request from Orchard Ridge (Pickering) G.P. Inc. and the City of Pickering to provide a permanent easement for a new storm sewer outfall, located on the south side of Park Crescent and west of Cliffview Road, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Lake Ontario waterfront. (Executive Res. #B15115) Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jack Heath WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from Orchard Ridge (Pickering) G.P. Inc. (Orchard Ridge) and the City of Pickering to provide a permanent easement for a new storm sewer outfall, located on the south side of Park Crescent, west of Cliffview Road, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Lake Ontario Waterfront; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with Orchard Ridge and the City of Pickering in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of 0.023 hectares (0.057 acres), more or less, be granted in favour of the City of Pickering for a new storm sewer outfall, designated as Parts 1 and 2, on Plan 40R- 28658, subject to the following terms and conditions; i) the easement price be $10,000.00 to be paid by Orchard Ridge to TRCA, and in addition Orchard Ridge shall reimburse any legal, survey and other costs incurred by TRCA to complete this transaction; ii) an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, all at the sole expense of Orchard Ridge; iii) a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by Orchard Ridge prior to commencement of construction; iv) TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated or stabilized following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA or City of Pickering staff, a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA and City of Pickering landscaping guidelines; v) Orchard Ridge and the City of Pickering shall fully indemnify and save harmless TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or loss of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the granting of this easement or the carrying out of construction; 126 vi) any additional considerations as deemed appropriate by TRCA staff or its solicitor; THAT said easement be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A52/15 - LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS Meadowbrook Golf and Country Club Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River Watershed, CFN 48538. Request for a license agreement to facilitate crossing of Meadowbrook Golf and Country Club property for emergency access to the southern portion of Bruce's Mill Conservation Area, located to the south of Stouffville Road and east of Warden Avenue, Town of Wh itch urch-StouffviIle, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River watershed. (Executive Res. #816/15) Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a license agreement with Meadowbrook Golf and Country Club for emergency access requirements; THAT the term be one year and shall renew annually unless terminated by either party upon 90 days written notice to the other; THAT the consideration be for the nominal sum of $2.00; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the license agreement, including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 127 RES. #A53 /15 - LEASE EXTENSION FOR BRUCE'S MILL CONSERVATION AREA Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River Watershed, CFN 31698. Request from the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville to extend the existing lease for soccer fields within Bruce's Mill Conservation Area, south of Stouffville Road, east of Warden Avenue, Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River watershed. (Executive Res. #B17115) Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jack Heath WHEREAS the Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle has requested an additional extension to the existing lease for soccer fields within Bruce's Mill Conservation Area, Regional Municipality of York, located to the south of Stouffville Road and east of Warden Avenue; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the lease with the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville for soccer fields at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area be extended until December 31, 2019 with one further five year renewal period at Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) sole option; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the lease extension and the further 5 year renewal at TRCA's option, including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION RES. #A54 /15 - SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Anthony Perruzza Seconded by: Vincent Crisanti THAT Section II item EX8.1 - Acquisition of Vehicles, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #2/15, held on March 6, 2015, be received. CARRIED SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #A55 /15 - ROUGE NATIONAL URBAN PARK CFN 46156. Update on the creation of the Rouge National Urban Park. Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick 128 THAT the staff report dated February 26, 2015 regarding the Rouge National Urban Park be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #11/13, held on January 31, 2014, Resolution #A239/13 as amended by Resolution #A240/13 was approved as follows: WHEREAS at Authority Meeting #2112, held on March 30, 2012, the "Statement of Intent - Towards Cooperation and Collaboration in the Establishment of a National Urban Park in the Rouge Valley" was endorsed, AND WHEREAS it is the opinion of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering it's objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with the Park Canada Agency (PC) in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA lands containing 2,266 hectares (5,600 acres), more or less, and highlighted on the attached plan be conveyed to PC for the Rouge National Urban Park, in the cities of Toronto, Markham and Pickering, regional municipalities of York and Durham subject to the following terms and conditions; a) the consideration is to be the nominal sum of $2.00; b) PC is to be responsible for all legal, survey and other costs related to the land conveyance; c) retention by TRCA of the lands included in the tripartite agreement between City of Toronto, Toronto Zoo and TRCA subject to refining the boundaries; d) conveyance by TRCA of lands and/or easements for municipal infrastructure to the cities of Toronto, Markham and Pickering and the regional municipalities of York and Durham if requested by the municipality and subject to concurrence by PC; e) Locust Hill School House and Cedarena properties shall be subject to further discussions between TRCA, PC and the City of Markham prior to being conveyed; 0 any additional considerations as deemed appropriate by TRCA staff or its solicitor. THAT said conveyance be subject to the Province of Ontario releasing its interest in the lands conveyed by it to TRCA for Rouge Park and Bob Hunter Memorial Park purposes; THAT said conveyance is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27 as amended; THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including the obtaining needed approvals and the signing and execution of any documents; 129 AND FURTHER THAT staff report back on the future of the lands to the east of the Park. In June 2011, the Speech from the Throne set the direction for the Government of Canada to establish a national urban park in the Rouge valley. In May 2012, the Government of Canada announced $143.7 million in funding over the next 10 years for the establishment of the park and a subsequent $7.5 million annually for ongoing park operations. The Rouge National Urban Park (RNUP) requires a management approach reflective of its urban character. As such, since early July 2011, Parks Canada (PC) has worked closely with more than 100 national, provincial and regional organizations, Aboriginal partners, RNUP tenants, and youth, along with individuals and organizations with expertise related to conservation, farming, tourism, recreation, youth engagement and education, to develop a proposed RNUP concept. In June 2012, PC released the RNUP concept. The concept presented a vision for the park, a study area and a broad overview of how the park will be established, protected and managed. The study area for the proposed RNUP is shown on the attached plan. The RNUP concept enshrined the following four fundamental elements of the RNUP; connect people to nature and history, support a vibrant farming community, conserve natural heritage and celebrate cultural heritage character. Rouge Park Alliance The Province of Ontario terminated the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Ministry of Natural Resources, Rouge Park Alliance and TRCA effective July 31, 2012. This MOU related to the Rouge Park Alliance and operations, administration and management of the Rouge Park. On July 23, 2012, TRCA received a letter from PC confirming PC's intention to have TRCA be responsible for the interim management of the Rouge Park until it is formerly established as RNUP and PC assumes operational control. In May of 2013, TRCA and PC entered into an Interim Management Agreement. Provincial Lands In January 2013, the Government of Canada and the Province of Ontario entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) relating to the transfer of the provincial government's 1,600 acres (648 hectare) of land to PC for the creation of the RNUP, as well as relinquishing reversionary rights to approximately 3,700 acres (1,497 hectares) of lands which were previously conveyed by the Province to TRCA. In this MOA, PC commits to working with the Province to develop written policies in respect of the creation, management and administration of the RNUP that meets or exceeds provincial policies set out in the Greenbelt Plan 2005, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe 2006 and the Big Move. Transport Canada Lands In June 2013, the Government of Canada announced that Transport Canada will transfer nearly 5,000 acres (2,024 hectares) to PC for the proposed RNUP. Memorandum of Agreement In December of 2014, Government of Canada (represented by the PC), City of Toronto, City of Markham, City of Pickering, The Regional Municipality of York, The Regional Municipality of Durham and TRCA entered into a Memorandum of Agreement with respect to the assembly of lands for the proposed RNUP. 130 The RNUP will include all publicly -owned lands within the park boundary with the exception of the Toronto Zoo, the former Beare Road landfill site, rail corridors, hydro transmission corridors and existing infrastructure including existing roads, road allowances and stormwater management facilities. Privately -owned lands are also excluded from the RNUP. The MOA includes the following terms and conditions: • establishment of the RNUP by federal legislation; • the lands each party will be contributing to the RNUP; • mechanism for conveyances and /or easements for future municipal infrastructure requirements; • entering into Supplemental Agreements to establish further terms and conditions respecting the transfer; • if the transferred lands are not designated as part of the park within five years, the lands will be transferred back to the party without any charge; all lands will be transferred for nominal value; • PC will reimburse each party for any "out of pocket expenses" associated with the transfer of lands to PC; • PC will assume all existing tenancies. PC is currently undertaking its due diligence work related to the transfer to PC of lands with the RNUP study area. Toronto Zoo The Zoo is strategically located adjacent to the RNUP with its overflow parking and some other facilities being located in the park study area. This creates a significant opportunity for collaboration and partnering on programs and possibly capital projects of mutual interest and benefit. In addition, attendance at both the Zoo and the park could be enhanced as each venue, through collaboration, could provide complimentary attraction content. The City of Toronto has recently completed a review of the governance of the Zoo and one of the recommendations is to update the Tripartite Agreement between the Zoo, the City of Toronto and TRCA for operation, management and maintenance of the Zoo. This update will include a review of the existing Zoo boundaries to determine if they are still relevant based on the current use and needs of the Zoo as well as the future needs of the RNUP. Lands not included in the Tripartite Agreement will be conveyed to PC. Infrastructure Requirements Since the RNUP is located in a large urban area which continues to grow, it is necessary for the RNUP to accommodate some existing and future infrastructure. Existing municipally -owned infrastructure such as roads and stormwater management facilities will be excluded from the proposed RNUP boundary. Prior to transfer of lands to PC, TRCA may be requested to grant certain easements for this infrastructure. The municipal parties to the MOA have also identified a number of road improvements which are anticipated to occur on roads which pass through the Park including provision of bike paths and safety improvements. TRCA may also be requested to transfer these lands to the municipality prior to the PC transfer. PC will be consulted on all such requests. 131 Transition Under the MOA, landowners will be responsible for their lands until such time as the lands are transferred to PC. TRCA will continue to manage the day to day operations of the park as it did under the now dissolved Rouge Park Alliance. The existing management agreements between TRCA and City of Toronto will continue to remain in effect until the lands have been transferred to PC or as mutually agreed to. A Transition Advisory Committee chaired by PC will be established to provide advice and input on the establishment process and provide input on interim management direction until a permanent governance strategy is created. The signatories to the MOA will be represented on the Committee. Supplemental Agreements As noted above, the MOA provides for Supplemental Agreements to establish further terms and conditions respecting the transfer between one or more of the parties and PC. The items to be addressed in Supplemental Agreements involving TRCA include: • identifying ongoing collaboration, joint programming, shared facility management and boundaries related to the Toronto Zoo; • identifying and transferring or granting easement for future municipal infrastructure requirement on TRCA lands prior to the transfer of these lands to PC (to date the City of Toronto is the only municipality requesting this agreement); • TRCA's ongoing role in the RNUP relating to management of rentals, leases, the Glen Rouge Campground and regeneration activities; • interface between the RNUP and TRCA's policy and program interests relating to the Rouge watershed; • interface between RNUP and TRCA lands outside of the RNUP ie. Port Union Waterfront Park, Petticoat Creek Conservation Area, Rouge /Duffins corridor; • costs associated with any staff displaced by the creation of the RNUP. To date Supplemental Agreements have been finalized relating to the Toronto Zoo and City of Toronto infrastructure requirement. Discussions are ongoing with PC with respect to a Supplemental Agreement(s) to address the remaining items. Draft Management Plan In June 2014, the Rouge National Urban Park draft management plan was released for public viewing and feedback. A public engagement process on the draft plan was undertaken from June to October, 2014. The following are the general comments provided to PC by TRCA staff: Collaborative Approach Used in Development of Management Plan TRCA recognizes the collaborative approach which PC has used in the development of the draft management plan, not only with TRCA, but also with the Province of Ontario, municipal partners and various stakeholders, including First Nations groups. TRCA has been pleased to provide input on many levels throughout the process to develop the draft management plan, and supports the vision and strategies which Parks Canada has set, subject to consideration of TRCA's comments and consensus on how to integrate them into the management plan. 132 Recognize History of Park Establishment and Describe Uniqueness of Urban Park It is important to recognize and briefly describe how Rouge Park was established including the grassroots community advocacy, which helped save the significant natural and cultural features from development. Also, a comprehensive description of the unique nature of the park should be included, which relates to its location in the GTA, the Province and Canada. Future Process, Directions and Overall Management A stronger emphasis and inclusion is needed in the plan on the importance of an ecological approach to planning and management of RNUP. Introduced in Ontario in the 1990 report for the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront, this concept was further established in the 1994 Rouge Park Management Plan, and carried through in the 2001 Rouge North Management Plan and the 2007 Little Rouge Corridor Management Plan. Provincial initiatives relevant to the park which also incorporated this approach for major land use planning initiatives date back to 1994, when the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy applied the ecosystem approach to planning in case studies for the Seaton Lands and the Oak Ridges Moraine. TRCA recommended language includes: e Rouge National Urban Park is a major protected natural heritage feature in the Greater Toronto Area and unique in the system of other Parks Canada national parks; e the largest natural heritage park within the urbanizing context of Canada's largest city region, and a comprehensive watershed system; e a scenic mosaic of natural landscapes and working agricultural landscapes that captures the evolution of cultural settlement in southern Ontario; e a landmark example of early ecosystem planning that must adapt to the ever changing pressures of urban development; e a park conceived by community activism and commitment to a high order natural and cultural landscape as part of the community fabric. 4. Priority on Conservation of Ecosystems The RNUP's terrestrial and aquatic habitats are some of the best remaining natural ecosystems in the GTA, and its ecological values are precious. TRCA strongly recommends that a priority and focus on conservation of ecosystems be explicitly stated in the management plan and that a comprehensive description of the unique nature of the park be included. East -West Connections East -west connections are as important as north -south connections for ecological linkages and recreational use and should be recognized in the plan. 6. Expand Ecological Restoration and Monitoring Ecological restoration and monitoring should be broader in scope than the Draft Fish Management Plan, Species at Risk and rare species. 133 Importance of Water Management The importance of water management should be reinforced, particularly as major areas north and west of the park will be developed as part of urban boundary initiatives. Describe Natural Hazards and Processes in the Park The impacts and significance of natural hazards should be explained, as the Rouge River system is sensitive to flooding and erosion. Identify and Describe Parks Canada Commitments to Meet/Exceed Other Plans The plan needs more clarity about whether Parks Canada commits to meet the requirements and objectives of other plans and regulations such as TRCA's watershed plans, Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy and The Living City Policies, as well as provincial Greenbelt, Places to Grow and the Big Move plans, and regional and municipal official plans. 10. Cultural Heritage Features The management plan should include and further describe a variety of additional significant cultural heritage features that exist throughout the Park. Objectives and targets for these features should outline protection, enhancement and story - telling approaches. 11. TRCA Continued Participation TRCA has a strong interest in participating in the ongoing planning and management for RNUP, through TRCA's current negotiations on the land transfer agreement, the additional memorandum of understanding regarding future roles and responsibilities, membership on future park advisory committee role of watershed managers, and continuing ecological restoration work and monitoring in the park. PC is currently analyzing the feedback received from the public engagement process Federal Legislation Rouge National Urban Park Act received third reading in the House of Commons on January 26, 2015. The Act received Second Reading in the Senate on February 19, 2015 and was referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources. The Senate Standing Committee has approved the Act without amendments. It is anticipated that the legislation will receive Third Reading and Royal Ascent shortly. The provincial government has indicated that it does not support the legislation as currently drafted. The Province maintains that the regulations are far too weak and will not provide adequate environmental protection. Unless the environmental protection is strengthened in the legislation, the Province has advised that they will not transfer any lands to PC including the relinquishing of their reversionary rights in the TRCA lands. Report prepared by: Mike Fanning, extension 5223 Emails: mfenning @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 Emails: mfenning @trca.on.ca Date: February 26, 2015 Attachments: 1 134 Attachment 1 b� I �'r rp 1 �1 1ti , r' 1 y� 1 rrn gAFHM1 Legend W Ta WZMaag Conservation Rouge National Urban Park Study Boundary for The Liningatp SITE E Municipal Boundary PEEL Yams i TRCA Land under the Zoo Agreement TRCA Property maorrra U U5 1 2 3 d u••o,aaA ®Kllometers Key Map Q Queen's Pm Wr for Onta and Is lCen5eR. RUM] MaY Not he Reproduced wllli" Pernriswon. THIS IS NOT R PLAN OF SURVEY 135 RES. #A56/15 - FREEDOM OF INFORMATION Summary of 2014 Requests. Provides a summary of requests under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT the report dated March 16, 2015, on 2014 freedom of information requests, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is subject to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. TRCA is also subject to the provisions of the federal Personal information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). Requests under the Act are dealt with by the Senior Manager, Corporate Secretariat, who is designated as TRCA's Information and Privacy Officer. Staff reports to the Information and Privacy Commission annually on the number and type of applications received each year. The activity in 2014 is summarized below. RATIONALE In 2014, TRCA received 27 requests for information under the Act. Of the 27 requests, 25 were completed in 2014 while the other two were completed in 2015. All of the requests related to "general records" as opposed to "personal information ". The latter refers to personal information TRCA has collected concerning the applicant. Of the 27 requests made, 11 requests were from individuals, 13 from businesses and one from an academic /researcher. Of the 27 requests received in 2014, twenty were responded to within the 30 day limit required under the Act. Three requests took 31 - 60 days and two took 91 days or more. Extensions were needed in some cases because of the volume of records to be searched and prepared and due to the information requested affecting a third parry resulting in a duty to consult prior to release of records. Of the 27 requests, complete information was disclosed as requested in four situations; partial information was disclosed in 12 situations; no relevant records existed in seven situations so there was no disclosure; and in four situations, the request was withdrawn, abandoned or non - jurisdictional. In 13 situations where general information was disclosed, personal information was removed for privacy purposes. Examples of the personal privacy exemption being applied include copies of cheques which may be on file and personal telephone numbers. Also, TRCA receives many requests concerning permit and planning applications which, once approved by the Executive Committee, are a matter of public record. 136 The Act requires that a $5 fee be included with each application. Also, the Act allows TRCA to charge for photocopies (20 cents /page) and search and preparation time ($30 /hour). In 2014, TRCA collected fees of $1,167.40, and $11.60 of fees were waived. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca Date: March 16, 2015 RES. #A57/15 - SENIOR STAFF EXPENSES Summary of senior staff expenses for the year 2014. Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT the summary of expense details for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Chief Executive Officer and Directors for January 1 to December 31, 2014, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Toronto City Council on November 29, 30 and December 1, 2011, the following resolution was approved: City Council approve the publication on the City's public website on a semi - annual basis, commencing with the 2011 calendar year, expenses related to business travel, conferences and training, hospitality and protocol for senior staff positions at the Division Head level and above. City Council provide a copy of this Item to the City's major agencies and corporations requesting that they adopt a similar policy for their organization if they have not already done so. In keeping with this request, TRCA staff advised the City of Toronto that TRCA staff will report to the Authority annually on the expenses outlined in the City staff report dated October 19, 2011 - Feasibility of Publishing Expense Details of Senior City Staff on the City's Website, for TRCA's senior staff including the Chief Executive Officer and divisional Directors. This information will be available on the TRCA website as a staff report in the minutes of the meeting. Expenses to be published include the following, and are detailed in Attachment 1: 1. business travel (including kilometrage reimbursement or operating costs when vehicle is provided to the employee); 2. conferences and training (including accommodation, registration and per diem allowance); 137 3. hospitality or protocol expenses (hosting TRCA events for non - employees at eating establishments or other appropriate locations). Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca, rsgambelluri@trca.on.ca Date: March 9, 2015 Attachments: 1 138 Attachment Senior Staff (Chief Executive Officer & Directors) Expenses January 1 - December 31, 2014 BRIAN DENNEY, Chief Executive Officer DEREK EDWARDS, Director, Parks and Culture Business Travel Jan 1 -Dec 31 Parking and Transit 435.50 Jan 1 -Dec 31407 ETR 646.21 Jan 1 -Dec 31 Operating Cost of Assigned Vehicle 3,939.11 19 -Sep Total 5,020.82 DEREK EDWARDS, Director, Parks and Culture Conferences and Training 3 -Nov University of Toronto - Lectureonclimatechange 118.31 23 -Mar Total 118.31 DEREK EDWARDS, Director, Parks and Culture Hospitality and Protocol 12 -Feb Breakfast - City of Vaughan Staff 31.19 23 -Mar Lunch meeting - Tennis Canada Staff 41.40 26 -Mar Lunch meeting- Direct Energy, Peel 115.57 19 -Sep Lunch meeting- Bill Granger 57.75 Total 245.91 DEREK EDWARDS, Director, Parks and Culture 139 Business Travel Jan 1 -Dec 31 Parking and Transit 233.89 Jan 1 -Dec 31 407 ETR 926.40 Jan 1 -Dec 31 Operating Cost of Assigned Vehicle 4,431.06 Total 5,591.35 139 Conferences and Training April 7-9 Meals while in New York for Museum & Attractions Tour for BCPV Research 450.34 Transportation in New York for Museum & Attractions Tour for BCPV Research 114.86 Total 565.20 139 * The W. Garfield Weston Foundation provided the funds for the New York Museum & Attractions Tour Hospitality and Protocol - No expenses ADELE FREEMAN, Director, Watershed Management Conferences & Training - No Expenses Hospitality and Protocol - No expenses NICK SACCONE, Director, Restoration Services Business Travel Jan 1 -Dec 31 Parking and Transit 47.50 Jan 1 -Dec 31 407 ETR 13.65 Jan 1 -Dec 31 Travel allowance 1,481.50 Total 1,542.65 Conferences & Training - No Expenses Hospitality and Protocol - No expenses NICK SACCONE, Director, Restoration Services Conferences & Training - No Expenses Business Travel Jan 1 -Dec 31 Parking and Transit 157.50 Jan 1 -Dec 31407 ETR 824.75 Jan 1 -Dec 31 Operating Cost of Assigned Vehicle 3,720.66 Total 4,702.91 Conferences & Training - No Expenses 140 Hospitality and Protocol 15-Mayl Lunch meeting -Works Committee 27.00 Total 27.00 140 ROCCO SGAMBELLURI, Chief Financial Officer CAROLYN WOODLAND, Director, Planning and Development Business Travel Jan 1 -Dec 31 Parking and Transit 205.00 Jan 1 -Dec 31407 ETR - Jan 1 -Dec 31 Travel Allowance 954.50 Total 1,159.50 CAROLYN WOODLAND, Director, Planning and Development Conferences and Training 26 -Nov Course Fee - Tax Update 394.37 23 -Oct Total 394.37 CAROLYN WOODLAND, Director, Planning and Development Hospitality and Protocol 15 -May Lunch meeting -Works Committee 24.74 23 -Oct Ramada Ottawa -CO Insurance Committee Meeting 128.81 Jan 1 -Dec 31 Total 153.55 CAROLYN WOODLAND, Director, Planning and Development Conferences & Training - No Expenses Hospitality and Protocol - No expenses CATHERINE MACEWEN, Director, HR, Marketing and Communications Business Travel - No Expenses Conferences & Training - No Expenses Hospitality and Protocol - No expenses 141 Business Travel Jan 1 -Dec 31 Parking and Transit 267.65 Jan 1 -Dec 31 407 ETR 287.45 Jan 1 -Dec 31 Travel allowance 1,824.00 Total 2,379.10 Conferences & Training - No Expenses Hospitality and Protocol - No expenses CATHERINE MACEWEN, Director, HR, Marketing and Communications Business Travel - No Expenses Conferences & Training - No Expenses Hospitality and Protocol - No expenses 141 RES. #A58 /15 - SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD Moved by: Glenn Mason Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT Section IV item EX9.1 - Albion Hills Field Centre Phase 5 Retrofit Project, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #2/15, held on March 6, 2015, be received. CARRIED ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED RES. #A59 /15 - APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Matt Mahoney Seconded by: Mike Mattos THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, items EX10.1 - EX10.9, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #2/15, held on March 6, 2015, be received. CARRIED TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:12 a.m., on Friday, March 27, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 142 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer TOWN OF WHITCHURCH - STOUFFVILLE Conveyance of Land for the Extension of Baker Hill Boulevard, north of Millard Street, Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River Watershed 168 WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES ETOBICOKE - MIMICO WATERSHED COALITION Minutes of Meeting #2/14, held on June 19, 2014 169 HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE Minutes of Meeting #3/14, held on December 2, 2014 170 PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN Minutes of Meeting #3/14, held on December 10, 2014 170 Toronto and Region 40 C onserwation Authority MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #4/15 April 24, 2015 The Authority Meeting #4/15, was held in Weston Rooms A & B, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, April 24, 2015. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:38 a.m. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Member Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member Ronald Chopowick Member Vincent Crisanti Member Chris Fonseca Member Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Mujeeb Khan Member Matt Mahoney Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Mike Mattos Member Ron Moeser Member Jennifer O'Connell Member Anthony Perruzza Member John Sprovieri Member Cynthia Thorburn Member Jim Tovey Member ABSENT David Barrow Member Ben Cachola Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Biase Member Justin Di Ciano (attending CNE Board meeting) Member Rob Ford (attending medical appointment) Member Glenn Mason Member Linda Pabst Member Gino Rosati Member 143 RES. #A60 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Ronald Chopowick Ron Moeser THAT the Minutes of Meeting #3/15, held on March 27, 2015, be approved. CARRIED (a) A delegation by Ms. Susan Walmer, Executive Director, Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust, speaking in regard to item AUTH7.1 - GTA West Corridor Individual Environmental Assessment Update. RES. #A61 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: DELEGATIONS Ronald Chopowick Chris Fonseca THAT above -noted delegation (a) be received. CARRIED (a) A presentation by Natalie Rouskov, Project Manager, MTO and Neil Ahmed, Consultant Project Manager, MMM Group, in regard to item AUTH7.1 - GTA West Corridor Individual Environmental Assessment Update. (b) A presentation by Rocco Sgambelluri, Chief Financial Officer, TRCA, in regard to item BAAB7.1 - 2014 Budget, Operating and Capital. RES. #A62 /15 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Mujeeb Khan THAT above -noted presentation (a) be received. RES. #A63 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Colleen Jordan Ron Moeser 144 CARRIED THAT above -noted presentation (b) be received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #A64/15 - GTA WEST CORRIDOR INDIVIDUAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UPDATE Status update on the Individual Environmental Assessment for the proposed Greater Toronto Area (GTA) West Highway - Stage 2. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Colleen Jordan WHEREAS an update on the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) West Highway Stage 1 Individual Environmental Assessment (IEA) was provided at Authority Meeting #6/11, held on June 24, 2011, with the understanding that Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff will report back to the Authority once alternative alignments within the transportation corridor have been determined; AND WHEREAS the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) has initiated the final stage of the IEA process (Stage 2) and is currently evaluating alignment alternatives and interchange locations within the planning study area in order to determine the preferred route; AND WHEREAS TRCA staff has notified MTO and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) of significant concerns regarding the Stage 2 preliminary information, including potential impacts to natural features, flooding and erosion hazards, impacts of crossings on the natural heritage system and their functions; requested further study of these impacts; and further requested that a comprehensive mitigation and compensation strategy be established for any unavoidable areas of impact during the IEA process; AND WHEREAS federal and provincial agencies are exempt from the regulatory approval process under the Conservation Authorities Act and, as such, formal permits in accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06 are not required by the Province of Ontario; AND WHEREAS in order to ensure that TRCA interests related to flooding, erosion, pollution and conservation of lands are addressed during the detailed design stage of provincial projects, TRCA offers a Voluntary Project Review, designed to ensure that projects meet the interests, objectives and tests of TRCA's permit requirements, fees are charged and regular TRCA review process and service delivery timelines are followed; AND WHEREAS TRCA has requested that MTO commit to following the Voluntary Review Process upon completion of the IEA; 145 THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the recommendations as detailed in Authority Meeting #6/11, held on June 24, 2011, be carried forward into Stage 2 of the IEA; THAT should MTO choose not to undergo the Voluntary Project Review process at the detailed design stage, that it be requested that TRCA concerns related to flooding, erosion, pollution and conservation of lands be fully addressed in the IEA; THAT staff continue involvement in the review and stakeholder consultation processes as it relates to the GTA West Corridor IEA and report back to the Authority when a final alignment has been determined; AND FURTHER THAT MTO, MOECC, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), Credit Valley Conservation, Conservation Halton and municipalities affected by this new highway corridor be circulated a copy of this staff report. CARRIED BACKGROUND In January 2007, the Ministry of Transportation began the Individual Environmental Assessment Study for the GTA West Corridor. The purpose of the study is to examine long -term transportation problems and opportunities while considering alternatives to provide better linkages to urban growth centres from approximately Highway 400 west to the Guelph area. The Terms of Reference was approved by the Ontario Minister of the Environment on March 4, 2008 thereby allowing MTO to proceed with their environmental assessment which is being completed in two stages. Stage 1 of the Individual Environmental Assessment Process Stage 1 of the IEA evaluated the area transportation system alternatives and was completed in November 2012. It identified the GTA West Preliminary Route Planning Study Corridor from Highway 400, terminating at the Highway 401/407 interchange in the west. The study area within TRCA's jurisdiction extends from Highway 400 in the City of Vaughan, west through the Town of Caledon and City of Brampton to approximately Heritage Road. The overall recommended solution consists of an alignment with a right -of -way in the range of 110 m (for the highway not including the transitway) and 170 m including the transitway. Preliminary analysis indicated that the alignment would include six lanes (three in each direction) between Highway 400 and the Highway 427 extension, and four lanes (two in each direction) between Highway 427 and the connection at Highway 401/407 ETR. The MTO project team will be completing additional modeling in Stage 2 of the IEA to update and confirm these requirements and the results will be provided later this year. At Authority Meeting #6/11, held on June 24, 2011, Resolution #A122/11 was approved as follows: THAT the Ministry of Transportation be advised that TRCA staff understands the provincial need for the new corridor, and that staff is committed to working with the Province to ensure the environmental impacts to the natural heritage system within the Humber River and Etobicoke Creek watersheds are avoided, mitigated and compensated as the IEA is developed, 146 THAT the Ministry of Transportation be required to further consider modifications to the draft preliminary route planning study area to minimize fragmentation of the natural heritage system, particularly in the area of the Nashville Resource Management Tract; THAT the Ministry of Transportation be required to provide an extensive review of existing natural features, impacts of crossings on the natural features and their functions, and provide a comprehensive mitigation and compensation strategy for those areas that will be impacted; THAT the Ministry of Transportation be requested to establish a working group with TRCA staff to examine the alternatives at a site specific level, to identify and scope the true implications to valleyland corridors and large tracts of natural heritage system within the Humber River watershed and impacts to the Nashville Resource Management Tract (lands in TRCA ownership); THAT the Ministry of Transportation be requested to work with the Ontario Road Ecology Group (GREG) to inform the planning and design of the GTA West Corridor in terms of priority areas for wildlife crossing mitigation; THAT the Ministry of Transportation be requested, due to the historical significance of the Humber River (designated a Canadian Heritage River in 1999) to involve First Nations, local heritage groups, municipalities and TRCA early in the planning process, as the potential for significant archaeological findings within this watershed is extremely high; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff continue involvement in the review and stakeholder consultation processes as related to the GTA West Corridor and report back to the Authority when alternative alignments have been determined. Stage 2 of the Individual Environmental Assessment (IEA) Process MTO has now commenced Stage 2 of the IEA. This stage represents the final stage of their IEA process whereby a preferred highway alignment and interchange locations will be identified, and preliminary design for the preferred route completed. At this time a long and short list of route alternatives (attached) has been generated by the Province together with potential interchange locations within the Study Corridor. This final stage will involve further development, assessment and evaluation of the short list of route alternatives and potential interchange locations. The long and short list of route alternatives are available using the following links: alternatives and potential interchange locations. The long and short list of route alternatives are available using the following links: http: / /www.gta- west. com /pdf /l 1 -26 -15 /Map %202 -1 % 20- %20GTA %20West %20Long %20List %20 Routes.pdf http://www.gta-west.com/pdf/l 1- 26 -15/ Map° / x202- 2 %20- %20Short%20List %20Routes %20- %201 C %201-ocations.pdf 147 Once the IEA has been completed it will be submitted to MOECC for approval. The [EA must be approved by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, and Cabinet before the project can proceed. Once the public consultation period is finished the Minister may: • refer it to mediation; • refer it to the Environmental Review Tribunal for a hearing; or • make a decision to approve, approve with conditions, or refuse the IEA. RATIONALE TRCA has identified to both MTO and MOECC its concerns with respect to the mapped alignments and interchanges, as well as the process to date in a letter dated March 3, 2015. These concerns are summarized below. Natural Heritage System and Natural Hazards The proposed GTA West highway will bisect both the Etobicoke Creek and Humber River watersheds in their mid and upper reaches. TRCA provided comments to MTO based on preliminary information, including a long and short list of route alternatives mapping and interchange locations which TRCA obtained from the MTO website. Based on the preliminary information provided, it is expected that there will be significant impacts to wetlands and valley and stream corridors, including headwater drainage features. TRCA also has a provincially delegated responsibility to ensure increased risk as a result of flooding and erosion hazards to upstream and downstream communities is avoided. Detailed analysis of the alignments will need to be completed in order to determine the overall cumulative impacts of a specific alignment and to ensure that sensitive natural heritage systems are protected to avoid fragmentation, allow for continued wildlife movement, avoid impacts to the hydrological and hydraulic regimes and to ensure these areas are assessed for impacts to flooding and erosion hazards. Special attention to natural heritage protection and enhancement will be required together with innovative technologies for water management and crossing sizes to maintain the form and function of these headwater features and terrestrial natural heritage systems which are critical to the health of our communities and downstream reaches. This will need to take place in the form of avoidance, mitigation, restoration and compensation opportunities. Compensation opportunities will need to be identified in the IEA to ensure clear direction is provided for the design and construction stages of the project. Areas of Concern Within TRCA's Jurisdiction Based on the mapping provided there are several key areas of concern within TRCA's jurisdiction where the number and magnitude of impacts to aquatic and terrestrial systems, wetlands and several key parcels of conservation land are expected. Areas include, but are not limited to, the Highway 427 extension, the Highway 410 extension, impacts to TRCA -owned lands along Etobicoke Creek, TRCA's Nashville Resource Management Tract and TRCA -owned lands and conservation easements on the east branch of the Humber River, as well as potential alignments east of the Nashville Tract in or adjacent to Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) and wetlands. flm In addition, development activities within regulated areas on lands owned by a provincial or federal agency are exempt from the regulatory approval process under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. In the absence of the formal permitting process the province may submit an application for a Voluntary Project Review at the design stage at which point TRCA will complete a comprehensive review and provide an opinion as to whether the interests, objectives and tests of TRCA's permit requirements will be satisfied. As there is no formal mechanism for TRCA involvement once the IEA has been approved, unless identified as a Condition of Approval by MOECC, should MTO choose not to proceed through the Voluntary Project Review process, TRCA staff will require some level of confidence that detailed design concerns have been fully addressed in the IEA in order to protect our interests. Any concerns not addressed in the final IEA will be identified to MTO and MOECC during the public review commenting period. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE At this stage TRCA has identified to both MTO and MOECC that it is premature for TRCA staff to recommend a preferred alignment due to the lack of information on the overall environmental impacts. MTO will be conducting field investigations for the short- listed alignment alternatives in 2015 together with additional studies that will help inform the review of this proposed highway. It is TRCA's expectation that the final preferred route will follow a transparent planning process which clearly identifies how MTO came to their preferred design and identifies why other options were eliminated. TRCA has met and will continue to meet with MTO in working sessions and provide input through TRCA's internal review process, the Regulatory Agency Advisory Group (RAAG), the Greenbelt Transportation Advisory Group (GTAG) and through discussions with local municipalities. An update was also provided to the Humber Watershed Alliance in 2014. TRCA staff will continue to provide input to the study team through the various working groups and through internal review and comment of provided reports. A report will be provided back to the Authority once a final alignment has been established at which time TRCA staff will be in a position to either recommend to MOECC that the chosen preferred alignment and interchanges in the IEA be approved, approved with conditions or refused. If staff recommends approval with conditions, staff will provide recommendations to MOECC for consideration based on TRCA's areas of interest. Report prepared by: Sharon Lingertat, extension 5717 Emails: slingertat @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Beth Williston, extension 5217, Mike Fenning, extension 5223, Sharon Lingertat, extension 5717 Emails: bwilliston @trca.on.ca, mfenning @trca.on.ca, slingertat @trca.on.ca Date: March 31, 2015 149 RES. #A65/15 - WEST NILE VIRUS MONITORING UPDATE Summary of the 2014 West Nile Virus Monitoring and Surveillance Program and receipt of the annual report - West Nile Virus Vector Larval Mosquito Monitoring Report - 2014. Moved by: Jennifer O'Connell Seconded by: Mujeeb Khan THAT the annual report "West Nile Virus Vector Larval Mosquito Monitoring Report - 2014" be received; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to circulate the annual report to the public health units of the regional municipalities of Peel, Durham, York and the City of Toronto; THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue to participate in the Regional West Nile Virus Advisory Committees in Durham Region and York Region; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue West Nile virus larval mosquito monitoring in wetlands and stormwater management ponds on TRCA -owned land during the 2015 summer season. CARRIED BACKGROUND West Nile virus (WNV) is a virus transmitted through mosquitoes to birds and incidentally to humans. In Ontario, the first outbreak happened in 2002 and more recently a significant outbreak occurred in 2012. The annual level of WNV activity and risk of exposure depends on the number of infected bird hosts and the number of adult mosquitos carrying the virus in a given year. WNV outbreaks are difficult to predict, therefore WNV management is focused on prevention and control, which is collectively undertaken by the provincial, regional and municipal health agencies in Ontario. As a major owner of greenspace, including substantial wetland areas, TRCA has had an interest in the WNV issue. As a measure of due diligence and at the request of regional health units, TRCA has been routinely monitoring larval mosquitoes in TRCA's natural wetlands and selected stormwater management ponds (SWMPs) since 2003. The objective of this monitoring has been to identify preferred breeding sites of mosquitoes, assess the level of WNV risk, and reduce human exposure to the virus by taking appropriate measures such as housekeeping activities (grading small depressions, garbage removal) and if necessary the application of larvicide. TRCA's program activities include public education activities, collaborating with the regional health units and conducting larval mosquito monitoring on TRCA -owned lands. The data collected over the years has been beneficial in guiding management decisions related to wetland protection and creation, land management planning and has assisted the public health agencies with their public education and outreach campaigns. At Authority Meeting #3/14, held on April 25, 2014, Resolution #A43/14 was approved, in part, as follows: 150 ...AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue West Nile virus larval mosquito monitoring in wetlands and stormwater management ponds on TRCA -owned land during the 2014 summer season. As per Authority Resolution, WNV surveillance and monitoring activities were again implemented in the summer of 2014. The following summarizes these activities and results Summary of WNV Program Activities in 2014 TRCA's program continued to implement a "three- pronged" approach including public education, collaboration with regional public health units, and larval mosquito monitoring and surveillance on TRCA properties. Public education activities in 2014 focused on updating a WNV website link, distribution of WNV related information and addressing public and staff inquires on WNV and standing water complaints. Mosquito larvae monitoring was undertaken at 45 monitoring sites including 39 wetlands and six SWMPs across the TRCA jurisdiction from June 3 to August 21, 2014. Each site was visited five times at approximately two -week intervals. Data collected was used to determine potential WNV risk at each site throughout the summer, and appropriate control measures were taken. Collaborations with regional health units required TRCA staff to attend regional public health WNV committee meetings, share collected data and notify the regions of any sites with high potential risk of WNV. TRCA received an Order on April 5, 2014 from the Medical Officer of Peel Regional Health under the Health Protection and Promotion Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.7 to assist with the implementation of control measures to reduce the number of mosquito larvae in the Heart Lake Wetland Complex in Brampton. It is anticipated that TRCA will receive another Order from the Peel Regional Medical Officer in 2015. Summary of Results Obtained in 2014 The 2014 sampling season yielded a total of 6,528 mosquito larvae from wetlands and 418 mosquito larvae from SWMPs. Similar to the monitoring results from previous years, TRCA's monitoring data showed that most wetlands posed very low potential WNV risk. Most (65 %) of the larvae collected in wetlands were Culex territans which exclusively feed on amphibians, thus not capable of transmitting WNV to humans. Occasionally localized WNV hot spots may occur on TRCA properties. Six sites were identified as having high potential WNV risk in 2014: Grenadier Pond in High Park, Woodland Pond, Goldfish Pond in Tommy Thompson Park, Granger Wetland South Pond, Albion Hills Pond 2 and an unnamed wetland in Vaughan. Each of these sites received larvicide treatments by the regional health units as proactive measures to address WNV concerns. It should be noted that these identified sites do not pose any immediate threat to the public, the designation of a "hot spot" only implies that the larval mosquitos found are of the variety that have been known to transmit the virus to humans once they have emerged as adults and have first bitten an infected bird. The proactive nature of this monitoring program and the subsequent action is designed to control and reduce the number of the adult mosquitos available to transmit the virus, thus reducing the potential exposure to humans. In SWMPs, the percentage of mosquito species capable of transmitting WNV to humans had greatly reduced (45 %) in 2014 compared to the numbers collected from the past decade (67 -99 %). This reduction is due to L'Amoreaux North Pond which had consistently been identified as a hotspot for the past years was not identified as one in 2014. 151 In 2014, the severity of WNV infection in humans had decreased significantly comparing to the past three years (Figure 1), with 11 human cases being reported in Ontario. Culex pipiens and Culex restuans over - winter as adult females, and perhaps many of them did not survive the long and frigid winter we experienced in 2014. In addition, the summer of 2014 was also the coldest in decades. Researchers at the Center for Vectorborne Disease at the University of California O suggested that WNV needs temperatures to stay above 14.3 C or it cannot survive in its hosts. The cooler summer temperatures (Figure 2) may play a key role in limiting the development and survival of WNV, leading to fewer confirmed human WNV cases this year. The importance of regular and continuous seasonal monitoring of wetlands and SWMPs through TRCAs WNV surveillance and monitoring activities is highlighted by the fact that it is impossible to predict the severity of WNV in a given year, and the programs ability to detect hot spots and subsequently take appropriate control measures. A copy of the Annual Report: "West Nile Virus Vector Larval Mosquito Monitoring Report - 2014" will be available on the corporate website (www.trca.on.ca; keyword: West Nile virus) for reference. Copies will be provided to members upon request. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will continue surveillance activities at approximately 47 sites on TRCA -owned lands. The following two additional sites will be included in 2015: 1) Evergreen Brick Works: Additional monitoring sites suggested by senior staff and board member. 2) Granger Wetland North Pond: Granger Wetland South Pond was a routine monitoring station in 2014 and it was identified as a hotspot for Culex pipiens larvae, due to the close proximity of the two ponds, Granger Wetland North Pond will be included as a routine monitoring site as well in 2015. Staff will continue to liaise with regional health units and participate in WNV advisory committees throughout the 2015 field season and will continue to respond to public inquiries on WNV and reports of standing water on TRCA property, in addition to providing general information for both the public and staff on WNV. Standing water complaints will be reviewed and addressed following the established Standing Water Complaint Procedure. Staff will continue to identify sites of concern on TRCA property through larval monitoring and advise other TRCA departments on maintenance or management duties required to reduce the number of potential breeding sites for mosquitoes. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for the 2015 WNV surveillance and monitoring activities is available under the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program with capital funding support from the regions of York, Peel and Durham, and the City of Toronto. A small amount of revenue is generated (up to $ 3,000) by the program on an annual basis through the provision of mosquito larvae identification training for regional health staff. 152 Overall this funding will be sufficient to support the 2015 surveillance fieldwork and staff support to liaise with the regional health units and to respond to complaints. The funding is not however expected to cover any costs associated with control measures if deemed necessary. If larviciding or site remediation is required as a control measure, the associated costs will be covered through TRCA Land Management funding. However, there have been opportunities identified in the past two years to partner with the various regional health departments in order to have sites treated with larvicide in a timely manner and at no cost to TRCA. Report prepared by: Jessica Fang, 289- 268 -3947 Emails: jfang@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jessica Fang, 289- 268 -3947 Emails: jfang@trca.on.ca Date: March 30, 2015 Attachments: 1 153 Attachments 25 q 20 e ' 15 e S. E 10 f • Figure 2. Minimum Daily Temperature, June- August 2014. N5 n Temp C - - - -- U ni mum 5 Temp for WNV m 0 survive 154 Figure 1. West Nile virus in Ontario — 2002 - 2014 700 ffi • 000 c m E r 5(10 v C m w 440 - 0 0 a 300 — n 0 a 200 0 i6 J3 E 100 a v 2002 2043 1 2004 2005 2009 2007 2008 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ■ # of positive pools 580 122 72 289 182 51 92 14 57 289 404 190 59 ■ # of fmnman casBs 395 95 14 101 1 43 18 9. 4 9 81 1271 57 11 25 q 20 e ' 15 e S. E 10 f • Figure 2. Minimum Daily Temperature, June- August 2014. N5 n Temp C - - - -- U ni mum 5 Temp for WNV m 0 survive 154 RES. #A66/15 - 2015 SURFACE WATER QUALITY LABORATORY ANALYSIS Partnership for analysis of surface water quality samples as part of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Regional Watershed Monitoring Program. Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Vincent Crisanti THAT the analytical laboratory services for the surface water quality monitoring program as part of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Regional Watershed Monitoring Program (RWMP) be undertaken in partnership with the Toronto Water's Laboratory from May 2015 through April 2016; THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to implement a service level agreement for this activity, including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents; THAT staff liaise with the Manager and Chief Chemist at Toronto Water Laboratory to monitor the partnership and to review the data quality; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to proceed with their biennial inter - laboratory comparative assessment in autumn 2016 in order to continue to reassess the capabilities of various water quality laboratories for consideration by the TRCA. CARRIED BACKGROUND As part of the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program, TRCA collects monthly surface water quality samples at 46 sites throughout its jurisdiction. This is an extensive monitoring network; unique among most conservation authorities which usually rely solely on the data from the Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network (PWQMN) through the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (OMOECC). The RWMP supplements TRCA's 13 PWQMN stations with 33 additional stations throughout TRCA's jurisdiction. In addition, the RWMP collects winter samples (November through March) at all sites including the PWQMN sites and E. coli bacteria at all sites year- round. The additional sites and winter samples help to refine the data seasonally and on a subwatershed scale. The surface water quality data is used to help understand the impacts of agricultural and urban areas on stream water quality and Lake Ontario. Historically, the analysis of these samples has been undertaken at several laboratories including the OMOECC, the York - Durham Regional Environmental Laboratory, the Toronto Water Laboratory (Dee Avenue) and various private labs. Using several laboratories has been a challenge over the years due to data compatibility. This issue has been identified as significant to the integrity of the RWMP, which was established to track and report on changes (often small) to the various water quality parameters assessed over time. The ability to achieve this requires that any changes observed in the data over time be attributable to only actual change: in water quality and not due to changes in technique or instrumentation used in the sample analysis process. 155 In an effort to improve the quality and consistency of the surface water quality data received and to allow a more consistent and robust interpretation of the results obtained, staff agreed and recommended that a laboratory comparison should be undertaken on a biennial basis (i.e. every other year). This inter - laboratory comparative study has been undertaken to determine which laboratories had results that most closely matched the processes and results available from the OMOECC. The inter - laboratory comparison has been conducted since 2008 and most recently was undertaken in the fall of 2014. At Executive Committee Meeting #11/09, held on January 15, 2010, it was brought to the Executive Committee's attention that TRCA was no longer using Toronto Water Laboratorys services for the analysis of surface water samples collected through the RWMP. At that time staff explained that the level of precision for analysis of certain water quality parameters required by TRCA was beyond the capability of Toronto's Dee Avenue laboratory. The additional precision of data is needed by TRCA in order to fully understand subtle changes in water quality within the range of conditions found in the TRCA jurisdiction, including those parameters found in relatively low concentrations. It was also identified that staff at the Toronto lab was proposing some upgrades to their instrumentation, and that they would be in a better position in the future to meet TRCA's needs. In this regard it was requested by several members of the board that TRCA continue to liaise with the Toronto lab to determine if this partnership could be re- established in the future. The 2014 inter - laboratory comparison study showed that the Toronto Water Lab showed a marked improvement over previous comparisons. Toronto purchased a new ICP -MS (analytical) instrument in 2011 which has improved the capabilities of the laboratory, and in addition they merged several systems and developed a new quality assurance program. In this recent comparison, it was found that for many parameters, Toronto's laboratory had results similar to the OMOECC and the York - Durham Regional Lab. Based on these improvements staff is recommending that TRCA re- establish a formal partnership with the Toronto Water Lab in order to support the analysis of water quality samples collected from May 2015 through April 2016 under the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program. RATIONALE The 2014 inter - laboratory comparison study identified strengths and weaknesses among the various laboratories assessed in terms of the equipment and analytical procedures, as well as the analytical detection limits available for certain water quality parameters. In terms of overall performance, it was found that several labs assessed, including the Toronto Water Laboratory, matched the OMOECC results. In this regard, staff is of the opinion that the results achieved from the Toronto Lab through the most recent comparative studies (2012 and 2014) have shown a marked improvement to the point where it is recommended that a formal partnership can be re- established. TRCA staff is recommending that during this first year that frequent review of the data be undertaken and that ongoing communication with the Manager and Chief Chemist at the Toronto Water Laboratory be maintained in order to review the quality of the data provided. 156 FINANCIAL DETAILS Through this partnership the laboratory analysis services will be provided by the Toronto Water Laboratory on an "in- kind" basis to support a mutual interest in monitoring the surface water quality in Toronto's streams, which has been facilitated through TRCA's Regional Watershed Monitoring Program. In exchange TRCA will continue to collect water quality samples at 15 sites that will be used to inform the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Master Plan, and to provide the City with the data, when requested. Report prepared by: Scott Jarvie, 289 - 268 -3941 Emails: sjarvie @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Scott Jarvie, 289 - 268 -3941 Emails: sjarvie @trca.on.ca Date: April 09, 2015 RES. #A67/15 - 70 MAIN STREET SOUTH EROSION CONTROL PROJECT Class Environmental Assessment. Initiation of the Class Environmental Assessment process for the 70 Main Street South Erosion Control Project. Moved by: Jennifer O'Connell Seconded by: Mujeeb Khan THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to commence a Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) for the 70 Main Street South Erosion Control Project in the City of Markham. CARRIED BACKGROUND The area of concern is located north of Highway 407 and west of Markham Road (Main Street South) on the south bank of the Rouge River downstream of the Milne Dam Conservation area Attachment 1). The tableland and slope face are on private property belonging to the owners of 70 Main Street South and the toe of the slope is owned by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). Erosion concerns were first identified to TRCA in April of 2014 by the homeowners of 70 Main Street who first noticed the scar in the fall of 2013. TRCA staff conducted a preliminary site inspection on April 24, 2014 to prioritize the site and collect data, and a further assessment on May 5, 2014 by senior staff who recommended that a slope stability study be completed to determine the cause(s) of instability and erosion, and the extent of risk to the property over the short and long term. Terraprobe Inc. was subsequently retained through a competitive process under Contract RSD14 -84 in October of 2014, who determined that the dwelling is at risk over the long term should no erosion control works be carried out. 157 RATIONALE Protection of life and property from the hazards of flooding and erosion is a key mandate of TRCA. The 70 Main Street South Erosion Control Project has been identified as a priority area for remedial erosion control works based on TRCA's priority system for erosion hazard sites and the results of the recent geotechnical investigation. As a public body, remedial erosion control projects proposed by conservation authorities (CAs) are subject to approval under the Environmental Assessment Act. The purpose of the Act is to ensure that possible environmental effects of a project are considered early in the planning stages and to select a preferred alternative that seeks to avoid or mitigate adverse effects to the environment. Recognizing that erosion control works generally have a predictable range of solutions, and that significant adverse environmental impacts are generally avoidable or can be mitigated through careful planning and design, CA led remedial erosion control projects are able to follow a streamlined environmental assessment process called the Class Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects (2013) or Class EA. TRCA recommends that a study be initiated to determine the preferred solution for the affected area, and recommend that this study be initiated as a Class EA being the approved process for projects of this type. DETAILS OF WORK The planning and design process of the Class EA is considered a suitable means for the planning of remedial flood and erosion control projects because it provides a consistent, streamlined process that ensures compliance with Environmental Assessment Act requirements. The Class EA process for this project will include the retention of a consulting firm specializing in geotechnical and water resources engineering to assist staff in the development of alternative options and in the detailed design of the preferred alternative as identified through the Class EA process. The Class EA process also involves public and agency consultation including affected landowners, interest groups, First Nations' groups, government review agencies and any person with an interest in the project, to ensure that all concerns regarding a proposed undertaking are taken into consideration during the development of alternative options and the selection of the preferred alternative. 158 FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding to complete the Class EA is available in TRCA's Erosion Monitoring and Maintenance Program - York Region, within account 189 -27. Implementation of the approved final design will be determined pending completion of a detailed construction estimate, review of other erosion priorities in York Region, and be subject to all necessary approvals, agreements and available funding. Report prepared by: Patrick White, 416 - 393 -6394 Emails: pwhite @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Matt Johnston, 647 - 808 -6743 Emails: mjohnston @trca.on.ca Date: March 17, 2015 Attachments: 1 159 Attachment 1 Rouge River at 70 Main Street South Class Environmental Assessment y m Ay 3 H�9 1,� YlL`uild N 1 W Conservation Legendb�N, *The Livuvcity — Watercourse —Roads ,..�.. ome.Waaaols =Area of Interest 160 RES. #A68/15 - WILKET CREEK REHABILITATION PROJECT Contracts RSD14 -174 and RSD14 -175. Award of contracts RSD14 -174 and RSD14 -175 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,000 tonnes of 600- 1300mm granite rip rap stone and approximately 4,200 tonnes of 400 -600mm granite rip rap stone in support of the Wilket Creek Rehabilitation Project - Site 3 Phase 2, City of Toronto. Moved by: Jennifer O'Connell Seconded by: Colleen Jordan THAT Contract RSD14 -174 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,000 tonnes of 600- 1300mm granite rip rap stone, to the Wilket Creek Rehabilitation Project - Site 3 Phase 2, City of Toronto, be awarded to Fowler Construction for a total unit price of $46.25 per tonne and a total cost not to exceed $185,000.00, plus a contingency amount of 10% to be expended as authorized by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; THAT Contract RSD14 -175 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,200 tonnes of 400 -600mm granite rip rap stone to the Wilket Creek Rehabilitation Project - Site 3 Phase 2, City of Toronto, be awarded to Fowler Construction for a total unit price of $46.25 per tonne and a total cost not to exceed $194,250.00, plus a contingency amount of 10% to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; THAT should staff be unable to achieve an acceptable contract with the awarded suppliers, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other suppliers that submitted tenders, beginning with the next lowest compliant bidder; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take all necessary actions to implement the foregoing, including the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND Watercourses and adjacent park areas within the City of Toronto sustained a significant amount of damage as the result of the August 19, 2005 storm event. In response to the damage caused, City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation (PF &R) entered into an agreement with TRCA in February of 2007 to complete the repairs required to return the damaged areas to a state of good repair in order to ensure protection of life and property within the City of Toronto parks systems, while funding for long term rehabilitation of key sites was sought. The Wilket Creek tributary of the East Don River was one of the watercourses that suffered a significant amount of damage as the result of the August 19, 2005 storm event. In 2007/08 TRCA staff undertook large scale restoration works within Edwards Gardens, and a series of 10 state of good repair projects within Wilket Creek Park, as part of the aforementioned agreement entered into by the City of Toronto and TRCA in February of 2007. 161 Following the completion of the State of Good Repairs work, TRCA entered into a multi -year agreement with Toronto Water and PF &R to undertake the completion of additional repair works within Wilket Creek Park, and a Geomorphic Systems Master Plan for the entire Wilket Creek subwatershed. To date works have been completed at Sites 6 and 7 (2011 -2012) and Site 3 Phase 1 (2012 - 2013). The works for Site 3 Phase 2 are proposed to be completed in 2015, and will include the protection of at -risk sanitary sewer infrastructure and associated channel realignment works. The following aggregates will be required for the proposed works Site 3 Phase 2: • approximately 4,000 tonnes of 600- 1300mm granite rip rap stone; • approximately 4,200 tonnes of 400 -600mm granite rip rap stone. Granite material is required in accordance with the specifications identified by the City of Toronto through the development of all phases of the Wilket Creek Rehabilitation Project, which was selected for its longevity and durability. RATIONALE Tender packages were sent to 13 suppliers as follows: • Brock Aggregates; • C.D.R. Young's Aggregates Inc; • Coco Aggregates; • Glenn Windrem Trucking; • J.C. Rock Ltd; • BOT Aggregates; • Miller Paving Ltd.; • Nelson Aggregate Co.; • R.W. Tomlinson Ltd.; • Strada Aggregates; • Mery Johnston; • B -Town group; and • TBG Landscape Inc. Tenders RSD14 -174 and RSD14 -175 were publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http: / /www.biddingo.com /) on Thursday, October 23rd, 2014. The Procurement Opening Committee opened tenders on Thursday, October 30th, 2014 with the following results: 162 Contract RSD14 -174 - Supply and Delivery of Approximately 4,000 Tonnes of 600- 1300mm Granite Rip Rap Stone BIDDERS TOTAL UNIT PRICE PER TONNE (Plus HST) TOTAL VALUE OF CONTRACT (Plus HST) Fowler Construction $46.25 $185,000.00 Glenn Windrem Trucking $47.60 $190,400.00 TBG Landscape Inc. $93.01 $372,040.00 Nelson Aggregates No Bid No Bid Contract RSD14 -175 - Supply and Delivery of Approximately 4,200 Tonnes of 400 -600mm Granite Rip Rap Stone BIDDERS TOTAL UNIT PRICE PER TONNE (Plus HST) TOTAL VALUE OF CONTRACT (Plus HST) Fowler Construction $46.25 $194,250.00 Glenn Windrem Trucking $48.80 $204,960.00 TBG Landscape Inc. $84.55 $355,110.00 Nelson Aggregates No Bid No Bid Based on the bids received, staff recommends that Fowler Construction be awarded Contract RSD14 -174, for approximately 4,000 tonnes of 600- 1300mm granite rip rap stone for the unit cost of $46.25 and a total cost not to exceed $185,000.00, plus HST, and Contract RSD14 -175, for approximately 4,200 tonnes of 400 -600mm granite rip rap stone for the unit cost of $46.25 and a total cost not to exceed $194,250.00, plus HST; they being the lowest bid that meets TRCA specifications for each contract. Each contract is subject to a 10% contingency to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff. Fowler Construction has agreed to honour their pricing for the supply of granite rip rap under Contracts RSD14 -174 and RSD14 -175 despite the significant delay in the award of contract from the initial tender submission date, which was the result of unforeseen design revisions by the City of Toronto that changed the quantities of the rip rap required. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding is 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto within account 185 -09. Report prepared by: Michelle Guy, 647- 808 -5809 Emails: mguy @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416 - 392 -9690 Emails: pnewland @trca.on.ca Date: March 31, 2015 163 RES. #A69/15 - HIGHLAND CREEK AT UTSC TRAIL REALIGNMENT PROJECT Contract #10000275 - Design /Build Services for the Construction of an Elevated Boardwalk. Award of Contract #10000275 for supply of all labour, equipment, materials and engineering services necessary for construction of an elevated boardwalk, in the City of Toronto. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT Contract #10000275 for the supply of all labour, equipment, materials and engineering services necessary for construction of an elevated boardwalk, in the City of Toronto be awarded to McPherson- Andrews Contracting Ltd. at a total cost not to exceed $397,472.00, plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 20% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractors that submitted tenders, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as is necessary to implement the contract, including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA has been undertaking remedial works along Highland Creek between Morningside Avenue and Old Kingston Road since at least the late 1980s. More recently, in 2013 -2014, TRCA completed bank restoration works along the east bank of Highland Creek approximately 120 metres downstream of the Morningside Avenue Bridge, where a section of paved trail was lost due to erosion. Prior to construction at the aforementioned site, a similar erosion concern was identified by City of Toronto staff further downstream, which is the focus of this current project. The area of concern is located at the site of a former pedestrian bridge where the trail from the valley slope terminates perpendicular into the watercourse, with no substantial safety barrier other than temporary orange snow fencing. The pedestrian bridge was decommissioned due to safety concerns following damage that occurred as a result of the August 2005 storm event. The current alignment of the existing trail leading from the north valley slope poses a safety risk to pedestrians and cyclists. The City of Toronto has partnered with TRCA to address the situation. There is additional concern that the watercourse may be widening and /or migrating towards the existing trail along the outer meander, which threatens the long -term stability of this important connection along the future Pan Am Path. 164 In support of the Highland Creek at UTSC Trail Realignment Project, TRCA requires a qualified design /build team to undertake the detailed design, fabrication and installation of a 3 metre wide by 40 metre long elevated boardwalk. Due to the quality and sensitivity of the flora in the proposed realignment area, a raised trail is the preferred method for mitigating adverse impacts to desirable trees in this area. The proposed elevated boardwalk will provide safe access for pedestrians and cyclist and will form an important connection as part of the proposed Pan Am Path. RATIONALE Contract #10000275 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo http: / /www.biddingo.com /) on January 23rd, 2015 with a mandatory site information meeting held on January 30th, 2015. Tender packages were sent to six contractors as follows: • Clearwater Structures; • Esposito Bros Construction; • Ground Force Foundations; • Guardian Bridge; • McPherson- Andrews Contracting Ltd.; and • Midome Construction. The Procurement Opening Committee opened the tenders on March 16th, 2015 with the following results: Contract #10000275 Highland Creek at UTSC Trail Realignment Project - Design /Build Services for the Construction of an Elevated Boardwalk BIDDERS TOTAL TENDER AMOUNT (Plus HST) McPherson - Andrews Contracting Ltd. $397,472.00 Midome Construction $544,000.00 Staff reviewed the bid received from McPherson Andrews Contracting Ltd. against its own cost estimate and has determined that the bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements and deliverables as outlined in the contract documents. Further assessment by TRCA staff of McPherson Andrews Contracting Ltd.'s experience and ability to undertake similar projects was conducted through reference checks which resulted in positive feedback that McPherson Andrews Contracting Ltd. is capable of undertaking the scope of work. Based on the evaluation of the bids received, staff recommend that McPherson Andrews Contracting Ltd. be awarded Contract #10000275 for the supply of all labour, equipment, materials and engineering services necessary for construction of an elevated boardwalk, in the City of Toronto for a total amount not to exceed $397,472.00 to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus a 20% contingency in the event of unforeseen issues during construction, plus HST, it being the lowest bid that meets TRCA specifications. 165 This project is aligned with Leadership Strategy #3 under TRCA's current 10 -year strategic plan, which is to'rethink greenspace to maximize its value'. Installing the proposed raised boardwalk structure and decommissioning the eroding section of trail will encourage public access along the proposed Pan Am Path while improving public safety. FINANCIAL DETAILS The cost of the project is 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto within Account #185 -80. Report prepared by: Michelle Guy, 647 - 808 -5809 Emails: mguy@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ashour Rehana , 647 - 808 -6542 Emails: arehana@trca.on.ca Date: April 09, 2015 RES. #A70/15 - 2015 BUDGET, OPERATING AND CAPITAL Recommends approval of the 2015 operating and capital budget. (Budget /Audit Resolution #C3115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Colleen Jordan WHEREAS the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) provides that a conservation authority, in establishing its annual levy, shall have the power to determine the proportion of the total benefit afforded to all the participating municipalities that is afforded to each of them; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, subject to such regulations under the Conservation Authorities Act as may be approved by the Lieutenant - Governor -in- Council: (1) all participating municipalities be designated as benefitting for programs included in the 2015 Operating Budget; (ii) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) share of the cost of the programs included in the 2015 Operating Budget shall be raised from the participating municipalities as part of the General Levy; (iii) the 2015 General Levy be apportioned to the participating municipalities in the proportion that the modified current value assessment of the whole is under the jurisdiction of TRCA, unless otherwise provided in the levy or a project; 166 (iv) the appropriate TRCA officials be directed to advise the participating municipalities, pursuant to the Conservation Authorities Act and the regulations made thereunder, and to levy the said municipalities the amount of the general levy set forth in the 2015 Operating Budget, including property tax adjustments and non - Current Value Assessment (CVA) levy, and to levy the said municipalities the amount of the project and special levy set forth in the 2015 Capital Budget and in the approved projects of TRCA; THAT the 2015 Budget, Operating and Capital, and all projects therein, be adopted; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to amend the 2015 Budget, Operating and Capital to reflect actual 2015 provincial transfer payment allocations in order to determine the amount of matching levy as required by the CA Act; THAT the cost of property taxes imposed by municipalities on conservation lands owned by TRCA be charged as additional levy to the participating municipalities where the lands are located, excluding the cost of property taxes which are passed on to a third party under a lease or similar agreement; THAT, except where statutory or regulatory requirements provide otherwise, staff be authorized to enter into agreements with private sector organizations, non - governmental organizations or government agencies for the undertaking of projects which are of benefit to TRCA and funded by the sponsoring organization or agency, including projects that have not been provided for in the approved budget; THAT, as required by Ontario Regulations 139/96 and 231/97, this recommendation and the accompanying budget documents, including the schedule of matching and non - matching levies, be approved by recorded vote; THAT the presentation of 2014 budget comparsions and related actuals be amended to conform to the presentation adopted in the 2015 budget document; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as may be necessary to implement the foregoing, including obtaining approvals and the signing and execution of documents. RECORDED VOTE Paul Ainslie Yea Maria Augimeri Yea Jack Ballinger Yea Ronald Chopowick Yea Vincent Crisanti Yea Chris Fonseca Yea Jennifer Innis Yea Colleen Jordan Yea Mujeeb Khan Yea Matt Mahoney Yea Mike Mattos Yea 167 RECORDED VOTE Cont'd Ron Moeser Yea Jennifer O'Connell Yea Anthony Perruzza Yea John Sprovieri Yea Cynthia Thorburn Yea Jim Tovey Yea THE MOTION WAS CARRIED RES. #A71/15 - TOWN OF WHITCHURCH - STOUFFVILLE Conveyance of Land for the Extension of Baker Hill Boulevard, north of Millard Street, Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River Watershed, CFN 53091. Receipt of a request from the Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle for conveyance of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned lands required for the extension of Baker Hill Boulevard, located to the north of Millard Street, in the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River watershed. (Executive Res. #B24115) Moved by: Jennifer Innis Seconded by: Matt Mahoney WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle for conveyance of land for the extension of Baker Hill Boulevard, north of Millard Street, Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River watershed; AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a parcel of TRCA -owned land containing 0.92 hectares (2.27 acres), more or less, required for the extension of Baker Hill Boulevard, north of Millard Street, Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, said land being Part of Blocks 2 and 11, Registered Plan 65M -4043 and designated as Parts 1 and 2 on Draft Plan of Survey prepared by Rady - Pentek & Edward Surveying Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Job No. 15 -026, be conveyed to the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffvi I le; THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, in addition to all legal, survey and other costs be paid by the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville; flw THAT the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from this conveyance or the carrying out of construction; THAT an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville; THAT a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval, in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines; THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by the Town of Wh itch urch- Stouffvilie prior to commencement of construction: THAT said conveyance be subject to approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #A72 /15 - WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT Section IV item AUTH8.1.1 - Watershed Committee Minutes, be received. Section IV Item 8.1.1 ETOBICOKE- MIMICO WATERSHED COALITION Minutes of Meeting #2/14, held on June 19, 2014 RES. #A73 /15 - WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: John Sprovieri 169 CARRIED W-Aff-IT411 THAT Section IV item AUTH8.1.2 - Watershed Committee Minutes, be received. CARRIED Section IV Item 8.1.2 HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE Minutes of Meeting #3/14, held on December 2, 2014 RES. #A74 /15 - WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES Moved by: Mujeeb Khan Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT Section IV item AUTH8.1.3 - Watershed Committee Minutes, be received. CARRIED Section IV Item 8.1.3 PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN Minutes of Meeting #3/14, held on December 10, 2014. RES. #A75 /15 - SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD Moved by: Chris Fonseca Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick THAT Section IV item BAAB8.1 - 2014 Year End Financial Progress Report, contained in Budget /Audit Advisory Board Minutes #1/15, held on April 10, 2015, be received. CARRIED ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED RES. #A76 /15 - APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Jennifer O'Connell Seconded by: Colleen Jordan THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, items EX10.1 - EX10.14, with the exception of EX10.11, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #3/15, held on April 10, 2015, be received. CARRIED 170 RES. #A77/15 - APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, item EX10.11 - Cityzen (Pine Grove) Inc., contained in Executive Committee Minutes #3/15, held on April 10, 2015, be received. CARRIED TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:52 a.m., on Friday, April 24, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 171 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer SAN ROMANOWAY COMMUNITY GARDEN CONSTRUCTION WEBSITE REDEVELOPMENT AND WEB APPLICATION SUPPORT Award of Contract WILKET CREEK REHABILITATION PROJECT - SITE 3 PHASE 2 Contract #10000364 NATIONAL WILDLIFE CENTRE Proposal for Lease of Land, Glen Haffy Conservation Area Municipality of Peel, Humber River Watershed LEARNING ENRICHMENT FOUNDATION Landscape Training Program 193 193 193 Town of Caledon, Regional 193 193 Toronto and Region 40 C onserwation Authority MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #5/15 May 29, 2015 The Authority Meeting #5/15, was held in Weston Room B, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, May 29, 2015. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:36 a.m. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Member Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member David Barrow Member Ronald Chopowick Member Vincent Crisanti Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Chris Fonseca Member Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Mujeeb Khan Member Glenn Mason Member Mike Mattos Member Jennifer O'Connell Member Anthony Perruzza Member Gino Rosati Member John Sprovieri Member Cynthia Thorburn Member Jim Tovey Member ABSENT Ben Cachola Member Justin Di Ciano Member Rob Ford Member Matt Mahoney Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Ron Moeser Member Linda Pabst Member 172 RES. #A78 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Jim Tovey Vincent Crisanti THAT the Minutes of Meeting #4/15, held on April 24, 2015, be approved. CARRIED (a) Presentation of the Charles Sauriol Leadership Award to Joe Pennachetti, City Manager, City of Toronto. (b) A presentation by Griffin Mangroves, Manager, Landscape Enterprise Program, The Learning Enrichment Foundation (LEF), Paul Ronan, Executive Director, Ontario Parks Association, and Andrew Holeton, Steward, LEF, in regard to item AUTH8.1 - Landscape Training Program. RES. #A79 /15 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT above -noted presentation (a) be received. RES. #A80 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Ronald Chopowick Michael Di Biase THAT above -noted presentation (b) be received. CARRIED CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #A81 /15 - GREENWOOD CONSERVATION LANDS MASTER PLAN Final endorsements for the Greenwood Conservation Lands Master Plan. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jack Ballinger 173 THAT item AUTH7.1 - Greenwood Conservation Lands Master Plan be deferred to a future Authority meeting and be brought back along with a staff presentation. CARRIED RES. #A82/15 - LYME DISEASE AND BLACKLEGGED TICK MONITORING UPDATE Lyme disease status update and overview of 2014 blacklegged tick surveillance activities. Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) continue to incorporate Lyme disease and blacklegged tick (Ixodes scapularis) related information into the TRCA Employee Health and Safety training and ensure TRCA field staff has access to tick removal tools; THAT TRCA continue to make information on Lyme disease and blacklegged ticks available at field centres, conservation areas and other TRCA facilities in order to increase the awareness of staff and visitors; THAT TRCA continue to facilitate tick surveillance activities conducted by public health agencies and academic institutes, and to liaise with the regional public health units in the regions of Durham, Peel and York, and the City of Toronto to receive up -to -date information and share surveillance data regarding Lyme disease and blacklegged ticks; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff assist by identifying ticks found on TRCA properties, and to submit any blacklegged ticks found to regional public health partners to be further tested for the Lyme disease causing bacterium (Borrelia burgdorferi). CARRIED BACKGROUND Lyme disease is one of the most common vector -borne diseases in the temperate world. The disease is named after the Town of Lyme (Connecticut, USA), where a number of cases were identified in 1975. Lyme disease causing bacterium, Borrelia burgdorferi is typically transmitted by certain ticks to a wide range of birds, reptiles and mammals including dogs and humans. The primary transmitter of Lyme disease in Ontario is the blacklegged tick (Ixodes scapularis), or commonly known as deer ticks. Blacklegged ticks live in wooded, brushy areas that provide the humidity that ticks need to survive. Exposure to ticks may be greatest in the woods (especially along trails) and the fringe area between forests and open areas. Ticks usually search for a host from the tips of low -lying vegetation and shrubs. Ticks do not jump or fly; they grab onto their hosts that brush against vegetation, and then they crawl around to find a place to bite. 174 In 2009, Lyme disease became a nationally reportable disease in Canada. This means that all health care professionals should report cases of Lyme disease to the Public Health Agency of Canada. The annual incidence of reported human Lyme disease cases has increased markedly in Canada since 2009 (Attachment 1). In about 80% of cases, early Lyme disease is characterized by a skin lesion, which expands to a diameter of more than 5 cm from the site of the tick bite. The signs and symptoms of early Lyme disease may also include fever, headache, muscle /joint pain and fatigue. If left untreated, the disease can progress to swelling of the joints from arthritis, problems with the nervous system, and persistent weakness and fatigue. Although rare, Lyme disease can be fatal. Recent studies suggest that the incidence of Lyme disease in Canada is increasing as populations of blacklegged ticks are spreading north at an estimated rate of 33 -55 km per year. This northward movement may be driven by movement of mammals hosts and by adventitious introductions from attachment to bird hosts. When a previous report on "Tick Surveillance and Lyme Disease Prevention" was provided at Authority Meeting #5/12, no established populations of blacklegged ticks were known within the TRCA jurisdiction. However, in 2014, tick monitoring activities conducted by regional public health units revealed that there could be a few established populations within TRCA's jurisdiction. This document is intended to provide the Authority with up -to -date information, identify the implications to TRCA and provide staffs recommendations on the approach to be taken. Surveillance Results Passive surveillance - involves the voluntary submission of ticks found on humans and domestic animals, by the public, veterinarians and health care professionals for further testing. TRCA's public health unit partners only accept tick specimens found on humans, not domestic animals. In the spring of 2014, York Region Public Health indicated that through passive tick surveillance, it was likely that a blacklegged tick was acquired at the Kortright Centre for Conservation property. A laboratory identified the tick as an adult female blacklegged tick Ixodes scapularis), but it did not test positive for Borrelia burgdorferi. Active tick surveillance - also known as tick dragging, is conducted by a team of staff dragging strips of white cloth, mounted on poles behind them through habitats that are suspected of harbouring ticks. Tick dragging is considered the most effective method of collecting wild ticks. Regional health units have been conducting active tick surveillance within TRCA's jurisdiction since 2012. In the fall of 2014, a number of blacklegged ticks (11 in total) were found for the first time during active tick surveillance conducted by the City of Toronto Public Health, Durham Region Public Health and York Region Public Health in the Rouge Valley. Several of these ticks tested positive for Borrelia burgdorferi. On November 26, 2014, the regional public health units issued a joint news release announcing their findings as a Lyme disease advisory in the Rouge Valley. 175 High Risk Regions The risk for exposure to the disease is highest in regions where the ticks that transmit Lyme disease are known to be established. The TRCA jurisdiction is located within the area predicted to be at high risk for emergence of Lyme endemic areas in Canada (Attachment 2). Even though blacklegged ticks have only been found in two isolated areas on TRCA land, one does not necessarily have to be in an area known to have blacklegged ticks to be at risk. In Ontario, these regions include southern and eastern Ontario. Established populations of blacklegged ticks have been found at Point Pelee National Park, Rondeau Provincial Park, Long Point Provincial Park, Turkey Point Provincial Park, Turkey Point lowlands, Wainfleet Bog Conservation Area, Presqu'ile Provincial Park, Prince Edward Point National Area, St. Lawrence Islands National Park and Charleston Lake Provincial Park. What Are The Implications To TRCA? TRCA takes the apparently increasing incidence of Lyme disease seriously, and recognizes that there are direct implications to the organization, as follows: • TRCA is the largest landowner in the Toronto region, and its properties include large areas of natural lands; • many TRCA staff work in the field, therefore these staff might have increased exposure to ticks, and ultimately Lyme disease; • many visitors use and enjoy TRCA facilities such as conservation areas, field centres and resource tracts, thus their potential exposure to ticks increases; • TRCA has been recognized as a leader in assessing and promoting climate change issues; • communication with the vector -borne disease divisions of regional public health units has been established through TRCA's West Nile virus monitoring and surveillance program and these staff are now incorporating Lyme disease into their various communication approaches. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Currently there are no feasible tick control measure available. Therefore TRCA's response to the apparently increasing incidence of Lyme disease will be focused on awareness and prevention. Staff has added the issue of ticks and Lyme disease to TRCA's health and safety training to raise awareness of all employees, and in particular those that will be working in the field. A tick -safe work procedures document has been drafted and has been circulated. TRCA is not the expert on Lyme disease or the ticks that carry /transmit it, and as such it is expected that TRCA should use the most up -to -date information that is available from the health agencies that are on the front line of existing and emerging health issues in the province. Tick removal kits have been assembled; each tick removal kit includes first -aid supplies and information on how to property remove ticks and where to submit the removed tick for identification and testing. These kits will be distributed to staff and volunteers involved in field related activities this season. 176 The Prevention Coordinator for the Rouge Nation Urban Park at Parks Canada has contacted TRCA staff and requested the ability to share TRCA's Lyme disease and blacklegged tick related information and resources. TRCA staff will continue to cooperate with Parks Canada and share up -to -date surveillance results and resources. TRCA's Environmental Monitoring and Data Management staff has the capacity to identify ticks to species (using the staff and resources TRCA currently applies to the West Nile Virus Surveillance and Monitoring Program) and will identify tick(s) found on TRCA properties. If blacklegged ticks are found, the specimens will be forwarded to the regional public health units for further testing. Ticks submitted by the general public will not be accepted, rather these inquiries will be re- directed to the appropriate public health unit. Regional public health unit partners will be issued a blanket Permission to Enter (PTE) from TRCA's Property and Risk Management department; this will enable public health staff to gain quick access to TRCA properties for active surveillance purposes effective May 2015. Researchers from University of Guelph have also expressed interest in conducting active tick surveillance on TRCA properties. Additional information (e.g. blacklegged tick distribution and their habitat preferences) resulting from their research could assist TRCA and its public health unit partners in assessing risk of Lyme disease and the distribution of blacklegged ticks. Staff will also explore the feasibility to adapt signage on TRCA properties to incorporate information on the potential presence of ticks and the Lyme disease issue where appropriate. Lastly, staff will continue to respond to public inquiries regarding blacklegged ticks and Lyme disease and will use the various regional health department committees as sources of information on the Lyme disease issue, and will communicate important updates to other staff. FINANCIAL DETAILS The future cost implication of this issue to the organization is not clear at this time. Most of the awareness activities can be undertaken within the scope of TRCA's existing health and safety and facility management approaches. Additional costs associated with monitoring (if determined necessary), property management or updates to signage used at TRCA properties or facilities will need to be evaluated on a case -by -case basis. To date a total of 100 tick removal kits have been assembled for all field crew, staff and volunteers at a total cost of $500. These costs have been distributed among the various programs and departments involved. 177 The cost associated with the identification of any ticks found and submitted from TRCA lands during the 2015 field season is expected to be minimal (i.e. <$1,000) and will be covered through the West Nile Surveillance and Monitoring Program (account 124 -34). Report prepared by: Scott Jarvie, 289 - 268 -3941 Emails: sjarvie @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jessica Fang, 289 - 268 -3947 Emails: jfang @trca.on.ca Date: May 7, 2015 Attachments: 2 178 Attachment 1 The numbers of reported human Lyme disease cases in Canada, 2009 -2013. (Source: Public Health Agency of Canada) 179 Attachment 2 Map of areas predicted to be at risk for emergence of Lyme endemic areas in eastern and central Canada in the coming decade. (Source: Public Health Agency of Canada) I. i RES. #A83/15 - LAKE ONTARIO NORTHWEST WATERFRONT: AN URBAN RECREATIONAL FISHERIES STRATEGY Recommending the approval of the Urban Recreational Fisheries Strategy. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has developed an Urban Recreational Fisheries Strategy for the northwest Lake Ontario waterfront in conjunction with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (OMNRF), Credit Valley Conservation Authority (CVC), Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority ( CLOCA), Ganaraska River Conservation Authority (GRCA) and Conservation Halton (HRCA); AND WHEREAS staff conducted a second and final round of public and stakeholder consultation for the Urban Recreational Fisheries Strategy; AND WHEREAS the document has now been finalized based on staff and stakeholder feedback; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA adopt the Urban Recreational Fisheries Strategy; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA's municipal partners, provincial ministries and neighbouring conservation authorities be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/13, held on April 26, 2013, Resolution #A57/13 was approved as follows: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) develop a recreational fisheries plan for the Greater Toronto and Area Lake Ontario Waterfront in conjunction with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority ( CLOCA); THAT staff be directed to coordinate a Project Team, which would include TRCA, MNR, CVC and CLOCA staff, interested government and organizations, community groups and community residents to assist with the development of the Greater Toronto and Area Waterfront: Urban Recreational Fisheries Plan and to facilitate the opportunity for public input; AND FURTHER THAT the final Greater Toronto and Area Waterfront: Urban Recreational Fisheries Plan be brought to the Authority for approval. 181 Following the approval of Resolution #A57/13, TRCA, in conjunction with OMNRF, CVC, CLOCA, GRCA and HRCA, initiated the preparation of the Urban Recreational Fisheries Strategy recognizing that the northwest shore of Lake Ontario has an abundant and diverse sport fishery and the potential to become an excellent local and regional fishing destination that is easily accessible through public transportation. This Strategy was also initiated to provide a series of recommendations to increase angling participation across the waterfront as there has been a steep decline over the past several years throughout Ontario (and across North America), particularly in urban areas where opportunities to enjoy the natural environment can be limited. In response to this decline, the Strategy was developed to encourage waterfront angler participation by improving or creating access to local fishing areas, mitigating potential issues that may result from recreational fishing, making information about fishing more easily available and improving the fishery itself. The scope of the strategy spans the Lake Ontario waterfront from the western border of the City of Burlington to the eastern border of Durham Region. To ensure that the strategy addressed recreational fisheries concerns across this expansive area, a technical team of regional experts was created to guide the development of the Strategy. The Strategy's vision is to create a strategic framework to enhance waterfront fishing opportunities, protect and restore fish habitat where needed, encourage people to fish the Lake Ontario nearshore waters, and support the creation of quality public access sites for recreational anglers to enjoy. To achieve the Strategy' s vision, the following objectives were identified: 1. Guide local, regional and provincial stakeholders that have local fishing interests. 2. Identify the state and health of the fish communities and provide guidance for managing recreational fishing. 3. Identify waterfront areas where recreational fisheries can be promoted. 4. Identify areas where recreational fisheries can be improved through opening access and /or aquatic habitat rehabilitation. 5. Work with local tourism and recreation stakeholders to promote public fishing opportunities. 6. Identify and use a variety of media channels to promote urban fishing and awareness of the fisheries resource to the public, including diverse ethnic communities. 7. Increase the number of licensed anglers within the GTA. 8. Identify and recommend methods to promote the message about Lake Ontario, fishing and the benefits of restoring and protecting habitat. Methods should focus on engaging children and youth. The Strategy's foundation is built on a number of Lake Ontario waterfront strategies, plans and management objectives. These include: Operation Doorstep Angling Metropolitan: Toronto Fishery Project Report; Urban Fisheries: A Guide to Angling in the Toronto Region; The Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy; the City of Toronto Official Plan; and Lake Ontario Fish Community Objectives. To assist with the planning of public access projects for recreational fishing, the Strategy provides a comprehensive description of aquatic habitat and fish communities along the north shore of Lake Ontario, a survey of existing access points, potential access construction and habitat restoration techniques, waterfront stewardship and recommendations. The Strategy provides six recommendations which were developed from information collected from the public consultation process, experts and the plans that preceded it. The recommendations are: 182 1. Maintain public access with no net loss of existing public fishing areas. 2. Expand fishing opportunities with improved access. 3. Improve the quality of the fishery. 4. Strengthen partnerships. 5. Promote angling in the Strategy area. 6. Improve signage. In addition to having the Strategy available for review and comment on the Aquatic Habitat Toronto website, a series of public meetings were held to seek input from the public. The first round of public meetings were held in Oshawa, Ajax, Pickering, Toronto and Mississauga in the fall of 2013. These meetings were held to provide an overview of the development process for the Strategy and an opportunity for the public to comment on its vision, mission and objectives. The second round of public meetings were held in Ajax, Toronto and Mississauga in the fall of 2014. These meetings were held to provide a summary of the draft Strategy and to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on the Strategy's recommendations. All comments received through this process were reviewed and incorporated into the Strategy where appropriate. RATIONALE This Strategy will benefit many communities across the Waterfront. The Strategy will not only provide guidance to optimize angling opportunities in a sustainable manner, it will also encourage safe urban angling practices such as sharing the shoreline with other users. To date, TRCA has implemented several shoreline restoration and public access projects based on the preliminary recommendations of the Urban Recreational Fisheries Strategy. These include: the Rotary Park Canoe Launch (Ajax), Frenchman's Bay (Pickering), the Outer Harbour Marina Fishing Node (Toronto) and the Long Pond Shoreline Project (Toronto). With the success of these projects, there has been increased interest in the implementation of additional waterfront public access projects. As a result, TRCA is working with project partners to identify funding opportunities to implement these projects. Furthermore, these projects are anticipated to provide opportunities to support a number of angling programs along the waterfront such as OMNRF's Learn to Fish program and Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters /Ontario Power Generation TackleShare programs. FINANCIAL DETAILS The Strategy was funded through the following sources: • Great Lakes Sustainability Fund $50,000 (cash); • TRCA $50,000 (in -kind support); • Toronto Remedial Action Plan $15,000 (cash); • OMNRF $10,750 (cash) and $15,000 (in -kind support). • Aquatic Habitat Toronto $5,000 (cash) and $5,000 (in -kind support). Report prepared by: Thomas Sciscione, extension 5628 Emails: tsciscione @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Gord MacPherson, extension 5246 Emails: gmacpherson @trca.on.ca Date: May 29, 2015 183 RES. #A84/15 - NAMING OF TRCA ASSETS Naming of a trail on TRCA lands in the vicinity of the communities of Palgrave or Bolton in the Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, as the Richard Whitehead Trail. Moved by: Jennifer Innis Seconded by: Colleen Jordan THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to work with Town of Caledon staff and the community to establish a trail in memory of former Councillor Richard Whitehead on TRCA lands in the vicinity of Palgrave or Bolton; AND FURTHER THAT the Whitehead family be thanked for Councillor Whitehead's years of service to TRCA. CARRIED BACKGROUND Former Regional Councillor Richard Whitehead was a long standing representative for both the Town of Caledon as well as the Region of Peel, representing Caledon Wards 3 and 4. Over his 25 years as a public representative, Councillor Whitehead worked diligently to support conservation values and further the protection of Toronto region's greenspaces. Councillor Whitehead's dedication to natural areas was further exemplified through his 14 years as a Member of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. During his long service as a Member, Councillor Whitehead also served as a Member of TRCA's Executive Committee and was Chair of the Public Use and Conservation and Related Land Management advisory boards. Councillor Whitehead also served for many years as a Member, and for a time, as Vice Chair of the Humber Watershed Alliance. In addition to the Humber Watershed Alliance, Councillor Whitehead served as a Member on several project advisory committees for TRCA. Through this work, Councillor Whitehead consistently served as a champion for the protection of major sections of conservation land within the Town of Caledon, Region of Peel and beyond; as well as for providing opportunities for the public to get outside and experience natural areas. Trail plans have been developed for TRCA properties in the communities of Palgrave and Bolton, and to date many of the trails have not yet been constructed nor have trail names. The naming of a trail system would formalize these elements and offer opportunities to connect local community amenities. At Authority Meeting #9/03, held on November 28, 2003, Resolution #A255/03 was approved, which set the protocol for the naming of TRCA assets. According to the protocol, a naming may contain any or all of the following: i ld • the name of a major individual or corporate /public sector organization, possibly a donor; • the name of an individual prominent in the environmental or conservation community; • a relevant historical name associated with the geographic area or community; • the name of a strategic initiative, a citizen's group or other partnership of TRCA; and /or • other names that may have significance for a specific site and area. Further, the naming of TRCA assets requires the approval of the Authority. The Richard Whitehead Trail name reflects the longstanding commitment of Councillor Whitehead to the Town of Caledon, the Region of Peel as well as TRCA. The proposed location study area also reflects Councillor Whitehead's local commitment to the Palgrave and Bolton communities which he served. It thereby satisfies the criteria of "the name of an individual prominent in the environmental or conservation community ". The Town of Caledon is being consulted in the selection of the site for the Richard Whitehead Trail and TRCA staff will seek further endorsement from the Town of Caledon for the establishment of the trail. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will work with Town of Caledon staff as well as the community to establish and gain Town of Caledon endorsement for an optimal routing for the Councillor Richard Whitehead Trail, establish the trail, as well as provide a commemorative plaque in memory of Councillor Whitehead's dedication to Town of Caledon, the Region of Peel and TRCA. FINANCIAL DETAILS The estimated cost of the trail dedication is estimated at $2,000. Costs for the construction of the trail will be established during the detailed design process for the trail and will be covered through TRCA's regular capital budget with funding from Peel Region as well as in partnership with the Town of Caledon. Report prepared by: Adam Szaflarski, extension 5596 Emails: aszaflarski @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Adam Szaflarski, extension 5596 Kasey Livingston, extension 5944 Emails: aszaflarski @trca.on.ca, klivingston @trca.on.ca Date: May 20, 2015 RES. #A85/15 - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jim Tovey 185 THAT the Committee move into closed session to discuss items AUTH7.5 - Succession Planning and EX7.1 - Personnel Records, as they pertain to personnel records. CARRIED RES. #A86 /15 - ARISE AND REPORT Moved by: Jack Ballinger Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick THAT the Committee arise and report from closed session. CARRIED RES. #A87 /15 - SUCCESSION PLANNING Recommendation from the Chair on members of a search subcommittee. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT the following Authority Members be recommended to make up the CEO Succession Process Subcommittee: Chair Maria Augimeri, Vice Chair Michael Di Blase, Colleen Jordan (Durham), Jim Tovey (Peel), David Barrow (York), Glenn De Baeremaeker (Toronto) and Glenn Mason (Mono /Adjala- Tosorontio). AMENDMENT Moved by: Anthony Perruzza Seconded by: John Sprovieri THAT the main motion be amended to add Vincent Crisanti to the CEO Succession Process Subcommittee. RECORDED VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT Paul Ainslie Nay Maria Augimeri Nay Jack Ballinger Nay David Barrow Nay Ronald Chopowick Nay Vincent Crisanti Yea Glenn De Baeremaeker Nay Michael Di Biase Yea Chris Fonseca Nay Jack Heath Yea Jennifer Innis Nay Colleen Jordan Nay Mujeeb Khan Yea Glenn Mason Yea Mike Mattos Yea i • RECORDED VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT Cont'd Jennifer O'Connell Nay Anthony Perruzza Yea Gino Rosati Yea John Sprovieri Yea Cynthia Thorburn Yea Jim Tovey Nay RECORDED VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION Paul Ainslie Yea Maria Augimeri Yea Jack Ballinger Yea David Barrow Yea Ronald Chopowick Yea Vincent Crisanti Nay Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea Michael Di Biase Yea Chris Fonseca Yea Jack Heath Yea Jennifer Innis Yea Colleen Jordan Yea Mujeeb Khan Yea Glenn Mason Yea Mike Mattos Yea Jennifer O'Connell Yea Anthony Perruzza Nay Gino Rosati Yea John Sprovieri Yea Cynthia Thorburn Yea Jim Tovey Yea THE AMENDMENT WAS NOT CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: THAT the following Authority Members be recommended to make up the CEO Succession Process Subcommittee: Chair Maria Augimeri, Vice Chair Michael Di Blase, Colleen Jordan (Durham), Jim Tovey (Peel), David Barrow (York), Glenn De Baeremaeker (Toronto) and Glenn Mason (Mono /Adjala- Tosorontio). 187 RES. #A88 /15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed, City of Toronto Infrastructure Ontario, CFN 38486. Acquisition of property located south of Queen Street East and west of the Don River in the City of Toronto, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River watershed. (Executive Res. #B29115) Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT 3.2 hectares (8.0 acres), more or less, of land including the flood protection landform, located to the south of Queen Street East and west of the Don River in the City of Toronto, said land being parts of Block 7, 8, and 9 on Registered Plan 66M -2473, designated as Parts 1 to 7, 9 to 19, and 23 on draft R -Plan from Holding Jones Vanderveen Inc., dated as October 14, 2014 and referenced as Job No% 05 -1670- REF23, be purchased from Infrastructure Ontario; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A89 /15 - ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS INC. Proposal for Lease of Land Bolton Heights Drive and Queen Street North, Town of Caledon Regional Municipality of Peel, Humber River Watershed, CFN 49876. Proposal to lease Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned land located in the vicinity of Bolton Heights Drive and Queen Street North, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, Humber River watershed, to construct and operate a cellular phone tower and associated equipment. (Executive Res. #B30115) Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Paul Ainslie WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has been requested by Rogers Communications Inc. to enter into a lease arrangement for lands located at Bolton Heights Drive and Queen Street North, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel; WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with Rogers Communications Inc. in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a lease with Rogers Communications Inc. of 0.008 hectares (0.020 acres), more or less, together with the use of a 0.020 hectare (0.051 acre) parcel of land for access and utilities for the construction and operation of a cellular phone tower and associated equipment, said land being Part of Lot 11, Concession 6, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel; THAT the lease with Rogers Communications Inc. be premised on the following: (i) the initial term of the lease will be for five years, with three renewal options for successive five year periods subject to the concurrence of TRCA to the renewals; (ii) the lease rate is to be $16,830.00 per annum; (iii) Rogers Communications Inc. is to be responsible for all approvals required for construction of a cellular phone tower and associated equipment; (iv) Rogers Communications Inc. shall be solely responsible for all costs associated with the construction of a cellular phone tower and associated equipment; (v) any other terms and conditions deemed appropriate by the TRCA's solicitor; THAT an archaeological review is to be completed at the expense of Rogers Communications Inc. with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA; AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action required to implement the lease, including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED i m RES. #690/15 - UNIONVILLE SPECIAL POLICY AREA Policy Update, City of Markham The City of Markham is updating the policies of the Unionville Special Policy Area in accordance with provincial guidelines. The Authority is requested to endorse the updated Special Policy Area policies that will be implement through the City's new Official Plan. (Executive Res. #B31115) Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Paul Ainslie WHEREAS the City of Markham has undertaken a review to update the policies of the Unionville Special Policy Area (SPA) in accordance with provincial guidelines for amending the policies of existing SPAS; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Authority support the request by the City of Markham to update the policies of the Unionville Special Policy Area in the City's new Official Plan for approval; THAT the Authority reaffirm the position held since 2007 that a multi -level municipal parking structure is not recommended within the flood plain at the location as detailed in this report in the absence of a thorough evaluation of options and a demonstrated reduction in risk; THAT Authority staff be directed to continue discussions with the City of Markham staff to assist in finding alternatives for parking outside the flood plain; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Markham, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry be so advised by the CEO's Office. CARRIED MOTION #1 RES. #A91 /15 - PERSONNEL RECORDS (Executive Res. #B49115 - Res. #B51115) Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT the request by Brian Denney for a two year extension to his contract as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) under the same terms and conditions as the existing contract be approved. 190 MOTION #2 RES. #A92/15 Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT Brian Denney continue development of a succession plan for senior staff during his term and report to the Authority; THAT a process be developed for succession planning including a competitive process for hiring a search firm for recruitment of a CEO; AND FURTHER THAT a subcommittee be created to develop the hiring process, made up of the Chair, Vice Chair and one additional member from each of the participating member municipalities, and recommend the process to the Authority for approval. RECORDED VOTE ON MOTION #1 Paul Ainslie Yea Maria Augimeri Yea Jack Ballinger Yea David Barrow Yea Ronald Chopowick Yea Vincent Crisanti Yea Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea Michael Di Biase Yea Chris Fonseca Yea Jack Heath Yea Jennifer Innis Yea Colleen Jordan Yea Mujeeb Khan Yea Glenn Mason Yea Mike Mattos Yea Jennifer O'Connell Yea Anthony Perruzza Nay Gino Rosati Yea John Sprovieri Yea Cynthia Thorburn Yea Jim Tovey Yea 191 RECORDED VOTE ON MOTION #2 Paul Ainslie Yea Maria Augimeri Yea Jack Ballinger Yea David Barrow Yea Ronald Chopowick Yea Vincent Crisanti Yea Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea Michael Di Biase Yea Chris Fonseca Yea Jack Heath Yea Jennifer Innis Yea Colleen Jordan Yea Mujeeb Khan Yea Glenn Mason Yea Mike Mattos Yea Jennifer O'Connell Yea Anthony Perruzza Nay Gino Rosati Yea John Sprovieri Yea Cynthia Thorburn Yea Jim Tovey Yea MOTION #1 WAS CARRIED MOTION #2 WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: THAT the request by Brian Denney for a two year extension to his contract as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) under the same terms and conditions as the existing contract be approved; THAT Brian Denney continue development of a succession plan for senior staff during his term and report to the Authority; THAT a process be developed for succession planning including a competitive process for hiring a search firm for recruitment of a CEO; AND FURTHER THAT a subcommittee be created to develop the hiring process, made up of the Chair, Vice Chair and one additional member from each of the participating member municipalities, and recommend the process to the Authority for approval. 192 SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION RES. #A93 /15 - SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT Section II items EX8.1 - EX8.4, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #4/15, held on May 1, 2015, be received. CARRIED Section II Items EX8.1 - EX8.4 SAN ROMANOWAY COMMUNITY GARDEN CONSTRUCTION (Executive Res. #B33115 & Res. #B34115) WEBSITE REDEVELOPMENT AND WEB APPLICATION SUPPORT (Executive Res. #B35115) WILKET CREEK REHABILITATION PROJECT - SITE 3 PHASE 2 (Executive Res. #B36115) NATIONAL WILDLIFE CENTRE (Executive Res. #837115) SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #A94 /15 - LEARNING ENRICHMENT FOUNDATION Landscape Training Program. Overview of the Learning Enrichment Foundation's Landscape Training Program and ongoing collaborative training. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Michael Di Biase WHEREAS at Executive Committee Meeting #1/15, held on February 6, 2015, the Committee supported the concept of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) working with the Learning Enrichment Foundation to investigate social enterprise opportunities and partnerships with TRCA and report back to the Authority; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the report and presentation by the Learning Enrichment Foundation be received. CARRIED 193 BACKGROUND The Learning Enrichment Foundation (LEF) provides integrated and holistic community responsive initiatives that enable individuals and families to become valued contributors to their communities social and economic development. LEF has a strong track record of providing training that connects people to employment. For 30 years, they have offered a wide array of training courses, each of which are constantly evolving with the needs of the community and of local businesses. LEF is a registered private career college under the Private Career Colleges Act, 2005 with all of its programs approved. Currently, LEF is piloting a Landscape Training Program in partnership with the Ontario Parks Association (OPA) that will prepare young people, between the ages of 20 and 29, to gain employment in the landscaping and grounds management industries. The Landscape Training Program has been developed in consultation with industry partners to ensure training is relevant to industry needs. OPA is currently slated to deliver key components of the training. Participants gain skills and hands -on experience completing tasks that are used frequently by TRCA field staff. TRCA has partnered with LEF through the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) and played an integral part in the hands -on training portion of the Landscape Training Program. The Head Gardener at BCPV worked with LEF to develop a Memorandum of Understanding; allowing trainees to visit the site and utilize the ground and equipment for training. In conjunction with OPA, those attending were certified in the safe and effective use of landscaping equipment. Trainees were also allowed to do work on the property including pruning, spring clean -up and garden maintenance. The collaborative efforts of both organizations was important as it allowed trainees to get real hands -on experience at a highly public and well known parks facility. RATIONALE TRCA has a long history of working with local and regional training programs. Continued and increased partnerships with groups such as LEF will help achieve several of the goals and objectives set out in TRCA's Strategic Plan (2013). Specifically, working with LEF will help diversify and strengthen TRCA's partnership base, assist staff in creating additional training opportunities and expand the range of initiatives that are essential to the growth and resiliency of TRCA. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA staff will continue to meet with LEF and OPA to further develop landscape training opportunities and help identify potential projects and additional partners that could benefit from the program. 194 FINANCIAL DETAILS There are no financial impacts to TRCA at this time. Report prepared by: Adam Dembe, extension 5939 Email: adembe @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Adam Dembe, extension 5939; Mike Bender, 416- 400 -2111 Emails: adembe @trca.on.ca, mbender @trca.on.ca Date: May 07, 2015 ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED RES. #A95/15 - APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Mujeeb Khan THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, items EX10 -1 - EX10.10, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #4/15, held on May 1, 2015, be received. CARRIED TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:46 a.m., on Friday, May 29, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 195 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Minutes of Authority Meeting #6/15 June 26, 2015 Authority Meeting #6/15 was held at TRCA Head Office on Friday, June 26, 2015. The Chair, Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:36 a.m. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Member Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member Ben Cachola Member Ronald Chopowick Member Vincent Crisanti Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Mujeeb Khan Member Matt Mahoney Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Glenn Mason Member Mike Mattos Member Ron Moeser Member Jennifer O'Connell Member Linda Pabst Member Anthony Perruzza Member John Sprovieri Member Jim Tovey Member I_\- 1-114�ki David Barrow Member Justin Di Ciano Member Chris Fonseca Member Rob Ford Member Gino Rosati Member Cynthia Thorburn Member 196 RES. #A96 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Ron Moeser Jack Heath THAT the Minutes of Meeting #5/15, held on May 29, 2015, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Peter Kendall, Executive Director, Earth Rangers Foundation, in regard to Item 8.1 Earth Rangers. RES. #A97 /15 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: George Mammoliti Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT above -noted presentation (a) be received. CARRIED CORRESPONDENCE (a) A letter dated June 17, 2015, from Paul Allore, Director, Planning and Development Services, Town of Ajax, in regard to item 7.6 - Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan. RES. #A98 115 - CORRESPONDENCE Moved by: Jack Ballinger Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT above -noted correspondence (a) be received. CARRIED 197 CORRESPONDENCE 6.1 `I 'max By the Lake June 17, 2015 Planning S Development Services Tel. 905 - 683 -4550 Fax. 905- 683 -0360 Chandra Sharma Director, Watershed Strategies Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 Dear Ms. Sharma: Re: Proposed Watershed Plan for the Carruthers Creek TOWN OF AJAX 65 Harwood Avenue South Ajax ON L1S2H9 www.ajax.ca I am writing in response to a report which will be tabled at the June 25, 2015 meeting of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority regarding the proposed Watershed Plan for the Carruthers Creek. As you know, in June 2002, the "Carruthers Creek State of the Watershed Report" was released as a precursor to the "Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek." This Report discussed the Durham Regional Planning Framework which designated large areas in the northern portion of the Carruthers Creek watershed as Permanent Agricultural Reserve. These lands include significant forests and woodlots, forming part of Durham Region's environment and open space system and continue to play a key role in maintaining hydrologic function. The policies of the Regional Official Plan and the Pickering Official Plan continue to protect the forests, woodlots and agricultural lands in the headwaters of Carruthers Creek. In August 2003, a "Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek" was released and was based on achieving an enhanced natural heritage system together with applying best management practices in all land use activities. An enhanced natural heritage system, based on "Future Land Uses as per Official Plans" with "Enhanced Natural Heritage Cover" was prepared that assumed an increase in natural cover of 25% to 30% in the Carruthers Creek Watershed. The existing Watershed Plan includes ten integral management actions which were later included as policy by amendment to the Ajax Official Plan. These actions were deemed so important that they were identified as integral to the overall health of the watersheds — to be afforded top priority for implementation including, among others: protecting existing meadows, wetlands, and forests identified in the enhanced terrestrial natural heritage system and secure lands to be restored; and actively restoring areas within the enhanced natural heritage system, which contribute multiple watershed benefits, and allow passive restoration to occur in the remaining areas. These principles should be upheld. The existing Watershed Plan indicates that losses in natural cover that occurred previously in the urban areas downstream in the Carruthers watershed were to be offset by gains in the natural cover in the headwaters. Therefore, any reduction in natural 00ar,o's Fir.t I1)9I8 Quality Cmmnnniitg cover in the headwaters in the future will result in a long term net loss to the entire Carruthers Creek watershed. Comments We wish to provide the following comments on the report Status of Existing Watershed Plan The Town of Ajax is concerned that this project will dispense with the fundamental goals, objectives and management actions in the existing Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan. The existing Plan, which was developed by the Carruthers Creek Task Force Members over a two year period, should be brought forward in any update to the Plan. The intent of the study should be about protecting and strengthening the ecological and environmental integrity of the watershed, including: i) protecting the integrity of the headwaters and enhancing the complexity of its ecosystems; ii) reducing and eliminating existing and potential future stressors within the watershed that could threaten its health; iii) ensuring that natural ecological processes are allowed to evolve naturally so that they are strengthened and self- sustaining. Intent of Study The TRCA report dated May 4, 2015 does not fully reflect the overall intended scope of this exercise. This study is being undertaken in preparation for the next municipal comprehensive review of the Durham Regional Official Plan. It is significant that the second phase of development will consider the principle of development in the headwaters of the Carruthers in advance of the required municipal comprehensive review. The watershed plan is being undertaken, as noted by Regional staff in report 2015 -P -16 under section 7.3.11 p) of the Durham Regional Official Plan, which indicates the following: 7.3.11 Expansions to the Urban Area boundaries beyond those shown on Schedule W— Regional Structure shall only occur through a comprehensive review of this Plan having regard for the following: p) where a comprehensive review of this Plan includes consideration of lands for Urban Area expansion within the City of Pickering east of the Pickering Airport lands, outside of the Greenbelt Plan, the following additional matters will be assessed and evaluated at that time: i) the amount and rate of development that has occurred in the Seaton Community; and ii) the preparation and completion of a watershed plan update for the East Duffin and Carruthers Creek watersheds." The last municipal comprehensive review (ROPA 128) was approved by the Ontario Municipal Board on January 9, 2013. The Carruthers Headwaters was then proposed for urban area expansion but was not required for residential or employment development within the 2031 timeframe. Onl,mv's Fhsl ISO 9001 Qnuli[q Qnumnnibl 199 On October 27, 2010 MMAH refused proposed urban boundary expansions into Northeast Pickering and other areas. This decision was later appealed by various parties, including the Region of Durham. Policy 7.3.11 p) as noted above was ultimately approved by the OMB, as a compromise between MMAH and the Region that resulted in the removal of the proposed Northeast Pickering Urban Area from ROPA 128. TRCA's June 26, 2015 report refers to Durham Region's report (2015 -P -16) which states that the completion of the Phase 1 work i.e. terrestrial natural heritage, water resources engineering, hydrogeology, aquatic species and habitat, surface water) will "allow the Region to determine if the principle of urban development can be considered for this area. If that principle can be established, then work will proceed to the second phase... which includes a review of proposed development scenarios ". It is this second phase of the project that is central to Ajax's concerns, but is not described in TRCA's June 26, 2015 report. It has not been demonstrated that urban development is needed in northeast Pickering to meet the Growth Plan forecasts. Ajax believes it is premature to consider these lands for urban development purposes through a watershed study in advance of any need for additional urban lands being demonstrated through a municipal comprehensive review. Other Comments on the Report In our view, the characteristics of the Carruthers Creek Watershed as highlighted in the Background section of the report should reflect the following points: 1. The Carruthers should be characterized as a delicate or fragile headwater, as changes in land use in the headwater often causes stress on the whole watershed. 2. The Carruthers is a unique watershed with only two distinct headwater streams, unlike other watersheds such as the Duffins which has multiple streams feeding the system. 3. The report should be clear that there should be more than a consideration for flooding, since Ajax has an existing Regional Flooding problem near the mouth of the Carruthers Creek. 4. Key watershed issues to be considered within the Watershed Plan should also incorporate the following three components: • vulnerability of the headwater; • ability of the watershed to recharge groundwater; • sensitivity to temperature increase. 5. The restoration of forest buffers to protect the headwaters is needed as contemplated by the existing Watershed Plan. Forest buffers are the first line of defense against non -point pollutants. 6. Maintaining the existing natural and rural land uses in the headwater is important for protecting and enhancing the existing surface and groundwater flow regime. The effects of surface water runoff from loss of pervious surfaces, especially in headwaters and recharge locations would be detrimental to the watershed. U„ttmo's First ISO 9001 Q,wlity Ca,mm,�nity 200 The Town of Ajax supports the notion of updating the Watershed Plan to reflect existing conditions, and applying current science to ensure that its long term environmental sustainability objectives continue to be supported and enhanced. However, the second phase of the study which will consider urban development in the headwaters is at best premature, and is inconsistent with the management actions recommended in the existing Watershed Plan. Therefore, the second phase of the proposed study should not be undertaken. I would be pleased to discuss this at your convenience. Thank you for your consideration. Yours truly, Paul Allore. MCIP. RPP Director, Planning and Development Services Copies: Mayor and Council Gary Muller, Manager of Planning Kevin Tryon, Manager of Engineering - Development O0"' ' ri"? ISO 9001 &ality Cnnr nni n ily 201 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #A99115 - 2015 REVIEW OF THE FOUR PROVINCIAL PLANS Update on TRCA comments submitted on the four provincial plans included in the 2015 review. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: John Sprovieri WHEREAS the Province of Ontario is undertaking a coordinated review of the Greenbelt Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has mandated roles and responsibilities in the land use planning and development process; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA's formal response to the Province on May 28, 2015 in Attachment 1 be received; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA's municipal partners and Conservation Ontario be so advised by the CEO's Office. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/15, held on March 27, 2015 , TRCA staff provided details on the provincially coordinated review of the Greenbelt Plan (GBP), the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP), the Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP) and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan), and provided a summary of previous TRCA positioning that would provide the basis of TRCA's submission to the Province. Additionally, the Report Card on the Environmental Health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands (Report Card) produced by the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition was brought forth for the information of the Authority. On May 28, 2015, TRCA submitted a formal response to the Province of Ontario on the coordinated review of the four provincial plans (Attachment 1). In the preparation of TRCA's comments, planning staff in the Planning, Greenspace and Communications Division consulted internally with senior management, planning and technical staff to formulate strategic recommendations and respond to the consultation questions posed by the Province. TRCA staff also participated in six regional town hall public consultation sessions to promote the recommendations and results from the Report Card. Summary of Key Issues Identified by TRCA TRCA provided the following key recommendations on the plan review: • The Growth Plan should be revised to include policies that require the completion of comprehensive integrated studies that assess the cumulative impacts of long -term development on flood risk, erosion and water quality at watershed and subwatershed scales and identify mitigation targets and actions for implementation at subsequent stages of the development process. 202 • The Growth Plan should acknowledge that growth planning needs to be based on the capacity of the watershed to maintain its ecological integrity while accounting for the changing hydrologic conditions caused by development (i.e., acknowledging that flood remedial plans and flood remediation infrastructure may be necessary in order to allow for intensification to occur). • The ORMCP and GBP need to include a greater range of tools which can support the day - to- day implementation of the plans' objectives. These additional tools could include: permits under the Conservation Authorities Act and municipal by -laws under the Municipal Act (i.e., tree cutting, fill, and erosion and sediment controls); increased funding for land acquisition, private land stewardship activities and Environmental Farm Plans; and payment for the provision of ecological goods and services. • The ORMCP and GBP should allow for additional flexibility for existing conservation authority facilities to provide environment -based recreation, education and tourism opportunities that respond to changing trends in these fields. Many conservation authority facilities are aging and in need of refurbishment and upgrades to meet new accessibility standards. Conservation authorities require flexibility in the ability to offer public uses complementary to its objectives, in order to generate revenues and achieve financial sustainability to maintain and upgrade its facilities to ensure they operate at the highest standards for environmental protection and accessibility to people of all abilities. A definition for "Conservation Projects" should be added to the plans to support and confirm conservation authority land uses and provide this additional flexibility. • The ORMCP and GBP should provide increased flexibility and economic opportunities to agriculture and rural livelihoods (i.e., bed and breakfast establishments, home businesses, dwellings for farm workers, nature -based tourism and value added agriculture), as long as the uses were subject to meeting the environmental policies and tests of the plans. • The policy requirements for transportation, infrastructure and utility development activities in the ORMCP and GBP should be strengthened with clearer direction on how to "demonstrate the need" for infrastructure projects and assessment of "no reasonable alternatives ", which is a key test in the ORMCP related to allowing infrastructure in the Natural Core and Linkage Area designations. There are an increasing number of environmental assessments taking place for large infrastructure projects (major highways, pipelines) which may cut across the ORM- Greenbelt, and through significant natural features such as valleylands, wetlands or forests. These projects need to be fully and carefully assessed for their need, location and possible alternatives, in order to minimize environmental impacts and limit growth from "leapfrogging" the ORM- Greenbelt and sprawling into the outer ring of the Growth Plan area. Additionally, there should be policy requirements added to the plans for enhancement and ecological compensation when Key Natural Heritage /Hydrologic Features are negatively impacted by infrastructure planning and siting. In addition to the key recommendations, staff provided recommendations on the relevant consultation questions provided by the Province to guide the review, as found in the chart in Attachment 1. 203 NEXT STEPS The advisory panel, led by Mr. David Crombie will review the comments submitted and provide their recommendations to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing staff in the fall of 2015. Provincial staff will then assess the recommendations and formulate proposed amendments to the plans for a further round of public and agency consultation. Report prepared by: Kathy Padgett, extension 5687 Emails: kpadgett @trca.on.ca For information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: dburnett @trca.on.ca Date: June 5, 2015 Attachments: 1 204 Attachment 1 May 27, 2015 Mr. Richard Stromberg Manager Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Ontario Growth Secretariat 777 Bay Street Toronto, ON MSG 2E5 Toronto and Region �.� Conservation for The Living City Re: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Comments in Response to the Co- ordinated Review of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Greenbelt Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and Niagara Escarpment Plan (Registry #012 -3256) Dear Mr. Stromberg: Staff at the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) would like to thank the Ministries of the Environment and Climate Change and Municipal Affairs and Housing for the opportunity to comment on the co- ordinated 10 -year review of the four Provincial Plans. Key themes are outlined below, while a detailed chart focusing on the consultation discussion questions is attached (Attachment 1). Effectiveness of the Four Provincial Plans The three environmental plans include the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP), Greenbelt Plan (GBP) and Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP). Along with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan), they have been effective in working together to protect bio- regional scale environmental systems and important agricultural lands, while seeking to minimize urban sprawl within TRCA watersheds. It is essential that the strong policies of the ORMCP, GBP and NEP are maintained to benefit the health of those unique natural areas and the people of southern Ontario. The objectives of all four Plans are necessary in working together to address climate change and achieve resilient communities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region. Additionally, these four plans are fundamental to protect the long -term health of the Great Lakes. Although the ORMCP, GBP and Growth Plan are implemented through Planning Act applications with municipalities as approval authorities, Conservation Authorities (CAs) play a key and ongoing role in the Plans' implementation. CAs undertake watershed /subwatershed plans and floodplain management studies to inform municipalities in the creation and updating of their official plan policies to achieve conformity with the ORMCP, GBP, Growth Plan and the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). Some of these include creation of natural heritage systems and appropriate policies. CA staff continuously spends time in the field on site visits to verify environmental conditions and feature boundaries to inform development limits, as well as reviewing the detailed technical environmental studies in support of development applications. Additionally, CA staff regularly participates as expert witnesses at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) to help defend the Plans and their on -the- ground implementation. The ongoing role of CAs in Plan implementation should be recognized in the Plans to give greater credence to CAs' role as a technical resource for approval authorities implementing the Plans. Highlighting this additional option for technical guidance is an opportunity to further enhance the effectiveness of the Plans for resource protection and building healthy communities. Tel. 416.661.6600, 1.888.872.2344 1 Fax. 416.661.6898 1 info@trca.on.ca 1 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, ON WN 154 MrmA,at Cone Iwn Ontario wwwArca.on.ca 205 Recommended Improvements to Increase the Effectiveness of the Growth Plan The TRCA jurisdiction is dominated by existing urban and urbanizing areas in much of our nine watersheds. The Growth Plan requires intensification of development in already built -up areas in order to accommodate growth while minimizing urban sprawl. TRCA's urban and urbanizing watersheds include 10 of the Growth Plan's 25 designated Urban Growth Centres (UGCs). Many of the UGCs and other lands identified for intensification are located in Flood Vulnerable Areas (FVAs - see attached map). There are a considerable number of people living within the 42 FVAs in TRCA's jurisdiction (over 35,000). There is also a substantial amount of potential property damage due to flooding which could occur within our jurisdiction. This includes an estimated $1.9 billion dollars of residential property damage and $1.2 billion dollars of non - residential property damage. This equates to $3.1 billion dollars in potential total damages. The number of structures in the floodplain is approximately 6,800 (this includes residential and business areas and flood vulnerable roads). Without renewed investment in stormwater management and flood remediation, this risk will only increase in the future with the additional flood flows that could result from ongoing intensification and urbanization, if these are not effectively managed and mitigated. It has been demonstrated through TRCA's watershed -based research and science that the cumulative impact of growth and intensification in our jurisdiction is causing changes to watershed hydrology resulting in increased flood risk in downstream areas. In addition, studies conducted in the Toronto region including TRCA's Rouge and Humber River watershed plans reveal that climate change is likely to have an increasingly negative impact on water resources, public infrastructure and private property, in part due to extreme weather events such as the July 2013 Toronto flood (reported as Ontario's most expensive natural disaster resulting in $850 million in damage to public and private assets). The combined impacts of urbanization and climate change mean that we are now reaching a threshold capacity in TRCA watersheds where communities, including redeveloped communities in UGCs and other intensification in FVAs, will increasingly be put at risk unless there is continuous improvement in how we manage stormwater and invest in infrastructure to reduce the risk of flooding where it currently occurs. In addition to impacts on flooding and flood risk, TRCA watershed plans and studies have also highlighted the impact of ongoing development and intensification on water quality and erosion if stormwater is not properly managed. Stormwater runoff from the increased number of impervious surfaces (such as concrete and asphalt) in newly developed or redeveloped areas contains contaminants that threaten aquatic ecosystems and recreational users in rivers and in receiving bodies like Lake Ontario. This runoff is also much warmer than the water that typically flows through rivers and streams, which can make it difficult for aquatic species sensitive to temperature, including some of Ontario's most threatened fish species, to survive. Further, additional stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces (over ten times greater than natural levels for some storms) causes erosion in receiving rivers and streams that damages private property and infrastructure and destroys aquatic habitat. Conventional stormwater management measures do not fully mitigate water quality and erosion impacts, and TRCA and others have been advocating a change to stormwater management practices that incorporate Low Impact Development and green infrastructure to manage the quality and volume of stormwater runoff at source in order to effectively manage these issues, as discussed below. The Growth Plan needs to be revised to address this issue by providing more direction on sustainable management of stormwater and flood risk in tandem with accommodating growth. The Growth Plan should address this in two ways: 1) by including policies that require the completion of comprehensive integrated studies that assess the cumulative impacts of long -term development on flood risk, erosion and water quality at watershed and subwatershed scales and identify mitigation targets and actions for implementation at subsequent stages of the development process; and 2) acknowledging that growth planning needs to be based on the capacity of the watershed to maintain its ecological integrity while accounting for the changing hydrologic conditions caused by development (i.e., acknowledging that flood remedial plans and flood remediation infrastructure may be necessary in order to allow for intensification to occur). IV Greater Direction on Comprehensive Integrated Studies to Achieve Environmental Sustainability The Growth Plan policies should include requirements to complete integrated studies at various nested scales to understand and manage for the cumulative impacts of ongoing development (e.g., watershed /subwatershed plans, followed by Master Environmental Servicing Plans and then site - specific studies) prior to or as a necessary pre- requisite to approving development in greenfield, intensification and redevelopment situations. This is necessary to avoid piecemeal planning and effectively plan for sustainable growth from the beginning of the planning process (i.e., not permitting intensification where it would result in an increase in the level of flood risk). In addition to requiring these studies to be completed, the Province should provide detailed guidance on what should be included in these studies, such as considerations for stormwater control, flood risk management, erosion, water quality, green infrastructure, integrated urban design, and the enhancement of natural systems to provide mitigation and resilience to climate change impacts. Conservation Authorities have expertise with these studies and can support this analysis and assist in the creation of guidelines. Two successful examples of a comprehensive planning process to allow for redevelopment and intensification while remediating flooding hazards are the downtown Brampton and Lower Don River projects. As a further example, many studies that are undertaken as part of current growth planning practices do not adequately protect water resources because they are too limited in scope and because the studies occur too late in the development process to affect decisions about site feasibility. This is particularly an issue in areas that are not subject to the policies in the ORMCP or GBP but still experience groundwater issues (i.e., ORM "fringe" areas, particularly on the southern slope off the ORM). In these areas, traditional urban design that looks at site feasibility based on above ground features does not detect the groundwater issues at the beginning of the planning process. When groundwater issues are found at the detailed design stage, the solution is often permanent dewatering of the aquifer. This can increase flooding and erosion downstream as the groundwater is pumped and discharged to surface streams; it also results in natural feature degradation as water tables are lowered and interdependent surface features such as woodlands and wetlands experience altered hydrological regimes. Protecting and expanding the natural heritage system is a key component to managing water in the urban watersheds. Strong action to identify and protect natural systems is needed to stem the continuing losses ( "death by a thousand cuts ") of natural heritage and water resource features in the lands covered by the four Plans. Policies 4.2.1 (1) and 5.3.4 (d) of the Growth Plan directed Provincial ministries to identify natural systems for Growth Plan lands. This has not been done at the Provincial level, but has been taken on by CAs (see above for CA roles in Plan implementation). Section 3.2.1.3 of the GBP contains some excellent language about the need for natural "systems" planning and strengthening connections of natural systems in the Greenbelt and integrating them with water resource and natural heritage systems outside the Greenbelt. This provides multiple benefits on the Growth Plan lands for community aesthetics, passive recreational opportunities, habitat connectivity and managing urban stormwater. A policy framework to require stronger protection of local natural systems and features within the Growth Plan lands is needed, incorporating these features into conceptual community plans. More prescriptive protection is required in areas where new development may be considered. In addition, a policy framework to allow for ecological compensation for when features must be lost to either development or infrastructure is needed. Growth Planning Based on Watershed Capacity and Water Management There is a gap in Growth Plan policies related to sustainability and the capacity of a watershed to accommodate additional growth. Guiding principles need to be added to the Growth Plan to prevent net negative impacts — and preferably achieve net improvements —to flood risk, erosion, water quality and aquatic ecosystems due to growth and intensification. It should also be specifically noted with respect to redevelopment and intensification in FVAs that significant infrastructure improvements are needed to address water management and natural hazard issues, including flood remediation prior to new or intensified development, as has been TRCA's experience. 207 Sustainable watershed growth and intensification that protects communities and the environmental resources they value and rely on requires continuous improvement in how we manage stormwater. This direction can be achieved through updated policies in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Growth Plan that require a treatment train approach to stormwater management that consists of source, conveyance and end of pipe controls (source and conveyance being Low Impact Development techniques), in order to appropriately manage the peak rates, quality and volume of stormwater runoff. Additionally, revisions are needed to the "Culture of Conservation" section of the Growth Plan to include a much stronger emphasis on using a systems planning approach to integrate natural heritage systems, open space lands and creatively using both green infrastructure and traditional stormwater infrastructure to mitigate the impacts of urbanization and climate change on water resources and watershed health in both infill and greenfield development. New and innovative practices such as green infrastructure and Low Impact Development techniques, including the design of streets, parks, and yard trees, as well as green roofs, swales, rain gardens and permeable pavement must all be considered in an integrated fashion as a cost effective mechanism to manage stormwater. This can achieve multiple benefits, such as improved water quality, reduced stormwater quantity, financial, and other public health benefits. Society needs to make planned and ongoing investment in the maintenance, renewal and improvement of both traditional flood mitigation infrastructure and green infrastructure in order for intensification or any further urban expansion to occur. The Growth Plan should be updated with new policies to require integrated and comprehensive planning for water management to protect both new and existing development from natural hazards, to preserve the environmental health of our watersheds and communities, and to make them resilient to the potential future impacts from climate change. A sustainable funding model is needed to support implementation of this new section /policies of the Growth Plan with multi -party investment in the maintenance, renewal and improvement of green infrastructure and other flood mitigation measures. A variety of opportunities to incent developers and municipalities to embrace these measures through alignments with other provincial policies and programs should be explored (e.g., more inclusive development charge levies, broadening Planning Act section 37 benefits to include open space improvements, stormwater management levies, etc.). Recommended Improvements to Increase the Effectiveness of the ORMCP and GBP To date, both the ORMCP and GBP have been largely effective in achieving their respective purposes of landform, agricultural land, and Key Natural Heritage /Hydrological Features protection. The Plans would greatly benefit by addressing consistency issues with respect to policy interpretation, application of policies, terminology and their associated technical guidance papers. The following key themes should be addressed to maintain and enhance the strength of these Plans: Additional Tools and Support to Implement the Plans are Required The Report Card on the Environmental Health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands, as produced by the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC), shows that almost half of the watersheds within the Plans' area had surface water quality grades of fair, poor or very poor (www.morainecoalition.ca). The Report Card concluded that implementation of the ORMCP and GBP through Planning Act applications is generally satisfactory to maintain existing conditions, but is not sufficient on its own to achieve the Plans' other goals and objectives to restore and enhance the environmental health and integrity of these environmentally significant lands. Other tools are needed. The ORMCP and GBP need to include a. greater range of tools which can support the day -to -day implementation of the Plans' objectives. These additional tools could include: permits under the Conservation Authorities Act and municipal by -laws under the Municipal Act (i.e., tree cutting, fill, and erosion and sediment controls); increased funding for land acquisition, private land stewardship activities and Environmental Farm Plans; and payment for the provision of ecological goods and services, similar to the Alternative Land Use Services (ALUS) program. Additionally, a provincial website should be developed that compiles all the relevant policy interpretations that K i provincial staff have provided over the years to various issues and questions raised during site - specific implementation of the policies. Increased Flexibility for Agriculture, Rural Livelihoods and Conservation Authority Owned Lands Flexibility for agricultural and rural land uses is somewhat lacking from the ORMCP and GBP which limits economic opportunities for rural land owners. For example, bed and breakfast establishments, home businesses, dwellings for farm workers, nature -based tourism and value added agricultural uses could be allowed some additional flexibility in the scale and scope of their operations, as long as these uses were subject to meeting the environmental policies and tests of the Plans. It is recommended to harmonize the definitions of agriculture and its related activities with the language used in the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement to permit rural agri- business innovation while maintaining the Plans' integrity with regard to protection of water resources and natural heritage. The Plans should also include policies to allow for additional flexibility for existing Conservation Authority facilities to provide environment -based recreation, education and tourism opportunities that respond to changing trends in these fields. Many CA facilities are aging and in need of refurbishment and upgrades to meet new accessibility standards. CAs require flexibility in the ability to offer public uses complementary to its objectives, in order to generate revenues and achieve financial sustainability to maintain and upgrade its facilities to ensure they operate at the highest standards for environmental protection and accessibility to people of all abilities. It is suggested that a definition for "Conservation Projects" (see attached table) should be added to the ORMCP and GBP to support and confirm conservation authority land uses and provide flexibility for conservation authorities to meet the recreational, educational and local tourism demands of the growing Greater Golden Horseshoe population. Strengthen Policy Requirements for Transportation, Infrastructure, and Utilities The ORMCP policies take a "business as usual" approach with respect to transportation, infrastructure and utility development activities. There is a need for clear direction (in the Plans or related guidance documents) on how to "demonstrate the need" for and assessment of "no reasonable alternatives ", which is a key test in the ORMCP related to allowing infrastructure in the Natural Core and Linkage Area designations. There should be added policy requirements for enhancement and ecological compensation when Key Natural Heritage /Hydrological Features are negatively impacted by infrastructure planning and siting. Additionally, the ORMCP should clarify that the requirements in the ORMCP and GBP for a Natural Heritage Evaluation and Hydrological Evaluation apply to transportation, infrastructure and utilities development activities, and not just to development and site alteration under the Planning Act. Should you have any questions or require clarification on any of the comments submitted, please contact David Burnett, Senior Manager, Provincial and Regional Policy, at 416 - 661 -6600 extension 5361. Sincerely, Carolyn Woodland, OALA, FCSLA, MCIP, RPP Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 209 CD Q C E N (D N n _T V) Q U N° S W O N N O C) H W A I c a O a,_ N 7 L > N ° V Q Q Q C °O N y V O /1 LL U) D H N N i m 3 Z F. o . U) 3 � � is Q C 0 O Y O LLI W m m o LLI W cc: C ,;BI„ f V > ° a m m M V� F C CO 3 'O- m Q Ln 0 C LL N ;v. O C C n „ U. W O 1 1O >� N U > O "U a LL > l J 5) � O }d A y1 M( d V� d J No m Y m O W p v V U cc S w W S > v > LU 0 W cl� H O Q W 3 > O y Z K C O C - C) L Oj w v F Q LU 0 { C 3 _ x O. E o J y Y Q� J Z N 7 Y � / o Gv c LI Ol N . 01 3 > Y c W Y W O: V O _ A N N Y LA W N W K V N W Y O �w V c c O W Vf c o. �� o m ° E m 3R V1 J o m Vw m $A a GJ �k a m Q i Q � V 0 b a C /!• CL °o _ c = o of L � o Ln N o L) 210 211 ti O p N C N a �O• N O tp m N w C 0 0 E C d '- o VIN C y N a f 41 J a+ - (6 v m Q v v v v 3 3 v £ = w W E E v y J, a o .� Y o m? c y v J = v a s a L m N A O C C N V F E d N N y t0 w, Y Y y«j L d u °u v 0 0 0 V v m y d ° a Y m° m- y J L - :p Cu •N m L N w v c L E Y c v m N o " c O -p `v u u v° o m co c v N ,� v m o LL .!' N N N N l0 C d C Y w f L « L N K i+✓1 M N (0 m> o Y 9 C 0 m« N 5; y m y 0 y ra 0 0 Z O -O 2 v>i u N u O O m L L> u v c$ o o J v �°> m\ Y v 3 y@ c E s v v Yo Z@? 3 N Z 0 L m y v v 3 ai 0 0 °' '° c M u oo N o •N 3 J G 0 u w C 3 v m O C a d U O A N f0 K O` c y U O d i K Z C .p C 3 6 Z d d aL. C N N Y X C y in > O N vOi N> v i d T v u v s E E ° u o° um- P- w E y r v o N v s.• u y; E a 3 a o v -a c a O O °o ° O° 0 16 3 3 c L.. c a v O m •` l7 is `v N c W Z« .� u o E v Y a E °- a w u° .� a m u m 2 d= 2 cLv, .m m o c c o Y ? v m « cCc d f0 L j i� w N d O L (0 J N Y N a °- Y 1. y N (E U J 10 a N w N N N> L 'Y_ w U C W O> %1 %1 6 Z C Q ate+ O O L 3 J b0 O H N d v L O � d J N N U � - v y � N C F C io V1 W to .O G 7 d N a Clv C L O O n v O c E v� 3 Y 3 y =° c c C C G rj O O � R C � C d J C d W Y 0p f0 211 ti 212 R y U C 10 H d 0) L N Y Ol a m O Ol CD i0 C « « N E @ C J C bo O L AM C 'o °" c L E 0 n c v m m 3 ac o C- Y Q O1 C O1 w 0 0@ -° ` N Y N N a @@ w> O) u C 10 u v C C O) 3 �! L n r a w N N E 3 .- "O O) d 3« �^ `D 00 yN. L N w y o a E v Q a u c m 'c 3 c :.:+_' u '° "@ ,J. 5 0`¢ E N ° c N E Y u u C @ ° 0 o. x �• O .� C > w O N 01 C 'u ° = °° v° .V c o .= a c M O Y J a d O C C J C C U_ OD J N@ .G Q« .j v Ol d W 00 - C t5 C J p O u@ E L N O C Ol a C OD w J = @` '� C Y '� a C a v « T O 01 C °_ 0) O y 0 '^ O L C C a C Z,• C@ C vi @ U« C a a+ N L 0@ A C p N d C t yam. C N` 01 01 > 0 M oo •°-N° m = @ c c 'm 'Q '� E ° r j-c-p m u° ` 0 Y w c`n a n u m l7 a o o o 1`0 0> d u c p eO w b0 u u> m O .v- w m v= o m `o' L c v a °• •- z° v J c v Y o v 'S u+ v u ,., m u J v> E .o v +. a un `w c y ui ~ v v Nc v N m Y o@ v J v E w c v: W o .. ` ,� oEdc @ c a °�na L:�'J: oaalco yusY UJ�vJV @@ °' N _« o m o +' L c c v y« a m �, w w c c v v •6 C N o. o °_ 3 v y 4- 0 « L 01 E `y yJ,i L J !^ p 0J 01 ,p W O« C N U cm p� _ L@ U a Op V y N W N c @? o L@ N UO O '«° v @- N O@ MM °c_° N a t w o `o 10 ,= `° m 3 u c a o v c Q m u w M N -° c `-° c c 0 ° Z o '^ v `w c° `•= a v -°i > .v. t u 2 m c 3 E `m m° w a ° v u a O a Y O@ '(p _n @ J v L O) °p 0) ° L C O 01 J L r- J C C L@ C d W F' C p r a nn a v F N a E m F o In @ 1O F a !^ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v . . . c c a a uM g Nm v 16 W Y t O p c o o 0 v m w v m c c y c m � a c v aLV, .n 7 = �? c° a > n v o > Ivil N 10 W W F 212 R 213 Jl @ U_ d d a v @ d d @ c c o E a@ p o m o a Y J 9 v y w; CO L 3@ O C N C N O O T O y` Y a vdi d Y"° D m Jo m n m° E o c v c c en a�i 3 m v¢ 3 J. vt. E v .v m c a o d« m a m c c J o c E 0 o o ,1O, v Ow o L '^' n~ 0 v 0 a o t- `° ,L, N N `° a d c �' E o r as -° O• •' ° L d '^ a J C n O L C N I- J C Y @ @> O a@ C a@ C O y N ._ w y > y a w u =r 1O v u c r .o - m c m 3 v v .J. N u« N@ O p d T 41 Y C L O N d d J d in W 00 d d° O O N N` d t7 E ';� n a Y N v a c 3 v- t E" o :: «% c o 0 v d q@ i+ "O ,>, U -p O` .O d y p@ d C N O w ,m C f0 Y ` '^ L d J p«> C in "O @ N N 7@ .0 a= N O L C '6 d C N a .N C R d v° ?� J A 9 N Y N O A R f N V JO a .N C a v .G o O O Y E O i@ N O d M O E w @ d m° u C n N a+ d L N E d Y d N QQ U d Y Y C a -p u N@ o L Y S d a o y •> L d •� d C_ N C J« Y C d d °' J J 09 O n .O O Y E. N Y C` C d Y c d N N L N@ d C d "O O L u u° V C C° d u aL+ ±' E C O O N> d Ul a v v •o e: •o n o n l7 0 _u N -° a O m N e v +•' ei d y c « .N+ d@_ H .� N O O C j N O L N d 0 3 d A C +d_' •d E N d @£@ C O@ i •@ d U O N t`p E C '6 m G > u N C ±+ @ i N -O a 'm cc� T N d N~ .� E° d J Y d T Y C C E@ C N O g N Y •O Y N E p N O @@ .O a Y by D, d °@ C Co U a V C E c O +' p« J Y v O L u N C '^ Q N @ v 'Y C C — d N L H N d@@ d d a Y N@ Y m °c .p a L `° v m c v m c 3 .; :Y E Q u ai m E E 0= d @ J c L N_ J w a O E c N` y E a± i L d O d V Z a a E°> v `v ° a 0 3 fl. =� L a m E v -° v °u c v 'O- E '� Y c W C >> u O N LU L C W= a 3 -�°� Q y v`di "JO y m °° G O L M u .O d° L a Y Y C O C O 3 Q "6 @ d 7 a v li a 3 o o lL d r V N C O �`• d a to O Y o a a N c O 0 3 O N@ O C y~j M 0 @ d U T d 3 v v y O. E CY C C d C L E p Z V V Y d U 3 0 ° 3 o a _ _ o LA "a v o v @ a± o @ O W G W x F 213 Jl 214 G C 5 m m N E Y Y L O N O= L d O E am+ = y U N U L O ° E m£ o a ,o o om`o b o « G N N W CO ~ c ° s ` .4v '—� v a c c °" 3 c '° 3 'c° v c« w a ao 'o 3 0 YO U O C y N v L� 3 � � ? N C in N C a t j• y J N C N U_ Y � w j0 m 'm v o_+• c J a o. v m' o. c N m o cc o F v c Y m 4 C-C v m LO •W m 3 i c N c fN`0 Y t' N X Y H C C t5 c am+ 'O h m c o v c `= E_ _ u u a_ m Y '^ N c° O O. °. N C C m C u ° Q N N +Cm-' 'p > p J 'Na^ N O N 'yam Y Y Y O N L O O C C L C Y m m J U O m mL. m c E° E c '° m c m° 01 ? o Y a w v N c m « 3 c N c o E o mm a T c v m m m '" m u E Lj Y i Y o °o, m v m o` c E m .�- 3 E °' v c am i o a v p. o o v —° v a° C m w v c c +� a v N o Lm w ° a 10 v„ m °u E Fes- 3 u m v m t° . c Z O N CO L O E L y d :C v u C '� C T a '� J m C7 A j m m U` w U' c +' ., V' N> C 0 iJo c E o >> aEi c v '� .v o 'v '� m t u v L .x o '—° m «'. r a v Y o a u �n v m p Q Y �, E F u a L a` — r m v v L a` • • Y v E L+ v y Y N m M1` m ` d 9 i Ul M E ° Y am+ a C > Y > m c m C m O C C u m m m E 3 m, • N °p —c° V1 m c u o. �`' C v u m Y Y a.,, v Y U y c£ c m c p> 3 U v q! a J. t U > m M1. m C o O E O O °- O N w N 2 2 N a 2 H O S C Ul O w N N 3 p N 15, d Y vui w N -Q O ! C O N� J° N C Y W N Q A Y CL y m m W W C C y C a •> a '� N ~ m v w m E= c f 214 G 215 1 C w J a u m 3 v v w c ; C Q. L H m J O L c C U m m O p Y .O w O. L C j N Y N m tp N C = 'O m O. m V m a j j W= h `o ° '3 N a >i L O E J p v -O O N o o o- w Y m N M c m Y ` 3 a m `w vTi 3 _ v o L Q °- u c m +' c 0 o v vYmi J. V O N w u m C Q u m 'O N c 0 3 w Y u >M h m CL .`L, E J C w G J O �+ O W m M w 'n w a u w '^ c m Y Y p m m Y m C 'Y p t' m N e ^: m es..w, m° `° c �L^ m= v w w E w a o c m Y ,, o %n N ;? h0 w C a+ J m C p a J w J w m w Y C E J YO L O C m p 0 E N o « U N C N m a c -a v w u u c c y; c w E a w • c. L u N c 2 E up -p w L J N IY/I N J' o c m a c .. s o Q N 3 w w w E 3 c m p JO �.= 3 w •` w c o a Y E c ,,, m c o O c c °1 w m c W w m N C a >, > w L w 0 N Ou u 0 .9 O W E w w C m C .m a N o C. J d N m O w E m L N' v` d? w C 'N E C w N .N V U Y m L L m 3 L Y 2 Yj L VI m a W 0 m 2 c 2 m o w a m c N u c a 'E w> u E J u c o w .o. `° m r ° '.•> -• c „Yo. v waco oy9 D oc;;o cmww°M w_mw mw Ep> w m y w m- w u o m a o c o "' -° c y w 30 v` a o m w m t p v m N C W d N u 9 W vJi u ' 'u w r u a v C t .° b0 C `1 - m'�O`?wm a J N Y 0Mv •N C u :pEaL y a X Nl7ybU ` N aj C Ul m O N `O m S m c o v m v w o o v a ' c « m o 3 M Yo a m a .+ c o a -o m •p v L w �' p v v L '^ w o f m a= E c 3 y 0 o m m m°` p J 3« 0 o V N N m w L O U N m Y 0 j w e t V N N C' m W w m N E w w U p 'p E 2 m c 3 w u .. C N `p .w, c w O w c Y m m O T Y L '^ m w U V c a 0 u w m a k c c m a H c y v m c w 3 o w N m w " 3 v -o N v u p L\ w .p c N ,� J� O 6 a °- O. N O' m m 3 L c -o \ N m '-^ IN`0 C vmi � m ,4 'O m` c E 'p Q ,Lw, C w W w 'O 0 w N w ,nw w J a N L m m O (� L m Y C N m O C w X J L u O m rap C O m£ w 2 t w o O F 3 a a a u o a w W F m u 3 u. N l7 a> c7 I- Y .n o w u O C Y m w m L L Y U 2 Y 3 M1 Z o 'yj O N W c c O u W w a m u u w s E a u O Z c O c O u w u w w N O w C 7 = w 0 O O a > H w c W W x f 215 1 216 E. w O •L C N T (C O N Ul (6 jIl V C U •o m c m m N C C m C 'O `« E +°_' c m v 3 0 L .y > a E -m°C w o v w _ O O Ny K. - m J u ] U E Om O m 0 O 'w w O C O + L C C w a c Y w C O 0 m C w O o o U a 7 C m C > ° 0 w 0 CL 0 0 m N C O 0 L 00 u 0 O w O C E J c L L Y m E w o ° =0 Vcy v0m'c aaa °per �c wwcmo'.> -.cEa m0 :P u w a o w e awi w" m w m w 0 N .. u 0 m« J E +L' 0 O c C c m �' O E L w w T Y C w w m N m C c w 0` J {.l w N C O u w -O M •y m N w >' L m ^ o C j s L, .N •> N j w w m U ' N m C n d c c c= m v v m m w ,� O` o .o v m N O p_ .� U W -O a o. •-� T C 3 N C m C a m m =' w m aL+ C —M 0 E m J L y S YJ m aL+ '^ L a w L O m d L M v G m m C c _« a « c J m m o 'N^ c o w w m '^ 3 v« a o. c_ a v U C -w° 0 y w v 0 m .Y J U C N w O u w Y w N w M `u a `m a 'c " d E � v m$ w`u w v o CL m v w a a w « E ` m N U w N N N Y C J CO C N O w O (g £ C y0. w y C N m 0 w 0 w m L m° m c w u w m '° m 0 '-^ v m N c o- m u c E o V c v w w v y w 3 0 0 3 M N « c m w c E c .0 v m a o «° c v o? c o m ,� w Ow Y O E Q m` .Y �f Y w U > s c c- -O v Loo o -c ry c 3` m 5 o. s m c s .w.. m v> O w J m M •O m> L .O O W c � eD a a O 3 m Y `p L o Y a O > > w„ L E n, 'N o o �; v v o a` N = a c� L o o w m n ° L° y u „ m m Z C Lm E c m 0 ° m M U U N c m 5 p :p 3 ` a y c m o o ° c E �_ t p c o 10 c m m o m N J u o m m o n a E r m W. v" E o O F Y m U 0 E w 'O fD U Y L Q Q m a a C a a m N N O... O m N >i V w N L w >_ m o — w > Y 0 47 cM � N N Z c O c m a; m O u M O E a N C m E O Q' L w0 O m Y 0 O_ c L S +• m a C 3 O L w yVj O 2 N a D U — C N m m O T L " N v w t m W a J c E F .Y % E E F LL 216 E. 217 m Y m C Y E$ a m E CL a E m o v m v �L. c v c ° ° w m w w m O C N m a yz C H a OD C y a L G d m a q U L O C a O m .3 m w a 00 v m m a v m v a o v a v m c a c v t a v w a a a 9 E m s E J o N v N ^N > .°. mw m= m ° °u E m 0 v aI m L N O O E C Oao m` Y T N C` `° `^ a° y w m 1° '0 L° J w E c c w —° v v c o a o c '—° " m o °> .4 v E m Y E m u Lv o m .°� to io c u 5 axi m °° ;; '� c c `° E Z~ o a a S .Q y c c c m y 3 Ec m d v w> v V o Y :ao a y 0 X C df w c N 'o Q O t O m m v 1!1 y Y C c u° f0 m L +Y a ,Y L L c v m a m L E p a— c ;: a c v c >° a w 0 a ?i m N y N C m °' u w N m am`+ p a m c a v yLa, m m v z ^ n_ v m s^ >_ m° m m y° o Y° �' o c w a c a v> •� a m Em w v v .`-' c m •a m o E w = c°> ° c` N Q °y O C w C m L i o t t> 9 V C 3 C a L C m p 0 m 3 o- p. a y w H o• c a a a N E C` O a O y C Y Q w "6 W Y O a G d ±' o N m 0 C ° '^ v m y o m a a d ?i o. a L u 6 •a° J m m .N 3 V m a p L m L o E L C O E a a N m m Z F> Y F a b u1 O a E d Z N a d d V N N C l v L p V J C o p a a N E m a 3 m o m o O a J u -p C aa.• in � L d m w co v J a a� a L N O C m Y G a Y a y K N m Y O a a J W W F 217 m 218 N N w YO 0— C m E M Y.S E m m s w m c .p o c v a o o L CL O i N m m w m w C N C m C v w o M m U Y a N n« o v v v 3 ba m > c E y° m I m w v v g v o c O O N N 3` w L m }' w C O J F w CL w w .V m m �F •C ° m 'pp w N C C N C C o uNf Ul u C L C w N m m°« W J w a E o v C m a - a ,a .0 ° o m g C O V u C C �� m C • Y y y J "O C C •O L w w m p` O L m N m •no ico v s m m 3° 'L' c c y v .Ym 3 '^ Sao= Eacwv mE� - vo tlw°�mmc w 3 C Y IN6 N N a sm+ v IYnm m N w m C m N L m `m a a v v m w E° L= v o d c 3 a o °-' v c an .s. m m m o O v m o J m L O v u m m 'a °? .- �. by — a 'm o c +� « s w w N p u w m m m w ° u v a u o m u m C �; m m u w y m E W i Y m O C 'O �' v m -_ C d.a m Y" 2 o u m 3> w m L C O y a 3 N oc N w >' o v = > u c E J u G Y0 C CL b 25 0mms l7Nws =w,pE Ica 1O a O w amv C a 0 0 0 O o `w °° C Y c v w v C o m `o b0 c o a 3? o a a Y N N .�, OF Y« m« E« F .rte' i7 V a Vp. O W m N V VI Y m v ° a m w 3 ? u t u N c `w o E u m y v p ` Q v + :' 0 v io `m m w ° o a c a a m m c .� J w v v a c c m m J -� c u p c N y m v w m N Y Y m O C s c n o O w _w p. a. w u J a m W w m m O. « 'O "' y �. m C O J « M ON v O L2 r.. vmi « YO n. J Z c w Y v u o m e 'Y-, E r. °3 v ou iA 3 v a w u E « 3 a m .°; y a E 3 = m 3 o w c° E .c 3 c _ wv `o o u x° -p m -° v v= m E N 3 '� c _° w m w x w E .m`, E .x °u ;_ a a= v= v 5 m° a� °u r o m w a« E w« `u c> a-p v c m a a N w u u Y M N N « 'w 0 o W c Y o w = 3 m W W j m c J v Y W ~ L E v C i O m m F u 218 219 :i 0 _C (D C W N ~ "J6 C R C` m N p a j J v '^ C w a E v 3 C m N O° 'O N d R m "O '6 "O "O O L C L pwj d L ° r C 'c N °' 6 a a C w .p c— C w o m Z c -O s c 2 E a o c m a— m o o '—° u ° a ,U^ "O i O m w w v a ++ Y 4 w w N L ymi C C 4- U L CL w L M a 0. J yUj L Y N w U N- o Y C> T« Y pip C N w w N — A W p w O 0 C N _O m m E C_ N m y Y y « U y Y i0m w +' N w •� C L a+ m 0 d w v C a d N C a 'iJJ "O a N w w v W O °' J w C w« w m a d D m Y 3 Z c N m N N p w d w a+ C ++ m C -O ?� E> 4z #+ w Q w w -o v m E m o c c" v o Y °u `w a c °' w m w o w C m w a >° C w m t « 0 a w a d °° w E a m l7 O U _^ E m O L 6 u a J a w N N fN0 C a 0 E a +Y+ G E 3 d 1 O p > m y U o °o a m v 3 O E o L m E w w m Y C C w C J w v J N w in m O O N. Y C y a C m N Y N w L C aN+ L °o `o O `° " u °° c s `w ° c 3� J en i o v, o c yw-, 'c o LL w C v E m a L E R '^ m° Y> w, O s> a —° w c v m w C W O Y O VNI U J Q m 0 W 3 tF m U Q N J yVo a y L Y° m° (J Q C m C o E c E L'i > E a c (7 c c u c a c o aLw, « 4 a„ ._ g o o _O E L N Y w O m '—^ aL+ u u "O a YO m °' N U m a Y u o u w O Y }' ° C L Y w a' L 'O C p m m` � C w J O a w w O .o N° p �Y�° m c> t v� .�^ « o me E N .� a "O v v E c °1 a m `-'a =o vv'c°mmoccv° �oym „wmddoa a aw g 3 v I m m o v .fl- u m a °. s w o m °' a ai o o A eca a « m. E v vL. x a E c c Nv w m+ m> « u c a Y E= o Y a o 0 N 0 ;� o u a' °- Y m 10 m C m -o C J N O w xJv ' am U V > °o E uoLYV��m c ova m E o s vJNv O3 v O —M L_p m C m Z p a m O d .v U w . .�0 U ' N L N J �• Y C m 3 K O a m m ''�� u L v Q m w ym £ G C L' 76 E o 3 u v a ' c« ._ E o c w C C a v J 0 tlC a N O c u 9 > w Y w v E o w ` N a E O m p v o d a ` v p m •J E C N N l m J= w p m 7 C '� m m j m Y yj w -p d p a Q C” > o w a 0 0 p w O C O N G u E v m 0 _F- 0 w `o N « E 0 a w a c a m 6 Y m > C m m C m O w t N N °u O L C C m O L C OD C C m> F h m a c a c u w CY y m e N m Z mu m in u u 3 j a m 0 2 .0 u 0 = O E E w m V o m E J N_ u v v� D u ..- w E s o x vi v1 � w ui v u w u m m N N C "O C S = Y F 219 :i 220 ° E � w a w C v 0 N C a m p c c « m c u v a > >, o i+ p ry G v C u C U C £ 3 wc . O O w p w •0 N y a+ J '- Q E o u U E v m v E N m Q mu o 3 v w ' s u v o o u w m« vLYn v c J c vi o .°-.° rCO C u v o c EE p w L u w o v 6 Op N C C C C a w w > m E J > v L O Y m Y O N m ,p C m O E Y m a p C C c w E c c a £_ a E u Y O C G! O N w > J E q Yn C -°p m J a• O u O u m E w m> a C J Q T C j. N m N L N w1 L w o Y Y c w a 0 v E a E Q m v Y m a J v m 0 w v E E u E •°p o° �', E w o E m O J `1 E w m L w ° O. 0C—o ° N 0 9 w N O w= a v Y L o m 0 0 m C C `o w m> o m °1 m° E " o c m J .O C p c a U J m O a m c m a a a +°' L N w C o Ae 'm v s E m m °> a v EQ m-p E N m m C .p w N w p .O N N N w Ul y VLF, C T C Q N 3 L J o .o E C N N m E N U w m m y N N "Q E m L N J Q y L E N c w c 3 .. c w o c '�, v E a o f o• = ° w a mO a 'u w a w° v N c Q v 'w a E c ,°, bB N o• > « m@ « w N 0 « w a v m w c Q w w t o u a a w° v m E `m a z —` w o o a o m P o —O c c W ° l7 d w l7 m '^ c > o m '° m a .°_' w w o 0 v q c y° w> m a E= o °- v > u u c m m E m 'o 'o• w ,> p r v a o v o `w E o E 2 °u o u° v°1 a c v a c p o C p N Ou w O C w r a a c v J m 7 U u N T N m Z v° w m c O v Q= j m o M1. V u v .O u v m m o v w w u a `m `m W G W x r 220 221 6 T 0 T V J mac m o o a Y E ++ N K N �0 O a. - 7 N C O J O m> y O p N C v 'O O C _6 aL+ w J H N N X 0 0 01 O ._ Y w` N C N O c c° O p u C N M E d w J C O m Mm N Ol Y aLO+ -p y N E m? u t! y m ° m ami v s '3 p E o U L U, L 0 f0 Y O a 'j N C Ol N L° o> Y `m IY/1 v `" J ° m N> a o$ E t0 10 m :. �' a v m w Z v m o U! °'a o u c .°.v o y E v m e 'v' o v « y°- m c w Y m o= u w ' ° c v w a �' °1 v 3 v° v� o- v ,6 O ,0 L O C i m= v L o v m am+ E m C d O v H Y C `° L '" .] L D °'cm o >3� = "-O ?m aLmcm ws 10 maw .v.om� m m N N m W Y 3: > 'N ° O Y M 41 U m U U CJ m E -m - O C N C J "° E_ w o a N U m C y, = J m am+ '� l7 = J° J Y C N W m O y 'EO 0 0 0 v y N 'O N 4 N .d a N Y t U ry 0 O! N T E O u' A Y C Y N° -ap C a m w N o o C O ''^ N c N J J a u J y E Y L "O m '� p a e 0 °` v .� m ,� c v m c C N o E c N N v l7 a w 0> a w u C Y U m Y O a LL Y C N C C J_ U '° Y J Ol N h9 C 0 `� 0 U N U m Ol O m L N V1 W N O p v O O W "O N `. a 0 c V "6 I- L m aO c v a m w a 'v m m w Y v o- m° m w ,' o 3 m o E v -6 m _ v °c v v c c c v m aL m '� a y `m U O v> o` N w LL J c m v m= 0 u > '� u E N 'p > u_ a ° v v ;� a m 0 '= O c r �' L^ u N a Y y L v>i L v u a E v 5° ° m m v o o c a v o o m c o° o m 3 L N? a n N o E m a J `w o O C K d '� U L "O O. F C K .-1 ~ �'' '�' O ♦+ F- O >i m E t t m W� Ol H O _> d y L 0 0= u V 0 \ m u L v V E m N L> Y L O] Ul d a c M r m `�_ Y \O m E C d° K O C C C C E K H m m 3 N ym,, 10 'm0 M a c m p u u C 6 L O .'. �, O O O d N !_' O> u J tV c K a I� N m m M a M� `. M m M � O M N L= "° N Y l0 W m O 2 aL+ p y Q 2 ,C u� .°O wLY- a N ~ m m c 0 0 m G -a O N O N o o v .O C° O in Z s x v v > y J v a ° N C v W m Y N Y> Y J Y V Y m a Y o m m Y ce y c a ,J�, w w v > f0 0° Z aui r> w o a v a E w a i a m 3 c w w c t m U H N N N: w u a N N N 1A a N Z m N W r N of m w a a.9 _ N o m Y p F a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V v L O c O y m h � z E r m f W E v C v O a O w E H U m s H 0 = C m c o m o c m a w o w v = ° v v w E m 9 221 222 > O t0 m N N N C O N O W O L E N N YU a Y C w 0 O L W 3 L N> N L C O C o a c N _ v u C u "6 c N_ C I- m U C m r a O C c m j m O a o o a 3 w °' a c v 6 v m u m O 0 Y t o c ' °> v sY c ov Y u c ecN u V U d a N 3 I O � Y 0 O T O W �w W m p X N O N O O W Y W C O l y w -O V C C °1 L Y O E E O C O J '2- C 0 O = w f O d C O W O m W p E O O r O i C w ! O = m > 'O E L s> Y v E c E «' J `° m a; ;= Y v °o v o o c a` a a m N o d 0 c u j d a ° c E m oo 9 a o o a 0 m -0 75 W w O w W v UU u !^ W N U c m w v t 'i��+ O O O 'C d c m y ° cm7 N o a ° a a z = o a y d w m> m y > N> w ';n m C « u= j 0 v p m j u Y Q L u O .0 m m q > m --- N¢ .L, 'Q .. o s R v a a E '3 o W a o :°, m o- v u 3 y vi CL a .W. ,LV, w o w m m C°o7 a v O a o °1 > v w Y O C D 'a a+ F vTi N �. N O YO w O w 0 v c c$ E ti ',Y-. w m a o a o w c c a m 0 °u m .E LW, a -o 0 �� c c J 3 ° °1 a v c v a s z L o. 'a N m y° ° W `m C c J G r m m Y a `m u o c c a v Fes.. 3 t w d c m ,aT+ w E W .L, o l7 0 v w o m o w 'O w 0 c E o E L u m L T �. m E L. m w o- F a r m a 3 `N° a Y° w o w s o c« 0 F£ w o o w U m F c w 0 v z z O W 7 CYv, z O V1 N 7 V v. O W W x f 222 223 M N d L G O O O m 2« E u v a L c a 0 c y => v u m cv v v a v m CL v N rca t o m w s E ;� c- v > N O IC CO •E N N O ° N Gl N L N b7 0 0 O O c N O m m Q D O O O ° Q � E __ �' m -° a ,� m c v v o„ v «. - v C N C > Ol Ul = l E Y « M vl .. °a '� a t o 0 w c s m ° ° vi a 3 m m !� c a, r u c E r w v (c > c v o m E m E O W C L fl. a. E Y a N +' N YO c O m OD > N N p C N y v ° ad+ v N W C N N y N L C V 0 M v 0 L N u 3cy0 w >`oov 3mv >y v -Op -a0 >'- w' >vmv v -O C L O v a0.. 'N^ N u C T w O. \ L m V "O O tNa m ° v o E 5 m°> c a 0 ° u u v Y o a « ;� c c v° °° O v v v aci ,. E N >, v o. v 'o G m 0 :N u O N v C C O o o > 0 -O ° >, U W 0 C v t 0 `M C w IO C ry L U I- Z3 UFO T m O L Y a L a° E a N O M m u >> o v Y a 0 m W W N ;° '- d > E >'!� c �' v y C m o v c ry m 2 m r cn v v v a m m O ,� o c v m s °- u v c E \ `u w m o v o a m o m d `o c `0 E 3 E .� w> .L. ,co c v CL a N E v Y ° �'O O O.� >'� v v m s> s "v, w u o o .y a '3 w v m E w c L v v o w w v E '^ a E =.I- .°. c a °u .°, s o 0 '- c, v v o L o v v c o m w ,•N_•` v p Ul 5 0 Y C N t U C y hC0 �� = W b09 "O u L> v N T c o° v o Y° m u° a' u£ �' v v a m v u 0-@ m W— m y> 0 u Q Oq O u N G V V >. _ 0 t W O O. « O aU+ (O C m N N O 0 tlp m m C Y« C h C L, O C N M >i N` C U! O` N` w v L L C N W O O. O O N N> •}>-' C v u G C c N W O '� N N O. v N .5 O 5 C 00 3 G E 0 °• t a a '� v Yi CO u O �O'' > 0 m W O 0 C N a N C > C °` O O d O .> L C O >i Q 'O a L l7 2' £ '.. d' C W Y a a H c C Cp L w W Gl O L .�F-. d U U L M 1p F o Y Y a f N O m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v w z O W 7 CYh Z 0 H N 7 V H O W W x f 223 M N 224 N w C c v N a o E a E °' Z nL. m w >L. x c R O 3 °- M °1 a � � w� 0• L m m o U a+ .'^ C O. = C E O O O °u w._. m E a a ° a w° �°- c aC v 0° '6 w a W N C W O O E C N 4 N W 3 o c> N' N m ti C W Y �+ `o a. m N c as u oo m c Q N m a n c c a u a E 's'' ` o A C N N u N L a m a+ _ L >j '!' Y C W W M N O �� u a C N tl0 = m y N W Y W •p E v° C i o.°.= E °C m ' ° = L N O` O O D O d J W O. !N = Q d N L m > E Y a C •W . L W n a> + 9 7 p 3° ° 3 L `~° Y c m `� °+' m° v s c7 '°" a> m Y = a u '°'' m m O L G d O W N a E L m O Z W aR+ " m r "O p N U T u d 0 L 3 a L 3 c u o -p '^ v L c u a c iii c — m 'a z a a c rO- O Y L O N V 'u a W N V« S O N N a O p 0 p^ 'a _ a0 c 317 L> L C +°+ C Y a w K a` > w} No a v y^ m `° °- o �i a ° W o a N a ° s W .. 3 a f0 E a .d. c N N w '^ N d °N' ° °- c ',� v m W o M W W N o _ o° m a m >, L= L w¢ w« L a a v c 3 L `o Y-. c m " va a C p w N c. m u w Z v u c o o a v M Y v a> s« m 0 M O O O bD p .0 ,�,, C u y E N p q N Q« d t' 0 d i N c d O C. w j `y c N N w C Y^ C C. L ': > w E a '' E U '- :. L c °w a E a c w a Z ? T w o. L E° c C 0 a E f0 H C> a W� E u u m C M -a 0 p L O m `! W M i 9 m uWi i h N m C `u O W E E "6 U CL Q "6 O W m m 3 N W« W> C W W C 0 7 O T d O. W L vOi C W L C O O L L O F O Q` N E d 'H N v V W d C u u O u L ul 0 W F W F N 3: F N u • • . . • • . L Y _ 0 m > a o v a Q m W Z O 0 f o c L v a C W p C O Z O N N W U W O W N W .0 O W W x f 224 N 225 o y o c o> o � N .4 y _o o 0 -o o_ •W Q W y m C _ C c Y W J WI ._ 10 C Y N 0 O V U N O 0 d 9 0 W E .p W W yOj .� a J a m z c 'N-' t m 0 a+ W O- N 'O W a a a W C W `a C W m m c -WNp Y �Wn C w m y v° o w w o o J c a c v a '6 E C d m p c m m ._ E w.- E N 'O a L u vi E m c c W c C E O C O N m W N W Z W m u\ p J E E L o c m i v£ 01 io Y m m c c w E 10 3 v s W W p A p m ,c ~ J E Y« 'N .°. A m m O to m a 00 E m C m 3 O C C a N 9 C 0 O W)> C m c — N L N Ol m 3 3 E c OQ a = Q w C x c W V°- w a m u Y m i •� Y m '� w L W y W W N W C C m O c C W m t m 'O J E a c E 0 u 0 3 y > N> C g X C O O' W w L z U? O O= w m O Y E W 0 C m W W W N m v 'WO N 9 W m E E �" W W C = N a p W m E N a A �" `1 a W o N J a v c v o o v !• c m° J D m M W W Y✓ Y N `I N W O l7 O O W O C N L m E- O Y C N L W m C -p m m> U C C W E 9 WI Q WI W y C W m u N p [0 W Z N _O L N IO h W y W J a N N Y« C Ol N y IO m O O Y m W `n c n r3 W o c m m 3 m I a m a c J o W O c 'c m y 0 o m E o= O ;°. '� N m J x c J m -° 0 $ 5 o E° E a W y °� 'in L O N W la- N W O m c m T m N m .o m y ',�, i m 'c. (D `m J m c w w« W v m m u •c N m O� m °c°� w .0 ? Y Y_ y Z r J pWp C m N 0 -pp u (7 W a 0 c v c u o .N W m W ~^ E° ao $ m a c r u v w v z W J Y .• E eW`n ° pu lm7 'O u t m w` in w C m O C L �, c W c m 3 p a vI m> (J W W « O 'Y O L 0 .O J S 'u i '�' u O ,aT+ E E a y > d 10 6 O c 'L L m 9 3 m C W C N v C N Y N VI W u N W@ °—' N E W~ L C N W ry W W« E m a_ W tJ C O L �-' c E �, v a— >. 10 "c E m '� c E_ o r- m E Y W a WG L c O O W W J C 'a W E o c a L 0,2 M E U Y E 0 —° > m C W O O •� E W c j v a C Q O O Q W - o > 'a L W a i J a p w O c 2 C l7 N L J W O c m u L 'O O W m W 0 3 E W -p E O o m F �n W F N V W m m F w N a U 9 F N WI -- 0 > ^ O > o m m N v "O a aW+ Y rv• W w E r. 'c o G— d W O m m W J v c« a v_ E 0 c W O w a v E p u c m E `W a W E W w E N V U O o m Z O l Y O W N L N C O c a v w O m 7 3 s :3 c v mi a Y N O « U N v N d W b L l0 d W W x f 225 RES. #A100115 - BILL 73: SMART GROWTH FOR OUR COMMUNITIES ACT TRCA's comments on Bill 73, the Smart Growth for Our Communities Act - an Act to amend the Planning Act and the Development Charges Act. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Linda Pabst WHEREAS the Province of Ontario's Bill 73 proposes amendments to the Planning Act and the Development Charges Act and has invited the public to provide comments on the proposed legislation; AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has mandated roles and responsibilities in the land use planning and development process that are affected by these two pieces of legislation; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA's formal responses to the Province on June 3, 2015 in Attachments 1 and 2 be received; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA's municipal partners and Conservation Ontario be so advised by the CEO's office. CARRIED BACKGROUND In fall 2013, the provincial government undertook a review of the land use planning and appeal system and the Development Charges Act, 1997, to determine if the planning system and the Development Charges Act continue to be responsive to the changing needs of Ontario's communities. On January 10, 2014, TRCA provided comments to the Province in response to this consultation. The Province considered the comments it received from all stakeholders during this process, and based on these comments, it drafted Bill 73, the Smart Growth for Our Communities Act. Bill 73 proposes amendments to both the Planning Act and the Development Charges Act, 1997. As of the date of this staff report, Bill 73 was in second reading debate. Concurrently with the parliamentary debate process, the Province has solicited feedback from the public on Bill 73's proposed amendments through the EBR (Environmental Bill of Rights). In response, TRCA submitted two formal responses to the Province of Ontario on Bill 73. One response was focused on Bill 73's proposed amendments to the Planning Act and the other on the Bill's proposed amendments to the Development Charges Act. This correspondence is contained in Attachments 1 and 2, however, the key recommendations are summarized below. In preparing these submissions, TRCA policy planning staff consulted internally with senior planning, ecology and engineering staff to formulate strategic positioning and recommendations. Due to the complex and contentious nature of some of the matters being considered, the provincial government also announced that it will be establishing two stakeholder working groups: one on the Development Charges Act and one on the Planning Act. These working groups will be established to support the proposed regulatory amendments, review substantive issues that were not addressed, and provide the government with options and recommendations for future regulatory amendments. A TRCA staff member (Mark Rapus, Senior Planner) has been invited to sit as Conservation Ontario's representative on the Planning Act working group to provide the conservation authority perspective related to the Planning Act. One of the main issues under discussion at this group will be providing recommendations to clarify the definition of a Minor Variance. 226 As another response to comments received during the 2013 -14 consultations, the government has announced that it intends to undertake a review of the scope and effectiveness of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). A time frame for this review has not yet been confirmed. However, it is expected that TRCA's recommendations on Bill 73 that relate to the Planning Act and suggested improvements to OMB processes will also be used to inform TRCA's input on the upcoming OMB review. Summary of Key Issues Identified by TRCA TRCA provided the following key recommendations related to the Planning Act: • That an additional amendment to the Planning Act be made to require that conservation authorities (CAs) are circulated on notices of appeal and mediation to the OMB that affect their areas of interest, and to require CAs to be consulted during the municipal pre - consultation process in order to ensure that the required technical work is complete before an appeal is made. • That whenever new technical work in support of an application is introduced during an OMB hearing, the hearing be suspended and the application continue to be processed to decision in the municipal planning realm for a set period of time. • That a further amendment be made to the Planning Act to introduce a preliminary timeline for resolution of OMB appeals by mediation. That the amendments to the Planning Act be expanded so that appeals in Special Policy Areas (SPA) (where a comprehensive review of the SPA has been undertaken and received ministerial approval) be added to the list of specified provincial matters on which appeals are to be disallowed. • That the Planning Act be more clear on how coordination is to occur on appeals that involve matters of provincial interest that are addressed through other legislation or provincial policy. • That the proposed amendments to the Planning Act be further strengthened so that appellants that intend to argue that appealed decisions are inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, Provincial Plans or upper -tier official plans, are required to complete a more comprehensive "conformity report". That the Planning Act be further amended to explicitly name CAs as agencies to be consulted in developing parks plans where applicable (i.e. if parks include CA regulated areas). In addition, the Planning Act should be amended to clarify that parkland dedication lands should not include hazard lands, (these lands cannot serve an active recreation function), and where possible, parks should be designed to ensure the natural heritage system is enhanced for its long term viability. TRCA provided the following key recommendations related to the Development Charges Act: In light of the amount of growth and intensification in Ontario and the associated challenges this brings in providing public services, TRCA encourages the Province to broaden the scope of eligible services under the Development Charges Act, as well as the associated regulatory framework. This is to ensure that this process continues to operate effectively based on the principle that growth should pay for growth. 227 A sustainable funding model is needed to support the maintenance, renewal and improvement of green infrastructure and other flood mitigation measures. Development charges should be considered as part of a suite of funding options to incent developers and municipalities to embrace these measures. The need for municipalities to use development charges to fund these types of projects should be further encouraged by the Province given that CA services are essential to the growth management objectives of municipalities planning for complete communities. • Given conservation authorities' important roles in activities and processes that are impacted by development charges, TRCA also recommends that at least one representative from a conservation authority CA be invited to participate in the government working group. The full text of TRCA's correspondence to the Province on Bill 73 is contained in Attachments 1 and 2. Next Steps Once Bill 73 the Smart Growth for Our Communities Act, 2015 has passed Second Reading debate, it will proceed to Review by Committee. At this point, further amendments will be considered and these amendments can be made to the Bill. The comments that the Province received in response to its recent posting of the Bill for public comment will be considered and further public hearings may also be held. The Bill will then proceed to Third Reading where it will be voted on for final approval. Once the final Bill comes into force, it will amend the Planning Act and the Development Charges Act. Additional changes to associated regulations may also be forthcoming. Report prepared by: Samantha Dupre and Mary -Ann Burns For Information contact: Mary-Ann Burns, extension 5763; Samantha Dupre, extension 5723 Emails: mburns @trca.on.ca, sdupre @trca.on.ca Date: June 09, 2015 Attachments: 2 228 Attachment 1 June 3, 2015 By Email Only - PlanningConsultation @ontario.ca ke n. petersen@onta rio.ca Ken Petersen, Manager Provincial Planning Policy Branch Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 777 Bay Street, 13th floor Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2E5 Dear Mr. Petersen: �tToronto and Region Conservation for The Living City- Re: TRCA Comments in Response to Bill 73- Smart Growth for Our Communities Act, 2015 (Amendments to the Planning Act) EBR #012 -3651 Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed amendments to the Planning Act as part of Bill 73. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has a keen interest in these amendments given our role as a public commenting body under the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act, as a body with delegated authority in plan review to represent the provincial interest for natural hazards, and a resource management agency operating on a local watershed basis. TRCA is also one of the largest landowners in Southern Ontario, with close to 18 000 acres of land and 700 km of trails. As a conservation authority (CA), TRCA also administers a regulation affecting land use and development within the regulated areas of our jurisdiction. TRCA's watersheds encompass the highest population and the most heavily urbanized lands in the Province of Ontario. The city- region is continuing to grow and intensify through both greenfield development and redevelopment occurring within the 18 municipalities to which TRCA provides its expertise. TRCA's jurisdiction also falls within the Provincial plan areas of the Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine, Niagara Escarpment and Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. While these plans are implemented through Planning Act applications with municipalities as approval authorities (and the Niagara Escarpment Commission), municipalities often depend on TRCA planners' and technical staffs advice in the interpretation of the Plans and their technical guides. Further, the requirement for municipal official plan and zoning by -law conformity with the Provincial Plans, has meant that the municipalities in TRCA's jurisdiction have undergone recent reviews and conformity exercises. Municipalities consult with TRCA during these official plan review processes and zoning review processes. Much of the major redevelopment being planned for in TRCA's watersheds is in urban growth centres, of which many are traversed by valleylands and other natural features, or are located within Special Policy Areas (SPAs) or Flood Vulnerable Areas (FVAs). Balancing the need for growth and intensification and the protection of natural systems is a significant challenge in the development review process. Consequently, there is a high volume of Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) appeals related to the natural environment and natural hazards for which our municipal partners largely rely on us to resolve with proponents. TRCA appreciates the opportunity to bring issues that affect our interests to the OMB when needed. However, we have found that there are inefficiencies in the current process which frequently result in board hearings that occupy a disproportionate amount of TRCA senior staff time. TRCA understands that the government intends to undertake a review of the scope and effectiveness of the OMB in the near future and looks forward to participating in this process. Tel. 416.661.6600, 1.888.872.2344 1 Fax. 416.665.6898 1 55horeham give, D ©wn,,ww, ON M3N 154 229 In the interim, TRCA would like to express support for the proposed amendments to the Planning Act that aim to address some of the concerns that we raised as part of the 2014 Land Use Planning consultation process. The following recommendations are offered to suggest additional opportunities to enhance the Planning Act to address specific issues through Bill 73. 1. Enhancing the Role of Third Party Comment and Technical Review for OMB Appeals TRCA is pleased to see that Bill 73 recognizes that successful land use planning in Ontario depends on collaboration with partner agencies and stakeholders and a transparent planning process. The Bill contains several provisions aimed at enhancing opportunities and roles for persons or bodies commenting on planning matters to an approval authority. However, there are several other areas where the role of public bodies could be further enhanced. These include requiring that CAs are circulated on notices of appeal and mediation, and requiring CAs to be consulted during the municipal pre - consultation process in order to ensure that the required technical work is complete before an appeal is made. 1.1. Notices of Appeal In current practice, TRCA is often left out of circulations of notices of appeal to the OMB that are circulated by the municipality. In these cases, TRCA is pulled into an OMB hearing process with very little time to adequately prepare. This does not serve the public interest. Therefore, the Planning Act should be further amended to ensure that all prescribed agencies (including CAs) should be copied on all notices of appeal that affect their areas of interest. In addition, if the parties decide to take advantage of Bill 73's newly proposed alternative dispute resolution provision, all prescribed agencies (including CAs) should receive notice that this process is taking place so that they can participate, as required. Further, the Planning Act should also be amended to require appellants to provide a more detailed description and justification for their appeal, so that external agencies and the public can better understand whether their interests are likely to be effected prior to the hearing. This would have the effect of enhancing the efficiency of the process so that agencies such as CAs would be able to scope their involvement to the appropriate appeals. 1.2 Pre - consultation TRCA is supportive of the proposed amendments to the Planning Act that will require descriptions of the measures and procedures for informing and obtaining the views of the public (subsections 16 (1) and (2)) in Official Plans. However, TRCA suggests that this section should be further modified to include a requirement to describe the measures and procedures for obtaining input from prescribed bodies (which should include CAs). The rationale for this change is that TRCA is not always advised of municipal pre - consultation meetings, nor do we always have input into the determination by the municipality that an application is complete. While municipalities may have language in their OPs or zoning by -laws that suggest that other agencies may be consulted, this is generally not considered to be binding and therefore it often does not happen. TRCA is then forced into a hearing without the ability to require that technical studies be completed and reviewed prior to the hearing proceeding. TRCA therefore recommends an additional amendment to the Planning Act to require municipalities to include requirements in their OPs or Zoning by -laws to modify pre - consultation and complete application requirements to include participation by all prescribed agencies prior to an application being signed off as complete by the municipality and appeal can be made. This change would strengthen the protection of provincial interests in natural hazards and natural heritage and would streamline the planning process by preventing appeals to the OMB for reasons of non - decision in cases where technical studies are lacking. 230 If such a change is not made, TRCA suggests that Bill 73's proposed amendment to the Planning Act that will allow for a temporary extension (90 days) of the 180 day timeline for appeal to the OMB for reasons of non - decision, be revised to extend this timeline beyond 90 days. This would allow for the resolution of this technical review issue during the extension period. While the proposed 90 -day extension is welcomed by TRCA, there is concern that if an additional mechanism is not introduced into the Planning Act that would require CAs to be consulted on complete applications, technical work will continue to be incomplete when an application is accepted, and therefore this additional 90 day timeline will be insufficient for the completion of this work. 2. New Technical Information Introduced During Hearings Another issue that TRCA has faced related to its role in the Planning process is that new technical information is introduced during the OMB hearing process. This occurs in cases where an appeal is occurring due to the failure of a municipality to make a decision within the 180 -day timeframe. It is our understanding that this scenario occurs because the existing Planning Act subsections that deal with new technical information being introduced in a hearing (17(44.3) and (44.4); 34(24.4) and (24.5); 51(52.4) and (52.5)) do not apply to this scenario where appeals are occurring for reasons of non - decision. This can result in plan review for major development being done at the OMB within unrealistic timelines, rather than through the municipal planning process. It can also lead to decisions being made without local input and in absence of thoughtful analysis of technical studies submitted. Regardless of the reason for holding a hearing, whenever new technical work in support of an application is introduced during a hearing, the hearing should be suspended and the application should continue to be processed to decision in the municipal planning realm for a set period of time. This would encourage more up -front planning, strengthen local level tools and decision making, and strengthen the protection of provincial interests. TRCA therefore recommends that additional amendments be made to the Planning Act to address this issue specifically for appeals that occur because of the failure of a municipality to make a decision within the 180 day timeframe. 3. Alternative Dispute Resolution The proposed amendments to the Planning Act will allow the process for a hearing to be delayed for 60 days for certain appeals to facilitate the use of mediation, conciliation and other dispute resolution techniques. Based on our prior experience in OMB mediation, TRCA suggests that this timeline be lengthened to at least 90 days. Promotion of dispute resolution is welcomed in order to avoid costly and unpredictable OMB proceedings. However, in TRCA's experience participating in OMB mediation on numerous appeals, mediation requires a defined end point to facilitate arriving at a solution in a timely and cost effective manner. While TRCA is generally supportive of the proposed amendments to allow for the use of dispute resolution techniques in certain appeals, it is unclear when this process would end and what the outcome would be (i.e. would it proceed to an OMB hearing or would mediation continue indefinitely ?). It is recommended that a further amendment be made to introduce a preliminary timeline for resolution by mediation. This timeline could then be extended as needed based on mutual agreement of the parties to ensure that progress is made in the mediation process. 4. Strengthening Decision Making to Protect Provincial Interests TRCA is highly supportive of the proposed amendments to the Act to disallow appeals of official plans in connection with the specified (provincial) matters (i.e. Provincial Plan areas) and to disallow global appeals of OPs. These amendments should serve to strengthen the protection of provincial interests in the land use planning process. However, TRCA is of the opinion that these amendments need to be strengthened even further as they relate to the issues outlined below. 231 4.1 Special Policy Areas & Coordination with Other Provincial Policy & Legislation The proposed amendments to the Planning Act do not address the role of the OMB with respect to appeals of Official Plans or Official Plan Amendments that are associated with Special Policy Areas (SPAs). In accordance with Section 3.1.4 (a) of the PPS, the designation of an SPA, and any change or modification to the site - specific policies or boundaries applying to an SPA, must be approved by the Ministers of MMAH and MNRF prior to the approval authority approving such changes or modifications. The proposal for a new SPA or modifications to the boundaries or policies of an existing provincially approved SPA may only be initiated by lower -tier or single -tier municipalities as the proponent. The fact that the criteria and procedures for approval are established by the Province needs to be clear to inform OMB hearings for appeals within SPAs. TRCA therefore recommends that the amendments to the Planning Act be expanded so that appeals in Special Policy Areas (where a comprehensive review of the SPA has been undertaken and received ministerial approval) be added to the list of specified provincial matters on which appeals are to be disallowed (sub section 17 (24.4 and 24.5) of Bill 73). The Act should also be amended to specify that only scoped or site specific appeals are permitted, and it should be more clear on how coordination is to occur on appeals that involve matters of provincial interest that are addressed through other legislation or provincial policy. For example, text could be added similar to what is already in the Greenbelt Plan that "the Planning Act must be read in conjunction with all other applicable land use planning policy, regulations and /or standards, as amended from time to time. In addition, where more specific provincial plans or regulations exist, the more specific plan or regulation prevails." This sort of language would also serve to ensure better coordination between the Environmental Assessment process and the planning process to ensure that infrastructure decisions are made in a more integrated fashion. TRCA is also supportive of the proposed amendments that require appellants who intend to argue that appealed decisions are inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, Provincial Plans, or upper -tier official plans, identify the issues in their notices of appeal. However, clarification is requested on whether there would be a corresponding requirement for the OMB to make a decision at that point whether it is appropriate to proceed with a hearing. A process similar to the EA review of Part II Order requests might be considered as one model to ensure that these notices are used appropriately in decision making. TRCA also suggests that this proposed amendment be further strengthened so that appellants that intend to argue that appealed decisions are inconsistent with PPS, Provincial Plans or upper - tier official plans, are required to complete a more comprehensive "conformity report". This report should identify and assess consistency with all sections of these documents. The rationale for this is that appellants often argue they comply with one section of the PPS for example, (i.e. the sections on intensification) but ignore other sections (i.e. section 3.1 re: flood hazards). In addition, there should be a preliminary assessment of consistency with other applicable legislation. 5. Minor Variances TRCA understands that the Province is convening a working group to provide further advice on several matters including what constitutes a minor variance. TRCA looks forward to participating as a Conservation Ontario representative on this working group. TRCA will provide the CA perspective gained through routinely commenting on consents and minor variances for municipalities and will provide further detailed input at that venue. At this time we anticipate that this would include the following: • Providing more clear direction with respect to severance applications and the ability for conditions to be imposed on the retained lands • Providing the ability to impose site specific restrictions through a variance application • Additional direction with respect to what constitutes a minor variance versus a zoning by- law amendment 232 6. Restructuring Review Timelines Bill 73 proposed to amend Subsection 26 (1) of the Planning Act to require revisions of an Official Plan 1 C years after it comes into effect as a new official plan, and every five years thereafter unless the plan has been replaced by another new official plan. While TRCA supports the extensions of these timelines, clarification is requested to distinguish between what would be considered a new Official Plan versus a revision to an existing Official Plan. It is anticipated that unless this is well defined, there will be difficulties in determining the appropriate review period (i.e. 5 or 10 years). Under the current timeline structure, TRCA has found that existing Official Plans are often still under appeal at the time that a new five year review commences. This can result in some parts of the old Official Plan and some parts of the new Official Plan being in effect at the same time, which is a very complex situation for members of the public to navigate. The proposed amendments should address some of these difficulties. However, where new provincial direction/plan/legislation are approved within the 10 -year time frame, it is recommended that the Province allow for discretion to direct revisions to official plans to reflect provincial interests within a specified period of time subsequent to approval of the provincial directionlplan /legislation. Permitting some revisions within the initial 10 year timeframe would allow an adaptive approach and would ensure that provincial interests are incorporated into official plans in a timely manner. 7. Parkland Dedication TRCA understands that Bill 73 will amend Section 42 (Subsections 4.1 and 4.2) of the Planning Act to require municipalities to develop parks plans if they wish to establish an alternative parkland dedication rate. It will also require that municipalities consult with and work with school boards in developing such plans and suggests that other persons or public bodies may be consulted. TRCA recommends that this subsection of the Planning Act be further amended to explicitly name Conservation Authorities (CAs) as agencies that must be consulted in developing parks plans where applicable (i.e. if parks include CA regulated areas). In addition, the Planning Act should be amended to clarify that parkland dedication lands should not include hazard lands, (these lands cannot serve an active recreation function), and where possible, parks should be designed to ensure the natural heritage system is enhanced for its long term viability. In tandem with developing parks plans, municipalities need to find ways to fund the maintenance and upgrading of both existing and new local and regional parks and open space systems. To this end, TRCA recommends that additional amendments to Section 37 of the Planning Act be considered to broaden the applicability of these benefits to include open space improvements. Thank you once again for the opportunity to provide comments on this important initiative. Should you have any questions or require clarification, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Carolyn Woodland, GALA, FCSLA, MCIP, RPP Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 233 Attachment 2 Toronto and Region Conservation for The Living City June 3, 2015 By Email Only — DCAconsultation @ ontario.ca john.ballantine @ontario.ca John Ballantine, Manager Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Municipal Finance Policy Branch 777 Bay Street, 13th Floor Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2E5 Dear Mr. Ballantine: Re: TRCA Comments in Response to Bill 73 - Smart Growth for Our Communities Act, 2015 (Amendments to the Development Charges Act, 1997) EBR #012 -3651 Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed amendments to the Development Charges Act, 1997 as part of Bill 73. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has an important interest in these amendments given our role as a public commenting body under the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act, a resource management agency operating on a local watershed basis, a body with delegated authority in plan review to represent the provincial interest for natural hazards; and as one of the largest landowners in the Toronto Region. TRCA owns close to 18 000 hectares and owns or manages over 700 kilometres of public trails. Despite these roles, Conservation Authorities (CAs) are typically not included in discussion and background reports about development charges and therefore we welcome the opportunity to provide comments on proposed amendments to this Act. We understand that the government is now establishing a development charges working group to support the proposed regulatory amendments and review substantive issues that were not addressed during the 2013 -14 consultations (in which TRCA participated). This working group will provide the government with options and recommendations for future regulatory amendments to the Development Charges Act, 1997 including whether other ineligible services should be made eligible for development charges. In light of the amount of growth and intensification in Ontario and the associated challenges this brings in providing public services (as outlined in specific comments below), TRCA encourages the Province to broaden the scope of eligible services under the Development Charges Act, as well as the associated regulatory framework. This is to ensure that this process continues to operate effectively based on the principle that growth should pay for growth. Given Conservation Authorities' important roles in activities and processes that are impacted by development charges, TRCA also recommends that at least one representative from a Conservation Authority (CA) be invited to participate in the government working group. TRCA offers the following detailed comments and background for the consideration of the government and working group. Tel. 416.661.6600, 1.888.872.2344 1 Fax. 416.661.6898 1 55horeham give, D ©wn,,ww, ON M3N 159 234 Detailed Comments TRCA's watersheds encompass the most heavily urbanized and populous lands in Ontario. There is a significant amount of new greenfield growth and redevelopment and intensification, occurring within the 18 municipalities in TRCA watersheds. TRCA's urban and urbanizing watersheds include 10 of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe's 25 designated Urban Growth Centres (UGCs). Many of the UGCs and other lands identified for intensification are located in Flood Vulnerable Areas (FVAs). There are a considerable number of people living within the FVAs in TRCA's jurisdiction (over 35,000). It has been demonstrated through TRCA's watershed -based research and science that the cumulative impact of growth and intensification in our jurisdiction is causing profound changes to our watershed hydrology resulting in increased flood and erosion risk in downstream areas. In addition, TRCA watershed plans reveal that climate change is likely to have an increasingly negative impact on water resources, public infrastructure and private property; in part due to extreme weather events such as the July 2013 Toronto flood (reported as Ontario's most expensive natural disaster resulting in $850 million in damage to public and private assets). The combined impacts of urbanization and climate change mean that we are now reaching a threshold capacity in TRCA watersheds where communities, including redeveloped communities in UGCs and other intensification in FVAs, will increasingly be put at risk unless there is a new paradigm in how we manage stormwater and invest in infrastructure to reduce the risk of flooding where it currently occurs. An integrated approach to planning for infrastructure and remediation to flooding and erosion hazards is essential in order to achieve community revitalization that is safe from the risk to life and property over the long term. In addition to impacts on flooding and flood risk, TRCA watershed plans and studies have also highlighted the impact of ongoing development and intensification on water quality and erosion if stormwater is not properly managed. Conventional stormwater management measures do not fully mitigate the flooding, water quality and erosion impacts associated with growth. TRCA and others have been advocating for a change to stormwater management practices that incorporate Low Impact Development and green infrastructure to manage the quality and volume of stormwater runoff at source, as well as a more holistic approach to stormwater management in order to effectively manage these issues. These issues are of great concern not just to TRCA but to the municipalities in TRCA's watersheds. The public services that CAs provide, such as the provision of public lands for flood plain management, erosion protection works, habitat restoration and recreational parks and trails systems are all essential to the health and wellbeing of municipal residents. These services have become that much more important in the face of the rapid growth and intensification taking place in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. This is especially true in the highly urbanized watersheds of TRCA's jurisdiction, where existing development and a lack of or inadequate stormwater management controls are already causing impacts of flooding and erosion, as well as straining the capacity of an underserviced parks and open space system. It is because of the lands and infrastructure that CAs own manage and regulate that a catastrophic loss of life and property of an order of magnitude many times greater than the July 2013 storm event (such as that experienced in Calgary) is not experienced in Southern Ontario. As public entities existing under the Conservation Authorities Act, CAs are reliant on a unique funding formula to support the functions and services they provide. Unfortunately, based on this model, it can be a struggle to realize the potential of the benefits that CA services can provide, as demands often outweigh the financial capacity needed to meet them. The existing lands and infrastructure of CAs plays a crucial role in servicing and protecting intensifying communities in Southern Ontario. Much like the municipalities, the CAs provide infrastructure that services redeveloping and intensifying communities and the development charges allocated with this development do not fund the expansion or strengthening of this infrastructure. TRCA is aware that some of our municipal partners have used development charges to fund flood and erosion remediation infrastructure, and green infrastructure in the past (i.e. this has happened for Toronto Waterfront projects including work on the Lower Don River watershed and is being proposed by the City of Vaughan for the revitalization of the Black Creek corridor in the Humber River watershed). TRCA has 235 worked successfully with our municipal partners on these types of projects, whereby the municipality and TRCA use the opportunity of urban redevelopment and revitalization projects to also rehabilitate degraded natural landscapes that can then be integrated with, and add tremendous value to, the urban landscape. However this type of coordination is not always achievable given that flood plain management and the provision of natural system enhancement are frequently perceived as cost prohibitive in an already expensive endeavour of urban revitalization. Furthermore these services can be argued to be ineligible public services under the Development Charges Act because they are CA- related. A sustainable funding model is therefore needed to support the maintenance, renewal and improvement of green infrastructure and other flood mitigation measures. Development charges should be considered as part of a suite of funding options to incent developers and municipalities to embrace these measures. The need for municipalities to use development charges to fund these types of projects should be further encouraged by the Province given that CA services are essential to the growth management objectives of municipalities planning for complete communities. To this end, the proposal to amend the Development Charges Act by removing the list of ineligible services from the Act and instead prescribing this list through regulations is supported, as it will make it easier to adapt this list to current needs. However, TRCA echoes recommendations from our municipal partners that this proposed amendment be taken a step further so that there are no ineligible services listed either in the Act or listed in any future regulation. This change would enable the full recovery of growth related capital costs through development charges and therefore would serve to ensure that the Act achieves its aim of ensuring that "growth pays for growth ". TRCA understands that currently the list of ineligible services in the Development Charges Act, 1997 includes items such as the acquisition of land for parks, and the provision of tourism facilities. This could be interpreted to mean that the Development Charges Act, 1997 does not allow for the collection of development charges to account for the cost of redevelopment and upgrading of specific open space facilities. As one of the largest landowners in the Toronto region, it is our experience that publicly owned facilities do need upgrading to service intensification and growth which puts additional pressures on publically owned parks and open space systems (local and regional) and increases demands for recreational opportunities and a network of trails. Current funding mechanisms are not sufficient to support the demands resulting from the amount of growth that is occurring in our jurisdiction. The ability to collect development charges to account for the true cost of redevelopment and upgrading of specific open space facilities, (such as trails, cycle paths etc.) that are needed to support new growth is essential to facilitate community sustainability for the long term. Thank you once again for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed amendments to the Development Charges Act. Should you have any questions or require clarification on any of the comments submitted, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Carolyn Woodland, OALA, FCSLA, MCIP, RPP Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 236 RES. #A101 /15 - TRCA ENGAGEMENT GUIDELINES Board endorsement of TRCA's Engagement Guidelines, which have been circulated for comment and are now finalized for staff use. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jack Heath WHEREAS in 2014, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Archaeology staff and Policy Planning staff developed a guideline for directing TRCA staff in their engagement with Aboriginal communities (Attachment 1); AND WHEREAS TRCA staff sought input on the draft Guidelines from Anishinaabe nations, the Huron- Wendat Nation, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy and Metis councils, and have now finalized the Guidelines; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Authority endorse the Engagement Guidelines for use by TRCA staff; AND FURTHER THAT the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, regional and local municipalities in TRCA's jurisdiction, Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation, Conservation Ontario and neighbouring conservation authorities be so advised. AMENDMENT RES. #A102 /15 Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: THAT during the 2016 budget process staff consider creating a TRCA position for an Aboriginal engagement coordinator. THE AMENDMENT WAS THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #8/14, held on October, 31, 2014, the Authority endorsed a draft version of the TRCA Engagement Guidelines for circulation to Anishinaabe nations, the Huron - Wendat Nation, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy and Metis councils. This staff report is to inform the Authority that the commenting period has ended, the groups that commented have been responded to, and staff have now finalized the Engagement Guidelines for use. 237 The Supreme Court of Canada has determined that the provincial and federal governments ( "the Crown') and its agents owe a duty to consult Aboriginal peoples when contemplating conduct that may adversely affect existing or asserted Aboriginal or treaty rights. While third parties such as TRCA do not have this duty, the Crown may delegate procedural aspects of consultation to them through legislation or other means. As a result, TRCA conducts engagement for projects where and as delegated by legislation or other clear means. TRCA is responsible for managing the engagement process for projects for which TRCA is the proponent. TRCA staff that currently carry out the engagement procedures is the Archaeology Resource Management Services team. The following is a list of legislation and related documents that may trigger engagement for TRCA projects: • Environmental Assessment Act; • Conservation Ontario Class Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects (Conservation Ontario, January 2002) as amended (CO Class EA); • Approvals under the Ontario Water Resources Act (OWRA) or the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) may trigger engagement if delegated by the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change; • Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002; • Ontario Heritage Act, 1990. The draft Engagement Guidelines were developed to address the growing need for the formalization of TRCA's engagement processes. The guidelines provide TRCA with direction about when and how to engage with Aboriginal communities during TRCA projects. The Guidelines focus on the legal requirements of engagement; however, they do not preclude TRCA from working with nations, confederacies and councils on other initiatives where they share common ground and goals. The document contains information about when TRCA is required by law to conduct engagement. Further, they provide direction about determining who should be engaged, how to initiate engagement, and the extent of engagement required for any given project. The document also includes information about what to do in emergency situations, and how to address disputes that might arise during the course of the engagement process. The draft Engagement Guidelines were authored based on knowledge informed by municipal and regional documents, as well as TRCA's in -house processes. These Guidelines were written under the guidance and advice of legal counsel to ensure compliance with the relevant legislation and case law. TRCA has also been working with relevant provincial ministries to capture the evolving requirements and processes of engagement and to analyze new information as it becomes available. This was especially important to ensure that TRCA practices are reflective of current provincial approaches and interpretations. In particular, TRCA has sought guidance from the relevant provincial ministries to clarify the roles and responsibilities of conservation authorities during the engagement process. Comments Received on the Draft Guidelines Staff circulated the draft Guidelines to Anishinaabe nations, the Huron - Wendat Nation, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy and Metis councils at the end of 2014. The Huron Wendat Nation provided the following comments on TRCA's draft Engagement Guidelines: 238 The guidelines do not state anywhere limiting discussions only to those nations which are most closely affiliated with a site so it is in keeping with the trend to include consulting with those nations in whose traditional territory a site is located in addition to the nation with the closest cultural affiliation. We are not in agreement that discussions on our own heritage (proven affiliation to HWN sites) include other Nations. This is disrespectful and wrong from a First Nation's perspective, regardless of the Nation involved. One can never speak or interfere with other Nation's own heritage and make decisions on their behalf unless it was agreed between those Nations. The Huron - Wendat Nation's Council speaks for itself and no other organizations can speak on our behalf when it comes to our own heritage. The guidelines also state that TRCA will, from time to time, and when funding is available, pay expenses for consultation - TRCA will not pay application fees to nations (see Page 4). We are concerned about this lack of support (or ensured support), especially with the Huron - Wendat Nation's extensive heritage in Southern Ontario: 711 existing HW officially affiliated archeological sites (8000 were destroyed) and that does not include sites that are still uncovered to this date. No other Nation has such proven heritage. Support for consultation is required in all discussions. This is part of appropriate duty to consult. TRCA staff responded to these comments by reiterating from our Guidelines the fact that TRCA cannot commit to pay fees for consultation and that only under special circumstances TRCA may cover (depending on available funding) modest, ordinary expenses such as travel and meals. TRCA also responded by saying that the Guidelines do not provide detail regarding archaeological procedures of engagement, but that TRCA is committed to following the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, 2011) where engagement is concerned. This would include notifying descendent communities and providing opportunities for involvement. It was also noted in staffs response that TRCA will soon be drafting an internal procedural document that details engagement strategies for archaeological sites. TRCA met with two representatives of the Haudenosaunee Development Institute (HDI) and the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs (HCC) in June 2014 on another TRCA project and presented them with a preliminary draft of the Guidelines at that time. The representatives did not review the Guidelines but made the following comments at the meeting, both verbally and in writing: • HDI /HCC requests annual payments of $500,000 to review all TRCA project and permit applications. TRCA sought guidance from the Province on this request by sending a letter to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). MNRF sent a letter back that was copied to the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs and Conservation Ontario, stating the following: • MNRF's view is that the TRCA is not required to pay application fees to the HCC, and we note this is consistent with direction in the TRCA's draft Engagement Guidelines. We note that TRCA's draft Engagement Guidelines contemplate limited funding for Aboriginal communities to support engagement in special circumstances. Subsequently, TRCA declined to comply with HDI's request. 239 Other responses to the Guideline circulation from municipalities included the Township of Uxbridge, who by Resolution of the Township Council supported the Guidelines, and the City of Toronto's Supervisor of Special Projects in Archaeology wrote to TRCA saying that the Guidelines were good and enquired as to when they would be finalized. Revisions to the Guidelines TRCA staff have not revised the draft Engagement Guidelines as a result of any of the above comments or requests, given that the Guideline already provides the appropriate level of direction regarding expenses. In using the Guidelines, staff will continue to seek guidance from provincial ministries as new information becomes available in order to ensure TRCA's practices comply with provincial approaches and provincial and federal case law. Moving forward, TRCA is looking to develop an operational manual for staff who use the Guidelines that will provide detail about the processes and procedures of engagement for varying types of TRCA projects. FINANCIAL DETAILS The Engagement Guidelines (Attachment 1) reflect how TRCA currently engages with Aboriginal communities. In current practice where engagement occurs, the associated costs of TRCA's Archaeology Resource Management Services program is incorporated into each project's budget, determined in discussion with TRCA's Archaeology Resource Management Services. TRCA does not pay application fees to aboriginal communities for engagement. However, under special circumstances, TRCA may cover (depending on available funding) modest, ordinary expenses such as travel and meals, in accordance with the Guidelines. Report prepared by: Mary-Ann Burns, extension 5763, Amanda Parks, extension 6417 Emails: mburns@trca.on.ca, aparks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 Emails: cwoodland @trca.on.ca Date: June 12, 2015 Attachments:1 240 Attachment 1 Toronto and Region 00 Conservation for The Living City- TRCA ENGAGEMENT GUIDELINES (June 2015) INTRODUCTION The following are Guidelines for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) when it engages with Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee and Huron - Wendat nations, and Metis councils about TRCA projects. The Supreme Court of Canada has determined that the provincial and federal government ( "the Crown ") and its agents owe a duty to consult Aboriginal peoples when it contemplates conduct that may adversely affect existing or asserted Aboriginal or treaty rights. While third parties such as TRCA do not have this duty, the Crown may delegate procedural aspects of consultation to them through legislation or other means. TRCA conducts engagement for projects where and as delegated by legislation or other clear means. Where TRCA is unsure if engagement has been triggered for a project, TRCA will attempt to obtain clarification from the Crown about any roles and responsibilities that may be delegated to TRCA. TRCA is responsible for managing the engagement process for projects for which TRCA is the proponent. The TRCA department that currently carries out the engagement procedures is the Archaeology Resource Management Services department. For a glossary of terms, see Appendix A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES TRCA's aim is to develop a positive relationship with nations, confederacies, and councils that have established or asserted rights that may be impacted by TRCA Projects, through a process of meaningful, mutually respectful engagement. There is no single way to conduct meaningful engagement. The process of engagement will vary depending on the project's impacts and the level of interest indicated by nations, confederacies, and councils. The engagement and commenting process must take place within the legislated timelines, described by the relevant legislation (e.g. Environmental Assessment Act). These Guidelines do not preclude TRCA from working with nations, confederacies, and councils on other TRCA initiatives where they share common ground and goals such as educational programming, management/master plans, and property stewardship initiatives. These Guidelines are not intended to alter the legal obligations of TRCA or nations, confederacies, and councils. TRCA will engage with nations, confederacies, and councils in accordance with these Guidelines, but must ensure that the engagement process meets the minimum standards set out in the relevant legislation. 1 I Page 241 WHEN TRCA IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO ENGAGE TRCA carries out engagement for TRCA Projects that are subject to legislation requiring engagement. The following is a list of legislation and related documents that may trigger engagement for TRCA Projects. • Environmental Assessment (EA) Act • Conservation Ontario Class Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects (Conservation Ontario, January 2002) as amended (CO Class EA) • Approvals under the Ontario Water Resources Act (OWRA) or Environmental Protection Act (EPA) may trigger engagement if delegated by the Ministry of Environment • Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 • Ontario Heritage Act (1990) WHEN TRCA MAY CONDUCT ENGAGEMENT ON BEHALF OF THIRD PARTIES When a third party's project or undertaking on TRCA -owned land triggers engagement, or when a third party employs TRCA as a consultant not on TRCA -owned land, TRCA may conduct engagement on behalf of the third party if agreed to in writing prior to the start of the project. The parties will agree to roles and responsibilities for TRCA and the third party when conducting engagement. TRCA's Archaeology Resource Management Services may lead the engagement or assist the third party proponent with the process, if and as agreed. However, the third party proponent and the Crown will retain their respective responsibilities to ensure that the duty to consult is fulfilled. Table 1 sets out some examples for determining when TRCA is the lead on engagement. Table 1: Examples for Determining Engagement Lead 2 1 P a g e 242 PROPONENT Legislation Trigger for Provincial /Federal Engagement TRC Municipality Governments EA Act/ CO Environmental TRCA TBD at TBD at project Class EA Assessment project onset onset OWRA/ EPA Discharge or TRCA, if TBD at TBD at project water taking requested by project onset requiring Ministry of onset provincial Environment approval (ECA or PTTW) 2 1 P a g e 242 Legislation Trigger for Engagement PROPONENT TRCA Municipality Provincial /Federal Governments Funeral, Burial Identification of TRCA TBD at TBD at project and Cremation ancestral human project onset Services Act remains onset Occasionally, TRCA may also be asked to take the lead on engagement when there are works by a municipality or a developer on TRCA -owned land that triggers engagement, or when one of TRCA's projects requires a Planning Act application and the municipality requests that TRCA conduct the engagement. THE PROCESS OF ENGAGEMENT DETERMINING WHICH NATIONS, CONFEDERACIES, AND COUCNILS SHOULD BE ENGAGED TRCA will determine which nations, confederacies, and councils should be contacted based on understandings of: • Traditional territories • Aboriginal and Treaty rights (established or asserted) • Potential impact of the project on Aboriginal and Treaty rights • Additional information provided by the Crown TRCA's Archaeology Resource Management Services will identify the nations, confederacies, and councils that may be affected by the project, and seek confirmation from the provincial Ministry or federal department responsible for the regulatory approval required for the undertaking. TRCA will contact the Ontario Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (MAA) and Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) prior to the start of a project for advice as to which communities may have an interest in a project. These government agencies can also provide up -to -date information related to land claims and specific treaties. GIVING NOTICE Prior to the commencement of a TRCA project, TRCA will give notice to nations, confederacies, and councils about the project as required by the relevant legislation. The notification will provide sufficient information for communities to assess a project's potential impact on their Aboriginal and /or treaty rights. The notification will also ask nations, confederacies, and councils to inform TRCA in writing whether or not a project will impact their Aboriginal and /or treaty rights, and in what ways. TRCA will give initial notice by mail, personal delivery, or email, as requested. If the nations, confederacies, and councils do not respond, TRCA may follow up to ensure that the original correspondence was received. 3 1 P a g e 243 EXPRESSION OF INTEREST If a nation, confederacy, or council expresses interest in a project, TRCA and the leadership or designated contact of the nation, confederacy, or council may meet to discuss the project, identify issues related to the impact on the Aboriginal and treaty rights, and discuss potential mitigation measures that may address the concerns expressed and impacts identified. In general, communication will begin in writing, and discussions may lead to phone conversations and /or in- person meetings when required. Where an interested nation, confederacy, or council raises objections and then declines to participate, TRCA will seek advice from the Provincial or Federal government as appropriate. TRCA will continue to plan and implement the project consistent with legal requirements while continuing efforts to obtain input from the nation, confederacy, or council. TRCA will consider using a neutral third party to re -start discussions. EXTENT OF ENGAGEMENT Appropriate engagement will vary depending on the context. In most cases, engagement will include: • Providing information about the project in a timely way, • Seeking input on impacts of the project, • Considering the input, and • Designing appropriate, reasonable and cost effective mitigation of potential impacts. TRCA's Archaeology Resource Management Services will determine the extent of engagement for the project in consultation with TRCA staff, any third party proponent, and the potentially impacted nations, confederacies, and councils. The extent of engagement with each nation confederacy, and council will vary depending on the strength of the right or claim and the seriousness of the impact of the proposed project on the right or claim of the nation, confederacy, and council. FUNDING For projects where engagement will occur, the associated costs of TRCA's Archaeology Resource Management Services department must be incorporated into each project's budget, to be determined in discussion with TRCA's Archaeology Resource Management Services. TRCA will not pay application fees to nations, confederacies, or councils for engagement. However, under special circumstances TRCA may cover (depending on available funding) modest, ordinary expenses such as travel and meals. 14 �T, I =I;Tci 4 � 16Y&A 11 0EA 111012 Should a situation arise that could reasonably be considered an emergency involving danger to property or to human health or safety, TRCA may proceed to address the emergency as necessary. If an Environmental Assessment is required following the emergency works to determine a long term solution, engagement will occur as required by the Environmental Assessment Act. ELEVATION OF MATTERS IN DISPUTE TRCA will work cooperatively with nations, confederacies, or councils to resolve disputes. Should a dispute arise during the engagement process, TRCA will discuss the nature of the 4 1 P a g e 244 dispute with the nation, confederacy, or council's contact for engagement and attempt, in good faith, to reach a resolution that is agreeable to each party. Should TRCA and the nation, confederacy, or council's contact be unable to reach an agreement, TRCA will elevate the matter within its organization and make available the Chair of the TRCA Directors' Committee (the CEO) to the Chief, traditional Chiefs' Council, or President of the Metis Community Council, as appropriate to attempt to resolve the matter. Representatives of the nation, confederacy, or council may also choose to make a delegation to TRCA's Board. Where these efforts do not resolve a dispute, TRCA may seek to resolve a dispute through the use of a mediator. Where collaborative efforts do not achieve a resolution, the matter will be referred to the Crown RECORD OF ENGAGEMENT TRCA will keep detailed records respecting the process, including all correspondence, records of telephone conversations, e- mails, minutes and attendees of all meetings. This record of engagement will be included in the relevant reports, as may be required by the regulator. Nations, confederacies, or councils may share traditional knowledge with TRCA. In general, traditional knowledge refers to indigenous knowledge systems that have been developed and maintained over time. The TRCA will respect the policies and requests of the nation, confederacy, or council regarding the use of traditional knowledge. If a nation, confederacy, or council consents to share its traditional knowledge with the TRCA for the purpose of including in a project document submitted to the regulator, they should be informed that any portion of that knowledge that forms part of project documents may be made public and may be subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. 5 1 P a g e 245 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF TERMS The following glossary terms apply to these Guidelines Aboriginal Peoples As defined by the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (2013), Aboriginal Peoples is the collective name for the original people of North America and their descendants. The Canadian Constitution (the Constitution Act, 1982) recognizes three groups of Aboriginal peoples — Indians (commonly referred to as First Nations), M6tis and Inuit. These are three separate peoples with unique heritages, languages, cultural practices and spiritual beliefs (Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, 2013). Wherever possible, TRCA refers to nations, councils or confederacies throughout this document. The term Aboriginal is used where it is part of a name of a government agency, or legal right or term in the Canadian Constitution, case law or statutes. Aboriginal Rights As defined by the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (2013), Aboriginal rights are collective rights, based on Aboriginal occupation and use of lands and customs, traditions and practices that make Aboriginal societies distinctive. For an activity to be an Aboriginal right, it must be an element of a practice, custom or tradition which is integral to the distinctive culture of the Aboriginal community claiming the right. For First Nations communities: the activity must have existed at the time of first contact with Europeans. For M6tis communities: the activity must have existed prior to the time of effective European control in an area. In both instances, the current practice, custom or tradition must have continuity with the historic practice, custom or tradition, and it must remain integral to the community's culture. Present - day activities may be exercised in a modern way. Aboriginal rights are protected by section 35 (1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. Aboriginal Title As defined by the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (2013), Aboriginal title is a type of Aboriginal right. Aboriginal title is the Aboriginal society's ongoing collective right to use and occupy (subject to certain restrictions) those lands that they used and occupied exclusively at the time the Crown assumed sovereignty over those lands. For Aboriginal title to be established: • an Aboriginal community needs to have occupied the lands prior to the Crown asserting sovereignty over the lands • continuity must exist between present and pre- sovereignty occupation • the occupation must have been exclusive at the time the Crown asserted sovereignty over those lands Aboriginal rights or title may be modified or surrendered through treaties. The impact of a treaty on Aboriginal rights or title will depend on the interpretation of the particular treaty. 6 1 P a g e REP Crown As defined by the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (2013), in Canada, and in other Commonwealth countries, which recognize the same Queen as the formal head of state, the state (or government) is commonly referred to as "the Crown." In Ontario, the Crown refers to the Ontario and Federal governments. Duty to Consult As defined by the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (2013), he Supreme Court of Canada has determined that the constitutional protection accorded Aboriginal rights and treaty rights under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 requires the Crown to consult with Aboriginal people when it has knowledge of an existing or asserted Aboriginal or treaty right and contemplates conduct that may adversely affect the right in question. The Supreme Court of Canada has further determined that third parties do not owe a duty to consult Aboriginal people. The Crown may delegate "procedural aspects" of Aboriginal consultation to third parties through legislation and associated regulations, guidelines and policies. Engagement Engagement refers to the "procedural aspects" of the Duty to Consult that the Provincial or Federal Crown may delegate to TRCA. The depth of engagement will vary depending on the strength of the right or claim and the seriousness of the impact of the proposed project on the right or claim. Treaty As defined by the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (2013), a treaty is an agreement made between the Crown and First Nations with the intention of creating mutually binding obligations, which would be solemnly respected. Treaty Rights As defined by the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (2013), Treaty rights are the specific rights of Aboriginal peoples embodied in the treaties they entered into with Crown governments (initially France and Britain, then Canada after Confederation). Generally, historic treaties are in writing. Courts have found that oral promises can also form part of a treaty and give rise to treaty rights. Some of the matters that treaty rights often relate to include: • creating a reserve • paying out money • the right of Aboriginal communities to hunt, fish and trap subject to the terms of the treaty Existing treaty rights are protected under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. 7 1 P a g e 247 RES. #A103/15 - PLANNING AND PERMIT ADMINISTRATION Continuous Strategic Improvements and Delegation of Emergency Infrastructure Works Permit Approvals. Adoption of the TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Protocol that will allow for delegated approval authority for Emergency Infrastructure Works permit applications under Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, to designated staff in order to streamline the permit approval process. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) through its Business Excellence objective, is committed to streamline administrative processes associated with the implementation of TRCA's planning and regulatory programs, for the benefit of all municipal and agency partners, and the private sector; AND WHEREAS TRCAs Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation, Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended by Ontario Regulation 82/13, enables the Authority to delegate permit approval authority to designated staff; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Protocol be approved; THAT the 2003 Emergency Works Protocol for the City of Toronto be rescinded and replaced with this new protocol; THAT the delegation of permit approvals to senior staff appointed as Enforcement Officers who are in the position of Associate Director or higher, in accordance with the TRCA operating procedures and criteria outlined in this report, be approved and implemented; THAT the Chief Executive Officer be given the discretion to require any permit to be directed to the Executive Committee for approval; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA's member municipalities, Conservation Ontario, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada, be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 2003, TRCA entered into an agreement with the City of Toronto, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) and the Ministry of Natural Resources (now Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF)) to implement the Emergency Works Permitting Protocol within the City's boundaries. Since that time, the legislation and /or implementation protocols for each of TRCA's Ontario Regulation 166/06, MNRF Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and DFO Level I I I Agreement with TRCA has changed, and the MNRF Endangered Species Act legislation has been adopted. Additionally, there have been a growing number of infrastructure related emergencies beyond the City of Toronto's boundaries that TRCA has addressed using the intent of this protocol as a guide. For each of these reasons, staff is recommending that the existing protocol be rescinded and replaced with the attached TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Protocol. The specific rationale for amending and expanding the existing protocol is as follows: RENO Emergency Works Permitting Protocol for the City of Toronto On July 30, 2003, TRCA, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) presented the City of Toronto (Toronto) with a joint protocol for addressing emergency works in the City of Toronto. The protocol was designed to address in -water works that are emergencies, with emergencies being defined by the proponent as "situations where there is deemed an immediate threat of injury to persons, loss of life or loss of property and are unexpected occurrences ". Since 2003, TRCA has formally implemented this protocol on numerous permit applications made in accordance to Ontario Regulation 166/06 as related to emergency works in Toronto's infrastructure. A similar protocol was never developed for other municipalities or agencies. As such, TRCA has continually and informally implemented the requirements outlined of the Toronto protocol when dealing with infrastructure related emergencies of others, such as the Regional Municipality of York, Enbridge Pipelines or private septic systems. Municipal and agency partners, as well as private infrastructure providers, have expressed support for formalizing a protocol for obtaining TRCA Emergency Infrastructure Works permits, and have provided input into the attached protocol. Delegation of Approval Authority for Ontario Regulation 166 /06, As Amended, to TRCA Staff On February 8, 2013, TRCAs'Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation', Ontario Regulation 166/06, was amended by Ontario Regulation 82/13 and approved by the Minister of Natural Resources. The amendments included the ability to delegate decision powers for permit decisions to designated conservation authority employees. At Authority Meeting #9/13, held on November 22, 2013, resolutions #A198/13 and #A199/13 were approved regarding delegated approval authority for non - complex permit applications under Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, with the provision that the Chief Executive Officer be given the discretion to require any permit to be directed to the Executive Committee for approval. Since being approved, TRCA Environmental Assessment (EA) Planning staff has implemented this delegated approval protocol for all "non- complex" emergency infrastructure works permits. However, when the project is considered complex, TRCA staff issue a letter authorizing the works to proceed and advise the enforcement officer, but cannot issue the actual permit until formally approved by the Executive Committee. Often, due to the urgent nature of the repair, the works are completed prior to the issuance of the TRCA permit. By giving permission to delegated senior approval authority for complex permit applications under Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, to designated TRCA staff, the process will be more streamlined and efficient. It is recommended that the designated staff be in the position of Associate Director or higher, in accordance with TRCA operating procedures whereby staff meet on a regular basis with the Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications to inform, discuss and /or seek direction on all emergency infrastructure works applications. As with non - complex permits, the Chief Executive Officer will be given the discretion to require that any Emergency Infrastructure Works permit application be directed to the Executive Committee for approval. 249 TRCA Voluntary Project Review Emergency Infrastructure Works are also undertaken by Crown corporations, including provincial and federal agencies, railways, and radio communication and broadcasting antenna system providers. These organizations are exempt from the Conservation Authorities Act Section 28 regulatory approval process and permits are not required. In the absence of the formal permitting process, TRCA has developed a process whereby the party may voluntarily request TRCA to review and comment on detailed design activities associated with required emergency activities to confirm that TRCA policies and procedures are being addressed. Once TRCA concerns are satisfied, a Voluntary Project Review Letter is provided by TRCA staff. Executive Committee approval of the project is not required. This process is detailed in the attached protocol. A TRCA Voluntary Project Review - Emergency Infrastructure Works category will be added to the TRCA database for file tracking purposes. MNRF Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and DFO Federal Fisheries Act Approvals In the 2003 City of Toronto Emergency Works Permitting Protocol, all permit requirements under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act were made directly to MNRF. In instances where the emergency or required mitigation works was determined to be a Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction of Fish Habitat (HADD), the proponent was required to obtain a Fisheries Act Authorization. This determination was made by TRCA staff through its Level 111 Agreement process. In 2006, MNRF amended their approval process; in 2013, DFO amended their approval process. Since being approved, EA Planning staff has implemented both of these amended processes when reviewing emergency infrastructure works projects and issuing the related TRCA permits. Delegation of Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act to Conservation Authorities The 2003 City of Toronto Emergency Works Permitting Protocol included provisions for permit requirements under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act. However, in 2006, MNRF advised Conservation Ontario that they would no longer be processing applications where a similar approval by a conservation authority is required except for works involving a dam. As such, MNRF is no longer involved with the review of emergency infrastructure works in TRCA's jurisdiction under this legislation. The attached protocol has been revised to remove provisions for MNRF approvals under this legislation. Cancellation of the TRCA Level III Agreement with Fisheries and Oceans Canada The 2003 City of Toronto Emergency Works Permitting Protocol included provisions for DFO screening under the Federal Fisheries Act. However, in 2013, DFO cancelled the Level III Agreement with TRCA and instituted a self- assessment process. As such, the onus is now on the proponent to ensure that the execution of the works does not result in serious harm to fish. Notwithstanding, upon the request of TRCA's municipal and agency partners, as well as private sector infrastructure providers, TRCA Ecology staff will provide an opinion as to whether the project and its implementation will cause serious harm to fish as per the DFO self- assessment process requirements. The attached protocol has been revised to remove provisions for the TRCA -DFO Level III Agreement. 250 Adoption of the Endangered Species Act In 2007, the Endangered Species Act came into effect. TRCA has no responsibilities under the Act, and therefore advises proponents to directly contact MNRF to determine if approvals are required. The attached protocol has been updated to add this legislation and the requirement for proponents to directly contact MNRF. The TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Protocol will simplify and streamline processes within the department, and improve tools for not only the City of Toronto, but to all of TRCA's municipal and agency partners, as well as private infrastructure providers. As such, the new protocol supports the TRCA Continuous Strategic Improvement (CSI) initiative of finding efficiencies in administrative processes within available financial and human resources. RATIONALE Since 2003, there have been a number of legislative and administrative changes related to the implementation of Ontario Regulation 166/06, the Fisheries Act, and the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act, as well as the establishment of the Endangered Species Act. EA Planning staff has seen an increase in the number of emergency related permit applications from both the City of Toronto, as well as other municipalities, agencies and private infrastructure providers. Many of applications are related to the severe flooding storms of 2005, 2008 and 2013. In fact, within Toronto, emergency related permit applications related to issues associated with the 2013 storm continue to be submitted today. In this regard, EA Planning staff has worked with its member municipalities and others since 2003 to both implement the Toronto protocol, and review its content to improve efficiencies. 2015 TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Protocol The protocol is provided in Attachment 1. In summary, the proponent declares to TRCA that there is an emergency situation related to existing infrastructure. Emergency is defined as 'an unexpected situation where there exists an imminent threat to public health and safety, loss of property and /or negative impacts on the environment'. Emergencies are categorized as failure, urgent and critical whereby, Failure: Infrastructure has failed and resulting response is immediate; works may proceed in advance of TRCA Emergency Infrastructure Works permit. Urgent: Infrastructure failure is imminent and structural soundness is questionable; response is immediate and on site planning is implemented. TRCA Emergency Infrastructure Works permit to be obtained prior to construction. Critical: Infrastructure is exposed but structurally sound; repairs are planned within one year or sooner. TRCA Emergency Infrastructure Works permit to be obtained prior to construction. EA Planning staff accepts the proponent's signed declaration, and moves forward with its review. Based on the requirements of Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, EA Planning staff determine if the required works are considered non - complex or complex. If the applicant is exempt from approvals under the Conservation Authorities Act, the applicant may still apply for TRCA review through the Voluntary Project Review process as defined above. The appropriate process is then followed: 251 Non - Complex Emergency Infrastructure Works Works which meet the definition of Routine Infrastructure Works, are reviewed under the current delegated approval process through an expedited review process. Regardless of whether the solution is considered temporary or permanent in nature, after completing the technical review in accordance with TRCA policies and procedures, staff approve the application and issue the permit. The Executive Committee is then notified of the approval through the delegated permit listing in the next committee agenda, and have the ability to question staff on permits of interest at the Executive Committee meeting. As the permit is approved, it should be recognized that works have likely commenced, and potentially been completed. This process has evolved over the past year and a half, starting when the Authority provided staff with delegated approval authority for non- complex permit applications. While there are no proposed changes to the approval process, the projects will appear on the Executive Committee agendas under a new "Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits" category. Complex Emergency Infrastructure Works Works which do not meet the definition of Routine Infrastructure Works or Standard are considered Complex. This includes projects which are significant in geographical area, and /or for which there have been or will be significant impacts to TRCA areas of interest. Due to their emergency nature, there may not be time to prepare detailed plans and technical studies to support the remedial works, thus staff ensures that the intent of the works will be consistent with TRCA policies and procedures. These works generally: • are temporary in nature; • require a long -term permanent solution; and, • require additional ecological, geotechnical, water resource engineering, hydrogeological, or fluvial geomorphic studies and assessment to inform the long term permanent solution. Regardless of whether the solution is considered temporary or permanent in nature, there is no current process for providing delegated approval for such projects; rather, staff issue a letter of approval for emergency infrastructure works to commence (and often finish), and then request formal approval from the Executive Committee. The last step is to issue the actual permit, often after the fact. It is therefore proposed that delegated approval authority be granted to senior staff for complex emergency infrastructure works permits for a period of not more than two years. This will allow for a streamlined process and improved tools for external clients seeking Emergency Infrastructure Works approvals. TRCA internal operating procedures are such that the Associate Director is informed of all emergency infrastructure works applications and provides direction to staff on a case- by- case basis. In circumstances of extreme environmental vulnerability, consultation with the Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications and the Chief Executive Officer, is sought. Such examples would include the 2005 Highland Creek sewer break, the 2005 Finch Avenue collapse at Black Creek, the 2008 crack in the Coxwell Sewer in the Don Valley, and the 2009 exposure of the Enbridge Line 9 Pipeline in the Rouge River, whereby in each case, there was excessive damage or potential damage to the valley corridor, as well as flood plain and erosion management issues, and extreme risk to life and property. Each of these instances are generally classified as "failure ". Other, less complex projects that are managed by staff through the direction of the Associate Director include watermain and sewer exposures, and eroded bridge foundations. These projects would each be generally classified as critical or urgent. 252 The workflow and details associated with the existing and proposed processes are provided in Attachment 2: Process Streamlining - Emergency Infrastructure Works Permit Application Review. Generally, designated staff will be given approval authority for Complex Emergency Infrastructure Works where: • permissions are consistent with approved TRCA policies and procedures; • permissions are for a period of two years or less; and, • temporary solutions will require a long term permanent solution be prepared as a condition of approval. Long Term Permanent Solution: If the solution to the emergency situation is considered temporary, then as a general condition of permit approval the proponent is asked to plan the permanent solution. Often this planning will require additional detailed technical studies and design drawings. A new permit application is submitted to EA Planning for review and approval under its regular process. If the permit associated with a permanent solution is considered routine or standard, staff will approve the permit in accordance with the delegated approval process, above. If the works are considered complex, then permit approval is provided by the Executive Committee. The permit is issued and works subsequently commence. These projects will appear on the Executive Committee agendas under the new "Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits" category. Process for Consulting with DFO and MNRF The proponent is advised to consult with MNRF and DFO in accordance with EA Planning regular review and commenting processes. Notwithstanding that the EA Planning review and approval process is a separate process, EA Planning staff will endeavour to coordinate with DFO and MNRF whenever practicable. This process is detailed in the new protocol. Extensive consultation on this new process has been undertaken with TRCA's municipal partners and all comments have been discussed, and where appropriate, included in the protocol. SUMMARY Approval of a protocol is necessary to allow staff to approve emergency infrastructure works required by TRCA's municipal and agency partners, as well as private infrastructure providers, in a more streamlined, expeditious and efficient review manner when the emergency repair works located within the Regulation Limit, and the hazard or natural feature. Similar to the Permission for Minor Works or Permission for Routine Infrastructure Work, the Emergency Infrastructure Works approval protocol would only apply to permit projects which are deemed to not impact flooding, slope stability and erosion hazards, dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land and are required in order to address unexpected situations where there exists an imminent threat of injury to persons, loss of life or loss of property as defined by the owner of the infrastructure. The applicant will be required to submit an Emergency Infrastructure Works application form and /or letter declaration of the emergency, and associated processing fee. Technical studies may be required as part of the long term solution to ensure compliance with TRCA policies and procedures. A permit will be issued by a designated Enforcement Officer, in the position of Associate Director or higher in accordance with TRCA internal operating procedures, and for a period of not more than two years. The Executive Committee will be notified of these approvals through a separate listing in their agenda. Projects will appear on the Executive Committee agendas under a new "Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits" category as: 253 Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits - Permission for Routine Infrastructure Works (approved by staff as per Authority Resolution #A198/13); Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits - Standard Delegated Permits, As Amended (approved by staff as per Authority Resolution #A198/13); Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits - Major Delegated Permits, As Amended (approved by staff as recommended in this report); • Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits - Major Application (to be approved by the Executive Committee). Staff will use these same categories to compile statistics regarding the number of emergency infrastructure works permits reviewed each year. TRCA Enforcement staff will continue to undertake routine site inspections to ensure compliance. The review process associated with the issuance of an approved permit will ensure that TRCA maintains our legal obligations under Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, while providing an opportunity to expedite the review process and improve service delivery to municipalities, agencies and private infrastructure providers. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE 1. Member municipalities and agencies will be circulated the 2015 TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Protocol. 2. The protocol will form part of the TRCA Planning and Development Procedural Manual and be posted on the TRCA website. 3. Staff will continue its ongoing dialogue with member municipalities to discuss the protocol and continue to refine and streamline implementation. 4. The TRCA Executive Committee agenda format will be amended to include a section listing all approved Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits. Report prepared by: Beth Williston, extension 5217 Emails: bwilliston @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Beth Williston, extension 5217 Emails: bwilliston @trca.on.ca Date: June 16, 2015 Attachments: 2 254 Attachment 1 ,RCA rat fMsSiON FOR EMERGENCY INFRASTRUCTURE WORKS Toronto and Region Review Protocol for Proponents Conservation Required for all Ontario Regulation 166106 Permit and '� °' Voluntary Project Review Applications June 2015 for The Living City- FOR EMERGENCY WORKS IN A TRCA REGULATED AREA This protocol has been developed to address emergency repairs or operations that are required to protect existing infrastructure. DEFINITION OF EMERGENCY WORKS The TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Protocol is intended to allow an affected area to be stabilized as quickly as possible to the public, property and the environment, and reduce or remove imminent threat(s) to existing infrastructure. For the purpose of this protocol, an emergency is defined as an unexpected situation where there exists an imminent threat to public health and safety, loss of property and /or negative impacts on the environment. Emergencies are categorized as failure, urgent and critical and include both remedial projects and operations and are declared as such at the discretion of the proponent. Failure: Infrastructure has failed and response is immediate; works may proceed in advance of TRCA Emergency Infrastructure Works permit. Urgent: Infrastructure failure is imminent and structural soundness is questionable; response is immediate and onsite planning is implemented. TRCA Emergency Works permit to be obtained prior to construction. Critical: Infrastructure is exposed but structurally sound; repairs are planned within one (1) year or sooner. TRCA Emergency Works permit to be obtained prior to construction. Under circumstances of infrastructure failure, it is understood that the proponent will take immediate action. The proponent shall notify TRCA of the failure, and if time permits, obtain a permit. Approved stabilization solutions are generally considered temporary, and development of a permanent solution to the emergency situation will be required. CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT The TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Review Protocol considers requirements related to Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act, and Ontario Regulation 166/06. Under Ontario Regulation 166/06, TRCA regulates and may prohibit work taking place within valley and stream corridors, wetlands and associated areas of interference and the Lake Ontario waterfront. A permit is required in order to do any of the following works: a. straightening, changing, diverting or interfering in any way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse, or for changing or interfering in any way with a wetland; b. development, if in the opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by the development. Development is defined as: a. the construction, reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind, b. any change to a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or potential use of the building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the number of dwelling units in the building or structure. c. Site grading, and d. Temporary or permanent placement, dumping, or removal of any material, originating on the site or elsewhere. TRCA may grant permission for development in or on a regulated area if, in its opinion, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land will not be affected by the development. 255 P age 2 TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Review Protocol June 2015 VOLUNTARY PROJECT REVIEW TRCA recognizes that the activities of all federal and provincial Crown corporations are exempt from conservation authority permitting activities under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act and under Ontario Regulation 166/06 — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses. In the absence of the formal permitting process, Crown corporations, railways and radiocommunication and broadcasting antenna system providers may voluntarily request TRCA to review and comment on detailed design activities associated with project construction, maintenance or emergency activities. As such, the provisions in this document will apply when TRCA review is requested. TRCA will issue a letter of Voluntary Project Review when this review is complete. TRCA PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF EMERGENCY INFRASTRUTURE WORKS PERMIT OR VOLUNTARY PROJECT REVIEW APPLICATIONS To immediately stabilize and protect threatened infrastructure at a specified site, a Declaration of Emergency Works must be made to TRCA. If appropriate and in order to facilitate implementation of the emergency works, TRCA will provide an extension to the fisheries timing window, unless related to an endangered species, as noted below. TRCA Contacts The following lead contacts should be contacted directly. A project manager from within the appropriate Environmental Assessment Planning team will be assigned. Beth Williston, Associate Director, EA Planning should be copied. City of Toronto York Region Peel and Durham Regions Copy of Correspondence Sharon Lingertat Beth Williston Renee - Afoom - Boateng Suzanne Bevan Senior Planner Associate Director Senior Planner Senior Planner EA Planning EA Planning EA Planning EA Planning slingertat(a)trca.on.ca bwilliston (a)trca.on.ca rafoom- boateng(a)trca.on.ca sbevan(a)trca.on.ca TRCA Submission Process Failed Infrastructure For failed Infrastructure, the TRCA shall be immediately notified of the failure via email to the above contacts. The proponent shall take all necessary corrective action to secure the infrastructure. The proponent will submit the following information as soon as possible, but no longer than five (5) business days after the active action to secure the infrastructure has been completed. Urgent and Critical Infrastructure For urgent and critical infrastructure, the proponent will submit the following information to the TRCA before the active action to secure the infrastructure is begun. Step 1: Declaration of Emergency Works A letter, or TRCA Emergency Infrastructure Works permit application, signed by senior official must be submitted to TRCA declaring the emergency situation. The letter /application shall include: 1. Classification of Emergency as failure, urgent or critical. 2. Background information on the location, existing conditions, project issue including property or infrastructure at risk, and rationale for immediate corrective action. 256 2 Page 3 TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Review Protocol June 2015 3. A statement declaring the emergency situation, such as: Based on the TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Review Protocol, it is the [proponent's] declaration that the project is to be carried in response to an emergency. It is to commence forthwith and is in the interest of public health and safety, and environmental and property protection. 4. Overview of other legislation that has been enacted. 5. A statement confirming the site visit can be conducted (i.e., the site is considered safe) 6. A brief outline of the methodology for corrective action; site access, staging and storage; and options for site stabilization /restoration. 7. A statement as to whether the proposed works will be considered temporary or permanent in nature, defined as such at the discretion of the proponent. 8. Consent for TRCA, its employees and other persons as required by TRCA, to access the property for the purpose of inspection, obtaining information, and /or monitoring any and all works, activities and /or construction pertaining to the property in addition to the works as approved under cover of any permit issued by TRCA, provided that the site is deemed safe as per Step 2. Step 2: Site Visit TRCA recognizes that provincial legislation and regulations may require an immediate response to an event, and a TRCA site visit may not be possible or may be delayed. Once it is determined that the situation is safe, the TRCA project manager will be contacted and the site visit will arranged with the proponent and TRCA planning and technical staff. During the site visit, TRCA will review the site conditions, proposed project design, construction methodology and ecological impact mitigation measures and advise of permit requirements. The TRCA project manager and technical staff will make the site visit a priority. Step 3: Submit Design Details and Fees The proponent will submit the following information as soon possible to the TRCA project manager: 1. Emergency Works Review Fees as per approved TRCA Fees Schedule, based on a discussion with the planner regarding the classification of the project as Non - Complex (Routine Infrastructure Works, Minor, Standard) or Complex (Major). 2. Cover letter, including: i) Description of the proposed works, including: (1) Description of the general design and construction timing for the permanent solution (if available), if different than the solution proposed for the Emergency Infrastructure Works Permit; and, (2) Description of methodology for corrective action. ii) A request for review under the Fisheries Act, if appropriate (see Step 4 for details). 3. A sketch, concept drawing or detailed design drawings (as appropriate to the time available to prepare ) detailing: i) Project location; ii) Site access, staging and storage details; iii) Erosion and sediment control details; iv) Construction methodology; v) Mitigation measures; vi) Site stabilization and restoration details; and, vii) Supporting technical documentation. 4. Air photos and site photos. 5. Additional information as identified during the site visit. 6. A completed Permission to Enter TRCA Property Application Form, if applicable, and the associated archaeological review fee. 257 3 Page 5 TRCA Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Review Protocol June 2015 Step 4: Review under the Federal Fisheries Act Upon request, TRCA will provide an opinion as to whether the project and its implementation will cause "serious harm to fish "as per the self- assessment process under the Fisheries Act for emergencies considered urgent or critical. Fisheries and Oceans Canada shall be contacted directly by the proponent in instances where the infrastructure has failed. Note that the onus is on the proponent to ensure that the execution of the works does not result in serious harm to fish. Step 5: Review under the Provincial Endangered Species Act The proponent is advised to contact the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNRF) to determine if any approvals under the Endangered Species Act are required. MNRF is responsible for timing window modifications related to endangered aquatic species and impacts to any other species under the Endangered Species Act. Step 6: Review under the other Legislation The proponent is responsible for seeking approvals under all other legislation independent of the Conservation Authorities Act as may apply to this project. Step 7: Issuance of TRCA Emergency Infrastructure Works Permits or Letter of Voluntary Project Review The TRCA staff will expedite project review and confirm if there are any outstanding issues. Once technical issues are satisfied, TRCA staff will issue an Emergency Infrastructure Works Permit or letter of Voluntary Project review and the works may then immediately proceed. The Emergency Works Infrastructure Permit will be taken to the following Executive Committee for information. If requested, the TRCA Ecologist can provide an opinion with regard to serious harm to fish under the Fisheries Act. If there is a likelihood of serious harm to fish, consultation with DFO will be recommended. Approval under other legislation, including the Endangered Species Act, is separate from the TRCA review and the responsibility of the proponent. Step 8: Implement Emergency Infrastructure Works The proponent will notify TRCA Enforcement when construction of the project is to commence or has commenced. The project will be constructed based on the approved Emergency Works Infrastructure Permit. Any modifications to the approved permit must be submitted to TRCA for review and approval as a revision to the permit. Please refer to the TRCA Fees Schedule for information regarding permit revision. TRCA Enforcement is to be notified upon completion of the works. Step 9: Develop Long Term Permanent Solution If the proposed solution is considered to be temporary in nature, then the proponent will undertake studies to develop and implement a long term solution for the project. This should be implemented before a second failure of the site occurs. The studies and detailed design plans for the long terms solution should be submitted to the appropriate agencies for formal review under approval processes defined through the Environmental Assessment Act or relevant Class EA process. Additional permit or permits and fees, in accordance with Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act review, may be required. 258 4 Attachment 2 v ° m d Yil E N N C C O v •L > '60 N O.O v ° m Lw Yil E N N C C O 41 L .O O Y E ` O a. y_ N O a a O c ° w L o E E m�awo ° 7 Y W M o. y t E W CL NL H N y In N N 259 N m E C• 7 a+ O 6 N a d W ° N f0 N Y Y D Da Y +' d O Ul '6 L Y 3 A a d CL a CL N a •- a o Y Y d Y L d O t Y 3 A L O Yil O N N Vl N C 'O u • Y m > y a a .a�E°mC FCC a a O c ° w L o E E m�awo r- w�•_o Etl0'o Ea C Y Ns u H N y 259 N m E C• 7 a+ O 6 N a d W ° N f0 N Y Y D Da Y +' d O Ul '6 L Y 3 A a d CL a CL N a •- a o Y Y d Y L d O t Y 3 A RES. #A104/15 - TORONTO AND REGION REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN Renewal of Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan governance agreements. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Giorgio Mammoliti THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff continue to work with federal and provincial partners to implement the 2015 -2019 Remedial Action Plan (RAP) agreement between TRCA and Environment Canada (EC) and the 2015 -2016 RAP agreement between TRCA and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change ( MOECC); THAT TRCA staff continue to work with the Toronto and Region RAP team, federal, provincial and municipal staff, academia, environmental non - governmental organizations, and other interest groups to implement the 2015 -2016 Toronto and Region RAP workplan and enhance RAP objectives; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA thank MOECC and EC for their ongoing commitment towards Great Lakes management. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Toronto and Region RAP was instituted in response to the 1987 designation of Toronto and Region as an Area of Concern (AOC) under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) between Canada and the United States. The Toronto and Region AOC consists of six watersheds stretching from Etobicoke Creek in the west to the Rouge River in the east. The GLWQA establishes a process for the development and implementation of a RAP for each AOC. Each AOC is evaluated against 14 Beneficial Uses and a RAP is developed to remediate all Beneficial Uses that are considered impaired. Criteria are established to determine when an impaired Beneficial Use can be considered restored, and once all impaired Beneficial Uses have been restored the AOC can be Delisted. Under the GLWQA and the associated Canada Ontario Agreement on Great Lakes Water Quality and Ecosystem Health (COA), EC and the MOECC share responsibility for ensuring progress on restoration and delisting Canadian AOCs. TRCA has led the administration of the Toronto and Region RAP since 2002 under agreements with EC and MOECC. Management of the Toronto and Region RAP is undertaken by the RAP team, consisting of representatives from EC, MOECC, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) and TRCA. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE In collaboration with the respective Toronto and Region RAP Team Beneficial Use Impairment (BUI) working groups, a five year workplan was developed in 2014 -2015 and will be implemented starting in the 2015 -2016 fiscal year. In implementing the 2015 -2016 workplan, the Toronto and Region RAP team will shift from a model of requesting RAP project proposal submissions for funding to an approach wherein funding is targeted to projects that meet the specific RAP workplan objectives. A communications plan was developed in conjunction with the workplan and is being implemented simultaneously. Both the workplan and the communications plan are available upon request. The BUIs in the Toronto and Region AOC that are still listed as 'impaired' are: • Eutrophication or undesirable algae; 260 • Beach closings; • Restrictions on fish or wildlife consumption; • Loss of fish and wildlife habitat; • Loss of fish and wildlife populations; and • Degradation of aesthetics. The BUI of Degradation of phytoplankton and zooplankton communities is classified as'requires further assessment' in order to determine if it is considered impaired. It is anticipated that assessments of the current status of the BUIs Eutrophication or undesirable algae, Degradation of aesthetics, and Degradation of phytoplankton and zooplankton communities will be completed by the end of the 2015 -2016 fiscal year. Other projects currently slated to be funded under 2015 -2016 RAP governance agreements with EC and MOECC are: • development of an accreditation program for operators of road salt spreading equipment; • development of a low impact development site design and performance modelling tool; • development of standard specifications for compost amended topsoil in Ontario; • developing stormwater balance criteria for the protection of natural features in urban settings; • operational izing integrated restoration planning and the restoration opportunities bank; • terrestrial biological inventory data update; • regional watershed monitoring; • Aquatic Habitat Toronto; and • a variety of projects undertaken by the watershed and waterfront teams. The RAP funding will also continue to be provided for a public outreach program, the Lake Ontario Evenings (LOE), through 2015 -2016. The LOE program is a speaker series that provides a casual atmosphere in which attendees listen to presentations and can ask questions of experts on issues currently facing Lake Ontario. A new initiative this fiscal year will be a large science workshop in the fall of 2015. Recent research on RAP issues in the Toronto and Region AOC will be presented by experts to assist and guide the RAP team, and interested stakeholders, in implementing the RAP. Additional public outreach during the 2015 -2016 fiscal year will consist of the release of a report outlining the activities undertaken during the past five years that contribute toward the delisting of the Toronto and Region AOC. Other projects being undertaken by TRCA under the umbrella of the RAP are specifically funded by EC through their Great Lakes Sustainability Fund. These projects include: • developing storm water balance criteria for the protection of natural features in urban settings; • effectiveness monitoring of aquatic habitat rehabilitation projects; • accelerating adoption of innovative stormwater treatment practices; • Toronto hydro corridor revitalization project; • integrated restoration planning - Phase 2; • Tommy Thompson Park west shore shoreline enhancement project; • stewardship and outreach education; and • evaluation of the implementation of the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy in TRCA watersheds. MOECC also funds additional projects related to the RAP through separate agreements with TRCA including: 261 • Rural clean water program; and • low impact development project for Country Court Boulevard filter swale assessment. In addition to these projects funded directly by the federal and provincial governments, large municipal projects such as the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Master Plan, the Don Mouth Naturalization Project and the Port Lands Flood Protection Project continue to constitute an important element of the delisting objectives of the Toronto and Region RAP. In collaboration with TRCA, the RAP team will continue to contribute feedback as requested in response to the February 2015 MOECC draft Bill 66: Great Lakes Protection Act 2015. If passed this Act will offer opportunities for the restoration and protection of the Great Lakes long after the Area of Concern is Delisted. FINANCIAL DETAILS RAP program delivery in the 2015 -2016 fiscal year will be jointly supported through agreements with EC and MOECC. Each agency has contributed $250,000 (total $500,000) for implementation of the 2015 -2016 RAP workplan. For future years, TRCA has an agreement in place with EC for five years (2015 -2019) for $1,250,000 ($250,000 per year). MOECC renews the RAP agreement with TRCA on an annual basis as needed to complete the RAP. Report prepared by: Meg St John, extension 5576 Emails: mstjohn @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313 Emails: ngaffney @trca.on.ca Date: May 22, 2015 262 RES. #A105/15 - CARRUTHERS CREEK WATERSHED PLAN Service agreement between Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Region of Durham to collaboratively develop a watershed plan for Carruthers Creek. Moved by: Jack Ballinger Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker WHEREAS the Region of Durham has requested Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to complete a watershed plan update for Carruthers Creek watershed; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA work with the Region of Durham, and in consultation with the City of Pickering and Town of Ajax, to complete an integrated watershed plan for Carruthers Creek; THAT TRCA staff be directed to enter into a service agreement with the Region of Durham to complete the watershed plan; THAT staff be directed to take such actions as necessary to develop an integrated watershed plan, including obtaining approvals, signing and execution of documents, and hiring consultants; THAT staff report on progress of the watershed planning process to the Authority annually, or more frequently as need arises, and at the completion of the watershed plan; AND FURTHER THAT the Region of Durham, City of Pickering and Town of Ajax be so advised by the CEO's Office. AMENDMENT #1 Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT the following be inserted after the main motion WHEREAS on March 10, 2015 by report No. 2015 -P -16 the Region of Durham has requested Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to complete an Update to the Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan; AND WHEREAS on June 26, 2015 TRCA will be considering a report to enter into a service agreement with the Region of Durham to complete the watershed plan; AND WHEREAS the Carruthers Creek watershed includes an area referred to as Northeast Pickering, which was specifically considered and removed from designation for urban development purposes by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Ontario Municipal Board through the approval of Amendment 128 to the Durham Regional Official Plan; AND WHEREAS the Carruthers headwaters is currently designated Prime Agricultural Area with Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Features; 263 AND WHEREAS the need for additional urban land beyond existing designated urban areas has not been demonstrated through a municipal comprehensive review, as required by Section 7.3.11 p) of the Durham Regional Official Plan which is likely not to commence until 2018; AND WHEREAS the Town of Ajax supports the fundamental goals, objectives and management actions within the existing Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan; AND WHEREAS the Town of Ajax supports a full scientific analysis to support and protect the ecological health and integrity of the Carruthers headwaters for the long term; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT any development scenarios to be examined as part of the watershed plan specifically exclude any new urban development in the headwaters of the Carruthers Creek; AND FURTHER THAT the development scenarios to be considered through this exercise be confined to examining intensification within existing designated urban areas only in conformity with local municipal and regional Official Plans. AMENDMENT #2 RES. #A106/15 Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Jack Ballinger THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: THAT staff report back after Phase I is complete. AMENDMENT #1 WAS NOT CARRIED AMENDMENT #2 WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS WHEREAS the Region of Durham has requested Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to complete a watershed plan update for Carruthers Creek watershed; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA work with the Region of Durham, and in consultation with the City of Pickering and Town of Ajax, to complete an integrated watershed plan for Carruthers Creek; THAT TRCA staff be directed to enter into a service agreement with the Region of Durham to complete the watershed plan; THAT staff be directed to take such actions as necessary to develop an integrated watershed plan, including obtaining approvals, signing and execution of documents, and hiring consultants; 264 THAT staff report on progress of the watershed planning process to the Authority annually, or more frequently as need arises, and at the completion of the watershed plan; THAT the Region of Durham, City of Pickering and Town of Ajax be so advised by the CEO's Office; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back after Phase I is complete. BACKGROUND Carruthers Creek Watershed Carruthers Creek watershed is located in the City of Pickering and Town of Ajax in the Region of Durham, and is the easternmost watershed in TRCA's jurisdiction. The watershed is a relatively small and sensitive drainage area of approximately 3,748 hectares (9,261 acres), from two to four kilometres in width, and only 18 kilometres long (Attachment 1). The headwaters of Carruthers Creek originate south of the Oak Ridges Moraine. The stream enters Lake Ontario through the Carruthers Creek Wetland Complex, a Provincially Significant Wetland approximately 141 hectares in size (348 acres). This wetland complex is one of the few blocks of natural lands in Carruthers Creek watershed, and the only significant block of publicly -owned greenspace in the watershed. Land use in Carruthers Creek watershed is currently rural north of Highway 7. South of Highway 7 to Taunton Road, the majority of lands are in the Protected Countryside area of the Greenbelt. From Taunton Road south to the lakeshore, low to medium density development predominates, serviced by a range of storm water management practices, from non - existent infrastructure to state -of -the art low impact development (LID) technologies. There is also a flood vulnerable area in the Pickering Beach neighbourhood of Ajax. Given its small size, physiography, and the extent and type of existing urbanization, among other factors, Carruthers Creek watershed has a finite and limited assimilative capacity to accommodate land use changes. Key watershed issues to consider include: • Sensitivity of the watershed to change, including consideration of flooding and erosion impacts. • Extent of the natural heritage system to be conserved and enhanced in order to provide long -term biodiversity in the watershed and, where possible, mitigate existing urban development impacts. A Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek (2003) In 1999, significant proposed land use changes in Pickering, such as the Seaton lands and the proposed federal Pickering airport, were expected to impact Duffins Creek. Scoping and work planning exercises by TRCA and our partners determined the need for a watershed plan for Duffins Creek, however these exercises did not consider Carruthers Creek. Local concern for the wetlands at the mouth of Carruthers Creek, among other issues, raised interest in watershed planning for Carruthers. At Authority Meeting #4/99, held on April 30, 1999, Resolution #A114/99 was approved, in part, as follows: ... THAT the Carruthers Creek Watershed Management Strategy be done simultaneously with the Duffins Creek Watershed Management Strategy. While a task force was established for Carruthers Creek, and a State of the Watershed report was completed in 2002, resources were inadequate to conduct a watershed planning process distinct from that for Duffins Creek. The two task forces met simultaneously and the Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek was completed in 2003. 265 When the provincial Greenbelt was created in 2005, portions of Carruthers Creek watershed were included in the Protected Countryside, however the headwaters area was not. Due to plans of subdivision which received approval prior to the creation of the Greenbelt, the Protected Countryside areas became fragmented from a natural heritage perspective. Current land uses include golf courses and rural estate subdivisions. The lands outside of the existing urban area and outside of the Protected Countryside are commonly known as the Whitebelt. The Region of Durham Official Plan recognizes the preparation and implementation of watershed plans as an effective tool in the protection of the Region's natural heritage resources. In 2014, Durham Planning staff initiated discussion with TRCA staff to consider a watershed plan for Carruthers Creek, to meet the requirement under the Region's Official Plan Policy 7.3.11. Through an iterative process conducted over a number of months, Durham Region staff and TRCA staff developed the work plan and budget. On March 10, 2015, Durham Region Planning and Economic Development Committee passed a motion to develop a watershed plan for Carruthers Creek in collaboration with TRCA, funded by the Region of Durham. Regional Council approved this motion on April 1, 2015 (Report #2015- P- 16), thereby confirming its support for an integrated watershed plan as the best way to protect the health of this small watershed. Upcoming work to collaboratively develop a watershed plan for Carruthers Creek will benefit from new information and studies which have been developed since the 2003 watershed plan was completed, including: • source water characterization studies prepared by the Central Lake Ontario/Toronto and Region /Credit Valley Conservation (CTC) source water protection team; • geological databases and a regional groundwater flow model from the York Peel Durham Toronto (YPDT) groundwater study; • additional studies completed by the Town of Ajax and TRCA on flood risk management in the Pickering Beach neighbourhood; • new best practices in stormwater management (low impact development); • new planning policies such as the Town of Ajax Official Plan Amendment 38 (Climate Change and Environment), City of Pickering Official Plan Amendment 23 (Planning Tools for Sustainable Placemaking), and The Living City Policies for TRCA; • emerging understanding of watershed inputs to the nearshore region of Lake Ontario; • protecting habitat for redside dace, a small fish listed by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry as Endangered in Ontario; • the Province of Ontario's review of Places to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Greenbelt Plan, and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, which began this year. The Region's investment in the Carruthers Creek watershed planning process will include the following outcomes and products from TRCA: • Overall project coordination, in collaboration with Durham Region, and ongoing consultation with the City of Pickering and Town of Ajax. • Budget management and financial reporting. • Full results of rigorous technical studies throughout the watershed planning process and final reports as appendices to the final watershed plan product. • Geographic and other data management, including an information portal for the planning process with varied levels of access to information, integrated and updated mapping, and a dynamic data management tool which may be shared with the Region, consultants and others. OV Support for community engagement to be led by Durham Region throughout the planning process, including media outreach, social media, and community events and activities. Outreach will include not only watershed businesses and residents, but also the many ENGOs and stakeholders who demonstrated interest in previous northeast Pickering land use issues. Collaborative review of any proposed development scenario models, as needed. An integrated watershed strategy, as well as an outline of short-term and long -term implementation activities and related cost estimates, such as ongoing monitoring, targeted ecological restoration, etc. RATIONALE The Region of Durham recognizes the preparation and implementation of watershed plans as an effective tool in the protection of the Region's natural heritage resources and has requested TRCA to complete a watershed plan for Carruthers Creek (Durham Region Report #2015- P -16). Staff expects the Region of Durham's investment in an integrated watershed plan for Carruthers Creek to provide future benefits and cost savings to the Region. The watershed plan will also be an opportunity for TRCA to work closely with Durham, Ajax and Pickering to build consensus and to work cooperatively to foster a healthy watershed with sustainable neighbourhoods. DETAILS OF THE WORK TO BE DONE In addition to engaging a variety of technical staff from various TRCA divisions, leadership of this project will be a coordinated effort between Watershed Strategies staff and Planning, Greenspace and Communications staff, in collaboration with Durham Region Planning staff. The ongoing involvement of staff from the Town of Ajax and the City of Pickering will be important throughout the entire four year watershed plan process. Initial discussions with municipal partners began in May 2015, and will continue as TRCA reviews the results of the watershed plan characterization with all municipal partners to determine current conditions and sensitivities of the watershed. The current state characterization in Phase 1 will identify select high sensitivity features or systems in the watershed (e.g., hydrology, hydrogeology, wetlands, headwater watercourses, drainage features) which will require specific management directions for any future urban area expansion, and subsequent planning and development approvals at the regional, local municipal and TRCA levels. The existing urban areas south of Highway 7 also merit special consideration, specifically with respect to cumulative impacts since these areas are subject to flood and erosion vulnerability. Phase 2 of the watershed planning process will build on the results from the Phase 1 assessments of the baseline physical conditions of the watershed. Technical studies will be completed, and the integrated watershed management plan will be written. While the duration of the second phase of the planning process (2017 -2018) is expected to be two years, the actual timing will depend on numerous factors, including the results of the data analysis in the first phase. Details for each study, and the work to be done in each phase, are included in the work plan which was approved by the Region of Durham (Report #2015- P -16). Stakeholder and community engagement will also occur throughout the watershed planning process. 267 FINANCIAL DETAILS This will be a multi -year planning process with a budget of $299,397 in 2015; $299,731 in 2016; $275,176 in 2017; and $215,127 in 2018, a total of $1,089,431, to be funded by the Region of Durham through a service agreement with TRCA, in account 120 -80. Report prepared by: Maryam Nassar, 647 -921 -5626 Emails: mnassar @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Gary Bowen, 416- 271 -8944 or Maryam Nassar, 647 - 921 -5626 Emails: gbowen @trca.on.ca or mnassar @trca.on.ca Date: 1 June 2015 Attachments: 1 • i Attachment 1 RESMA107 /15 - ONTARIO CLIMATE CONSORTIUM Governance Structure, Terms of Reference and Governing Council Membership. Approval of the 2015 -2017 draft Terms of Reference and proposed membership for Ontario Climate Consortium's Governing Council. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Colleen Jordan WHEREAS "Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change: TRCA Action Plan for The Living City" released in 2008 identifies the establishment of a regional climate change partnership to foster collaboration around research and action as a key priority action; AND WHEREAS Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and York University established a formal partnership in 2009 to provide climate services to TRCA's partner municipalities, the Ontario public service and private sector end - users; AND WHEREAS in October 2011 the Authority endorsed the Ontario Climate Consortium (OCC) Strategy, approved the Terms of Reference for the OCC Advisory Board, and directed TRCA staff to act as the OCC Secretariat and facilitate the implementation of partnerships and priority projects; AND WHEREAS in May 2015 the OCC Governing Council (formerly known as Advisory Board) endorsed an updated strategy to reflect current strategic and operational realities, and an associated update to the Governing Council draft Terms of Reference; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the OCC Governing Council draft Terms of Reference, as outlined in Attachment 1, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the appointment of members to OCC's Governing Council, as outlined in Attachment 2, be approved. CARRIED BACKGROUND Following the approval of "Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change: TRCA Action Plan for The Living City' by the Authority in April 2008, York University and TRCA formed a partnership to support research and action on climate change. This ad hoc partnership became formalized in 2011 with the development of the Ontario Regional Climate Change Consortium Strategy (later renamed to the Ontario Climate Consortium or OCC) which was developed through a collaborative process that involved representatives from twelve universities as well as a range of private and public sector organizations, including municipal governments. This Strategy was endorsed by the Authority in October 2011. The OCC is well aligned with TRCA's Strategic Plan (2013- 2022). It helps to demonstrate TRCA's leadership in addressing climate change at the regional scale, and highlights TRCA's strengths in building partnerships and new business models to facilitate a region -wide approach to addressing climate change mitigation and adaptation imperatives. Since 2011 the OCC has achieved a number of notable successes, including: 270 • Annual Climate Symposium - Organized three climate change research symposia at academic institutions across southern Ontario, each of which drew more than 150 delegates from public, private and non - governmental organizations. OCC's most recent symposium, at McMaster University, featured keynote speeches from Glen Murray, Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, and David McLaughlin, former head of the National Round Table on the Environment and Economy. NRCan Regional Adaptation Collaborative - Leveraged more than $500,000 of funding from Natural Resources Canada's Regional Adaptation Collaborative program to deliver on a range of projects, including: • A climate change risk and vulnerability assessment of electricity transmission in the Greater Toronto Area in collaboration with the Independent Electricity System Operator (I ESO). • The development of a training program for municipal water managers to improve understanding of the potential effects of climate change on watershed hydrology and water resources. • Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessments in the Regional Municipalities of Peel and York — Leading collaborative projects to evaluate the vulnerability of key municipal assets to climate change and extreme weather. This work is ongoing. Matching funding of approximately $100,000 was secured through Grate Lakes Integrated Science Assessment Centre, University of Michigan. Great Lakes Climate Change Science — Provided research support for Environment Canada, and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, to develop a synthesis report on the strengths and gaps in climate change science in the Great Lakes basin. • Land Use and Climate Change Research — Leading a research team to support to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to develop policy recommendations to address climate change in the context of the coordinated review of four provincial plans in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Area. • Identification and Validation of Extreme Weather Indicators for Agriculture Production and Rural Resilience in Ontario— Working with Agriculture and Agri -Food Canada to identify climatological indicators that can express current and future exposure to extreme weather and agro - climatic conditions. This research enables a better understanding of impacts and opportunities associated with climate change. Comparison of Techniques for Updating Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) Statistics — Leading a collaborative effort to understand the best methods for updating IDF statistics to account for projected climate change. This research will help municipal water infrastructure managers to manage extreme precipitation that is expected as a result of climate change. RATIONALE The 2011 OCC strategy was launched with a three year implementation plan that was predicated on securing core seed funding from provincial government sources to develop a provincial centre of expertise on climate change adaptation and mitigation. This seed funding was to address near term organizational development, and would be replaced by fee - for - service and project -based revenue streams as service offerings solidified. 271 With provincial government funding not imminently forthcoming, the OCC Secretariat adapted the business model to focus on securing funding from fee - for - service and grant -based project work (some examples of which are described above). The OCC also developed a formal membership framework, and secured funding agreements from four Ontario universities (York University, The University of Western Ontario, McMaster University and the University of Guelph). In 2014 the OCC Governing Council directed the Secretariat to update the Strategy to align with this adapted business model. The OCC Secretariat undertook this update in the latter half of 2014 and into 2015, and the OCC Governing Council approved the strategy at the May 11, 2015 Annual Meeting. The Strategy update had three overarching objectives, which were addressed as described below. Objective 1: Strengthen programs for end -users and researchers How this is proposed to be addressed: Whereas in the original 2011 strategy OCC programs were organized around sector nodes (i.e. Water resources, Agriculture and Forestry, and Health), the OCC Secretariat proposes an updated program framework that is focused on core services which are applicable across sectors. The core service lines proposed are: • Climate Information, including custom analysis and applied climate science; • Adaptation and Mitigation research and planning support; • Research Mobilization through convening researchers and end -users at annual symposia and other events, and by communicating academic and technical research findings to end -users in a variety of formats. Objective 2: Update operating structure to support sustainable program delivery. How this is proposed to be addressed: Whereas in the original 2011 strategy, the operating structure was aligned with the objective of securing core government funding, the proposed update to the operating structure creates alignment with the reality that the OCC is reliant on project -based funding opportunities through fee - for - service and research grants. The update also creates opportunities to enhance the membership base (and associated revenues), as well as for increased sponsorship and event revenues. Objective 3: Update existing governance structure to facilitate focused and meaningful engagement of members and advisors. How this is proposed to be addressed: Whereas in the past OCC governance was open to a broad group of both funding and non - funding members, the Secretariat has proposed an updated OCC Governing Council draft Terms of Reference (Attachment 1) which, among other things, would limit voting membership on the OCC Governing Council to financially contributing members. Additional non - voting positions are proposed to be made available to key stakeholders who currently are not providing funding support, but may in the future, or may be able to connect the OCC with alternative funding opportunities. A proposed list of Governing Council members is provided in Attachment 2. This updated strategy and governance framework is intended to be implemented in the latter half of 2015 through the creation of a work plan that will address the OCC's organizational development and activities to 2019. 272 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The OCC Secretariat intends to undertake the following key activities over the coming months to support medium and long -term sustainability of the OCC business model: 1. Membership Development - Recruit additional funding members from the academic, public and private sectors. 2. Work Plan Development - Establish a 2016 -2019 work plan, in collaboration with OCC members, that builds on past successes and aligns the research needs of OCC's municipal and other public /private sector partners with the research expertise and interests of academic partners. A portion of the work plan development will be focused around securing long -term grant -based funding to support the OCC Secretariat and the program management services it provides. FINANCIAL DETAILS The OCC's annual budget of approximately $500,000 is drawn from a range of funding sources, including grants, self generated revenues, fee - for - service projects and membership revenues. Report prepared by: Ian McVey, 416 - 451 -1420 Emails: imcvey @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ian McVey, 416 - 451 -1420, Christine Tu, extension 5707 Emails: imcvey @trca.on.ca, ctu @trca.on.ca Date: June 12, 2015 Attachments: 2 273 Attachment 1 OCC GOVERNING COUNCIL 2015 -2017 DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE Background The Ontario Climate Consortium (OCC) was established in 2011 to respond to the need for research to support the design and implementation of policies, tools and guidance that address climate change issues at a local and regional scale in Ontario. The OCC was founded with the financial support of York University and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). These institutions have been joined by The University of Western Ontario, McMaster University, the University of Guelph, the City of Toronto and the Regional Municipalities of York and Peel as financially contributing members. In recognition of the changes in OCC's membership, the OCC secretariat initiated the development of an updated strategy and governance framework in 2014, which is being implemented in 2015 and will address the OCC's organizational development to 2017. This document updates the Terms of Reference developed in 2013 to align with the updated strategy and governance framework being implemented in 2015. 2. Mission, mandate and operating structure 2.1 Mission To support the implementation of climate change responses at the local and regional level in Ontario by facilitating knowledge exchange between OCC's network of research experts and public and private sector decision - makers. 2.2 Mandate The mandate of the OCC is to: Provide a platform for knowledge exchange between OCC's research network and public and private sector decision - makers. Facilitate the assessment of climate change related risks and opportunities, as well as planning and implementation to address risks and opportunities at the local and regional level. Work with researchers and end -users to actively communicate the outputs of climate change research to a broad audience within Ontario. 274 2.3 OCC Program Areas Climate Information Mitigation and Adaptation Research Mobilization Custom Analysis: Planning Support: Symposium: Flagship Projects that leverage Guide end -users and OCC event focused on completed analysis or provide technical support showcasing Consortium existing analyzed datasets to facilitate risk -based projects and initiatives, for adaptation or other mitigation and adaptation research and thought purposes (e.g., localized planning using leaders (e.g., annual OCC climate projection for risk standardized symposium with partner assessments using methodologies (e.g., universities /sponsored or climate data from infrastructure risk using themed events). government sources). Engineers Canada Communication and Applied Climate approach). Engagement: Work with Science: Primary Research Support: Lead researchers and climate research into the use of and coordinate projects change practitioners (end - climate information in a that answer critical users) to maximize the broad range of research questions to utility of outputs from OCC applications (e.g., inform mitigation and research. Active marketing evaluating the validity of adaptation responses and and promotion of OCC different datasets and develop broadly research (e.g., "A Dialogue methodologies to extreme applicable guidance with Stakeholders," climate indicators [e.g., materials /tools. position papers, research OF curves]). summaries, information session and training). 3. Governing Council 3.1 Mandate The Governing Council's mandate is to provide strategic direction to the OCC Secretariat on organizational priorities, to evaluate overall performance, particularly with respect to achievement of established objectives, and to provide input on and /or endorse the OCC's annual workplan and associated budget. 3.2 Roles and Responsibilities Specifically, members of the Governing Council will be primarily responsible for: • engaging researchers within their institutions in the OCC's activities, including fee - for- service work, and training and development opportunities; • reviewing and approving the OCC strategy and programs as required; • providing input on and /or endorsing the OCC's annual workplan and associated budget; • monitoring overall OCC priorities and performance; • facilitating access to strategic partners and advisors • publishing an annual report with the support of the OCC Secretariat. 275 3.3 Structure Supported by the Secretariat, the Governing Council will have a Chair, Co -Chair or Vice Chair, and will be comprised of up to a maximum of 13 Voting Members. 3.3.1 Governing Council Voting Members The Governing Council will consist of up to 13 Voting Members including the Chair, Co -Chair or Vice Chair, appointed representatives of contributing members, strategic partners, members of the business community and a number of government representatives as follows: • Academic Contributing Members (eight (8) voting representatives) o Eight members drawn from representatives of financially- contributing university partner members. • TRCA (one (1) voting representative) o The Authority Chair or other designated member of staff (Chief Executive Officer or the Director, Watershed Strategies). • Municipal Representatives ( up to three (3) voting representatives) o One staff representative from each of the municipalities collaborating with OCC and /or financially supporting OCC programming. 3.3.2 Governing Council Advisory Members In addition to Voting Members, non - voting Advisory Members can be invited to join the Governing Council and support its activities. These members can be drawn from government, non - government and private sector organizations. 3.4 Appointment Process Governing Council members will be appointed for a three -year, renewable term. OCC contributing members (TRCA, academic and municipal partners) will be formally requested to nominate representatives, and all proposed appointments will be presented to the Governing Council for formal approval. The Chair and the Co -Chair or Vice Chair will be elected by members of the Governing Council for a term of three years. 3.5 Chair and Co -Chair or Vice Chair The Governing Council Chair and Co -Chair or Vice Chair will provide leadership in building a shared vision and commitment for moving forward with the Consortium's mission and mandate. The Chair will have the following additional responsibilities: • presiding over Governing Council meetings, setting the agenda and generally ensuring the effectiveness of meetings; • recruiting new Governing Council members when openings arise; and 276 In the absence of the Chair, the Co -Chair or Vice Chair will perform the above functions 3.6 Meetings The Governing Council will meet at least two (2) times per year, roughly every six (6) months. One of these meetings will be an in person meeting held in conjunction with the annual OCC symposium. Meetings are anticipated to be approximately two (2) hours in length — at the discretion of the Governing Council — and an agenda will be distributed in advance of meetings. It is anticipated that members will commit at least two (2) days per year to prepare for and attend Governing Council meetings. The Chair will have the discretion to call additional conference call meetings if required. 3.7 Reporting The Governing Council is accountable to the broader membership of the Ontario Climate Consortium for achievement of overall goals. The Governing Council, with support from the Secretariat, will update members annually on the status of OCC projects and initiatives and on progress with respect to overall goals and annual workplan objectives. 3.8 Quorum and Governance A quorum will consist of voting members in numbers greater than or equal to one -third of the total number of voting members on the Governing Council. Consensus -based decision making will be the preferred procedure. Formal decisions will be based on a simple majority vote. In the event of a tie, the Chair will cast the deciding vote. 4. Secretariat The Governing Council and its Chair will be supported by a Secretariat housed within Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). The Secretariat will provide the following services: • Facilitation of OCC sponsored events and Governing Council meetings. • Project and program development and implementation. • Research and policy analysis. • Administrative and recruitment support. • Financial management. • Communications management. 5. Funding Funding for Consortium activities will come from both public and private sector sources, with specific funding for programs and projects being sought from a variety of funding sources including grants, self - generated revenues, fee - for - service projects and membership revenues. 277 Attachment 2 2015 - 2017 ONTARIO CLIMATE CONSORTIUM GOVERNING COUNCIL PROPOSED VOTING MEMBERSHIP The Governing Council will consist of up to 13 Voting Members. The following appointments are proposed for the 2015 -2017 Ontario Climate Consortium Governing Council: Sector Institution Individual Title Academic York University Dr. Robert Hache Vice President, Research Alternate: Dr. Noel Sturgeon Dean, Faculty of Environmental Studies University of Guelph Dr. John Livernois Vice President, Research Alternate: Dr. Benjamin Bradshaw Associate Professor McMaster University Dr. Mo Elbestawi Vice President, Research Alternate: Dr. Arain Altaf Director, McMaster Centre for Climate Change Western University Dr. John Capone Vice President, Research Dr. Gord McBean Chair, Ontario Climate Consortium Vacant Academic Seat Vacant Academic Seat Vacant Academic Seat Vacant Academic Seat Conservation Authority Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Brian Denney Chief Executive Officer Alternate: Chandra Sharma Director, Watershed Strategies Municipality Region of Peel Arvin Prasad Director of Planning Alternate: Mark Pa'ot Climate Change Specialist York Region Valerie Shuttleworth Director, Long Range Planning Alternate: Teresa Cline Senior Planner City of Toronto Jim Baxter Director, Toronto Environmental Office Mark Bekkering Manager, Environment and Energy Division In addition to Voting Members, non - voting Advisory Members can be invited to join the Governing Council and support its activities. These members can be drawn from government, non - government, and private sector organizations. 278 Non - voting observing members Sector Institution Individual Title Conservation Conservation Authority Ontario Kim Gavine General Manager Municipality Air and Climate Change City of Hamilton Brian Mont ome ry Coordinator Durham Region To be determined Federal Director General, Atmospheric Government Science and Technology Charles Lin Directorate Ontario Region Director, Environment Strategic Integration and Canada Michael Goffin, Partnership Ontario Climate Change Government Directorate To be confirmed 279 RESMA108 /15 - BRE INNOVATION PARK AT THE LIVING CITY CAMPUS Infrastructure and Research Project Construction with The Canadian National Shelter Program. Approval to enter into an agreement with the Canadian National Shelter Program and subsequently incorporate a not - for- profit corporation to accept an in -kind donation of construction labour and equipment to facilitate the development of BRIE Innovation Park under Canada Revenue Agency's Scientific Research and Experimental Development program. Moved by: Linda Pabst Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) undertakes scientific research and experimental development at The Living City Campus; AND WHEREAS TRCA has been approached by The Canadian National Shelter Program (CNSP) with a proposal to participate in the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR &ED) program; AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with CNSP; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into an agreement subject to terms and conditions deemed acceptable to staff and solicitor; THAT TRCA incorporate a not - for - profit corporation as required under CRA's SR &ED program guidelines; AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action required to implement the agreement, including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Living City Campus at Kortright was established at Authority Meeting #2/08, held on March 28, 2008 by Resolution #A45/08: THAT the plan dated March, 2008 for The Living City Campus at the Kortright Centre for Conservation be approved. Through the planning process at that time the vision for The Living City Campus was established "to inspire, support and monitor change toward sustainable living, leading the way toward sustainable development and the use of sustainable technologies through practice, education and market transformation. This vision (was) to be realized by enhancing the existing facility to make it: • a link to cutting -edge thinking, technologies and initiatives; • practical demonstrations on how to integrate 'green' community building projects into daily lives; • a place of local, national and worldwide significance; and • a destination to visit, to learn and enjoy time and again." i o Currently the Campus is one of North America's largest demonstration, education and research facilities for renewable energy technology and green buildings. The addition of the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP) to the Campus has helped generate numerous research projects with industry and academic institutions including Ryerson University, York University, University of Waterloo, University of Guelph, McMaster University, George Brown College and Seneca College. STEP has also developed several professional training and certification programs for erosion and sediment control professionals and photovoltaic installers which have prompted requests from national and international organizations for TRCA staff to sit on numerous safety, research and standards committees, raising TRCA's profile around the world. To build on this success and grow the international market for Canadian green products and services, TRCA staff sought Authority direction in 2012 to develop a business arrangement with the Building Research Establishment (BRE) in the UK, for the establishment of an Innovation Park at The Living Centre Campus at the Kortright Centre for Conservation which was approved through Resolution #A132/12 which states, in part: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Building Research Establishment (BRE) to collaborate on research, education and training initiatives;... BRE developed the "Innovation Park" concept to assist British builders in achieving new building code standards. Similar to TRCA's existing archetype houses but on a much larger scale, these Parks have driven Britain's building industry towards net zero carbon homes production. TRCA aims to collaborate with its municipal and corporate partners to expand its existing demonstrations, research and education programs at The Living City Campus to become Canada's BRE Innovation Park. TRCA hopes that the Innovation Park will position Ontario as a North American and global leader in providing innovative solutions for sustainable construction. Over the past 3 years TRCA and BRE staff have worked collaboratively to lay the foundation for the establishment of an Innovation Park that will be built at The Living City Campus around the existing archetype houses. The business plan was developed to assist with identifying key objectives for the Park, determining key design themes and performance benchmarks for the demonstration buildings, identifying features and outcomes of the Park, and outlining stakeholder involvement. TRCA was approached by The Canadian National Shelter Program (CNSP) Research and Development Corp. in December, 2014 regarding an in -kind donation for the BRE Innovation Park at The Living City Campus. CNSP is committed to developing infrastructure, housing, long term economic development and training to meet the needs of Canada's mid -North, or what has historically been referred to as The Mid - Northern Development Corridor. CNSP seeks to create an affordable housing and infrastructure development strategy for the Mid - Northern Development Corridor that addresses issues of climate change, resource extraction, urban growth, economic - employment development and Aboriginal relations equality. 281 The vanguard of this strategy is the project CNSP refers to as Discovery House. This housing solution will have a minimum life expectancy of 100 years and will function independently of municipal services. Discovery House will need to be able to be constructed by someone with a grade 9 education and no prior trade experience, but still be complex enough to function as a gateway solution into the carpentry trade. The intent is that a successful and deployable Discovery House will become the first step in building up world class permanent settlements in Canada's north. By creating a sustainable and permanent construction industry and work force based out of the reserves, CNSP would be able to develop the needed infrastructure locally at a dramatic reduction in cost to government and industry. Critical challenges to this initiative include workforce development, sustainability, transportation, isolation and issues of economic development. Technical obstacles include the development of an independent utility services solution that includes liquid waste management, water purification, and power generation from both solar and gas. These obstacles have led to CNSP's interest in participating in the BRE Innovation Park at The Living City Campus. The SR &ED Program is a federal tax incentive program designed to encourage Canadian businesses of all sizes and in all sectors to conduct research and development (R &D) in Canada. The program is administered by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The SR &ED program allows deductions for SR &ED expenditures from income for tax purposes. To qualify, the work must meet the definition of SR &ED in subsection 248(1) of the Income Tax Act. Any taxpayer carrying on a business in Canada can deduct in computing its income from the business for the tax year expenditures associated with SR &ED work performed in Canada, in line with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Generally, a Canadian - controlled private corporation (CCPC) can earn a refundable input tax credit of 35% on qualified SR &ED expenditures. Under SR &ED's Third -Party Payments Policy, claimants can make third -party payments for research to certain types of entities, including 'D' entity. 'D' entities are non - profit SR &ED corporations resident in Canada and exempt from tax under paragraph 149(1)0) of the Income Tax Act. The creation of a "D" entity, as a wholly -owned and controlled not - for - profit corporation under TRCA, will provide for future opportunities to access research sponsorship and funding programs through both the provincial and federal governments. RATIONALE CNSP will provide in -kind labour and equipment services for the following projects located that The Living City Campus at Kortright: • completion of test but and building footings; • renovation and restoration of Solar Cottage; • clearing and grading at project site; • construction and installation of required municipal servicing infrastructure; • excavation and installation of the bio retention Swale project site. TRCA will provide in -kind research services and equipment for basic research (work undertaken for the advancement of scientific knowledge without a specific practical application in view), for the following subject areas: • liquid waste /storm -water management; • thermal storage; • system integration /micro -grid development. CNSP involvement in the construction of the BRE Innovation Park and associated projects was requested based on TRCA's history of research work and proposed demonstration and research projects and TRCA's research expertise. 282 TRCA and the BRE Innovation Park at The Living City Campus is recognized by CNSP as being important in that it will provide academics, industry and government living laboratories to field test, monitor and verify performance of technologies prior to commercialization. The Park will provide infrastructure to test new and innovative infrastructure components and carry out general research related to CNSP's Discovery House development prior to widespread implementation. FINANCIAL DETAILS Procurement of services will be conducted in accordance with TRCA policy and subject to execution of a Sponsored Research and Collaboration Agreement. The total estimated value of work exchanged will be $1,200,000. Report prepared by: Amanda Yip, extension 289 - 268 -3916 Emails: ayip @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Glenn MacMillan, extension 289 - 269 -3901 Emails: gmacmillan @trca.on.ca Date: May 08, 2015 283 RES. #A109/15 - ORACLE TRAIL RACE EVENT Township of Uxbridge. The Oracle Trail Race Event on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority properties in Uxbridge. Moved by: Jack Ballinger Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff work with Envisions to finalize all the necessary details and agreements for the Oracle Trail Race Event to be held on TRCA properties in the Township of Uxbridge; AND FURTHER THAT Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA), Township of Uxbridge and the East Duffins Headwaters Stewardship Committee be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA is partnering with Envisions, LSRCA and the Township of Uxbridge to host the Oracle Trail Race Event on February 13, 2016. A copy of the event proposal is available upon request Envisions is a not for profit organization whose mission is to encourage, educate and inspire individuals with and without disabilities to see beyond what they are capable of and see that life has no limits, except the ones that we set for ourselves. Envisions's goal is to work with people and organizations to break down barriers and empower people to reach beyond the accepted confines of what it means to be disabled, redefine what is possible and achieve success. The Oracle Trail Race Event will be a multi- distance endurance winter trail race event held in Walker Woods, Glen Major Forest and Durham Forest in Uxbridge, with a total participant cap of 350 people (not including volunteers, pacers, crew, fans, media and other support persons). The purpose of the race is to create a first -of- its -kind winter trail race experience in Ontario where event participants with and without disabilities participate together, learn to challenge themselves to break through accepted barriers and achieve success. The event will also showcase the beauty and ease of accessibility of the trails to the outdoor community while driving an overall message of education, involvement and awareness of the trails. Training runs will be offered on the course during January 2016. In addition to the race component of the event, Envisions seeks to create an interactive workshop in partnership with TRCA and LSRCA on Friday, February 13, 2016. Envisions hopes to conduct a goal setting and motivational talk to begin the workshops, and then engage a partner to create dynamic and interactive sessions with students about animal tracking, shelter making, winter survival, mountain bike demonstrations and more. RATIONALE The intention is that the Oracle Trail Race Event will become a major annual event to support the goals and objectives of Envisions, TRCA, LSRCA, the Township of Uxbridge, and core partners and stakeholders. This event supports the TRCA's Building The Living City: 10 Year Strategic Plan 2013 -2022 by: • encouraging a diverse range of people to engage with nature more often through the races and companion workshop; • working with partners and stakeholders to promote tourism; • facilitating physical activity through a connected trail system in partnership with LSRCA; • integrating the local stewardship committee and partners in the planning of the event; • celebrating the story of the Toronto region through partner programs at the workshops; Pq . A • practicing a multi - partner collaboration to organize and deliver a unique event that has a financial benefit to TRCA through the use of TRCA facilities, staff and programs. The provision of such an event also supports TRCA's Accessibility for People with Disabilities policy by putting into action TRCA's commitment to treating all people in a way that allows them to maintain their dignity and independence through integration and equal opportunity. The planning and delivery of the Oracle Trail Race Event also supports the mandate of the East Duffins Headwaters Stewardship Committee by engaging that Committee in a recreational and educational event on East Duffins Headwaters properties that support the implementation of the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties. The East Duffins Headwaters Stewardship Committee will support TRCA in communicating this event to the local community, identifying potential event partners and maintaining the trail in advance of the event, In addition, LSRCA and the Township of Uxbridge have endorsed this event in principle and will work as partners with TRCA and Envisions to plan and host a meaningful event for the community. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The responsibilities of TRCA in regard to Oracle Trail Race Event are administrative and facilitative in nature. Staff will continue to work with Envisions and the other partners to develop a successful program that supports all partner goals through a coordinating committee. Staff will cooperatively develop required agreements, permissions, communications strategies and logistical management plans. Staff will also work with Envisions and the East Duffins Headwaters Stewardship Committee to identify race routes, finalize by receiving approval from appropriate technical staff groups such as Planning Ecology, and mark race routes on TRCA properties as soon as possible. Staff will remove hazards from the final race routes and staging areas on TRCA properties in advance of the training runs and event. FINANCIAL DETAILS Envisions will be working closely with varied corporate partners to offset the cost of running the event. Once approval has been received from TRCA and LSRCA, a complete list of all logistical, marketing, budgetary and administrative aspects of the Oracle Trail Race Event will be submitted to TRCA and LSRCA for information. There are no anticipated budget expense implications to TRCA at this time regarding partnering on this event. All monies raised through the Oracle Trail Race Event will be used to fund the event and the Envisions Foundation. In addition, 5% of each registration cost will be distributed in order to promote the creation, development, preservation, management and use of trails locally and throughout Ontario, as follows: • 1 % to the Ontario Trails Council; • 2% to TRCA; • 2% to LSRCA. Report prepared by: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204 Emails: dcheriton @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204, Mike Bender, extension 5287, 416- 400 -2111 (cellular) Emails: dcheriton @trca.on.ca, mbender @trca.on.ca Date: May 22, 2015 285 RES. #A110/15 - PORT LANDS FLOOD PROTECTION AND ENABLING INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Due Diligence and Project Planning Phase. Award of contract for hydraulic engineering services to refine DELFT3D model and provide technical services to TRCA Water Resources Engineers. Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Glenn Mason THAT the preferred source contract for Hydraulic Engineering Services for the Due Diligence and Project Planning Phase of the Port Lands Flood Protection and Enabling Infrastructure Project be awarded to W.F. Baird and Associates Coastal Engineers Ltd. at a total cost not to exceed $69,727.00, plus 5% contingency, plus HST. CARRIED BACKGROUND This work is required in support of the Due Diligence and Project Planning Phase of the Port Lands Flood Protection and Enabling Infrastructure Project. This is a collaborative venture being undertaken by Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC), Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), the City of Toronto and the Toronto Port Lands Company (TPLC). Project governance is provided by an Executive Steering Committee, which draws together the project sponsors from these four organizations. A multi - disciplinary team of designers, engineers and specialist consultants is being assembled to take this work forward. TWRC is responsible for overall project management for this project phase, while each of the participating organization is responsible for specific aspects of the work, including procurement of the necessary professional services. History and Context When TWRC was first formed, one of the priority projects mandated by its government partners had the twin goals of transforming the existing channelized Don River mouth into a healthier, more natural river outlet to the lake and eliminating the flood risk posed by a regulatory storm event to several large spill zones, including a significant portion of the Port Lands. In working with their co- proponent, TRCA, flood protection of the West Don Lands and adjacent downtown areas has since been achieved through construction of a flood protection landform along the west bank of the Lower Don River, and hydraulic capacity improvements to the CN Rail crossing of the river. TRCA and its co- proponents, TWRC and the City of Toronto, have further recently completed a 10 -year Environmental Assessment (EA) process, which culminated in provincial approval of the "Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project' (DMNP EA) on January 28, 2015. With this approval, the companion Lower Don Lands Master Plan Class EA (LDL MPEA) also came into effect. The DMNP EA sets out a preferred solution for achieving the balance of the flood protection mandate while the LDL MPEA addresses related municipal infrastructure requirements. Together, these EAs cover virtually all of the scope of the Port Lands Flood Protection and Related Infrastructure Project, as defined below. In 2007, TWRC launched an international design competition to complement the DMNP EA process then underway. The purpose was to find common ground among the numerous other environmental assessments required for developing the adjacent Lower Don Lands, and a solution that would merge the natural and urban fabric into a green, integrated and sustainable community. The winning design best addressed the competition's two key objectives: • •� 1. providing a naturalized mouth and iconic identity for the Don River that would address flood protection needs; and 2. creating a comprehensive plan for addressing related urban design, transportation, naturalization, sustainability and other ecological issues. The plan also took into account soil conditions and remediation, engineering requirements and land ownership issues. As a result of this exercise, a new DMNP EA alternative was generated. A great deal of activity ensued, including extensive public and stakeholder consultations. Toronto City Council ratified the preferred alternative and in 2010, the DMNP EA was submitted to the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) for approval. At the same time, Council approved TWRC's precinct plan for the Lower Don Lands, which generally conformed to and further developed the vision set out in the City's Central Waterfront Secondary Plan, and the accompanying LDL MP EA for transportation, transit and servicing infrastructure. During the MOE review period, landowner /agency objections to the preferred solution were tabled, and additional concerns regarding affordability and public finance impacts were raised by the City of Toronto. In September 2011, Toronto City Council mandated further examination of options for the DMNP EA, among other related tasks that collectively became known as the Port Lands Acceleration Initiative ( "PLAI "). On October 2, 2012, City Council unanimously endorsed the PLAI's recommendations. Over the next two years, TWRC, TRCA and the City responded to City Council's direction to amend the DMNP EA and LDL EAMP to align with the outcomes of the PLAI and to submit the amended EAs for approval. Project Objectives The EA approvals marked a critical step forward, recognizing that for the Port Lands, flood protection infrastructure is the key to unlocking the area's unique and robust economic potential. The proposed flood protection scheme will also benefit existing commercial and residential areas nearby, eliminating the flood risk posed by a regulatory storm to a total of approximately 290 hectares of urban land east and south of the Don River. This will in turn catalyze additional private and public sector investments in the future and produce spin -off economic benefits. The past decade has seen the occurrence of more frequent and severe flooding in urban areas across the country. Governments have come to recognize that without adequate mitigation and protection measures in place, they will be faced with assuming the increasing financial risk of flood- induced damage to properties and public infrastructure. Consequently, governments have shown growing interest in making strategic flood protection investments. The Project comprises the flood protection and naturalization features set out as part of the preferred alternative (Alternative 4WS Amended) in the approved DMNP EA. The Project also encompasses the major municipal infrastructure that must be constructed — or in some cases, reconstructed — in conjunction with implementing flood protection, so as to maintain functional transportation and service networks and minimize throw away costs. The Project will demonstrate Toronto's, Ontario's and Canada's leadership in innovative approaches to building resilient cities. 287 A preliminary business case was prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC and submitted to the federal and provincial governments in September 2014 to begin the process of securing their shares of the implementation funding. Confirmation of funding commitments from the provincial and federal orders of government for the subsequent design and construction phases is contingent upon developing a robust project implementation and business plan, supported by a thorough analysis of costs and benefits. The initial Due Diligence and Project Planning phase of the Project, of which the services described herein form an important part, is designed to provide government funders with the assurance that key components and functionality can be successfully delivered within the agreed implementation budget. At its meeting on May 4, 2015, TWRC's Board approved a capital expenditure of up to $5 million to undertake due diligence and project initiation work, based on budget approval contained in the City of Toronto's 2015 Budget. At Authority Meeting #3/15, held on March 27, 2015, direction was given to TRCA staff to work with TW RC, the City, TPLC and other stakeholders and agencies in order to further develop schedules, budgets, preliminary design and due diligence related to the Project. RATIONALE WF Baird & Associates Coastal Engineers Ltd. were retained by TRCA as part of the planning and engineering consultant team, led by AECOM (then Gartner Lee), to undertake the DMNP EA. Baird's role was to develop detailed two dimensional (2D) hydraulic modeling of the Lower Don River up to the Regulatory Flood event, and to undertake three dimensional (3D) hydraulic and sediment transport modeling to between the 5 and 10 year flood event in order to assess the impacts of the preferred alternative. Following a review of 2 and 3D hydraulic modeling systems, the DELFT3D model was deemed the most effective commercially available system for identifying the extent of flooding under a catastrophic flood scenario and modeling sediment transport. As a result, the DELFT3D model was selected as the tool of choice for the DMNP EA, and ultimately, to become TRCA's design tool and flood regulation model for the mouth of the Don area. During the DMNP EA, Baird and Associates developed a modeling grid based on a composite of topographic surveys, bathymetric surveys and remote sensed data to develop the DELFT31D for the Lower Don River and floodplain under the existing conditions. The model incorporated flows from the Base Flow condition to the Regulatory Flood event to determine the extent of flooding that would occur in the Port Lands area (Attachment 1). Baird has also developed a series of DELFT31D model scenarios that tested and confirmed that flood conveyance objectives were met through a three phased build -out of the Preferred Alternative developed through the DMNP EA process. The DELFT3D model was developed through a parallel peer review process, in which a second hydraulic engineering firm, LimnoTech, working on behalf of TW RC, incorporated similar topographic and hydraulic inputs to an EFDC hydraulic model to confirm that the results generated in the DELFT31D model were realistic and replicable, thus, building in an independent Quality Control process through the DMNP EA. Baird also incorporated DELFT3D to develop a 3D sediment transport model to test the effectiveness of the proposed sediment trap, located north of Lake Shore Boulevard, which is a key element of the DMNP EA. The DELFT3D model is a commercially available software system that was developed by a firm in the Netherlands and was used extensively in western Europe, however, was not used extensively in North America at the time. The DELFT3D model has since become an open source code model, and has been gaining increased usage in North America over the last several years. Baird was an early adopter of the DELFT3D system in North America and remains one of the most proficient firms at using the DELFT3D system. Furthermore, as the engineer of record for developing the DELFT3D model for the Lower Don River, Baird remains uniquely qualified to participate in the refinement of the DELFT31D model scenarios to a design level standard, which is required for the Due Diligence and Project Planning Phase of the Port Lands Flood Protection and Enabling Infrastructure Project. Furthermore, Baird has demonstrated a strong capability in providing "real- time" training and capacity building for TRCA water resource engineers to ensure that TRCA has the ability to develop and operate the DELFT3D model into the future. A key component of the refinement work will be to train several new TRCA water resource engineers in the "grid refinement" and "model operation" of the DELFT3D model system. Thus, given Baird's in depth knowledge of the DELFT3D model system in general, and in particular, their knowledge of the models that were developed specifically for the Lower Don River during the DMNP EA, make Baird the preferred firm to undertake the DELFT3D model refinement and TRCA capacity building processes in support of the next phase of work on the Port Lands Flood Protection and Enabling Infrastructure Project, particularly in light of the Due Diligence Project deadlines. As a result, staff recommends award of the contract on a Preferred Source basis to Baird as per Section 9.3.3 of TRCA's Purchasing Policy as follows: The required goods and services are to be supplied by a vendor or supplier having specialized knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be reasonably provided by any other supplier. Scope of Work The Due Diligence and Project Planning Phase of the Port Lands Flood Protection and Enabling Infrastructure Project involves the refinement of the concepts generated through the DMNP EA and LDL Master Plan Class EA to further define the overall project components, scheduling and costs. The specific work associated with this approvals, involves the refinement of the existing conditions and various phase conditions of the DELFT3D hydraulic model to reconfirm the results of the DMNP EA, and to establish a modeling framework in which scenario testing can proceed for proposed modifications to the valley and infrastructure alignments. Given the above, if awarded the contract, W.F. Baird and Associates will be authorized to undertake the following work: To be completed by September 15, 2015: 1. Refine the DELFT3D model for existing conditions and Phases 1, 2 and 3, based on updated surveys and information (collected by other parties), previously identified refinements and grid extensions. 2. Provide training to TRCA water resource engineers on the DELFT31D model refinement/update process as work is underway in Item 1 above. TRCA staff will meet at the consultant's offices during the model refinement for the first day of every task (e.g., updating of the existing conditions model, conversion of existing conditions model to Phase 1 and 2 models, and grid extension of Phase 3 model). 3. Provide advice to TRCA regarding the proposed collection of sediment core samples in the Don River. i 6 4. Provide documentation, in the form of a technical memorandum (or supplementary technical memorandum), the methodology, assumptions and results of the model refinement. To be completed between November, 2015 and April 2016: 1. Provide advice to TRCA and complete quality assurance /quality control (QA/QC) of DELFT3D model operations led by TRCA water resources engineers following the completion of Items 1 and 2 above, associated with scenario testing of concept design tweaks proposed byTWRC's planning and design consultant. Separate from the approved work identified above, it is likely that requests will be received by TRCA to test different river valley and infrastructure scenarios through the DELFT31D model as part of separate project planning initiatives in the area. These projects may include, but not be limited to the following: 1. Gardiner Expressway Environmental Assessment; 2. Port Lands Framework Plan and Port Lands Servicing Master Plan Class EA; and 3. First Gulf Site Planning. Work and costs associated with such third -party requests are not authorized under this Contract. Instead, TRCA will work with these individual project proponents to develop separate work plans and budgets (which may include involvement of Baird) to test these proposed scenarios once the primary DELFT3D model refinement works have been completed. It is anticipated that Baird and Associates would be involved in such third -party requests to undertake large -scale modifications of the DELFT3D model, or provide QA/QC of TRCA -led refinements if the changes are minor in nature. The expenses for Baird's involvement in these third -party scopes of work would be negotiated at the time with the project proponents. FINANCIAL DETAILS Total cost of work identified under the above scope of work is not to exceed $69,727.00, plus a 5% contingency and HST. Costs will be covered under the Delivery Agreement with TWRC regarding the Due Diligence and Project Planning Phase of the Port Lands Flood Protection and Enabling Infrastructure Project in account 191 -21. Report prepared by: Ken Dion, extension 5230 Emails: kdion @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ken Dion, extension 5230 Emails: kdion @trca.on.ca Date: June 15, 2015 Attachments: 1 290 Attachment 1 RES. #A111 /15 - 2014 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The 2014 audited financial statements are recommended for approval. (Budget /Audit Res. #C7 115) Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Mujeeb Khan THAT the transfer of funds from surplus to reserves in the amount of $1,989,000.00, as outlined in Note 8(a), "Continuity of reserves" to the financial statements, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the 2014 audited financial statements, as presented in Attachment 1, be approved, signed by the Chair and Secretary- Treasurer of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), and distributed to each member municipality and the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry, in accordance with subsection 38 (3) of the Conservation Authorities Act. CARRIED RES. #A112 /15 - CITY OF TORONTO Request for a Permanent Easement for a Storm Sewer Outfall, Don River Watershed, CFN 53302. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement for a storm sewer outfall, southeast of Yonge Street and York Mills Road, in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area), Don River watershed. (Executive Res. #B53 115) Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement, southeast of Yonge Street and York Mills Road, in the City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area), Don River watershed; AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with the City of Toronto in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of 0.037 hectares (0.091 acres), more or less, be granted to the City of Toronto for a storm sewer outfall southeast of Yonge Street and York Mills Road, designated as Part 1, on a plan prepared by the City of Toronto Engineering and Construction Services Department, Engineering Support Services, Land and Property Surveys, Sketch No. PS- 2005 -030, dated March 30, 2015; THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00 and in addition all legal, survey and other costs to be paid by the City of Toronto; 292 THAT the City of Toronto is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the granting of this easement or the carrying out of construction; THAT an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the City of Toronto; THAT all TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated /stabilized following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines; THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by the City of Toronto prior to commencement of construction; THAT said easement be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C. 27, as amended, if required; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A113/15 - YORK REGION RAPID TRANSIT CORPORATION Request for conveyance of lands required for the construction of the Vaughan Metropolitan Centre rapidway system, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Don River watershed, CFN 53757. Receipt of a request from York Region Rapid Transit Corporation for the conveyance of lands located north of Regional Road 7, west of Bathurst Street, in the City of Vaughan, Don River watershed. (Executive Res. #B54115) Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from York Region Rapid Transit Corporation ( YRRTC) for the conveyance of lands required for the development of a regional rapidway system located north of Regional Road 7 and west of Bathurst Street, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Don River watershed; AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with YRRTC in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a parcel of TRCA -owned land containing 0.02 hectares (0.04 acres), more or less, required for the development of a regional rapidway system located north of Regional Road 7 and west of Bathurst Street, said land being 293 Part of Lot 11, Concession 2, and designated as Part 1 on the Plan 65R -35613 be conveyed to YRRTC; THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, in addition to all legal, survey and other costs be paid by YRRTC; THAT YRRTC is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from this conveyance or the carrying out of construction; THAT an archeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of YRRTC; THAT a landscape plan be prepared by YRRTC for TRCA staff review and approval, in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines; THAT said conveyance be subject to approval of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; THAT said conveyance be subject to the approval of The Regional Municipality of York and the City of Vaughan, who jointly own the subject property with TRCA; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A114/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed. Katherine Jane Dalton and Christine Styles Dalton, Estate Trustee for the Estate of Ian Robert Dalton, CFN 22588. Purchase of a property municipally known as 12800 11th Concession Road, located to the west side of the 11th Concession Road, and south of King Road, Township of King, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #855115) Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Ben Cachola THAT 44.20 hectares (109.22 acres), more or less, of an irregular shaped parcel of land, improved with a log cabin and a detached, two bay garage, being Part of Lots 3 and 4, Concession 11, Township of King, Regional Municipality of York, located to the west side of 11th Concession Road and south of King Road, municipally known as 12800 11th Concession Road, be purchased from Katherine Jane Dalton and Christine Styles Dalton, Estate Trustee for the Estate of Ian Robert Dalton; THAT the purchase price be $2,760,000.00; 294 THAT acquisition by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be conditioned upon all necessary funding being available; THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. AMENDMENT RES. #A115/15 Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT the following be inserted after the last paragraph of the main motion: THAT TRCA's request to the City of Toronto for funding from the Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve also include a request on behalf of the Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust (ORMTL) for financial support in the amount of $1,200,000 for the ORMLT's 2015/2016 Land Securement Program; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back in September. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: THAT 44.20 hectares (109.22 acres), more or less, of an irregular shaped parcel of land, improved with a log cabin and a detached, two bay garage, being Part of Lots 3 and 4, Concession 11, Township of King, Regional Municipality of York, located to the west side of 11th Concession Road and south of King Road, municipally known as 12800 11th Concession Road, be purchased from Katherine Jane Dalton and Christine Styles Dalton, Estate Trustee for the Estate of Ian Robert Dalton; THAT the purchase price be $2,760,000.00; THAT acquisition by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be conditioned upon all necessary funding being available; THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; 295 THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents; THAT TRCA's request to the City of Toronto for funding from the Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve also include a request on behalf of the Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust (ORMTL) for financial support in the amount of $1,200,000 for the ORMLT's 2015/2016 Land Securement Program; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back in September. RES. #A116/15 — GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed. Nine - Ten West Limited, CFN 53809. Acquisition of property located north of Rutherford Road, east of Dufferin Street, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011- 2015," Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River watershed. (Executive Res. #856115) Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT 3.23 hectares (7.98 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Part of Lots 16 and 17, Concession 2 and designated as Blocks 8, 10, 15 and 17 on a Draft Plan of Subdivision prepared by Schaeffer Dzaldov Bennett Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, Job No. 03- 519 -OOA, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, located north of Rutherford Road, east of Dufferin Street, be purchased from Nine -Ten West Limited; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the lands free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 296 RES. #A117 /15 - SIGNING OFFICERS Delegation of authority to sign documents which bind Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. (Executive Res. #B57115) Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT the proposed amendment to the Signing Officers policy delegating authorization to sign certain documents that bind Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) (herein "agreements "), as outlined in the staff report, be approved. CARRIED SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION RES. #A118 /15 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT Section II Item 8.1 — Fishleigh Drive Erosion Control Project, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #6115, held on June 5, 2015, be received and be amended such that the following be inserted after the last paragraph of the main motion: THAT the City of Toronto be requested to provide necessary funding for TRCA to acquire 81 and 83 Fishleigh Drive, Toronto, should a successful acquisition agreement be negotiated with the property owners. CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: THAT Contract RO #10000469 for the development of detailed designs for, and inspection services during construction of, slope stabilization and associated shoreline protection below 81 - 83 Fishleigh Drive, in the City of Toronto, be awarded to Terraprobe Inc. at a total cost not to exceed $177,244.00 plus HST, it being the lowest bid that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of $20,000.00 as a contingency allowance, if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded consultant, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other consultant that submitted a cost proposal; THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as is necessary to implement the contract, including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents; 297 AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto be requested to provide necessary funding for TRCA to acquire 81 and 83 Fishleigh Drive, Toronto, should a successful acquisition agreement be negotiated with the property owners. RESMA119 /15 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Glenn Mason THAT Section II Items 8.2 and 8.2, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #6/15, held on June 5, 2015, be received. CARRIED Section II Items 8.2 & 8.3 APPOINTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT OFFICER (Executive Res. #859115) APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS AND DESIGNATION AS PROVINCIAL OFFENCES OFFICERS (Executive Res. #860115) SECTION III - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #A120/15 - EARTH RANGERS Update and Presentation of Activities. Overview of collaborative activities between Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Earth Rangers. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Colleen Jordan THAT the presentation by Peter Kendall, Executive Director, Earth Rangers, and staff report be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Earth Rangers is a conservation organization focused on engaging and inspiring children to take an active role in preserving and enhancing the biodiversity of Canada's ecosystems. Programs in support of Earth Rangers' mission are delivered through a range of activities, including a national television presence, community events and school outreach and classroom visits. Earth Rangers Bring Back the Wild program, which educates children on the impact of biodiversity loss and provides opportunities for community action to restore and preserve crucial habitat, annually highlights four species of special concern for children to learn about and take action to protect. In 2000, TRCA entered into a partnership with Earth Rangers to establish and construct the Earth Rangers Centre at The Living City Campus at Kortright to provide office and workshop space, as well as accommodations for live animals used in their educational demonstrations and shows. The Earth Rangers Centre for Sustainable Technology was certified LEED Gold for New Construction in 2006 and LEED Platinum for Existing Buildings in 2012 and is currently Canada's highest rated LEED Building. TRCA and Earth Rangers have a strong history of collaboration, including funding for education experiences for Caledon students at Albion Hills Field Centre, joint fundraising activities, cross - delivered programming at Kortright and the Earth Rangers Centre, sustainable technologies research and training activities at The Living City Campus, joint restoration activities on the Kortright Centre property, as well as providing office space for TRCA staff within the Earth Rangers Centre. The following are examples of collaboration between TRCA and Earth Rangers: Performance Monitoring of Bioretention System In 2010, TRCA's Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program (STEP) partnered with Earth Rangers to design and implement a bioretention system for stormwater control and treatment as part of the planned expansion of the Earth Rangers parking lot. The vegetated bioretention system drains a 2,300 square meter parking area and was monitored by STEP between 2010 and 2012. The system performed exceptionally well, with over 90% of runoff volumes reduced through soil infiltration and evapotranspiration. Performance of the system is documented in a technical report and summary brief provided on the STEP website. Additionally, STEP has utilized the Earth Rangers theatre for approximately 25 workshops and training events on different topics for industry professionals and practitioners. 299 Together for Clean Water TRCA collaborated with Earth Rangers on their "Together for Clean Water" events held in June 2013 and again in May 2015. These half day events featured a wildlife presentation at the Kortright Centre, followed by a rotation of Garlic Mustard pull, tree planting activities and a water themed hike along the Humber River. Kortright waived admission fees for registrants of the event, provided in -kind staff support to lead the hike and invasive species pull, volunteers for the event, planting equipment (gloves and shovels) and training and guidance for planning the event logistics. TRCA's Conservation Land Planning group assisted with sourcing and ordering trees, prepared the site and provided staff support on the day of the planting. In 2013, 89 community members participated in the Together for Clean Water program, planting 200 trees and collecting 40 large garbage bags of invasive species. In 2015, 128 Telus staff and their families and community members planted 300 trees, learned about the importance of water and collected 50 large garbage bags of invasive species Office Accommodations Since 2007, TRCA has leased office space at the Earth Rangers Centre to provide office accommodations for TRCA staff. TRCA currently leases 6,300 square feet of office space for 40 staff, including lab space, and additional storage space. This arrangement has facilitated stronger connections between TRCA and Earth Rangers while also supporting ongoing operations and partnership development for The Living City Campus and the Kortright Centre for Conservation. Report prepared by: Darryl Gray, 416 -791 -0327 Emails: dgray @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Darryl Gray, 416 - 791 -0327 Emails: dgray @trca.on.ca Date: June 08, 2015 300 RES. #A121/15 - LAKEVIEW WATERFRONT CONNECTION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Status update Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT the update for the Lakeview Waterfront Connection Environmental Assessment be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #11 /11 on January 27, 2012, Resolution #A274/11 directed Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to provide project management and technical services for Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) and the Region of Peel relating to the undertaking of an Environmental Assessment for the Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project (LWC Project). The LWC Project will create a new conservation area along the eastern Mississauga waterfront, connecting the future Inspiration Lakeview community in the west with the western end of Marie Curtis Park beach in Toronto in the east. Environmental Assessment planning was coordinated with the City of Mississauga's Master Planning efforts that were underway with Ontario Power Generation (OPG) involving the Inspiration Lakeview lands. The LWC Project will ultimately create new coastal wetlands, forests and meadows for the benefit of fish, birds and other wildlife. The Project will also create a land base that will enable the relocation of the Waterfront Trail to the Lake Ontario Waterfront, thus providing excellent public access to and along the Lake Ontario shoreline, in an area where access is not currently available. The LWC Project will coordinate with other Region of Peel infrastructure projects in order to maximize reuse of locally generated fill material in order to create this new land base. The LWC Project is an initiative derived through the City of Mississauga's Inspiration Lakeview visioning process (2010/2011). On October 18, 2013 and October 24, 2013, CVC and the Region of Peel, respectively, received direction to: • submit the LWC EA for approvals on the basis of the Preferred Alternative as depicted in Attachment 1; • commence design and permit activities on the basis of the Preferred Alternative; and • continue to engage TRCA for project management and technical service support through the design process. At Authority Meeting #9/13, held on November 22, 2013, Resolution #A187/13 directed TRCA staff to continue to provide project management and technical services on behalf of Region of Peel and CVC in support of the Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project as part of the detailed design process and to report back as required. Details of the Preferred Alternative were summarized as follows: 301 The refined Preferred Alternative proposes to use approximately 1.5 to 2 million m3 of clean fill to create a new land base extending southeast into Lake Ontario. In the east, the feature will connect to the western -most extent of Marie Curtis Park and transition from a gravel /sand beach to a cobble beach. Three rocky islands are proposed to help absorb wave energy, allowing for calmer waters along the new beach proposed for the feature, and for the creation of aquatic habitat. Views to both the City of Mississauga and City of Toronto shorelines are proposed as part of the design, as well as a network of multi -use trails. The Preferred Alternative was best able to meet the project objectives: • Naturalization: The proposed feature "establishes a range of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem habitats and ecological linkages" and enhances the quality and function of the shoreline area for both residents and migratory species. Based on the use of approximately 1.5 to 2 million m3 of clean fill, the LWC will result in the creation of approximately 26 to 33 hectares of greenspace consisting of natural meadow, new beach, coastal, treed swamp and seasonal island habitat. • Access: The LWC will provide "... accessible public linkages..." by creating a land base that establishes a new local linkage between Marie Curtis Park to the east and Lakefront Promenade (once Inspiration Lakeview is in place) to the west. Access to this area is currently restricted due to safety concerns along the Ontario Power Generation lands and Region of Peel's GE Booth Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF). • Compatibility: The LWC has been developed in a manner such that both function and access to both the GE Booth WWTF and the Lakeview Treatment Plant have been maintained, thereby ensuring that it is "compatible with existing infrastructure." • Coordination: The LWC "coordinates and informs other local planning and development efforts" and contributes directly to conservation and restoration efforts and public accessibility and recreational priorities from the local to regional levels. • Fiscal Viability: The LWC presents a unique opportunity to reuse "locally generated fill from Regional and City capital works projects..." in a manner that enables cost savings to the Region of Peel to be reallocated to the creation of the LWC. This local solution will translate to reduced impacts to surrounding rural communities and farmlands and reduced use of already limited regional landfill capacities, while minimizing truck travel times and associated greenhouse gas emissions. On May 27, 2015, the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change approved the Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project Environmental Assessment. The Region of Peel is anticipated to report to Council in fall 2015. CVC is anticipated to report to their board regarding these approvals in June 2015. TRCA staff is continuing to provide project management and technical support services to CVC and the Region of Peel relating to the development of detailed designs and acquisition of permits for the LWC Project. Report prepared by: Kenneth Dion, extension 5230 Emails: kdion @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kenneth Dion, extension 5230 Emails: kdion @trca.on.ca Date: June 9, 2013 302 II' ' ♦ i .Yy 1 p OF t � II' ' ♦ i .Yy 1 p OF RES. #A122115 - SPRING CREEK CHANNEL RESTORATION PROJECT City of Brampton, Region of Peel. Update on the initiation of the Spring Creek Channel Restoration Project following a Master Plan process that meets the requirements of a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment as part of the implementation of the Peel Region Channel Remediation Strategy. Moved by: Matt Mahoney Seconded by: Mike Mattos THAT the staff report dated June 26, 2015, providing an information update on the initiation of the Spring Creek Channel Restoration Project Master Plan process, City of Brampton, Region of Peel, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #2/14, held on March 28, 2014, Resolution #A15/14 was approved as follows: THAT the Peel Channels Remediation Strategy in Spring Creek be implemented within the City of Brampton; THAT the Authority support applying the evaluation methodology developed in the Peel Channels Remediation Strategy. Spring Creek Pilot Study to the rest of Peel Region; AND FURTHER THAT a preferred source contract to undertake concept and engineered implementation designs, and research in cooperation with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), City of Brampton, the Region of Peel and the public be awarded to the Faculty of Geography at the University of Guelph at a total cost not to exceed $50, 000 plus HST. In 2012, the Peel Channels Remediation Strategy: Spring Creek Pilot Project was initiated to identify sections of channelized watercourses that could be naturalized without compromising the flood conveyance, human safety or property, and while improving the ecological health of the creek and maximizing the benefits to local neighbourhoods. The pilot project focused on review of 14 kilometres of hardened stream within the Spring Creek subwatershed in the City of Brampton. Candidate sites identified as part of this review were then evaluated using a comprehensive evaluation methodology that was developed by TRCA through extensive consultation with technical staff, Peel Region, City of Brampton, City of Mississauga, and the Etobicoke - Mimico Watersheds Coalition. These results were documented in a report titled "Interim Report: Peel Channels Remediation Strategy— Spring Creek Pilot Project "which included a series of implementation recommendations including the following: a. TRCA, in partnership with the City of Brampton, initiate a Master Plan Environmental Assessment in 2014 to guide the process of determining the best design options for candidate sites identified through the Spring Creek Pilot Study; b. as part of the Master Plan process, undertake a fluvial geomorphic assessment of sufficient scope to inform the detailed design of all candidate sites identified through the Spring Creek Pilot Study; 304 c. the Technical Advisory Committee will include TRCA staff that is leading the next generation 2D modeling exercise in Spring Creek which may further inform the understanding of channel hydraulics and flood water behavior within the candidate sites (and throughout the subwatershed); d. TRCA to lead and financially support the implementation of a stream naturalization project in Spring Creek pending the outcome of the Master Plan process and next generation 2D modeling; and, e. undertake subsequent stream naturalization in Spring Creek as funding permits. RATIONALE To build on the work completed during the Spring Creek Pilot Project and implement one of the key recommendations, TRCA is proposing to move forward with a Master Plan in partnership with the City of Brampton, Region of Peel and Guelph University. TRCA is intending to take the lead role in the planning and design phases of the Master Plan which will be completed in accordance with the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) under the requirements of a 'Schedule B' project for Municipal Water and Wastewater Projects. With the completion of the Master Plan, TRCA and City of Brampton will have a comprehensive list of prioritized sites that require channel restoration work due to failing infrastructure. The Master Plan approach will provide a more holistic look at the subwatershed that will allow work to be sequenced and coordinated with other infrastructure projects occurring within the City of Brampton over a longer time horizon. This approach will also streamline the regulatory review and approvals process by including a level of investigation, consultation and documentation that will fulfil the requirements for multiple sites through the completion of one environmental assessment. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The study area for the Master Plan will include the Spring Creek subwatershed, located within the City of Brampton, Region of Peel (Attachment 1). The Master Plan will take a comprehensive approach to identifying and evaluating a range of design options for high priority sites with degraded and failing stream infrastructure. The evaluation process will consider technical feasibility, constructability, costs to construct and maintain, as well as potential impacts on the natural environment, flood and erosion risks, property and individuals to determine a preferred option. Sites will also be prioritized and sequenced for construction based on current condition of the existing channel treatments and risk to human health and safety. A key component of the Master Plan process will be stakeholder consultation. Consultation with affected parties will occur early and at multiple points in the process so that their concerns can be identified and addressed before irreversible decisions are made. The planning process will also provide opportunities for members of the general public, including affected landowners, public interest groups and any other interested parties to offer recommendations on the development of the design options, where appropriate. TRCA staff will be presenting the proposed work for the Spring Creek Channel Restoration Master Plan at a future City of Brampton Committee meeting. 305 FINANCIAL DETAILS The cost to complete the Master Plan, including all environmental studies and community consultation is estimated at $200,000 plus HST. All costs including consultants, TRCA project management and technical staff, and other associated costs will be funded from Peel Natural Channel Habitat Implementation Projects Account 128 -71. Report prepared by: Natalie Seniuk, extension 5655 Emails: nseniuk @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rick Portiss, extension 5302 Emails: rportiss @trca.on.ca Date: June 26, 2015 Attachments: 1 306 Attachment 1 °o o" s° y° 0 o" o TO g9ygtF q @q9� 9qp qp 1gF'PO 'Fq0 � l q Gqp p'J' \i7 No�O ST ? O gT9q'O J e �ST P e e° 9 a-ONO ' 00 CpgF C 9qp qp 0+, q F� 9jq 9 °q P ° pq �° � kp Q� 2�ti y VP 4� 9 0 A 2 4> i qp � ` V O+ ° O °JP` �c��G Tq qF pp Cq�q 9rgFpL \ ST p J��`y4/ pCy<'gq C \ pS T le, 00 C9 qp Legend L /—' Toronto and Region � Conservation for The Living City- _ r )p yH U i n.�in i nmu 4 qC 9 �F cake o.rdo W SECTION IV - ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED RES. #A123 /15 - SECTION IV - ONTARIO REGULATION 166106, AS AMENDED Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT Section IV - Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, items 10.1 — 10.15, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #6/15, held on June 5, 2015, be received. CARRIED NEW BUSINESS RES. #A124 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: CITY OF MARKHAM Jack Heath Jim Tovey THAT staff report back in the fall on the potential for transferring to the City of Markham two properties — Cedarena and Locust Hill School House. CARRIED RES. #A125 /15 - 220 GREY ABBEY TRAIL Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT staff report back at Authority Meeting #7/15, scheduled to be held on July 24, 2015, with the background and history on 220 Grey Abbey Trail. CARRIED 9TIFee TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:15 p.m., on Friday, June 26, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 309 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Minutes of Authority Meeting #7115 July 24, 2015 Authority Meeting #7/15 was held at TRCA Head Office on Friday, July 24, 2015. The Chair, Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. PRESENT Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member Vincent Crisanti Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Chris Fonseca Member Jack Heath Member Rodney Hoinkes Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Maria Kelleher Member Matt Mahoney Member Mike Mattos Member Jennifer McKelvie Member Ron Moeser Member Jennifer O'Connell Member Linda Pabst Member Anthony Perruzza Member John Sprovieri Member Jim Tovey Member ABSENT Paul Ainslie Member David Barrow Member Justin Di Ciano Member Jennifer Drake Member Rob Ford Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Glenn Mason Member Gino Rosati Member 310 RES. #A126/15 - APPOINTMENTS TO TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY FOR 2015 City of Toronto. The Secretary- Treasurer advises that new appointees to TRCA, representing the City of Toronto, have been duly appointed and are entitled to sit as Members of this Authority until the 2016 annual meeting. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT the following be recognized as City of Toronto Members of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) until July 9, 2018, and until successors are appointed, and as such are duly appointed and entitled to sit as Members of this Authority until Annual Authority Meeting #1/16, scheduled to be held on February 26, 2016, or until their successors are appointed: Jennifer Drake Rodney Hoinkes Maria Kelleher Jennifer McKelvie Mike Mattos AND FURTHER THAT Ben Cachola, Ronald Chopowick, Mujeeb Khan and Cynthia Thorburn be thanked for their service to TRCA. CARRIED BACKGROUND In December 2014, the City of Toronto Council appointed Members to TRCA for a term of office expiring on December 31, 2016 and until the first meeting of TRCA afterwards. In July 2015, City of Toronto Council approved the five citizen appointments to TRCA as indicated above. This resulted in four changes to TRCA's membership, with Mike Mattos remaining as a citizen appointee. Each year at the annual meeting the Secretary- Treasurer advises who is entitled to sit as Members of the Authority for the upcoming year. Due to the change in membership, such advisement needs to be provided at the July 24, 2015 meeting, to be effective until Annual Meeting #1/16, scheduled to be held on February 26, 2016. Asa result, the Secretary- Treasurer is advising that Jennifer Drake, Rodney Hoinkes, Maria Kelleher, Jennifer McKelvie and Mike Mattos are duly appointed to sit as a Member of the Authority, effective July 24, 2015. Report Prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: July 10, 2015 311 RECESS The Chair recessed the meeting at 9:35 a.m., on Friday, July 24, 2015 in order to conduct the Toronto and Region Source Protection Authority Meeting. RECONVENE The Chair reconvened the meeting at 9:37 a.m., on Friday, July 24, 2015 after conclusion of the Toronto and Region Source Protection Authority Meeting. CITY OF TORONTO REPRESENTATIVE ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Ron Moeser was nominated by Mike Mattos. RES. #A127 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT the nominations for a City of Toronto representative on the Executive Committee be closed. CARRIED Ron Moeser was acclaimed as a City of Toronto representative on the Executive Committee, for a term to end at Annual Authority Meeting #1/17. RES. #A128 /15 - MINUTES Moved by: Jennifer O'Connell Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT the Minutes of Meeting #6/15, held on June 26, 2015, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A welcome by Neil Lacheur, Vice President, Property Management, Bentall Kennedy, to 101 Exchange Avenue. 312 (b) A presentation by Mike Bender, Associate Director, Master Planning and Greenspace Conservation, Kim Krawczyk, Planner, Greenspace Conservation, and Gord MacPherson, Associate Director, Restoration Projects, TRCA, in regard to item 9.1 - Greenwood Conservation Lands Master Plan. RES. #A129 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Ron Moeser Jack Heath THAT above -noted presentation (a) be received. RES. #A130 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Colleen Jordan Ron Moeser THAT above -noted presentation (b) be received. CARRIED Ca11 F*11 SECTION I — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #A131 115 - GREENWOOD CONSERVATION LANDS MASTER PLAN Final endorsements for the Greenwood Conservation Lands Master Plan. Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT the staff report be referred to the September Authority meeting for a staff report with information on possible volumes of fill, clarification of Pickering's plans for recreation fields, options to close the funding gap, provincial lands purchased for the Highway 407 corridor and clarification on conditions of the original transfer of lands from Toronto and mechanism for approval of plans and funding contributions as required. Maria Augimeri Nay Jack Ballinger Yea Vincent Crisanti Yea Glenn De Baeremaeker Nay Michael Di Blase Yea Chris Fonseca Yea Jack Heath Yea Rodney Hoinkes Yea Jennifer Innis Yea Colleen Jordan Yea Maria Kelleher Yea 313 RECORDED VOTE Cont'd Matt Mahoney Yea Mike Mattos Yea Jennifer McKelvie Yea Ron Moeser Yea Jennifer O'Connell Yea Linda Pabst Yea Anthony Perruzza Nay John Sprovieri Yea Jim Tovey Yea THE MOTION WAS CARRIED 314 RES. #A132115 - PROPOSAL FOR LEASE OF TRCA PROPERTY John Bales House 4169 Bathurst Street City of Toronto, CFN 54213. Request from the City of Toronto to lease the John Bales House located at 4169 Bathurst Street which is managed by the City of Toronto to the Russian Canadian Cultural Heritage Foundation of Maria Blagoveshchensky. Moved by: Chris Fonseca Seconded by: Vincent Crisanti WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is the owner of the John Bales House located at 4169 Bathurst Street, City of Toronto; AND WHEREAS the subject lands have been previously turned over to the City of Toronto for management purposes, in accordance with the terms of an agreement dated June 14,1961; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA concur with the City of Toronto entering into a lease agreement with the Russian Canadian Cultural Heritage Foundation of Maria Blagoveshchensky (RCCHF) for a term of five years commencing August 1, 2015; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction, including obtaining of any necessary approvals and the execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND An agreement dated June 14, 1961 between TRCA and the City of Toronto authorized the City of Toronto to manage the subject lands. Under the terms of the agreement the City is required to obtain written approval of TRCA for any leasing of the property. TRCA is in receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to permit RCCHF, a non - profit tenant, to lease the John Bales House, located at 4169 Bathurst Street in Earl Bales Park, for below market rent of $2.00 per year. The building has historic designation and the tenant must comply with all heritage requirements throughout the term of the lease. Staff has reviewed the proposal and is satisfied that TRCA policy and program interests will not be adversely impacted by such leasing. The building is located immediately east of Bathurst Street, south of Sheppard Avenue, and is located entirely on tableland within Earl Bales Park. Attached is a plan showing the location of the subject lands. FINANCIAL DETAILS In accordance with the terms and conditions of the management agreement, no revenue or expenses will be incurred in this instance by TRCA. The rental rate will be $2.00 per year. The City of Toronto staff has advised that this proposal is satisfactory to the City, which will receive the revenues generated. Report prepared by: Nigel Holder, extension 5859 Emails: nholder @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Nigel Holder, extension 5859; Jae R. Truesdell, extension 5247 Emails: nholder @trca.on.ca; jruesdell@trca.on.ca Date: July 08, 2015 Attachments: 1 315 r {� Y�Y qy (vim y Legend �ay L� Y _ Y 0 Y Y IM Y)YWW n Toronto and Region SSG Conservation for The Living City. P P P IP 4 tp C TO O F� v" en� o Y RES. #A133/15 - NAMING OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY ASSET Approval to name a Toronto and Region Conservation Authority property in the Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, as The William Dennison Forest Preserve. Moved by: Chris Fonseca Seconded by: Vincent Crisanti THAT 20.21 hectares (49.94 acres) of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) owned land in the Town of Caledon (Attachment 1), be officially named "The William Dennison Forest Preserve'; THAT the Town of Caledon be so advised; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to erect a sign designating the properly as The William Dennison Forest Preserve. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Meeting #7/14, held on September 19, 2014, the Authority adopted Resolution #A149/14, directing staff to accept a donation of land from Lorna Ann Milne; subsequently, the property was transferred to TRCA on December 30, 2014. The subject TRCA -owned lands are located on the east side of Innis Lake Road and south of Old Church Road, in the Town of Caledon. TRCA staff and The Living City Foundation staff were approached by Mr. Ross Milne on behalf The Honourable (Hon.) Loma Milne regarding the donation of 20.21 hectares (49.94 acres), more or less, of ecologically sensitive land. The donation was processed through the Ecological Gifts Program administered by Environment Canada. The former Milne property is located within the Centreville Creek Area Environmentally Significant Area (ESA) which consists of a large natural area with high biodiversity and is rich in rare flora / fauna species as well as rare vegetation communities. In addition, the subject land forms part of the Widgett -Innis Lakes Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) Complex and the Innis - Gibson Lake Kettles which is classified as an Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI). The property is also situated within the Greenbelt Plan Area and is within the designated Natural Core Area of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. TRCA's acquisition of the former Milne property will provide long term protection of the ecologically sensitive attributes of the ESA / PSW / ANSI and protect the sensitive flora / fauna communities supported within the natural heritage features of the site. At Authority Meeting #9/03, held on November 28, 2003, Resolution #A255/03 was approved, which set the protocol for the naming of TRCA assets. In accordance with the protocol, a naming may contain any or all of the following: • The name of a major individual or corporate /public sector organization; • The name of an individual prominent in the environmental or conservation community; • A relevant historical name associated with the geographic area or community; • The name of a strategic initiative, a citizen's group or other partnership of TRCA; and /or • Other names that may have significance for a specific site and area. 317 The donor, The Hon. Lorna Milne, has requested that the property be named "The William Dennison Forest Preserve" after her father, the late William Dennison. Mr. William Donald Dennison (January 20, 1905 - May 2, 1981) served as a Member of Provincial Parliament (MPP) for two, non - consecutive terms in the 1940's and early 1950's. Following his terms as an MPP, Mr. Dennison continued with a political career in municipal politics, holding offices firstly as an alderman, then as a member of the Toronto Board of Control and finally as Mayor of Toronto for two consecutive, three -year terms between 1967 and 1972. Following in her father's footsteps, The Hon. Lorna Milne also pursued a political career and served as a public school trustee from 1964 to 1972, then was appointed to the Senate by Prime Minister Jean Chretien, serving as Senator for Peel Region from 1995 to 2009; her husband, William Ross Milne, also served as a federal Member of Parliament in the 1970's. In addition to his devotion to public office, William Dennison had a passion for conservation. Along with his good friend the late Charles Sauriol, Mr. Dennison was one of the founders of the Don Valley Conservation Authority. Although his efforts focused on improving the ecological health of the Don River watershed, Mr. Dennison's vision as an avid conservationist extended to a property he had purchased in Caledon in the 1940's where he and his daughter planted tens of thousands of trees over a period extending into the 1950's. The Hon. Lorna Milne's decision to preserve her father's legacy of conservation and protect the unique ecological character of his Caledon property in perpetuity by donating the land to TRCA is to be commended. Town of Caledon Council endorsed naming the subject TRCA property "The William Dennison Forest Preserve" at its meeting held on July 7, 2015. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will produce and install an appropriate sign on the land fronting on Innis Lake Road to identify the property's name, history and acknowledging the generous donation to TRCA. A commemorative event for the sign unveiling is being planned for the latter part of September. FINANCIAL DETAILS The estimated cost of producing and installing the sign on the property is $2,000. This expense will be covered by TRCA's capital budget with funding from Peel Region. Report prepared by: George Leja, extension 5342 Emails: gleja@trca.on.ca For Information contact: George Leja, extension 5342, Jae R. Truesdell, extension 5247 Emails: gleja@trca.on.ca and jruesdell @trca.on.ca Date: July 09, 2015 Attachment: 1 318 Attachment 1 Legend - CFN50632 ...... Floodline Watercourses L J Regulation Limit Parcel Assessment OPEf�w a�< r Ioardlon �S� CToonservation lorneL"rringCity� 0 eo 160 ago Melem CiQueen's Printer far Ontario and its liecnsmrs_ 120051 May Nat M Reymduced wWtout Pem mission THIS IS NOTA PLAN OF SURVEY 319 urmae Key Map RES. #A134/15 - CANADA 150 FUND APPLICATION Approval and authorization of funding application submission to Canada 150 Fund. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker WHEREAS the federal government led by the Department of Canadian Heritage has announced the Canada 150 Fund, a funding program that aims to promote Canadian values, culture and history, generate national pride and bring citizens together to celebrate Canada 150; AND WHEREAS project applications must be duly authorized or endorsed by a resolution of the Authority and submitted as a component of the application; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) submit funding applications to the Canada 150 Fund for the following projects: • Black Creek Pioneer Village: Celebrating History Through Art Interpretive Walk • Black Creek Pioneer Village Interpretive Exhibit: Engaging History, Engaging Canadians • Boyd Conservation Area Multicultural Canada Day Eve 2017 Celebration • Heritage Humber River Celebratory Events 2017 • Sugarbush Maple Syrup Festival 2017 • Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan (SNAP) • The Living City Experience: Phase 1 • Toronto Hydro Corridor Revitalization; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as required. CARRIED BACKGROUND Canada's 150th anniversary of Confederation in 2017 is a pivotal milestone for our country that allows us to connect with our past, celebrate who we are, honour our exceptional achievements and build a legacy for tomorrow. Since 2012, the Government of Canada has been actively planning for Canada 150 by inviting Canadians to celebrate historic nation - building events on the Road to 2017. The overarching theme for Canada 150 is Strong, Proud, and Free — three words that define and characterize present -day Canada: • A Canada that is a strong leader in the world with one of the most robust economies. • A Canada that is proud of its identity and achievements as well as its natural beauty and resources. • A Canada that is free with an open, diverse, and pluralistic society. This theme connects us with our past, embraces the present, and builds towards the future. The Department of Canadian Heritage is the lead department for the celebrations of Canada 150 and has created the Canada 150 Fund; a funding initiative that aims to promote Canadian values, culture and history, generate national pride and bring citizens together to celebrate Canada 150. Funding is available in the form of grants or contributions for projects that support the objectives below. 320 The goal of the Canada 150 Fund is to create opportunities for Canadians to participate in activities that contribute to building a sense of pride and attachment to Canada. The Canada 150 Fund will support activities that: • encourage participants to give back to Canada through gifts of time and energy, in ways that leave a legacy for the future; • provide Canadians with opportunities to actively participate and /or celebrate together, promoting and building a deeper understanding of Canada, its people and what it means to be Canadian; and • recognize and promote exceptional Canadian people, places, achievements and events that continue to shape our country. Examples of eligible projects under the Canada 150 Fund include: • celebratory or commemorative activities and events; • community building activities and events; • sport and active - living activities and events; • exhibits; • plaques, monuments and permanent installations; • ceremonies for site dedications; • interpretive programming and tours; • documentary films; • learning materials and activities; • theatrical or musical performances; • large -scale artwork projects; • new Canada 150 fairs and festivals; and • specific Canada 150 programming added to regular or recurrent fairs and festivals. Project applications must be duly authorized or endorsed by a board resolution. The resolution must be submitted at the time of the application. Proposed TRCA Projects TRCA requests approval to submit applications for the following projects. Canada 150 Fund does not require that projects be ranked in order of organizational priority. Project names, details, costs and grant percentages provided below are preliminary and may be updated as staff work through the application process. Black Creek Pioneer Village: Celebrating History through Community Art Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) proposes to engage the local community, partner organizations and community artists in a streetscape rejuvenation project that will artistically interpret and chronicle 150 years of Canadian history in celebration of our nation's sesquicentennial. The streetscape will be animated through the creation of large -scale art installations that will extend along the perimeter of BCPV's property. Additional art exhibits will commence at the Pioneer Village subway station and follow an interpretive walk to BCPV, with a goal of connecting the Village to the new subway station, which is scheduled for completion in 2017 and provide an interpretive experience for visitors arriving by subway. The project will showcase BCPV's offerings along Steeles Avenue while highlighting the Canadian legacy and heritage. All images and art installation will culminate at the main entrance to Black Creek Pioneer Village. 321 The project is the first step in the transformation of this neighbourhood into the Pioneer Village Community. Examples of proposed art installations include: • murals along the fence line of BCPV; • interchangeable installations inside the subway stations, showcasing differently themed Canadian Heritage exhibits; • interpretive pedestrian and street signage; • interactive installations along the walking path; • interchangeable photography and art. The budget for this project is $415,000. TRCA is seeking 50% ($207,500) from Canada 150. The remainder of the funding is available through municipal partnerships and community sponsorship funds. Black Creek Pioneer Village Interpretive Exhibit: Engaging History, Engaging Canadians BCPV will inspire a deeper understanding of Canada's past by transforming eight underutilized historic demonstration spaces and five exterior spaces into interactive history labs. In the new interactive history labs, hands -on, multi- sensory exhibits, activities and interpretive programming will engage Canadians in learning about the motivations, challenges, and achievements of individuals and communities who have contributed to the Canada we know today. The new labs mark BCPV's shift away from a "do not touch" philosophy that is pervasive in museums, where artifacts are displayed behind glass, to one that emphasizes "please touch ". The interactive history labs will combine the following components to celebrate Canada's 150 years of nationhood and leave a lasting legacy for Canadians: • re- designed historic rooms with 1860's -style reproduction furniture and props to immerse visitors in authentically Canadian historical experiences that engage all of our senses; • newly created hands -on activities, from simple to custom designed and built, to inspire deeper learning of and interaction with Canadian life "as it really was'; • larger -scale historically themed outdoor stations that promote active learning and physical activity; and • new drama programming that celebrates Canadian stories from the decade of Confederation, including the everyday people and key figures that are a part of Canadian history. The budget for this project is $850,000. TRCA is seeking 50% ($425,000) from Canada 150. The remainder of the funding is available through partnership and fundraising by The Living City Foundation. Boyd Conservation Area Multicultural Canada Day Eve 2017 Celebration Canada's 150`" anniversary of confederation is a monumental event that calls for a weekend - long celebration to bring the community together to celebrate our multiculturalism, values and accomplishments as a nation. As a compliment to the existing Canada Day events being held in Vaughan on July 15`, 2017, TRCA is proposing to offer a Canada Day Eve celebration with a multicultural focus at Boyd Conservation Area. This event would be held Friday, June 301h, 2017 and will offer the public an opportunity to celebrate the multitude of cultures that form our incredible country. 322 Boyd Conservation Area is located near the intersection of Islington Avenue and Rutherford Road, a densely populated area, and an ideal location for the community to converge to celebrate our cultures, citizenship and express gratitude to a great country. This event will feature the following exciting activities that celebrate many of the diverse cultures and ethnicities that are proud to call Canada home: • multicultural food market; • powwow demonstration; • Brazilian dancers; • international beer tent; • musical performances; • cultural pavilions; • African drumming; • textile and ceramic artisans, etc. The budget for this project is $35,000.00. TRCA is seeking 50% ($17,500.00) from Canada 150. The remainder of the funding is available through partnership and community /tourism sponsorship funds. Heritage Humber River Celebratory Events 2017 TRCA proposes to host "17 celebratory events in 2017" across the Humber River watershed, in partnership with municipalities, First Nations, community groups and residents, to enliven and animate the historic Carrying Place Trail. These events will involve community partners, food vendors, booths, First Nations dance and blessings. Examples include: • community theatre to showcase the Carrying Place Trail; • First Nations cultural heritage development guided walks and self - guided maps /apps; • buskers on the trail; • speakers corner; • Blue Trail paddle sport development; • "End to End" series from Lake Ontario to Mono. The over - arching themes of the events will be as follows. Humber River - A Canadian Heritage River In 1999, the Humber River was designated as a Canadian Heritage River. The designation recognizes the importance of the Humber for its natural heritage, cultural heritage and recreational values. Running from the Niagara Escarpment, a United Nations Biosphere Reserve, and the Oak Ridges Moraine south through Canada's largest urban centre, the Humber River plays the role of "Wild in the City ". The Carrying Place Trail The historic Toronto Carrying Place Trail was used by First Nations as a trade route between Lake Ontario and the inland areas to the north for generations. First Nations could travel north by canoe and portage up the Humber River, towards Lake Simcoe, and into Georgian Bay. French explorer Etienne Brule was, purportedly, the first European to encounter the Humber River and likely traveled it in 1615. It remained an important trade route until Yonge Street was constructed in 1796. 323 Humber River and Hurricane Hazel Hurricane Hazel hit Toronto on October 15, 1954, leaving enormous damage and 81 deaths in her wake. Houses were swept off their foundations and roads were washed away. With no flood control measures in place, the Humber River saw the most damage in the GTA — water levels rose by 6 to 8 metres, flooding out huge areas of Toronto — including Etienne Brute Park. This single disaster influenced the priorities of conservation authorities for decades. The budget for all three events is $50,000. TRCA is seeking 50% ($25,000) from Canada 150. The remainder of the funding is available through TRCA's municipal partners. Sugarbush Maple Syrup Festival 2017 For the past twenty years, the Sugarbush Maple Syrup Festival has taken place at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area and Kortright Centre for Conservation annually from the beginning of March to the first week of April. The festival continues to grow and improve, and last year expanded to a new location in partnership with Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) at Terra Cotta Conservation Area. The festival is a sure sign of spring and attracts many new and repeat customers, with approximately 40,000 visitors attending each year. It is a truly authentic Canadian experience and is a very popular activity among school groups and families from the GTA and beyond. The festival boasts many diverse activities that highlight the heritage of maple syrup production in Canada. Some of these activities include maple syrup self - guided walks to learn about historic and modern maple syrup production, pancake breakfast, maple syrup gift shops with sweet treats for sale, horse drawn wagon rides, farm animals, family entertainment, and local artisans selling unique and sustainable goods. With Canada's 150`h anniversary of confederation approaching in 2017, TRCA proposes to celebrate by promoting the Sugarbush Maple Syrup Festival 2017 as a unique celebration of our Canadian heritage with expanded programming, as well as promotion and mention of Canada's 1501h birthday in all marketing campaigns. Some of the additional activities proposed for each location will include the following: • lumberjack show; • powwow celebration; • native storytelling workshops; • musical performances. The budget for this project is $45,000. TRCA is seeking 50% ($22,500.00) from Canada 150. The remainder of the funding is available through TRCA partnerships, regional tourism organizations and community sponsorship funds. Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan (SNAP): Building Canada's legacy through neighbourhood based and community driven sustainable urban renewal. The very qualities of Canadians who built this nation and Canada's greatest asset, our natural heritage, can be celebrated and re- invigorated by communities as they participate in actions toward sustainable urban renewal. 324 The SNAP program brings together diverse partners to revitalize neighbourhoods in the Toronto region. SNAP fosters cross - cultural and inter - generational collaboration; respect for the past that is woven together with realizable dreams for the future; and conservation of our valuable resources through more sustainable living and renewal projects. Partnerships, plans and projects already established in five SNAP neighbourhoods in the Toronto region provide a strong basis for this proposal. This Canada 150 project will engage residents in new neighbourhood installations and events that will act as catalysts for further sustainable urban renewal, celebrate diverse cultures, old and new, and strengthen connections within the community. These legacy projects will be designed together with community partners and may include the creation of great gathering places such as a natural amphitheatre or a pavilion, interpretive native gardens, cultural landscapes and art installations along walking paths and in public spaces. These installations will restore ecological function, employ sustainable materials, transform underutilized spaces and add beauty to meet diverse needs. These projects will create platforms for celebration and they will inspire local residents to take actions to live more sustainably at home and in their community. Example celebratory events could include activities such as interactive art, educational native plantings and home retrofit workshops. Projects and events that take place in the five SNAP neighbourhoods will be promoted more broadly in the Toronto region and beyond and as part of this innovative model for urban renewal. The budget for this project is $600,000. TRCA is seeking 50% ($300,000) from Canada 150. The remainder of the funding is available from regional and local municipal partners and other fundraising championed by The Living City Foundation. The Living City Experience — Phase One An online and interactive web -based tool that will allow for the deployment of information, programming, and unique initiatives from TRCA and its partners, that is tailored to the users interests and experience level. Through a geo- referencing system the user will be able to access information relating to restoration projects, historical information, flora and fauna identification, and events and programming, as they travel through the watersheds in the Toronto region. They will be able to engage, sign -up, volunteer and provide comments on their experiences on anything they see in the watersheds, and this information will be accessible to the entire community. TRCA and partner groups will able to track, through a heat mapping process, how users engage with the watersheds around them, which will allow TRCA and partner groups to develop programming that focuses on user interests and maximizes the use of TRCA resources to implement the goals and objectives of the Strategic Plan. The advanced development of an interactive watershed application will provide TRCA with a tool that is capable of deploying any new community focused engagement model that is developed for the Toronto region. 325 The main objectives of this project are: • Encourage participants to give back to Canada through gifts of time and energy, in ways that leave a legacy for the future: The Living City Experience's online and interactive watershed will provide the opportunity for Canadians to connect with and engage in the projects, programs and events that are being developed to shape the future of the watersheds in the Toronto region. It will function as a resource for all Canadians to help build a lasting legacy of positive environmental conservation in the Toronto region. Provide Canadians with opportunities to actively participate and /or celebrate together, promoting and building a deeper understanding of Canada, its people and what it means to be Canadian: This project will provide Canadians with the ability to learn about, and engage in, the environmental programs that are being designed to guide the management of the natural areas in Canada's most urbanized landscape. Fostering community participation in the management of these areas will provide a generational sense of pride in what it means to protect and conserve the environment in Canada. Recognize and promote exceptional Canadian people, places, achievements and events that continue to shape our country: The interactive watershed will be designed to promote and connect the community with some of the most important opportunities to help protect, manage and conserve the natural environment. This system will function as a vital connection between the people, places and events that are transforming the Toronto region into a leading symbol of conservation in an urban context. The budget for this project is $150,000. TRCA is seeking 67% ($100,000) from Canada 150. The remainder of the funding is available through funds generated by The Living City Foundation and TRCA through watershed events such as Paddle the Don. Toronto Hydro Corridor Revitalization Connecting the Don Watershed with the Rouge National Urban Park Toronto is home to some of Canada's most incredible parks. From High Park to Morningside, and from ET Seton to Taylor Creek, the diversity and unique beauty of our natural spaces is one of the defining characteristics of Canada's largest urban region. These natural areas provide a vital benefit to the health and wellbeing of all Torontonians, and incorporate a balance between the urban and natural environment in a city that faces increasing development pressures. Following the geographical footprint of the City of Toronto's ravine system, these natural areas have well established north -south connections; however, they lack the east -west connections that are required to effectively establish a connected natural system that is vital to the future of sustainable city building in Toronto. Hydro corridors provide the opportunity to secure these important east -west connections for the City, and are some of the most strategically important resources in the goal to maintain a healthy and vibrant natural system in the City. Imagine being able to walk, run or bike from downtown Toronto to Rouge National Urban Park (RNUP) while being surrounded by the natural environment. Travelling through the Don River watershed across the Gatineau Hydro Corridor and onward to RNUP can be a reality, and with the support of partners and the community, this project presents an opportunity to revolutionize how we establish natural connections in Toronto. The ultimate goal of this project is to revitalize the Gatineau Hydro Corridor, between the Don River watershed and RNUP. In addition to the revitalization of these areas, the project seeks to build meaningful community engagement and educational opportunities that will facilitate an increased sense of community pride and ownership of this important natural connection. 326 Building on the success of The Scarborough Centre Butterfly Trail, TRCA is proposing to expand the meadow along the Gatineau Hydro Corridor in order to build a critical mass of contiguous meadow habitat, and take the next steps in the overall goal to connect the Don River watershed to the Rouge National Urban Park. The main objectives of this project are: • Encourage participants to give back to Canada through gifts of time and energy, in ways that leave a legacy for the future: The development of a natural connection between the Don watershed and RNUP will provide the community with an opportunity to take active ownership of an environmentally significant area in the heart of Canada's largest urban region. Providing an opportunity for Canadians to travel from Downtown Toronto to RNUP without leaving the natural environment will leave an incredible legacy for future generations of this city. Provide Canadians with opportunities to actively participate and /or celebrate together, promoting and building a deeper understanding of Canada, its people and what it means to be Canadian: Celebrating the beauty and diversity of Canada's largest urban region is of vital importance in the continued efforts to protect and conserve the important natural areas in the Toronto region. Connecting with nature is important to all Canadians, and the natural environment in Canada is one of the most important symbols of national pride in this country. Developing a connection between the country's largest population and one of the most important areas of national parkland, will provide a vital link between the natural environment and millions of Canadians. Recognize and promote exceptional Canadian people, places, achievements and events that continue to shape our country: The ravine system in the Toronto region is one of Canada's most important and defining natural areas. The tens of thousands acres of ravine and natural areas that exist in the Toronto region provides a unique identity to Canada's largest city. The ravines are a place to celebrate the people, achievements and history that have shaped this city. They are areas that swell with community pride, and define, for many, what it means to be a Torontonian in Canada. Connecting the Don watershed ravine with the ravine system in Rouge National Urban Park, will provide increased strength to a system that continues to shape an important component of the natural and cultural history of this country. Phase Three Revitalization Located west of The Scarborough Centre Butterfly Trail, this 45 hectare site has been identified as the third phase in the revitalization process. Long term support for this location has been fostered between TRCA, the City of Toronto and Hydro One. Although there are additional agreements that are required to activate the revitalization process at this site, all partners are optimistic that the agreements can be completed, and discussions are underway. The budget for this project is $1,200,000. TRCA is seeking 42% ($400,000) from Canada 150. The remainder of the funding is being raised through TRCA's charitable partners who have already made commitments for Phase I and II of the project. Grant applications have also being made to the Trillium Foundation. 327 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE If endorsed by the Authority, TRCA staff will submit Canada 150 funding applications for the aforementioned projects in September 2015. Approved projects will be presented to the Authority for further approvals as required. FINANCIAL DETAILS While the Canada 150 Fund can support up to 100% of eligible expenses, applicants are strongly encouraged to secure other cash or in -kind sources of funding. The level of cash or in- kind support from other sources will be taken into consideration during the assessment process. There is no set limit to the number of projects that can be funded for any one applicant. Report prepared by: Kate Pankov, extension 6418 Emails: kpankov @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kate Pankov, extension 6418 Emails: kpankov @trca.on.ca Date: June 29, 2015 328 RES. #A135 /15 - EROSION MANAGEMENT FOR THE JULY 8TH, 2013 SEVERE WEATHER EVENT 2015 Mid -year Update. Staff update on the management of erosion and slope instability hazards resulting from the severe weather event on July 8th, 2013. Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Rodney Hoinkes WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff reported on the management of erosion and slope stability hazards related to the July 8, 2013 severe weather event at Authority meetings #6/13 held on July 26, 2013, #11/13 on January 31, 2014, #6/14 on July 25, 2014 and #10/14 on January 9, 2015; AND WHEREAS TRCA staff was directed at Authority Meeting #10/14 under Resolution #A210/14 to continue with the implementation of several ongoing and new priority projects described in the 2015 workplan; AND WHEREAS staff identified the need for potential in -year adjustments to the 2015 workplan at Authority Meeting #10/14 due to changing priorities and potential project delays; AND WHEREAS staff has also identified that hundreds of sites categorized as being lower priority are unlikely to receive assistance with erosion control works given the growing number of sites with each severe storm event, anticipated funding over the next 10 years, and how work is prioritized to address the highest risk sites first; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue with implementation of the 2015 workplan, including the mid -year revisions outlined herein; THAT staff be authorized to pursue additional funding opportunities specifically for lower priority properties with the intent of preventing major failures from occurring and realizing cost savings over the long term by working proactively; AND FURTHER THAT a copy of this report be provided to the cities of Toronto and Mississauga and Region of Peel. AMENDMENT RES. #A136 /15 Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Rodney Hoinkes THAT the following be inserted after the third paragraph of the main motion: AND WHEREAS additional funding from the City of Toronto has been identified for Critical Erosion and Floodworks projects for 2016 to 2025, subject to Council approval; THAT the following replace the fourth paragraph of the main motion 329 AND WHEREAS staff has also identified that hundreds of sites categorized as being lower priority may be required to wait several years for assistance with erosion control works given how work is prioritized to address the highest risk sites first; AND FURTHER THAT the second last paragraph of the main motion be amended to read as follows: THAT staff be authorized to allocate a portion of each year's funding to lower priority sites where proactive works may prevent significant future damage to or loss of property; THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff reported on the management of erosion and slope stability hazards related to the July 8, 2013 severe weather event at Authority meetings #6/13 held on July 26, 2013, #11/13 on January 31, 2014, #6/14 on July 25, 2014 and #10/14 on January 9, 2015; AND WHEREAS TRCA staff was directed at Authority Meeting #10/14 under Resolution #A210/14 to continue with the implementation of several ongoing and new priority projects described in the 2015 workplan; AND WHEREAS staff identified the need for potential in -year adjustments to the 2015 workplan at Authority Meeting #10/14 due to changing priorities and potential project delays; AND WHEREAS additional funding from the City of Toronto has been identified for Critical Erosion and Floodworks projects for 2016 to 2025, subject to Council approval; AND WHEREAS staff has also identified that hundreds of sites categorized as being lower priority may be required to wait several years for assistance with erosion control works given how work is prioritized to address the highest risk sites first; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue with implementation of the 2015 workplan, including the mid -year revisions outlined herein; THAT staff be authorized to allocate a portion of each year's funding to lower priority sites where proactive works may prevent significant future damage to or loss of property; AND FURTHER THAT a copy of this report be provided to the cities of Toronto and Mississauga and Region of Peel. 330 BACKGROUND On July 8, 2013 an intense downpour rolled through the Toronto area, causing wide - spread flooding, surcharges of water infrastructure, and significant damage to the river and valley systems including extensive damage to park trails and pedestrian bridges, numerous debris jams, and an unprecedented number of slope failures on hundreds of private properties that border these natural areas. TRCA Restoration Services staff became the first responders to flood and erosion related damage following this event, inventorying and assessing more than 500 sites over the course of several months. On July 26, 2013 staff brought the first post -storm erosion damage report to Authority Meeting #6/13, providing an overview of the information collected to date with recommendations for further action. At that time, only 141 properties had been inspected and the full extent of damage was not known, however six sites were flagged as requiring immediate action due to the perceived level of risk to houses and /or municipal infrastructure. Staff acted quickly to initiate engineering investigations at these and other top priority sites to determine the appropriate course of action using reallocated 2013 funding. At Authority Meeting #11/13, held on January 31, 2014, staff provided an update to the Authority detailing the work completed to date, and the estimated cost of each major activity. By this time, the total number of sites inspected had risen to 482, and the preliminary estimate of damages was approximately $37 million. It is noted that this estimate included only those properties reported to and inspected by TRCA, and excluded damages to municipal lands and infrastructure, which TRCA's municipal partners reported on separately to avoid double - counting. Also presented at Authority Meeting #11/13 was a workplan outlining a list of projects recommended for remedial works in 2014 using 2014 -2015 Critical Erosion and Floodworks funding from the City of Toronto, which also provided funding for priority projects not related to the July 8, 2013 flood; and 2014 -2015 core erosion management funding from the Region of Peel. In accordance with TRCA's Erosion Management Program, all work proceeded on a priority basis, to ensure the most hazardous sites be addressed first. As an update to the January 2014 workplan, a mid -year report was brought to Authority Meeting #6/14 on July 25, 2014 to outline the in -year adjustments that were required following the receipt of more detailed information from engineering studies, additional storm damage at already known sites, and project delays due to stalled erosion agreements with individual property owners. It was noted that the workplan was neither a rigid nor exhaustive list, but a framework to approach what was, and continues to be, a large backlog of sites requiring erosion control works in the Toronto region. The last update, presented at Authority #10/14 on January 9. 2015, provided an overview of the erosion restoration work completed or in progress as of December 31, 2014 with 2014 Critical Erosion and Floodworks funding from the City of Toronto, and 2014 core erosion management funding from the Region of Peel for sites related to the July 8, 2013 storm. The report also requested approval of the 2015 workplan, allowing staff to continue on with this important work at additional priority sites identified in previous reports to the Authority. 331 Since the last report to the Authority in January 2015, a number of property owners and Toronto Councillors have expressed concern at the length of time TRCA staff has estimated it will take until some properties will be eligible for assistance with erosion control works. To this point, given the list of approximately 360 sites presently requiring erosion control works, the increasing frequency of severe storms that create new hazards, and the way TRCA's Erosion Management Program is structured to re- prioritize work as needed to address the highest priority areas first, it has become clear that many of these properties considered 'lower priority' (i.e., those sites where the house or other essential structure is not at risk but still have varying degrees of property loss or damage) are unlikely to receive assistance with erosion control works. In other words, because TRCA's efforts are increasingly focused on responding to severe storm damage, it is very difficult to work proactively by stabilizing areas before more serious damage occurs, and to realize the cost savings over the longer term that could be achieved by doing so. Although staff maintains that using a risk -based priority system to allocate funding is the best approach where protecting public safety and infrastructure is concerned, there is merit in identifying a separate category of sites for which additional or special funding can be pursued to implement work from a preventative or proactive maintenance perspective. This action would allow TRCA to diversify its approach to erosion management in the Toronto region, without compromising its ability to address the sites with the highest risks first. RATIONALE As an update to the workplan presented at Authority Meeting #10/14, the current status of each project currently in progress is provided in Attachment 1. It is noted that the erosion damage sites located in Peel Region have been assessed at a detailed level, and since the risk to these properties were determined to be lower than first thought, no works have been recommended for 2015, with the understanding that these properties would continue to be monitored and placed in queue for remedial works with other erosion priorities in Peel Region. As such, the 2015 workplan does not include any specific deliverables in Peel Region related to the July 8, 2013 event other than monitoring. As expected, some in -year adjustments to the 2015 workplan are and may continue to be required as more detailed information is received from engineering studies, subsequent storm events worsen conditions at certain sites, and other projects are delayed due to legal negotiations and other factors. In compliance with the original workplan approval, all work completed with the funding provided is done on a priority basis as best possible, and is subject to all necessary approvals and confirmation of available funding. It is therefore recommended that staff be authorized to continue with the implementation of the 2015 workplan, including the mid -year revisions outlined in Attachment 1. It is noted that there is only one new site that has been added to the 2015 workplan, located at 219 -226 Roslin Avenue in Toronto where a the slope reportedly failed following the July 8, 2013 storm but was not reported to TRCA until spring 2015 when the condition worsened significantly to the point that the foundation of 226 Roslin Avenue was found to be at risk. Given the severity of the situation, staff recommends carrying out a detailed slope stability assessment to confirm the type(s) and extent of risk to the homes on Roslin Avenue to prioritize this site against the ones already evaluated for potential future erosion control works. 332 Based on a review of the sites prioritized for erosion control works within the current system, staff estimate that up to 50% of the sites on the list for remedial works may not receive assistance given the projected available funding between 2016 -2025 and the preliminary cost to carry out the works needed at each site. Therefore, to allow TRCA to work more proactively without delaying work at sites where public safety or essential structures may be at risk, it is also recommended that staff be authorized to pursue additional funding opportunities specifically for lower priority sites that can benefit from proactive erosion control works. Such opportunities may be found at other levels of government, through special funding, grants or subsidies related to climate change mitigation, or increasing the landowner's contribution to the cost of the work for example. Staff also suspects that there are hundreds of additional properties at risk which could benefit from this same preventative maintenance, and TRCA intends to proceed with an erosion risk mitigation strategy in 2016 pending receipt of approvals and funding, to look more broadly across the ravines and valleys of the Toronto region to identify and mitigate these risks more proactively. While this strategy is being completed, if additional funding can be secured to proceed with this work for the already known sites, the process and details of this work could help to inform the recommendations and cost estimates in the strategy. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total cost to mitigate all known erosion hazard sites is estimated at $39 million, not including the work completed to date since the July 8th, 2013 event which totals approximately $5.9 million. The estimate of total erosion work remaining was done coarsely using past similar works for reference and includes a contingency allowance to account for unknown and missing information, and is subject to ongoing revision as conditions change, existing sites are repaired and new sites are identified. The total budget for Critical Erosion and Floodworks in 2015 is $7 million; Attachment 1 shows how the $7 million is allocated to different priority projects and the 2015 expenditures for each project as of May 31, 2015. To ensure the details of all erosion restoration work related to the July 8, 2013 storm are made available to the Authority, TRCA's partners and the residents of the Toronto region, staff will provide another update to the Authority at year end. Report prepared by: Moranne McDonnell, 416- 392 -9725 Emails: mmcdonnell @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Moranne McDonnell, 416 - 392 -9725 Emails: mmcdonnell @trca.on.ca Date: June 30, 2015 Attachments: 1 333 Attachment 1 Mid -Year Update on 2015 Priority Erosion and Flood Restoration Projects 334 2015 EXPENDITURE CURRENT PROJECT 2015 SCOPE OF WORK BUDGET S AS OF MAY STATUS 30, 2015 1. Black Creek Channel (Wilson 1. Survey complete; planning and Ave. to Queen's Drive) sediment design in progress; work to and vegetation removal commence Fall 2015 2. Yonge -York Mills Reach 3 2. Survey complete; planning and 1. Flood Control sediment and vegetation $1,000,000 design in progress; work Channel removal; development of + $219,000 $284,000 tentatively to commence late Maintenance permanent access point(s) for (2014) August 2015 future maintenance 3. Surveys in progress; scope of 3. Sheppard Channel and work to be confirmed by end of Lavender Creek: preliminary 2015; construction tentatively studies to develop scope of scheduled for 2016 pending work for future maintenance review of priorities • EA addendum 90% complete; 2.1 Midland - 81- Bluff erosion hazard mitigation approvals in progress 83 Fishleigh threatening life and property $1,300,000 $25,000 . Commence with shoreline stabilization and slope buttressing work Fall 2015 • RFP in progress; project delayed Bluff erosion hazard mitigation due to ongoing inquiries by threatening life and property potential buyers of 449 3.441,447 $3,500 Guildwood Parkway re: Guildwood $1,500,000 stabilization requirements and Parkway costs . Finalize design, secure approvals and commence construction Fall 2015 4. Valley Erosion Hazards (including July 8, 2013 storm $3,200,000 +$838,000 $1,471,000 See individual progress updates damage sites) 2014 below . Re- inspection of sites to update Monitoring; Ongoing inspections of July 8, priority list in progress Project Planning; 2013 storm damage sites; Project $200,000 $125,000 . Carry out minor works (fencing, minor works scoping; Minor works signage, downspout extensions, etc ) as needed in progress Phase 2 Detailed Geotechnical investigations of 132 . All final reports circulated Slope Stability properties plus additional $80,000 $49,000 . Follow up site visits and priority Assessments investigation of 219 -226 Roslin ranking updates in progress Avenue (new site 2015) . Scope of investigation for Roslin Avenue underdevelopment Downsview Dells Completion of stabilization works at . 137 Whitbum 90% complete STS /Whitbum 111, 117, 135,137 and 139 $1,043,000 $437,000. 139 Whitburn substantially Crescent to Whitburn Crescent; complete Jennifer Court Completion of channel stabilization • 111 -117 Whitbum tentatively Emergency Works work; final site restoration scheduled for Fall 2015 pending approvals and agreements Includes: . Channel restoration work 2,4 Jennifer connecting individual slope Court, stabilization sites being 139,137,135, 117, expanded in consultation with and 111 Whitburn Toronto Water Crescent . South tributary drainage improvements potentially deferred to 2016 pending available funding and approvals • Final site restoration spring 2016 334 PROJECT 2015 PROPOSED 2015 PRELIM. EXPENDITURES TENTATIVE SCHEDULE SCOPE OF WORK BUDGET AS OF MAY 30, 2015 Complete Phase 1 . Phase 1 emergency work 5 Old Yonge Street emergency works, $637,000 substantially complete; restoration including 14,16 Brookfield and Phase 2 slope $790,000 Fall 2015 Rd re-grading and Phase 2 work TBD pending general ravine completion of detailed design and restoration approvals . Downspout investigation complete Downspout Detailed plan in progress redirections; finalize Class EA finalization on hold Class EA and submit $1,500 pending completion of consultation 6 -22 Northover Street for approval; continue .510.000 requirements Continue with agreement erosion control agreement negotiations; detailed design and negotiations construction schedule to be developed pending receipt of agreements Phase 1 emergency . Phase 1 emergency works 90% works: Mechanically complete Stabilized Earth . Phase 2 (select properties between 1 Katrine Road; 5 -69 (MSE) slope (1 $145,000 5 to 45) to be completed through Riverhead Drive (select Katrine - 53 $1,400,000 Class EA process in progress participating properties) Riverhead); slope re- . Phase 2 construction TBD pending grading and completion of EA process buttressing (47 -49); Phase 2 Class EA 114 Cambome Avenue Slope stabilization $80,000 $60,000 . Work complete; post-construction works to protect a monitoring and reporting in progress private residence Class EA to determine $40,000 $4,000 . Class EA in progress 22 -32 Norfield Crescent preferred measure of . Construction TBD pending (excluding 26; completed slope stabilization completion of Class EA, receipt of as emergency works in agreements and approvals, and 2014) review of 2016 priorities 1025 Scarlett Road Slope stabilization to $250,000 . Detailed design contract recently protect apartment (plus $250, 000 $2,500 awarded building and children's from Ministry of . Commence construction Fall 2015 playground Natural Resources pending approvals and Forestry, MNRF . 767 Royal York Rd. Detailed design of . All RFPs in final development stage • 39 -41 TopcliffAve. preferred solutions $145,000 $10,000 . Detailed designs to be developed . 19 -31 Ridge Point Cres. over remainder of 2015 -early 2016 • 14 Appletree Ct. Note: Projects may be . Construction schedules to be . 22 Bucksburn Rd. accelerated or developing following receipt of • 19 -25 Ridgegate Rd. deferred as project detailed estimates, and review of . 30 Northline Rd. costs are refined. priorities and available funding ADD ROSLINAND TOM RILEY $8,057,000 $1,471,000 335 RES. #A137/15 - ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR STOUFFVILLE DAM DEFICIENCY REPAIR DESIGN PROJECT Request for Proposal #10000230. Award of Contract #10000230 for professional engineering services for the design of repairs for deficiencies at Stouffville Dam to meet Lakes and River Improvement Act requirements for dam safety in Ontario. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT Contract #10000230 for the engineering services required for the Stouffville Dam Deficiency Repair Design Project be awarded to Hydrosys Consulting Inc. at a total cost not to exceed $110,050.00, plus HST, it having submitted the highest ranked and lowest cost proposal, resulting from the evaluation criteria set out in the Request for Proposal (RFP) document; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 15% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement with the above - mentioned proponent, staff be authorized to enter into contract negotiations with the next highest ranked proponent; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as necessary to implement the contract, including the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND Stouffville Dam was built in 1969 to provide flood protection to the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville. The dam is located on Stouffville Creek approximately 700 metres upstream of the downtown core of the town. The dam is approximately 8 metres high and 335 metres long and consists of an earth embankment with a concrete drop structure that controls flow through the dam. Maximum reservoir storage is approximately 190,000 cubic metres of water during flood events. In 2014 Stouffville Dam underwent a Dam Safety Review (DSR) which is a requirement of Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA). DSR's are intensive investigations of a dam that determine whether the structure meets all current safety requirements. All components of the dam are investigated including geotechnical stability, design flood requirements, concrete structures, hazard potential classifications, seismic loading and public safety. The 2014 DSR determined that the hazard potential for Stouffville Dam was "Very High" which corresponds to 11 or more persons at risk should the dam fail. The 2014 DSR also determined that there are the following five major deficiencies with the structure that could compromise the safety and stability of the dam: 336 Deficiency Description Geotechnical Factor of Safety The earth embankment of the dam does not meet factors of safety outlined in the LRIA. Further geotechnical information is required to confirm if the embankment is stable for all loading conditions. Condition of Concrete Spillway Concrete spillway has cracked and spalled. Alkali /Aggregate Reaction is occurring. Concrete repairs are required to maintain structural integrity of the spillway. Inadequate Rip Rap Protection on Upstream Rip rap slope protection does not extend high Slope enough up the embankment. During periods of high water in the reservoir wave action could erode the embankment. Undefined Emergency Spillway Emergency spillway does not have adequate erosion protection during high flows. Flood water velocity could erode the emergency spillway that could compromise stability of the dam. Low Flow Pipe Intake Condition Condition of the low flow pipe is unknown. A dive inspection with a remote camera is required to determine the condition of the pipe. TRCA requires engineering services to: • further investigate each deficiency to confirm site conditions; • design repairs to remediate each deficiency to meet current dam safety requirements and provide drawings suitable for construction tender; and • provide construction inspection services during the repair work. TRCA anticipates implementing deficiency repairs starting in 2016 dependent on the availability of funds. If the investigation detects issues that would require emergency repairs, TRCA will reallocate funds or request special funding to mitigate the hazard. There is an Emergency Preparedness Plan in place if the situation escalates to a point where dam stability is compromised or public safety is at risk. RATIONALE Request for Proposals for engineering services to conduct Dam Safety Reviews was advertised on -line with biddingo.com on May 22, 2015. The submissions were evaluated on a weighted scoring system consisting of 70% technical criteria and the remaining 30% on the fee proposal. These criteria included the following: • applicable experience of the responding lead firm and their consulting team in dam safety assessments and geotechnical engineering; • experience, qualifications and availability of individual team members proposed for this project; • consultants understanding of the scope of work; • proposed approach and methodology for this assignment including an assessment of any anticipated difficulties and the proposed approach to overcome them; • proposed schedule and work plan, and ability to comply with the proposed schedule; and • reasonableness of cost. 337 As per TRCA's Purchasing Policy and procedures, the proposals were opened by the Procurement Opening Committee on June 26, 2015 with the following results: BIDDERS TOTAL Plus HST KGS Group Consulting Engineers $177,275.00 MMM Group Ltd. $157,500.00 H dross Consultants Inc. $110,050.00 Stantec Consulting Ltd. $398,269.00 AMEC Foster Wheeler $164,375.00 Members of the Selection Committee, consisting of TRCA staff (Craig Mitchell, Matt Derro and Ali Shirazi), reviewed the proposals based on the aforementioned evaluation criteria. The results of the evaluation are as follows: BIDDERS RANKING out of 100 H dross Consultants Inc. 95 KGS Group Consulting Engineers 87 AMEC Foster Wheeler 81 MMM Group Ltd. 80 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 63 Based on the evaluation of the bids, it was concluded that the combined technical and fee proposal valued at $110,050.00 submitted by Hydrosys Consulting Inc. offered the best service for value among the engineering firms whose technical capacity matched the project needs. This project is aligned with Leadership Strategy #2 under TRCA's current 10 -year strategic plan. TRCA is demonstrating responsible management of our water resources for current and future generations by reducing or eliminating flood risks within our jurisdiction. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding is available from two sources. The Small Dams and Channels Account 107 -03, funded by York Region, will contribute 50% to this project. MNRF, through the Water and Erosion Infrastructure Program (WECI), will contribute the remaining 50 %. Report prepared by: Craig Mitchell, 647 212 -2410 Emails: cmitchell @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Craig Mitchell, 647 212 -2410 Emails: cmitchell @trca.on.ca Date: July 13, 2015 338 RES. #A138 /15 - ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR CLAIREVILLE DAM AND MILNE DAM SAFETY REVIEWS Request for Proposal #10000231. Award of Contract #10000231 for professional engineering services to conduct Dam Safety Reviews for Claireville Dam (Peel Region and City of Toronto) and Milne Dam (York Region) to meet Lakes and River Improvement Act requirements for dam safety in Ontario. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT Contract #10000231 for the engineering services required for the Dam Safety Reviews (DSR's) for Claireville Dam and Milne Dam be awarded to KGS Group Consulting Engineers Inc. at a total cost not to exceed $206,647.00, plus HST, it being the highest ranked proposal resulting from evaluation criteria set out in the Request for Proposal (RFP); THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 15% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement with the above - mentioned proponent, staff be authorized to enter into contract negotiations with the next highest ranked proponent; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as necessary to implement the contract, including the signing and execution of documents. AMENDMENT RES. #A139 /15 Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: AND FURTHER THAT staff report back on ecological health of the water control structures and reservoirs owned by TRCA. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: THAT Contract #10000231 for the engineering services required for the Dam Safety Reviews (DSR's) for Claireville Dam and Milne Dam be awarded to KGS Group Consulting Engineers Inc. at a total cost not to exceed $206,647.00, plus HST, it being the highest ranked proposal resulting from evaluation criteria set out in the Request for Proposal (RFP); 339 THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 15% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement with the above - mentioned proponent, staff be authorized to enter into contract negotiations with the next highest ranked proponent; THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as necessary to implement the contract, including the signing and execution of documents; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back on ecological health of the water control structures and reservoirs owned by TRCA. BACKGROUND Claireville Dam and Milne Dam are flood control structures owned by TRCA. They provide flood protection on the West Humber River and the Rouge River respectively. Claireville Dam was constructed in 1963. It consists of an earth embankment 15 metres high with a concrete flow control structure that utilizes five radial arm gates to control flow. The earth embankment is 457 metres long. Claireville Dam is considered a 'large" dam under International Commission on Large Dam (]COLD) criteria. The dam received its last Dam Safety Review (DSR) in 2004 which determined that its hazard classification is "High" which corresponds with one or more persons at risk should the dam fail. Milne Dam was constructed in 1969 to replace a previous dam that was destroyed during Hurricane Hazel. The dam is 10 metres high and 130 metres long. Flow is controlled by a concrete ogee type spillway. The dam is considered a passive structure as gate operations are not required during high flow events. The dam received its last DSR in 2004 which determined that its hazard classification is "High" which corresponds with one or more persons at risk should the dam fail. In 2004 both dams underwent Dam Safety Reviews that used criteria from the 1999 Ontario Dam Safety Guidelines developed by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) and the Canadian Dam Association (CDA). In 2011 MNRF released updated dam safety requirements under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act Technical Guidelines and Best Management Practices (LRIA). The LRIA contains the most recent engineering principles for dam safety in Ontario and is the standard for dam owners to use when assessing the safety of their structures. The LRIA states that the DSR is "a systematic review and evaluation of all aspects of design, construction, maintenance, operation and surveillance and all other factors, processes and systems affecting dam safety. The evaluation should be based on current knowledge and standards which may be different from the acceptable standards at the time of original construction or a prior DSR ". The LRIA contains the following requirements for assessing dam safety through DSRs: • Classification of Inflow Design Flood Criteria • Seismic Hazard Criteria, Assessment and Considerations • Structural Design and Factors of Safety • Spillways and Flood Control Structures • Geotechnical Design and Factors of Safety 340 • Public Safety Around Dams • Dam Safety Reviews Under the LRIA, dams with a hazard potential of "High" or "Very High" are required to have a DSR every 10 years. This is to ensure that dams posing a high risk to persons and property are investigated regularly using the most recent dam safety standards. As both dams received their last DSR in 2004, Claireville Dam and Milne Dam are due for new DSR's. Safety deficiencies noted during the DSR will be used to identify future capital projects. RATIONALE Request for Proposals for engineering services to conduct Dam Safety Reviews for Claireville Dam and Milne Dam was advertised on -line with biddingo.com on May 22, 2015. The submissions were evaluated on a weighted scoring system consisting of 70% technical criteria and the remaining 30% on the fee proposal. These criteria included the following: • applicable experience of the responding lead firm and their consulting team in dam safety assessments and engineering; • experience, qualifications and availability of individual team members proposed for this project; • consultant's understanding of the scope of work; • proposed approach and methodology for this assignment including an assessment of any anticipated difficulties and the proposed approach to overcome them; • proposed schedule and work plan, and ability to comply with the proposed schedule; and • reasonableness of cost. As per TRCA's Purchasing Policy and procedures, the proposals were opened by the Procurement Opening Committee on June 26, 2015 with the following results: BIDDERS TOTAL Plus HST KGS Group Consulting Engineers $206,647.00 EXP $76,250.00 Sanchez Engineering $296,000.00 H dross Consultants Inc. $150,390.00 Stantec Consulting Ltd. $380,956.00 AMEC Foster Wheeler $209,676.00 Members of the Selection Committee, consisting of TRCA staff (Craig Mitchell, Matt Derro and Leland Wilbur), reviewed the proposals based on the aforementioned evaluation criteria. The results of the evaluation are as follows: BIDDERS RANKING (out of 100) KGS Group Consulting Engineers 83 H dros s Consulting Inc. 77 EXP 75 AMEC Foster Wheeler 74 Sanchez Engineering 72 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 63 341 Based on the evaluation of the bids, it was concluded that the combined technical and fee proposal valued at $206,647.00 submitted by KGS Group Consulting Engineers Inc. offered the best service for value among the engineering firms whose technical capacity matched the project needs. EXP's proposal is not recommended by staff because the proposal price does not reflect the amount of work required to conduct a thorough DSR. Time allotted for required tasks was deemed inadequate for large dams with high hazard potential. EXP's proposal was also scored lower because the DSR geotechnical stability investigations would be based on conservative assumptions regarding items such as embankment materials and pore water pressures. TRCA prefers actual field parameter data be obtained so that slope stability models accurately reflect the condition of the embankment. Hydrosys Consulting scored lower as their proposal also did not include a geotechnical drilling program to obtain actual embankment conditions but rather to base embankment stability models on assumptions of field conditions. KGS Group had the most complete proposal that met the requirements of the RFP. The project team offered the most experience with projects of similar scale and scope, including experience with large dams with high hazard potential. KGS Group's proposal was the lowest priced that included a geotechnical borehole drilling program and underwater inspection. This project is aligned with Leadership Strategy #2 under TRCA's current 10 -year strategic plan. TRCA is demonstrating responsible management of our water resources for current and future generations by reducing or eliminating flood risks within our jurisdiction. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding is available from two sources. The Large Dams Capital Account 107 -04 (Claireville Dam) and the Small Dams and Channels Account 107 -03 (Milne Dam) funded by City of Toronto, York Region and Peel Region will contribute 50% to this project. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, through the Water and Erosion Infrastructure Program (WECI), will contribute the remaining 50 %. Report prepared by: Craig Mitchell, 647 212 -2410 Emails: cmitchell @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Craig Mitchell, 647 212 -2410 Emails: cmitchell @trca.on.ca Date: July 08, 2015 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE RES. #A140115 Moved by: Jack Ballinger Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT the Committee move into closed session to discuss item 9.8 — Dufferin Vistas Ltd. (Formally Eugene and Lillian lacobelli), as it pertains to ongoing legal matters in which the Authority is involved. CARRIED 342 RISE AND REPORT RES. #A141 /15 Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Mike Mattos THAT the Committee rise and report from closed session. CARRIED RES. #A142 /15 - DUFFERIN VISTAS LTD. (FROMALLY EUGENE AND LILLIAN IACOBELLI) 230 Grand Trunk Avenue (formerly 9500 Dufferin Street) Planning Block 18, West of Dufferin Street and North of Rutherford Road City of Vaughan, York Region. History and background on subject property and continued TRCA participation as a Party at the associated Ontario Municipal Board appeal. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT confidential item 9.8 - Dufferin Vistas Ltd. (Formally Eugene and Lillian lacobelli) be approved; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back when the item is completed and can be made public. Maria Augimeri Yea Jack Ballinger Yea Vincent Crisanti Nay Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea Michael Di Biase Nay Chris Fonseca Yea Jack Heath Yea Rodney Hoinkes Yea Jennifer Innis Nay Colleen Jordan Yea Maria Kelleher Yea Matt Mahoney Nay Mike Mattos Yea Jennifer McKelvie Yea Ron Moeser Yea Jennifer O'Connell Yea Linda Pabst Nay Anthony Perruzza Yea John Sprovieri Yea Jim Tovey Yea 343 THE MOTION WAS CARRIED RES. #A143 115 - 220 GREYABBEY TRAIL Notice of Violation # V 2814. Report back on TRCA and City of Toronto efforts to resolve an outstanding permit violation. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT confidential item 9.9 — 220 Greyabbey Trail be deferred to Authority Meeting #8/15, scheduled to be held on September 25, 2015. CARRIED RES. #A144 /15 - CITY OF PICKERING Request for a Permanent Easement Lake Ontario Waterfront, CFN 54047. Receipt of a request from the City of Pickering to provide a permanent easement required for an overhead power line, pole and pole anchors being relocated to the south side of Park Crescent in the City of Pickering, Lake Ontario waterfront. (Executive Res. #865115) Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Michael Di Biase WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the City of Pickering to provide a permanent easement in the City of Pickering, Lake Ontario waterfront; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with the City of Pickering in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of 0.001 hectares (0.003 acres), more or less, be granted to the City of Pickering for an overhead power line, pole and pole anchors, on the south side of Park Crescent; THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00 and in addition all legal, survey and other costs to be paid by the City of Pickering; THAT the City of Pickering is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the granting of this easement or the carrying out of construction; 344 THAT all TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated /stabilized following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines; THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by the City of Pickering prior to commencement of construction; THAT said easement be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C. 27, as amended, if required; THAT the transaction be completed on terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitor; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A145/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed Teefy Developments Ltd., CFN 53336. Acquisition and lease of property located west of Bathurst Street and south of Rutherford Road, in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River watershed. (Executive Res. #866115) Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Chris Fonseca THAT 6.42 hectares (15.87 acres), more or less, of vacant land located west of Bathurst Street and south of Rutherford Road, in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, said land being Part of Lot 15, Concession 2 and designated as Parts 1 and 2 on Plan 65R -35713 and Parts 1, 2 and 3 on a Draft Plan of Survey prepared by Schaeffer Dzaldov Bennett Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Job No. 12- 316 -17, dated June 11, 2015, be purchased from Teefy Developments Ltd.; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the lands free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; 345 THAT TRCA enter into a lease with the Toronto Waldorf School for the use of the subject lands for its Environmental Stewardship Program for a term of 40 years, subject to consent approval pursuant to the Planning Act of Ontario, R.S.O. 1990 and terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitor; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A146/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed, Shell Canada Limited, CFN 54025. Purchase of property located at 3550 Queen Street East in the City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015 ", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #867115) Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT 0.54 hectares (1.34 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 6, Concession 8 Northern Division and designated as 'lands to be conveyed to TRCA (condition)' on the plan prepared by Walker Nott Dragicevic Associates Limited, located at 3550 Queen Street East in the City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, Humber River watershed be purchased from Shell Canada Limited; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 346 SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION RES. #A147/15 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Maria Kelleher Seconded by: Jennifer McKelvie THAT Section II Items 12.2.1 - 12.2.6, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #7/15, held on July 3, 2015, be received. Section II Items 12.2.1 — 12.2.6. Inclusive HOSPICE VAUGHAN (Executive Res. #868115) ONTARIO MUNICPAL BOARD HEARING (Executive Res. #869115) CANADA GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL AND ITS GREATER TORONTO CHAPTER (Executive Res. #870115) PORT LANDS FLOOD PROTECTION AND ENABLING INFRASTRUCTURE DUE DILIGENCE AND PROJECT PLANNING (Executive Res. #871115) MUD CREEK RESTORATION - REACH 5 (PHASE 2) - CREEK BYPASS PUMPING SYSTEM (Executive Res. #872115) G. ROSS LORD DAM PROJECT — BUILDING UPGRADES (Executive Res. #873115) 347 SECTION III — ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #A148115 - SMART NET -ZERO ENERGY BUILDINGS RESEARCH NETWORK Update on progress with the Network. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT the staff report on the status of the partnership with the Smart Net -Zero Energy Buildings Research Network be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #12/11, held on January 27, 2012, Resolution #A278/11 was approved, in part, as follows: ...AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report back to the Authority on an annual basis on the progress of the research network. Approximately one third of Canada's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are attributed to building energy consumption. Buildings also account for about 53% of Canada's electricity consumption. They are largely responsible for the peaks in electricity demand associated with space heating and cooling, lighting and appliances. These peaks, if not reduced and shifted in time, will impose additional requirements to build new power plants. Without a major transformation in the way we design, build and operate buildings, Canada cannot expect to meet its goals for reductions in GHG emissions and thus help to mitigate the impacts of climate change. Technologies and practices that allow buildings to act as a net energy generating system and also shift peak demand can provide the basis for this transformation in the buildings sector. At the same time, a comparison of the Canadian construction industry with that in other industrialized nations points out the urgent need for Canadian innovations. This convergence of the need for innovation in the construction industry and the requirement for drastic reductions in energy use and GHG emissions provides a unique opportunity to transform the way we conceive buildings and their energy systems. Research to deal with these issues began in 2006 through the Solar Buildings Research Network (SBRN). The success of that initiative in bringing together researchers from across Canada and the expected expiration of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) grant at the end of 2011, led to the development of a proposal for the Smart Net -Zero Energy Buildings Research Network ( SNEBRN). The SNEBRN is a collaborative research network that brings together researchers from academia, industry and government. It includes the original 14 researchers from the SBRN as well as 11 new researchers from 15 Canadian universities. In addition, the network includes 35 other partner organizations from government, utilities, manufacturers and the construction industry. The purpose of the network is to perform research that will facilitate widespread adoption, by 2030, of optimized net -zero energy building design and operation concepts suited to Canadian climatic conditions and construction practices. The main network goal is to develop optimal pathways for achieving zero average annual energy consumption at both the building and neighbourhood levels. REFOO The network consists of the following five research themes, each focused on specific components required to achieve net -zero buildings and communities: 1. Integrated Renewable Energy Systems and Heating /Cooling Systems for Buildings; 2. Dynamic Building Envelope Systems and Passive Solar Concepts; 3. Mid -to Long -Term Thermal Storage for Buildings and Communities; 4. Smart Building Operating Strategies; and 5. Technology Transfer, Design Tools and Input to National Policy. Each of these themes has the potential to provide significant transformation toward net -zero buildings and communities within existing construction markets. An important aspect of the network is its research involvement of developers and builders so that the most effective findings can be immediately pushed to market. To date, the network has trained more than 100 highly qualified personnel, including leaders who will go on to join universities, industry and government and provide further innovations and work to overcome the barriers to net -zero energy buildings and communities. In 2012, TRCA signed the agreement to enable participation in the network. TRCA's main role was to participate in the Technology Transfer committee of SNEBRN. In this role, TRCA staff has participated in a variety of conferences, workshops and seminars. TRCA attended the SNEBRN annual general meetings in 2014 and 2015. These meetings served as a platform to promote collaboration among the network's students, professors and industry partners and a forum to discuss ongoing research projects within and beyond the network. At each meeting, one day was spent discussing innovative net -zero energy projects undertaken by industry and government network partners and the next was spent providing an update on each of the projects pursued under the respective research themes. The purpose of TRCA attending these meetings was to understand, distill and disseminate the work being completed within the network under its respective themes, and transform it into real change within TRCA and externally by its partners. Attendance at these meetings provided TRCA with both formal and informal means of networking with industry professionals and professors in attendance. TRCA used the networking opportunity to pursue partnerships with industry leaders that demonstrated synergies with TRCA's strategic plan as well as showcase its unique industry/academia project management offering to professors. This offering brings industry partners together with interested academic researchers to host experimental projects within TRCA. In addition, TRCA was given the opportunity to share with the network the work it has completed with its partners relating to net - zero energy buildings and communities. As a result of attending the meetings, TRCA was able to both involve new industry partners and researchers and generate additional interest from network partners to pursue future projects directly with TRCA. Over the last three years, TRCA has also worked closely with a number of professors within the network to conduct research and pilot projects that either contribute to the research conducted within the network or promote that research to TRCA's internal and external partners. More than 40 highly qualified personnel have conducted their research in partnership with one or more TRCA programs. Projects within the themes of the network have also helped influence the design of the BRE Innovation Park by providing the technical background research to make informed decisions on infrastructure and building technology choices. 349 RATIONALE There are significant synergies between SNEBRN's research and TRCA's strategic plan. The collaboration with the network has helped contribute to TRCA's strategic goals, specifically Greening the Toronto Region's Economy, Building Partnerships and New Business Models, Gathering and Share the Best Urban Sustainability Knowledge, Accelerate Innovation, and Facilitate a Region -wide Approach to Sustainability. Specifically, the network aligns closely with the following programs: • Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program - A multi- agency program to monitor and evaluate sustainable technologies and facilitate greater market penetration. • BRE Innovation Park - Providing a platform to demonstrate innovative solutions to achieve net -zero energy and water buildings and communities and to provide data on capital costs, skills gaps and carbon savings. • Greening Health Care - Helping hospitals across Canada collaborate on energy and water efficiencies in their facilities. • Mayors' Megawatt Challenge - Helping municipalities across Canada collaborate on energy and water efficiencies in their facilities. • TRCA Property Development - Establishing an office and site planning environment that provides industry leadership and is a model in green technologies and urban sustainable design. • Partners in Project Green - Working with business and government to create the largest eco- business zone in North America around the Toronto Pearson Airport. • Ontario Climate Consortium - Accelerating regional action on climate change through research, capacity building and action. • Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plans - Engaging local communities in the development of action plans to address environmental issues around water, energy, biodiversity and more. By working with SNEBRN, TRCA has found new opportunities to integrate TRCA's work, that of our municipal partners and GTA businesses with the network. Moving forward into the last two years of the network funding period, there will be additional opportunities for TRCA to disseminate research findings as well as to participate in pilot and implementation projects. Specifically, the BRE Innovation Park will include a collection of hand- picked technologies and solutions produced by this network. It will also provide living laboratories for the SNBERN network to field test, monitor and verify performance of these technologies and solutions. The Park will promote the objectives of SNBERN by providing a platform for national and international recognition, facilitating knowledge sharing and widespread adoption of net -zero energy building design and operation. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA will continue to interact with the network and support its activities by conducting research projects with professors and industry partners, training students and providing technology transfer. The projects underway and supported within the network will continue until 2017 and there are still many opportunities for direct experimental research as well as a largely untapped market for technology transfer of the research findings. The network will continue to play a key role for the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program group and the downstream programs such as Partners in Project Green and Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plans that put successful technologies into action within our community. The network will also be a key participant in the guidance and research conducted within the BRE Innovation Park. The BRE Innovation Park will integrate the most effective research projects from within the network into the Park to provide a clear path to implementation for developers and TRCA's municipal partners. 350 FINANCIAL DETAILS TRCA's contribution to the program has been in the form of in -kind staff time for participation in activities and events. The maximum annual in -kind contribution has been $10,000 for five years. Funding for this program is available from the City of Toronto and regions of Peel and York through the Community Transformation Program and the Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program. Since the signing of the agreement with the network, indirect revenue derived from this project for the services provided to students while conducting their research projects at the Archetype Sustainable House has so far amounted to over $100,000. This revenue is utilized to provide students from the network with better technological and support services while partnering with TRCA on research projects and pilot studies. Report prepared by: Leigh St. Hillaire, 416- 277 -3849 Emails: Isthilaire @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, 5326 Emails: bmcintyre @trca.on.ca Date: July 9, 2015 351 RES. #A149/15 - GOOD NEWS STORIES Overview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities from April - June, 2015. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT the summary of Good News Stories from April - June, 2015 be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND As per Authority direction during 2006, a report covering highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) activities is provided to the Authority quarterly. The stories for April - June, 2014 are as follows: April • Move to 101 Exchange Avenue completed on time and under budget. The staff team is to be congratulated. • $90,450 received from the Local Food Grant towards the Black Creek Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action plan (SNAP). • $60,000 received from RBC towards the Bayview Glen SNAP. • TRCA is now utilizing its entire $10,000 per month Google Grant for search advertising. This will allow TRCA to obtain as much as $120,000 per year in free advertising on the Google Adwords network. • TRCA Professional Access Into Employment program partnered with the Province of Ontario to host the announcement of Ontario Bridge Training programs for new Canadians. Rouge National Urban Park legislation received Royal Assent. Parks Canada now owns and is managing former Transport Canada lands, west of York/Durham Townline. • Rainbow trout are spawning in the Brock North Barrier Mitigation project, which was recently completed in partnership with the Ministry of Transportation. The rainbow trout represent a precursor for the recolonization of Atlantic Salmon. • Partners in Project Green (PPG) delivered a successful Spring Networking Event with 249 representatives from the business community in attendance. Karen Clarke - Whistler, Jon Dwyer and Michael 'Pinball' Clemons delivered inspiring keynotes around succeeding against all odds. • Partners in Project Green staff participated in an exclusive consultation with the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change for their upcoming long term waste plans. • Actual Media has invited TRCA to serve as summit advisors for the 2016 Canadian Water Summit taking place in Toronto. PPG staff has been invited to serve as the representative for the advisory board, which will provide tremendous profile to the water stewardship work done at TRCA. • The 2015 People Power Challenge successfully launched on April 6th, with 12 member organizations, comprising over 8,000 employees all competing against one another to earn points for engaging their staff around sustainability. • The 2015 terrestrial and aquatic monitoring field season has begun. April biodiversity records include the second confirmed pickerel frog found in the TRCA jurisdiction and a rare observation of a whip - poor -will. These and other updates on TRCA's ongoing environmental monitoring activities are being posted on a new twitter feed @TRCA_Monitoring. 352 The City of Brampton has committed $930,000 to TRCA towards the construction of a new trail link to the Etobicoke Creek Trail from Mount Charles Park in Mississauga to Kennedy Road in Brampton. This link will provide an important recreational and active transportation corridor linking Brampton and Mississauga and address illegal off -road vehicle activity in the valley. Implementation of this project will allow TRCA to move forward with restoration plans for this important section of the Etobicoke Creek valley system. Part one of a four -part series on getting out and enjoying the pleasures of our parks was published Saturday, April 25th in the GTA section of the Toronto Star. TRCA has partnered with Credit Valley Conservation and Torstar Studios to produce four articles, a banner ad and two Twitter parties to promote what our parks have to offer in terms of recreational use. The articles will focus on four main topics; the complexity of trail making, the health benefits of nature, the multicultural experience (camping /fishing) and the'staycation' opportunities and experiences that are within a 30- minute drive of our homes. TRCA's outreach education staff participated in the York Region Envirothon on April 16`h. A total of 60 students from eight schools in York Region participated. Media coverage included Metro land and CTV. Mav • The Aquatic Plants Program kicked off the 2015 season with 850 students planting 1,500 aquatic plants at five sites across Peel, York and Toronto. • On May 21 st, 45 students from two elementary schools joined Stewardship staff in Caledon to release 200 salmon they have been raising in their classroom since January as part of the Bring Back the Salmon program. • On May 15th TRCA received a plaque from the Town of Ajax for TRCA's involvement and contributions to the Town's environmental initiatives. • BCPV hosted their 1st annual Girl Guide day. • 7,000 people attended Doors Open Toronto at BCPV. • A $36,000 Museums Assistance Program grant has been secured for BCPV to upgrade the artifact Collections Database. • Seaton Developers Group to fund over 15 years the watershed monitoring program valued at $1.6 million, with the first $210,000 installment coming next month. • Earlier this month, TRCA staff connected researchers representing eight water - related research projects occurring within TRCA's jurisdiction in a two -day Research Collaboration Workshop. The purpose of the workshop was to share information, data and expertise to encourage collaboration and synergy amongst the researchers. The ultimate goal was to undertake discussions to focus how separate studies could be designed to enable progress towards answering questions around cumulative effects and how to better manage our watersheds. A number of new connections were formed and there was much excitement around how collaboration could advance our understanding of cumulative effects. • Environment Canada will be renewing a three -year funding agreement of $180,000 in support of the Water Balance for Natural Features project through the Great Lakes Sustainability Fund. The project examines how to better manage water to protect ecosystem functions as catchments urbanize. • TRCA's first high school student conference on Great Lakes was held on May 7th at the Harbourfront Centre and Tommy Thompson Park (TTP). There was great attendance and partners are excited about seeing a 2nd conference. • The first early childhood education conference was held at Kortright on May 23rd to a sold out crowd. • Part 2 of the Toronto Star sequence published about how nature is good for you. 353 • Three MPs were taken on a boat tour of TRCA's habitat works and other projects that they provided money for. Bernard Trottier has committed more time and effort toward raising funds for the Western Beaches Watercourse breakwall as a result. • Linda Jeffery has agreed to tour Heart Lake Conservation Area and see the work completed there. • Successfully completed annual Class 2 backpack electrofishing certification course with one participant travelling from Thunder Bay. • Water safety training course was held for TRCA field staff. This program has been a very successful health and safety tool and has been well received. A second workshop is planned this year to ensure all field staff receive this training. • Staff has been maintaining the sea lamprey traps on the Humber River and Duffins Creek under contract to Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Monitoring has found a 20% occurrence of "White- tooth" disease in the lampreys handled. The significance of this is not known at this time but data is being shared with DFO. • 22nd annual Manulife Paddle the Don raised over $100,000. • Gatineau Hydro Corridor Revitalization Project to receive $170,000 from the Weston Family Parks Challenge to begin work on Phase Two of the revitalization process. • Completed Amberlea Erosion Control Project in Pickering. • On May 30, 300 high school students from across Peel participated in the 6th annual Peel Planet Day at Claireville Conservation Area. Students helped TRCA's Stewardship staff plant 325 native trees and shrubs and do trail work within the park. • This spring TRCA launched a group training session for TRCA Event Volunteers. The first five volunteers were and have contributed over 120 hours of time at community events this spring. • The 2015 Peel Children's Water Festival celebrated its 20th Anniversary at Heart Lake from May 21 to May 28th. Stewardship staff hosted "Eco Jeopardy" a pollinator relay race, planted 1,400 wildflowers and released 1,000 rainbow trout into Heart Lake. June • Following another successful OCC Symposium held this year at McMaster University, the McMaster Centre for Climate Change recently renewed their partnership agreement with TRCA and the Ontario Climate Consortium, ensuring that we can continue to deliver groundbreaking climate change research to partners across the province. • TRCA delivered a workshop on High Efficiency Trail Assessment Process (HETAP) at the 2015 Trailhead Ontario conference held at McMaster University on June 10th. TRCA staff delivered a brief presentation and a hands -on outdoor field activity to nine people, including someone from as far away as Nova Scotia. • 700 people were engaged in the Don watershed bioblitz and found over 1,100 species. • Lakeview Waterfront Connection EA approved by the Minister. • Bruce's Mill hosted Walk to Cure Diabetes which 4,000 people attended. • Part 3 of Toronto Star series released, on engagement in conservation parks. • An article was published in the June Ontario Nature magazine highlighting the waterfront (fish) acoustic telemetry monitoring program. Staff is working on another short article for the July edition. • Partners in Project Green (PPG) bus tour participants joined over 200 people at the launch of Calstone's Rainwater Harvesting project. • Natural Resources Canada contract approved to gather business intelligence for Smartway program. 354 • PPG materials exchange finds new recycling opportunities for Maple Leaf Foods in Brampton and Hamilton. • Building off of PPG's eco- efficiency recommendations, Medallion Corporation is scaling up its energy conservation projects (anticipated savings of $200,000). The federally endangered piping plover attempted nesting at Hanlan's Point on Toronto Islands. It is the first nesting in Toronto in over 80 years. • TRCA staff with funding from Environment Canada improved structural habitat at Baere Road wetlands using ash trees from the City of Toronto. They have been highly successful for turtles, but have also attracted a wide variety of wildlife. • Toronto Zoo, in partnership with Parks Canada and TRCA, participated in the Headstart Blanding's Turtle release program. Twenty -one baby blanding's turtles were released into the Rouge National Urban Park. • 400 riders joined TRCA's Etobicoke - Mimico team for the second annual Bike the Creek event - a partnership with the City of Brampton, Town of Caledon, Region of Peel, Bike Brampton and many more. • The Valleywood Spring Tree Planting event was held on Saturday May 23, 2015, where 200 trees and shrubs were planted and 20 residents were engaged, including Councillor Jennifer Innis and her family. • Rouge Days ran from June 3 -7 and included 13 partner organizations joining together to host 28 events across five municipalities in the Rouge River watershed. • Stewardship staff launched their guided walk series along the Etobicoke Creek Trail on June 23, 2015. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: July 6, 2015 RES. #A150 /15 - SECTION III — ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD Moved by: Maria Kelleher Seconded by: Jennifer Mc Kelvie THAT Section III item 12.2.7 — Ontario Municipal Board Hearing, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #7/15, held on July 3 ,2015, be received. CARRIED SECTION IV— ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED RES. #A151 /15 - SECTION IV - ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell 355 THAT Section IV - Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, items 10.1 — 10.22, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #7115, held on July 3, 2015, be received. CARRIED TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 1:14 p.m., on Friday, July 24, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 356 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Authority Minutes of Meeting #8/15 September 25, 2015 Authority Meeting #8/15 was held at TRCA Head Office, on Friday, September 25, 2015. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:43 a.m. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Member Maria Augimeri Chair Vincent Crisanti Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Jennifer Drake Member Rob Ford Member Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Maria Kelleher Member Matt Mahoney Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Glenn Mason Member Mike Mattos Member Jennifer McKelvie Member Ron Moeser Member Linda Pabst Member Anthony Perruzza Member John Sprovieri Member ABSENT Jack Ballinger Member David Barrow Member Michael Di Blase Vice Chair Justin Di Ciano Member Chris Fonseca Member Rodney Hoinkes Member Colleen Jordan Member Jennifer O'Connell Member Gino Rosati Member Jim Tovey Member RES. #A152/15 - MINUTES Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Maria Kelleher THAT the Minutes of Meeting #7/15, held on July 24, 2015, be approved. 357 DELEGATIONS (a) A delegation by Sandra Smithson, daughter of resident of 197 Greyabbey Trail, in regard to 8.2 - 220 Greyabbey Trail. RES. #A153 115 - DELEGATIONS Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT above -noted delegation (a) be received. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Chris Bagley, General Manager, Black Creek Pioneer Village, TRCA, in regard to item 7.1 - Black Creek Pioneer Village. (b) A presentation by Brian Denney, CEO, TRCA, in regard to item 7.11 - Review of the Conservation Authorities Act. (c) A video presentation of the Girls Can Too Program at Bolton Camp. http: / /www.theg lobeand m ai I. com /I ife /I ife- video /video -g i rls- can -too- construction /article26126709 / #vid eo0id26126709 RES. #A154 115 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT above -noted presentation (a) be deferred to Authority Meeting #9/15, scheduled to be held on October 30, 2015. CARRIED RES. #A155 115 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Jack Heath Ron Moeser THAT above -noted presentation (b) be received. RES. #A156 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Jennifer Innis Linda Pabst CARRIED THAT above -noted presentation (c) be received. 358 CORRESPONDENCE (a) An email dated September 12, 2015 Dana and Jiri Kopka, 201 Greyabbey Raod, Toronto at in regard to item 8.2 - 220 Greyabbey Trail. (b) A letter dated September 20, 2015 from Roy Wright, resident, 471 Guildwood Parkway, Scarborough, in regard to item 8.2 - 220 Greyabbey Trail. (c) An email dated September 20, 2015 from Christine Vachon & Elizabeth Byrnes, residents, 203 Greyabbey Trail, Scarborough in regard to item 8.2 - 220 Greyabbey Trail. RES. #A157/15 - CORRESPONDENCE Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT above -noted correspondence (a) — (c) be received. CARRIED 359 "Dana Ko ka" To <kstranks @trca.on.ca >, <councillor_ainslie @toronto.ca> cc 09/12/2015 04:04 PM bcc Subject Notice of Violation #V 2814 Dear Mr. Ainsley and TRCA staff, We would like to acknowledge that we have received your invitation to the upcoming TRCA meeting m regarding Notice of Violation # V 2814 of 220 Greyabbey Trail on September 25 . Regrettably, we are not able to attend the meeting at the scheduled time to once again voice our concerns, but felt it prudent to at least re- express our immense concern in a letter to you, in hope that you will present it on our behalf during the meeting. Although we are pleased that you have taken interest in the issue, and continue to investigate potential resolutions, we feel that the amount of time that has already lapsed since the mountain of dirt was carved out of the Scarborough bluffs and deposited directly in front of our house, is beyond unacceptable. The respective agencies involved in approving this project have thoroughly failed in actually exploring and understanding the project's impact and magnitude prior to approving it. The individuals that should have been overseeing this project failed to do so, as the project was allowed to continue until irreparable damage has been caused. As a result, environmental harm has been caused, important habitats destroyed, community appeal has been damaged, our property values have been decreased, our sanctity has been violated and our peace has been disturbed. All this has been going on for two years with empty promises of a soon -to -come resolution that never appears to make it out of the committee's meeting room. We are frustrated that this project was allowed to happen, we are furious that (to our knowledge) there have been no consequences for the parties involved in this epic failure, and that no reprieve or answers have been provided to the residents of our community in two years. At this point, given that the damage has already been done, we only have the following request: Remove the pile of dirt, restore the value of our properties and return peace to our community. Sincerely, Dana & Jiri Kopka 201 Greyabbey Trail Scarborough See below one of our previous emails: From: Dana Kopka Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:17 PM To: info@trca.on.ca; planning &permits @trca.on.ca Subject: Destruction of the Scarborough Bluffs 360 Importance: High Dear Sir/Madam, We are writing to you to request an explanation regarding a construction at 220 Greyabbey Trail in Scarborough. We have raised our concerns with our local MP, Mr. Paul Ainslie and we were advised that you are responsible for permitting the construction and later stopping the project due to owner's "non- adherence to your guidelines ". Because of that the whole neighborhood has been affected by this unsightly construction site for over a year. There sits an approximately 10 in high pile of dirt directly across the street from some houses which markedly decreases the value of our properties by thousands of dollars, not to mention the ugly obstructed view and ever - present dust. How does this agree with your policy : "our goal is to support a greener, cleaner, healthier place to live ?" Please explain, how is it even possible, that you gave the permission for the destruction of a sizable part of the Scarborough Bluffs which are considered an ecological treasure. Did you really think that the Bluff can be remodelled to its original shape after agreeing to a construction road to be built from its top ? FYI this has caused several months of very busy heavy machinery traffic on a street which had "No entrance to trucks" sign due to weight limits. It is especially difficult to understand because there was already an access road built through the Guildwood Park to enable the Bluff reinforcement along the shore. It is even more confusing now in the light of the proposal of developing a "Waterfront Park along the Bluffs" in the very same area. Obviously your assessment and permit seem very short sighted. We understand that you have stopped the work due to "a violation of the strict guidelines for the environmentally sensitive area" following Ms. Connie Pinto's inspection, however we believe that much greater violation was done by issuing the permit. We are asking that you at least move quickly on the matter of finishing this shameful project as soon as possible in keeping with your vision " for a new kind of community, The Living City, where human settlement can flourish forever as part of nature's beauty and diversity." Please update us on the progress, time -line and final plans for this construction. Thank you. Dana and Jiri Kopka 201 Greyabbey Trail Scarborough — PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING, STORING OR FORWARDING THIS MESSAGE- Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this communication including any attachments may be confidential, is intended only for use of the recipient(s) named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby noted that any dissemination, distribution,disclosure or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please resend this communication to the sender and delete it permanently from your computer system. Thank you." 361 TRCA Board Members: September 20, 2015 Re: Violation #V2814 — 220 Greyabbey Trail, Scarboroueh My name is Roy Wright, I live at 471 Guildwood Parkway located six houses west of 220 Greyabbey Trail. I am writing this deputation on behalf of myself and 12 other Greyabbey neighbours (names and addresses available upon request). The Greyabbey community at large all agree that the 220 Greyabbey home situated on a large lakefront property has been a proud and positive asset to the whole neighbourhood. For the past dozen years, the grounds have been professionally landscaped with a full time gardener and other employees. During the Christmas season, this property has become somewhat of a celebrity and a tourist attraction. The spectacular Christmas light show draws admirers both locally and visitors from out of town. We are urging TRCA to help the Greyabbey property owner (Ms. Greening) to both save her substantial home from the erosion problem and to bring her unique lakeview property back to its former glory as soon as possible. I fully understand Ms. Greening's worrisome erosion urgency and her self help effort to save the eroding tableland as others have successfully been allowed to do. The City of Toronto, The Toronto Hunt (golf course) and myself procured TRCA permits to construct the previously accepted Geotech approved method of top filling that Ms. Greening was seeking (and was denied thus creating this violation problem). Note 1. The 100% successful result of capping the cliff face with solid rubble fill has enabled TRCA approval for a new 2015 building permit for a 4,300 square foot house to be built 60 feet from the edge of the cliff at 473 Guildwood Parkway. 2. I observed a trespassing violation by TRCA's employees in August 2015 marking survey numbers on the private property at 220 Greyabbey's beachfront. 3. TRCA's coastline development plans at this location may be considered to be in violation of the original "conservation" mandate. Lake filling required to build a coastline roadway changes the ecology and will forever eliminate the remaining 2 kilometers of the natural sandy beachfront trail. Hopefully our comments will be considered when judging violation #V2814. Roy Wright Resident neighbour 362 Christine Headley �> 09'20;2015 08:43 PM To "kstranks @trca.on.ca" <kstranks @trca.on.ca? cc "councillor_ainslie@toronto.ca" <cou ncil lor_a i n sl ie@toronto. ca3 bcc Subject Meeting Sept 25 re 220 Greyabbey Trail History: .P This message has been replied to. To: Toronto Region Conservation Authority From: Christine Vachon & Elizabeth Byrnes, 203 Greyabbey Trail, Scarborough As residents in close proximity to the property at 220 Greyabbey Trail we would like to take this opportunity to express our concerns about the work being done at this location. The project, which we were told would last a matter of a few months, has now stretched on to last over two years with no end in sight. This has a direct impact on the enjoyment of our property which is located directly opposite to the site. The noise and dirt of the construction are just the start of the problems with the biggest impact being the huge mound of dirt, which completely obstructs our view, one that is normally of our beautiful Lake Ontario. This mound consists of sand and soil dug from a wide swath cut into the bluffs to build a temporary road facilitating the work. After sitting here over a year, the dust is no longer an issue, as the mound is covered in weeds which produce spores spread throughout the areas property owners lawns and a neighbouring park. Additionally, this pile of sand has accelerated a local spring hatch of sand flies that occurs annually along the lake front, taking it from a nuisance lasting a few weeks to swarms of bugs lasting months, and making outdoor enjoyment an impossibility. The impact to the eco system and natural habitats for other species and animals surely must also be affected, in ways that are unknown to us. This project was halted mid way and has sat idle for the past year. We implore the TRCA to exercise their authority to immediately take action to remediate the unacceptable state resulting from their decisions. The unfortunate reality is that the TRCA granted permission to dig up the Scarborough Bluffs causing ever lasting damage to a landmark that was uniquely produced by glacier activity. The question now is, how do you propose to rebuild the bluffs, one of our natural treasures? Christine Vachon 203 Greyabbey Trail Scarborough, Ont. ME 1W2 Sent from my iPad 363 Section I — Items for Authority Action RES. #A158 /15 - BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE North Lands Master Plan and the Vision. Board endorsement of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Vision and the North Lands Master Plan. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT item 7.1 — Black Creek Pioneer Village be deferred to Authority Meeting #9/15, scheduled to be held on October 30, 2015. CARRIED RES. #A159 /15 - GREENWOOD CONSERVATION LANDS Greenwood Conservation Lands Master Plan and Brock North inland filling. Final approval of the Greenwood Conservation Lands Master Plan; the strategic placement and grade of clean surplus fill within an abandoned aggregate extraction area within the Greenwood Conservation Lands at the Brock North tract; the transfer of provincially -owned Highway 407 ETR East Extension Lands and the strategic acquisition of lands to facilitate inland filling for ecological restoration and financial sustainability. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT item 7.2 — Greenwood Conservation Lands be deferred to Authority Meeting #9/15, scheduled to be held on October 30, 2015. CARRIED RES. #A160 /15 - TRCA CROSSING GUIDELINE FOR VALLEY AND STREAM CORRIDORS Board endorsement of TRCA's Crossings Guideline for Valley and Stream Corridors, a technical guideline developed to support The Living City Policies (2014). The Guideline was circulated for comments and is now finalized for staff use in the review of crossing applications under planning, environmental assessment and TRCA permit processes. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Mike Mattos WHEREAS in 2014 and 2015, based on up -to -date knowledge from science and practice, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff developed the draft TRCA Crossings Guideline for Valley and Stream Corridors to articulate TRCA objectives and study requirements for the planning and design of corridor crossings; 364 AND WHEREAS in 2015, TRCA staff sought input on the draft Guideline from provincial agencies, partner municipalities, the Building and Land Development Industry (BILD), and neighbouring conservation authorities, and have now finalized the Guideline; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Authority endorse the TRCA Crossings Guideline for Valley and Stream Corridors for use by public and private proponents of crossings and TRCA staff in the planning and development submission, review and approvalprocesses; THAT staff continue to monitor and study the long -term effectiveness of crossings constructed in TRCA watersheds to better understand their cumulative impact on watershed health and to identify the best approaches for crossing design; AND FURTHER THAT the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ministry of Transportation, regional and local municipalities in TRCA's jurisdiction, Conservation Ontario, and neighbouring conservation authorities be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #6113, held on July 26, 2013, Resolution #A118/13 was approved to proceed with the development of updated TRCA guidelines for road - watercourse crossings. The updated guidelines would incorporate the latest science to balance ecological benefits with economic costs, while fulfilling mandated responsibilities for the management of flooding and erosion hazards. Since that time, TRCA staff from the Watershed Strategies, Planning, Greenspace and Communications, and Restoration and Infrastructure divisions have worked to develop the Crossings Guideline for Valley and Stream Corridors (hereafter referred to as "the Guideline "). The draft Guideline was thoroughly vetted through senior technical and planning staff and directors, in addition to undergoing a comprehensive external consultation process. TRCA's partner municipalities, provincial agencies and neighbouring conservation authorities were all circulated the draft Guideline. Staff also conducted a webinar for these public agencies in which participants were oriented to the structure and content of the Guideline and offered a forum to discuss their initial reactions before the formal circulation and request for their written comments. Subsequent to this, the Guideline was made available to private sector developers and consultants through the BILD policy and government relations representative, after staff conducted a separate webinar for BILD on the Guideline to solicit their comments. Based on the feedback received through the external consultation process, TRCA staff have now revised and finalized the Guideline for use by public and private proponents of crossings and TRCA staff in the planning and development submission, review and approval process. 365 RATIONALE TRCA and other conservation authorities become involved in the design and construction of road crossings over valley and stream corridors because of the potential impacts of these works on natural hazards and natural heritage. TRCA reviews crossings in a number of capacities: as a public commenting body and service provider to approval authorities under the Planning Act and the environmental assessment process, and as a regulator issuing permits under section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. Under the Planning Act, TRCA also represents the provincial interest in natural hazards as delegated by the Province of Ontario to all conservation authorities. There are currently over 3,500 bridges and culvert crossings within TRCA watersheds. In coming years, many crossings will be added, upgraded or reconstructed to accommodate population growth and associated transportation network needs, in addition to those that will be replaced or repaired through routine maintenance. Evidence from the TRCA jurisdiction and elsewhere indicates that crossings of this number and density can have substantial impacts on both natural hazards and natural heritage at the watershed scale. From a natural hazard perspective, improperly designed crossing structures can: • Impede the flow of floodwaters, creating increases in flooding upstream of crossings or creating conditions in which roadways are flooded. • Come into contact with river and stream channels as they migrate across the floodplain over time, causing damage or failure of the crossing infrastructure (e.g., to footings, abutments, piers). • Be damaged by valley slope failure if constructed in inappropriate locations or with inadequate countermeasures. • Destabilize slopes during construction resulting in risks to adjacent land uses. Natural hazard issues related to crossings are of increasing concern, as impacts are exacerbated by the changing climate, including an increased frequency of flood events and conditions that create the potential for slope instability and erosion. Risks to public safety and to road infrastructure can be prevented through carefully sited, sufficiently sized and appropriately designed crossings. From a natural heritage perspective, improperly designed crossing structures can: • Impede the movement of fish species upstream and downstream, particularly during migration or other critical life stages. • Prevent the movement of terrestrial animals up and down valley corridors, fragmenting populations and often forcing animals onto roadways where they are killed by cars and create a public safety hazard. • Fragment high quality aquatic and terrestrial habitat, decreasing its quality and ability to support healthy populations of native and sensitive species. The protection of these natural heritage functions has become increasingly important in recent years as the value of protecting and restoring natural heritage functions in urban and near -urban landscapes is now widely recognized and enshrined in provincial policy as well as municipal official plans and sustainability strategies. Most municipalities in the TRCA jurisdiction have invested in defining, protecting and restoring natural heritage functions through establishment of natural heritage systems; the bulk of these systems is comprised of valley and stream corridors. The impacts that road and rail crossings can have on the natural heritage functions of valley and stream corridors can threaten to undermine these investments. Sufficiently sized and appropriately sited and designed crossings can mitigate many of the impacts on the natural function of corridors and on the broader natural heritage system. • •� TRCA staff's understanding of the impacts and management of road crossings of valley and stream corridors has changed and increased significantly over the past decade, as a result of both observations of conditions in TRCA watersheds as well as significant new scientific developments in the field. Given the risks of not adequately addressing the natural hazard and natural heritage impacts described above, the Guideline was developed to support TRCA staff, TRCA partner municipalities, other approval authorities, and proponents with this latest understanding of how these impacts can be managed and mitigated. As well, the Guideline is intended to increase the understanding of public and private proponents preparing submissions in support of crossing projects guiding them to a comprehensive approach to study and analysis. The Guideline is consistent with the broad objectives for natural hazards and natural heritage management outlined in The Living City Policies (LCP), and is aligned with provincial and municipal partner objectives. Further, in recognition of the fiscal and logistical challenges of TRCA partner municipalities in constructing and maintaining the bridges and culverts that cross valley and stream corridors, the Guideline outlines a balanced approach to achieving these objectives, which directs effort and expenditure to the mitigation of impacts to where it is most needed with more flexible requirements in less critical locations. Content of the Guideline The Guideline articulates TRCA study requirements for the review of proposed new crossings and upgrades to existing crossing upgrades (extension, repairs, replacements) from preliminary concepts and alignments, to intermediate planning stages, through to detailed design. The submission criteria for studies outlined in the Guideline reflect much of what crossing proponents are already providing in submissions to TRCA, but these criteria are now organized in a helpful manner that will better facilitate and streamline the review and approval process. The Guideline itself is organized as follows: • Introduction: Provides an overview of the context, rationale and role of TRCA in crossing planning and design. • TRCA objectives for crossings: Objectives against which TRCA staff test applications for proposed new crossings or alterations to existing crossings. • TRCA study requirements: Requirements for submissions in support of crossings for TRCA staff to assess whether a crossing will meet the objectives. These requirements are organized by project type (new crossing or existing) and by stage of the planning or environmental assessment process (early, intermediate and late) and vary accordingly in scope and detail. Technical Appendices: Specific technical details and procedures to guide consultants in preparation of the required studies for natural hazard and natural heritage assessments, including a high level mapping tool. The mapping tool was developed by TRCA staff using desktop analysis of existing data to highlight valley and stream corridors that are predicted to be of high ecological concern for crossings within TRCA's jurisdiction. Given major new developments in the science of habitat connectivity and function, TRCA staff incorporated this new information into state -of- the -art analyses that were undertaken to understand the most important locations in TRCA watersheds for the management of these impacts and accordingly, in the specification of guidance for crossing location, sizing and design. Notably, the tool is prefaced with the caution that natural heritage priorities must be considered in the context of all of the constraints affecting a crossing project (e.g., natural hazards), such that the greater of these constraints will ultimately drive crossing siting and design. 367 Throughout the Guideline, labeled diagrams and tables illustrate, synthesize and organize study requirements for greater reference. Comments Received on the Draft Guideline During the consultation period for the LCP, many municipalities and consultants remarked that they were anticipating the crossings Guideline to be helpful in supporting the infrastructure policies. Accordingly, feedback on the draft Guideline through verbal comments in the webinars and through written comments was largely positive. A detailed listing of written comments received with TRCA responses can be found in Attachment 1. However, a summary of these comments is below. Province The only provincial ministry to comment, the Ministry of Transportation (MTO), stated that although they are exempt from TRCA's permit process, they may still voluntarily undergo TRCA review on specific circumstances. They went on to state that the information in the Guideline is of assistance as MTO continues to proactively collaborate with TRCA on various issues and initiatives to ensure alignment of provincial and TRCA policies. The comments also stated that MTO appreciates TRCA referring to MTO guidelines and standards and TRCA's efforts in ensuring the alignment of TRCA Guidelines with provincial policy. Municipalities Many municipalities commented that they have no concern with the Guideline and /or no comments for the revision of the Guideline. Some comments recognized that the Guideline identifies the best approaches to corridor crossings in accordance with legislation and policy, accepted science, and current best practice, and is therefore useful to a very wide audience. It was recommended that the Guideline should highlight this point more strongly. Of the municipalities that made comments, many highlighted the issue of costs associated with retrofitting existing crossings. For example: • The document is very useful in outlining the information that TRCA requires to review road and rail crossing structures and proposed modifications to existing structures and should be of assistance in the management of natural hazards and natural heritage issues associated with crossings. • We appreciate the effort that has gone into preparing the document and believe they will be very helpful to use going forward. We support their use on guiding our projects, provided there continues to be support from TRCA on the consideration of all factors (including cost) in the decision making. • This document is generally identifying a 'best practices' approach to valley / watercourse corridor crossings, and is therefore applicable and potentially adoptable by a very wide audience, ranging from other conservation authorities, to regional /area municipalities, and other agency and private proponents. • While it is important to include material in this document that expresses how these guidelines build upon / support TRCA's planning and regulatory responsibilities, you may wish to express / emphasize that these guidelines will help all responsible levels of government / agency/ proponents to fulfill their mandates / policies / standards to address these critical issues. • The document repeatedly notes that TRCA may recommend replacement vs. extension. How does this relate to TRCA's approval of a project if a proponent disagrees based on issues of cost, timing, etc.? • i • Criteria /requirements for rehabilitation or modifications to an existing bridge should be much less stringent compared to a new bridge. In response, staff made revisions to further emphasize the Guideline's alignment with provincial and municipal objectives. Staff also acknowledged the challenges and limitations associated with upgrading an existing crossing and pointed to the associated flexibility already in the Guideline for existing crossing study requirements relative to new crossing projects. Other Conservation Authorities Comments from TRCA's neighbouring conservation authorities were supportive of TRCA's efforts to develop a holistic approach to the planning and design of crossings to address natural hazard and natural heritage issues, and indicated that the Guideline would be useful to them in their own work. Credit Valley Conservation in particular submitted a number of written comments which TRCA staff addressed through minor revisions to the Guideline and by highlighting existing sections of the Guideline that spoke to their comments. Building and Land Development Industry (BILD) BILD members submitted no formal written comments on the Guideline, but informal feedback from BILD's policy and government relations representative suggested the response by their membership was generally positive. Feedback from the attendees of the webinar was also largely positive, with acknowledgement of the clarity that the Guideline provides regarding TRCA's approach to crossings. Some of the webinar attendees provided constructive suggestions regarding the need for additional clarity on some points, which have been accommodated through minor revisions to the text. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The Guideline will be implemented through the Planning, Greenspace and Communications division in review processes for Planning Act applications, environmental assessment and master planning, and through TRCA's own permitting process. As in current practice, TRCA planners, engineers and ecologists reviewing applications will work with crossing proponents and approval authorities to streamline the review process while striving for the best possible outcome for environmental and growth planning objectives. Similar to other TRCA technical guidelines supporting The Living City Policies, the Guideline will be updated to reflect any legislative changes or technical / scientific updates related to current practices as they arise. In addition, TRCA staff will monitor the impacts of crossings in TRCA watersheds and evaluate the performance of crossings located and designed in accordance with the Guideline. This work is intended to validate the guidance in the Guideline, particularly with respect to natural heritage management and to refine it over time with the on- the - ground understanding of what is happening in TRCA watersheds and what approaches to mitigating crossing impacts are most effective in our local context. This will ensure that the Guideline is providing value to TRCA partner municipalities and communities by directing impact mitigation efforts and resources so that they protect valued elements of watershed health. To this end, TRCA staff have already established a long term study design and a working group for Road - Valley Crossings Research comprised of members from various levels of government, neighbouring conservation authorities, academic institutions and wildlife conservation organizations. 369 FINANCIAL DETAILS The development of the crossings guideline was supported through capital funding from the regional municipalities of Peel and York. Staff secured additional funding through research - granting organizations to undertake the research and advanced technical analysis that supported the development of the Guideline. In future years, Peel and York regions' capital funding will also support the ongoing research and monitoring on the outcomes of crossings and incorporation of the results through revisions to the Guideline. Report prepared by: Ryan Ness, Namrata Shrestha and Mary-Ann Burns Emails: rness(5)trca.on.ca, nshresthsaC&trca.on.ca, mburns(aD-trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ryan Ness, extension 5702 or Mary-Ann Burns, extension 5763 Emails: rness(a)trca.on.ca, mburns(a)trca.on.ca Date: September 9, 2015 Attachments: 1 370 r d E L U R b, 371 O v m a � Z u u1 a7 U (D V1 O G U Q N R G N 0) O is `O N M m r h N N = a) O 'n .L. L Z O U a 4% a) ` u) m a1 m N- L 1 � R C R 3 N U C R(n L 0 y w m ` co o .- a RO R 7 o y rn 3 C E p N R O- N w Co N s m Co y O CO u) O .GO.. a) 3 a' cn fL -0 () L (0 ++ a) a 0 T > O C> U O :3 -C -0 N V= = y L R L N C 3 9 C Y y o u Z o a) CD m a) 'C a) t N a o U a IL- c aj a o w c n u m v= -o a) C U G 'co U 'a m w R u) R a) a) .� .+ - �C N T N O_ L R R R U-0 y L -p (n a d a m V 07 L 7 Q R '.G�., t C N U C O T p '0 U co L U C = C L R ��mE�oa ° -jai a °�y�p�.` y -T o ai ° °' m e m o R > wc- rn r Q C C N !o 'O U a) n R (n Co L R C �'� u) C -0 R "0 C a) ur 0 U• 07 N L y � 0 N C w a) V) = N O G p 3 O_ R W G V L ,., a) c°o .O s -0 0 y= V) o w a) a o rn c? Q R O w R J -� C L y m -p C T .7 w� U .L-. 2 0 C w a) R 0 "O '� L N OO O G R -0 7 R= CO R a) T E Z •p L u) O_ C (6 0 Q Q d R Q E Z a) L O y C R d C O O Co R o C -O N E F' C u) N C m O a) G u1 ° Q O G C m u (n O L >, O O u' cn C U O C a) R E.L.. R U .0 0) C U a U C N N O E u) O N O .L N 0 (n y R r R _� a) R cn U U 0) Q U C -0 0 O -0 C U O O. 01 .�0, a j E R U N O U C U R 0_ = (n N , L O O' 7 F 0 0 7 C t 'O a7 LO C 0 H m Q� d U~ i ... in i U U .� i ... R O_ U L O U) a) L w d > C O R y O) }, 0 a) O w T N U O. - a L r CD 0 'O u) >, C U 0) '3 a c m L ,�- p O u) )n "0 LL L N� R d a) Cc 0) .o. � n � c a 0 `m R° E - ° Z c N o a L a) �- C O. O. a) y aN) a>) uJ L u) N c CD.- C C R> U a) -o _0 a) 0 co N a) '6 d: N E v U C R_ Q co C C R« O E O a R- C -0 C L C O C ) . T T 7 a) R w U O- CL u) O m C U a) s0. a) a E U 0 -o N p lCC N 2 R R U '0 E 'C y L in a m N a - 2 rn 'i ,°n a E° p R m 0 R y E C •L.+ 0 0 W (n 7 a7 C C 7 U 0-°o�ELmmL° aciZm a) ca �EFu co E R m.o ° 0)-_ E rn a•o rn aiwa s ca m ai a> N O_ �' 0 >O 00 N N N 0 `) L O. U _M 7 L n. N C. i 0- R O) L Q L o -0 =_ u) a) j C a) f6 O N R a R yO w 0 u) N U) a) C R 3 L C X L C R u) m W u) R Y u) N N R Y 01 a) '0 2 R a) R L L a) C U O N 6 L R R L C C R 'C L 7 p ,N O p L R _ d :` > Q C a) C ._ R "O U `�- C LL p C O U L E p C C 0) O N C O a) M °_ Co N R R 0 N R a) N C Y N O) L a) (n R M d C a) L C R R m R Q a) C R R O L a) N E s °- 0 0 a = a) L O 'C n n Co o 0 C C R p_ fa F> O O T (D t E a) "0 � w 7 O) a n to O a) 0 U c) CU U > c v 'C m$ o '� X c C 0) -0 0 0 a) w a) u) C O U y a) C a .L.. ul -° a) o- p ca '06 o O C O .0. O R O j N N _ n -O N N .L.. C O T w L_ n 0 L 0 d a j R a) 3 u) C y R .N O a) R -0 C O_ O_ E E u) Z a) V) .. cn L L Q N NO i O m R �C E > 0)a) C R ° a) Q u) R R p= L a) R E C 0 C C c - 'o��Q� N- u) 0 cn, a) C y C N R " a U -- w"- a) R C N CO n 0) u) R "O >i -o N A U .� 03 N m u) N R ,L.., O= C N N p ." E E 0 > 0 3 O C R N C 0 U ° N O L d p O 0) U Ef :2 ) ' r u C O- 0 w ° E 'C U 2 O) n E a) 3 a) U a) C O O C K a) 0 -0 a) L a) �. N >, C -' a) a) 3 a) N L a) p N >. N N N U) L N` o L n U O a) L N N R> R U 'C � 0 C al 'C L p 0 X O m H U R O m '0 O. �a L O - I— •L.. E 0) w Z a) R a) Q' L> E (1) a) L a) E O C C 0 8' W U U N Ln C C r O O O N O O_ a L E E N N m R Q d o 0 U Q F- to U U 371 O v m a 372 v N O N a) 0a M a Z Z } Z .>. 0-0 a) N > "O Co .0 M O a) fa 'C N N C, m a y G E Co r- Co M U N c N C y () a) a) U r Q a) M t/l o� a) y T'N 7 N O C O) w a M U O M CC O)L L �` m c °n a1n n b . Q) 3� cc a Q G G o C a) a)m CD m �L 3 ��a U q N a > m w L o. M 0) E O C O O Ui NM M Q a) o cc p 7 M G � a w N a) Co G �'° ma) m E °� @ F C D 3 •G m N (C6 OL Q F _ m C rN. N= .i N U w0 ..N.. N= r O a � L Taa)i ° Co F-0 C > c N p) p 'O M~ O a1 MN in Ca a) C a >, a1 Cp - C .3 C a) O m y 0 CO a) C .0 M N 'O U O ,O N 'C C Cn Q N ' O ti O M M 2-a m -° .M N "O M O O Co .0 U O) a) @ N .=M• m m • V °" CO N Cc) N p 'MO .�' N E a) M M M G '6 7 .> N M O_ .,_.. -c CO E N .U- L a) E UO U C i C N N Q C •-� N M w �O N Co a) fn C o N w �O �_ �_ °o M 7 3 c w E a m r a) c o c 3 c°- 3° a) c m °� m N m a°i M o N .0 x N C a) a M p• x @= 1�- .Q Co M 0 aNi d � 0 a) 0 9 o O Co y y m N M I o �a m M c > a) > C E M m M L =p Q) a) E° ° t .L.. a) .O U ° E C O N 04 .�.. E ri O) E -O -O :. = (6 Q EO O a) ¢ O N ~. G c C 7 O O E C N a) y6 E U :C E � N OO E O _r_ Q O N N N Q N 0 O N o N m U N Q M a N° N c ° U ° Q W m M ai Z N a) N @ > (D 7 ¢ W > m a) V m a) N a) '' N N C E N N 7 C N > O .L.. U� a) y C a) N N U Ca O M N O� a) -0 Q V .M+ ° ° M `- .7.. N O M M O C O O) M (`0 N U 'O "O M a) "O E E a) a) C U) y 0 O a) ° C N Q c Ch 3� m.n E m N m 0 O 0° c Q M 6._ N E.0 0)>, 7 r°n- m M ^> m c c m_ M M.2 M E cNO 2 M ' @t p CF`°)�° QM -C �3 > n °mc U o r. Y C F Q Q° 7oC7 N a) c 3 M °)o a) a) M a) C m 7 c c > co a 3 v > W m � C aMi N m a) d c —° '� "O M N q) a) a) N U M C Q M '� N N M O "O a) N-0 N O C M N 7 L > 7 N 0 C N C N w m 7 0 cc U O t `� O .N N °- x Nn m L) > o a) M C m 3 � ) > LL y °) v � o a) o c a) o CL c c. Cz O L t N a y .° M p 's � c- ,O -0 _M n C O) d W E R) 7 C a) en O a) >, N a Q C Q �O N a) — N 7— •N O N -'0 O V) N M O �` C C N N u) 7 N O N 5 C a) y O O f0 7 C N N O) E +M+ � i 7 Y y O -0- Cj N C �j — N E +�• T° U) E .L.. C °) .N N •>, ° O C ) 7 N " U _M U 'M w 2 CO m f0 m M N °3 m C LL E a- M M 5 a) "O c M ._ w N a) a C fn p a) C a°) a a m U) m a Y N a) E °? ii CO a' a) a) L a) m _^ > T Y N "MO M = C N a) -O L N w a= M M M a) Co ._ Z 7 C>1 C U C a a m N N c m M o c D a) m p) a c N a) E °c 3 M L w m o "O c M V a° C: aUi �' N= :° O o 'O '� r c ' o° Q M a M M V .. Vi CL N -c L N N U V Z) N E^ C) N E Cn 0 N 'O x C a) F a) M C a) W e °� O p ^ U a) m m C °) C @ >, N O C (L C 7 N rn '-' m a) M C 'O N "O O V w V) E 2 � C �p a) >: a) M O) N�� Y) N N 3 ly> M N 7 U M rn a) N N N 7 F ° `) C N O C C c Mn ° 3 aNi c aNi v° C° m m m � c t A m a m .°) a) -MO LL "O O O °)° �U-. 'O � .7. m °� 7 rL-. C a) N O. C C. E C N '-°O •O N a? t L a) M a N° m m m N? rn T C a) 3 a¢ ° u) 0 a) o M o ui ¢ 5 m C N N _ 7 M 0 U N 7 _ .. v N N ^C .0 M L p �, E O C N O a) W M 2 N O Z E M ° o °- p W '— a) c p m E y Q V �p L N 7 C 7 7 0 >+ .� C U) a) M O U 7 a) O '@ C O M N O '� N U y O` 7 7 LY "O C> 7 >i Co N p j •U) p E a) E N' U— m _ O} c N M O m `- fa "O O y m— U w U N m a7 U@ C N m Q. n N L O Oi f0 N N CO 0. >i O Q 3@ .t.. _° N O_ •V1 -O -° N LL ;F N N U. r-. C N C a) C O m N U) _M C = N E C C .u) .rN-. a) .N L 7 M O 7 m U M _7 7° C a) a) O M 7 U N C •U O. Z O° U O N • O .0 S N O. N N 0. a F O) U U F- O) N M M M Q. ¢ O. U) L)) @ �O O) U LL E f6 0) (a M fa a) N c c c a) a) a) M C� 0 C7 U C C C C O O O O O_ C_ O_ Q E E E E M M M M O] O] m O7 O 0 0 O O O 0 w >, U CJ U 0 372 v N O N a) 0a M a 373 d• O m Q) m a Z } Z Z Z Z } Z v C cn ul C m m y m c 'y c $ C O p m y m m O m U N O .. C N Co ` N V .-. O Q. m L V E Q c m 7 O "O 7 O 'V d C U i a) CO w •=L C T ca C` 'O > C T N a) _ T O O O w O .a) 7 O m 07 a) C i 0) 'C N wL0„ > 0> U cm -° p C C c c y U ` m o w 0) -a 3 a) O cam E 8 c c C m L a) 'O O° N x w a) C U O- O U 'm L m p _ o ° m L a rn ca U 3 a) N '? N a N N cn C .m c N m o N d v lL 0 n uj O is -° N m L N U O L 7 U c ul O `� C O m T C d s. p 7 0 j) L °' y Q F N _ C- m C 3 p U> L L Y U w .m° O" o m m Q ca _ ° _0 o L01- m ur m E L 'O -O .L.. m t (La ,+�•�• =1 U a) �' •O a) m C -° C O a) O) cr C E O 0) « T > a) a) Q Q ch ca a 7 d -r- O ai fn m N d ]. O N a) N (� O- a) I N O N C C= ul 3 +' > N fn x I Co o Co w c E p a CO m 0 D m N o O ui 7- 7 C a) O v U L C C 7) Q C (a �- O W U m a) 7 E U a a) -p m a 0 ul m 'O a) �. m y a) E a) O °_ .a. U w U Q Q m N C V E m O' CLO. 7 Co co N O N E m C O�Q ma Q c Q a) E� C V 2' U Co N L.. N a) m O m c i 374 C ti w 0 a m on a m 3 m m 0 N N - t LL C c > 0 O � N m � r m O 0 � N N N N a) m C_ m c6 m •U m w O) r U a) m U m c w 3 CL n n rn� C1 d CL c U CU m m c L E u m m m N E N O a) a) a) O U O -_ 0 0 0 L L -a)a c (n c (n c (n 3 -o Q o c m U L - -ld E E E L67 E E E uj w c U U U >- m o a) o j rn c 0 c O .0 c .N. c O,�C N C 'c 0) O c ai U m c °) -, c E a) 'O _ (n .3 a) ly N m 0 0 a y o C 0 0) C C r a) 0 0 y a) o� O 0 m '� o (n m 0 L U d �c- O U E Q L1 O to .L.. U "C 2 C .0 L L N m t U N NC c L f0n (n N c N > U a) '0 0) C .m(' C V N C m ._ C 75 m` F-H '6 cn .� '0 O .N _7 O 0 O 2 7 3 O UC O O Co -0 0 > M Cl) 0 0 c in co O 3 a) _(D 'y 'V a) U L 0 r- C .N y m .N > C m m O m m (on c a) 3 o >, (n @ 0 c c .Co cn m U a_ y m C> a) m d E m: 0 m v Q V Q` "o m o m U 0 0 E -o '0 n n °) m E a) 0 L m m 0 - N o c y c 0 O m m a) 0 H o -o (n o -0 N o m m F U a) y L.. 33o m vv m 0 mom U) /n L Q F w � ° o E 0 mUn. `o m N . DZ N a) '0 .c U O U co iZ L O N ~ ) N _ L 0 M m o E N (n Q a) m Mn 3 m C O cn L N N> C m m� y a) a) O L c W cn m-0- Co c m >> U) ° 0 m m > rn c y E Q U m 0` U V U) c o , O N L 0 m U L 2 c m 3 c m Q = Q »- U° o o rn� CD LL c 0 c 3 °0Q 0 rnm > U mU E= rn- r c w U c aTi� �ly to C 3 m (L° y aa) > m N o � a) 0 O .> -o E m N 0 O = `- to U m ii 0 �m w m o t m C o m o n 0) 3 L l -0 m m E o CA a) m y = m° m L aCa 0�� oaa))aa))0Q �0 Q E c c C N m U .a)a')0) CL o U a U � m U '.' m en w 3 Y C "= o U�.y o 0 a) c 0 w L m cc 0 > ,2 0 _c E m— 0 N w E g a) m m c 2 0 -o c ° NE m oc U) > 0 0 7 °0 7 m C`. �U 3a'� oU .c E �U ° � O > c H O Q. ELL F �.dC fl. 2 N N m L m L m L m L a) m a) m 1 ,a) V 'c^ V ,a) V 'a) V C m O O O ca O C O O L m (n � 0 cn 0 0 !n o y U) c m c .� in v, (n m m e m 374 C ti w 0 a m on a 375 v N 0 v no m n. } Z Z Z rn a) c N coo N � Lr. a) m N cn m CM 0 f6 N w y p 0 0 N d' o .L O E o N �- c~ Q E Q a) o a o ° O L a) o> 0 a) w Q o N cc E c Q m w :- Co — v) O E O rn o rn a) 0 wa)3w c omQ` a) mac ti 0 Y Q 7� C D N "' °- O 'y A c N 0 7 V) — .V U) c O y Ip rn N c > — U 3 CO '0 () rn (6 a) a) O a) p_ ' to N C fn c co a) 0) O c E L m a N Y .O a 0 ' c) U Q 0 0 7 - c0) O o a) ri W W c a ncri Ea m > a) Y� m.N c a) ° a c Y a) O c rn O> a a O O) c w a) U L N O "00 " U J c c0 =_ 3 "c c ra a- a) c O a' 0 3 > a0) m ` o a) o) a) a c E o a) W> O OCn« A C c aN " Q a) c E° a7 N Q c c 0 a) � a) a) L U O7 y L 3 0 ^'0 0 0 U) c 7 N ` Q r c E 7Y a) mm o Q 0�'�a a) a) N a a) N rn N a 3 a) c O) L N (n ._ c m � a a1 Co ca C Q U > U) O V L O •L.+ `�- a) N N :U rn inU a7 E° W O) .ULa C�a O_ c 7 aJ co Xd' Qy a)F co c — 7 m 7 c Z.0 O.O �«.. O O TE N 0) d a) L) LL cc m N -aa)) > 3 E n T O rn CD 0 E y 3 m 'c c a m -p a) 7 n m c V �.- as E .c 7 ' rn 0 .a c to c co c> U O ,. 7 CA N -r- a T c •-a)p "00 .c a) U C a) Q LO r0 c3a � : �' M0 m 0mcm. .= c E Q r ca > o) 0 uS o) a) EE a) � ° Ch 0 a) L m U -0 X rn aJi y y v L0 aci o v m rn F w '� 11J O L L O O O) a) (`6 = a) o f rn_ ii c F o Q O 0 Q > Q 3 0 v m aa)) a a c O 7 QJ - p N p p O ti v N N rn a rn m v N p. M 7 2 C o U u U) m p] Q W v y m 13 7 a) ca w >1 U U) w O . a N cn E d Q N a) a U) O CL 01 v n v N a m o a) m o. c .5 U vm�� =o v v = O E >,a) _n a) Yv mm a E� p p n N r c e rn C Q a) O) p v p p E y0 N C y 0 c p E p o v a m 0 N C w 3 a E c c N c 0 3 r c� - ¢ - c .LO-. 0 u p m- v v a p p y 000 mN ? a w E m L N a t U 0 +O + n: m °a 8 E `o y 4 v `n v °1 w, E v v E v v w m 3 a� .a >' m y c 'U v a V°- 6 C N v o r- U a v N` W C W N 7• m N Q o d 3 a— p G T N_ o p O a L N O c T Q C t w °a w m a vi E, Q n m W w ? y U) o r v v N ma" w F w M m m y ca rn 0) CO a v 04 -v m� "« ACS ve Q� v mN ca a) .> 0 a "� �v 'p °- z E N- mao a) E i a�� a.. m t N�' .t c L N Q rt == «� V_ o m vim v G u a p Q O 7 x'00 'O O c '. a m u '> C p m N �^ d U " c 0 L W U a) . u f . °. C• rn S.. b .N. CL C Q 3LO ca o a) U rn U W 0 7 =U Q _ o w N m (D a) 0 a) r_ r_ c N CD C9 U' U` 2 2 2 2 a a a a .0 c c .0 c .0 c 0 c E c E C E C E 375 v N 0 v no m n. 376 d' N 0 fu oa fo a z z z z z z U ti 0 m o o ) -0 >` C (7 C E co U y ° U C O m U O ° O - m >O X V- N > N 0 fl.n m C '� C i- m r •3 o .y)'a x 0) C N L 7 m L (D C U p) p Q ._ p m 'C "0 N 3 0) w C C CL a) � Co ° o m Y m'y ti C Q 'U O m _ O` 01 U N C O U N n ac) a) > 5 w E p 7 w. rn U ° L U U U V w O La) O aN ) a) 0) ° 0r C ° a) a) O O E CL n "6 a)U m n 0 O m— O n n p U -0 O Co m m C N U 0 co N Y 0 -C fn 0) O m m a) O F 0) J- 0 '0 '0 "' O C U m -0 a) fa a) a) ° c - N° m .v_ c E E N n O O N U.0 N t a) N V 0 O C C N V m N U N 7 CO d O E a) .D O U° 'O w fn C C -p m T O a) E E N Fn E E N rya m �o: U H U )i 2 3 U n '�° cn a 2 O n° 0 Co .. N N N U E 0) -0 �_ -° Cl) rL cc `m o a) — — m S a p N a) o a D m w y° m cm T > c co O r- O '- m n _a) > N 0) m N 'O fNA m Y a7 m - N m f0 L .N 0) T) C '� .LO. p- 0 N cn v N o° c v> '3 ° c m o c`mi n m E 0 E n° 3 L c .°_ w c°) m o m a) o > c ° o E rna).� -°o o. o° v N m c a) 'n m c y` .N N o m c m c` m m o -0 N U C w c C E O ca U 7 -° 0 o C rn p 0 a) UO E a) n 0 2•° N a) o a w E� o m >. a) N .� '� N O) 'In "O a) N c .E C m 7 N p w a) >m a7 U > L L N O "0 cmE N a) p U m d ocm 'O O N O CD U C w L ._ C O C a) a) c O fA EM .� O C N m .N. L a) N U '0 a) N E ..L�. a) 'O N .N U C U 0 E U a m o � m' a) C C C p m p m N n l6 m U L c O U C n o L) L 7 ,N .E C .0 S Co cm C C m C a) CL O a) n° c U C 0 m w .0 a) 0) a) U C m i= O_ rL- 3 C •0""0 C .O p n 0 m 2 a) C n� m U> U E ° a 7 a) o O p Co C 7 Q co n CL Q i6 n m m o E ar o) C o N Z U m c m 0) 'o +r o U ° U C m U U U Cp .D N m C N N N N O m .E = O H TmT m m > T CU .0 E 'Ln E.N`o mn3 o E N t` woo o L w n N p �� a) 5 E "i_ Co —° a) mw r rQ m� a) �)� �'E m .E Yew `m r n N p o o a) m w 'p c 'c N O i 0) N _0 = m m "0 a) N L N C C c n r 0) 0 C ..i.. a) . c Co o m 0 a) m m ° c p a o 'n v w ° N o) a) v 3 cLi o y m m N > 0 o c m N C) m O 0 C '> Y N U o >i 0) C 0) M m N m E a) m m C N m U N a) '0 C t ``k "O C C (n c .L-. ° N (a > L a) `� N m 'y m E "O O N 7 p j .� C ° y p N C N C N m C a) m C N U w O_ V m O •- a) 0 O U O U C a) m C > m C N C V m = N U Q n p a) E U (a N fn N m a) 0) C U CL n 0 m Oi U L O T 7 m N m a) L n E C a) a i L w 0 E N U n) V) 0)d E m m a) a) w V C U 0 U) 0 O L m U U U C Q m n 3 w Imn U 7 O U) U u fan Z a) > •L.+ C fa L [a (a V (a L fa a) [a L l6 V V V V V V V T C T C >. C T C T C T C p 0 N •O p 0 Co Z > Z > Z > Z > Z > Z E a) m a) .. a) a) _ a) m N a) C N a) C N 0 C N 0 C N 2 C N a) C C O " O C O C O O C O =3 U U lo U U U U U U U U U o 376 d' N 0 fu oa fo a 377 v c, 0 m a } Ln 0 0 a� E 0 U N N O a N MA N C N N 9 fn c0 L N C a 3 N L a-� w O X O CD � C C F 3 y c y a� O •y � f0U3 m 7 cc l9 _- N =a) mNVn�'�'�myU 'a0G6r �Gn3�LL C L 7 H�� Nw�� `N �Etc�'m Gu= c�vt orb, � -�u mcu -al LL Z!e `,.0 '0 oEV =m U C 7 y �?9� �- m N— v -- Q �GN�'GUM�m4 m m «_ -_ m ,f0jm0 _ a) ca a) V U Ci C C.�� C n fi ° E CS' -N-� E V GL„ N.4 N Cd dl 3 —T o '�.NN O_L L ca N yU(p� 2m YvOU W�OVCmdEGm.Om �"@ S X N ya vz `m °m3 a� �Nao o�mE� mn'�o oL�� N w (O'7 �vyp NAB QfC m ?G 0IL UH V'�'.- P.9 NC G. Q Nom' �L OIGCO�OTJ �` pie ijd I`9 �.4[�JOm 6Yn OV GvNm` c O_ c 70 o a9 G T 6.E co (c6 a% U oC. v�p u y•4c oNa €mc�0lt uE yJW s�.�oc rn Q7 �r ca y mGdd U O > CC x 41 O 01 N N C U 4 N J �r L c> O O a v J G 6Y O CJ w v ✓' U co Q m _ D 0 '. V 9 m" w fi F N m.0 O p m 0 c :e t`1 .Q y v O m N O �� x 41 mOR.L. a L°NVNNO'— �NL 01- '�+�a ; 5 N,mR 9C LJm M—C `� ._ 0 E'C N O.7 cr Ol - Nr NNNrryyV PENN y, U. L mtw NN,O1 L��V] N N �V 0 9 J NOt T� ° V 'v = e 47 U N (�Q N 0 0. g 0 x O yTN '��' G N O l6 L N'�p1 m A m m u r�9 N N G p V V' 0 pEp Lw O_ N Na UPSm >4 CAN 4�NCdncVOp L,N CmO f0 7 N N t ? E 9N �7 Cpm NCNGL'.�C O�.0QM iT Zr 1' , Nm N3NO NW0 O C N f0 w N p V E�n 0�� va c p'N my cacJiN N.°1�nL jc8pr ]ero Y co C- r_ J L a m- .00 > 0 0 m C 7 y� N (�i 701 ° m m. « W J m � O O LL ANE,j 0NC3 NO 0 GA CJ WG g���OL ma 0� m OTLm a-� L °�� Q L d� N �� �= N N L 0 c m H "rn d AL N` .N a .E 1']TU Nwr9 °.•`m Nf02lC 7 t_ 7 (0 I, U ^f d C t 0'0D C N N O fn C — m to e m N -C [ dr L J 0 �U aY q) w `-Yw w'vl C. t m m a) N C N O __« L m c S'] M d O —_. � L y 0 Y(D y y - -T �. �_. yi0 C m N IA J E N bV3N m 3 W G N d O .0 f'3 U T.m J Q a`RmLC ry ° u._ ca U'O O I 3 N f0 -� s J0 m Vi- n �Ot �, G.. � uL yLt .mw m� mN 0 vL et c ... „-• �v 6 Y 7"(O N— N C Cl C3i N Yj _ m�G[ J (} N�a a M l d m ._ T? dr p« �� pU�— OC =�"�E U' r aJ N y� E� =pm C C 0 [J VO 0 O x 0 � rsD e Oja 0 H N O C G m nJ a N O m C Eoa +r ��PPauo3 emu O O m V Q u. =? CYl1wGm E fc n ca E o f=5 V U L t C N C O + (0 w C N E r C ' O *6 U N C O O_ E O CD w O U 377 v c, 0 m a ti O W v op a } Z o c T y _O C U > 0 C O 0 N a) -0 -0 _T C C E 0) -0 E 0 - @ 7 fn YV U O y m c 0 0 c O O 0 0 N 0 3 0 0 U "0 0 3cm C > c _c 0 C C 0 0 N O m00)c 0 _O y a cp -0 m U m _m _m N d Cb "D O O m 0 7 N .- ur U) 0 '- 0 m Q c 0 =� M 0) c m c 0 O 0 o U rn E Q� L c = U) '� Q a m M 0 E 0 aa)) � a) U) 0 c! 0 N 0 '6 ._. U C y 0 0 U 0 LL 0 .0.. c c p C U "O m 00 rL-. u- O O 7 0 0 m N U ul @ O w 0 cc '0 m O C 0).0. 0 0 0 N O 0 •N U m U) c C - •U ° U C r U a) c6 W W 0 m O -c N c m ,� 0 0 -00 7 N N U U 0 m U~ m Q V) U a) m C 0 O' Q 0 a) N U) p C « 0) m p ,C C 0 0 m 0 _T a) a) U O 0 N m to 0 C ca X O m U N a) U) > O m C m 0 .N (n m o O @ -0 0 0 m EU E -- ) Oc N cp > 0. @ d' 00 7 , fn w c ch Y a a) m O- in m m -0 m o y m c O w a) y E > 5 L o E 0 N" c L> Q) fl ) ii 0 0 Q w N F .� O0 F Q F O-C 0 c a) Q O c a) m 0 c m .0 0 N a rfi L 7 n1 N a) O 7, aS v '°' M +-� 0 O 0 C ° G i� 0) — .. 7�t G V mto O F O 3 N a N O^ U Y cW O 0 U a a) 0 N D � = Q 3 a �' O N C 4 Q C g.G o y m o E (D .� c E U O1 y 0 D q] C< G Q m U m E 0 O r c Q[ t'S Q G 0 T3 O CJ c) 0 i ,L 7 4 G' a D m � � w a) 0 N 9 C > m O -(3 1 _m L c> 3 [; D L c; t) - y c C N s c c � U rC � •� � � N m� O W C 7 OQ CL V) 0)).0 3t -.Fm N� cc rn C d 4 1 N Ma Q.- C r •C G fli j p q m -0 Y C ^�' v U a) C NO � � .0 O L O `� -O ✓ U CD -F L1 CS ou F O 1 6 C 5 N 0 � L �— m y �S Q m ' �F N U O m r � ��� y V o c O c 0 C � � � - y N 07 C �. CE o a O N C. fq O) C Q 0- v C Tp W a) = 4 U a u! O m L -Y G mLr` 0� @ C E r C C W= E V .0 > C U 7 7 .0 f-00 0 r c r c ' O O U U 0 ) c O O_ _ E _ m C O O O C E w 3 � U Im— K ti O W v op a 379 d' N 0 m CD a } } Z C-C m - y t� .Lm.. bj O a) c a: aooy N Y a) 3 -°-"ai m -0 _ O m e c a) m c o m 0 c m'c a m m 'O c c m U m 0 N CO Q a m e _ 0 a co o) m i j c a �°, o N m c O C ,,-�. N Q' a -cc m N U 0 C m X '� p) N O N V p= p L N co y d G N Co m N Co W ,3 C 'O y. fn a m p� U N •O O E 0 N y y y L m— 0 fc0 a y a) U' N G l m m .O O. m F-o m e Q° 3 m o rn a' v °i �a o m me Q O °) C 0 0 .L.. L c c m U 0 N C O) ,c y c ,wm Q a) N U c V c iq n w 3 a) .m' y E vj 7 ,,L-. C-0 @ y y `Q y m y 3 `Q y i +'. N 0 m Q N F O 3 N N Y N .k O m G 'c m - '.� y k h O L N ,0 a ..' Om N=� O Q. L `O. a) @ L O m m y 3 , L m "- O a w 3 y a) E a>i m 0, m= U m a) o a) Q > m ,'c,. m e I c> a y > c r r y c m a a) y m �' m �m�m��� rnF� of o rn°jO��a�`�° =)0) C) oyu n> a) E m - a) m E c c .0 O) U) 0 N a m y N 4: L U ',.0 U C m m N q) U p L C_ CD - (_=p O a) Cts a C c m d. m m a m` UO M C m 3 'Lm^ m 0- Z a) y m M M 0 d N Q U L y k 0 E co y d 0 y y Q m �' N ) o a) m a= n m h a-0 '+ N ,n ' Q c U c a O C m 0 0 `�° C O w 3 C N N O °) U a) a) G h a) m U 0 m ami m m 0 y° a°i h t m m m c c °Q E c`a o c c@ c m a) Y °> a) o U) a) o Q ° o m a Q m U o m ci F y F m Q. >> m E N O C N-Q O •� m OO U a) m ,�3„ L U �, C O c c °- Q m ,- Q m U o a) c M m a m Q a) o Q F- Q y m 0 > r y a°i aOi c w y m .- ui O c - O Q� c fn cri 0 M= ` m .c m y CO auIm me a)CcoQ`ma�Q) c 3' E(c�mmo a =r-0) c m o c c o a a)L o O�.N o m a°) ° c° c E ° cm).c x — O m x N y :° C E .0 y -O .. U °@ X 3 fy/) N h U k h N .. m m = m a) -° _ 'c .3 N a) m m °) o .c a m y N 0 fn o c o a) -O O a) U Co V i y c fl" y C '� N E- wO -° U, U O o` N ° U N N m a a ) m C)E U c m o m m L m m y m o m o a) m im L N Q in U V; E U N 7 0 Y N N 7 c m y U ~ ..- a� N LL h 'i G ,c 2m' .N O 0 G m F t o_ v -°0 � W� Q a � ax) 0)) r -QQ a) C m ca r- a) L y "0 c O a) Y m E U L Y O C m N N 0 a) L a m -o y O m m 0 O O L y CO a a)' E > m -° '� •U O .m m= Y .c a Q C F .L.. a) O O L 3 0 'd m ;�, N 00 L c m c „' m C n L E a) c n L v o m o y N U 0) 0) c C ,� 7 0 "O E o - °' c c N °c m L.0 o f N c m'x a s m m U Q >. O N c 3 c N m° "O 0 c ax) mO N c U E E c Q' O m -C 0 >, .- ,L-� N a O a) �--' m N y C O a) Y p U m m y w a) a) � m -O pO Y N p .�U"Y —} a) m U G= m 0 m Q 0 c o -O C cc U° W C =0 o cam m >. a C N O y E c o m N 0 0 CL co E E CE a)0 c O ° o c N mE 3 N a) N 7 L m L O' _) L L m C rn F- n m Q ° 0 U U m a) w> 0 N U 'O w N _m "O L C O O N F O m E Y m a) c 0 0 L a) m 0 m m_ O L a -o m c O v a 0 ° m> E F m@ C m o) a` ac) cLi a) 0) It ai Q y C .O O O a) .O m 0 E yU Ld N Om mLa N N .O m CL cc _ E — c Y °- n a) c ° o c 0 c E° c o a3i 0 aci x ,r L0Ea) m a)Eoy� LO m 3 m rn ti a °, ay) co) a) o '� N m y O> Co n- C C 6-0 C a) C rte.. a) L I > a) O F O U C n c m n'O L 'O .0 c 0 0 m o O N Q a) m N E w O m N °-) U N a) N U O N y V o a) U) a U N Q' m m 0' m F- w U c _m C E a r= I a) C Y C � F n o (n E m LD O' a'N C� >, y C a 0 '0 -0 N I .0 n O c C a) m m m m m 7 N E co c m C .�.., m m _ U m e E C f4 o CO E +L- U V) '=_ N - m a m O U m°. U n E 0 a) N a) y -0 C U L >. U a) '_ .X m -O ' L a) m y a) -U y> L E O a) a) 7 F- !n cn a) !� n n m 3 U m Y F- :J c m co C r C C ' O O O U a) U m U m•- fn (n fn N m Y m n m E Y m^ M C M a) m C C m L a) m E m m E O E En m O 0 C m CL w c m a) U W W a U U 379 d' N 0 m CD a • k v ci 0 O N v m a Z Z } Z Z } } OCT '0 a) a 0 0 •C c) O N fn 'M o m N X C - 3 la W C C O c- ++ 0 U a 'O C N °)a Jr- a) 0 'O m m e 'm U C y m a a 0 m .0 a� p° Y o w 0)o m c O y r E C L C C '0 C U m N m N N G m a, m a) L m � a) N D- nj x , ch m co N a) O N Q m L m a U a () a a) m C nj O O M .,,, •C c7 0i N L L C L N V O Y TO "' m i o Z 0 N a m "m0 -0 C m m C yU-_ t o D U C a L a N- L U m X" G C N C O N o 7 C O Q O Y m o o a a m a) a, 3 m m e a) m o a In a ° m c y o 0~ m o o 7 F m e n W N o " m; 0 a) >i m C a) c O) E- 0 D -G a •' `0 y U O N N N a vj `p 0) co N N G N U y N M .0 O, a) 7 .v_� L "��' O a -° a m °' O N �' C N °- .. 4 'O '0 N L N d c M G "L" a) L '� 0) p N X E G -0 C p '� "� 0 >i N U m O' a X w m C O- Vi O Q 0 0 0 aa)i aa)i p p m N m (� m' a) N 'E N N a) C E U m E co 0 l0 ;O Co a) - N _ N ;._ m 7 m U N a) a N G m C .+ of 7 C a) m O m U 7 p` N Y T •_ G U U An a o O> a N m C m 0 N N a s m �, V �O a) 07 E N N o UO m .� j m m .T m E m N a) +L' C w U L N N I N c1 J f- .N+ N 0 fn m m a Up N "O a) 'C '0 C 'O E a c .' 0) T _ D a Y t N N (a m N x a' G U C a) c•M 2 L O m 'O m m L Co C Q y j L .0 -p 7 y a- S m m w E O Q w w% m a "-' U m o Q a a) a) a w cn c ° m e o Cl) ac) m e 3 mo _ c) m m 3 7 3 Gp '7 a) a) 'C 7 ` Q^ U w N +L. L 'O C -0 m ? N O U w 0 pa• V 0• a) in N w c° U N Q N 0 ca) U a) N a a) N C N V O m C- N U D a y .`� N co N N a) 0 `—° .L.. O G T C a) m N CD - N N m N N L) N U r7. E D N = ° O) a a a) L p' x a m c 3: om.0cmcC pay C 0 a)a�c °'Em QWw`c_ o E mo to a E c o r Q m U y O N a) a 0- '5; m '= a5 0 c o 0 U N o w 0 � Q CO 0) U -p y o a) C i Y N m a 'w N m a c a) a) a 7 .N m c m e 5 N� p c T 0 y� 7 N m oc o M 0 Y a) O> m aa)) a) c ¢ Q N 0 ..� -� = w > w m= m m 0) N N C N m m a U 'p m N o a) c Co O N? C L c@ N Q • O U aa)) U -0 w >, .0 m m V CL C C G G X V N U m C N C a m O. "O > c a s h p_ O 7 0 -Dp N -p E M m 0~ -Q, G) 7 m C ,ym+ a) N O C) C U m a 0) N .0 C 0 E N LL U > m N c G C y W aa)) 'N ° .0 L N O fU/) �' C c c0j '> D a) co .c) O N G a N L >` 0) "N m 0 0 0 y ui N N a7 a U 'O '0 N N L -C V D C N O N a) E C -j a) L '> ., U y '> N V O 0 'O C L a) N d 'N F C X ,L.. p L L N L m L p o a) c G a) N a) p F U m m w a° a) 3 U a O m CL F N E in H 0 a w W (n Q (n = v 3 O U L 0 m C ma 0) u m C 7 O U) fn r ''-- C .T. N m> 7 O' C C m _ 2' LL .X a) 'c y w O` O O> W m a a) `° '@ D O 0 o v o 01 0 E L' -o OU '0 'F r N > >, Q a) 7 ac O o m m 0) C c m o m E "O m "O m m cc E N C'. �j O N o a) 7 N c 'C .` •� 'C .0 Q N C O �.�° V) cc 3 083 o UWm Lm m 0 Co a) N 'f0 w p >, O N E F C w m 3 E m E c o f T E o Z E m n a a) E N a)) m °) Q> c p a) o N 0 o w m m a) T N m +' m N N _ c (n +L.. m �. N O C a) .m .L.+ O N m N a) O L m O' U w m m U O rL.. a) a) r~ _ �. N 0 U O N a) w saNi t o'am w me mw C fL0 N a E c =U) >' a) inE r C C N 7 a) N O a a) '0 C _ O 3 0 OL a) a m C .N N E O 7 C f T a) :? C> O N a) > CL c E N C C 0 0 O a) Np 3 C a 3 O T" 0 a i C co 0 -O M U L m cc ca a) O '0 '0 a N a) Co Y .0 "O p C L a) 0 m E C N U) CI. i N N N M Q m L E 7 L ` N N a) N c E m .0 m U p -0 a) 9 w L E2 O O~ C EO 'O a) O 'N N 7 a) N N a C �- O_ w « S U C c O E E N ['• N N C N U C Y a) w m p ?� m F p 'D a) a) E N '� :E_ C V Q) of N C N m c N OL E a) O o E O a) N Co -0 N Y cmj C E otS E v 0 C °) > N a) 0 a) C C> T OX a) a) m 0) N N a) �' C a) O E a) T+ E° C W N N L N N aci 0 N m >, w U w N m a) N c U m m 0 m U m a) E o m 0 d p N rn a) p 3 f .0 N a L _ Q d >. m @ o la aci Y n a 3 `m c M CL a) -° v mo m e m o m > L a) > - _ a) m 0 mo c L a) o n L) m c ) N� •� c m CT c m a) m a) L '0 3 o E m m fn CD O c m a) a o 'w rn a) 0 7 E m 0) c 9 N 0) a) a) a m o N a o m 7 °� m y p 0) cu p a) c m` ca r N c o s E o a 7 rn N N O m o L E o a) a 7 B 'c c a) a o a m h- o a) m 0) c a O H e c o m 0 F r N c r o W co W .o 0 U d .n N d o M x L C� -m C c O O OC Oc _ O O N C c a) a) ) Qa) N 4C ) fn NN . U) m NN cnm fnm 0 c (nm fnm E C c c c m O O O O —le c m E CL E CL E CL E Co a) aTi .o m m .o @ m m m m E > Z > Z m m m m O V m "" N LO N "� a) N O O O O 07 C a N c � a) c _ U W a U U U U U U U U • k v ci 0 O N v m a a 0 v on a o c m G c -0 c a) "0 0 0 G O a° L N p) U N G a N m "0 h G • C m y �0 O" y p v1 0) > L O G m 0 m c N C Q > E .G G v) m L O Q �) O m O `�- L e C .p m N a) N a) y .0. _ G p CO fn E m a y O¢ in o v) YQ 3 m U N O q) z .h o S m 3 rn m fn ttz 0 a m °- O) U G O "0 i C 7 3 c N f,L6 p G a) fn a) .L-. co O M .41 O U O O N :. U y .0 >, m -o y y G y O G ..L. m 0 OL Q m m co co a) y=m N c + CL cn 0 0) G U O C N Ei 2' m Q j m N ~ O N N C r- h O N �'�p .0 c G G _m U j y r d N p N rn 3 w c y .= N m af m h a G j cr m G .p.. M a E m c _0 Q '1u L a, CD m o m L U O E 0) m co E a) m m �.c m 0 �' N N ri C. a) m Y o r u m .0 N w Un m- a v3 p a� p a �mGaj° >>'Namio0E�3 -voi c� M m m m a a) m m G $ a aa) tmn vi N h G a G a�' •U C a) c a) .0 ai N m E c 0 CY) c U y N °' a) G N Q) rn O N w °- N U 3 m E C E L o 0) o m o y aGi y n y aUi �F– co co a)� TU Q,�� E fn cn CO m m a1 a�a)ma) w >+ a moo; a) a m m p •k a) Q) U N m a7 Vi Z x N G` G h rn m" m E m m w, X Q> G G 'C L 0 o a m C o .o m m m 0 m =' E m fn 'Eb L m L rot 1 .o a°) m m L p E 'O =a) �- y Q G m o F a) o. L L O C fL0 "0 = .f3 U Q m a n N L a) a) a p p O m c V m a) p) p G ID L a) 0 o 7 m aa)) ° 0 m t O t 0 �tia�QaQ C) C) rnaa:so�o ��' o D a) a) rn n aNi o m c vai m aa)) 0> o m .5 0 m W 0) E a) m f0 U _ a w -0 0 Q o N y a m m u c i L ' N O�� 0) O a) C N 'O U c �' '^ 0 a O p N N L a) w y w c � E � . N T ,N c cn L G O c c +Lh 0. 0_ `= � Q� C v' Y_ 3 �Q�z o-o cn m 2mv RT rcUu nNOn L� rn m a) a) L1J to 7 iT N N a) O U N N rn pN .- N C O D1 C m L c y m -OmmEa) ro G to g o " !A to C rli O) mm � C '0 , 0 io C U a) 0 U y 0 m c� o mU y V m ro '� C 3 M C m m � a) m O 0)._ c m cnc'c_ma c° c� M c M "� m E o o a s ¢ E� w a Qu F> Q� y E o °� H a)y =Y E �� a>i =MET, =3�NMc ��.� o � w 0 t = L (D o 3 c c w o aE ow � maaN���� v =a c y V m U, y a) m a) ST N N m N L L tl7 a N m o= � a N � v «. v U) a n r p, a ain a m m a) 0 N E D m .L am) r- a")¢ a) 0 rn� w a) °L'�o � m c Sc=Y ° E U a) m 0 v a) s rn i U c_'c ° av" � m m `o N m E U U � a) a) � �'N o� o+ O o .. w v N O u O f6 O� p� O.L.. 3 U y S� oroM wF a) y C al O w N T L O a) aL L "O N ._ p N �a vv r a v cn m 9c�v .0 E v N ro a a 'O N p'D a) N fn C C m E r 'F 7 a) Y m r. w N G O 7� C y" r/� Nt�n O y CNdc L N pa- `�N C N T) rli E ENV w O :! m y a) ,N. d U C p L Y " �9SA ,}, awe v,'L' "EE o� U 'rn CL N .a) r'm0 C CL m w .L--' m N a)' m m C r N oo E M 6 "a5m `� a m� °u '" c O E "` .Lm• a) m m J in _ m 0 O C •�' a) Q c� .0 N C m m L aL a) p, ra' c ,� h p N " v '- c' - y 0) O .+ T °) a) N m m N 6 c c E °c N N 0 C a Q C m 7 C L ia U O m to "O �_ '� N S' ,L d O O �' 6 d n CT V1 .. 'q r.7 Rf G N¢ —75 vin • a) a) C Y a) U (6 C" O T +L. O E w E a z c CL am O a O V a o O m L C C +• c a e a e N wc" E C° C m U C T U m fn a C O O d m N a) m a L E m y i� 'v 'C N ." c x y" r a rn k N M �k k L N a) �. 'o � c E� c Lam a)- N a - C rna 2 0N o� .. N 0 0 0 0 0 E C .`+ U m FL N N O.L.. C L �� CJ "' m G '� Q n a`J E �' a a a) E p' •; n O N !!) ' p_ m a) . O 0) � 'O > m 3 U 7 C W n `o c T p G �' �u � o. °' C CD ca 1, W O) r- Xk U m L i?, - 7 C _ w"-. C 0-00.0 070)E —_ U W cn m N D7rnrnrnm O Nc C 0 W .N C C L U a7 O N 'E O N "O C a) m C C C m m m ,C • T fn C 0) a) a) C O m c m I L -d m fn cO U C `= 0) L m U L L L m U U U O 0) cn tom o m y ¢ m m .S a • 0 0 0 o -� m N a) N - _ m N - m M fn co Cn M CO co CO co c c C c O O O O CL a a a m m m m MW M M co M 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O • T W T W > T W C) CU U U a 0 v on a L% ISYA d N 0 N ti m m a Z Z } Z Z O a) y C m l0 > L N U L LO L �, (6 N .N C O) C L .� V N ca Co L L a7 m m y ~ 'm0 y .p, w N L •' L Vl o n "m0 3 4) O) X , m Vi cc .a y o U CL L w> .� E .c F N a) w w F 0) m m oo `m 3 0) a m m 'C b -0 O m C m cc t c C E CO V C C a r m O con - -°_ 3 0 rn w N N rEi C U .3 V Lm. m L d 'y m 3 m c m L U CO O m 0 N 7 c m N a) N N c m o O m C c N> y cm) CD 0 0) C a) -0 U t (0 n cc 7 m a) N U �O 0)b N N cC m T� N- � -p C "O x '0 LL '0 m •L• N ` C 3 M f0 3 m V m L -O y U �- > c N a) c -N a) M Y v m n a m 0) o m a) ° a m C c L aUi n m .+ c w E -o c E C L E a) U o L n as c cmn c O 0 U ' C) 3 7 a N (LO a) m .m U m U " co N L m C C cl) Nn -0 L (i Y n Fn a :C.. a) C> n c* .� 0 N m m W N m N N C ca m ° C O- o a7 3 c o y LL L 7 y "O L rt 0 U' U O l_ .L] v LO E `) - m C. r O m w U L c U Co 0 L F c 0 O 0 a) 0 o m 0) m a7 m 07 O C U L CL U N m '.G 3 N U .O F 0 O Cc o m w �' 3 E E m V 0 o m ° w m 3 (h m ci L m m 0 �' c l0 co) 7 O= c L C C M m y6 C _0 U R 'off n C N m c .- 'm > LO c L L m n L .. C m '0 w - m m /� .Q a) .0 m o c a7 y w O m C_ 7 c fl.m m m = E> fmn y L> m m L :� L n U m L m O N y Co m N O_ E L o 'C U U) Q) Y "O O L m N m C L L Co L w j T E N .m. Co a) N co -O L 9� m Lon_ m >' - 3 m =) m a) w o y a) c ' a ri w ami a CO o m� w s> F' m-0° a m o m ri Q.- c cn N .m = m U cu E ,� a) 0) — N a) m O�' m co c c )n o N •3 p m o rn m o, ym Y 0) m � Y Z '� o '3 o m a > C '() O O L N >p .�. v C V E ya m n a1 a) �' Co (Q co.% W > w c L '� n= n /N LL U.? Q U o L) Lm c CL > ^ a O c O a) a O '� .� w o .0 a c c o. as y cn F= O E E 0) O a) L `- +L. U M N co m U C c N U m c c c m 3 o f m m .�_ a C C C 7 N t .N a) Q -0 O .O 3 o m C n 0 O .0 • ..U-.� a 0 y C O) con O c L m L N C CC .c a7 m U fa T 3 - E O C E 0 N c L N N "O V .N O O m U O. '� 7 0 N 7 X .L.. '0 m m N c O x o o E 'Q m m E n m T a) c m m L a) a L O N a a N E c N m p m c c m 0 N N m L OL m m L N U n T£,t N m 0 E N m a) >, to m > +mom. a II T Q N F m O m 7 F n N m m L 0 O m F C a) U ,� n m C Q d n i L N E L i a5 a) N i '0 U Q U m C E i a7 �. F E 0 0 3 cu a) %- 7 a) a) a as T m a) d E O c a) N -0 ""' O c (n a E L a) n L N co U m c N Y m a) U m O E =r- 0 E c (D o as c y m m a) m 0 f6 N °- w N L 3 c C. Y 01 E c 3 0) U C a) r 0)s O C E2 m �0 c N m O N m T L E Y 3 m m T N 0) L L 0U) o M o 3 m° m co 0 0 E U E m E ' as r L-5 o c m 0 n 3 v� � o m c m 3 N m as Y c` 0 C N T N- c0 n L _ c 0 N CL d M M ` m O N_0 N N E o j > y CL 0) m 0 Z O > = N 3 O w m N CL o n 1 Y. U N T O Nam ° 3 rn N a E N U Z m> E as 0 CL L o ") o cn '� C c 3 0 c C ~ a) F L N 0 m m a 0 o E m � N O w w 0-0 N 7 o L a) 0):=w m E -0 > -0 • w c 0) - L 0 "O m m N N U L T c O. m V 0 T 3 n c N d L) m c c r c >0 L a m 0 0 .v aT O A L Q C m U d CL -0 m L Z CL c O M C C 0 cn cu L V- c c o c c m v E o L C m. m y N a E m Q o m N N a) m _ m n cc m o ° E m a c 0 a) O m 0 .0 m 0).i U N m �O L - --- Tv m EY Co m m m m -0 O > m 3 a) m .O m T- c C m o m 1.L > a) S m 0 yL.., C C LO c 3 a m U T c O 0 m L U m ^- t6 0 - .m 0 N L N c0 `0 0 07 m i U 7 CU .0) 0 0 c m as �- .c >' C m O` - 7 a) O E O) T co L 7 a U 7 c L� m > m o `o. m F w 3 Z o � Y i� 2� 0 a 3 o x x c S c m m o o c c - N OQ) r ci. a) N c-i m a CO m a U U) co co N c) Q N Q N E cc —_ O O O 2 'c m > Z _ w Z > 2 81)) E > 0 0 O m ca m N a y a(h C E CL d m N p d Q t 0 U U W O U U U U U 0 !— 0� L% ISYA d N 0 N ti m m a a ti w 0 m v on a Z Z y Q a1 aw c N� mQ c a) o m a N !n N (._0 a) O OL E a) 7 c O O. N -0 a) Ca a 0) U i=, d m�> v O .L. 4) L t a) O c 'y T > O t �O Cc 7 N fn L U U N (6 N rn T N N ° a) D) a) U a) L _ O U O w O> a) 0 T Y a) L c c w ° 3" o YO p S a ° m c > a = c m N 0 t N c fn 4.7 U `) Ca c0 O i a) p w _T O> N f� .= i N O a) -0 c 0) C c 0 U 0_ to O a a) C N a) i c w o o c p c N =5 a) E c c °w: 3 a) mL (6 ++ (n m O 0 y O v a 0� cc a) ° -p c y� `•) N X E N a )n i L Cl) a) a7 j to Q> m y N to (a N 0 7 .O O c N O" , N C CO a) in C N a7 C F 7 4 a) 0) O> �O L U Ca a) )n 7 0. c N N �a ,� y - c 0 -o .O 0 N> > t .0 DO a)� U c T O p 0 0 Q .N U a) Z a) 'y U a) U r> a) +_• E a) •0 V N E N Ca N U c 3 7 C (n L .0) a) a O_ a) p p M N L L 00 y 3 EK C.) ° a> 3 a) m o m °— ° E cc -0 Co ca L a> > m y CU 4 c o > a) o a) m mm o> rnm c w° ° m E m m L (A D > to -0 N E 7 c0 N Ca a> a) U aUi a) 7 a) -0 c -p (a 'U N to m Ca a) N w, O 0) �- N N° c O7 > L N 5 a) •p a) CL y t o a) ~ .L.. rn Y o o a"- o= m 3 �° -0 m m a o o m o vi c a°i ai y o o w a) (D m c c L a w L 0 w m @ � m -C aZ c m O m a w a) CM YL"`a— ° 0 Ca N Ca m ca O. 0) M 03 fl_ '� a .0 c O O C 0 C) o a�ELU ���3 >mNa�Laoomrn3 a m t CD co Ua>>QC: O c y >O Co a7 V N M' C L N C n Z d N N > N U 0) O_ .. a) E w ,� ? O (6 " CL C.i c c a) (6 p O 4> Co X w c> a) O O 0 O ,� ..=3 (0 -p U w O. "0 U LL X a) '00 U a)' j O N i m E al 'O a) m a) N c N U N O N (Ni> a) > N U m a) m C .0 a) wL., •U a U u) O. O c N N U c c a) CL N a) N y 0) "O 3 a) (0 N i l a) O 0) a N a) " Q CL a) Q 0 ` E L y L "O (6 L O) p p c i2 O. a) O_ O. L 0= N .L.., O_ _T N O U E U w E Q N F > a> a) = O a) E-0 Q O F O L O N 'O U 'O Cc a) m 3 U >._ m . 3 U Q >- 0 a) U c (6 T N > O o� Ca m L cc 0 CM w O a 0 N 'p U Ca O p a) o L- a) �' "O C c a m o m O - 7 0) a o N c O. O a> a •3 ai o w ) m L N Cc m "O L co T y O y c c i N ' c m M a) � O 0> O C a) n O a) E L Y =? w U C a O E F C 0 O Q L c y p)`0c c m V a) E'�a w m c O a) ° .N O L 'c 'C U p w L O a) m C p ca O O" C d C C U U .L. N OE O E O Ca 0 > N O Ea)_TU Y .0 a) >,QU O n 'O 0 O. a) co 0) 0) "O c c a> Ca L a) 7 J E 0) L (n N 0) a) c )n C w Ca N n t` a) O C 0) (i a) N E a) In w m m .Lp-. C O C O_ N ui C a) p p c .0 )n N 0 y a) 0 Q .0 O. O O. a) c 00 M >, -0 O i Ca CL U p E p U c m m a_ N Q O a C 07 N C) a U E y N O N 3 t (n "p c 0 ,0 0 a) T 'ti. O. N a) U c a) 0 rn c Ca U L O N N T Z, O_ — E N '= -p c Y f0 a> a) (6 rT+ N — o '> E � W to m X Co F O m a L c >> U 0 Ca a) d N N m 7 N -0 U C3) N C O E C w lL c in an d O N w a) O c0 '� E O U Cl. c ❑) U C N N V O a) _ C) a7 - O p c0 .+ c 0= y Uoa)oa) n N(n p a) U �0 a lC �i— N O ya a) c °> aaci m c cc c m 0 3 c a) N _C O Q U N N M .LO+ `ai O c ECOL= Ec��'a a°ica)i `o m O7 c c O m • u a v �> a7 c a) U CD ac) CO 7 Ca "o a) Q' U Z 'O d N X X X X '0 'O 10 "O • c c c c CL aU aU QU aU C. Q N Q CV Q CV j< N a) 0 Ca O O O — — Co Co ._, > Z > 2 > Z a) a) m m N a) c N m e co m e a N m r- _ " o C o o o U U U U U U U U a ti w 0 m v on a greer a O C aJ tla a V Z a L 0) o 0 0 -°)o N a) E _r_ c 'p0 a a) a> 0 >` c U O N C U C ,p y C U 03 L U _ �a) Ecoyvr� oa °�� o @ a) Oa) c s o@ m@ CA (n W y ° (n a) n c o O U a) L i• L L in @ CL c t L VJ O r-� •O 3@ w@ c CO °. m a) o Y o ° �ax)EY aci -' �ooa)CL 0 �c U) a�i3 QE w @ a) U cc o 0p w -Op = as OD E c y a) O ul i .j . C p F a L L° U a N a) °�. ° .3 cam °n v @�'o U ° OIL O° a) u@ c y m of m U)aEi m a) n j° N T @ N U E O w a) O 7 N Y a) a) > Emvo @a L 0) aw �•y-ocLa� c O c �@ c .=o) SYZ _ C L (n w 4) u O _ y a) N O a) -G y z V C O :5 y 0° a) ° L E a) a) o- c O) 0@ a) U C c O o) 7 T y w T 1 a @ .0 0@ C) O .� @ p E m L O V) a m y O fl. U C N@ -.C.. w a) v n E a@ w n° a) L a) °° o ° E m o L)) c o @ m 0 N C:, o m Cc L Y o y v a@ oa ) a m N 7 Q Qm Ern C @ w�a >. E a N N� @ L@ L n m 3 0 6U CL o m a) y E O y o ° y Y 0) a@i V o U Co (D a L m °� t a a 'O a) r (6 O a) U -p a a) C L a) a) T U yo cn c0a)aa)aiET� ca N `U ca a� > � -° 3 d .3 p U C O N V N o N U 'oo a) d OL N N c? N a x N@ m o = a .=O. c m E c - o c a °? rn 0 a�oi ° a m -o @ aai c 3 .N o c a>i CU o o L o .N o a E y c o O N° E o U N o E m= c'o @ L -O ac) a) a 'p 7 0 w: @' U a Q Q U o aS L C m C C@ a) Cl c y N (V m X `n t a) ° y E° L— m 3 m O L d U .� Y a) x '� c o C a) m (D m m Q C 'p 0 0 cr m Q 'O a) ~> '� a? @ C c C N> U "O 'a a) a= n@ .-, p 2 E w a) C@ a U a) +• O O U a) @ a) y c a N CL L c a) Vl c� V) o-oa a .- o LO > U@ OL W a o) `� L C> c= O o C Q 7 3 a) a 0 0 0 'o C (nLL 7 F Q t0.� F@ i7 (tea F a a- o° N @@ 3 in . p a° (D E r° Q@ 0) c m o m a) rn � @ :o r a) @ ° ur @ c a O) a) ° U ur p_ @ a) p m U "NO m C N CL is C -p a) m in o U 'o O C No 0) m L r N a) m y o a o a@i a) L a a) 0 o E O U a) a) 0 O Co rn y O 3 N 0 @ 0 L .p w a) a) c L O a) 'V E C m a) O a) �_ a CL E a a E c CL o a) °(n m 'D 3 > N c C y O 'r w w a) L O O C y ca N 3 a w N O o .�.. T c a) a) m cn N U N � a) V p a7 m ..•Cr a) L a) � a) O L O) N (n O p a) o c_ a U = W @ (n 'O @ o m a m a) 0 L C c O a) c '- in w C O N c a) a N u) o) E c 'o m O c = .c. O a) .N >. E -O d a) O 7 N O O 'o o L N y :N 6 U m w@ w a v a) = @ 3 p a N C U c p-'j U "O A o cn 'O Y° a) 0 m o L) a --o y N@ w w O) ° O p Y a1 N U 'C O U= a) w T C N N to L a) N N a) CL @ a) o n• 0 'Ca 3 -0 cc O a) U a) L O E @U a) U O) a) a) .c L L U C ° t > m m o c o o E o E° U 3 E N T U Co c (D p a) o a) L @ c °o E a) a) N V) N C N-0 __03 N : C E C 0 0 F 7 X c m O m O C O a) E •— >, :. y N 'c U a t a a) a L a) Ca Z x U a) @ > m CL Co o p CL o 0 a) o t C c . CD O - CL o w c c =p: - g @c 'U a Qorno owoin oEo3o-o x x a • c c m m aU aU Q N Q N a) O O Co > Z > Z a) .. m 16 a) m - L o L o U U U U greer a O C aJ tla a RESMA161115 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2016 -2020 Approval of the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Mike Mattos THAT the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 be approved; THAT the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry be requested to approve the project pursuant to Section 24 of the Conservation Authorities Act; THAT the project be circulated to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) participating municipalities as the basis for funding and land securement opportunities; THAT the project be circulated to the Credit Valley, Central Lake Ontario and Lake Simcoe Region conservation authorities, Nature Conservancy of Canada and Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust and other relevant organizations for their information and as the basis for any joint land securement opportunities which may arise; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any necessary action to implement the Greenlands Acquisition Project 2016 -2020. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 -2015 expires at the end of 2015. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020, (document available upon request), is the latest in a long series of multi -year land acquisition and securement projects approved by TRCA. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020, when approved by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry under Section 24 of the Conservation Authorities Act, will be the legal mechanism used by TRCA to secure greenspace lands for their protection in perpetuity. The project will be circulated to TRCA's participating municipalities and form the basis for securement of lands in partnership with the City of Toronto and the regional municipalities of Durham, Peel and York using reserve funds established for securement of greenspace. The project will also serve as a vehicle to secure funding from other partners including the federal government, Province of Ontario, local municipalities, foundations and private donors. RATIONALE The purpose of the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 is to formalize and confirm the legal framework and implementation tools required for the acquisition of greenlands by TRCA. The direction for greenlands securement provided in the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 does not vary in any significance from the direction provided in the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 -2015. TRCA secured 802 hectares between 2011 and 2014, and is likely to meet the target of 1,000 hectares established in the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 -2015. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 builds on the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 -2015 and previous TRCA land acquisition projects. It continues on the course of those projects with new knowledge and refined direction provided by TRCA's integrated watershed plans and provincial plans for source water protection, greenbelt and land use. RTSOR Securements made under the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 are based primarily on identifying and assessing land opportunities which may arise in the real estate market. Therefore, the project is limited by the unpredictable and changing nature of this market. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 identifies funding partners and estimated financial contributions over its five year duration. Based on recent rate projections, it is estimated that 1,000 hectares (2,500 acres) could be secured during the period of this acquisition project, at a projected purchase expense of $35 million. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 explains why TRCA acquires greenlands, including TRCA's legislated mandate and the benefits of public greenlands in Sections 1- 4. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 also discusses the need for securing greenlands and the role of acquisition in relation to other forms of securement. It relates the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 to the broader context of TRCA's vision for The Living City and to the United Nations' Earth Charter. Support for greenlands securement is provided by recent plans, policies and strategies. These include but are not limited to Building The Living City (TRCA's 10 year Strategic Plan for 2013 - 2022), The Living City Policies for Planning and Development in the Watersheds of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, TRCA's integrated watershed and waterfront plans that combine the latest science including the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy, TRCA's integrated restoration prioritization framework, the approved assessment report: Toronto and Region Source Protection Area and provincial land use plans. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 reviews the types of ownership and the tools used by TRCA to secure greenlands. The project sets out the criteria for determining if a property meets the threshold for securement. Finally, the project details the financial strategy including identified and potential funding partners. FINANCIAL DETAILS The project includes annual expenditure estimates of $6.4 million in 2016, growing to $7.75 million in 2020, for a project total of $35 million. All expenditures are subject to availability of funding from participating regional municipalities, local municipalities, land sale proceeds, federal and provincial governments, non - government organizations, and donations. Also included in the project is recognition of the need for annual conservation land care funding based on the established formula of $309 per hectare for lands not otherwise managed by agreement with municipalities or other organizations. Report prepared by: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204 Emails: dcheriton @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Deanna Cheriton, extension 5204, Jae R. Truesdell, extension 5247 Emails: dcheriton @trca.on.ca, jruesdell@trca.on.ca Date: September 14, 2015 gears RES. #A162/15 - HEART LAKE CONSERVATION AREA WORKSHOP Feed -in -Tariff (FIT 3.0) Project. Request for approval for design and build of a turnkey photovoltaic (PV) system at Heart Lake Conservation Area Workshop. Moved by: Glenn Mason Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT Contract #10000397 for the design /build of a turnkey photovoltaic (PV) system at Heart Lake Conservation Area Workshop be awarded to Power Vector at a total cost not to exceed $129,405.57, plus HST, it being the highest ranked bid meeting Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 15% of the total cost of the contract as a contingency allowance, if deemed necessary; AND FURTHER THAT authorized staff be directed to take the action necessary to implement the contract including obtaining any approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 2014 TRCA acquired a 20 -year fixed price Feed -in -Tariff (FIT 3.0) contract from the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) as established under the Green Energy and Green Economy Act 2009. TRCA staff is seeking approval to select a qualified proponent to design, supply, install, test and commission a fully operational grid connected 50kW AC rated solar PV system to be installed on the roof of the Heart Lake Conservation Area Workshop that was constructed in 2014. Under the terms of the FIT contract, TRCA must deliver the PV system not later than the OPA's "Milestone Operational Date" of August 27, 2016 or the contract becomes void. In exchange, the OPA will pay TRCA at the rate of $0.343 /kWh for the power delivered to the grid. This project initiative aligns with TRCA's objective of Business Excellence and strategic priority of Green the Toronto Region's Economy. RATIONALE Request for Pre - Qualification (RFPQ) for Tender #10000397 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http: / /www.biddingo.com) on March 30, 2015 and closed on April 15, 2015. The work includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the provision of engineering design services and the supply of labour, material, supervision and equipment required to complete the scope of work for the project. The successful proponent will prepare the design and coordinate permitting, approvals and construction activities which comprise a fully functional and compliant rooftop solar PV system. A total of 20 companies downloaded the pre - qualification documents and three companies submitted completed packages in accordance with the requirements of the pre - qualification process. Proponents interested in pre - qualifying were advised that the criteria for evaluation would include the following: • CCDC 11 (Canadian Construction Documents Committee) requirements and completion; • completeness of submission; relevant project experience - type and budget; 387 • financial references and bonding ability; • ability to meet project milestones /timing; • ability to coordinate work by others; • experience dealing with projects with construction budgets of $150,000.00 to $250,000.00; • personal resumes for key project staff; • project references - client and /or consultant. A total of three companies were pre - qualified to submit tender bid prices. Tender bid documents were distributed to the following pre - qualified companies with a closing date of June 24, 2015: • Deltro Electric Ltd.; • Power Vector; • RESCo Energy Inc. A mandatory pre -bid site meeting was held on May 21, 2015 to review the project scope and site conditions with prospective bidders. All of the prequalified bidders attended the mandatory site meeting. Three completed tender bids were received. The Selection Committee of TRCA staff (Dave Rogalsky, Svend de Bruyn and Kate Pankov) reviewed the proposals. The criteria used to evaluate and select the recommended consultant included the following: Criteria Description Points Total Qualifications Company history and experience 5 20 and Experience FIT program experience 5 Implemented projects (of similar size and scope) 5 Experience and qualifications of key individuals 5 Quality of the Understanding of the RFP and approach to RFP objectives 5 20 Proposal Technical approach and flexibility to conditions 5 Performance monitoring and reporting 5 Implementation schedule reasonable 5 Photovoltaic Proposed photovoltaic system technologies 10 25 System & Other equipment items — metering /monitoring, display 5 Equipment Warranty 5 Projected Technical Performance 5 Financial Lump -sum cost 20 35 Cost per kW installed 15 Total 100 A summary of the received fee proposals is as follows: Contract #10000397 — Heart Lake Conservation Area Workshop — Photovoltaic System Design /Build BIDDERS Fees (including Permitted Expenses, Plus HST Deltro Electric Ltd. 202,000.00 Power Vector 129,405.57 RESCo Energy Inc. 225,600.00 gToopee The scoring was completed by each member of the evaluation committee, and averaged to produce total scores as follows: Company Proposal Score /100 Deltro Electric Ltd. 45.42 Power Vector 87.33 RESCo Energy 82.46 Based on the Selection Committee's review of the proposals, Power Vector was evaluated the highest by the Committee. Therefore, staff is recommending that the contract be awarded to Power Vector at a total upset cost not to exceed $129,405.57, plus HST, plus a contingency allowance of 15% as deemed necessary by TRCA staff. FINANCIAL DETAILS All expenditures that pertain to this contract will be assigned to the Heart Lake PV System project budget account 424 -05. Funding is available from TRCA reserves. Revenues are anticipated in the order of $20,000 per year based on the projected kWh's generated during the FIT contract 20 year period (2016- 2035). Revenues are expected to provide a return that will pay back the capital investment within 6 -7 years. Beyond the pay -back period, revenues will then offset a portion of the annual operating cost of Heart Lake Conservation Area. Report prepared by: Kate Pankov extension 6418 Emails: kpankov @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kate Pankov extension 6418 Emails: kpankov @trca.on.ca Date: August 20, 2015 MOSS RES. #A163/15 - SCARBOROUGH WATERFRONT PROJECT Third Party Facilitator Services. Authorization to proceed with amendments to the Third Party Facilitator Contract with Dillon Consulting Ltd., for the Scarborough Waterfront Project Environmental Assessment. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Ron Moeser WHEREAS on August 29, 2014, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) was authorized to enter into an agreement for Third Party Facilitator Services with Dillon Consulting Ltd. to complete the Scarborough Waterfront Project Environmental Assessment, to an upset limit of $80,915.00, plus HST, plus, additional expenditures to a maximum of 20% of the contract cost ($16,183.00) as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary, was also approved, for a total budget of $97,098.00 plus HST; WHEREAS the size of the study area and significance of the natural features of the bluffs required a more robust public and agency consultation plan than originally planned for; WHEREAS Dillon Consulting Ltd. was asked to provide a revised scope of work resulting in an increase of fee to the amount of $37,465.00, plus HST; THERFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the contract for Third Party Facilitator Services to complete the Scarborough Waterfront Project, be increased by $21,282.00 to an upset limit of $118,380.00, plus HST; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 10% of the total revised contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take all necessary actions to implement the foregoing, including the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND Toronto City Council on December 16, 2013 adopted, in part, the following resolution: City Council amend the Toronto Water budget by including $1.5 million for Environmental Assessment work on the Scarborough Waterfront Erosion Control and Access Plan with funding coming from the Toronto Water Capital Reserve (Ex.36.17). At Authority Meeting #3/14, held on April 25, 2014, Resolution #A36/14 was approved, in part, as follows: ...THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to work with the City of Toronto to initiate the Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan Individual Environmental Assessment. Based on this direction, TRCA initiated a study under the Environmental Assessment Act to create a system of greenspace along the Lake Ontario shoreline which respects and protects the significant natural and cultural features of the Bluffs, enhance the terrestrial and aquatic habitat, and provide a safe and enjoyable waterfront experience. To provide support to TRCA staff with the public consultation and outreach required for the Environmental Assessment (EA), TRCA released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Third Party Facilitator Services. 390 On August 29, 2014, Award of Contract RFP #10000061 for Third Party Facilitator Services for the Scarborough Waterfront Project EA received TRCA Chief Executive Officer approval as follows: THAT Contract RFP#10000061 for Third Party Facilitator Services for the Scarborough Waterfront Project Environmental Assessment be awarded to Dillon Consulting Limited at a total cost not to exceed $80,915.00, plus HST, it being the highest ranked proposal meeting Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications set out in the Request for Proposal; and THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 20% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary. The original consultation program as outlined in RFP #10000061 was a basic public consultation plan that included: • two Public Information Centres (PICs) as part of the Terms of Reference (ToR) phase, and two PICs as part of the EA phase; and • two Stakeholder Committee (SC) meetings as part of the ToR phase, and two SC meetings as part of the EA phase. As a result of public and agency feedback received during the development of the Terms of Reference, additional consultation meetings and outreach activities have been planned to provide an extensive consultation process more reflective of the size of the study area and significance of the natural features of the bluffs. Consultation will include: • four PICs as part of the EA phase; • three SC meetings as part of the ToR phase, and five SC meetings as part of the EA phase; • social media outreach; and • park user surveys, online user surveys and electronic newsletters. RATIONALE TRCA required the services of a third party facilitator to assist the project team in completing the Environmental Assessment. The third party facilitator services are required for communications, issues management, public consultation and stakeholder engagement. The third party facilitator is also responsible for the public consultation summary of the Terms of Reference and Environmental Assessment document. During the public and agency consultation for the Terms of Reference, it became clear that a more robust program was needed to engage the public, agencies and other interested parties in order to move the Environmental Assessment to a positive outcome. As a result of this, the Scope of Work for Dillon Consulting Ltd. was increased to reflect their preparation and participation in two additional PICs, three additional SC meetings, several Project Team meetings and an increase in one year to the contract. Dillon provided a revised Scope of Work and cost estimate that resulted in an increase of $37,465. This cost estimate exceeds the approved 20% contingency by $21,282. The revised upset limit for the Third Party Facilitator Services contract is $118,380 plus HST. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Public and agency consultation for the Environmental Assessment will resume in the fall once a decision on the Draft Terms of Reference has been made by the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. 391 FINANCIAL DETAILS Third Party Facilitator Services will be funded by Scarborough Waterfront Project EA in the Toronto capital budget, account 204 -03. Report prepared by: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313 Emails: ngaffney @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313 Emails: ngaffney @trca.on.ca Date: September 9, 2015 392 RES. #A164/15 - TOWN OF AJAX STORMWATER MANAGEMENT POND CLEAN -OUT PARTNERSHIP Commence stormwater management pond clean -out in partnership with the Town of Ajax. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Giorgio Mammoliti THAT approval be granted to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to enter into a partnership with the Town of Ajax for the Annie Crescent Stormwater Management Pond Clean -out and Retrofit Project; THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the partnership including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND The creation of stormwater management facilities (SWMF) proliferated in the 1990s, and since, there has been significant research and improvements made to their design and function. However, the management and maintenance of SWMFs has become a growing concern for many municipalities as the cost and technical feasibility of maintaining them is highly variable. Many SWMFs are never maintained or dredged, and many are nearing or have reached their maximum sediment capacity. Improper maintenance reduces a SWMFs capability to hold and treat stormwater, thereby no longer protecting the surrounding areas from localized flooding and improving downstream water quality. SWMFs require regular maintenance and sediment removal in order to operate effectively. The Annie Crescent stormwater management facility was constructed in 1994 to provide water quality and erosion control for the 42.19 ha residential site in the East Duffins Creek watershed. It was designed to provide control from a two hour duration 25mm rainfall design storm. In 2012, flooding issues at the outlet, complaints of unpleasant odours and damage to the submerged outlet structure prompted the Town of Ajax to retain professional engineering services to perform assessments relating to the operating and maintenance of the Annie Crescent SWMF. The review revealed that elevated permanent pool water level (blocked /damaged outlet structure) and overgrown vegetation interfered with the proper operation of the pond. Further, bathymetric and topographic surveys showed that the active storage volume had decreased by over 35% of the original design volume. In early 2015, the Town of Ajax approached TRCA's Restoration Projects section within the Restoration and Infrastructure division seeking assistance with the clean out and retrofits of the Annie Crescent SWMF. TRCA has had a long history in SWMF planning, approval, construction, retrofit, monitoring, and it currently manages a geo- spatial database with almost 1,000 SWMF records across TRCA's jurisdiction. More recently, TRCA has been working with its member municipalities to develop cleanout and maintenance programs to showcase the feasibility and benefits of routine pond maintenance, and highlight practical, cost effective strategies to facility maintenance. Since 2013, TRCA has been working with the City of Toronto on a Stormwater Management Pond Clean -Out Partnership. The Restoration Projects section as well as Engineering Services and the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP) have gained valuable experience in all aspects relating to the cleaning -out, retrofit, maintenance and management of SWMF's . To date, five facilities have been cleaned and retrofitted to restore 393 and improve function, thereby protecting the surrounding area from localized flooding and erosion, as well as improving downstream water quality. A Stormwater Pond Maintenance and Clean -out Plan includes the following: • assessment of background information and current site conditions; • detailed survey and sediment investigation; • clean -out options and retrofit assessment; and • detailed costing and implementation phasing. Through additional discussions and investigation with Ajax, it has been determined that there is opportunity to begin to develop a longer term SWMF management and retrofit program. Annie Crescent Pond will be the first to be cleaned; however, Ajax is also interested in partnering on the retrofit of other ponds. TRCA has $40,000 to contribute to retrofit high priority SWMFs in Ajax. This retrofit would ideally be conducted in coordination with a pond cleanout and will be the basis for prioritization of the next partner project. RATIONALE TRCA has identified SWMFs as an integral component of water resources management within the TRCA jurisdiction. SWMFs improve water quality and provide flood and erosion control, and must be maintained, and often retrofit to achieve TRCA's watershed targets. The Town of Ajax currently manages 55 SWMF's, and many of these are now reaching their design capacities and are in need of maintenance. In partnership with Ajax, TRCA has agreed that there is an immediate need to showcase the feasibility and benefits of routine pond maintenance, as well as functional improvements that can be made from retrofitting existing ponds. To date, there are few excellent examples of pond maintenance in TRCA's jurisdiction. Dredging and retrofitting the Annie Crescent SWMF will ensure that it continues to provide the surrounding area with effective flood control and water quality management. Annie Crescent SWMF is situated on TRCA property in a sensitive valley corridor which has now developed into a rich wetland flora and fauna community. The site is known to support significant reptile, amphibian and fish communities. As a result, fish and wildlife rescue will be an important consideration to complete this project. The Restoration Projects Division, in undertaking this endeavor, will work with TRCA's stormwater management team within Engineering Services, as well as the STEP program. The STEP program is a multi- agency initiative, and it is currently updating the SWMF Maintenance Guide which will be finalized in the fall of 2015. Through these additional relationships, TRCA brings greater value to the partnership with Ajax, and the project will be profiled to improve knowledge and the science of SWMF maintenance. The management of SWMFs is consistent with the TRCA's Strategic Plan, specifically: priority strategy #2 Manage Our Regional Water Resources for Current and Future Generations, and strategy #7 Build Partnerships and New Business Models. TRCA has gained valuable experience in SWMF maintenance in recent years. In its current partnership with the City of Toronto, TRCA has cost effectively cleaned five SWMF's in sensitive public areas. The opportunity to work with the Town of Ajax allows us to further promote TRCA's current pond management techniques, and is an excellent opportunity to showcase pond maintenance in Ajax and Durham Region in significant valley corridors owned by TRCA. 394 FINANCIAL DETAILS The maintenance and clean -out plans are being completed by TRCA staff. The cost to clean Annie Pond may vary greatly, because disposal costs depend heavily on the levels of contamination found within each pond. The funding for the pond clean -out and maintenance will be 100% recoverable from the Town of Ajax within account 109 -40, and is estimated to cost $312,655.84 (plus HST). DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Annie SWMF will be dredged mechanically and the site will be restored upon completion. Dredging is tentatively scheduled to commence in September 2015 contingent on approval of the staff recommendation in a subsequent report on this September Authority agenda on the award of contract for the disposal of stockpiled sediment dredgeate. The pond will be de- watered during the dredging, and will be managed to ensure the pond is providing stormwater management function during this time period. The method of sediment disposal depends on the contamination levels of the sediment. It is expected that the sediment will be dried on -site and then disposed of off -site. A Request for Quotation will determine which contractor(s) is /are chosen for sediment disposal. Only contractors operating under a Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Certificate of Approval are eligible to undertake the disposal of the sediment. Ajax and TRCA staff will establish a working group to manage this project and prioritize additional projects for both retrofit and maintenance needs. TRCA will also be providing $40,000 of funding to address additional retrofit opportunities for ponds in Ajax in 2016. Report prepared by: Ralph Toninger, extension 5366 Emails: roninger@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ralph Toninger, extension 5366 Emails: rtoninger @trca.on.ca Date: September 14, 2015 395 RES. #A165/15 - ANNIE CRESCENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT POND (SWMP) CLEAN OUT AND RETROFIT PROJECT Contract #10000904 - Disposal of Stockpiled Sediment Dredgeate. Award of Contract #10000904 for the disposal of stormwater management pond Dredgeate at Annie Crescent SWMP, Town of Ajax. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT Contract #10000904 for the disposal of stormwater management pond (SWMP) dredgeate for Annie Crescent site, in the Town of Ajax be awarded to TBG Landscape Inc. for a total cost not to exceed $176,063.18, plus 25% contingency, plus HST, it being the lowest bid meeting TRCA cost estimates and specifications; THAT should TRCA staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractors that submitted tenders, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the agreement including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Town of Ajax currently manages 55 SWMP's. Many of these are now reaching their design capacities and are in need of maintenance. In partnership with Ajax, TRCA has agreed that there is an immediate need to showcase the feasibility and benefits of routine pond maintenance, as well as functional improvements that can be made from retrofitting existing ponds. To date, there are few excellent examples of pond maintenance in TRCA's jurisdiction. The Annie Crescent stormwater management pond (SWMP), located near Annie Crescent and Elizabeth Street in the Town of Ajax, was constructed in 1994 to provide water quality and erosion control for the 42.19 ha residential site in the East Duffins Creek watershed. In early 2015, the Town of Ajax approached TRCA's Restoration Projects section, seeking assistance with the clean out and retrofit of the Annie Crescent SWMP. Approval of this partnership is a previous agenda item on this September 25`h Authority agenda, therefore award of contract #10000904 for the disposal of stockpiled sediment is contingent upon the approval of that earlier item. Sediment sampling indicated that the dredgeate marginally exceed the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) 2011 guidelines for Residential /Parkland /Institutional Property; however the dredgeate did meet Commercial /Industrial /Community Property guidelines. Therefore, the material will need to be hauled away by a licensed contractor and disposed of at an industrial /commercial disposal facility that is operating under an MOE Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA). Approximately 4,186 tonnes of sediment will need to be dredged from the site. RATIONALE The Request for Quotation (RFQ) #10000904 was publically advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo.com on September 2, 2015 for the haulage and disposal of sediment material from the Annie Crescent SWMP. The document was downloaded for review by 22 vendors. As a condition of the RFQ, only bidders that operate under an MOE Environmental Compliance Approval were considered to undertake the disposal of the sediment. 396 The Quotations were received on September 16, 2015 and formally opened by TRCA staff (Lori Colussi, Judith Reda and Natalie Racette) on the same day with the following results: Contract #10009904 Annie Crescent SWMP Disposal of Stockpiled Sediment Dredgeate (approximately 4,186 tonnes) BIDDER General Contract Disposal TOTAL (Plus HST) Requirements (cost per tonne) (Lump Sum TBG Landscape Inc. $1,800.00 $41.63 $176,063.18 Ground Force $6,844.80 $46.80 $202,749.60 Environmental Inc. Ambler & Co. Inc. $10,875.37 $46.17 204,142.99 TRCA reviewed the bids received against its own cost estimate and has determined that the lowest bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements and deliverables as outlined on the contract documents. TBG Landscape Inc. is capable of undertaking the scope of work. Based on the bids received, staff recommend that TBG Landscape Inc. be awarded Contract #10000904 for the disposal of SWMP dredgeate at the Annie Crescent SWMP for a total cost no to exceed $176,063.18, plus $44,015.80 contingency to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus HST. FINANCIAL DETAILS The cost of this contract is 100% recoverable from the Town of Ajax, within account 109 -40. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The Annie Crescent SWMP will be dredged mechanically and the site will be restored upon completion. Only contractors operating under a Ministry of the Environment Certificate of Approval are eligible to undertake the disposal of the sediment. TRCA will execute the contract, including: management of the awarded disposal contractor on site, certification of each load leaving the site, issuance of bills of lading to each truck, verification of the dumping site's MOE ECA, and random checks to follow trucks from dredging site to disposal site. These activities ensure the chain of custody of the dredged sediment from the SWMP to the licensed dump site operating under an MOE ECA. Dredging is tentatively scheduled to commence in late September 2015 upon receipt of all approvals and the availability of resources. The pond will be de- watered during the dredging, and will be managed to ensure the pond is providing stormwater management function during this time period. Ajax and TRCA staff will establish a working group to manage this project and prioritize additional projects for both retrofit and maintenance need. TRCA will also be providing $40,000 of funding to address additional retrofit opportunities for ponds in Ajax in 2016. Report prepared by: Natalie Racette, extension 5603 Emails: nracette @trca.on.ca For Information contact: John DiRocco, extension 5231 Emails: jdirocco @trca.on.ca Date: September 17, 2015 397 RES. #A166/15 - AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Professional Access and Integration Enhancement Program. The PAIE audited financial statement for the period April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015 is presented for Authority approval. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT the Professional Access and Integration Enhancement Program (PATE) audited financial statement as presented, be approved and signed by the Chair in accordance with the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade's Audit and Accountability Guidelines for 2014 -2015 Ontario Bridge Training Projects. CARRIED BACKGROUND Funded by the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade (MCI IT), TRCA has been delivering the PAIE Ontario bridge training program since 2006 to assist internationally trained professionals to access training, licensing and employment opportunities in their field within the environmental sector. As part of its project audit guidelines, MCI IT requires Authority approval of PAIE financial statement, as attached, as verification that the financial information in the audit report is complete and accurate. RATIONALE Under funding from MCIIT, the Authority is responsible for financial reporting and is ultimately responsible for reviewing and approving the financial statements, including verification that: • project funding has been solely applied to costs directly related to the Project; • funding and /or expenditures from other sources, not directed related to this project, have not been included in the Report; • the Ministry expects that tuition /program fees will be used to off -set program costs related to the delivery of the bridge training project. • reported expenditure is net of HST rebates; • shared costs have been properly apportioned to the Project; • the Project bears full responsibility for absorbing any project deficits; • Project funds that were provided to the Project prior to their immediate need were maintained in an interest - bearing account; and • interest earned on Project funding has been credited to the Project. The accounting firm of Grant Thornton LLP has completed the audit. The audited financial statement is presented for approval as Attachment 1. Report prepared by: Dash Paja, Leigha Abergel, extension 5593, 5574 Emails: dpaja @trca.on.ca, labergel @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca Date: Date created: September 1'% 2015 Attachments: 2 GrantThornton Statement of Revenue and Expenditures Professional Access and Integration Enhancement Program (A Program of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority) Year ended March 31, 2015 399 Contents Independent Auditors Report Statement of Revenue and Expenditures Notes to the Statement of Revenue and Expenditures OF Page 1 -2 4 -5 GrantThornton Independent Auditor's Report Grant Thornton LLP Sulte 200 15 Allstate Parkway Markham, ON URW 7(416)366 -0100 F(905)475 -6906 www.GrantThornton.ca To the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade We have audited the statement of revenue and expenditures ( "the StatemeneD for the Professional Access and Integration Enhancement Program of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority ( "TRCA'D for the year ended March 31, 2015. The statement has been prepared by management in accordance with the Audit and Accountability Guidelines for Ontario Bridge Training Projects from the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade. Management's Responsibility for the Statement Management is responsible for the preparation of the Statement in accordance with the Audit and Accountability Guidelines for Ontario Bridge Training Projects from the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of the Statement that is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Auditor's Responsibility Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Statement based on our audit. We conducted . our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the Statement is free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the Statement. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the Statement, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity's preparation of the Statement in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's internal control. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the Statement. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion. Audk- Tax•Advisory Gmnl TraWnt . A Canadian WmW d Grant RaWn lm aWnal LW GrantThornton Opinion In our opinion, the statement of revenue and expenditures for the Professional Access and Integration Program of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority for the year ended March 31, 2015 is prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the Audit and Accountability Guidelines for Ontario Bridge Training Projects from the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade. Basis of Accounting and Restriction on Distribution and Use Without modifying our opinion, we draw attention to Note 2 to the Statement which describes the basis of accounting. The Statement is prepared to assist Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to meet the financial reporting requirements of the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade. As a result, the Statement may not be suitable for another purpose. Our report is intended solely for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade and should not be distributed to or used by parties other than Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade. Markham, Ontario June 30, 2015 402 Chartered Accountants Licensed Public Accountants Professional Access and Integration Enhancement 540,847 Program 2,052 (A Project of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority) 568 Statement of Revenue and Expenditures 1,521 Year ended March 31 2015 Revenue 2,477 Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and 551,286 International Trade grant $ 570,170 Interest 1,530 Program and application fees 25,910 Communications 597,610 Program costs Salaries and benefits 540,847 Website development and online learning tools 2,052 Network events / meetings 568 Third -Party Evaluation 1,521 Technical training and supplementary workshops 3,821 Speaking with Clarity 2,477 551,286 Administrative costs TRCA administrative recovery (Note 3) 28,458 Computer equipment 3,112 Communications 4,078 Travel, meetings and consultations 2,543 Facility rentals 2,681 Marketing 1,815 Audit 2,564 Other general administrative costs 1,073 46,324 Total expenditures 597,610 Excess of revenue over expenditures $ See accompanying notes to the statement of revenue and expenditures. 403 Professional Access and Integration Enhancement Program (A Project of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority) Notes to the Statement of Revenue and Expenditures Year ended March 31 1. Nature of operations This Statement of Revenue and Expenditures ( "the Statement') pertains to the Professional Access and Integration Enhancement Program ( "PAIE" or "the Program') administered under the Funding Agreement issued by the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade, and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA "). Accordingly this statement does not include all the assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of TRCA. The TRCA is administering the Program on behalf of the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade. 2. Significant accounting policies and basis of presentation This financial information has been issued under the name of TRCA The Statement reflects the operations of the PAIE, a project of TRCA, and has been prepared by management based on the Audit and Accountability Guidelines for Ontario Bridge Training Projects from the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade. Costs eligible for reimbursement by the Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade under the Funding Agreement effective April 1, 2014 are eligible costs that are incurred after April 1, 2014 and before March 31, 2015. The more significant accounting policies with respect to the Statement are as follows: Accrual accounting Items recognized in the Statement are accounted for in accordance with the accrual basis of accounting. The accrual basis of accounting recognizes the effect of transactions and events in the period in which the transactions and events occur, regardless of whether there has been a receipt or payment of cash or its equivalent. Accrual accounting recognizes a liability until the obligation or condition(s) underlying the liability is partly or wholly satisfied. Accrual accounting recognizes an asset until the future economic benefit underlying the asset is partly or wholly used or lost. Additionally, items of a capital nature have been reflected as expenditures and not through amortization of property, plant and equipment. Revenue recognition Government transfers received are recognized in the Statement as revenue when the transfers are authorized and all eligibility criteria have been met except when there is a stipulation that gives rise to an obligation that meets the definition of a liability. In that case, the transfer is recorded as deferred revenue and recognized as revenue as the stipulations are met. User charges, including revenue from the program and application fees are recognized as revenue in the period in which the related services are performed. Amounts collected for which the related services have not been performed are recognized as deferred revenue and recognized as revenue when the related services are performed. DIE Professional Access and Integration Enhancement Program (A Project of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority) Notes to the Statement of Revenue and Expenditures Year ended March 31 2. Significant accounting policies and basis of presentation (continued) In -kind contributions In accordance with the agreement for the funding with respect to this Program, no in -kind contributions have been included in this schedule. 3. Related party transactions Under the terms of the Funding Agreement, TRCA charged $28,458 during the year ending March 31, 2015 for project overhead and administration costs with respect to the administration of the Program. 5 KIP Appendix IV: Labour Market Integration Unit Statement of Revenue and Expenditure Template FOR THE REPORTING PERIOD FROM 2014/04/01 TO 2015/03/31 (Please refer to your Schedule B for the Reporting Period) Organization Name: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Project Case Number: 2013 -08 -1- 15258274 Organizational contact Name: Leigha Abergel, Project Manager Telephone #: (416) 661 -6600 ext. 5343 PROJECT REVENUE Approved Carryover Funding from Previous Reporting Period(s) Ministry Funding for audit period as per Schedule B (2014/2015) $ 650,000 Tuition /Program Fees $ 25,910 Total $ 675,910 PROJECT EXPENDITURE Total Expenditure $ 597,610 DEFERRED REVENUE Deferred Revenue for audit period as per Schedule B (2014/2015) $ 78,300 UNALLOCATED Unspent funding INTEREST EARNED Interest Earned for audit period 2014/2015 $ 1,530 I verify that the above financial information is correct and that: • Project funding has been solely applied to costs directly related to the Project; • Funding and /or expenditures from other sources, not directed related to this project, have not been included in the Report; • The Ministry expects that tuition /program fees will be used to off -set program costs related to the delivery of the bridge training project. • Reported expenditure is net of HST rebates; • Shared costs have been properly apportioned to the Project; • The Project bears full responsibility for absorbing any project deficits; • Project funds that were provided to the Project prior to their immediate need were maintained in an interest - bearing account; and • Interest earned on Project funding has been credited to the Project. I certify that the information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and claimed in accordance to the Bridge Training Agreement. Signature of Agency Signing Authority Date Name: Maria Augimeri Title: Chair I have authority to bind the Recipient. Audit and Accountability Guidelines for Ontario Bridge Training Projects 2014 -2015 406 14 RESMA167 /15 - SUPPLY AND DELIVERY OF CLOTHING 2015 -2017 Award of Contract #10000813. Award of Contract #10000813 for the supply and delivery of clothing for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority staff. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT Contract #10000813 for Supply and Delivery of Clothing 2015 -2017 for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be awarded to Dufferin Apparel at an estimated cost of $148,000.00, plus HST per year for a two year term at a total estimated contract price of $296,000.00, plus 10% contingency to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, it being the lowest bid meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized staff be directed to take the necessary action to implement the contract including the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA'S Uniform and Costume Policy was adopted at Executive Committee Meeting #4/99, held on April 30, 1999 by Resolution #884/99. The policy states that: "in recognition of the public service nature of the work of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), and in order that TRCA staff is easily identifiable by the public, TRCA uniforms or special costumes must be worn by designated staff while carrying out their normal work duties." As part of the TRCA Clothing Guidelines and Allocations, approximately 800 employee uniform orders are placed throughout the year. At Authority Meeting # 10/14, held on December 12, 2014, Contract #10000128 for the Supply and Delivery of Clothing 2015 -2017 was approved and awarded to Needham Promotions Inc. at a total cost of $135,000 per year plus 10% Contingency, plus HST. The contract included a 90 day notice cancellation clause, allowing either party to terminate the contract without penalties. On July 14`h, 2015, Needham Promotions advised TRCA staff that they could not adhere to the contract pricing due to the diminishing value of the Canadian dollar, and therefore, provided TRCA with 90 days written notice of contract termination. As Needham Promotions did not violate its previous contract terms with TRCA, it was allowed to re -bid on Contract #10000128. Furthermore, the opportunity was posted publically on Biddingo.com as Section 14 of TRCA's Purchasing Policy dictates that "purchases of goods and services that exceed $100,000, standard advertising media (e.g. web -based procurement services, trade magazines, etc.) is to be used to advertise the opportunity. In order to prevent such contract terminations without penalty in the future, TRCA will be revising Contract #10000813 in accordance with advice from its legal counsel. 407 RATIONALE Request for Quotation (RFQ) documentation was issued by TRCA and publically advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http: / /www.biddingo.com) on August 7`h, 2015. TRCA identified product numbers of items currently purchased in order to ensure that like quality items were priced. Where exact product numbers were not available, material and quality specifications were provided. Bidders were requested to quote on these exact products when possible, or a substitute close in quality and specifications. In addition, the RFQ indicated a requirement to provide a secure on -line TRCA catalogue of available items for ease and consistency in purchasing. Quotations were opened by a Procurement Opening Committee comprising of TRCA staff (Lesley Adams, Kate Pankov, Kathy Stranks and Jenifer Moravek) on August 21, 2015 with the following results: BIDDER ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST* Plus HST Dufferin Apparel $148,391.15 G & L Promotions $163,147.00 Needham Promotions $170,166.79 Cotton Candy $207,298.01 * Estimated costs above are based on average cost per item and on average annual quantities required of each item. The products quoted by Dufferin Apparel meet TRCA's uniform needs and adhere to the product specifications requested. Dufferin Apparel has served as TRCA's clothing supplier in previous years and has proven to be a reliable and professional company. Therefore, based on the bids received, staff recommends that the contract for Supply and Delivery of Clothing 2015 -2017 for TRCA staff be awarded to Dufferin Apparel at an estimated cost of $148,000.00 per year for a two year term, plus 10% contingency, it being the lowest bid meeting TRCA specifications. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funds for clothing will be identified within the various annual divisional operating and capital budgets. Report prepared by: Lesley Adams, extension 5668 Emai Is: ladams @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Lesley Adams, extension 5668 Emai Is: ladams @trca.on.ca Date: September 2, 2015 A / RESMA168 /15 - 2015 PROVINCIAL REVIEW OF THE CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT Endorsement of draft Toronto and Region Conservation Authority comments related to the 2015 Review of the Conservation Authorities Act due for submission to the Province of Ontario by October 19, 2015. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Ron Moeser WHEREAS the Province of Ontario is undertaking a review of the Conservation Authorities Act through a posting by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) on the Environmental Registry (EBR# 012 - 4509); AND WHEREAS the Province has released a Discussion Paper with a series of questions to focus stakeholder feedback on the governance, funding mechanisms, and the roles and responsibilities of conservation authorities, as a first step in the review process; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) response to the Province as outlined in the following report and in Attachment 1 be endorsed; AND FURTHER THAT these comments be submitted to the Province and circulated to TRCA's municipal partners, neighbouring conservation authorities and Conservation Ontario. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry has initiated a review of the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) to ensure that the Act is meeting the needs of Ontarians in a modern context. The objective of this review is to identify opportunities to improve the legislative, regulatory and policy framework that currently governs the creation, operation and activities of conservation authorities that may be required in the face of a constantly changing environment. As a first step in the Ministry's review process, a discussion paper has been posted on the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry (EBR), which can be found at the following link: http:Happs.mnr.gov.on.ca /public /files /er /Discussion Paper 2015.pdf. The purpose of the discussion paper is to focus stakeholder feedback on the governance, funding mechanisms and the roles and responsibilities of conservation authorities (CAs) and includes a series of questions to solicit comments on each of the three theme areas. Comments on the discussion paper are due October 19, 2015. TRCA has participated on a Conservation Ontario CA Act Review Working Group to prepare a collective response to the Discussion Paper on behalf of all 36 CAs. The response, based on the CAs' input, will be considered by Conservation Ontario Council at its September 28, 2015 meeting. Conservation Ontario and members of the Working Group also had the opportunity to participate in a facilitated dialogue session with MNRF on August 25, 2015, as part of the Province's stakeholder engagement process. TRCA supports the collective positioning that Conservation Ontario has developed in response to the CA Act review and this report serves to complement those key messages within the context of TRCA's experience and perspective. Responses to the specific EBR questions are provided in Attachment 1 to this report. Kilo] Overview When contemplating the roles, responsibilities, funding and governance of CAs in Ontario, it should be remembered why the CA Act was originally created and amended — namely, to address the Province's largest natural resource management challenges of the first half of the twentieth century such as deforestation, erosion and the control of flooding. The degradation of the landscape resulting from these impacts is reminiscent of the predicted conditions for the current crisis of climate change: flooding, erosion, drought, poor air and water quality, and natural heritage losses. TRCA's Rouge and Humber watershed plans revealed that climate change in our developed watersheds is likely to have a negative impact on water resources and ecosystems at least as severe as those that have been caused by human activity alone. And so, in the decades since their inception, CAs have been working with a range of watershed stakeholders to address issues tantamount to the severity of climate change. Not replicated to the same extent in other jurisdictions, CAs have a unique history of partnering in conservation and sustainable development. The mandate and efficacy of CAs are revered by many academic and government agencies around the world. In TRCA's case, no other city- region has close to 70 years of expertise and management experience in dealing with these issues in such an inter - disciplinary and collaborative context. The success of Ontario's CA programs needs to be strongly recognized in the CA Act, supported by a bolstered funding formula, and a multi- agency liaison body to leverage the good work of CAs and their partners. Affirming the Value of CAs in Building Sustainable Communities Roles and Responsibilities The creators of the CA Act had a broad vision of the issues of their time. Today, this perspective is still integral to TRCA's work, led and supported by our municipal partners and carried out through a unique collaborative approach engaging diverse stakeholders. Together, we endeavour to combat the potential impacts of climate change through the promotion of an ecological design approach to development and servicing that uses green infrastructure, green buildings, near -urban agriculture, energy and sustainable transportation to plan and build sustainable communities. These are further enhanced and supported by celebrating cultural heritage and fostering environmental education and stewardship. As a resource management agency, TRCA works in all of these areas in partnership with business, citizens and all levels of government in science, research, education, public health and community outreach. Through this work, TRCA helps to identify issues, synergies and solutions among watershed stakeholders for building sustainable communities. TRCA then advocates for the knowledge and understanding acquired through this work to be incorporated into TRCA's and our partners' policies and projects. Building upon the foundation of TRCA's mandated responsibilities of natural heritage and natural hazard management, this broad but integrated approach to watershed management meets provincial policy interests, while contributing to high quality urban design in municipal growth planning and advancing the green economy. 410 Given that it is not bound by the Planning Act, the CA Act serves to define CAs as watershed planning bodies that are separate from the land use planning process, yet grants them the ability to administer a regulation that affects planning matters (including infrastructure and servicing). CAs as public commenting bodies under the planning and environmental assessment processes, although not decision - makers, play a significant role in managing the natural resources of watersheds for the municipalities that fall within them. In particular, TRCA has forged many successful working relationships with its participating municipalities, which appreciate TRCA's specialized expertise that they may not possess in -house for meeting provincial and municipal objectives in building healthy, resilient communities, e.g., floodplain management, stormwater management, geotechnical engineering, hydrogeology, fluvial geomorphology, ecology, and the integration of flood remediation and ecological protection and restoration with urban growth and design. CA input is science and watershed -based advice that helps municipalities to implement the hazard, heritage and water management directions found in the Provincial Policy Statement, the four provincial plans, and supporting provincial guidance documents. Currently, CA services in land use and infrastructure planning and design are delivered as outlined in CA- municipal memorandums of understanding (MOU) and other agreements, as well as the Conservation Ontario - Ministry of Natural Resources - Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing MOU for natural hazards. These services are carried out as part of CA planning and technical staffs day -to -day work under the planning and environmental assessment processes, and ultimately in these projects' detailed design stage where they may require a CA permit. Accordingly, CAs typically see the full range of work involved in city building where it affects regulated areas — from the scale of master plans, official plans and secondary plans, to master environmental servicing plans, draft plans, down to site planning, building permits, erosion and sediment control, restoration and monitoring. As a result, CAs are progressive and critical agencies with both a "big- picture" view that contributes to all levels of sustainability planning yet with knowledge of the "on- the - ground" environment. CAs' watershed -based work also serves to mitigate for the impacts of urbanization and climate change on the Great Lakes. In the Province's Great Lakes Strategy and the draft Great Lakes Protection Act, CAs are named as essential partners in the implementation of programs and project initiatives to protect and improve the health of the Great Lakes. With CAs as partners, the Province has initiated outreach and guidance on integrated stormwater practices, environmental farm plans, habitat restoration and environmental monitoring. TRCA works in concert with federal, provincial and municipal governments on aquatic and terrestrial shoreline restoration projects, as do many of the CAs on the Great Lakes. On a collective basis, CAs and their partners' environmental protection and management of the Greater Golden Horseshoe's rivers, wetlands and headwaters provide downstream benefits to the Great Lakes, including those for water quality, habitat and recreation. The issues that CAs raise, collaborate on, and problem -solve in the development and infrastructure policy formulation, and development review processes, are integral to sustainable development. In turn, sustainability is vital to economic prosperity, human health, safety and well- being. Accordingly, CA input should not be seen as an "aside ", as duplication or as causing unnecessary delay, but as a requirement for "good planning" that serves the public interest as well as any other routine prerequisite for development and infrastructure planning and design. 411 Governance The Province, through the CA Act, defines the objects to be pursued by the authority (Section 20) and the powers granted to the authority to achieve these objects (Section 21). In the past, the Province played a more direct role in overseeing CAs. Today, while oversight of CAs is still shared between the Province and municipalities, changes to the CA Act, policy and general practice over time have resulted in less direct provincial oversight. The CA Act provides for the number of representatives that can be appointed to the board by each municipality. This works well as it provides the municipality the flexibility to appoint who they deem appropriate to represent them, whether elected or a citizen, and because municipalities are the primary funders of CAs. As well, having municipal representatives as the members on a watershed board provides an effective mechanism for municipalities to have a greater say in defining issues and their solutions that lie outside their municipal administrative boundary. The watershed -based governance model enables innovation to develop practical solutions to current and emerging issues (e.g. flood management, drinking water and Great Lakes water quality, climate change, rapid urbanization /growth). Effective programs focused on watershed health have been initiated and implemented due to the flexibility in the CA Act. The broad oversight by the Province allows for the development of programs and services that are adaptable to fit local circumstances. It also facilitates the ability of CAs to establish partnerships at various levels of government and most importantly with local watershed stakeholders. The governance model based on watershed jurisdiction facilitates localized expertise and allows for local decision- making. The leadership of our municipal partners has enabled TRCA's innovation in climate change research and strategies, urban forest strategies, low impact development and the promotion of ecological design and green infrastructure into community planning design. The governance model provides for efficient use of local, on- the - ground service delivery for environmental and resource management, enables CAs to engage stakeholders, and to develop processes, procedures and policies that respond to their local watershed. Oversight on permit decisions by the CA board under section 28 regulations are appropriately adjudicated (on appeal) by the Mining and Lands Commissioner (MLC) as delegated by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). This must remain a provincial responsibility, separate from the Ontario Municipal Board, to ensure the integrity of the natural hazards management program and the conservation of land in Ontario. This is given that the dismissal or granting of appeals is predicated on the MLC's interpretation of the five tests of the section 28 regulations. The five tests are not based in planning law, but rather in science, and are often discussed in a cross - municipal boundary, watershed context that is ideal for assessing cumulative impacts, risk and liability. Therefore, hearings on appeal for section 28 permits most appropriately rest with the MNRF. 412 However, legislative amendments to enable compliance mechanisms in Section 28 of the CA Act are needed in order to effectively and efficiently uphold our regulatory responsibilities and to support the provincial interest in natural hazard management. The limitation of the current legislation is a serious concern to the member municipalities of the most highly urbanized CA. Amendments are needed to support compliance efforts, assist in the prosecution of violations in the Ontario Provincial Court, and facilitate site rehabilitation. These changes should include the ability to issue stop work orders and orders to comply, enable enforcement officers to enter a property for purposes of investigation, significantly increase fines to reflect monetary penalties in line with other compatible environmental legislation (e.g., Environmental Protection Act), require restoration and rehabilitation, a method of cost recovery similar to other legislation (e.g., Municipal Act), as well as opportunities for greater coordination with municipal site alteration /fill by -laws to address issues related to large scale fill operations. An enhanced CA- provincial ministry relationship is needed. CAs undertake work that supports and benefits multiple provincial priorities. It is suggested that a provincial directive, policy or memorandum of understanding is necessary, and that it would mandate coordinated, multi- ministry engagement with CAs towards an integrated watershed management approach to environmental and resource management that delivers local program needs while meeting cross - ministry science, policy and legislative objectives. This coordination would be premised on a return to a more equitable cost sharing partnership between the Province and municipalities. This provincial directive could be given effect at the provincial level through some type of provincial watershed liaison body (e.g. one ministry, or a lead agency, or a multi- ministry secretariat or steering committee or even a standing agenda item for existing multi- ministry initiatives such as Ontario's Great Lakes Strategy, and Climate Change Strategies). The formalized relationship should result in a more efficient and effective approach to environmental and resource management in Ontario that would clarify responsibilities and recognize the contributions CA programs make to achieving multiple provincial priorities and fund them accordingly. Funding The CA Act establishes a number of mechanisms that CAs can use to fund programs. The Act allows MNRF to provide CAs with funding to support Ministry approved programs. A CA may also apply for funding from the Province to deliver programs on its behalf. Local resource management programs and services are funded through municipal levies. CAs can generate funding through service, user and admission fees, resource development fees, and fundraising and grant programs. The attached chart below summarizes TRCA revenue sources since the early 1990s and will be referenced in the discussion that follows. 413 TRCA Funding Sources 1992 - 2014 120,000 100,000 80,000 v c 60,000 0 40,000 20,000 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 • Self Generated • Municipal • Provincial - Other • WECI Program • Source Water Protection • MNR Operations & Capital The funding partnership between the Province and municipalities has undergone many changes over time. Today, the scope of work deemed eligible for provincial support is very narrow, as illustrated by the TRCA chart on funding sources. TRCA as well as most other CAs currently derive a significant portion of their budgets from local municipalities through the levy process defined in Ontario Regulation 670/00 and enabled through Section 27(16). Over the last 5 years, approximately 46% of TRCA budget has been financed from municipal levies and grants. The reduction in provincial funding has been absorbed by an increase in municipal funding. The reduction in provincial contributions has resulted in municipal criticisms of provincial downloading, which would diminish if the Province returned to the traditional 50:50 cost - sharing ratio and list of eligible expenditures, and considered inflation in the annual allocations. The "delegated" programs and other partnership agreements with the Province generally provide more services than recognized and financially supported by the Province. Funding for ongoing operation of programs has diminished significantly and also does not adequately reflect the diversity, complexity and range in CA capacity. The Province is encouraged to review basic operational activities /programs of CAs that support multiple provincial priorities and provide a broader public benefit with a view to providing long term funding to CAs and increasing the efficiency of environmental and resource management in Ontario. 414 Since the mid- 1990s, MNRF has only approved provincial funding for the water - related natural hazard prevention and management role of CAs, which includes flood and erosion control. Funding for this program area has been cut since the mid -1990s with no inflationary increases let alone increases to address the increasing demands in managing the current and future impacts of more frequent flood events. Currently there is a significant shortfall in provincial transfer payments for the following: - the operation of the flood management program including flood emergency management and mapping - strategic asset management planning - land securement - Support for implementation of source water protection plans - water and erosion control Infrastructure - land use planning policies to prevent development in hazard lands - flood remediation for comprehensive redevelopment - natural heritage systems planning to mitigate for flooding and erosion - CA infrastructure and environmental assessment planning - green infrastructure /LID approaches to storm water management (all of which directly or indirectly mitigate and adapt for the potential impacts of climate change and contribute to Great Lakes water quality) Also of benefit would be provincial recognition of the role that TRCA plays in areas of outdoor education, recreation and quality of life that contribute significantly to the health and well -being of our residents and visitors, thereby reducing provincial health care costs. TRCA provides extensive facilities and land base for recreational trails tied to existing communities and new growth areas. Similar discussions should involve MTCS for greenspace and recreational trail planning, and MMAH, MTCS, and MAA for aboriginal engagement with respect to conservation land management. As well, CAs provide a tremendous amount of work and value for the Province which remains unfunded. A thorough review of provincial responsibilities versus funding should be initiated. To achieve the greatest environmental and economic benefit for the residents of Ontario, the Province should develop a sustainable multi- ministry (e.g. MNRF, MOECC, MMAH, MEDEI, OMAFRA, MTCS) funding formula for basic operational activities of CAs that support multiple provincial priorities. Without this investment, there will continue to be varying capacity to deliver on existing and any additional provincial priorities. This is one of the most critical changes necessary to level the playing field and enable an equitable and effective program. This should be the immediate priority of the Province (see more details in answer to 2a Provincial Funding Support). On average, 47% of the TRCA's budget is financed from self - generated revenues. The ability to charge fees, to enter into partnerships and to fundraise has made the difference in the ability of TRCA to operate effectively and to introduce and expand program offerings. It should be noted, however, that revenue generated by user fees and admissions does not completely cover the cost of program delivery or corporate overhead. Service contracts generate revenues mostly from regional and local municipalities within TRCA's jurisdiction, for which a small contribution is provided for corporate overhead. Finally, revenue generated through grants (including federal grants), contributions and donations are restricted in use. Although self - generated revenues are a significant component of TRCA's budget they are not available to support activities beyond those that generate them. 415 Finally, it would be beneficial to CAs and municipalities to have the Province provide specific language to clarify variances in interpretations between the Act (Section 27(16)) and the Levy Regulation (Ontario Regulation 670/00). Additionally, Section 1 of the Act should be updated to define the types of costs (e.g. administration, maintenance, operating and projects) that could be included in municipal levies and then, the Act or Regulations should direct how the levies are to be apportioned. Apportionment would occur through either a watershed levy where the entire watershed benefits from the project or program and allocation is based on modified current value assessment; or through a special benefitting levy where allocation of costs is based on project or program benefits to individual municipalities. There must be continued municipal and provincial funding support for the basic operating capacity of CAs to meet today's environmental challenges. The cost - sharing formula should include at least 50% provincial funding for eligible expenditures and must take into account inflation. CONCLUSION The CA approach, based on inter - municipal cooperation and the management of new environmental challenges at the regional, watershed scale has been extremely effective. While landscape and flood management remain important, Ontario's challenges are made much more complex by trends that could not have been foreseen in the 1940s, including the cumulative impact of the burning of fossil fuels, a dramatic rate of population growth and urbanization and issues of food security. These issues are experienced and expressed in the jurisdictions of all CAs, notwithstanding a broad diversity of landscapes, land use profiles, political climates and a range of complexity in urban and rural issues. For the most part, the CA Act as it exists today provides the appropriate framework for consistency among CAs to each execute a program of natural resource management that meets the needs of their jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the significant role of CAs in addressing the impacts of urbanization, and the compounding effects of climate change, which supports provincial interests and municipal mandates, needs to be recognized and supported. The importance of a governance structure that facilitates an integrated approach in dealing with climate change is emphasized in the International Panel on Climate Change's most recent assessment report: Climate change is a threat to sustainable development. Nonetheless, there are many opportunities to link mitigation, adaptation and the pursuit of other societal objectives through integrated responses. Successful implementation relies on relevant tools, suitable governance structures and enhanced capacity to respond. Therefore in their review, TRCA urges the Province to consider CAs as key players in the response to Ontario's most important current environmental issues. Updates to the CA Act should result in optimizing the use of CAs' capacity to transcend political boundaries and to bring municipalities and other stakeholders together to respond to ongoing and new environmental challenges. It is thereby recommended that the Province consider the following: 416 A provincial directive, policy or memorandum of understanding (MOU) developed among the Province, municipalities and Conservation Ontario for CA input to the planning and environmental assessment processes. This MOU would affirm CAs' valuable role in managing natural hazards, natural heritage and other sustainability measures necessary to combat the potential effects of climate change and to continue to grow healthy, resilient urban and rural communities. • A new multi- agency liaison body among the Province, municipalities and Conservation Ontario that facilitates working partnerships among public and private watershed stakeholders, which encourages collaboration and innovation in building sustainable communities resilient to the effects of urbanization and climate change. • Maintain MNRF's oversight of appealed permit decisions under the CA Act section 28 regulations through the Mining and Lands Commission and separate from the Ontario Municipal Board. • Amend section 28 of the CA Act to enable compliance mechanisms in order to effectively and efficiently uphold CA regulatory responsibilities and to support the provincial interest in natural hazard management. • Review the current list of eligible expenditures recognizing those activities across multiple ministries which contribute to provincial objectives. • Provide specific language to clarify (and modernize) the levy provisions within the Act. NEXT STEPS The release of the Discussion Paper represents the first step in the MNRF's review of the Conservation Authorities Act. The feedback received in response to the EBR posting will help the Ministry identify priority areas for review. If specific changes to the existing legislative, regulatory or policy framework are considered in the future, further public consultation will occur as appropriate, for example through subsequent EBR postings. Through TRCA's website and reporting back to the Authority, TRCA will keep members and watershed stakeholders informed on the status and process of this initiative. Additionally, TRCA will continue to participate on the Conservation Ontario CA Act Review Working Group. Report prepared by: Laurie Nelson, extension 5281, Mary -Ann Burns, extension 5763 Emails: Inelson(abtrca.on.ca, mburns(aD_trca.on.ca For Information contact: Laurie Nelson, extension 5281, Mary -Ann Burns, extension 5763 Emails: Inelson(o)trca.on.ca, mburns(obtrca.on.ca Date: September 23, 2015 Attachments: 1 417 Attachment 1 TRCA's Comments on the Discussion Paper for the Provincial Review of the Conservation Authorities Act September 25, 2015 6.1 Governance General Comments The Province, through the Conservation Authorities Act, defines the objects to be pursued by conservation authorities (Section 20) and the powers granted to authorities to achieve these objects (Section 21). In the past, the Province played a more direct role in overseeing conservation authorities (CAs). Today, while the Province and municipalities still share oversight of CAs, changes to the Act, policy and general practice over time have resulted in less direct provincial oversight. Question #1: In your view, how well is the current governance model as provided in the Conservation Authorities Act working? a) What aspects of the current governance model are working well? Governance is the dual process of decision - making and holding those that make decisions to account. The CA governance model is guided by the fundamental principles of local decision - making, cost sharing, and watershed jurisdictions. It is these principles that provide the foundation for CAs to be innovative, solution driven, efficient, transparent and accessible at the grass roots in relation to decision - making, which in turn, enables our governance to "work well" The watershed -based governance model enables innovation to develop practical solutions to current and emerging issues (e.g. flood management, drinking water and Great Lakes water quality, climate change, rapid urbanization /growth). Effective programs focused on watershed health have been initiated and implemented due to the flexibility in the Conservation Authorities Act. The current governance model works well for TRCA because of the flexibility inherent in the broad range of objects and powers it assigns to CAs. The Act's premise that CA jurisdictions are watershed -based and not based on municipal boundaries is ideal for environmental management. For example, the section 20 powers of a CA "to study and investigate the watershed" and "to cause research to be done" are reflective of CAs' work as resource management agencies. CAs are able to address the issues of the day by conducting research on their own, or in partnership with other watershed stakeholders such as municipalities, academics and NGOs. The products of this research can be data sets, studies, reports, demonstration programs, or presentations, which can immediately be shared and used to inform watershed plans and strategies, advocacy for integrated watershed management in the land TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper A Page 1 use planning process, policy and guideline development, regulation, and best management practices for the day -to -day work of both TRCA staff and other watershed stakeholders. The powers to "acquire" and "use" lands and to "collaborate and enter into agreements" with other governments and organizations, facilitates these roles and are reflective of CA roles of service provider, public commenting body with delegated provincial interest for natural hazards, regulator, and landowner. The CA Act provides for the number of representatives that can be appointed to the board by each municipality. This works well as it provides the municipality the flexibility to appoint who they deem appropriate to represent them whether elected or a citizen and because municipalities are the primary funders of CAs. As well, having municipal representatives as the members on a watershed board provides an effective mechanism for municipalities to have a greater say in defining issues, and their solutions, that lie outside their municipal administrative boundary. Finally, the collective decision to create an Association of CAs of Ontario (i.e. Conservation Ontario) has enabled a single collective voice that represents the majority of CA opinions on a given issue. In terms of program design and development, having Conservation Ontario as the liaison (i.e. single voice) with the Province on the development of the source water protection program and its implementation, has benefited both CAs and the Province, and more importantly, the environment and well -being of Ontarians. b) What aspects of the current governance model are in need of improvement? An enhanced CA and provincial ministry relationship is needed. CAs undertake work that supports and benefits multiple provincial objectives. Closer collaboration would be jointly beneficial. To achieve this enhanced relationship, it is suggested that a Provincial Directive /Policy or a new memorandum of understanding is necessary, which would mandate coordinated, multi- ministry engagement with CAs. This initiative would be premised on an integrated watershed management approach to environmental and resource management that delivers local program needs while meeting cross - ministry science, policy, and legislative objectives. It would also be premised on a return to a more equitable cost- sharing partnership between the Province and municipalities. Through some type of provincial watershed liaison body (e.g. one ministry, or a lead agency, or a multi- ministry Secretariat or Steering Committee or even a standing agenda item for existing multi- ministry initiatives such as Ontario's Great Lakes Strategy, and Climate Change Strategies), this provincial directive could be given effect at the provincial level Such a formalized relationship would result in a more efficient and effective approach to environmental and resource management in Ontario that clarifies responsibilities and recognizes the contributions CA programs make to achieving multiple provincial and municipal priorities and funds them accordingly. In addition, the establishment of some type of Watershed Liaison Body could provide centralized legal support for enforcement of section 28 regulations. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 419 Page 2 With regard to provincial oversight for the water - related natural hazard (e.g. flood, regional control, wetlands) prevention and management programs, there are legislative, policy and technical guidelines and support tools that require updates and amendments from MNRF necessary for consistency and modernization. The need for these improvements has been identified by Conservation Ontario over the past several years and it is our belief that implementation would lead to more efficiencies and effectiveness in delivery. It is noted that this requires a renewed commitment within the MNRF to provide this policy and guideline support (leveraging CA expertise) to the modernized delivery of this program. Other provincial partners are also key, such as MEDEI for infrastructure management, MMAH for land use planning policies, EMO /MCSCS for flood emergency management, and MOECC for infrastructure and environmental assessment planning, and green infrastructure /Low Impact Development (LID) approaches to stormwater management. In addition, many CAs own and manage an extensive land base for trails and other recreational facilities benefitting existing, growing and new communities. Therefore, similar discussions for updates should involve the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) for greenspace and recreational trail planning, and MMAH, MOECC, MNRF, MTCS, and the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (MAA) for aboriginal engagement with respect to land management. Finally, there are a few legislative amendments related to governance that have been endorsed by Conservation Ontario over the past several years. Conservation Ontario endorsed in 2006 an amendment to Section 14 (4) of the CA Act to adjust members' appointments from "no more than 3 years" to reflect municipal councilors' terms of 4 years. As well, in 2001, Conservation Ontario endorsed that Section 37 be amended to remove the requirement for OMB approval for board members' salaries, expenses and allowances since little to no provincial money is used to compensate CA board members' expenses. As well, it is noted that there is a need to clarify the inconsistencies that exist between the CA Act and the proposed Ontario Not - for - Profit Corporations Act (ONCA). c) In terms of governance, what should be expected of: The board and its members? • Meet current best practices of and requirements for any not - for -profit corporation board (e.g. Governance policy handbook including roles of Members and Staff, Codes of conduct) • Voting should be done in accordance with the best interest of the watershed which may not always be the same as the individual municipal interest • Regular report backs to the Council of the municipality they represent on important watershed issues and initiatives • Adhere to Municipal Conflict of Interest legislation, Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, policies, and protocols • Direct and undertake performance review of the General Manager or Chief Administrative Officer; recruit, hire, dismiss same • Set strategic direction and operational policies TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 420 Page 3 • Ensure fiscal stability and approval of budgets and auditor's statements • Uphold CA regulatory responsibilities and serve as a Hearings Board for Section 28 regulations • Make decisions that are consistent with the mandate to further the conservation, development and management of natural resources ii. The general manager or chief administrative officer? • Oversight of day to day operational needs in accordance with approved policies and applicable legislation and contractual commitments • Manages staff and programs • Engages municipalities in the CA budget development and approval process; • Implements board resolutions • Acts as spokesperson for the Authority in the absence of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Authority o Makes regular reports /updates to and liaison with all municipalities in the watershed iii. Municipalities? • Appoint members • Engage CAs in the municipal budget development and approval process • Identify environment and natural resource issues that require the CA's attention • Engage and collaborate with CAs in the development and implementation of strategic initiatives (e.g., Municipal Climate Adaptation strategies, water /watershed management strategies) that support environmental sustainability • Partner in projects with common goals and objectives iv. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry? o Lead the modernization /update of the provincial policy, science and standards that guide the natural hazards program (including wetlands) in Ontario to address current environmental issues • Provide consistent technical and financial support to CAs to implement and defend delegated Natural Hazard responsibilities • Advocate for the appropriate support for CAs through the budget process to ensure that they can deliver on this delegated program responsibility • Participate on a provincial watershed liaison body (see response to 6.1 b for examples) to ensure coordination of delivery of cross - ministry science, policy, and legislative objectives • Further to the previous bullet, proactively fund programs supporting provincial environmental sustainability o Partner in projects with common goals and objectives TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 421 Page 4 V. Other provincial ministries? o Participate on a provincial - municipal -CA watershed liaison body to ensure coordination of delivery of cross - ministry science, policy, and legislative objectives • Further to the first bullet, proactively fund programs supporting provincial environmental sustainability • Partner in projects with common goals and objectives • MOECC to advocate for the appropriate support for CAs through the budget process to ensure that they can deliver on this delegated program responsibility i.e. source water protection under the Clean Water Act vi. Others? o Various watershed stakeholders, (e.g. non - government organizations) to provide input to CA boards and participate in development and implementation of local projects (e.g., watershed plans, wetland restoration projects, rural clean water programs) d) How should the responsibility for oversight of conservation authorities be shared between the province and municipalities? Oversight of CAs is generally defined in the Conservation Authorities Act and appropriately provides for oversight by both the Province and municipalities. The Province should establish a provincial watershed liaison body (see response to 6.1 b for examples). Such a body would ensure coordination of delivery of cross - ministry science, policy, and legislative objectives and a return to a more equitable cost - sharing partnership between the Province and municipalities. It would create better efficiencies between programs and avoid duplication of efforts in on -the- ground delivery with complementary environmental benefits. Oversight on permit decisions by the CA board under Section 28 regulations are appropriately adjudicated (on appeal) by the Mining and Lands Commissioner (MLC) as delegated by MNRF. This must remain a provincial responsibility, separate from the Ontario Municipal Board, to ensure the integrity of the natural hazards management program and the conservation of land in Ontario. This is given that the dismissal or granting of appeals is predicated on the MLC's interpretation of the five tests of the section 28 regulations. The five tests are not based in planning law, but rather in science, and are often discussed in a cross - municipal boundary, watershed context that is ideal for assessing cumulative impacts, risk and liability. Therefore, hearings on appeal for section 28 permits most appropriately rest with the MNRF. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 422 Page 5 Municipalities provide oversight through the appointment of municipal representative(s) to the board with each member having a vote. The board is responsible to carry Directors' and Officers' Liability Insurance for their decisions around the programs delivered (including permits) and the budget. Finally, it is noted that CAs are accountable to municipalities in their request for levy through the annual CA and municipal budget processes and through the Section 25(2) ability for municipal councils to make an appeal. It is these processes that, in part, prevent duplication between CA and municipal services as well as up to date MOUs that outline the municipal /CA technical service agreements in support of municipal decision- making under the Planning Act and the environmental assessment process. e) Are there other governance practices or tools that could be used to enhance the existing governance model? Improvements from the proposed Ontario Not - for - Profit Corporations Act (ONCA) and other legislation that institute best practices (e.g. Municipal Conflict of Interest Act) should be integrated into the Conservation Authorities Act and the language used should be modernized (e.g. Directors instead of Members on the board). Further, the section 30 Administrative regulations should be amended accordingly. Overall, greater consistency in policies, procedures and practices across the CAs would be beneficial. A Provincial Directive and enhanced provincial policy supporting integrated watershed management with the establishment of some type of provincial watershed liaison body would strengthen the ability to provide local environmental and natural resource management programs for greater public benefit. 6.2 Funding Mechanisms General Comments The Conservation Authorities Act establishes a number of mechanisms which CAs can use to fund programs. The Act allows the MNRF to provide CAs with funding to support Ministry approved programs. A CA may also apply for funding from the Province to deliver programs on its behalf. Local resource management programs and services are funded through municipal levies. CAs can generate revenue through service, user and admission fees; resource development fees; fundraising and grant programs. The attached chart below summarizes TRCA revenue sources since the early 1990s and will be referenced in the discussion which follows. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 423 Page 6 120;000 100,000 80;000 v c 60,000 0 40,000 20,000 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 • Self Generated • Municipal • Provincial - Other • WECI Program • Source Water Protection • MNR Operations & Capital Question #2: In your view, how are the programs and services delivered by conservation authorities best financed? a. How well are the existing funding mechanisms outlined within the Act working? Municipal Funding The funding partnership between the Province and municipalities has undergone many changes over time. Today, the scope of work deemed eligible for provincial support is very narrow, as illustrated by the TRCA chart on funding sources. Today, TRCA as well as most other CAs derive a significant portion of their budgets from local municipalities through the levy process defined in Ontario Regulation 670/00 and enabled through Section 27(16). Over the last 5 years, approximately 46% of TRCA budget has been financed from municipal levies and grants. The reduction in provincial funding has been absorbed by an increase in municipal funding. The reduction in provincial contributions has resulted in municipal criticisms of provincial downloading, which would diminish if the Province returned to the traditional 50:50 cost - sharing ratio and list of eligible expenditures, and considered inflation in the annual allocations. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 424 Page 7 Enabling CAs, through legislation, to levy municipalities within the watershed is consistent with the recognition that management of natural resources is most effectively done on a watershed basis. There are accountabilities in the municipal budget process that are respected and make this arrangement work through municipal appointees to a CA board. Detailed budget submissions outlining CA work completed in the previous year as well as work to be completed (including a detailed breakdown of all revenue sources and expenditures) are part of this process at TRCA. Municipalities are provided with notification of their projected levy amounts for their use in development of the municipal budget, and, TRCA presents and defends its budget at municipal committee and Council as requested. As well, there is a 30 -day appeal after the CA's budget vote [see details Conservation Authorities Act, S.25(2)] if the municipal council is dissatisfied. Provincial Funding Support Since the mid- 1990s, MNRF has only approved provincial funding for the water - related natural hazard prevention and management role of CAs, which includes flood and erosion control. Funding for this program area has been cut since the mid -1990s with no inflationary increases let alone increases to address the increasing demands in managing the current and future impacts of more frequent flood events. Currently there is a significant shortfall in provincial transfer payments for: - the operation of the flood management program including flood emergency management and mapping - strategic asset management planning - land securement - support for the implementation of source protection plans - water and erosion control Infrastructure - land use planning policies to prevent development in hazard lands - flood remediation for comprehensive redevelopment - natural heritage systems planning to mitigate for flooding and erosion - CA infrastructure and environmental assessment planning - green infrastructure /LID approaches to storm water management (all of which directly or indirectly mitigate and adapt for the potential impacts of climate change and contribute to Great Lakes water quality) Also of benefit would be provincial recognition of the role that TRCA plays in areas of outdoor education, recreation and quality of life that contribute significantly to the health and well -being of our residents and visitors, thereby reducing provincial health care costs. Many CAs provide extensive facilities and land base for recreational trails tied to existing communities and new growth areas. Similar discussions should involve MTCS for greenspace and recreational trail planning, and MMAH, MTCS, and MAA for aboriginal engagement with respect to conservation land management. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 425 Page 8 With regard to MOECC Clean Water Act funding, the Discussion Paper indicates that "Future levels of funding are expected to move to a steady state once current source protection plans are approved" (p.16 Discussion Paper). The Province is encouraged to ensure a minimum level of capacity at the CA level to support implementation by municipalities and various organizations and agencies and the success of the program. With a $220 million provincial investment it is imperative to keep the knowledge up -to -date and the expertise maintained. The ongoing CA local policy interpretation, technical, communications, and administrative support function for implementation of this program is critical. The science and policies under this program also inform and integrate easily with other provincial mandates including climate change studies and protection of the Great Lakes. This further underscores the co- benefits of an integrated watershed management approach with provincial mandate. The 'delegated' programs and other partnership agreements with the Province generally provide more services than recognized and financially supported by the Province. Funding for ongoing operation of programs has diminished significantly and also does not adequately reflect the diversity, complexity and range in CA capacity. The Province is encouraged to review basic operational activities /programs of CAs that support multiple provincial priorities and provide a broader public benefit with a view to providing long term funding to CAs and increasing the efficiency of environmental and resource management in Ontario. Self - generated revenue On average, 47% of the TRCA's budget is financed from self - generated revenues. The ability to charge fees, to enter into partnerships and to fundraise has made the difference in the ability of TRCA to operate effectively and to introduce and expand program offerings. It should be noted, however, that revenue generated by user fees and admissions does not completely cover the cost of program delivery or corporate overhead. Service contracts generate revenues mostly from regional and local municipalities within TRCA's jurisdiction, for which a small contribution is provided for corporate overhead. Finally, revenue generated thought grants (including federal grants), contributions and donations are restricted in use. Although self - generated revenues are a significant component of TRCA's budget they are not available to support activities beyond those that generate them. b. What changes to existing funding mechanisms would you like to see if any? CAs provide a tremendous amount of work and value for the province which remains unfunded. A thorough review of provincial responsibilities versus funding should be initiated. To achieve the greatest environmental and economic benefit for the residents of Ontario, the Province should develop a sustainable multi- ministry (e.g. MNRF, MOECC, MMAH, MEDEI, OMAFRA, MTCS) funding formula for basic operational activities of Conservation Authorities that support multiple provincial priorities. Without this investment, there will continue to be varying capacity to deliver on existing and any additional Provincial priorities. This is one of the most critical changes necessary to level the playing field and enable an equitable and effective program. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper rA • Page 9 This should be the immediate priority of the Province (see more details in answer to 2a Provincial Funding Support). Finally, it would be beneficial to CAs and municipalities to have the Province provide specific language to clarify variances in interpretations between the Act (Section 27(16)) and the Levy Regulation (Ontario Regulation 670/00). Additionally, Section 1 of the Act should be updated to define the types of costs (e.g. administration, maintenance, operating and projects) that could be included in levies and then, the Act or Regulations should direct how the levies are to be apportioned. Apportionment would occur through either a watershed levy where the entire watershed benefits from the project or program and allocation is based on modified current value assessment; or through a special benefitting levy where allocation of costs is based on project or program benefits to individual municipalities. c. Which funding mechanisms, or combination of funding mechanisms, are best able to support the long term sustainability of conservation authorities? There must be continued municipal and provincial funding support for the basic operating capacity of CAs to meet today's environmental challenges. The cost - sharing formula should include at least 50% provincial funding for eligible expenditures and must take into account inflation. d. Are there other revenue generation tools that should be considered? Recognizing the provincial deficit and the likely need for a new source of provincial revenue, consideration should be given to use of carbon pricing revenues to support growth planning and climate change mitigation and adaptation activities of CAs. There also needs to be recognition of the financial value of the ecological services that CAs provide. These ecological services help support clean air, water, and mitigate infrastructure costs. Accordingly, other sources of revenue that could be facilitated through legislative amendment or policy for CA eligibility (through their municipal partners) include: Development Charges Act, the Planning Act (where it applies to development charges), enactment of the Sustainable Water and Sewage System Act (i.e. recoverable cost from water rates), stormwater fees /rates (e.g. City of Mississauga in 2016; Kitchener), Trillium Foundation, Infrastructure funding for recreational / outdoor education facilities, etc. 6.3 Roles and Responsibilities General Comments The Conservation Authorities Act enables CAs to undertake a wide range of activities on behalf of provincial, municipal and other interests. CAs are the only resource management agencies in Ontario that are organized on a watershed basis. The Act provides CAs with the power to develop their own programs and services tailored to the local needs and interests they serve. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 427 Page 10 This flexibility allows CAs, and the municipalities that fund them, to focus their resources on areas of greatest need to the local population. It also results in variability in the scale and range of programs and services delivered by any individual CA. Recent years have seen an increased interest in reviewing CA roles in resource management in Ontario. The Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Service in particular called on the Province to undertake a review of the programs and services delivered by both the MNRF and CAs to clarify responsibilities and eliminate any duplication. In 2007, the provincial government created a Conservation Authorities Liaison Committee (CALC) with representatives from the building industry, the Province, municipalities, CAs, Conservation Ontario and environmental organizations. MNRF approved the 2010 "Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authority Plan Review and Permitting Activities' developed by the committee that describes the roles of CAs in the areas of municipal planning, plan review, CA Act s. 28 permitting related to development activity and natural hazard prevention and management and protection of environmental interests. Question #3: In your view, what should be the role of conservation authorities in Ontario? a. What resource management programs and activities may be best delivered at the watershed scale? Under the Conservation Authorities Act, the watershed boundary was chosen for CA jurisdictions as an important ecosystem boundary to manage natural resources and particularly, water. It should remain the boundary for program delivery. From a science perspective the watershed unit is the appropriate scale for the management of water for all uses and inputs to the Great Lakes and for modeling watershed responses to various land use and climate change scenarios. It is also a meaningful context to assess cumulative impacts, not just for the water resource system but also for the natural heritage system. Ontarians are most interested in the quality and quantity of water and natural areas in their watersheds where they live, locate their businesses and enjoy recreation. CAs use this frame of reference to engage their local watershed residents in support for watershed management. They provide science -based advice and deliver services within their watersheds including: watershed /sub- watershed planning, water quality /quantity modeling, natural hazards management and regulation, natural heritage systems, forestry, source protection, environmental monitoring and reporting, watershed stewardship and restoration, technical input and review for municipal land use planning and development, as well as, outdoor education and recreation. This consultative and science -based approach is called integrated watershed management. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper i Page 11 The CA Act serves to define CAs as watershed management bodies that are separate from the land use planning process, yet grants them the ability to administer a regulation which affects planning matters (including infrastructure and servicing). This is consistent with other environment and natural resource management legislation that issues permits. CAs as public commenting bodies under the planning and environmental assessment processes, play a significant role in managing the local natural resources of watersheds for the benefit of the municipalities that fall within them and for broader public benefit. The issues that CAs raise in the development review process are integral to environmental sustainability. Additionally, accountabilities are in place as per the 2010 "Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authority Plan Review and Permitting Activities ", which indicate the provincial expectation that, "CAs should give public notice and undertake public and stakeholder consultation prior to submission for CA board approval of all proposed policies, watershed and subwatershed plans, guidelines or strategies that are intended to be used by the CA to comment on future land use and land use planning and inform CA review of applications made pursuant to the Planning Act." CAs have forged many successful working relationships with their participating municipalities, which appreciate the efficiency of utilizing watershed -based specialized science and technical expertise that many individual municipalities do not possess in- house, e.g., floodplain management, stormwater management, hydrogeology, fluvial geomorphology, ecology, and natural heritage systems planning. These services are delivered as outlined in MOUs with municipalities as part of planning and technical staffs day -to -day work under the planning and environmental assessment processes, and ultimately in these projects' detailed design stage where they may require a section 28 permit. CAs pride themselves in ensuring coordination of applications under the Planning Act, the environmental assessment process, and the CA Act to eliminate unnecessary delay or duplication in the process. Access to these differing review - processes, and assessing all of these applications in a watershed context, is ideal for considering cumulative impacts. In addition, it facilitates a strategic approach to considering opportunities for remediation of natural hazards, restoration of natural heritage, and enhancement of the inter - regional trails and open space system. CAs' watershed context make them examples of, and advocates for, comprehensive land use planning and design on the part of approval authorities, development and infrastructure proponents and other watershed stakeholders. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 429 Page 12 Individually, CAs generally operate at a tertiary watershed scale, but collectively, 36 CAs operate on a Great Lakes basin /watershed scale. Environment and natural resource management program efficiencies can be gained by examining opportunities to look at programs across individual watersheds. To date, the provincial modernization and transformation of provincial environment and natural resource management programs have focused on increasing efficiencies for an individual agency's processes through computerization and proponent self- assessment. The ultimate effectiveness of these processes is undetermined in meeting provincial environment and natural resource mandates including the minimization of the cumulative impacts. CAs observe that overall these individual processes are less efficient in that applicants are having to wade through multiple processes and to make decisions for which they may have limited or no qualification to assess. Partnering with the CAs on environment and natural resource management programs best delivered on a watershed basis, could serve as the basis for more clarity and a "one window"' service delivery model. There is no agency responsible for coordinating and implementing the myriad of resource management programs by the provincial ministries and CAs. A provincial watershed liaison body could address the coordination gap. In terms of implementation, CAs are well structured to serve as the primary agency to assist municipalities with implementing environment and natural resources management programs of provincial agencies and ministries. Addressing the gap will streamline and optimize effectiveness of review and approval processes. b. Are current roles and responsibilities authorized by the Conservation Authorities Act appropriate? Why or why not? What changes, if any, would you like to see? The legislation provides a broad mandate and suite of responsibilities which empower CAs to set local programs and priorities in collaboration with member municipalities, government ministries and partners. The current CA mandate, as broadly outlined in sections 20 (objects) and 21 (powers) of the Act, remains as relevant today as when it was envisioned in 1946 because these sections have enabled integrated watershed management (see response to 1 a for more details). That being said, the Act could be clearer about reflecting current roles and responsibilities best undertaken at a watershed scale (see response to 6.3a). For example, the roles stated in the 2010 "Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authority Plan Review and Permitting Activities" that CAs may undertake could be embedded in the Act. This would eliminate confusion surrounding CAs' mandate. The provincially recognized roles in plan review and permitting include: regulatory authorities (s.28) and delegated provincial interest in plan review for natural hazards management, resource management agency (with clear emphasis on watershed - based), public commenting bodies, service providers, and, landowners. Overall, the challenge in the drafting of these clauses will be to ensure that they clarify the CA mandate without having the unintended consequence of being limiting for effective and innovative local environmental and resource management on a watershed basis. It is proposed that to achieve this ideal definition and better CA/provincial /municipal coordination of implementation, a Provincial Directive /Policy /MOU should mandate coordinated, multi- ministry engagement with CAs towards an integrated watershed management approach to environmental and resource TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 430 Page 13 management that delivers local program needs while meeting cross - ministry science, policy, and legislative objectives. There needs to be some effort put towards harmonizing the CA Act with other legislation such as the Planning Act, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, the Places to Grow Act, the Niagara Escarpment Protection Act, the Development Charges Act and the Provincial Offences Act. Harmonization includes ensuring that CAs are recognized and legally defined consistently and their roles and responsibilities are recognized. Such harmonization would be timely given the Provincial Plan review, and the reviews of the Development Charges Act and the Planning Act, that are currently taking place. c. How may the impacts of climate change affect the programs and activities delivered by conservation authorities? Are conservation authorities equipped to deal with these effects? Impacts of climate change including rising temperatures and changing precipitation patterns in Ontario have already increased the intensity of local flood events, reduced river flows, warmed surface waters and impacted wetlands. These impacts will likely continue and other threats to environmental, public health and our economy are expected to materialize including reduced quantity and quality of drinking water and disruption to businesses and costly damage to infrastructure. Like their municipal and private sector counterparts, CAs anticipate having to spend more of their budgets on mitigation activities to address liability (e.g. damaged trees from ice storms along trails in Conservation Areas) and protection of environmental integrity and biodiversity. As leaders in natural resource protection in Ontario, CAs are uniquely positioned to support measures to conserve, preserve, restore, mitigate and adapt to climate change but CAs cannot deal with these effects alone. They need the Province to take a leadership role in developing and providing policies /technical guidelines and the best available science (including monitoring data and research) to facilitate mitigation and adaptation. These initiatives should be pursued together and be supported by provincial funding. This issue of Climate Change is bigger than any one CA and we believe that the federal government, the Province, municipalities and CAs must work together to deal with the effects of climate change. Watershed specific work is underway but federal and provincial leadership and funding is required. CAs believe that mitigation and adaptation are critical, complementary initiatives which should be pursued together in order to work towards implementing a greener, low- carbon economy supported by sustainable natural resources. The following illustrates some current CA Climate mitigation and adaptation initiatives and activities that should be supported; improving delivery of these programs will be key for the future. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 431 Page 14 Mitigation Adaptation Flood Management Programs Low Water Response Carbon & Water Trading Offsets d. Is the variability in conservation authorities' capacity and resourcing to offer a range of programs and services a concern? Should there be a standard program for all authorities to deliver? Why or why not? Variability in resources is a concern if local needs are not being met. As larger, better funded CAs take on additional programs there is increased expectations that the smaller CAs can and will also take them on. There are also stakeholder expectations that all CAs have the same data and capacity to assist them. The funding inequity for CA programs accounts for the financial variability in Conservation Authority capacity to deliver on existing and any additional Provincial priorities unless they are funded Better funded and more consistent CA watershed management programs around both water and land resources ensures clean and sustainable water and land resources needed for our daily lives and our economy. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 432 Page 15 Ecosystem Enhancements Sustainable Transportation Climate Change Water Quality and Quantity (e.g. Fleet) Strategies Municipal Plan Input and Green Building Technologies Land Use Review & Retrofits (e.g. LEED) Planning & Regulations Local Climate Change Energy Conservation monitoring & modelling Watershed Plans Renewable Energy Information Management Education & Tree Planting /Carbon Outreach Green Infrastructure / low Sequestration (e.g. wetlands) impact development stormwater management Low Water Response Carbon & Water Trading Offsets d. Is the variability in conservation authorities' capacity and resourcing to offer a range of programs and services a concern? Should there be a standard program for all authorities to deliver? Why or why not? Variability in resources is a concern if local needs are not being met. As larger, better funded CAs take on additional programs there is increased expectations that the smaller CAs can and will also take them on. There are also stakeholder expectations that all CAs have the same data and capacity to assist them. The funding inequity for CA programs accounts for the financial variability in Conservation Authority capacity to deliver on existing and any additional Provincial priorities unless they are funded Better funded and more consistent CA watershed management programs around both water and land resources ensures clean and sustainable water and land resources needed for our daily lives and our economy. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 432 Page 15 Provincial priorities (e.g. climate change, Great Lakes protection, source water protection, natural hazards management, growth, economy) that are best delivered at the watershed scale should be funded as such with a "standard framework" for integrated watershed management for all CAs to deliver. The concept of a restrictive `standard program' for all CAs to follow would adversely affect the ability of a CA to develop unique programs required for their specific watershed. Beyond the standard requirements for provincially delegated programs referenced above, the intent or origins of the conservation authority movement is to allow for local watershed issues and concerns to be addressed. This should not change. The existing flexibility should be retained for CA board approved programs that support local watershed needs. e. What are some of the challenges facing conservation authorities in balancing their various roles and responsibilities? Are there tools or other changes that would help with this? The provincial funding shortfall for the natural hazards management program is considered to be a major challenge in delivery of that role and responsibility; as well as, the need for the MNRF to undertake legislative (Section 28) amendments for consistency /efficiency (some outlined in more detail at the end of this section), and MNRF and partner ministries to provide leadership and support in modernizing the provincial technical guidelines to address growth, intensification and redevelopment/revitalization. Lack of a sustainable funding formula that recognizes the multi- ministry benefits of the CA watershed management program in general is another major challenge especially given the MNRF's limited budget in comparison to other provincial ministries. As previously referenced, there are a myriad of government bodies that have objectives towards protecting and managing natural resources; this is a major challenge. In terms of tools or other changes that would be helpful in addressing this challenge, as described in more detail above, what's needed is funding and a provincial directive for coordinated multi- ministry engagement with CAs towards an integrated watershed management approach to environmental and resource management that delivers local program needs while meeting cross - ministry science, policy, and legislative objectives. Many of the lands identified for redevelopment and intensification in TRCA's watersheds are located in Flood Vulnerable Areas (FVAs). There are a considerable number of people living within FVAs in TRCA's jurisdiction (over 35,000). TRCA's watershed -based research and science has demonstrated that the cumulative impact of growth and intensification in our jurisdiction is causing profound changes to our watershed hydrology resulting in increased flood and erosion risk in downstream areas. In addition, climate change is likely to have an increasingly negative impact on water resources, public infrastructure and private property; this in part, due to extreme weather events such as the July 2013 Toronto flood (reported as Ontario's most expensive natural disaster resulting in $850 million in damage to public and TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 433 Page 16 private assets). The combined impacts of urbanization and climate change mean that we are now reaching a threshold capacity in TRCA watersheds where communities will increasingly be put at risk unless there is a new paradigm in how we manage stormwater and invest in infrastructure to reduce the risk of flooding where it currently occurs. Continual incremental loss of natural features and fragmentation of valley and stream corridors occurring through infrastructure and development negotiations, has led to cumulative impacts and the deterioration of natural heritage systems in urban areas where these systems are most needed. There is insufficient support for the protection of provincial and local natural features through the development process despite collaborative processes with municipalities and landowners. The Province needs to lead negotiations on new funding priorities /tools for CAs efforts with AMO and municipalities, e.g., infrastructure renewal /new initiatives, flood remediation and river restoration, regional open space and parks infrastructure renewal and management/maintenance, eco- tourism; strategic and legislative recognition of the role of conservation lands and natural systems for the functional health and servicing of new communities /sustainability over time. Municipalities have a suite of tools to address non - compliance and cost recovery that CAs do not have for the implementation of their Section 28 permitting responsibilities. These are enabled by other legislation, eg. Municipal Act — offender's tax bill, Ontario Building Code Act — stop work orders, etc. Sections 28 (16, 17, 20, 24) & 29 of the Conservation Authorities Act should be amended to support Conservation Authority enforcement efforts to more effectively prevent violations, assist in the prosecution of violations and facilitate site rehabilitation. These changes should include at a minimum: • Addition of the ability to issue stop work orders and orders to comply • An increase in fines to reflect penalties comparable to other environmental legislation (i.e. Environmental Protection Act violations) • Add in ability to neutralize any monetary benefit from the commission of the offense • Addition of methods of cost recovery similar to other legislation (e.g. proceeds from fines should be payable to the CA to assist with recuperating costs, a mechanism such as in the Municipal Act — offender's tax bill) • Broaden rehabilitation section of the Act to allow courts to order rehabilitation of any type of land (currently it is limited to wetlands and watercourses) • Facilitate collection of costs for CAs to do the rehabilitation if necessary • Facilitate enforcement officer entry on property for the purpose of investigations • Consideration of opportunities for greater coordination with municipal site alteration/fill- by laws TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 434 Page 17 There are terms used throughout Section 28 that could be defined through a Section 40 Regulation. TRCA acknowledges the value of defining terms to facilitate consistency in program delivery. TRCA has successfully defended the application of the 'conservation of land' test before he Mining and Lands Commissioner and the courts, which have accepted a broad interpretation of the meaning of conservation of land to include "all aspects of the physical environment, be it terrestrial, aquatic, biological, botanic or air and the relationship between them" (611428 Ontario Limited vs. Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, CA 007 -92, February 11, 1994 p. 38). TRCA requests consistency with this decision should the Province proceed to define 'conservation of land'. f. Are there opportunities to improve consistency in service standards, timelines and fee structures? What are the means by which consistency can be improved? What are some of the challenges in achieving greater consistency in these areas? In May 2010, MNR and MMAH finalized and approved the draft document produced by the Conservation Authorities Liaison Committee, entitled "Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authority Plan Review and Permitting ", to form part of MNRF's 'Conservation Authority Policies and Procedures Manual'. Among other items, the document addresses standards, timelines and fees. A Provincial review through the CA Liaison Committee was undertaken with regard to service standards, timelines and fees. It was demonstrated that overall Conservation Authorities have met the standards established in MNR Policies and Procedures with regard to timelines and fees. The 2012 report "Review of Conservation Authority Fees', according to a provincial summary, "provided a basis for improved understanding and discussion of fees among members [of the Committee] and for identifying potential areas of improvement ". To date, the Committee has not been reconvened on this topic, and, generally, it may be appropriate to reconvene this committee on at least an annual basis to discuss and resolve issues. With regard to fees, challenges in achieving greater consistency are related to: differences in CA board direction with regard to an expectation of 100% cost recovery through fees versus an expectation that the services be delivered through the municipal levy and provincial transfer payment; the amount and complexity of development applications within a watershed; regional differences in costs (e.g. wages, consultants); and, the amount and severity of natural hazards existing within a CA's jurisdiction thus contributing to complexity of review. CA capacity and ability to improve service standards, timelines and fee structures is a critical point of discussion. The Drinking Source Water Protection Model was used to successfully address some of these issues by providing a provincial directive for watershed partnerships, leadership and capacity building. Key to this success was provincial investment. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 435 Page 18 6.4 Other Areas of Interest Question #4: Are there any other areas, questions or concerns regarding the Conservation Authorities Act or conservation authorities in general that you feel should be considered as part of the review? The Province is currently undertaking a review of several pieces of provincial legislation. There is an opportunity to harmonize the CA Act with other legislation such as the Planning Act, ORM Act, etc. to ensure that CAs are legally defined consistently and that their roles and responsibilities are recognized. In addition, the Province, municipalities and CAs should develop a coordinated communication plan to inform the public and stakeholders about the role of CAs in Ontario. TRCA comments — Conservation Authorities Act Review and Discussion Paper 436 Page 19 RES. #A169 /15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed Her Majesty The Queen In Right Of Ontario, CFN 52819. Acquisition of a lease agreement for a 10 year term for the purpose of trail head parking and to sublease the existing building to Chabad Lubavich on a property located at 12611 Yonge Street, in the Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #892115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a lease agreement with Her Majesty The Queen In Right Of Ontario As Represented By The Minister Of Economic Development, Employment And Infrastructure ( MEDEI) to operate and manage the property owned by MEDEI located at 12611 Yonge Street, said land being Part 5 on Reference Plan 64R -4458, improved with a two storey building and gravel parking lot, containing approximately 0.489 hectares (1.210 acres), in the Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York; THAT the term the lease agreement be for 10 years; THAT the consideration be a nominal sum of $12.00 per annum; THAT the final terms and conditions of the agreement be satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors; THAT the property with the exception of a portion of the parking lot be sub - leased to Chabad Lubavich under the same terms and conditions; AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever actions may be required to give effect thereto including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A170 115 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain Conservation Component Humber River Watershed Regional Municipality of Peel, CFN 53756. Acquisition of land located at 19282 Mountainview Road, to the west side of Mountainview Road, south of Beech Grove Sideroad, in the Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #893115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney 437 THAT 0.040 hectares (0.099 acres), more or less, of land, located west of Mountainview Road and south of Beech Grove Sideroad, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, said land being Part of Lot 20, Concession 5 East of Hurontario Street, be purchased from the Regional Municipality of Peel; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A171/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed Ford Valley Properties Inc., CFN 53883. Acquisition of property located south of Rutherford Road and east of Pine Valley Drive, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #894115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT 0.74 hectares (1.82 acres), more or less, of vacant land, located south of Rutherford Road and east of Pine Valley Drive in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, said land being Part of Block 31 on Plan 65M -3410 and designated as Part 1 on a Draft Reference Plan prepared by Ivan B. Wallace, Ontario Land Surveyor Ltd., drawing 5- 10676 -RP2, dated July 3, 2015, be purchased from Ford Valley Properties Inc.; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED i RES. #A172115 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed Raija Leena Varjo, CFN 53007. Acquisition of land located north of Stouffville Road and east of Bayview Avenue, Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River watershed. (Executive Res. #895115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT 0.8325 hectares (2.0571 acres), more or less, of vacant land located north of Stouffville Road and east of Bayview Avenue, Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, said land being Part of Lot 2, Concession 2, be purchased from Raija Leena Varjo; THAT the purchase price be $30,000.00, inclusive of HST; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A173115 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain Conservation Component Rouge River Watershed Fairgate (Ninth Line) Inc. CFN 54356. Acquisition of property located east of Ninth Line and south of Bethesda Sideroad in the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011- 2015 ", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River watershed. (Executive Res. #896115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT 3.67 hectares (9.07 acres), more or less, of vacant land located east of Ninth Line and south of Bethesda Sideroad in the Town of Wh itch urch-StouffviIle, Regional Municipality of York, said land being Part of Lot 3, Concession 8 and designated Blocks 88 and 89 on the draft plan of subdivision prepared by Donald E. Roberts Ltd. OLS, ref no. 12 -7790, be purchased from Fairgate (Ninth Line) Inc.; 439 THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A174/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain Conservation Component, Highland Creek Watershed Newfin Land Development Company Limited, CFN 54104. Acquisition of land located north of Clemes Drive and west of Centennial Road, in the City of Toronto, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Highland Creek watershed. (Executive Res. #B97115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT 0.223 hectares (0.552 acres), more or less, of vacant land, located north of Clemes Drive and west of Centennial Road, in the City of Toronto, said land being Part of Lot 3, Concession 1 and designated as Parts 3, 4 and 5 Plan 66R- 28008, be purchased from Newfin Land Development Company Limited; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the lands free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED M11 11 RES. #A175115 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek Watershed E. Ovide Holdings (Altona) Inc., CFN 54363. Acquisition of property located south of Finch Avenue and east of Altona Road in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015 ", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek watershed. (Executive Res. #898115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT 0.051 hectares (0.125 acres), more or less, of vacant land, located south of Finch Avenue and east of Altona Road in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, said land being Part of Lots 5 and 6, Registered Plan 566, designated as Part 5 and Part 6 on a Draft Plan of survey prepared by J. B. Fleguel Surveyors, Project # 4783_D_RP, be purchased from E. Ovide Holdings (Altona) Inc.; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A176115 - E. OVIDE HOLDINGS (ALTONA) INC. AND THE CITY OF PICKERING Request for Permanent Easements for Stormwater Retention Swales, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Petticoat Creek Watershed, CFN 54048. Receipt of a request from E. Ovide Holdings (Altona) Inc. and the City of Pickering to provide two permanent easements for stormwater retention swales, located south of Finch Avenue, east and west of Altona Road, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Petticoat Creek watershed. (Executive Res. #899115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney 441 WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from E. Ovide Holdings (Altona) Inc. ( Ovide Holdings) and the City of Pickering to provide two permanent easements for stormwater retention swales, located south of Finch Avenue, east and west of Altona Road in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with Ovide Holdings and the City of Pickering in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT permanent easements containing a total of 0.077 hectares (0.191 acres), more or less, be granted in favour of the City of Pickering and Ovide Holdings for stormwater retention swales, said lands being Part of Lot 32, Concession 1 and designated as Part 1 on a Draft Plan of Survey prepared by J.B. Fleguel Surveyors, under their project #4783_RP; and Part of Lot 2, Registered Plan 388 and designated as Part 1 of Draft Plan of Survey prepared by J.B. Fleguel Surveyors, under their project #4783_B_EXT_RP, subject to the following terms and conditions: i) that the easement price be $10,000.00 to be paid by Ovide Holdings to TRCA, and in addition Ovide Holdings shall reimburse any legal, survey and other costs incurred by TRCA to complete this transaction; ii) that an archeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, all at the sole expense of Ovide Holdings; iii) that a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by Ovide Holdings prior to commencement of construction; iv) TRCA lands distributed by the proposed works be revegetated or stabilized following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA or City of Pickering staff, a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA and City of Pickering landscaping guidelines; v) Ovide Holdings and the City of Pickering shall fully indemnify and save harmless TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or loss of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the granting of these easements or the carrying out of construction; and vi) any additional considerations as deemed appropriate by TRCA staff or its solicitor; THAT said easements be subject to the approval of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 442 RES. #A177115 - TRANSCANADA PIPELINES LTD. Request for a Permanent Easement for a New Nominal Pipe Size (NIPS) 36 Inch Diameter Natural Gas Pipeline. City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel and City of Toronto, Humber River Watershed, CFN 53376. Receipt of a request from TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. to provide a permanent easement for a new NIPS 36 inch diameter natural gas pipeline, south of Steeles Avenue, west of Highway 427, within Claireville Conservation Area, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel and City of Toronto, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #8100/15) Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Ron Moeser WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. (TCPL) to provide a permanent easement for a new Nominal Pipe Size (NPS) 36 inch diameter natural gas pipeline, south of Steeles Avenue, west of Highway 427, within Claireville Conservation Area, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel and City of Toronto, Humber River watershed; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with TCPL in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of 1.10 hectares (2.72 acres), more or less, be granted to TCPL for a new NPS 36 inch diameter natural gas pipeline, said land being Part of Lot 15, Concession 9 SD, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, designated as Part 29 on a draft Plan of Survey prepared by J. D. Barnes Limited, under their Reference No. 13- 23- 195 -02, dated March 9, 2015 and Part of Lots 36, 37, 38 39 and 40 FTH, City of Toronto, designated as Parts 28, 28b, 29a and 31 on a draft Plan of Survey prepared by J. D. Barnes Limited, under their Reference No. 13 -23- 195 -02, dated March 9, 2015, subject to the following terms and conditions: (a) the permanent easement price is $1,833,300 and the price for temporary working easements is $1,621,650, of which a portion will be contributed toward the Claireville Land Management Implementation Plan, for a total of $3,454,650, in addition to all legal, appraisal, survey and other costs incurred necessary to complete the transaction; (b) TCPL is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims arising from injury, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the granting of this easement or the carrying out of any construction; (c) an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the sole expense of TCPL; (d) all TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated /stabilzed following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines; 443 (e) a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by TCPL from TRCA prior to commencement of construction; and (f) any additional terms or conditions deemed appropriate by TRCA staff or solicitor; THAT said easement be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27 as amended; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining of any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. AMENDMENT RES. #A178/15 Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: AND FURTHER THAT the management plan for Claireville Conservation Area be reviewed to reflect changes to status of several parcels. RECORDED VOTE Paul Ainslie Yea Maria Augimeri Yea Vincent Crisanti Yea Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea Jennifer Drake Yea Rob Ford Nay Jack Heath Yea Jennifer Innis Yea Maria Kelleher Yea Matt Mahoney Yea Glenn Mason Yea Mike Mattos Yea Jennifer McKelvie Yea Ron Moeser Yea Linda Pabst Yea THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED M i THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. (TCPL) to provide a permanent easement for a new Nominal Pipe Size (NPS) 36 inch diameter natural gas pipeline, south of Steeles Avenue, west of Highway 427, within Claireville Conservation Area, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel and City of Toronto, Humber River watershed; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with TCPL in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of 1.10 hectares (2.72 acres), more or less, be granted to TCPL for a new NPS 36 inch diameter natural gas pipeline, said land being Part of Lot 15, Concession 9 SD, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, designated as Part 29 on a draft Plan of Survey prepared by J. D. Barnes Limited, under their Reference No. 13 -23- 195 -02, dated March 9, 2015 and Part of Lots 36, 37, 38 39 and 40 FTH, City of Toronto, designated as Parts 28, 28b, 29a and 31 on a draft Plan of Survey prepared by J. D. Barnes Limited, under their Reference No. 13- 23- 195 -02, dated March 9, 2015, subject to the following terms and conditions: (g) the permanent easement price is $1,833,300 and the price for temporary working easements is $1,621,650, of which a portion will be contributed toward the Claireville Land Management Implementation Plan, for a total of $3,454,650, in addition to all legal, appraisal, survey and other costs incurred necessary to complete the transaction; (h) TCPL is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims arising from injury, damages or costs of any nature resulting in anyway, either directly or indirectly, from the granting of this easement or the carrying out of any construction; (i) an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the sole expense of TCPL; (j) all TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated /stabilized following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines; (k) a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by TCPL from TRCA prior to commencement of construction; and (I) any additional terms or conditions deemed appropriate by TRCA staff or solicitor; THAT said easement be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27 as amended; THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining of any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents; 445 AND FURTHER THAT the management plan for Claireville Conservation Area be reviewed to reflect changes to status of several parcels. RES. #A179/15 - CITY OF TORONTO Request for a Permanent Easement Humber River Watershed, CFN 49327. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement for the replacement of a storm sewer, located south of Dundas Street West. and west of 4070 Old Dundas Street, City of Toronto. (Executive Res. #8101115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement located west of 4070 Old Dundas Street and south of Dundas Street West, in the City of Toronto; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with the City of Toronto in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of 0.054 hectares (0.134 acres), more or less, be granted to the City of Toronto for the replacement of a storm sewer designated as Part 2, on Sketch No. PS -2015 -084, dated July 10, 2015, prepared by the City of Toronto Engineering and Construction Services Department; THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, in addition all legal, survey and other costs be paid by the City of Toronto; THAT the City of Toronto is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the granting of this easement or the carrying out of construction; THAT an archeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the City of Toronto; THAT all TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated /stabilized following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines; THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by the City of Toronto prior to commencement of construction; Ems s THAT said easement be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A180 /15 - REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY -OWNED LAND Behind 58 Park Drive, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River Watershed, CFN 48048. Recommendation thatthe subject Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned property, located to the rear of 58 Park Drive, City of Vaughan, Humber River watershed, be retained in TRCA ownership for conservation purposes. (Executive Res. #8102115 & Res. #8103115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) -owned property located at the rear of 58 Park Drive, in the City of Vaughan, be retained in TRCA ownership for conservation purposes; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to negotiate and finalize a lease with terms and conditions satisfactory to staff with Dr. Izzat for the subject property. CARRIED RES. #A181 115 - REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY -OWNED LAND Rear of 134 Ravendale Court , City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River Watershed, CFN 44843. Recommendation that the subject Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned property, located south of Stegman's Mill Road and east of Islington Avenue (rear of 134 Ravendale Court - Kleinburg), City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed, be retained in TRCA ownership for conservation purposes. (Executive Res. #B104115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) -owned property located at the rear of 134 Ravendale Court - Kleinburg, in the City of Vaughan, be retained in TRCA ownership for conservation purposes. CARRIED 447 RES. #A182 /15 - REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY -OWNED LAND 17 Mill Street, City of Markham, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River Watershed, CFN 26351. Recommendation that the subject Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned property located at 17 Mill Street, in the City of Markham, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River watershed, be retained in TRCA ownership for conservation purposes. (Executive Res. #B105115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) -owned property located at 17 Mill Street, City of Markham, Rouge River watershed, be retained for conservation purposes; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to investigate the potential of a long term lease for the restoration and preservation of the heritage building located at 17 Mill Street, in consultation with the City of Markham. CARRIED RES. #A183 /15 - TOWN OF WHITCHURCH STOUFFVILLE Land Management Agreement, CFN 24344. Entering into a consolidated land management agreement with the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville for park and recreational uses of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned lands located within the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York. (Executive Res. #B106115) Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Matt Mahoney WHEREAS the Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle manages a number of parcels of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) -owned lands for park and recreation purposes under the terms of a number of existing agreements; AND WHEREAS TRCA and the Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle are desirous of consolidating these agreements into one land management agreement and to add TRCA lands to this agreement; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the existing management agreements with the Town of Wh itch urch - StouffviIle be consolidated into one agreement with 'TRCA Lands' on Schedule "A" (attached) being added to the agreement; THAT from time to time by mutual agreement, additional TRCA lands may be added to the agreement; i i AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of any necessary approvals and execution of any documents. CARRIED RES. #A184 115 - VOLUNTEER POLICY Approval of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's updated Volunteer Policy. (Executive Res. #8107115 & Res. #8108115) Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Glenn Mason THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Volunteer Policy, updated September 2015, outlined in Attachment 1 be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the Volunteer Management Procedures, as amended with respect to dismissal, outlined in Attachment 2, be received. CARRIED Section II — Items for Authority Information RES. #A185 /15 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Linda Pabst Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT Section II items 10.1.1 — 10.1.4, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #8/15, held on August 7, 2015, be received. Section II Items 10.1.1 — 10.1.4 ELGIN MILLS GREENWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT (Executive Res. #882115) RFP #10000648 — TREE SEEDLING COLD STORAGE HOLDING FACILITY — DESIGN /BUILD (Executive Res. #883115) DON VALLEY GOLF COURSE EROSION CONTROL PROJECT (Executive Res. #884115) APPOINTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND DESIGNATION AS PROVINCIAL OFFENCES OFFICER (Executive Res. #885115) Ems • RES. #A186 115 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT Section II item 10.1.5 — National Floodnet Research Network, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #8/15, held on August 7, 2015, be received. RES. #A187 /15 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Glenn Mason Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT Section II items 11.1.1 and 11.1.2, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #9/15, held on September 11, 2015, be received. Section II Items 11.1.1 & 11.1.2 APPOINTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT OFFICER (Executive Res. #8109/15) OMB APPEAL BY GILLIAN EVANS /DAVID TOYNE (Executive Res. #8110/15) RES. #A188 115 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Matt Mahone THAT Section II item 11.5 — Cost Centre Accounting, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #9115, held on September 11, 2015, be received. Section III - Items for the Information of the Board RES. #A189 115 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed. Katherine Jane Dalton and Christine Styles Dalton, Estate Trustee for the Estate of Ian Robert Dalton, CFN 22588. Status of requests for funding for purchase of a property municipally known as 12800 11th Concession Road, located to the west side of the 11th Concession Road, and south of King Road, Township of King, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed. 450 Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT the staff report dated September 11, 2015, regarding the status of requests for funding for purchase of a property municipally known as 12800 11th Concession Road, located to the west side of the 11th Concession Road, and south of King Road, Township of King, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed, be received. I_1�dN1 01 W, 1=121 119 RESMA190 /15 Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: AND FURTHER THAT the Chair of TRCA be requested to meet with the Chair of Toronto Public Works and Infrastructure Committee in regards to the financial support for the source water protection land acquisition program. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: THAT the staff report dated September 11, 2015, regarding the status of requests for funding for purchase of a property municipally known as 12800 11th Concession Road, located to the west side of the 11th Concession Road, and south of King Road, Township of King, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed, be received; AND FURTHER THAT the Chair of TRCA be requested to meet with the Chair of Toronto Public Works and Infrastructure Committee in regards to the financial support for the source water protection land acquisition program. BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #6/15, held on June 26, 2015, Resolution #At 15/15 was approved as follows: THAT 44.20 hectares (109.22 acres), more or less, of an irregular shaped parcel of land, improved with a log cabin and a detached, two bay garage, being Part of Lots 3 and 4, Concession 11, Township of King, Regional Municipality of York, located to the west side of 11th Concession Road and south of King Road, municipally known as 12800 11th Concession Road, be purchased from Katherine Jane Dalton and Christine Styles Dalton, Estate Trustee for the Estate of Ian Robert Dalton; THAT the purchase price be $2,760, 000.00; THAT acquisition by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be conditioned upon all necessary funding being available; 451 THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents; THAT TRCA's request to the City of Toronto for funding from the Land Acquisition for Source Water Protection Reserve also include a request on behalf of the Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust (ORMLT) for financial support in the amount of $1,200,000 for the ORMLT's 201512016 Land Securement Program; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back in September. Attached is a sketch showing the location of the subject lands. Status of Requests for Funding The Regional Municipality of York has been requested to fund 50% of the total cost of the acquisition of the Dalton property. York Region staff is supportive of the request for 50% funding and has scheduled a report for consideration by the Committee of the Whole on October 8, 2015; subsequently, Regional Council will consider the request at its meeting scheduled for October 15, 2015. The City of Toronto has been requested to fund 33% of the total cost for the acquisition of the Dalton property as well as financial support in the amount of $1,200,000 for the Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust's 2015/2016 Land Securement Program. City of Toronto staff has indicated that Toronto Water's approved 2015 -2024 Capital Plan does not include funding for land acquisition for source water protection; and have indicated that these requests could be considered as part of 2016 -2025 budget submission process as new funding requests. Therefore, the remaining 50% for acquisition of the Dalton property to be provided by TRCA will be achieved through funds contained in the land acquisition capital account. The funding in this account is from land sales, easement revenue and a bequest. Presently, there are no other sources of funding available in order to meet the financial requirements to complete the transaction. Furthermore, the owners are not receptive to extend the purchase into 2016. Report prepared by: George Leja, extension 5342 Emails: gleja@trca.on.ca For Information contact: George Leja, extension 5342, Jae R. Truesdell, extension 5247 Emails: gleja@trca.on.ca, jtruesdell@trca.on.ca Date: September 11, 2015 Attachments: 1 452 IS r ---IN Ilk !r 1 J 1, Air it 1, > 1 , , I f T —� 1 1 ilo Legend 0 � 1 1 W Conservation t-ne Living City P rP SP LP 453 1 'I COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE RES. #A191 /15 Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT the Committee move into closed session to discuss item 8.2 — 22 Greyabbey Trail, as it pertains to legal matters in which Toronto and Region Conservation Authority is involved. CARRIED RISE AND REPORT RES. #A192 /15 Moved by: Jennifer Innis Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT the Committee rise and report from closed session. CARRIED RES. #A193 /15 - 220 GREYABBEY TRAIL Notice of Violation # V 2814. Report back on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and City of Toronto efforts to resolve an outstanding permit violation. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT the report on 220 Greyabbey Trail be received. AMENDMENT RES. #A194 /15 Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT the main motion be amended to read as follows: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to facilitate immediate removal of the pile of dirt on the front of 220 Greyabbey Trail; THAT staff report back as soon as possible on plans to rectify the matter; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to report back on policies and procedures used to supervise construction done under the Conservation Authorities Act. THE AMENDMENT WAS THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS 454 CARRIED CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to facilitate immediate removal of the pile of dirt on the front of 220 Greyabbey Trail; THAT staff report back as soon as possible on plans to rectify the matter; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to report back on policies and procedures used to supervise construction done under the Conservation Authorities Act. RES. #A195 /15 - SECTION III — ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT Section III item 11.3.1 — Absenteeism and Turnover, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #9/15, held on September 11, 2015, be received. Section IV — Ontario Regulation 166/06, As Amended RES. #A196 115 - SECTION IV — ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT Ontario Regulation 166106, as amended, item 10.2, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #8/15, held on August 7, 2015, be received. CARRIED RES. #A197 /15 - SECTION IV — ONTARIO REGULATION 166106, AS AMENDED Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, item 11.4, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #9/15, held on September 11, 2015, be received. CARRIED 455 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:53 a.m., on Friday, September 25, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 456 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Authority Minutes of Meeting #9115 October 30, 2015 Authority Meeting #9/15 was held at TRCA Head Office, on Friday, October 30, 2015. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:32 a.m. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Member Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member David Barrow Member Vincent Crisanti Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Jennifer Drake Member Chris Fonseca Member Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Matt Mahoney Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Glenn Mason Member Mike Mattos Member Jennifer McKelvie Member Ron Moeser Member Linda Pabst Member Anthony Perruzza Member John Sprovieri Member Jim Tovey Member ABSENT Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Justin Di Ciano Member Rob Ford Member Rodney Hoinkes Member Maria Kelleher Member Gino Rosati Member RES. #A198/15 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Glenn Mason Ron Moeser THAT the Minutes of Meeting #8115, held on September 25, 2015, be approved. CARRIED 457 CONFLICT OF INTEREST Linda Pabst declared a conflict of interest in regard to item 7.10 — Caledon Equestrian Park as her daughter is involved with the equestrian business. PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Chris Bagley, General Manager, Black Creek Pioneer Village, TRCA, in regard to item 7.1 - Black Creek Pioneer Village. (b) A presentation by Rocco Sgambelluri, Chief Financial Officer, TRCA, in regard to item 9.1.1 - 2016 Budget. RES. #A199 /15 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Maria Augimeri Seconded by: Anthony Perruzza THAT above -noted presentation (a) be received. RES. #A200 115 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Colleen Jordan Chris Fonseca CARRIED THAT above -noted presentation (b) be received. CARRIED i Section I — Items for Authority Action RES. #A201/15 - BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE North Lands Master Plan and the Vision. Board endorsement of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Vision and the North Lands Master Plan. Moved by: Maria Augimed Seconded by: Anthony Perruzza WHEREAS the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) Vision and the BCPV North Lands Master Plan have been completed; AND WHEREAS select deliverables of the BCPV North Lands Master Plan have been included in an Environmental Assessment completed by the City of Vaughan; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the BCPV North Lands Master Plan be approved in principle; THAT the BCPV Vision be approved in principle; AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff work with the municipalities and community to foster support. CARRIED BACKGROUND BCPV opened as a living history museum owned and operated by TRCA in 1960. The Village is comprised of five 19'h century buildings on their original location and more than 30 pre- Confederation buildings moved from surrounding municipalities. BCPV is one of the GTA's most important cultural treasures. It is here where the history of the Toronto region is researched, preserved and presented to the public. Not only does BCPV interpret pioneer heritage, it is also a leader in living history communication methods and techniques. In support of the TRCA Strategic Plan, "Building The Living City," BCPV tells the story of the Toronto region: An appreciation of our cultural heritage gives meaning and context to our path toward the future. When citizens have a strong sense of place, they are more likely to become champions for their communities and stewards of their environment. Building The Living City Leadership Strategy #6 In addition to museum operations, BCPV has additional revenue streams including green weddings and social events, corporate events, and a brewery partnership. The site is also a popular and successful location for commercial filming and photography. BCPV's North Lands is a 16- hectare parcel of land located on the northwest corner of Jane Street and Steeles Avenue in the City of Vaughan. This site contains five buildings, including three 19`h century structures that are original to the site. One of these original buildings is the rare 1809 Pennsylvania- German Dalziel Barn, which is considered to be of national historic significance. 459 The Humber Valley Conservation Authority began acquiring this land in 1954 and opened it as the Dalziel Pioneer Park and Museum in 1956 with the objectives of providing public greenspace, preserving historic structures and showcasing best practices in conservation. When BCPV opened to the public, it continued to operate the North Lands as a public facility until the 1980s. Today, the area generates revenue for TRCA as a filming location, is used as a public event space and provides important storage area for artifacts. In 2010, TRCA staff started working on the development of the BCPV North Lands Master Plan and BCPV Vision. Now complete, the Master Plan and Vision offer critical plans for the future. Explored below are key findings acquired through this process, as well as next steps and future actions. Black Creek Pioneer Village North Lands Master Plan The BCPV North Lands lie adjacent to lands addressed by the City of Vaughan Official Plan Amendment 620 (OPA 620) for development. The master planning process was initiated to consider the relationship between the BCPV North Lands and OPA 620 lands, as well as the impacts of the future urbanization of the area and the northward extension of the Spadina subway line. A stormwater management pond located on the North Lands, which serves a 22- hectare industrial area west of the site, was earmarked for expansion by the City of Vaughan through the Municipal Servicing Master Plan Study process. The City of Vaughan undertook an Environmental Assessment to identify the municipal servicing improvements and /or modifications to the stormwater, water and wastewater services required to implement the development objectives outlined in OPA 620. The BCPV North Lands Master Plan would further address future site usage and determine if the existing stormwater management pond is appropriate for retrofit to accommodate future development. On May 7, 2010, TRCA's Executive Committee adopted Resolution #B40/10, allowing the undertaking of a master planning process for the BCPV North Lands to study flood control measures for the adjacent OPA 620 lands. Key deliverables of the Master Plan include: • improved flood control measures; • protection of existing heritage structures; • introduction of interactive programs onto the site; • creation of three precincts: natural heritage, cultural /agricultural heritage and commercial development site. With funding from the City of Vaughan, Schollen & Company undertook the master planning process. The process included visits to the property to assess existing features, with the field work of Schollen & Company supplemented where necessary by natural heritage, archaeological and aquatic habitat inventory work completed by TRCA staff. It also involved consultation with TRCA staff responsible for the management of BCPV and that of other TRCA properties, assessment of existing financial and market conditions associated with BCPV, consultation with OPA 620 environmental assessment (EA) consulting team, and public consultation. The Master Plan recommends the division of the property into three precincts: 1. Natural Heritage Precinct Located toward the west side of the property, the Natural Heritage Precinct would consist of: a) forested area, west of Black Creek, designated for monitoring and research activities; A ST1 b) trails to afford public access within the valley corridor, providing opportunities for nature - appreciation and education; c) improvements to existing stormwater pond. 2. Cultural /Agricultural Heritage Precinct Encompassing all of the heritage buildings and the proposed stormwater management facility, this precinct would consist of: a) event space in the retrofitted Dalziel Barn and a landscaped outdoor event area located adjacent to the Barn and suitable for large -scale events; b) urban farm lands used for demonstration and education with produce sold to benefit BCPV; c) office, administrative and meeting space in the retrofitted building; d) enhanced public and education programs in restored heritage buildings; e) dry pond /meadow stormwater management facility. 3. Commercial Development Site Fronting on Jane Street, this precinct could be rezoned and leased to accommodate a retail /commercial enterprise. Once completed, revenue would be generated from: • Village Common rental for events e.g. farmers' markets, arts & crafts shows, festivals, etc.; • school group fees; • location for film shoots; • wedding and commercial photography location; • retail /commercial development of a portion of the site. In 2013, TRCA staff began work on a broader vision for BCPV that incorporated the recommendations made in the BCPV North Lands Master Plan. It was deemed prudent to present this new vision for BCPV along with the BCPV North Lands Master Plan. The complete Black Creek North Lands Master Plan can be made available upon request. Black Creek Pioneer Village Strategic Plan In 2012, staff completed a strategic plan for BCPV featuring the following Mission Statement: Black Creek Pioneer Village helps people apply the history of life in the Toronto region to build a better future in their own communities. We invite everyone to join in this exploration. We care for and show a historical collection of value to all, create experiences of benefit to all, and tell meaningful stories for all. Our programs and exhibits focus on experiential learning and encourage people to draw connections between the mid -1800s and contemporary life. Our services enhance these connections and encourage diverse usage of the site. The BCPV Strategic Plan identified four key objectives for the site, to be: • relevant to communities; • visited by more people more often; • financially sustainable; • a champion for cultural heritage. 461 The plan also takes into consideration important findings of a 2011 intercept survey completed by Foundation Research Group. The results of this survey demonstrate that despite finding the museum educational and the costumed interpreters informative, friendly and engaging, BCPV visitors are looking for additional opportunities for interactive participation within the site's historic buildings, and would like the interpretation program to provide more entertainment. Research Field Trips Following the completion of the BCPV North Lands Master Plan and the BCPV Strategic Plan, with support of a private donor, staff undertook a series of research trips to 13 top -tier museums in North America to inform the framework of the BCPV Vision. The key learning outcomes from the field trips are as follows: • Visitors learn more by doing. People have positive and memorable experiences when they are actively engaged. • Adults and children want to be engaged by their surroundings. Visitors want to do rather than watch and listen. • Costumed staff members are integral to educational and enjoyable museum visits. People enjoy engaging with interpretive staff and learn more about history through these types of exchanges. • Visitors relate to stories about real people from the past. First person accounts, such as quotations in exhibits, recorded voices in period room settings, and drama presentations in gathering spaces, offer relatable experiences and can be integrated seamlessly into historic settings. • Mobile apps enhance the museum experience. Digital technology can improve interaction between visitors and their environment when delivered in practical and relevant ways. • Historic buildings can function as a device for exploring the stories of the people who lived, worked or passed through them. Heritage buildings are most effective and engaging when they offer a wide range of stories about people, change, and community. • Cross - cultural exhibit themes, such as food, culture, work and lifestyle, can effectively engage communities. During content development, collaborating with community stakeholders to explore these themes helps foster a sense of community, belonging and common purpose; when captured through programming and exhibits, these topics speak to the personal histories of visitors while fitting into the broader stories of the Toronto region. • BCPV will create a unique visitor experience in Canada. No other museum in Canada combines the elements proposed in the new BCPV. The BCPV Vision Framework Based on the aforementioned learnings, staff produced the BCPV Vision Framework with the help of the museum consulting firm Museum Planning Partners (MPP). Today, many people view BCPV as a place to learn about a specific group of people living in the Toronto region at a specific point in time. The BCPV Vision Framework proposes to broaden the stories it tells by sharing stories of people currently living in the area in their own words. In addition to discovering how others have lived in this area, community members will see themselves reflected in the stories told at BCPV. Community members will partner with staff to tell stories of relevance to everyone. 462 The BCPV Vision Framework consists of five major alterations to the site and how visitors interact with it (Attachment 1). These changes enable TRCA to meet the objectives and actions articulated in the TRCA Strategic Plan Leadership Strategy #6, "Tell the story of the Toronto region," while creating a heritage attraction unlike any other in Canada. Community Consultations To seek community input into BCPV's Vision, both internal and external consultations were held. Over 180 individuals, including representatives of municipal, provincial and federal governments, school boards, cultural institutions, representatives of the Jane Finch community, BCPV partner organizations and post- secondary institutions were invited to a forum held on June 10, 2015. On July 25, 2015, BCPV held a second public consultation at which 75 BCPV members and volunteers provided feedback on the draft plan. In addition to these two public consultations, a number of internal consultations were held, including BCPV staff member participation in a consultation session and a working session with senior TRCA staff members. Key themes that arose through the consultation process included: • Support and excitement for the visioning of BCPV. • BCPV's responsibility to help preserve and steward heritage within Ontario and the local community. • Attract more visitors by making the site more visible and accessible. • Ensure there is a strong physical connection between BCPV and the new Pioneer Village subway station. • Increase awareness throughout the region by connecting with other attractions. Help the local community to recognize and identify with BCPV by creating a strong sense of place. • Develop connections between BCPV and other local institutions and organizations. Fundraising Feasibility Study To assess the willingness and ability of the community to sustain a capital campaign that would support the BCPV Vision Framework, The Living City Foundation (LCF) and TRCA, with support from a private donor, contracted with Inspire Inc., a fundraising consultancy firm, to complete a fundraising feasibility study. The study concluded that: • A philanthropic /fundraising goal of $1.5 million be set with a total project budget of $5 million. • A revised case for support be written. • A program of identification and cultivation for volunteer leadership and campaign donors be initiated. • The fundraising campaign be launched in late spring 2016. BCPV Vision: Planning and Concept Development The results of the fundraising feasibility study and feedback from the consultations allowed for further planning and concept development of the BCPV Vision. The BCPV Vision provides recommendations for the overall direction for BCPV along with preliminary descriptions of the approach and elements that will make the plan a reality within the $5 million budget suggested by the fundraising feasibility study. The BCPV Vision recommends the creation of more interactive experience for visitors through initiatives including: • barrier -free hands -on activity areas; 463 • digital discovery apps; • re- imagined streetscape and entranceway; • partnership with local community arts group. The essential elements of the BCPV Vision are outlined in Attachment 2. Work Completed Towards the BCPV Vision The following initiatives have been introduced to BCPV to reflect the BCPV Vision. These initiatives also align with the BCPV Strategic Plan and TRCA's 10 -Year Strategic Plan, "Building The Living City ". • Interactive discovery stations with a "get involved" philosophy. • "Farmyard Friends ", where visitors may meet and pet farm animals. Acquisition and socialization of child - friendly heritage -breed animals. • Interactive drama programs that encourage participation and learning. • Enhanced local community engagement programming and event development. • Development of new audiences through new specialized programs. • Increased capacity to provide programs, events and exhibits through strategic partnerships. • Piloted projects that will inform future plans and growth. These initiatives have resulted in a vibrant and active atmosphere in the historic village, an increased capacity to provide visitors with the interactive experiences they are seeking, and more community involvement with the site. Return on engagement is high. Initial feedback to these changes indicates that the vision for BCPV reflects visitor expectations and is encouraging community participation in the museum. RATIONALE A number of factors have combined to create a strategic opportunity for BCPV to move forward with the implementation of the BCPV Vision, including plans for the North Property, and a related fundraising capital campaign. These factors include: • improved public transit will make BCPV more accessible. The new Pioneer Village TTC station will open to the public in 2018. Located 800 metres from BCPV, Pioneer Village station will make BCPV more accessible while providing promotion for the site; • Canada's sesquicentennial will result in heightened public awareness and interest in Canada's history, in particular an interest in Confederation which is the exact time period that BCPV depicts; • an increase in public funding in celebration of Canada's 150`h birthday; • BCPV North Lands Master Plan recommends revitalization of the area's natural spaces and increasing public usage of the area through innovative public programming funded, in part, through commercial development; • financial support of the W. Garfield Weston Foundation resulted in leading -edge research into building and maintaining audiences at living history museums; • BCPV's audiences are demanding increasingly interactive experiences. Audience demand is demonstrated through 2011 intercept survey, trends in education program bookings, and visitor comment cards; • recent transformations at other history museums located in southern Ontario have resulted in heightened profile and increased annual visitation; • fundraising feasibility study concludes that the community will support a capital campaign for $1.5 million dollars as part of a larger $5 million dollar project. FINANCIAL DETAILS BCPV North Lands Master Plan The anticipated cost for implementation of BCPV North Lands Master Plan is $9.26 million as follows: Activity Expense Site Preparation $73,152 Earthworks $45,341 Site Work hard landscaping) $605,146 Services $4,327,349 Building Improvements & New Structures $2,504,250 Soft Landscape Works $565,475 Project Cost Estimate $8,120,713 Contingency $379,336 Design/ Technical Investigation Costs $758,672 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $9,258,722 Sources of revenue for the project include a portion of the development fees for OPA 620 lands. Other revenues include potential leasing of commercial lands located on BCPV North Lands. No work will be initiated until funds are secured. BCPV Vision The anticipated cost for implementation of BCPV Vision is $5.17 million as follows: Activity Expense Planning $130,000 Infrastructure Improvements $1,988,000 Content Research $370,000 Interactive Historic Experiences $1,300,000 Technology Investment $300,000 Community Outreach $435,000 Evaluation and Training $100,000 Marketing $300,000 Contingency $246,000 Total $5,169,000 Sources of revenue for the project include: Activity Revenue Community Support $1,500,000 Community Support. In Kind $160,000 Grants $1,300,000 TRCA: Internal Re- allocation $1,400,000 TRCA: In Kind $800,000 TOTAL $5,169,000 All components of the vision for BCPV are flexible and scalable. No substantial investments will be made until components are proven to be financially viable and until funding is secured. • DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • Completion of a detailed business plan, including a marketing plan and operating budget for the BCPV Vision. • Completion of an interpretive plan, in cooperation with a museum consultant that outlines the specific topics and means of communication to be used in the interactive historic experiences and throughout the property. • Implementation of a fundraising campaign starting with a program to identify and cultivate volunteer leaders and potential donors for the capital campaign. • Implementation of projects associated with the BCPV Vision. Report prepared by: Wendy Rowney extension #5407 Emails: wrowney @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Derek Edwards extension #5407 Emails: dedwards @trca.on.ca Date: Date created Attachments: 2 • • Attachment 1 Interactive Historical Experiences a. Create accessible interactive historical experiences in eight historic buildings and five outdoor spaces. Provide multiple opportunities for visitors to do, rather than watch. b. Provide highly- interactive experiences. Experiences may range from churning butter to lifting a weighted "ice block," from "ploughing" to setting type on the press, from roping a bed to baking in a wood - burning oven. c. Remove existing barriers in these historic buildings so that visitors may go right into the heart of the space. Replace artifacts with heritage- inspired reproduction furnishings. Store artifacts for future generations. d. Incorporate new technologies strategically, e.g. mobile apps. e. Ensure every experience is fully accessible. 2. History Actors a. Develop characters based on real people and real happenings from the community's past. b. Introduce these characters through short plays, interactive drama programs, and unscripted interactions. c. Provide visitors with copies of primary source documents showing the detective work required to find and bring these real people "to life" through drama. 3. Visitor Centre Experience & Streetscape a. Streamline ticketing and wayfinding to provide visitors with an overview of all there is to do at BCPV. b. Provide a conceptual overview and historical context for the BC experience. c. Work with TTC and community partners to provide appropriate yet creative exhibits in the subway station and wayfinding from the Pioneer Village station to BCPV. d. Partner with local community group and artists to create a heritage mural or art heritage path along the BCPV fence line on Steeles Avenue and Murray Ross Parkway. 4. Technology Investment a. Develop mobile apps that will encourage visitor interaction with the site. b. Provide recorded voices in unstaffed spaces through a mobile app. c. Introduce app that encourages visitors to discover the more recent history of the community by listening to edited interviews at BCPV buildings that are thematically linked to the site. 5. Community Outreach a. Conduct interviews with diverse community members. Focus interviews on themes common to all e.g. home, work, health & well- being, leisure. b. Edit interviews. Create walking tour through BCPV with stops based on themes. 467 Attachment 2 Participation • Convert a number of spaces in the historic buildings to barrier -free hands -on activity areas with replaceable collections or replica materials. • "Discover Black Creek" — a number of digital apps that can be downloaded from the BCPV website and provide activities for families and a more in -depth look at artifacts and historical figures related to BCPV. • Black Creek Farm and Gardens — Provide additional interpretive signage and links to Discover Black Creek apps to provide more information and insight into BCPV's living collection. Rent out areas of BCPV for specialty and heritage crops. Landmarks • TTC Pioneer Village Subway Station — portions of which would carry appropriate heritage theming through painting and super - graphics. A colourful and easy -to -read map will show the best path from the station to BCPV. • Heritage Mural — Completed in partnership with local community arts groups and located at a strategic viewing point for vehicular traffic, the mural will mark the main route to BCPV in a complex urban environment and invite members of the public to take this unique journey to the past. Introductions within the Visitor's Centre Build on the orientation messaging to streamline ticketing and wayfinding to provide visitors with an overview of what is available to see and do at BCPV, how to find what interests them and how to budget their time. Provide a conceptual overview and historical context for BCPV experience through an engaging orientation map. Offer improved access to food, beverage, and entertainment facilities at the Brewery and festival areas. RES. #A202/15 - CANADA 150 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE FUND Project Approval/ Board authorization of projects approved for funding by the Canada 150 Infrastructure Program (CIP 150). Moved by: Jack Ballinger Seconded by: Jack Heath WHEREAS in September of 2015, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) received funding approval from FedDev Ontario for the following projects from the Canada 150 Infrastructure Program (CIP 150): • Rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building – Phase 1 • Improvement of Claremont Field Centre • Installation of Fitness Trail at Heart Lake Conservation Area • Expansion of Petticoat Creek Aquatic Facility; AND WHEREAS projects approved for funding must be duly authorized or endorsed by a resolution of the Authority; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the aforementioned projects approved for funding by FedDev Ontario be approved in principle; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as required. CARRIED BACKGROUND In May of 2015, Economic Action Plan 2015 announced $150 million nationally over two years for the new Canada 150 Community Infrastructure Program (CIP 150). The CIP 150 is part of a coordinated federal approach to celebrating Canada's 150th anniversary. Under the theme "Giving back to Canada" — shaping the future, leaving a lasting legacy and giving a gift to Canada — this program will support the rehabilitation, renovation and expansion of existing public infrastructure assets such as community centres, recreational facilities, local arenas, cultural centres and other community infrastructure. This commitment is expected to strengthen public infrastructure and provide economic benefits in communities across Canada. The Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev Ontario) is delivering the program in southern Ontario with an allocation of $44.4 million over two years. Successful recipients are eligible for a maximum non - repayable contribution of up to 50 percent of the total eligible project cost, up to a maximum of $1 million, with priority given to projects that require a contribution of only 33.2 percent. All projects are required to be substantially completed prior to March 31, 2018. RATIONALE In June of 2015, TRCA submitted applications for funding for the following projects (ranked in priority sequence): 1. Rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building – Phase 1 2. Repair and Partial Replacement of Heart Lake Conservation Area Drinking Water System 3. Repair of Boyd Conservation Area Roadways and Replacement of Failed Bridge 4. Improvement of Black Creek Pioneer Village Heritage Buildings 5. Improvement of Claremont Field Centre 1 • 6. Improvement of Kortright Centre for Conservation 7. Renovation of Albion Hills Conservation Area Chalet 8. Rehabilitation of the Kortright Conservation Area Maple Syrup Trail 9. Installation of Fitness Trail at Heart Lake Conservation Area 10. Expansion of Petticoat Creek Aquatic Facility In September of 2015, TRCA received funding approval from FedDev Ontario for the following projects. Rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building — Phase 1 The Small Arms Building is situated on the northwest corner of the Arsenal Lands property at the foot of Dixie Road. The building, designed in 1939 by Allward and Gouinlock Architects, is an important artifact in Ontario and Canada's history. The City of Mississauga — in 2009- designated the building as being of cultural heritage value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act. Since that time, the community has championed a new vision for the building as a future centre for arts, culture, heritage and science. The proposed vision for the building will promote the transition of the Lakeview community from industrial to a vital mixed use waterfront community. The Small Arms Building and surrounding Arsenal Lands property have had a rich history, adding to the appeal of the Mississauga waterfront. The scope of the proposed project involves the rehabilitation of the southern part of the designated heritage building, the last remaining structure of the Small Arms Limited munitions facility into a dynamic community, arts and culture and events space. The proposed works include replacement or upgrades to the following components: • electrical, plumbing and mechanical systems; • interior finishes; • windows; • site servicing; • fire safety; • accessibility; and • parking and site access. The benefits of the renewal will include, but not be limited to: • attraction of small businesses to the Lakeview community; • contribution to the health, vibrancy and diversity of the community; • preservation and enhancement of heritage features, that represent Lakeview's contributions to World War I and World War II; • promotion of education and research related to sustainable urban design and planning; • enhancement of public amenities and connected network of regional parks and natural open spaces that bridge Toronto and Mississauga; and • promotion of arts and culture. The project is scheduled to be completed by March 30, 2018. 470 Improvement of Claremont Field Centre Claremont Field Centre was built in 1970 and requires improvements to the facilities and amenities to meet future user needs, particularly with a renewed emphasis on opening up the Centre to a wider range of user groups, public workshops and learning opportunities. Historically, Claremont Field Centre provided learning experiences exclusively for students and youth groups. The new vision for Claremont builds on this strong history of school programming and creates a new environmental community hub in a growth area of Durham Region. This project supports the re- creation of Claremont Field Centre into an environmental community hub through increased partnerships, improved accessibility for all segments of the community and renewed program and activity areas. Work includes: • improvements to trails and learning wetlands; • preservation and restoration of a heritage cabin used for learning purposes; • revitalization of indoor and outdoor classrooms; and • development of community gathering spaces and associated parking areas. The project is scheduled to be completed by August 31, 2017. Installation of Fitness Trail at Heart Lake Conservation Area Heart Lake Conservation Area provides outdoor recreation experiences to over 100,000 visitors annually. The park features swimming, Tree Top Trekking, fishing, boating, and hiking opportunities and draws tourists and visitors from across Ontario. Heart Lake is a popular destination for the local community and fitness enthusiasts, as it provides several adventure and high impact recreation opportunities. In an effort to expand on the popular fitness offerings, TRCA is planning to install a fully accessible fitness trail with six innovative exercise stations located along an existing public use, double track trail. Work includes: • creation of multiple exercise stations situated along the trail; • delivery and installation of 16 pieces of equipment (i.e. push -up bars, step benches, hurdles, etc.) situated among the stations; • delivery and installation of seven information panels providing detailed instructions and fitness suggestions. The objectives of the fitness trail are as follows: • promote healthier lifestyles through regular physical activity by offering accessible, safe and affordable fitness opportunities in a natural setting; • increase attendance and tourism draw; • improve access for persons with disabilities and active seniors by providing opportunities to exercise that are Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) compliant; and • facilitate social connectedness, community engagement and social cohesion. The project is scheduled to be completed by June 30, 2016 Expansion of Petticoat Creek Aquatic Facility Petticoat Creek Aquatic Facility was completed in 2012 through partial funding from the Canadian Infrastructure Economic Action Plan. The facility features a main swimming pool, three wading pools and a splash pad. The facility sees over 40,000 visitors each season and is TRCA's largest and most popular aquatic facility. Expansion of the aquatic facility will complete Phase 2 of the original project. Work includes: • supply and installation of interactive water play features in the existing wading pools; 471 • installation of shade structures; and • additional soft landscaping. The main objectives of the project are: • increase attendance and tourism draw; • promote outdoor recreation and social connectedness among children; • provide long -term benefits to the community by connecting people with the natural environment; and • promote healthier lifestyles by offering accessible, safe and affordable recreational opportunities in a natural setting. The project is scheduled to be completed by June 1, 2017. FINANCIAL DETAILS Rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building — Phase 1 Project Budget: $3.2 million CIP 150/ FedDev Ontario Funding Ask: $1 million (31 %) CIP 150/ FedDev Ontario Approved Funding: $1 million (31 %) $1.2 million is available through the Region of Peel within account code 432 -01; $500,000 is pending approval from the Province of Ontario; and $500,000 is pending approval from the City of Mississauga. Improvement of Claremont Field Centre Project Budget: $600,000 CIP 150/ FedDev Ontario Funding Ask: $300,000 (50 %) CIP 150/ FedDev Ontario Approved Funding: $297,000 (49.5 %) Remainder of the required funding is available through the Region of Durham. Installation of Fitness Trail at Heart Lake Conservation Area Project Budget: $88,000 CIP 150/ FedDev Ontario Funding Ask: $44,000 (50 %) CIP 150/ FedDev Ontario Approved Funding: $44,000 (50 %) Remainder of the funding is available through the Region of Peel, within account code 440 -49. Expansion of Petticoat Creek Aquatic Facility Project Budget: $192,500 CIP 150/ FedDev Ontario Ask: $96,250 (50 %) CIP 150/ FedDev Ontario Approved Funding: $96,250 (50 %) Remainder of the funding is available through TRCA's municipal funding partners within account code 302 -01. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Funding Agreements between TRCA and FedDev Ontario will be executed in November of 2015. Eligible project expenses must be accumulated between April 1, 2016 and March 31, 2018. Report prepared by: Kate Pankov extension 6418 Emails: Kpankov @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kate Pankov extension 6418 Emails: Kpankov @trca.on.ca Date: October 13, 2015 472 RES. #A203/15 - BOLTON CAMP PHASE 1 SITE DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING RETROFIT Request for Proposal (RFP) #10000181. Award of contract for professional architectural and engineering services in support of the planning and design of the site development and building retrofit of the Bolton Camp site entrance /parking, recreation centre /pool, and former dining hall (13540 Caledon -King Townline South), Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT Contract #10000181 for the Bolton Camp Phase 1 Retrofit and Renovation Project - Architectural Services be awarded to the engineering team led by LGA Architectural Partners for a total cost not to exceed $332,695.00, plus HST, it being the highest ranked proponent resulting from evaluation criteria set out in the Request for Proposal (RFP); THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 25% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement with the above - mentioned proponent, staff be authorized to enter into contract negotiations with the next highest ranked proponent; AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the necessary action to implement the contract including the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/10, held on June 25, 2010, Resolution #A102/10 was approved, in part, as follows: THAT a partial taking containing 105.6 hectares (260.91 acres), more or less, consisting of an irregular shaped parcel of land improved with in excess of 30 buildings and a private water system and sewage system including two sewage lagoons, said lands being Part of Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10, Concession 8, Albion, Town of Caledon, in the Regional Municipality of Peel, municipally known as 13540 -13650 Caledon -King Townline South, be purchased from the Hi -Lands of Bolton Corp.;... The Bolton Camp property was formerly operated as a youth camp from 1922 to 2006. From 2006 to 2011, the property, including over 60 buildings and structures, was abandoned and fell into a severe state of disrepair. Since TRCA's acquisition of the property, staff has been working to re- purpose the camp into an adventure and leadership development centre. In March 2014, TRCA retained Coolearth Architecture to conduct a heritage, structural, mechanical and electrical assessment of 21 buildings on site. This assessment documented the physical condition of the buildings and provided recommendations for rehabilitation or demolition. Based on the results of the assessment, TRCA has developed a list of buildings that will undergo renovations in order to increase accessibility and meet future programming needs. 473 The scope of work for the first phase of site development and building retrofit will involve the relocation of the site entrance, construction of a new visitor parking lot, and renovation of the recreation centre /pool and former dining hall buildings: • The site entrance will be relocated in order to meet Transportation Association of Canada engineering and fire service access requirements. • The recreation centre will be a multi - purpose space for sports activities and small events /meetings. • The pool and associated washrooms /showers will be re- purposed to provide a community pool to service summer camps and local residential use, as well as visitors to the site. • The former dining hall will be repurposed into a social innovation /maker space and meeting /event space that can accommodate a variety of uses, such as facilitated workshops or organized community events. The recreation centre and former dining hall will be converted to four season use and will be reconfigured to provide barrier free access in compliance with Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) guidelines. The buildings will also need to meet Ontario Building Code (OBC) requirements through the architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical, and water /wastewater servicing upgrades and repairs. TRCA's mandate for sustainability and green building technologies will be incorporated into the design principles. A Heritage Conservation Plan will be developed so that any heritage features of the buildings can be salvaged and integrated into the site. TRCA will require the assistance from an architectural firm to lead a diverse team of consultants to obtain necessary permits and approvals and complete design drawings that not only meets OBC requirements but the needs of TRCA and its partners. The consultants will work closely with TRCA staff and various stakeholders to develop working drawings to implement the retrofit. Major retrofit items include: roofing, floors, foundation, windows and doors, insulation, safety features such as fire protection, emergency access routes, barrier free entrances and washrooms, HVAC and other mechanical systems, and broadband infrastructure. The Region of Peel is currently undertaking the design and construction of a new water /wastewater system on the property. It will be the responsibility of the consultant to incorporate these services to the buildings by connecting to the main system. The architectural firm will also work in collaboration with TRCA and local youth by conducting six learning and development sessions with secondary students from the Public and Catholic school boards in the Region of Peel during the design phase of the recreation centre. This will allow students to provide input into the improvement of the site and to ensure that the needs of the community are met, as well as provide an educational experience for students with interests in architecture. RATIONALE Request for Pre - Qualification (RFPQ) for architectural and engineering services was advertised on -line with Biddingo.com on March 31, 2015 and closed on April 17, 2015. Architectural firms interested in pre - qualifying were advised on the criteria for evaluation, including: • corporate profile and details on the project team; • past experience with the proposed scope of work; • qualifications and experience of the Project Manager; • qualifications and experience of key sub - consultants; and • proposed methodology and approach for this project. 474 The pre - qualification documents were reviewed by the selection committee consisting of TRCA staff (Mark Preston, Lindsay Prihoda and Lisa Moore) and a shortlist of 10 of the highest scoring proponents was created. The short- listed proponents were invited to respond to RFP #10000181 which was sent to the following consultants on June 22, 2015: • Coolearth Architecture; • DTAH; • ERA Architects; • Gow Hastings Architects Inc.; • Kongats Architects; • LGA Architectural Partners; • Sustainable.TO Architecture + Building; • Ward99 Architects; and • Workshop Architecture Inc. On July 23`', the Procurement Opening Committee opened the fee proposals with the following results: Consulting Firms Fees Plus HST LGA Architectural Partners $332,695.00 Ward99 Architects $399,100.00 Workshop Architecture $414,978.00 DTAH Architectural Services $438,273.00 Gow Hastings Architects $489,185.00 Sustainable.TO $472,926.26 Coolearth Architecture $543,372.50 ERA Architects $567,520.00 Kon ats Architects $586,940.00 Chamberlain Architect Services Ltd. No Bid Members of the Selection Committee, consisting of TRCA staff (Mark Preston, Aaron D'Souza and Lisa Moore), reviewed proposals based on a weighted scoring system consisting of 90% based on the technical review of the proposal and the remaining 10% on the fee proposal. The criteria used to evaluate the submission and to select the recommended consultant included the following: • completeness of submission; • understanding of the scope of work; • similar projects in scope and magnitude; • expertise and availability of the project team; • proposed approach and methodology for this assignment including identification of project limitations, proposed solutions and innovative ideas; • proposed schedule and work plan; and • detailed cost breakdown. The results of the evaluation are as follows: 475 Consulting Firms Rankin out of 100% LGA Architectural Partners 83 ERA Architects 82 Gow Hastings Architects 80 Kon ats Architects 77 Sustainable.TO 74 Ward99 Architects 73 Workshop Architecture 69 DTAH Architectural Services 63 Coolearth Architecture 52 Given the complexity of the proposed work and the close scoring of the top three proposals (LGA Architectural Partners, ERA Architects and Gow Hastings Architects), the proposals were evaluated further through request for clarifications and reference checks. At the conclusion of the evaluation, it was determined that the technical proposal and fee proposal (valued at $332,695.00) submitted by LGA Architectural Partners was the most complete proposal, met the requirements of the RFP, and offered the best value for services. FINANCIAL DETAILS The planning and design for the Phase 1 site development and building retrofit is a multi -year project and is anticipated to take place over three years (2015 — 2018). Cost of the contract is $332,695.00, plus 25% contingency, plus HST. Funds are available in the Peel Region Capital Budget for the period of 2015 — 2024, in account 433 -01 (Bolton Camp Site Improvements). DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The planning and design of the Phase 1 site development and building retrofit of Bolton Camp will include the relocation of the site entrance and parking and the retrofit of the recreation centre /pool and the former dining hall. Recreation and community programming will begin once the development of the site entrance /parking lot and retrofit of the recreation centre /pool are complete. Below is a brief outline of the consultant's workplan for each aspect Phase 1 site development and building retrofit: • confirm the scope of work, determine requirements for permits and approvals, and provide design recommendations; • engage secondary school students from the Region of Peel in the design of the recreation centre by conducting six learning sessions throughout the design process; • prepare conceptual drawings, outline specifications and estimate cost of construction; • develop construction drawings and specifications; • obtain building permits and approvals from authorities having jurisdiction; • prepare tender documents and provide technical assistance during the procurement process; and • provide construction administration services, including: site meetings, review of shop drawings and submissions, certify payments and substantial completion, conduct deficiency review, and provide operations manuals and all project related files to TRCA. Report prepared by: Lisa Moore, extension 5846 Emai Is: Imoore @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Darryl Gray, 416- 791 -0327 or Lisa Moore, extension 5846 Emails: dgray @trca.on.ca or Imoore @trca.on.ca Date: October 13, 2016 rA we RESMA204 /15 - STORM DAMAGE - 111 AND 117 WHITBURN CRESCENT Award of Contracts RSD14 -214 and RSD14 -215. Engineering and construction services for stormwater management improvements as a result of the July 8, 2013 storm event. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT contract RSD14 -214 be awarded to TBG Contracting at a total cost not to exceed $192,332.35 plus HST for engineering and construction services in the design and implementation of stormwater management improvements for the property at 111 Whitburn Crescent; THAT contract RSD14 -215 be awarded to TBG Contracting at a total cost not to exceed $572,061.20 plus HST for construction services in relation to the construction of an MSE wall and stormwater management improvements for the property at 117 Whitburn Crescent; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 10% of the value of the contracts as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractors, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractors that submitted tenders, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the agreement including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND On the evening of July 8, 2013, a severe thunderstorm passed through the Greater Toronto Area bringing large amounts of rainfall over the span of a few hours to the west end and downtown areas of the cities of Toronto and Mississauga. The storm event caused wide - spread flooding and significant damage to river and valley systems, including an unprecedented number of slope failures on private properties. Reports of damage to private property ranged from minor bank erosion and collapsing retaining walls, to major landslides. Multiple slope failures were identified behind private properties and on public lands within Downsview Dells Park, including the apartment complex at 111 and 117 Whitburn Crescent. In accordance with the Class Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects (amended 2013), or Class EA, TRCA issued a Notice of Intent on May 8, 2014 to commence developing preferred solutions for all sites identified to be potentially at risk within the project area. By July 2014 TRCA was in the early stages of planning and design when Toronto Water staff expressed concern over accelerated erosion and ongoing exposure of the trunk sanitary sewer line within the northern tributary channel between 4 Jennifer Court and 117 Whitburn Crescent. TRCA staff subsequently issued a declaration of emergency works to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change on July 21, 2014 to advise of the immediate need to undertake stabilization measures at several locations within Downsview Dells Park to protect essential infrastructure and public safety. 477 The properties at 111 and 117 Whitburn Crescent are bounded by two unnamed tributaries of Black Creek; referred to herein as the North and South tributaries. During the July 8'h storm event, a portion of the driveway for the building at 117 Whitburn Crescent collapsed, and sections of the slope adjacent to the driveway and parking area for the building at 111 Whitburn were significantly impacted by the concentration of runoff during the extreme rainfall. RATIONALE The implementation of works as outlined in Contracts RSD14 -214 and RSD14 -215 are aligned with strategy number two of TRCA's new strategic plan, as erosion hazard mitigation is a major component of responsible management of our water resources, particularly in urbanized areas. Request for Proposals for contracts RSD14 -214 and RSD14 -215 were publically advertised on -line with Biddingo.com on January 13, 2015, with a mandatory site meeting held on January 20`", 2015. The submissions were evaluated on a weighted scoring system consisting of 70% technical criteria and the remaining 30% on the fee proposal. These criteria included the following: • experience, and qualifications as it relates to the project scope; • understanding of the scope of work; • expertise and availability of key staff; • reasonableness of cost. Tender packages were viewed or downloaded by 61 suppliers as follows: • Armtec Limited Partnership • 2203356 Ontario Ltd. O/A RW Contracting • 827133 Ontario Ltd. • Accardi Schaeffers Consulting • Anthony Furlano Construction Inc. • Arimco Services Inc • Baggs Construction Ltd • Baker Forestry Services • Blackstone Paving & Construction Limited • Bomar • Braywood Services Inc. • Brinkman & Associates Ltd • Bronte Construction • Canada Construction • Cheminee Lining. • Clearway Construction Inc. • CSL Group Ltd. • Dean Construction • Diamond Earthworks Corporation • Info - Opportunites • Ira McDonald Construction Ltd. • Iron Bridge Fabrication Inc. • Jeffrey G. Wallans Construction Limited • John Eek & Son LTD • Kapp Contracting • King Hydroseeding Inc. • M franks landscaping • Maccaferri Canada Ltd. • Mada Holdings • Nick Carchidi Excavating • Nilex • Pave -Tar Construction Ltd. • Phoenix Restoration Inc. • Road Mill Construction Inc. • Roni Excavating • Samson Management • Seawaves Development Services Inc. • Structural Panels Inc • Dynex Construction Inc. • Superior Boiler Works and Welding Ltd. • Envirolok Vegetated Environmental Solutions • Tascan Corp. • Martinway Contracting Limited • TBG Environmental Inc. f • MultiBobcat Services Ltd. • TDI International Inc • Esposito Bros. Construction • Tedescon Infrasructure ltd • Everbridge, Inc. • Terrafix Geosynthetics Inc. • FCM Construction Ltd. • Toronto Construction Association • Garden Grove Landscaping • Trisan Construction • GeoSoly Design /Build Inc. • Ultimate Construction Inc. • Hamilton - Halton Construction Association • Vaughan Paving LTD. • Hawkins Contracting Services Ltd. • Vertical Horizons Contracting Inc • Hilton Construction Corporation The closing date for contracts RSD14 -214 and RSD14 -215 was February 12, 2015 with bids received from the following firms: CONTRACT RSD14 -214 BIDDERS TOTAL TENDER AMOUNT (Plus HST) Bronte Construction $108,500.00 Hilton Construction $190,000.00 TBG Landscape Inc. $192,332.35 Midome Construction $400,000.00 Esposito Brothers $440,239.18 D nex Construction $669,700.00 Four Seasons Site Development $1,045,000.00 CONTRACT RSD14 -215 BIDDERS TOTAL TENDER AMOUNT (Plus HST) Bronte Construction $549,100.00 Hilton Construction $598,000.00 TBG Landscape Inc. $572,061.20 Midome Construction $600,000.00 Esposito Brothers $794,943.97 D nex Construction $1,288,700.00 Four Seasons Site Development $1,175,000.00 Restoration and Infrastructure Division staff completed a thorough evaluation of the bids received for each contract using a standardized scoring methodology as follows: Criteria Scoring Experience and Qualification 25% Understanding of Work 25% Expertise and Availability of Key Personnel 20% Reasonableness of Cost 30% with the following average results: 479 Based on the bids received, staff recommend that TBG Landscape Inc. be awarded Contract RSD14 -214 for engineering and construction services for stormwater management improvements at 111 Whitburn Crescent, at total cost not to exceed $192,332.35, plus HST; and that Contract RSD14 -215 be awarded to TBG Landscape Inc. for engineering and construction services for a Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) wall and stormwater management improvements at 117 W hitburn Crescent, at a total cost not to exceed $572,061.20, plus HST; they being the highest ranked bids that meet TRCA specifications for each contract. Each contract is recommended to carry a 10% contingency, plus HST, to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff to account for unforeseen circumstances that may arise during the course of these contracts. An 1 R5D14.214 CRITERIA AVERAGE WEIGHTED SCORE BASED ON EVALUATION COMMITTEE RESULTS Bronte TBG Hilton Midome Four Esposito Dynex Seasons Bros. Experience and 168.75 200 112.5 143.75 212.5 212.5 206.25 Qualifications 137.5 200 150 118.75 175 193.75 212.5 Understanding of the Work 81.25 187.5 118.75 125 200 200 200 Expertise and availability 140 140 145 115 145 145 165 of key personnel Reasonableness of cost 240 240 247.5 157.5 150 150 37.5 Total Weighted Points 630 767.5 623.75 536.25 707.5 707.5 608.75 Based on the bids received, staff recommend that TBG Landscape Inc. be awarded Contract RSD14 -214 for engineering and construction services for stormwater management improvements at 111 Whitburn Crescent, at total cost not to exceed $192,332.35, plus HST; and that Contract RSD14 -215 be awarded to TBG Landscape Inc. for engineering and construction services for a Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) wall and stormwater management improvements at 117 W hitburn Crescent, at a total cost not to exceed $572,061.20, plus HST; they being the highest ranked bids that meet TRCA specifications for each contract. Each contract is recommended to carry a 10% contingency, plus HST, to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff to account for unforeseen circumstances that may arise during the course of these contracts. An 1 RSD14 -215 CRITERIA AVERAGE WEIGHTED SCORE BASED ON EVALUATION COMMITTEE RESULTS Bronte TBG Hilton Midome Four Esposito Dynex Seasons Bros. Experience and Qualifications 137.5 200 150 118.75 175 193.75 212.5 Understanding of the Work 56.25 193.75 150 93.75 168.75 193.75 187.5 Expertise and availability of key personnel 135 150 155 115 135 160 170 Reasonableness of cost 262.5 263.75 225 203.75 15 127.5 15 Total Weighted Points 591.25 807.5 703.5 531.25 488.75 675 635 Based on the bids received, staff recommend that TBG Landscape Inc. be awarded Contract RSD14 -214 for engineering and construction services for stormwater management improvements at 111 Whitburn Crescent, at total cost not to exceed $192,332.35, plus HST; and that Contract RSD14 -215 be awarded to TBG Landscape Inc. for engineering and construction services for a Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) wall and stormwater management improvements at 117 W hitburn Crescent, at a total cost not to exceed $572,061.20, plus HST; they being the highest ranked bids that meet TRCA specifications for each contract. Each contract is recommended to carry a 10% contingency, plus HST, to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff to account for unforeseen circumstances that may arise during the course of these contracts. An 1 TBG Landscape Inc. has agreed to honour their pricing for Contracts RSD14 -214 and RSD14 -215 despite the significant time lag since the tender opening, which was delayed pending successful execution of the erosion control agreement with the property manager for 111 and 117 Whitburn Crescent, Davpart Inc. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Upon issuance of these contracts, shop drawings of the MSE wall and new stormwater systems will be prepared from the design plans previously developed by TRCA and its consulting engineers at Terraprobe Inc. and TMIG, and permits for construction will be obtained. Pending the receipt of all permits and approvals, and confirmation of available funding, construction is tentatively scheduled to commence in January 2016. Work generally consists of an MSE wall along the top of slope to protect 117 Whitburn Crescent, new stormwater infrastructure, parking lot re- grading and final site restoration in spring 2016 as weather conditions permit. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total cost of this project including all staff time and associated costs to manage these contracts is estimated at $900,000. Funding for this contract is available from the City of Toronto through TRCA's Critical Erosion and Flood Works capital budget, within account 133 -13. In compliance with TRCA's Private Landowner Contribution for Erosion Control policy, Davpart Inc. will contribute $270,000 towards the total cost of the work, and has agreed to easements and restrictive covenants on the property to protect the works and facilitate future monitoring and maintenance. Report prepared by: Patricia Newland, 416 - 392 -9690 Emails: pnewland(a)trca.on.ca For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416- 392 -9690 Emails: pnewland(atrca.on.ca Date: October 1, 2015 noel RES. #A205/15 - DON VALLEY BRICK WORKS PATIO — DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS, CITY OF TORONTO Award of Contract #10000999. Award of Contract #1000099 for the implementation of patio drainage and landscape improvements at Don Valley Brick Works, 550 Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT Contract #10000999 for supply of all labour, materials and equipment necessary for construction of Don Valley Brick Works Patio - Drainage and Landscape Improvements, in the City of Toronto be awarded to Landtar Construction Inc., at a total cost not to exceed $359,655.80 plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 15% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractors, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractors that submitted tenders, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the agreement including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND Over the past few years many improvements have been made at the park including the installation of new trail connections within the park and to the Belt Line Trail, a new entrance feature to the Quarry Garden, many pathway surface upgrades and the most recent addition of interpretive signs and elements to help animate the site and explain the natural and cultural significance of the Don Valley Brick Works to park users. The patio feature at Don Valley Brick Works is an important and highly used public space that serves as a gateway into the Weston Quarry Garden and a connection to the Evergreen facilities. It is used extensively as a gathering space for visitors to the site and supports a number of City of Toronto events and programs. The existing patio surface has deteriorated significantly since its installation in the mid 1990's when the site was originally developed. As a result of years of ongoing construction activities related to the chimney stabilization efforts and the associated Evergreen Brick Works site development, the patio surface has become broken and uneven, leading to surface drainage and safety issues which affect the functionality of the space. This project seeks to repair and improve the patio space to ensure it continues to serve the public as a safe, accessible and inviting space for many more years. RATIONALE This project is aligned with leadership strategy number three in TRCA's new strategic plan. MESON Through thoughtful planning and action this project will contribute to healthy and resilient landscapes through the construction of green infrastructure. Tender #10000999 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http: / /www.biddingo.com /) on Monday, September 21st, 2015. Tender documents were viewed and /or taken by 40 contractors. A mandatory site inspection and tender briefing meeting was held on Friday, September 25th, 2015, with 11 prospective contractors in attendance as follows: • Alpeza General Contracting; • Basekamp Construction Corp.; • CSL Group Ltd.; • Esposito Bros. Construction; • Euro Landscape Professionals Inc.; • Hawkins Contracting Services Ltd.; • HN Construction Ltd.: • Lancoa Contracting; • Landtar Construction Inc.; • Seawaves Development Services Inc.; • TBG Environmental Inc. Six sealed tender bids were received by the tender closing time of 12:00 pm at TRCA 's Head Office on October 7`h, 2015. One additional sealed bid, submitted by Basekamp Construction Corp., was disqualified as it arrived after the closing time of 12:00 pm for this tender. The Procurement Opening Committee opened the Tenders on October 7`h, 2015 with the following results: Tender #10000999 Don Valley Brick Works Patio — Drainage and Landscape Improvements BIDDERS TOTAL TENDER AMOUNT (Plus HST AI eza General Contracting $678,837.90 CSL Group Ltd. $323,374.66 Hawkins Contracting Services Ltd. $489,849.14 Landtar Construction Inc. $359,655.80 Seawaves Development Services Inc. $370,447.00 TBG Environmental Inc. $374,992.54 * — The bid submitted by CSL Group Ltd was disqualified as it was submitted on the incorrect tender form. The revised Form of Tender (REV01 was circulated as part of Addendum 01 (dated September 30, 2015) and contained changes that affected the bid structure and values. As a result, CSL Group's bid cannot be fairly evaluated against other bids received. CSL Group Ltd also failed to acknowledge the tender Addenda. BOOK Restoration Services staff reviewed the bid received from Landtar Construction Inc. against its own cost estimate and has determined that the bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements as outlined in the contract documents. Further assessment by TRCA staff of Landtar Construction Inc.'s experience and ability to undertake similar projects was conducted through reference checks which resulted in positive feedback that Landtar Construction Inc. is capable of undertaking the scope of work. Based on the bids received, staff recommend that Landtar Construction Inc. be awarded Contract #10000999 for the supply of all labour, materials and equipment necessary for the construction of Don Valley Brick Works Patio — Drainage and Landscape Improvements, City of Toronto, for a total amount of $359,655.80, to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus a 15% contingency, plus HST, it being the lowest bid that meets TRCA specifications. The 15% contingency allowance is to cover any additional construction costs based on approved changes necessitated by unforeseen site conditions or changes to the approved scope of work. The City of Toronto's Fair Wage Office has confirmed that Landtar Construction Co. is in compliance with the City's requirements in this regard and has no objection to the recommendation to award accordingly. a 1,ra1, Is] r_111110]4r_1I4 All project expenditures and fees are 100% recoverable from City of Toronto 2015 capital funds. Eligible project expenditures will be assigned to project account 117 -66. Report prepared by: Dave Rogalsky, extension 5378 Emails: drogalsky @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Dave Rogalsky, extension 5378 Emails: drogalsky @trca.on.ca Date: October 2, 2015 fl66 i RES. #A206/15 - COATSWORTH CUT PROJECT Contract #10000909- Channel Dredging Works. Award of Contract #10000909 for dredging works of the navigation channel at Coatsworth Cut, Ashbridge's Bay Park, City of Toronto. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT Contract #10000909 for channel dredging works of Coatsworth Cut be awarded to Catalina Excavating Inc. for a total cost not to exceed $206,710.00, plus 25% contingency to be expended as authorized by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bidder to meet TRCA specifications; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractors, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractor that submitted a tender, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the agreement including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents CARRIED BACKGROUND In 1983, TRCA began dredging operations at the mouth of Coatsworth Cut to maintain navigation between Lake Ontario and the boating facilities located at Ashbridge's Bay Park. As a result of increasing dredging volumes and associated expenses overtime, in 1999 TRCA began to investigate shoreline modification options that would eliminate the need for annual maintenance dredging. Currently the long -term solution to the sedimentation problem in Coatsworth Cut is being addressed through a number of planning initiatives, however TRCA plans to continue with maintenance dredging until such time that the final solution is in place and sedimentation rates are confirmed to be declining in response. As of the date this communication was prepared, implementation of the preferred solution was expected to commence in 2016 pending receipt of the necessary approvals and funding, with work anticipating to take 4 - 6 years to complete. Maintenance dredging at Coatsworth Cut was last completed in the summer of 2014 with the removal of approximately 3,900 cubic metres of material. The dredged material was tested and deemed to meet parkland quality guidelines for disposal at Tommy Thompson Park (TTP) for use in the construction of habitat projects within the park. RATIONALE This project is aligned with leadership strategy number two in TRCA's new strategic plan. Ensuring safe navigation of our waterways is an important component of successfully managing our water resources for current and future generations. Ongoing deposition reduces available water depth in the channel, creating a hazard to boaters and limiting marine -based emergency access if not addressed. To reduce the risk of property damage and personal injury, TRCA proposes to dredge approximately 4,300 cubic metres of material under this project. Dredging is proposed to commence at the beginning of November 2015 pending the receipt of all necessary approvals and execution of agreements. i • Sediment sampling has been completed for this project and the majority of dredged material is proposed to be removed using a combination of water and land based equipment for dredging and off -site disposal to TTP for use in the construction of on -site habitat projects as part of the master plan implementation. At the north end of Coatsworth Cut, a portion of the sediment near the fueling station is not suitable for disposal at TTP; this material will be disposed of at a Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change ( MOECC) regulated facility by a licensed contractor managed by TRCA, once the limits of the impacted soils are delineated and the volume is confirmed. Contract #10000909 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (htto: / /www.biddingo.com) on Thursday, September 10`h, 2015 with a mandatory site information meeting held on Thursday, September 17th, 2015. Tender documents were subsequently sent to the following 15 contractors: • Catalina Excavating Inc.; • Anthony's Excavating Central Inc.; • Bronte Construction; • Cedarfalls Building Consultants Limited; • Construction and Project Management Inc.; • dBA Environmental Services Inc.; • Dean Construction; • Great Lakes Offshore Services Inc.; • Groundwater Environmental Management Services Inc.; • MultiBobcat Services Ltd.; • Primrose Contracting Inc.; • Seawaves Development Services Inc.; • Galcon Marine; • T & C Construction Welding Ltd.; • The Ontario Construction Company Limited. The Procurement Opening Committee opened the Tenders on Thursday, September 24`h, 2015 with the following results: BIDDERS TOTAL TENDER AMOUNT (Plus HST) Catalina Excavating Inc $206,710.00 Galcon Marine $280,043.00 Based on the bids received, TRCA staff recommend that Catalina Excavating Inc. be awarded Contract #10000909 for Channel Dredging Works of the navigation channel at Coatsworth Cut, City of Toronto, for a total amount not to exceed $206,710.00, plus a 25% contingency to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bidder to meet TRCA specifications. The higher contingency is recommended to allow for the removal of additional material from the navigation channel, if there is available budget remaining once the costs for staff to manage the project and for the removal of impacted soils to an MOECC facility are confirmed, to maximize navigation depths in the channel until the next maintenance dredging project can be completed. SOON FINANCIAL DETAILS There is $300,000 available from the City of Toronto within TRCA's Waterfront Capital Budget under account 211 -16 to complete the 2015 maintenance dredging project, including all costs associated with Contract #10000909, the disposal of impacted sediments to an MOECC facility, and all staff time and associated costs to manage this project. Report prepared by: Jordan Budway, 416 - 392 -9721 Emails: jbudway @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Brook Piotrowski, 647 - 405 -0239 Emails: bpiotrowski @trca.on.ca Date: September 29, 2015 Bob RESMA207 /15 - CONSERVATION ONTARIO MEMBERSHIP Appointment. Appointment of representatives to Conservation Ontario. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT Chair Maria Augimeri, Vice Chair Michael Di Blase and Brian Denney, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), be appointed as Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Voting Delegate, Alternate and Second Alternate, respectively, to Conservation Ontario, until their successors are named. CARRIED BACKGROUND Conservation Ontario is an umbrella organization representing all 36 conservation authorities which brings together members and staff to achieve common goals. Conservation Ontario is governed by a Council consisting of three representatives of each conservation authority. Council directs the activities of staff and a variety of working groups, task forces and committees focusing on various areas of common interest to all conservation authorities. Conservation Ontario's bylaws require that member conservation authorities appoint Representatives which include a Voting Delegate, Alternate and Second Alternate as follows: c) "Representatives" are the appointees of the Member Conservation Authorities or other groups who have been invited to become Members of Conservation Ontario, and who participate on behalf of the Members in meetings of Council or Committee of the Whole; provided that at such meetings, decisions will be taken by the Members only by votes of the Voting Delegates (or Alternates).. Their specific duties and responsibilities are outlined in Appendix E. d) "Members" of Conservation Ontario are those organizations who have been invited to become Members of Conservation Ontario and who have accepted that membership and had their membership confirmed by a resolution of Council. e) "Voting Delegate" is a Representative designated by a Member to vote on its behalf at Council meetings. f) The "Alternate" is a Representative designated by a Member who votes at Council meetings if the Voting Delegate is unable to attend. g) The "Second Alternate" is a Representative designated by a Member who votes at Council if the Voting Delegate or Alternate is unable to attend. The appointment of representatives requires approval of the Authority as noted in the Council Composition as follows: 2. Composition Members may appoint up to three Representatives, designated as Voting Delegate, Alternate, and Second Alternate. Council will consist of the Voting Delegates appointed by each Member. The Voting Delegate and both Alternates shall be registered with Conservation Ontario annually. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Brian Denney, 416 - 667 -6270 Emails: bdenney @trca.on.ca Date: October 21, 2015 H • • RES. #A208/15 - MEETING SCHEDULE 2016 -2017 Schedule of board meetings for the period beginning February 26, 2016 and ending February 24, 2017. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT the Schedule of Meetings 2016 -2017, dated October 13, 2015, be approved; THAT the Executive Committee be delegated the powers of the Authority during the month of August, 2016, as defined in Section 2.10 of the Rules of Conduct; AND FURTHER THAT the CEO's Office distribute this schedule at the earliest opportunity to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) watershed municipalities and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. CARRIED RATIONALE Since most Authority members also sit on municipal councils, boards or committees which usually meet on days other than Friday, the recommended schedule accommodates TRCA board meetings on Fridays. Staff has made every effort to avoid conflicts with municipal council meetings, Federation of Canadian Municipalities' (FCM) annual conference and Board of Directors meeting, Board of Governors of Exhibition Place meetings, statutory holidays and school March breaks, in selecting the proposed meeting days, while still maintaining a schedule which meets TRCA's functional needs. There are some meetings that are the same week as Toronto City Council, so if the City meeting runs into extra days, a conflict may occur. Given the long weekends, other conflicts noted above and TRCA reporting requirements, these are the optimal dates for the meetings. An Authority meeting is not scheduled in the month of August due to summer vacations. To accommodate the large number of permit requests at this time, an Executive Committee meeting is scheduled. Should an item require Authority approval in August, Section 2.10 of the Authority's Rules of Conduct permits the Authority to delegate its powers to the Executive Committee: 2.10 to exercise such additional powers, excluding those powers set out in Clause (d) of Subsection (1) of Section 30 of the Act, as may be assigned to it by the Authority during the months of July and August provided that a report be given to the Authority at the first meeting of the Authority thereafter, Staff is recommending powers be assigned to the Executive Committee for August, 2016, with the required report being brought to the Authority at its meeting proposed to be held on September 23, 2016. Staff is also recommending that the August Executive Committee meeting be conducted with the option of teleconferencing due to the lighter agenda, unless otherwise advised as a result of items scheduled. At Authority Annual Meeting #1/02, held on January 25, 2002, Resolution #A6/02 was approved in part as follows: ME THAT the dates of future Annual Meetings be changed to accommodate the budget meeting schedule for our member municipalities, such that the Annual Meeting held following a municipal election be in January while the Annual Meetings in the interim two years between elections be moved to February- In accordance with Resolution #A6/02, the 2017 annual Authority meeting is proposed to be held on Friday, February 24, 2017. The January and February 2016 meetings were previously approved in Meeting Schedule 2015 -2016, but are provided below for assistance in updating calendars. Meetings will be held at TRCA's Head Office at 101 Exchange Avenue, Vaughan. The Authority and Executive Committee meetings will be held at 9:30 a.m. with the exception of the Annual meeting which will be held at 10:30 a.m.. The Budget/Audit Advisory Board (BARB) meetings will be held at 8:30 a.m. Members are requested to enter all board meetings in their calendars upon receipt of the annual schedule. Members are further requested to schedule to be in attendance at Authority and Executive Committee meetings until at least 1:30 p.m. to ensure quorum is maintained. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: October 13, 2015 Attachments: 1 491 C d E L V R m co N rn M o O M o r w o M r v N fn N M N N N (n N N M N M N F D X � Q W # Q < N< N N •> X 7 N N N N M N � N m O N r N N N N N N F ^ N ♦- H ^ M F N N m N N M N N M O l0 � N LL N N O V N LL N �❑ N � tt1 Q W I Q � � r m N fn h <M N LL in N M O N V 0 W O N r W N N N Ol N N M N < F N N A N N m � N M N F D X � Q W # Q N N LL N •> X 7 N N N W Q • M N � N m O N r N N N N N N F ^ N ♦- H ^ M F N N m N N M N N M O l0 � N O N N O V N O N �❑ N � N N � � r m N fn h <M N N N M N N N M O t0 t0 r V tp N r N N N Q � o J M Q o J Z Z Q V I � m t0 �O M O N V 0 W O N r W N N N Ol N N M N < F N N A N N m � N M N F D X � Q W # Q N N LL N •> X 7 < N W Q O N N r O N 7 H N N N N N N Q � o J M Q o J Z Z Q V I � m t0 �O M O N V 0 W O N r W N N N Ol N � N N < F N N A N M 2 V � 2 LL H W N F D X � Q W # Q N N r fL V 2 LL Co W Q a `m O m N O E a E Q U a L y a Q W in 11 II 11 S U m F W D X Q W m N W N F � � # J # M LL W Q o 7 Z Z Q N V 0 W O N < N M N N OI F N N A N M N 10 � (q � N N N N # N N r fL V 2 LL Co W Q a `m O m N O E a E Q U a L y a Q W in 11 II 11 S U m F W D X Q W m N W N F � � # J # M LL W Q o 7 Z Z Q N V 0 W O N < N OI Of W t0 N N (O OI O r tD < N r N LL X M N 10 Q (q O N N N # W LL N •> X 7 < N W Q O N N r O N 7 H N N ^ M N N H ^ N H ^ M F N N m N N M N N M O l0 � N O N N O N O O N M N M m N fn h N N N N M N N N M O t0 t0 r V tp N r m V 2 LL m W Q N N r fL V 2 LL Co W Q a `m O m N O E a E Q U a L y a Q W in 11 II 11 S U m F W D X Q W m N W N F � � # J # M LL W Q o 7 Z Z Q N V 0 W O N < N OI Of O O r tD ' LL X M UL Q N N r fL V 2 LL Co W Q a `m O m N O E a E Q U a L y a Q W in 11 II 11 S U m F W D X Q W m N W N F � � # J # M LL W Q o 7 Z Z Q N N O O r tD ' I M LL O (q O N N N N r fL V 2 LL Co W Q a `m O m N O E a E Q U a L y a Q W in 11 II 11 S U m F W D X Q W m N W N F � � # J # M LL W Q o 7 Z Z Q im N O O r tD ' I M LL O N N # W N N •> N < N < O N N r O N 7 H N N ^ M N N H ^ N H ^ M N N N N M N N M O l0 N N O N O O N M N (n N m N M h N N N im Y N N m L U W T N 'O O N N N N O O r tD ' I M LL # # # LL H W H N r O N 7 H N N N N Y N N m L U W T N 'O O N N N 10 t0 M O r tD I N N # # # LL H W H a w a H N N W N ? O N M O r O N M N O O N M O N N N RESMA209 /15 - CALEDON EQUESTRIAN PARK CFN 24276. Update on the Caledon Equestrian Park project and approval to increase TRCA's capital contribution for the revitalization of the Park. Moved by: Jennifer Innis Seconded by: Colleen Jordan THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) fund 50% of the cost of installing synthetic footings in three outdoor rings at the Caledon Equestrian Park to an upset limit of $250,000. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA entered into a management agreement with the Town of Caledon (Town) for the subject lands in 1978. In 1981, the lands were licensed to Bolton Horse Shows Inc. for horse shows and related activities, subject to the original management agreement with the Town. In 1989, the Town was advised that Bolton Horse Shows Inc. was no longer able to operate the shows and assigned the operation to the Equestrian Management Group Inc. (EMG). In 2000, EMG purchased a parcel of land east of the TRCA property and included it as part of the equestrian facility. The TRCA lands and the EMG lands are known collectively as the Caledon Equestrian Park (CEP). In March 2009, the Town was notified that the 2015 Pan /Parapan American Games Bid Committee had selected the CEP as its preferred hosting site for the equestrian events. On November 6, 2009, an international delegation of representatives from Pan American Sports Organization voted in favour of awarding the 2015 Pan /Parapan American Games to Toronto. In 2012, the Town of Caledon and TRCA entered into a 40 year lease with EMG to continue the use of the subject TRCA lands by EMG for an equestrian facility and to use the facility for the 2015 Pan Am Games. It was necessary to expand and improve the CEP facility for the Pan Am Games. These upgrades and improvements included the following: • A new main stadium building. • Permanent spectator seating. • A new Grand Prix ring that meets International Equine Federation standards, warm -up rings and training areas. • Synthetic footing installed in five of the outdoor rings. • An indoor competition and warm -up riding arena. • A building to house 80 stalls. • Upgraded parking and site services. The total budget for these improvements was $11.7 million. The federal and provincial governments paid a combined 56% of the games related capital costs, while the remaining 44% of games related capital costs was contributed by the Town and the Region of Peel (through TRCA). The Town invested an additional $1.9 million in a community centre, offices and associated furniture, fixtures and equipment included within the indoor arena. The equestrian events for the Pan Am Games were held successfully at the CEP between July 11 and July 25, 2015. 493 RATIONALE One of the fundamental principles of the Pan /Parapan American Games Bid Committee was that the venues chosen must provide a permanent benefit to the community and that the venues must be financially sustainable after the Games. While there were substantial Pan Am Games related improvements to the park, there were certain improvements that were not required for the Games. These additional improvements are required to attract and keep international events at the facility. These include synthetic footing for the remainder of the outdoor rings, synthetic footing for the indoor competition and warm -up arena, bleachers for the indoor competition arena and permanent outdoor stalls. A temporary flooring system for the indoor arena to make the facility more flexible to host a wider variety of events is also an option. With the expanded facilities and uses, the site no longer conforms to the existing zoning. As an interim measure a minor variance was obtained to allow the Park to continue to operate and allowed for the Pam American Games operation. A permanent rezoning will now be required. The equine industry creates a significant economic benefit for the Town of Caledon and the Region of Peel. By investing in additional capital improvements at the CEP, the CEP will become home to one of the foremost equestrian facilities in the world. It is anticipated that this world class facility will host a larger number of events each year resulting in a long term economic spin off to Caledon and Peel. FINANCIAL DETAILS As noted above, the total budget for the Games related improvements was $11.7 million funded 56% by federal and provincial governments and 44% by the Town and Peel Region (TRCA). The completed works came in under budget by just over $400,000. It is proposed that a portion of the Caledon/TRCA share of these savings be used to rezone the CEP. The critical capital investment for the 2016 season is the installation of synthetic footing for the indoor arena and outdoor rings. EMG has already installed the synthetic footing in the indoor competition and warm -up arena at a cost of $105,000. EMG funded a 100% of this cost. EMG has requested TRCA participate in funding up to 50% of the cost of the installation of the synthetic footing in three additional outdoor rings. It is estimated this work will cost $500,000. To be ready for the 2016 season, the work must start in early November. As noted above, the Town has already invested an additional $1.9 million in upgrades to the CEP. Funding for TRCA's share of the project costs is available in the Peel capital account - Pan Am Games Equestrian Facility. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE EMG is currently finalizing the contract for this work. Other potential capital improvements to the CEP will be assessed by the Town, EMG and TRCA during 2016. Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 Emails: mfenning @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 Emails: mfenning @trca.on.ca Date: October 22, 2015 !•A RES. #A210/15 - 2016 BUDGET Update on the status of the 2016 TRCA budget process. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Linda Pabast THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) 2016 operating budget make provision for a cost of living adjustment of two percent (2 %) effective April 3, 2016; THAT the 2016 operating budget include municipal levy increases consistent with the guidelines provided by the respective participating municipality; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to submit the 2016 estimates and multi -year funding requests to the City of Toronto, the regional municipalities of Peel, York and Durham, the Town of Mono and the Township of Adjala- Tosorontio in accordance with their respective submission schedules. CARRIED BACKGROUND Operating Budget The internal process for finalizing the 2016 operating estimates has commenced. The operating budget will amount to approximately $40.5 million in expenditures and will be balanced with projected revenue and municipal levy. The operating budget includes the direct operating and maintenance components of the following programs: conservation parks; Bathurst Glen Golf Course; Kortright Centre for Conservation; Black Creek Pioneer Village; conservation field centres; planning and development services; various watershed management activities and corporate services. The net cost of the services included in the operating budget is funded through the general levy, as adopted by the Authority. The TRCA general levy formula apportions the net cost of these services to the participating municipalities on the basis of current value assessment (CVA) in each municipality, as modified by TRCA policy. The components of the operating budget are distinguished from those included in the capital and special levy budget discussed below by the fact that the net cost of capital projects is for the most part designated by the Authority as singularly benefitting and therefore the capital levy is raised from the municipality where the project is undertaken. Staff will finalize the 2016 operating budget after final approvals are obtained by the participating municipalities and will present it at the March 2016 meeting of the Budget/Audit Advisory Board. Operating Expenditures The operating budget is comprised of wage related costs of approximately 77 %. In addition to the proposed cost of living adjustment (COLA), wage related pressures include accommodations; cost of staff returning from maternity and other leaves; and annualization of positions hired in 2015. For 2016, staff is recommending a 2% COLA effective the first full pay in April. The annual COLA increase between 2011 and 2016 will average (simple) approximately 2.2 %, as indicated in the following chart: TRCA annual salary and wage (COLA) adjustments: 2016 — 2% (proposed) r Me • 2015-2% • 2014-2% • 2013 — 2% • 2012 — 3% The proposal for a 2% COLA increase in 2016 is comparable to the average of TRCA's municipal partners, conservation authorities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Consumer Price Index. Tax Adjustment TRCA policy requires that the cost of property taxes paid by TRCA in a participating municipality be added back to the general levy of that municipality as a tax adjustment. This practice ensures equity in the levy allocation process, as the City of Toronto exempts TRCA non - revenue producing property from taxation. In 2015 TRCA consolidated administrative offices, leasing a property at 101 Exchange Way in the City of Vaughan. A special request will continue to be included in the York Region budget to cover the new taxes or in the alternative for a 100% rebate or complete exemption. The matter is under consideration by York Region staff. Municipal Operating (General) Levy Below is a summary of the status of the discussions that have been held at the staff level with the participating municipalities: • Adjala and Mono - No formal communication has occurred. • Durham Region - TRCA has requested a 3.5% increase in its preliminary submission. No formal guidelines have yet been released. • Peel Region -Peel staff has indicated a 3% increase can be accommodated for 2015. TRCA staff has agreed to work within that guideline. • Toronto - Toronto Water staff will support a 2.5% increase over 2015 on the portion of the levy funded from water revenues (57 %). Toronto Finance staff is considering a TRCA request for a similar 2.5% increase, representing $84,000, on the 43% of the budget that is funded from the tax base. The City has also requested from TRCA an analysis of the impact of a 1% reduction in the tax levy, as compared to the previous year. TRCA staff has indicated that, if a reduction is necessary, it will recommend to the Authority staff and program reductions associated with Black Creek Pioneer Village. • York Region - The submission made to York Region includes a 4% increase ($126,000) over 2015, excluding the impact of the tax adjustment described above. The following is a summary of the general levy requested from each of the participating municipalities of TRCA for 2016: Participating Municipality Apportionment* Funding $ 000's Change Over 2015% Ad'ala - Tosorontio 0.0 1.0 2.0 Durham 4.1 554.0 3.5 Mono 0.0 2.0 2.0 Peel 12.8 1,741.0 3.3 Toronto 60.6 8,256.0 2.5 York 22.51 3,072.01 4.0 Total 100.01 13,626 * Based on latest CVA data provided by the Province of Ontario, applicable to the 2015 fiscal year as adjusted by TRCA policy. The 2016 CVA rates are expected later in 2016. r e • Operating Revenues User fees and revenue from other sources fund 66% of the operating budget. The remainder, 34 %, is funded through the general levy. The final version of the operating budget will include a number of fee adjustments, including fees associated with new or expanded program areas, including the full year operation of the Tree Walk Village at Bruce's Mill, the Tree Top Observation Course at Heart Lake and the automated parking lot operation at Black Creek Pioneer Village. A review of planning fees is also underway, with any changes to be implemented in 2016. However, the water park at Claireville may not open in time or not open at all, depending on whether a timely agreement can be reached with new operators. As we get closer to the end of the budget year, staff will analyze the 2015 results and make appropriate adjustments. Capital and Special Project Budgets Member municipalities usually require that TRCA provide 10 year capital budget projections and each municipality has its own requirements and format for this information. Increasingly, more scrutiny is occurring to the post 2016 estimates. Attachment 1 includes summary tables for capital and special project programs in the City of Toronto and the regions of Peel, York and Durham. Detailed information sheets on each TRCA projects and programs are available to members who require them. As a matter of course, TRCA staff regularly consults with municipal staff, to ensure that there is alignment on objectives and deliverables; to avoid duplication of effort; to coordinate activities and procurement to realize maximum value and efficiency; and to report on the achievement of project deliverables. City of Toronto The 2016 capital submission, which meets City guidelines, amounts to $14.171 million ($14.069 million in 2015.) The City funds TRCA capital programs from both debt and water rate funding which may include reserve funding. The City's annual debt guideline for TRCA is $3 million and has remained unchanged for many years. The 2016 portion of the budget funded from water rates is $11.171 million, which includes the continuation of a $5 million enhancement for critical erosion control works started in 2014 and it adds to the $2 million already in place. Excluding the $7 million funding noted above, the $4.171 million level of core water funding for 2016 represents a 2.5% increase over 2015. Toronto Water staff has confirmed this level of funding will be included in its 2016 estimates. Further, Toronto Water continues to fund the Environmental Assessment for the Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan, which will ensure improved public access from Bluffers Park eastward. Discussions are continuing with City staff with respect to the implementation of the plan once the Environmental Assessment is completed. Funding for the implementation phase of the project currently estimated at approximately $60 million appears in the Toronto Water "Unmet Needs" list and is not included in TRCA's submission. Regional Municipality of York York Region guidelines provide for a minimal increase in water rate funding of 1.2% over the approved 2015 budget. The TRCA multi -year submission to the Region includes a list of potential projects which have been termed "unaccommodated pressures" by the Region in the amount of $1.3 million. A list of these projects is included in Attachment 2. 497 During the 2014 budget cycle the Region had conditionally approved a contribution of $500,000 for the Kortright servicing project. TRCA staff recently confirmed in a report to Council that the condition which required matching funds had been met. Council at its meeting held September 24, 2015 passed a motion which deferred the request back to the Commissioner of Finance for consideration as part of the 2016 budget cycle. Regional Municipality of Peel The core 2016 capital submission to Peel at $16.177 million reflects a 3.3% increase in capital funding as compared to 2015 ($15.700 million.) The Peel guidelines for TRCA have been met. Regional Municipality of Durham Capital funding for Durham Region totalled $959,400 in 2015 and the preliminary 2016 request is at $1,007,500, an increase of 5% over the previous year. Preliminary indication from Durham Finance staff is that a 2% increase over 2015 will likely be recommended. Guidelines are not yet available. Attachment 2 lists priority projects which staff has submitted to the participating municipalities as "unmet or unaccommodated" needs. Discussions continue with staff to review available funding. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Following year end, the capital budget can be finalized and will include the municipal capital projects as approved by the respective participating municipalities as well as all other capital projects such as those projects funded by Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation. The operating estimates will become final following year end, at which time staff can determine the impact of the 2015 operating season and final municipal approvals. Staff is prepared to describe in detail the capital and special projects included in the submissions at the Budget/Audit Advisory Board meeting scheduled to be held on October 16, 2015, and at the Authority meeting scheduled to be held on October 30, 2015. Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca Date: September 1, 2015 Attachments: 2 Attachment 1 iomnm "ai Conserantl'vvation EQ000 60,000 63,000 91,000 Consolidated Capital 10 -Year Forecast 5 -YFAg TOTALS CHANGE 2015 35,688,400 595,000 2016 36,424,500 21% 2017 37,530,000 3.0% 2018 38,434,500 2.4% 2019 43,974,500 14.4% Region of Durham Region of Peel City of Toronto York Region she al Studies and Region of Durham Region of Peel City of Toronto Region of Durham Region of Peel City of Toronto Region of Durham Region of Peel City of Taranto Region of Durham Region of Peel City of Toronto Total 50,000 74,000 77,000 80,000 83,000 561,000 575,000 775,000 530,000 880,000 1,565,000 3,995,000 240.000 242,000 169,000 246,000 333,000 2,281,000 341,900 341,900 348,000 405,000 414,000 2,239,000 2,309,000 2,591,500 2,654,000 2,648,500 3,649,500 17,463,000 9,714,500 9,740,500 10,816,000 10,826,000 12,331,000 85,083,500 267,100 267,100 275,000 283,000 293,000 1,977,000 3,805,000 3,804,500 4,176,000 4,217,500 4,313,500 27,422,000 1,328,500 1,364,500 1,373,000 1,383,000 1,396,000 8,805,500 5,400 29,500 30,500 31,500 32,500 216,000 1,272,00 1,330,000 1,332,000 1,759,000 2,481,000 8,756,000 117,000 118,000 119,000 120,000 121,000 735,000 129,000 129,000 134,000 139,000 191 1,279,000 1,347,000 1,367,000 1,00,000 1,150,000 1,325,000 42,820,000 788,000 788,000 788,000 788,000 789,000 4,729,000 Region of Durham EQ000 60,000 63,000 91,000 91 654,00 Region of Peel 538,000 558,000 564,000 595,000 587,000 3,513,000 City of Toromo MPIannIng 151,000 119,000 126,000 133,000 135,000 1,138,000 York Region 156,000 160,000 164,000 168,000 176,000 1,143,000 and Development Total „ r i r r r w .� •, r, r w r r r Region of Durham - - 40,000 40,000 40,000 240,000 Region of Peel 3,253,000 2,982,000 2,310,000 1,836,000 1,865,000 11,]32,000 Cityof Toronto 204,000 154,000 209,000 209,000 214,000 1,449,000 Region of Durham Region of Peel City of Toronto 64,00 64,000 66,000 93,000 95,000 657,000 2,438,000 2,606,000 2,750,000 2,835,000 2,916,000 17,887,000 802,000 921,000 951.,000 953,000 952,000 6,345,000 Region of Durham 42,000 42,000 84,000 ",000 84,000 503,852 Region of Peel 163,000 163,000 333,000 333,000 1,333,000 2,098,00 City of Taranto MCoraorafte 724,000 724,000 724,000 724,000 724,000 4,344,000 York Region 352,500 402,000 762,000 765,000 768,000 3,899,000 Services Total „ r„ r r w .� •, r, r w r r r TOTAL 490 400 36,424,500 37,530,000 38,434,500 43,974,500 947,390,000 Attachment 2 Unmet/Unaccommodated Pressures 2016 2017 2018 2019 City of Toronto South Mimico Trail Connection 1,300,000 700,000 0 0 Sherway Trail Connection & Restoration Plan 200,000 0 0 0 Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan - Implementation 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 Scarborough Bluffs West Project EA 1,500,000 500,000 0 0 Scarborough Bluffs West Project implementation 0 0 4,000,000 4,000,000 Tommy Thompson Park Enhancements 1,500,000 990,000 4,267,000 2,555,000 Long Term Office Accommodation Project 0 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 IT Infrastructure 100,000 100,0001 100,000 100,000 Black Creek Pioneer Village Retrofit 400,000 400,0001 400,000 400,000 Assets Management Plan Analysis and Development 250,000 250,000 0 0 Assets Management Plan Implementation 0 0 500,000 500,000 Gatineau Hydro Corridor Revitalization (Scarborough Butterfly Trail) 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Greenlands Acquisition Project 2,000,000 2,250,000 2,500,000 2,750,000 Lower Humber Weirs EA and Implementation 425,000 1,000,000 500,000 650,000 Flood Mitigation Priority Enhancements 150,000 100,000 150,000 150,000 Special Policy Areas (SPAS ) and Flood Vulnerable Areas FVAs Reviews 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Watershed Updates and Follow -up Program 175,000 1751 000 175,000 175,000 Integrated Youth Development Program 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 Climate Research and Resilience 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Sustainable Neighborhood Retrofit Action Plan 75,000 75,000 100,000 100,000 Partners in Project Green 175,000 320,000 370,000 250,000 Subtotal 14,925,000 14,535,000 20,737,000 19,305,000 Region of Durha __ Office Accommodation Project Conservation Land Care 42,000 42,000 42,000 Educational Infrastructure Watershed Strategies Implementation 40,000 40,000 40,000 Flood Protection Climate Consortium /Climate Science Applications - 50,000 52,000 Planning and Development Flood Remedial Works - 25,000 26,000 Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program Asset Management - 25,000 25,000 Tourism and Recreation Subtotal 367,000 469,000 50,000 Subtotal 1,300,000 82,000 182,000 235,000 Region of Peel Conservation Land Care - - 300,000 1,000,000 Watershed Strategies Implementation - - 300,000 500,000 Climate Consortium /Climate Science Applications - 317,000 317,000 500,000 Flood Remedial Works - - - 1,000,000 Asset Management - - - 1,000,000 Subtotal 367,000 469,000 600,000 4,000,000 500 101 Exchange Property Tax 112,000 153,000 156,000 159,000 Office Accommodation Project - 317,000 317,000 317,000 Boyd CA Bridge - Erosion 400,000 Nashville RMT Management Plan Implemenation 400,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 Land Care - Capital 388,000 367,000 469,000 340,000 Subtotal 1,300,000 1,437,000 1,542,000 1,416,000 500 RES. #A211/15 - BUSINESS SYNOPSIS AND RATIONALE Presentation of a business synopsis and rationale for each of the TRCA programs within the service areas. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to update the Business Synopsis and Rationale for the 2016 budget cycle and to report back to the Budget/Audit Advisory Board. CARRIED RATIONALE In recent years staff has introduced the "service area" approach to the presentation of financial information contained in the annual budget, audited financial statements and to varying extents to the presentations made to the participating municipalities. One of the primary objectives has been to improve the level of consistency in TRCA's financial reporting. The implementation of the new financial system has provided staff with the appropriate tools to facilitate this task. A further objective is to improve the quality of the information provided to stakeholders for the purpose of reaching more informed budgetary conclusions. Toward this end, staff has identified within the eight service areas 27 programs within which TRCA carries out its work, excluding corporate services. Attachment 1 entitled, "Business Synopsis and Rationale 2015 - 2019" provides a summary of the work carried out by TRCA within the 27 programs. These may be considered abbreviated business plans as much of the content is consistent with what one might expect in a business plan. Topics covered include objectives, program features, context, stressors and opportunities, funding, complementary TRCA actions and activities, level of investment, key outcomes, key activities 2016 -2019, and outlook. It is staff's intention to use this approach in future budget cycles in order to improve the quality of the budgetary information presented and, consequently, enhance the decision making process inherent in the annual budgetary cycle. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The 2016 version of the Business Synopsis and Rationale document will include the 2016 recommended budget together with the 2015 budget comparison and 2015 actual results. One of the challenges staff faces relates to reporting of expenditures for tangible capital assets, which are presented differently in the audited financial statements as compared the TRCA budget and municipal budget requests. As previously indicated to the board, the 2016 budgetary information will include a version of the financial information which will exclude expenditures on capital assets in order to reconcile to the presentation required for financial statement reporting. The 2016 document will identify the key metrics for each program and where available will include projected and past performance. The identification of meaningful indicators and the collection of the data has been a particularly difficult task, requiring much more effort than originally anticipated. 501 Finally, the 2016 budget will also include a summary by line item as this is required financial statement disclosure for public sector entities. Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232 Emails: rsgambelluri @trca.on.ca Date: October 8, 2015 Attachments: 1 502 Attachment 1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Business Synopsis and Rationale 2015 -2019 Toronto and Region Conservation for The Living City 0 LL K LL W ,� � ° �•8 - rev° . • • �a p O � d q J E GO 001 1 IJ l =` fro vs EL Jce ; a I P �`J � .o •r C �' _ S m o�� O °C ti 100 o z `V m p J 50 Business Synopsis and Rationale 2015 -2019 Executive Summary Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Business Synopsis and Rationale 2015 -2018 outlines 27 Program Areas, organized into eight Service Areas, through which TRCA provides services to jurisdictional partners and citizens. These Program Areas are informed and shaped by TRCA's mandate as a conservation authority: "... to establish and undertake, in the area over which it has jurisdiction, a program designed to further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources other than gas, oil, coal and minerals." Conservation Authorities Act (1946), Section 20 Situated in Canada's most populous urban centre, TRCA programs address issues borne of expansive and sustained urbanization, changing climate, infrastructure renewal and resilience demands, and the needs of a dynamic citizenry. TRCA mission to realize The Living City captures TRCA's modern operating space amidst these challenges: "To work with our partners to ensure that The Living City is built on a natural foundation of healthy rivers and shorelines, green space and biodiversity and sustainable communities. " The Business Synopsis and Rationale 2015 -2019 outlines how TRCA pursues The Living City vision by offering programming that combines one or more of TRCA's five main value propositions; these include: 1. Reducing jurisdictional physical, environmental, social, and economic risk on an at -cost basis in areas of legislated responsibility or relevant fields otherwise prone to one or more types of market failure; 2. Delivering value -added and streamlined services to reduce partner or client expense, service time, uncertainty, and /or financial risk; 3. Parlaying public funding into programming that sustains Toronto region as a desirable and competitive location for socially, environmentally, and economically desirable industries and /or enhances citizen, community, and ecosystem health; 4. Maintaining and advancing science, monitoring, technology, and /or best - practices in support of TRCA and partner objectives; and 5. Building productive partnerships, collaborations, and networks, in particular those otherwise unlikely to occur through traditional public, private, or non - profit avenues. The business rationales contained in this document continue TRCA's comprehensive performance measurement and management initiative that began with the mapping of TRCA projects to Service Areas in 2014. Future iterations of this document will include enhanced financial analyses, program outcome metrics, and internal operations metrics. Later versions will also include additional sections that demonstrate program delivery and progress against the strategic plan objectives of our partners and TRCA's own 10 -year strategic plan Building The Living City (2013- 2022). Toronto and Region Conservation is committed creating a Living City that protects and restores the integrity the region's natural resources, provides opportunities for the enjoyment of nature and outdoor recreations, and enables sustainable city building that creates value for residents, businesses and nature. We look forward to working with our partners to realize this bright future. 505 TRCA Expenditures by Service Area - 2015 Budget ($000) Watershed Studies and Strategies Watershed and Waterfront Plans 1 Sources of Revenue 841 Tangible 382 628 Surplus/ Capital Assets Gross Expenditures Deficit Govemment - Contract 255 - - Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts 2 874 108 10 Grants and User Fees Services Capital Levy Operating Levy 4,553 949 10 Mar 1,453 1,668 Watershed Studies and Strategies Watershed and Waterfront Plans 1 3,424 841 - 382 628 1,573 - Report Cards - 255 - - - 255 - - Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts 2 874 108 10 91 570 95 - 3 4,553 949 10 473 1,453 1,668 Water Risk Management Water Resource Science 11 6,317 942 29 3,176 2,140 30 - Flood Management 48 4,172 334 - 908 2,596 334 Erosion Management 1,255 16,869 - - 4,422 12,447 - - 1,314 27,358 1,276 29 8,506 17,183 364 Regional Biodiversity Biodiversity Monitoring 11 1,677 76 29 419 1,153 - - Ecosystem Management Research and Directions 10 866 309 13 - 541 3 - RestorationandRegeneration 261 11,351 780 24 6,192 4,354 1 Forest Management - 1,278 20 - 20 1,111 127 - 282 15,172 1,185 66 6,631 7,159 131 - Land Securement and Management Land Securement 3,382 3,506 1,850 1,300 100 157 99 - Land Management 81 4,094 25 10 1,640 1,980 730 (292) Rental Properties 150 1,980 388 2,253 - - (661) - 3,613 9,580 2,263 3,563 1,740 2,137 168 (292) Tourism and Recreation Waterfront Parks 979 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 413 - - Conservation Parks 946 6,552 - 4,000 - 1,119 1,433 - Trails 821 4,095 13 - 3,769 288 25 - Bathurst Glen Golf Course 14 1,239 149 1,090 - - - - BlackCreekPioneerVillage 4 3,775 231 1,371 - - 2,173 - Events and Festivals 26 2,460 79 2,747 - - (366) - 2,790 21,850 2,232 9,218 5,315 1,820 3,265 - 506 Planning and Development Review Sources of Revenue Tangible Gross Expenditures Development Planning and Regulation Permitting Surplus/ 4,137 Capital Assets 4,492 Deficit Government (505) - Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 7 3,183 1,141 691 108 Gmets end User Fees Contract Capital Levy Operating Levy - - - 632 Other Corporate Services Services 8,141 1,291 5,183 Planning and Development Review Development Planning and Regulation Permitting 19 4,137 150 4,492 - - (505) - Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 7 3,183 1,141 691 108 348 895 - Policy Development Review 2 821 - - - 632 189 - Corporate Services 28 8,141 1,291 5,183 108 980 579 Education and Outreach 3 1,649 53 2 - - 1,594 - School Programs 393 7,802 1,673 3,023 243 2,523 746 (406) Family Programs 1,178 2,551 50 54 - 2,512 (65) - Professional Training and Development 2 2,258 1,230 520 45 415 48 - Information Infrastructure and Management 1,573 12,611 2,953 3,597 288 5,450 729 (406) Sustainable Communities Living City Transition Program 18 5,003 1,595 299 561 2,548 - - Community Engagement - 2,516 236 18 158 2,112 (8) - 18 7,519 1,831 317 719 4,660 (8) - Corporate Services Corporate Management and Governance 3 1,649 53 2 - - 1,594 - Financial Management 1 1,957 720 - - 1,238 - Human Resources - 762 - - - - 762 - Communicallons 224 1,615 100 - - - 1,515 - Information Infrastructure and Management 470 2,298 175 15 - 405 1,703 - Office Services 3,603 6,267 2,149 63 - 1,444 2,611 - Project Recoveries 24 (3,034) - - - - (3,034) - Vehicle and Equipment 885 40 40 - - - - - 5,210 11,554 3,237 80 - 1,849 6,389 - Total 14,831 118,338 17,217 22,063 23,780 42,691 13,285 (698) 507 Watershed and Waterfront Plans Report Cards Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts 1: Watershed and Waterfront Plans Objectives: • Asses existing watershed conditions • Provide state of the art science to support watershed planning and implementation • Provide integrated solutions to manage regional water and ecosystem risks • Integrate watershed management with municipal planning and provincial policy directions • Improve watershed health Program Features Positioning As per the Conservation Authorities Act (1946), TRCA is responsible for advancing the conservation, restoration, and management of the natural resources within its watershed -based jurisdiction. Watershed -scale planning and management is the preferred mechanism for buttressing Toronto region viability because of its ecological and economic coherence; upstream activities and infrastructure significantly influence downstream actions and investments. Context TRCA's jurisdiction includes the Humber, Etobicoke, Mimico, Duffins, Don, Highland, Rouge, Petticoat, and Carruthers watersheds as well as 60 km of Lake Ontario shoreline. This area encompasses 3,495 kM2 of land and 3,653.6 km of river or stream winding through 20 municipal jurisdictions. Watershed Plans inform and guide the actions and activities of TRCA, partner municipalities, provincial and federal governments, non - government organizations and private landowners. Data, analysis, and /or recommendations contained in watershed plans may support the update of policies and practices that relate to and natural hazard and water management strategies, natural heritage protection and remediation initiatives, and stewardship and outreach activities. Stressors and Opportunities In 1987 the International Joint Commission, through the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, identified Toronto and Region as one of 42 environmentally problematic Great Lakes Areas of Concern. The Toronto and Region Area of Concern listing was watershed based its listing was driven by consequences of urbanization: habitat loss, stormwater runoff and reduced water quality, and degraded fish and wildlife health and populations. Since 1987, continued development of greenspace and agricultural lands has exacerbated negative habitat and hydrologic conditions. Watershed Plans and their associated strategies have had some success in mitigating the rate and extent of further degradation; should watershed plans continue to be insufficiently implemented, however, the Toronto region is expected to maintain a negative trajectory with respect to overall regional ecological and human wellbeing. This trend will manifest as increased stormwater damage and associated flooding and erosion expenses, decreased wildlife richness and abundance, decreased thermal regulation and increased urban heat stress, decreased water quality, and decreased community health and wellbeing indicators. Climate change will affect TRCA's watersheds and waterfront. Specific changes cannot be predicted at the watershed scale, however it is expected that the climate of southern Ontario will become warmer, more unpredictable, and experience greater variations and increases in extreme weather. Climate change effects will cascade through watershed ecosystems and are expected to negatively affect water balance and availability, groundwater levels, stream flow, channel and bank stability, surface water quality and terrestrial and aquatic habitats. Urbanization and climate change effects exacerbate one another through positive feedback loops. If watershed plans that mitigate urbanization and climate change effects fail to be adequately implemented, negative outcomes (and expenses thereof) can be expected to increase in a non - linear fashion. Watersheds within TRCA's jurisdiction are under very significant pressures resulting from the expansion and intensification of urban areas, aging infrastructure, extreme weather impacts and other emerging threats such as invasive species. In the coming years, partner municipalities implement growth, intensification and redevelopment and revitalization plans and undertake infrastructure renewal projects. Given current needs and trends, TRCA will require up -to -date understanding watersheds and waterfront conditions to ensure watershed management directions are current, relevant and integrated with a broad range of community sustainability objectives. Funding Funding for watershed planning is obtained primarily through operating and municipal levy. Direct Actions and Activities Watershed plans are typically developed cooperatively by TRCA, government agencies, and stakeholders. Plan development incorporates regional and watershed data, land use projections, and demographic and behavioral trends. From the data syntheses, watershed plans advance actions and strategies to address the interconnected and interdependent management needs for natural resources, human activities, and biotic and abiotic stressors. Recommendations are advanced that seek to address issues and opportunities at the most efficacious ecological, social, and political junctures. Technical documents, research, background materials, data analyses, report cards, monitoring plans /reports, and implementation plans support watershed plan development and implementation. These documents inform the preparation of TRCA's Watershed and Waterfront Plans and allow continuous, responsive improvement throughout plan implementation. Results from TRCA's monitoring programs enable prevention, remediation, and /or improvements throughout the planning and implementation cycle; key management issues are identified, improvements realized by restoration and protection efforts are evaluated, and restoration and regeneration priorities are identified. This adaptive management cycle enables preventative actions and reduces costs by rapidly identifying and remedying planning and /or implementation problems. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Watershed and Waterfront Plans are supported by the following TRCA activities: • Regional Biodiversity Monitoring and Water Resource Science provide data and analysis to enable defensible, science -based planning and recommendations • Policy Development and Review works with municipal, provincial, and federal partners to ensure watershed plan relevance and integration into wider policies, plans, and strategies • Community Engagement(Collaborative Watershed Management and Implementation) ensures watershed planning processes includes elements of participative democracy and support for implementation • Watershed plan recommendations are implemented through Living City Policies and guideline documents. Level of Investment Watershed Studies and Strategies ($000) Watershed and Waterfront Plans Report Cards Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts Key Outcomes 3,424 841 382 628 1,573 255 - - - - 255 874 108 10 91 - 570 95 949 10 473 • TRCA conducts and advances state -of- the - science watershed planning • Municipal Partners technical and policy /planning needs are adequately supported • TRCA watershed science /engineering /technical insights are reflected in Municipal Official Plans, strategies, as well as other relevant internal and external documents and regulations • Population is inspired to engage in actions that have a positive benefit on local environmental conditions as well as their own physical and social well -being • Indicators of watershed health improve Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Continue to incorporate climate change science into assessments of watershed risks and opportunities • Develop the framework and terms of reference for the Next Generation of Watershed Plans • Initiate and complete background studies and update three priority subwatershed /watershed plans • Strengthen connections between watershed management and management of the Lake Ontario near - shore area • Continue to fill data gaps, apply emerging science, and maintain up -to -date understanding of watershed and waterfront conditions including responding to municipal growth and intensification objectives, climate change, and community sustainability objectives Outlook Integrated waterfront and watershed planning processes will continue to be a cornerstone in the development and implementation of TRCA programming. TRCA will continue to refine waterfront and watershed plan structure and content to ensure continued relevance; of particular note, future iterations of waterfront and watershed plans will continue to focus on natural heritage and natural hazard issues, but must increasingly focus on sustainability, climate change resilience, and improving human health and well -being ( through access to greenspace and recreational opportunities). Where necessary, TRCA will expand its use of regional and local /sub- watershed plans and strategies to ensure issues and opportunities are addressed at the appropriate scale. Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy 3,424 841 382 628 1,573 255 - - - - 255 874 108 10 91 - 570 95 949 10 473 • TRCA conducts and advances state -of- the - science watershed planning • Municipal Partners technical and policy /planning needs are adequately supported • TRCA watershed science /engineering /technical insights are reflected in Municipal Official Plans, strategies, as well as other relevant internal and external documents and regulations • Population is inspired to engage in actions that have a positive benefit on local environmental conditions as well as their own physical and social well -being • Indicators of watershed health improve Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Continue to incorporate climate change science into assessments of watershed risks and opportunities • Develop the framework and terms of reference for the Next Generation of Watershed Plans • Initiate and complete background studies and update three priority subwatershed /watershed plans • Strengthen connections between watershed management and management of the Lake Ontario near - shore area • Continue to fill data gaps, apply emerging science, and maintain up -to -date understanding of watershed and waterfront conditions including responding to municipal growth and intensification objectives, climate change, and community sustainability objectives Outlook Integrated waterfront and watershed planning processes will continue to be a cornerstone in the development and implementation of TRCA programming. TRCA will continue to refine waterfront and watershed plan structure and content to ensure continued relevance; of particular note, future iterations of waterfront and watershed plans will continue to focus on natural heritage and natural hazard issues, but must increasingly focus on sustainability, climate change resilience, and improving human health and well -being ( through access to greenspace and recreational opportunities). Where necessary, TRCA will expand its use of regional and local /sub- watershed plans and strategies to ensure issues and opportunities are addressed at the appropriate scale. Report Cards Objectives: • Assess the outcomes and effectiveness of watershed plan implementation and other watershed activities • Provide consolidated reliable environment and sustainability data to influence municipal plans and strategies • Communicate environmental conditions within TRCA's watersheds • Increase awareness and level of engagement throughout communities Program Features Positioning TRCA invests significant resources into the development and implementation of waterfront and watershed management plans. Report Cards are the process by which TRCA and its partners consolidate data and comprehensively assess the effects and outcomes of watershed development and regeneration initiatives. The products of this syntheses and analyses - the Report Cards proper - are easily accessible communications products that convey progress against indicators, measures and targets contained in watershed and waterfront plans. Context Since the early 1990's TRCA has released Report Cards. Watershed Report Cards convey the status of watershed health indicators, described TRCA watershed management plan implementation, and encouraged partners and residents to take action where improvements were still required. In 2011, TRCA released a consolidated Report Card — The Living City Report Card - with regional environment and sustainability indicators addressing water, greenspace, energy, air, stewardship and outdoor recreation. In 2013 TRCA published nine individual watershed report cards for watersheds and the Lake Ontario waterfront within TRCA's jurisdiction. These individual report cards were smaller in scale and scope than previous TRCA watershed report cards. Based on the new Conservation Ontario format, these watershed report cards addressed the need for consistent, comparable province -wide watershed reporting. Stressors and Opportunities The data contained in The Living City Report Card possess value to the Region's State of the Environment reports, as well as the opportunity to report and reflect on the status of specific municipal targets and /or objectives. These data may be used by TRCA and municipal partners in the development or modification of plans and strategies. The Living City Report Card also poses the potential of partnering with other agencies to enable broader sustainability reporting within TRCA's jurisdiction. Climate change is are expected to alter watershed conditions by negatively affecting water balance and availability, groundwater levels, stream flow, channel and bank stability, surface water quality and terrestrial and aquatic habitats. Without a better understanding of climate change effects and their synergistic and /or antagonistic interactions with urbanized environments, it will become increasingly difficult to discern the causal mechanisms behind positive and negative changes to watershed health. This will result in progressively diminished certainty of the appropriateness and /or cost - benefit profiles watershed improvement initiatives. Report Card releases are discrete events that pose public communications opportunities. Such events can be used to build public knowledge of, and /or draw attention to, specific environmental or sustainability needs or successes. Realizing this opportunity requires the effective translation of high volumes of science and data into completing narratives and visuals that capture public attention amidst multiple competing alternatives. Funding Funding for the report cards is obtained primarily through municipal levy and partner agencies in -kind support. Direct Actions and Activities Report Card development includes data collection, analysis and synthesis. Following Report Card release, presentations are made to municipal councils and other key stakeholders. Public communications plans are also developed and implemented. Public opinion surveys may be conducted to inform Report Card preparation. These surveys enable TRCA to assess the public's level of knowledge and awareness of watershed issues, understand attitudes or perspectives and willingness to support TRCA objectives, and record environmental behaviors and participation in activities that enhance watershed health. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Report Cards are supported by the following TRCA activities: • Water Resource Science and Biodiversity Monitoring provide data and analysis that inform Report Card metrics • Waterfront and Watershed Plans identify appropriate targets and indicators against which progress is evaluated Level of Investment Watershed Studies and Strategies (2015) ($000) Watershed and Waterfront Plans 3,424 841 - 382 - 628 1,573 Report Cards 255 - - 255 - Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts 874 108 10 91 - 570 95 949 10 473 - 1.453 1.668 Key Outcomes • Watershed programs and policies are evidence -based • Effectively communicated regional watershed and waterfront conditions • Increased community and stakeholder engagement and awareness Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Watershed and Waterfront Plans 3,424 841 - 382 - 628 1,573 Report Cards 255 - - 255 - Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts 874 108 10 91 - 570 95 949 10 473 - 1.453 1.668 Key Outcomes • Watershed programs and policies are evidence -based • Effectively communicated regional watershed and waterfront conditions • Increased community and stakeholder engagement and awareness Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Produce, release, and undertake activities to promote the Watershed Report Cards and The Living City Report Card. Outlook The next version of The Living City Report Card will provide a more robust analysis of human health indicators. Watershed Report Cards design and distribution will continue to evolve with technology- mediated changes in data presentation and consumption patterns. Changes to report format and structure, however, will undergo stakeholder consultation to ensure new Report Card products continue to be accessible, find use, and provide value. Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts Objectives: • Enable science -based planning and decision making • Identify data deficiencies and research opportunities of municipal, academic, and private sector partners • Identify and /or develop best - practices and policies for climate change mitigation and adaptation • Prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk of climate change to human life, local ecosystems, infrastructure, and private and public property Program Features Positioning TRCA's Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts program responds to information needs and knowledge gaps identified by municipal partners, other government agencies and local stakeholders. Primary climate science requires significant specialized intellectual and computational assets beyond the scope of TRCA or a single agency. Accordingly, TRCA meets climate advisory and research needs by coordinating and administering a network of university climate researchers on a fee - for - service basis. TRCA maintains in -house applied climate adaptation expertise to support the application and integration of climate science and best - practices into both TRCA and municipal plans and policies. TRCA's pre- existing familiarity with municipal infrastructure, natural heritage, and municipal strategies allow it to engage and respond in a timely manner and offer tailored recommendations. Context The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) (2013) reports, with a high degree of certainty, that climate change is worsening and poses a serious threat to humanity. In Ontario, as elsewhere, climate impacts are likely be more severe in the coming decades than previously anticipated. The Toronto region has already experienced a wide range of recent extreme climate events including heat waves, ice storms, severe precipitation events, windstorms, and drought. These events are consistent with climate change projections and have resulted in significant negative effects on ecosystems, water resources, critical infrastructure, and human health. Average temperatures across Peel Region, for example, could increase by 1.4 °C (from 1981 -2010) by 2020, 2.0 °C by 2050 and 4.9 °C by 2080. Toronto region natural systems contain diverse climate vulnerabilities. With respect to natural heritage, the greatest concerns relate to shallow unconfined aquifers, isolated and surface water -fed wetlands, transitional cold and warmwater streams and climate- sensitive vegetation that is distributed through urban and natural areas. Inland ponds and the shoreline of Lake Ontario are likely to sustain more frequent algal blooms. Vulnerable flora and faunal species - and /or those that rely on these vulnerable habitats sensitive to predicted climate impacts - include brook trout, many amphibians, and white spruce. Low -lying areas, particularly those in urbanized areas surrounded by paved surfaces that convey high volume run off, will become increasingly flood vulnerable under current climate change scenarios. Human populations are vulnerable to climate health impacts. Those particularly at risk include seniors, children, those experiencing social isolation, individuals with chronic conditions, disabilities, or both, and, socially or economically marginalized individuals. Stressors and Opportunities Historical climate records will no longer be a reliable indicator of future conditions. Accordingly, historical design standards may be insufficient to accommodate more extreme events in the future. More intense storm events in the Toronto Region will pose risks to municipal infrastructure. Increased stormwater flows, in combination with stormwater infrastructure nearing the end of its lifecycle throughout the jurisdiction, is expected to dramatically increase risk to property and life. Better understanding of anticipated future wet weather scenarios enables more accurate cost - benefit analysis of stormwater management and mitigation alternatives. This, in turn, will enable TRCA and partner municipalities to optimize climate mitigation investments. Such investments have the potential to significantly decrease future storm - related property and infrastructure repair costs. Changes to the timing, duration, and intensity of temperature and precipitation may disproportionately harm certain ecosystem components. Better understanding of local natural heritage climate vulnerabilities enables TRCA and partner municipalities to preemptively increase proactive adaptation measures while reducing and /or discontinuing investments in projects or programs facing significant climate threats. This will increase the short- and long -term value for money of ongoing natural heritage investments. Funding Funding for Climate and Extreme Weather programming is a combination of municipal levy and fee - for - service. TRCA coordinates the Ontario Climate Consortium (OCC) Secretariat, manages contract administration therein, on an at -cost, fee - for - service basis. Direct Actions and Activities The Ontario Climate Consortium (OCC) is a group of Ontario universities that have agreed to make their climate faculty /researchers available for contract work on a fee - for - service basis. TRCA convenes the OCC by negotiating the OCC's operating parameters, working with individual institutions to garner their participation in , project managing contract proposals and invoicing, mediating client- researcher relations and, as needed, conducting complementary research and analysis for the contracting and /or contracted party. TRCA in -house climate staff provides technical expertise in support of strategies for extreme weather resilience and climate change adaptation and mitigation. These services are offered to internal TRCA programs and municipal partners. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities The Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts program is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Water Resource Science and Biodiversity Monitoring provide the raw data, and analysis thereof, to support the assessment of local conditions, vulnerabilities, and early -stage climate mediated change • Ecosystem Management Research and Directions fills knowledge gaps pertaining to best practice, target setting, planning and policy for urban ecosystems that integrate aquatic and terrestrial management objectives • Policy Review and Development work with municipal, provincial, and federal governments to incorporate the best available science and planning practices into plans and policies • Watershed and Waterfront Plans incorporate climate science into integrated watershed and waterfront management plans to guide implementation activities at the watershed scale Level of Investment Watershed Studies and Strategies ($000) Watershed and Waterfront Plans Report Cards Climate and Extreme Weather Impacts Key Outcomes 3,424 841 - 382 - 628 1,573 255 - - - - 255 - 874 108 10 91 570 95 949 10 473 • Climate change plans and recommendations are based on defensible data and supporting science • Defensible expert climate advice and best practices are provided to internal, municipal, and private sector partners • Reduced risk to human safety, private and public property and essential structures and infrastructure Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Support TRCA partner municipalities in the development and implementation of climate change adaptation and mitigation plans • Continue to conduct climate change impact, vulnerability and risk assessments for partner municipalities and other stakeholders • Ensure that understanding of climate change impacts and risks is integrated into updates to TRCA -led watershed and waterfront plans • Continue to coordinate the Ontario Climate Consortium, including increasing the number of partner universities, development and implementation of a research agenda based on user - identified needs for adaptation and mitigation priorities Outlook TRCA will continue to maintain and expand its science /technical climate change consulting services. To enhance the efficacy and uptake of these offerings, TRCA will significantly expand its efforts in climate change policy, advocacy, and coordination. TRCA's orientation to both its private and public climate offerings will be deeply influenced by the pending Provincial Climate Change Strategy. Once released, TRCA will evaluate new or revised mechanisms through which it can best contribute to provincial objectives. At present, however, TRCA is preparing to assist public sector partners in the proposed coordination and implementation of region -wide climate strategies. This may include new initiatives to accelerate and /or coordinate climate planning and implementation across jurisdictional, sectoral (public /private) and institutional boundaries. Private sector clients will also be targeted for enhanced climate change mitigation and adaptation outreach. New or enhanced objectives will include reducing greenhouse gas emissions (including optimizing operations under anticipated cap and trade scenarios), reduced barriers and increased adoption of climate risk mitigation tools and strategies, and overall enhanced economic and ecological resilience. Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy 3,424 841 - 382 - 628 1,573 255 - - - - 255 - 874 108 10 91 570 95 949 10 473 • Climate change plans and recommendations are based on defensible data and supporting science • Defensible expert climate advice and best practices are provided to internal, municipal, and private sector partners • Reduced risk to human safety, private and public property and essential structures and infrastructure Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Support TRCA partner municipalities in the development and implementation of climate change adaptation and mitigation plans • Continue to conduct climate change impact, vulnerability and risk assessments for partner municipalities and other stakeholders • Ensure that understanding of climate change impacts and risks is integrated into updates to TRCA -led watershed and waterfront plans • Continue to coordinate the Ontario Climate Consortium, including increasing the number of partner universities, development and implementation of a research agenda based on user - identified needs for adaptation and mitigation priorities Outlook TRCA will continue to maintain and expand its science /technical climate change consulting services. To enhance the efficacy and uptake of these offerings, TRCA will significantly expand its efforts in climate change policy, advocacy, and coordination. TRCA's orientation to both its private and public climate offerings will be deeply influenced by the pending Provincial Climate Change Strategy. Once released, TRCA will evaluate new or revised mechanisms through which it can best contribute to provincial objectives. At present, however, TRCA is preparing to assist public sector partners in the proposed coordination and implementation of region -wide climate strategies. This may include new initiatives to accelerate and /or coordinate climate planning and implementation across jurisdictional, sectoral (public /private) and institutional boundaries. Private sector clients will also be targeted for enhanced climate change mitigation and adaptation outreach. New or enhanced objectives will include reducing greenhouse gas emissions (including optimizing operations under anticipated cap and trade scenarios), reduced barriers and increased adoption of climate risk mitigation tools and strategies, and overall enhanced economic and ecological resilience. Water Resource Science Flood Management Erosion Management 518 Water Resource Science Objectives: • Enable science -based planning, monitoring and decision making • Enable best - practice identification and implementation • Enable evidence -based program design • Meet data needs and requirements of municipal, academic, and private sector partners Program Features Positioning The Conservation Authorities Act, Section 21(a) assigns TRCA a mandate "to study and investigate the watershed to determine a program whereby the natural resources of the watershed may be conserved, restored, developed and managed'. To this end, TRCA maintains research, monitoring, and data analysis capabilities to meet internal and municipal partner data requirements in a manner that maintains intellectual property, data integrity, and cost - effectiveness. TRCA may offer free and /or fee - for - service data collection, sharing, and /or analysis for projects on which it is actively involved. TRCA has conducted (and continues to conduct) research and method validation for stormwater management pond (SWMP) cleanout and retrofit technologies. As a result, TRCA holds unique local competencies in SWMP cleanout practices and offers this service to municipalities primarily on a fee - for - service basis. When bundled with habitat and /or public greenspace enhancements, TRCA's offerings provide economic and environmental value -added services at low marginal cost. Context Many TRCA Service Areas - including Water Risk Management, Regional Biodiversity, and Watershed Studies and Strategies — require high volume data collection and analysis to develop and legitimize plan and policy development. TRCA maintains its own data collection activities because the scope and scale of data collection need for known and standardized QA/QC and on -call expertise, and applied use of TRCA landholdings render the use of consultants inappropriate and prohibitively expensive. In -house data collection is also more easily adapt to evolving needs. Approximately 61 % of TRCA's jurisdiction is urbanized or urbanizing. The accompanying increase in surface hardening and stormwater collection in grey infrastructure diverts water flows away from natural features such as wetlands and groundwater recharge zones. Low Impact Development (LID) technologies offer alternatives to grey infrastructure and provide an opportunity to reduce negative outcomes associated urbanization. Adoption and implementation of LID technologies, however, is currently hampered by policy barriers related to performance validation as well as by high implementation costs associated with early stage commercialization. TRCA jurisdiction contains approximately 995 stormwater management ponds, the life expectancy of which spans from 8 to 12 years without major maintenance. The cleanout and /or retrofit of a SWMP typically costs approximately $300/m3 of sediment to be removed (or — $350,000 /SWMP) and can face complications including construction and environmental challenges. Stressors and Opportunities Water Resource Science provides the empiric and theoretical foundation for many TRCA activities. The loss of comprehensive and /or sustained data collection could threaten the legitimacy of TRCA plans and recommendations. Changing climate and weather patterns in the Toronto region will result in more frequent and intense storm events. During a rain event, the "first flush" of stormwater over impervious surfaces has a significantly high concentration of pollutants. LID measures can detain and treat flows of highly contaminated stormwater bound for local waterways, allow for onsite contaminant reduction and groundwater recharge, and protect nearby natural features reliant upon surface and /or groundwater inflows. Provided they can be rendered increasingly cost - effective and applied at scale, LID technologies pose the opportunity to mitigate the negative hydrologic impact of urban surface hardening. Many SWMPs within TRCA jurisdiction are operating at reduced capacity and require maintenance or retrofit in order to continue to meet design objectives. TRCA's assessment of SWMP cleanout practices have led to offerings tailored to local climate, sediment, and hydrologic conditions. TRCA's collaborative fee - for - service model will provide municipalities with cost - effective, low -risk services to meet SWMP maintenance needs as they arise. Funding Water Resource Science is funded through municipal levies, as well as federal and provincial funding. Agreements with environmental analytical laboratories at the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change and City of Toronto laboratories provide significant cost provision by conducting sample analysis on an in -kind and /or at -cost basis. Direct Actions and Activities TRCA maintains the physical and intellectual assets — including 320 monitoring stations — required to assess hydrology, river hydraulics, water quality, fluvial geomorphology, and hydrogeology across the jurisdiction. TRCA's comprehensive data collection and analysis capabilities increase standardization, reduce risk, and ensure predictable and cost - effective operation. Economies of scale are realized by centralizing and sharing data between applications including source water protection, stormwater management, and hydrology and floodplain mapping. TRCA undertakes research to determine the effects of traditional stormwater management and LID infrastructure on local natural features, runoff quantity, and quality. These data are used to inform sustainable community design parameters, inform planning and permitting reviews and criteria, and protect natural features such as wetlands. This last consideration holds considerable significance for individual landholders for whom the aesthetic and recreational values of natural features offer a property value premium. As requested and funded by municipalities, TRCA undertakes stormwater management inventories, pond clean -out and retrofits; TRCA has conducted an average of 3 clean - out/retrofits per year and it is anticipated that this quantity will remain stable or increase in coming years. Cleanout and retrofit initiatives restore stormwater management pond capacity and improve physical and chemical water quality parameters, thereby reducing flood and pollution risk. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Water Resource Science is supported by the following TRCA activities: • The Biodiversity Monitoring program collects data that provide ecological context to physical /chemical data collected by the Water Resource Science program • Watershed and Waterfront Plans and Planning and Development Review identify future watershed scenarios and outline current and future data needs Level of Investment Water Risk Management (2015) ($000) Water Resource Science Sources of Revenue. 942 29 3,176 Gross Flood Management Surplus Expenditures Government Erosion Management 16,869 - - 4.422 - 12447 - / Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operatin and Other Fees Services Levy g Levy Water Resource Science 6,317 942 29 3,176 2,140 30 Flood Management 4,172 334 - 908 - 2,596 334 Erosion Management 16,869 - - 4.422 - 12447 - 27.358 1.276 29 8.506 - 17,183 364 Key Outcomes • Plans, criteria, and recommendations are based on defensible data and supporting science • Data sets are of sufficient extent and quality to be utilized by academic research partners and published in peer- reviewed publications • Defensible expert advice and best practices services are provided to internal, municipal, and private sector partners Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Finalize flood management guidelines and provide training and technical support to staff, Municipal partners, Provincial Agencies and the building industry • Complete Stormwater Pond inventory and prepare maintenance plans • Undertake stormwater and low impact development retrofit projects in partnership with local municipalities • Initiate and finalize major update to Low Impact Development (LID) Guidelines in collaboration with partner Conservation Authorities and provide training and technical support to staff, Municipal partners, Provincial Agencies and the building industry • Continue long -term Regional Watershed Monitoring to add necessary data and to track changes within watersheds and throughout the GTA Region Outlook TRCA will intensify investigation of the impacts of urban development and climate change on flood risk, groundwater resources, erosion and water quality in TRCA watersheds through advanced modelling and monitoring. TRCA will also seek to develop innovative stormwater management strategies in concert with partner municipalities and the provincial government to fully address climate change and urbanization impacts. Flood Management Objectives: • Prevent, eliminate or reduce the loss of life and property due to flooding • Protection and regeneration of natural systems to reduce frequency and severity of flooding Program Features Positioning The Conservation Authorities Act (1946) grants Conservation Authorities the mandate to reduce the risk to life and property from flooding. As a result, TRCA provides municipalities and citizens with comprehensive flood risk identification, warning, and mitigation services. Context In 1995, the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry delegated natural hazard responsibilities to conservation authorities. This delegation included flood plain management, hazardous slopes, Great Lakes shorelines, unstable soils and erosion, all of which are now encompassed in Section 3.1 "Natural Hazards" of the Provincial Policy Statement (2014). In this delegated role, conservation authorities are responsible for representing the "provincial interest" on natural hazards. TRCA jurisdiction contains 15 Special Policy Areas (SPAs) in which development is accommodated within existing Flood Vulnerable Areas (FVAs). The jurisdiction also includes over 7,500 structures and more 75 roads situated within flood vulnerable areas. TRCA owns and manages flood control infrastructure and flood vulnerable lands to manage and mitigate floodplain and /or erosion risk. This inventory includes four major dams, seven minor dams, 15 flood control structures and channels, and 4,124 ha of land subject to flood risk. To assist with real time flood monitoring and warning, TRCA operates a system of 32 rainfall and water level gauges covering more than 80% of TRCA's 249,222 ha jurisdiction. Stressors and Opportunities Climate predictions for the Toronto region point to more extreme weather patterns including more frequent and intense rainfall events. Stormwater runoff continues to be exacerbated by ongoing development and urbanization practices that incorporate inadequate stormwater controls. Collectively, these conditions will place additional loading on existing flood infrastructure, whose capacity is already limited as it approaches its service life. Enabling flood infrastructure to meet both existing and future wet weather events is critical to manage risk to property and life. One or both of the cost of flood remediation works, and /or the attendant risks of flood related disruptions to society and commerce are expected to increase. The renewal of flood and stormwater infrastructure - particularly of stormwater conveyance channels /systems - poses a significant opportunity to apply natural design standards to reduce stormwater intensity, increase resilience to wet weather events, improve runoff water quality and create or enhance riparian habitat and aquatic communities. A robust Toronto region real estate market continues to prompt applications for development including intensification in SPAs and FVAs. The approval of these developments has the potential to compound flood risk, increase the impact of flood events, and entrain liability questions. Funding Funding for flood management is obtained primarily through general and capital levy. Matching dollars (1:1) for specific projects are obtained through the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Water and Erosion Control Infrastructure (WECI) program. TRCA is also pursuing funding from the Federal government through the National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP) Direct Actions and Activities TRCA operates a comprehensive remote rainfall gauging network that spans its jurisdiction and provides real - time data to TRCA's Flood Forecasting and Warning Centre and on call Flood Duty Officers. When wet weather or other hydrological events (i.e. thunderstorms) pose a threat to citizens, infrastructure, or property, TRCA alerts relevant public response agencies and issues appropriate warning messages to the public. Flood control infrastructure managed and maintained by TRCA mitigates the volume and intensity of stormwater flows reaching vulnerable areas. The Claireville and G. Ross Lord dams retain water flows upstream of highly populated areas of the lower Don and Humber Rivers, respectively. During low flow periods the dam's reservoirs provide baseflow quantities sufficient to meet aquatic wildlife and habitat needs in the lower river stretches. TRCA Flood Management program conducts extensive data collection, flood modelling, and plan development to mitigate flood vulnerability and steer development outside of flood and erosion hazard areas. Intense and sustained rainfall conditions nonetheless occasionally overwhelm system capacity and results in damage. In such circumstances TRCA provides at -cost engineering and construction services to municipal partners through Restoration Services; TRCA service delivery focuses on expedited repair, reduced financial risk to municipal partners and, where appropriate, enhanced aesthetic or natural features. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Flood Management is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Erosion Management initiatives identify and remediate priority erosion sites • Planning and Development and Flood Line mapping initiatives direct development away from the floodplain • Stormwater management initiatives mitigate runoff impacts from urban development ;and • Climate research and modelling initiatives enable preparation for future climate scenarios Level of Investment Water Risk Management (2015) ($000) Water Resource Science Sources of Revenue 942 Gross - 2,140 Surplus/ Expenditures Government 334 908 2,596 334 Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Water Resource Science 6,317 942 29 3,176 - 2,140 30 Flood Management 4,172 334 908 2,596 334 Erosion Management 16,869 - - 4,422 - 12,447 - - 27.358 1.276 29 8.506 - 17.183 364 Key Outcomes • Reduced risk to human safety • Reduced risk to private and public property • Reduced risk to essential structures and infrastructure • Improved aquatic habitat Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Complete jurisdictional coverage of real time rainfall /stormwater gauging network • Continue flood monitoring and warning program • Flood modelling and mapping • Operations and maintenance of flood control infrastructure • Planning and design, of remedial projects to the limit of available funds with a focus on special policy areas (i.e. Lower Don, Downtown Brampton) Outlook Flood Management will continue to be responsible for producing long term plans for the sustainable management of flood risk to minimize impacts due to riverine flooding on life and property. Erosion Management Objectives: • Prevent, eliminate or reduce the risk to life and property from flooding, erosion and slope instability • Encourage the protection and regeneration of natural systems Program Features Positioning The Conservation Authorities Act (1946) underlies TRCA's mandate to reduce the risk to life and property from erosion hazards. Accordingly, TRCA offers comprehensive and integrated erosion identification, assessment and remediation services (collectively "erosion management ") to municipal and provincial partners and private property owners. Erosion works are frequently bundled with habitat and /or public greenspace enhancements to achieve aesthetic, environmental, and economic gains at low marginal cost. These enhancements, combined with the ability to offer streamlined environmental assessment and permitting services, make TRCA's offerings unique in the delivery of both economic and environmental value -added services. Context In 1995, the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry delegated natural hazard responsibilities to conservation authorities. This delegation included flood plain management, hazardous slopes, Great Lakes shorelines, unstable soils and erosion, all of which are now encompassed in Section 3.1 "Natural Hazards" of the Provincial Policy Statement (2014). In this delegated role, conservation authorities are responsible for representing the "provincial interest" on natural hazards. TRCA's jurisdiction spans nine (9) watersheds that contain several major ravine systems and stretches approximately 60 kilometres (km) along the Lake Ontario shoreline. Of land within TRCA's jurisdiction, 4,124 ha (or —1.6 %) is owned by TRCA to mitigate floodplain and /or erosion risk; this area represents a highly conservative estimate of erosion vulnerable area within the jurisdiction. To manage and mitigate flood and erosion within a highly urbanized area, TRCA owns and maintains an inventory of more than 500 erosion control structures that provide protection for pathways, roads, bridge abutments, sewer infrastructure, green space and private property. Stressors and Opportunities There is scientific consensus that climate and weather patterns in the Toronto region will result in more intense storm events with attendant risks to municipal infrastructure. Stormwater runoff from such events will be exacerbated by ongoing development and urbanization practices that incorporate inadequate stormwater controls. Increased stormwater flows, in combination with stormwater infrastructure that is nearing the end of its lifecycle throughout the jurisdiction, is expected to dramatically increase risk to property and life. As such, the cost of erosion maintenance and remediation are anticipated to increase considerably in the future. The expertise of TRCA's Erosion Management Program is recognized and accessed by several partner municipalities and other Conservation Authorities; TRCA now enters into agreements with both to assist with projects in which it holds experience. Through these opportunities TRCA is enhancing already strong partnerships, and reducing project cost and uncertainty for municipal partners undertaking works outside TRCA's jurisdiction. Funding Funding for erosion management is obtained primarily through municipal levy and special capital projects. In certain circumstances, partial or full cost recovery (typically $10K - $100K per property) will be collected from private landowners when an alternate agreement cannot be reached. Direct Actions and Activities TRCA monitors existing erosion control structures and known hazard sites on public and private property. New erosion control works are typically planned in accordance with the Class Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects (amended 2013) or Class EA; the approved process for projects of this type that undertaken by CAs. A condition assessment and priority ranking of all hazard sites and existing structures is maintained and updated annually or as conditions require, such as following a significant weather event. These priority rankings provide the rationale for TRCA's annual and long -term work plans for erosion control maintenance and remedial works. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Erosion risk and liability reduction are supported by the following TRCA activities: • Planning and Development and Flood Line mapping initiatives direct development away from areas vulnerable to erosion and communicate risks to existing property owners and seeks to mitigate existing hazards to private land • Climate research and modelling initiatives, which offer insight and enable preparation for future climate scenarios Level of Investment Water Risk Management (2015) ($000) Water Resource Science 6,317 942 29 3,176 - 2,140 30 Flood Management 4,172 334 - 908 - 2,596 334 Erosion Management 16,869 Key Outcomes 4,422 - 12,447 27,358 1,276 29 8,506 - 17,183 364 - • Reduced risk to human safety • Reduced risk to essential structures and infrastructure • Reduced risk to safety and marine vehicles from sedimentation • Improved terrestrial and /or aquatic habitat Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Water Resource Science 6,317 942 29 3,176 - 2,140 30 Flood Management 4,172 334 - 908 - 2,596 334 Erosion Management 16,869 Key Outcomes 4,422 - 12,447 27,358 1,276 29 8,506 - 17,183 364 - • Reduced risk to human safety • Reduced risk to essential structures and infrastructure • Reduced risk to safety and marine vehicles from sedimentation • Improved terrestrial and /or aquatic habitat Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Conduct annual and post -storm monitoring of TRCA and partnering priority sites to generate a prioritized list of maintenance and remedial works to be undertaken in 2017 and beyond Continue planning, design and construction of maintenance and remedial projects as identified in 2015 on a priority basis, to the limit of available funds, including Class EA projects Outlook The Erosion Management Program is anticipated to continue in its present form. As noted, the scope of the program is expanding to serve as a source of expertise to Conservation Authorities in adjoining jurisdictions on a cost - recovery basis. The scale of the program may increase as weather patterns become more volatile and rainfall events intensify. TRCA's Erosion Management Program is capable of adapting to these circumstances; the business model is readily scalable as works undertaken each year are bounded only by available funding. Ecosystem Management Research and Directions Biodiversity Monitoring Restoration and Regeneration Forest Management 528 Ecosystem Management Research and Directions Objectives: • Identify and address data and policy deficiencies regarding urban ecosystem health • Identify targets for urban ecosystem components • Enable science -based planning and decision making • Identify best - practices for urban ecosystem management • Improve watershed health Program Features Positioning TRCA's Ecosystem Management Research and Directions program responds to information needs and knowledge gaps identified internally or by municipal partners. Pre- existing relationships with academic, non- profit, and private sector partners are maintained and, where favorable, TRCA enters into partnerships where research needs and interests overlap. Use of this research partnership model increases and diversifies external funding and human capital for TRCA- initiated and /or managed research to meet high priority research needs in a cost - effective manner. TRCA maintains in -house expertise in applied aquatic and terrestrial ecology. In addition to ensuring value creation and capture in partnership arrangements, on- demand internal expertise enables TRCA to independently pursue research in support of TRCA, municipal, and provincial /federal program and policy development. Internal capacity also ensures the inclusion of integrated watershed management principles early in the research planning and policy development stages. Context An extensive body of academic literature exists on the management targets, methodologies, and best practices for urban and near -urban ecosystems. This literature has identified habitat connectivity as a lynchpin factor in climate change resilience, biodiversity protection, and the maintenance of ecosystem health at the watershed scale. Many practices and methodologies from the primary literature are transferrable to the Toronto region, however associated ecological targets must be customized to be relevant and defensible in a specific local or regional context. In the past, TRCA has worked with municipal and provincial partners, academic institutions, and other stakeholders to fill data and target gaps. Examples include the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy (2007) that sets terrestrial habitat objectives at a region -wide scale, as well as individual watershed fisheries management plans that outline river and stream conditions necessary to support diverse and abundant fish populations. Target values for many critical ecosystem components, however, remain outstanding. Further, most existing aquatic and terrestrial objectives have yet to be fully integrated. As a result, many important ecosystem interrelationships may be inadequately managed and regulated through existing TRCA policy and planning processes. Stressors and Opportunities The Toronto region is home to many academic and government research. With adequate and sustained funding, few barriers are anticipated to assembling credible research teams capable of synthesizing defensible ecological targets for the Toronto region. Climate change is expected to result in a southern Ontario climate that is warmer and more variable with increased extreme weather events such as droughts and storms. These changes will stress ecosystems and are expected to negatively affect water balance and availability, groundwater levels, stream flow, channel and bank stability, surface water quality and terrestrial and aquatic habitats. At present, there is a significant need for climate change considerations to be incorporated into new and existing ecosystem targets, particularly in regard to habitat connectivity. Connected habitats increase the probability that climate stressed organisms can migrate - either through direct locomotion (fauna) or seed dispersion (flora) - toward more hospitable conditions. In the absence of habitat connectivity and constrained movement, many species may be extirpated and regional biodiversity and ecosystem health will be reduced. Ecological targets that incorporate interconnected terrestrial and aquatic habitat considerations pose an opportunity to mitigate this risk. Ongoing urbanization activities — both Greenfield development and urban retrofit — pose both opportunities and threats to a sustainable urban /ecosystem balance. The population of the TRCA's jurisdiction is anticipated to increase 6.8% in the coming four years. This growth, combined with the renewal of existing aging infrastructure, will involve the planning and review of projects of sufficient scale to significantly enhance or undermine ecological objectives. Lacking an adequate suite of ecological targets, it is unlikely that development and associated infrastructure implementation will see potential benefits realized or significant threats avoided. Funding Funding for ecosystem management is obtained primarily through municipal levy and government grants. Direct Actions and Activities Ecosystem Management Research and Directions synthesizes the outcomes of primary research with local data to develop ecosystem targets, management strategies, and practices sensitive to local meteorological, hydrogeological, ecosystem, and policy considerations. As needed or when mutually beneficial, TRCA partners with academic, public, and /or private sector groups to undertake novel or supplementary research on questions of urban and near -urban ecological health and management. Data and analysis outputs are used to support the implementation and /or update of internal strategy documents, planning and development policies, and ecological restoration and remediation activities. Current initiatives in this regard include the identification and ranking of priority restoration sites, the development of a protocol to ensure terrestrial ecosystems lost in development are adequately replaced, and the re- evaluation of stream crossing structures to ensure sufficient habitat connectivity. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Ecosystem Management Research and Directions is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Policy Development and Review identified key development stressors and opportunities within TRCA's jurisdiction • The waterfront and watershed plans and strategies and report card processes help identify and situate data and knowledge gaps within an integrated watershed management perspective • Restoration and Regeneration initiatives and the monitoring of site performance following remediation activities, support best practice evaluation and adaptive management Level of Investment Regional Biodiversity (2015) ($000) Biodiversity Monitoring Ecosystem Management Research and Directions Restoration and Regeneration Forest Management Key Outcomes 1,677 Sources of Revenue 29 419 Gross 866 Surplus/ Expenditures Government 11,351 780 24 6,192 - 4,354 Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy 1,677 76 29 419 - 1,153 866 309 13 541 11,351 780 24 6,192 - 4,354 1,278 20 - 20 - 1,111 127 15,172 1,185 66 6,631 7,159 131 • TRCA conducts and advances state -of- the - science urban ecosystem planning • Municipal partners technical and policy /planning needs are adequately supported; plans and recommendations are based on defensible data and supporting science • TRCA science /engineering /technical insights are reflected in municipal Official Plans, strategies, as well as other relevant internal and external documents and regulations • Indicators of watershed health improve, in particular those related to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem health • Data analyses are of sufficient quality to be utilized by academic research partners and published in peer- reviewed publications Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Develop a prioritized research agenda to address data and knowledge gaps • Provide science and tools to assess and manage risk and opportunity associated with extreme weather and changing climate • Complete and implement the Ecosystem Compensation Program • Complete and implement the TRCA Crossing Guidelines for Valley and Stream protocol • Continue development and implementation of the Restoration Opportunities Bank Outlook The agenda for Ecosystem Management Research and Directions will continue to be sensitive and adaptive to emerging scientific research and ecosystem data as well as municipal partner needs. In addition to maintaining a research agenda at the intersection of urban development and ecosystem science, TRCA anticipates incorporating the economic perspective more frequently in coming years. The economic dimension of ecosystem health, and changes thereof, are captured by the evolving field of ecosystem valuation (which provides a monetary equivalent of the value of ecosystem goods and services). As the practice and expertise around this disciple become more standardized and readily available, TRCA expects to increasingly incorporate this dimension in the dialogue around urban ecosystem priorities and alternatives. Biodiversity Monitoring Objectives: • Enable science -based planning and decision making • Enable best - practice identification and implementation • Enable evidence -based program design • Meet data needs and requirements of municipal, academic, and private sector partners Program Features Positioning The Conservation Authorities Act, Section 21(a) assigns TRCA a mandate "to study and investigate the watershed to determine a program whereby the natural resources of the watershed may be conserved, restored, developed and managed". To this end, TRCA maintains research, monitoring, and data analysis capabilities to meet internal and municipal partner data needs in a manner that protects intellectual property and data integrity while minimizing expense. TRCA may offer free or fee - for - service data collection, sharing, and /or analysis for projects in which it is actively collaborating. It also actively partners with adjacent Conservation Authorities to address regional data needs in a consistent and coordinated manner; the standardization of monitoring protocols at diverse sites allow data integration and comparison with watershed - and region -scale data sets. As part of an integrated service delivery model, Biodiversity Monitoring enables TRCA to accelerate the adaptive management cycle and address emerging opportunities and concerns more quickly, comprehensively, and cost - effectively. Context Many TRCA program areas - including Restoration and Regeneration, Forest Management, and Watershed Studies and Strategies — require high quality data collection and analysis to inform plan /policy development and habitat creation or restoration initiatives. The scope and scale of data collection, the need for in -house QA/QC practices and specialized expertise, and the frequent requirement for access to TRCA lands, partnerships and /or specialized aquatic monitoring equipment render the use of consultants unsuitable and prohibitively expensive for most projects. Stressors and Opportunities Biodiversity Monitoring provides the empiric and theoretical foundation for many of TRCA initiatives. Many of this program's activities, however, do not produce immediately recognizable, stand -alone outputs. If funding pressures were to prohibit sustained data collection, the legitimacy of TRCA plans and recommendations may be compromised. Further, long- standing data records reflecting the effects of urbanization, climate change, and environmental restoration activities may be interrupted. The absence of robust, comprehensive, and continuous data records would compromise the ability of private and public sector clients to access data to support or refute proposals in a timely manner. TRCA's involvement in Toronto region monitoring collaborations (including advisory services to adjacent Conservation Authorities) ensures that data collection targets and protocols are regionally coordinated and consistent. This consistency of approach increases data value and usability for public, private, and academic partners while reducing unproductive data collection redundancies. Funding Funding for biodiversity monitoring is obtained primarily through municipal levy and special capital projects. Significant in -kind contributions are made by Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change and City of Toronto for laboratory analysis of water samples. Direct Actions and Activities Fixed monitoring sites are assessed on an annual or rotational basis and provide insight on the effects of regional urbanization on terrestrial and aquatic habitat, species and communities. Results from this work, in combination with comparable site specific monitoring undertaken at development and (restoration) project sites guide greenspace acquisition, restoration planning, and management strategies to ensure continued biodiversity and regional ecosystem stability. The data may also be used to establish pre - development baselines and assess the relative success or failure of sustainable community building and restoration activities. In addition to the above, TRCA conducts a Terrestrial Biological Inventory and Assessment on lands acquired or scheduled for development. By applying the same methodologies as at fixed plot monitoring sites, TRCA garners data that inform regional analysis and perspectives on issues such as the distribution of species of conservation concern and landscape -scale opportunities and threats. Waterfront monitoring activities assess the abundance and diversity of aquatic habitat and communities such as fish. Data from this program validate the effectiveness of aquatic habitat restoration activities and guide and /or support future water and /or waterfront initiatives and environmental assessments (EAs) while demonstrating compliance with federal and provincial fisheries legislation. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Biodiversity monitoring is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Water Resource Science program collects data that provide physical and chemical context to the ecological data collected by the Biodiversity Monitoring program • Watershed and Waterfront Plans, Report Cards, Ecosystem Management Research and Directions identify future watershed scenarios and outline current and future data needs • Restoration and Regeneration projects identify and /or motivate site specific monitoring needs Level of Investment Regional Biodiversity (2015) ($000) Biodiversity Monitoring 1,677 76 29 419 1,153 Ecosystem Management Research and Directions 866 309 13 - - 541 Restoration and Regeneration 11,351 780 24 6,192 - 4,354 Forest Management 1,278 20 - 20 - 1,111 127 172 1.185 66 6.631 7.159 131 Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating Fees Services Levy Levy and Other Biodiversity Monitoring 1,677 76 29 419 1,153 Ecosystem Management Research and Directions 866 309 13 - - 541 Restoration and Regeneration 11,351 780 24 6,192 - 4,354 Forest Management 1,278 20 - 20 - 1,111 127 172 1.185 66 6.631 7.159 131 Key Outcomes • Plans and recommendations are based on defensible data and supporting science • Data sets are of sufficient extent and quality to be utilized by academic research partners and published in peer- reviewed publications • Defensible expert advice and best practices services are provided to internal, municipal, and private sector partners and stakeholders Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Maintain and expand the Biodiversity Monitoring network, including required investments in capital assets (data collection equipment/instruments) and human capital (staff resources and training on current practices and techniques) • Investigate and implement data and information technologies to more effectively house and share large data sets • Streamline internal and external data /information sharing and transfer • Support the development of key TRCA communication products including watershed report cards (2018) and the next generation of watershed strategy reporting Outlook The Biodiversity Monitoring program will continue to pursue partnerships and technologies that expand, refine, and coordinate the scope and scale of data collected while enhancing data integrity, security, and accessibility. Additional avenues — either though increasing accessible platforms or new communications products — will be sought to highlight the type of data available, the value resulting from its collection, and /or specific narratives used to enhance our understanding of the issues and outcomes related to regional biodiversity. Restoration and Regeneration Objectives: • Plan and implement the protection and restoration of natural systems: • Protect and restore ecosystem health and function • Enhance landforms and shorelines • Improve watershed health Program Features Positioning The Conservation Authorities Act, Section 20 assigns TRCA a mandate "to establish and undertake... a program designed to further the conservation, restoration, development and management to natural resources other than gas, oil, coal and minerals." To this end, the Restoration and Regeneration program undertakes comprehensive and integrated environmental restoration services for public sector partners and private clients. Restoration works are commonly bundled with erosion, habitat and /or greenspace enhancements to achieve aesthetic, environmental and economic gains at low marginal cost. These enhancements, combined with the ability to offer streamlined habitat implementation plans and permitting services, make TRCA's offerings unique in the delivery of both economic and environmental value -added services. Context Healthy natural systems rely on functional hydrologic and landform processes and vegetative cover. Impairment occurs when those processes have been altered. The current state of the Toronto region represents over 100 years of such alterations; these extend from initial deforestation through the damming of rivers to power mills to current Greenfield development for residential and commercial purposes. As a result of this continued legacy of landscape alteration and /or degradation, TRCA now holds an inventory over 10,000 lake, stream, and terrestrial sites that require restoration and /or regeneration. Restoration and regeneration occurs within a multijurisdictional space with diverse legislative and regulatory inputs. To streamline aquatic initiatives, TRCA is a founding member of Aquatic Habitat Toronto; this group includes municipal, provincial, and federal partners as well as Waterfront Toronto. At present no equivalent exists for the coordination and acceleration of terrestrial project planning and implementation, however TRCA maintains positive relationships with each of the relevant stakeholders for terrestrial initiatives. Stressors and Opportunities Continued development and urbanization of the Toronto region will continue to compromise natural features, communities, and processes. Through internal collaboration with internal divisions addressing flood and erosion risk, urban infrastructure retrofit, and regulatory planning and permitting processes, however, TRCA is able to identify sites where restorative works can be undertaken at favorable cost - benefit profiles. Despite these service delivery efficiencies, the ongoing creation of new restoration sites and opportunities decrease the rate at which the backlog can be addressed. As climate change continues to progress the number of sites requiring restoration and /or regeneration is anticipated to increase. High intensity storms, such as that of summer 2013, can significantly increase priority restoration site count and priorities with a single acute event. In contrast, climate change effects such as drought or altered hydrologic regimes will unfold more slowly but create a need for restoration and regeneration over very large areas. Funding Funding for restoration and regeneration is obtained through municipal levies and contracted services throughout TRCA's jurisdiction. Direct Actions and Activities Restoration sites are identified through field assessments; priority restoration site rankings are updated annually or as conditions require (i.e. following a significant storm event). Priority rankings inform annual and long -term restoration and regeneration projects and associated habitat improvement projects. In 2014, TRCA implemented over 120 restoration projects which restored 6,762 metres of stream and shoreline, and 52.93 hectares of wetland and terrestrial habitat. Restoration and Regeneration's expertise assists municipal, regional, and provincial partners in the development of policies and guidelines relating to natural protection and restoration. TRCA also conducts informative workshops for private landowners, partners and other conservation authorities on ecosystems and biodiversity. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Restoration and Regeneration is supported by the following TRCA activities: • The Water Resource Science program collects data that provide physical and chemical context to the ecological data collected by the Biodiversity Monitoring program • Watershed and Waterfront Plans, Report Cards, Ecosystem Management Research and Directions identify future watershed scenarios and outline current and future data needs Level of Investment Regional Biodiversity (2015) ($000) Biodiversity Monitoring 1,677 76 29 419 - 1,153 Ecosystem Management Research and Directions 866 309 13 - - 541 Restoration and Regeneration 11,351 780 24 6,192 - 4,354 Forest Management 1,278 20 - 20 - 1,111 127 15,172 1,185 66 6,631 7,159 131 Key Outcomes • Restored natural hydrologic processes and balanced hydrologic regimes • Improved aquatic systems and habitat (including critical habitat) • Increased natural vegetative cover, soil stabilization, and terrestrial habitat (including critical habitat) • Improved air and water quality Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Biodiversity Monitoring 1,677 76 29 419 - 1,153 Ecosystem Management Research and Directions 866 309 13 - - 541 Restoration and Regeneration 11,351 780 24 6,192 - 4,354 Forest Management 1,278 20 - 20 - 1,111 127 15,172 1,185 66 6,631 7,159 131 Key Outcomes • Restored natural hydrologic processes and balanced hydrologic regimes • Improved aquatic systems and habitat (including critical habitat) • Increased natural vegetative cover, soil stabilization, and terrestrial habitat (including critical habitat) • Improved air and water quality Key Activities — 2016 - 2019 • Continue to provide expert technical guidance to municipal and agency partners on the natural systems, terrestrial and aquatic habitat, and green infrastructure • Conduct annual monitoring to report the health and condition of the watershed within TRCA's jurisdiction, as well as track the changes in health, condition and regional biodiversity over time • Implementation of high priority restoration and habitat projects • Continue to provide expertise, data and mapping to municipalities to support the continued development of municipal natural heritage policies, strategies and programs Outlook In addition to remaining abreast of current restoration and regeneration science and engineering, the Restoration and Regeneration program will continue its three - pronged approach of planning, implementation, and regulatory insight to achieve on- the - ground gains. No significant program shifts are anticipated and the program will continue to be sensitive and responsive to the changing needs of municipal partners, cost saving and value -add opportunities, and the state of the natural environment. Forest Management Objectives: • Establish and maintain healthy, vigorous and diverse forest cover and associated habitat • Improve watershed health • Increase awareness and level of engagement throughout communities Program Features Positioning TRCA's forestry expertise allows it to offer comprehensive and integrated reforestation and restoration services to municipal and regional partners and private property landowners. Reforestation projects are commonly bundled with habitat and /or public greenspace enhancements to achieve aesthetic, environmental and economic gains at low marginal cost. To ensure supply availability and cost - effectiveness for the use of native species in TRCA ecosystem regeneration projects, Forest Management operates its own nursery. Locally collected seed is used to grow hardy native plant materials well adapted to local environmental conditions. Context TRCA manages over 6,000 hectares (15,000 acres) of forested lands within its jurisdiction. Active management of forests greatly improves positive forest qualities attributes including biodiversity, resilience, wildlife habitat value, environmental protection, stormwater management and long -term survival. The use of locally adapted genetic populations in ongoing planting and other regenerative activities is critical to supporting a robust natural cover on the landscape. This objective is in part accomplished by the use and promotion of native species that are collected and propagated from local trees and shrubs. The Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) is an invasive species that kills host ash trees. Despite substantial research and control efforts, this beetle is now found throughout much of southern Ontario. Recent findings and EAB observations in the Toronto region indicate the spread and intensity of the infestation has accelerated and compressed the anticipated EAB mortality curve; within TRCA's jurisdiction it is now widely held that EAB mortality will peak in 2015/2016 and diminish thereafter as ash tree populations decline. Stressors and Opportunities Existing forest resources, under both public and private ownership, are experiencing increased biotic and abiotic stressors including invasive species and climate change. The combined effects of these stresses can have a detrimental effect on the overall health and quality of the resource and its ability to sustain its supported ecological functions. In particular, continued global trade and an increasingly warm climate anticipate the continued arrival and establishment of invasive species targeting forest species. Like Emerald Ash Borer, and Dutch elm disease before it, invasive species are able to decimate local tree populations, cause extensive ecological damage, and increase risks to human health risk as trees die and collapse. TRCA uses stressors as educational opportunities to promote good forestry practices as well as proactively maintain and increase forest health and vitality. By realizing the opportunity to create more knowledgeable and engaged public and private landowners, TRCA fosters a growing constituency of landowners capable of contributing to forest cover targets and associated ecosystem services. The expertise of TRCA's Forest Management Program is recognized and accessed by several partner municipalities and conservation authorities. Other conservation authorities now coordinate planting efforts with TRCA to provide similar services, as well as combine program advertising and promotional activities. Through these opportunities TRCA is enhancing already strong partnerships. Funding Funding for Forest Management is obtained primarily through municipal levy. Direct Actions and Activities The Forest Management program fulfills TRCA's goal of ongoing reforestation and riparian planting on public and private lands. TRCA staff provides reforestation and riparian habitat site planning and advisory services to support tree planting efforts with municipal and regional partners. Planting sites are screened and selected based on established program criteria. To manage and maintain reforestation and restoration, TRCA propagates and produces trees and shrubs at its nursery. Between 2001 and 2014, more than 3 million trees and shrubs were supplied and /or planted by TRCA. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Forest Management is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Ongoing public engagement and education through Community Outreach activities including participation in forest stewardship and reforestation planting events; • Delivery of Private Landowner Forest Stewardship programming and services • Land Acquisition program to protect and grow the publicly held and managed forested land base for a variety of green space values and sustainable nature based recreation activities • Risk mitigation activities that include hazard tree monitoring and abatement to provide a safe environment for users of TRCA properties • Terrestrial Natural Heritage Strategy that establishes targeted priority enhancement areas for natural cover on the landscape • Regional Monitoring program to gauge the general health and integrity of forests across the jurisdiction and document changes over time Level of Investment Regional Biodiversity (2015) ($000) Biodiversity Monitoring Ecosystem Management Research and Directions Restoration and Regeneration Forest Management 1,677 Sources of Revenue 29 Gross - 1,153 Surplus/ Expenditures Government 13 - - 541 3 - 11,351 Deficit 24 6,192 User Contra il 1,278 Capital Operating 20 - 1,111 Grants Fees Services Other Levy Levy 131 and Other 1,677 76 29 419 - 1,153 - - 866 309 13 - - 541 3 - 11,351 780 24 6,192 - 4,354 1 - 1,278 20 - 20 - 1,111 127 15,172 1,185 66 6,631 7,159 131 Key Outcomes • Maintain, increase, and improve forest cover • Transform marginal and or agriculturally fragile lands into forests • Contribute to watershed objectives including: • Healthy habitat and wildlife populations thereof • Greenhouse gas reduction and climate change mitigation • Contribute to landowner and /or citizen benefits including: • Improve outdoor recreation opportunities and realize attendant academic, health, and wellbeing benefits • Reduce private property energy costs (shade and shelter) • Increase social and community well -being through collective contribution to the natural environment Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Continue public engagement and education on best forestry practices • Continue identification, planning and implementation of reforestation and restoration priority projects, including prepare site specific forest resource management plans • Continue to monitor, grow and supply hardy native plant materials from TRCA's nursery • Analyze, prioritize and coordinate enhanced Managed Forest implementation on TRCA lands with an emphasis on stands with a high composition of ash trees as a result of the emerald ash borer Outlook At present, the Forest Management Program is anticipated to continue working toward high quality forest cover capable of sustaining ecosystem functions while providing safe and enjoyable passive recreational opportunities for citizens. TRCA will continue to educate the community and improve existing forest health by implementing good forestry practices. Land Securement Land Management Rental Properties 541 Land Securement Objectives: • Bring environmentally significant natural heritage lands into public ownership • Assure the protection of life and property by securing lands subject to flood and erosion hazards • Increase the recreational health benefits by allowing for public use and enjoyment Program Features Positioning The Conservation Authorities Act provides TRCA with the mandate "to acquire by purchase, lease or otherwise and to expropriate any land that it may require," This securement allows for the protection of human life and property by securing lands subject to erosion or flooding hazards, protects the form and function of natural heritage lands by bringing them into public ownership and management and increases the local and regional recreational health benefits by allowing for public use and programming. Land is secured through a variety of methods including fee simple purchases, donations, conservation and other easements, restrictive covenants, leases and management and other agreements. Land securement is primarily achieved through the Greenlands Acquisition Project 2016 -2020. Context TRCA's current landholdings contain approximately 7% of the total land base of TRCA's jurisdiction; these include several Conservation Areas, major ravine systems including 9 watersheds, the Lake Ontario shoreline, and other existing greenspace holdings of more than 18,000 hectares. TRCA's Greenlands Acquisition Project 2016 -2020 includes criteria such as the TRCA's Terrestrial Natural Heritage Strategy (TNHS) and outlines priority areas and parcels for acquisition. Securement of these lands was identified as critical to maintain viable functioning of Toronto Region's watersheds and associated ecosystems. Stressors and Opportunities TRCA is currently constrained in being able to fund fee simple acquisitions. While the Regions of Peel, York and Durham, currently have greenlands funding programs that will contribute up to a maximum of 50% of the total cost of acquisition, matching funding sources have proven difficult to obtain. Opportunities to secure land through donation have increased due to the Environment Canada's Ecological Gifts Program, which allows donors to use their charitable tax receipt for up to 10 years, offsetting up to 100% of their yearly income. While such transactions bring important natural heritage features into public ownership, they are opportunity based and complement TRCA's land securement initiatives. TRCA also continues to acquire lands through the development process for nominal consideration. Funding Funding for securement of nominal value transactions and donations is obtained through municipal levy. For market value land acquisitions, regional and local municipal programs exist which allocate up to 50% of the total costs for the purchase of priority environmental significant lands as identified by TRCA. These regional and municipal initiatives are constrained by a lack of matching funding. Funding may also be secured from other organizations such as the Nature Conservancy of Canada, the Ontario Heritage Land Trust and private foundations. Direct Actions and Activities TRCA secured 802 hectares between 2011 and 2014, and is on track to meet the target of 1,000 hectares established in the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 -2015. The Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016- 2020 identifies funding partners and estimated financial contributions over its five year duration. Based on recent rate projections, it is estimated that 1,000 hectares (2,500 acres) could be secured during the period of this acquisition project. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Land securement is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Building the Living City (TRCA's 10 year Strategic Plan) • TRCA's integrated watershed and waterfront plans • The Living City Policies for Planning and Development and Flood Line mapping initiatives, which direct development away from areas vulnerable to flooding or erosion resulting in the conveyance of undevelopable lands to TRCA for nominal consideration. • Erosion control projects which allow for the conveyance of lands upon which new protective infrastructure is built • Remedial Action Plan program • Waterfront public use development which fund the securement of key trail and other connections • Natural heritage regeneration projects which identify priority parcels of land to enhance regional and local natural heritage resources • Watershed management projects which identify priority parcels of land to protect and secure a viable and sustainable source of potable groundwater Level of Investment Land Securement and Management (2015) ($000) Land Securement 3,506 1,850 1,300 100 157 99 Land Management Sources of Revenue 25 Gross 1,980 730 (292) Surplus/ Expenditures Government 2,253 - - (661) - Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Land Securement 3,506 1,850 1,300 100 157 99 Land Management 4,094 25 10 1,640 1,980 730 (292) Rental Properties 1,980 388 2,253 - - (661) - 9,580 2,263 3,563 1,740 - 2,137 168 (292) Key Outcomes • Acquisition of land in support of TRCA's Living City Policies, Integrated watershed and waterfront plans, provincial, regional and municipal official plans and the Terrestrial Natural Heritage Strategy as well as other TRCA plans and strategies • Protection of environmentally significant land including terrestrial and aquatic habitat • Protection of greenspace for health and wellness benefits including air and water quality preservation, trails and active recreation, and social enhancement, and aesthetic benefits • Increased use of natural features in the attractiveness of the Toronto Region as a location for business and residence Key Activities — 2016 - 2019 Implement the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016 -2020 o Acquire lots of record that are located in the flood plain or in ecologically or hydrologically important areas o Secure areas for source water protection, as they are identified o Acquire lands to extend and to complete the missing connections in the TNHS and public ownership along the river valleys and Lake Ontario shoreline o Secure continuous corridors for the regional trail system o Acquire greenlands around existing TRCA properties, to amass larger areas o Communicate the benefits of the Ecological Gifts Program to private landowners Outlook Land Securement is delivered primarily through the Greenlands Acquisition Project 2016 -2020 will continue in its present form. This new project will include revised objectives regarding the quantity, location, and parameters of land TRCA seeks to acquire. Program implementation and success will ultimately depend on securing adequate funds to acquire priority parcels of land. Land Management Objectives: • Extensive networks of healthy and sustainable greenspace • Improved protection of Toronto region's natural systems • Increased public utilization and enjoyment of greenspace, with individual and social health and wellbeing benefits Program Features Positioning The Conservation Authorities Act (1946) provides the legal basis for TRCA's mandate to undertake watershed planning and management programs that prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk to life and property from flood and erosion hazards, as well as encourage the conservation and restoration of natural resources. To meet this mandate, TRCA undertakes comprehensive land asset management services on TRCA managed lands to reduce human and asset risk from natural or human hazards, eliminate encroachments, and discourage unauthorized use of conservation lands. Through its land management activities, TRCA is able to ensure that natural and cultural heritage resources are protected and, where appropriate, provide opportunities for safe and enjoyable recreation experiences to residents and visitors. Context TRCA owns over 17,000 hectares of land within the Toronto region (approximately 7.2% of TRCA's jurisdiction). TRCA's ownership over this property enables the protection and management of valley and stream corridors, flood plains, the Lake Ontario shore lands, wildlife, vegetation and environmentally significant areas. Over half of TRCA -owned lands are managed outright by TRCA and offer limited or no public access (8,300 hectares), or instead serve as conservation parks and education field centres (530 hectares). The balance of TRCA land is managed under municipal management agreements, third -party leases, rentals or other covenants and easements. TRCA and its municipal partners manage trails, conservation areas and parks within communities. Trails linkages include those within ravine systems and on the Lake Ontario shoreline. Large urban wilderness parks like Tommy Thompson Park offer outdoor activities such as hiking, cross country skiing, bird - watching and nature appreciation. While most of TRCA lands provide opportunities for minor recreational use or passive non - intrusive uses, certain areas are managed to support major recreational uses such as campgrounds, educational facilities, sustainable community demonstration sites, and a golf course. TRCA employs best management practices and environmental stewardship, through the establishment of land management and master plans, to protect and conserve the valuable natural and cultural heritage attributes within each of its nine watersheds. All TRCA properties, regardless of the management category and intensity of public use, require regular and proper inspection, land planning, management and monitoring. Stressors and Opportunities The Toronto region faces a rapidly growing urban population with increasing demand for access to greenspace that is declining in quality. To meet future needs, greenspace planning and management must be addressed as an integrated system. To this end, TRCA will assist municipal partners in the development of a greenspace network that maximizes community wellbeing and local ecosystem protection. Opportunities with this approach include increased citizen health and happiness, increased appropriate access to existing nature, and the creation of new green infrastructure in urban areas. Investment in long -term greenspace management and renewal will be required for these objectives to be realized. TRCA lacks stable funding to ensure comprehensive site securement and /or maintain state of good repair on existing infrastructure. Funding to develop additional land management or public use plans (to proactively prepare for future public needs for accessible greenspace) is also lacking. The absence of stable public funding indexed to land securement poses a significant threat to TRCA's ability to continue providing greenspace access in a responsible manner. Should stable funding sources not be identified, TRCA expects to develop strategies that curtail greenspace access and decrease associated expenses to sustainable levels. Funding Funding for land management is obtained primarily through municipal levy and special capital projects. Taxes and insurance are funded through operating funds. Direct Actions and Activities TRCA's land management activities complement TRCA's aim to protect and restore the form and function of existing ecological systems. Program initiatives include the assessment, planning, management, monitoring and administration of TRCA properties. These actions ensure that natural and cultural heritage resources are protected and, where appropriate, opportunities are provided for safe and enjoyable visitor experiences. Administrative functions undertaken through the Land Management program include asset inventories and management planning, stewardship and monitoring, site securement and encroachment removal, hazard identification and mitigation, and the administration of insurance and realty taxes. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Land management is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Land Securement and Rental program initiatives bring new lands into TRCA ownership and generate revenue for TRCA programs • Forest Management programs assist in the identification and mitigation of natural hazards on TRCA lands and reduce or eliminate the realty tax burden on qualifying lands • The Trails program directly coordinates with land management actions on lands where public access is permitted • Conservation Parks and School Program field centres include high- intensity public uses such as campgrounds, swimming facilities, educational programing and facilities etc. However, the basic land management requirements for these lands are still consistent with a broader land management framework for all TRCA lands • Community Engagement programs are involved in the development and implementation of land management plans and programs Level of Investment Land Securement and Management (2015) ($000) Land Securement 3,506 1,850 1,300 100 157 99 Land Management Sources of Revenue 25 Gross 1,980 730 (292) Surplus/ Expenditures Government 2,253 - - (661) - Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Land Securement 3,506 1,850 1,300 100 157 99 Land Management 4,094 25 10 1,640 1,980 730 (292) Rental Properties 1,980 388 2,253 - - (661) - 9,580 2,263 3,563 1,740 2,137 168 (292) Key Outcomes • Identify and protect ecological functions and services and cultural heritage on TRCA lands • Provide safe, sustainable public recreation opportunities (where appropriate) and reduce /mitigate TRCA liability and risk as a landowner • Undertake responsible steward /partnership with respect to aboriginal engagement and heritage • Improve individual and social health and wellbeing indicators by providing safe access to natural environment interaction and activity Key Activities — 2016 - 2019 • Initial inventory of new property acquisitions and lands not previously assessed • Ongoing audit of TRCA property boundaries • Ongoing assessment and abatement of hazard trees along prescribed property boundaries. • Ongoing land operation activities including site securement, encroachment removal, hazard identification and mitigation • Initiation of jurisdiction -wide Greenspace Strategy • Ongoing administration of TRCA's Cultural Heritage Master Plan including archaeological database management, assessments and monitoring, collection management, aboriginal engagement, and archaeological education and outreach Outlook As the broader socio - ecological context of the region continues to change, TRCA management systems will seek to remain responsive and adaptive. Land Management program activities, however, are dependent on the level of financial resources made available by benefitting municipalities. Where financial support is strong, land management activities will continue to be robust, comprehensive and proactive. Where little or no financial support is provided, land management activities will include only basic hazard audits and mitigation necessary to permit safe public use on select lands; remaining lands in unfunded regions will be closed to public access. On May 4, 2011, the federal government announced the creation of the Rouge National Urban Park. This site, located within the Rouge Watershed, consolidated TRCA, federal, provincial and municipal lands into a new park under Parks Canada management. TRCA is working with Parks Canada on the conveyance of 2,266 hectares of TRCA land to the Park of which nearly 60% is managed by TRCA and the remainder by City of Toronto. Most of the TRCA managed lands are included in third party leases and rentals. Rental Properties Objectives: • Financial sustainability • Maximize asset values and associated revenues • Comply with relevant legislation. Program Features Positioning The Conservation Authorities Act empowers TRCA to lease land that it has acquired. TRCA does on occasion acquire property that is improved with residential dwellings /outbuildings and parcels of land that may be suitable for leasing. Provided the environmental features for which the properties were purchased are not being impacted, the dwellings /outbuildings and suitable land are being leased to maximize asset values and associated revenues. Retrofits, upgrades and renovations to the structures are considered in conjunction with the TRCA's overall commitment to sustainability, a healthy and safe environment and net revenues to support other corporate projects. Context TRCA currently manages 163 leases comprised of 118 residential leases, 19 farm land leases, 8 commercial leases, together with 18 ancillary land use leases. Commercial leases include but are not limited to, cellular telecommunication towers, Wild Water Kingdom, Frenchman's Bay Club, and the Claireville Ranch. TRCA also rents more than 2,534 acres of land for farming purposes, which includes near urban farm agricultural agreements. TRCA in partnership with trail organizers and school boards has entered into trail agreements and field school agreements. Stressors and Opportunities A key stressor associated with maximizing rental income is the age of the structures. Older homes have poor insulation, are more difficult to heat and maintain. Budgetary constraints limit the capital expenditures available for this purpose. TRCA is exploring partnerships with private individuals or companies wherein uninhabitable TRCA homes (poorly insulated or otherwise) would be renovated in exchange for free or significantly reduced rent over a defined period of time. At the end of the lease period TRCA would have a housing unit in an improved and habitable condition. TRCA continues to explore and pursue revenue generating opportunities from the lease of TRCA land. Some examples include expanding near urban agricultural opportunities and trail agreements. These opportunities contribute to community engagement, i.e. trail users and ability to purchase locally grown food. Funding The rental program is self - sufficient. Revenue generated from this program covers the costs for maintaining the residential properties and the net revenue generated, supports other corporate programs and supports staff costs for managing TRCA lands. Direct Actions and Activities The residential component of the portfolio is governed by the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006. Rental related activities include, managing rental payments, rental expenditures and terms and conditions of the leases and includes the renewal of leases and filling of vacancies. This includes the negotiation of new commercial leases and long term restoration agreements. Furthermore, TRCA arranges for regular and major maintenance repairs to the structures, as well, as prepares 10 year maintenance plans. TRCA abides by all Ontario Health and Safety Regulations, the Heritage Act and the Ontario Building Code. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Rental properties are supported by the following TRCA activities: • Land Securement acquires the properties in the initial stage Level of Investment Land Securement and Management (2015) ($000) Land Securement 3,506 Sources of Revenue 1,300 100 Gross Land Management 4,094 Surplus/ Expenditures Government Rental Properties 1,980 388 2,253 - (661) - 9,580 Deficit 3,563 1,740 Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Land Securement 3,506 1,850 1,300 100 - 157 99 - Land Management 4,094 25 10 1,640 1,980 730 (292) Rental Properties 1,980 388 2,253 - (661) - 9,580 2,263 3,563 1,740 2,137 168 (292) Key Outcomes • Revenue generation • Compliance with all applicable legislation • Support staff costs for managing TRCA lands Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Ongoing health, safety, and major maintenance inspections • Water quality within residential and commercial properties • Negotiate long -term occupancies and /or restoration agreements • Increase rental income by increasing near urban agricultural leases, cell tower leases and other lease opportunities • Prepare ten -year maintenance plans Outlook Rental Property income is anticipated to increase in 2016 in accordance with the Residential Tenancies Act. Continue to carry out regular and major maintenance on the residential dwellings and manage the rental portfolio. Explore opportunities for long term restoration agreements and commercial leases, in an effort to increase revenues to support other TRCA programs and for asset betterment. On May 4, 2011, the federal government announced the creation of the Rouge National Urban Park. This site, located within the Rouge Watershed, consolidated TRCA, federal, provincial and municipal lands into a new park under Parks Canada management. TRCA is working with Parks Canada on the conveyance of 2,266 hectares of TRCA land to the Park which includes 68 residential leases, 9 farm land leases, 2 commercial leases and 2 ancillary land use leases. TRCA is in discussions with Parks Canada about its ongoing role in the management of the rentals and leases after transfer. Conservation Parks Waterfront Parks Trails Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) Bathurst Glen Golf Course Events and Festivals 550 Conservation Parks Objectives: • Provide sustainable and accessible nature -based recreation and tourism experiences for residents and visitors • Enable behaviours that foster individual and social health and well -being including: • Active living through active recreation • Connections to nature through recreation • Enhance equality, inclusion, and access to natural environment settings for populations facing barriers to participation • Deliver a high quality customer experience in support of a vibrant eco- tourism economy. • Ensure financial sustainability and promote sustainable growth • Draw and retain regional tourism visitation by developing, operating and maintaining world -class recreational programming, facilities and trails Program Features Positioning TRCA is the largest landowner in the Toronto region and manages ten Conservation Parks across nine watersheds. Proximity to the urban core makes Conservation Parks attractive to urban and suburban residents and visitors seeking natural spaces and recreation opportunities within the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Conservation Parks offer the public unique outdoor experiences by providing specialized site -based amenities and hosting niche, nature -based recreation activities and products. Context Conservation Parks are generally located within a 45- minute driving radius of Toronto's urban core. Daily park admission fees are charged at seven parks, and are $6.50 for adults, $5.50 for seniors, and free admission for children under the age of 15 when accompanied by a paying adult. Park sites for which admission fees are not charged are campgrounds, offer fewer or basic amenities, or are subject to agreements whereby park administration expenses are covered by the local municipality. Conservation Parks complement the green space offered by local municipalities through enhanced outdoor recreation offerings. Conservation Parks offer multi -use trails designed for hiking, biking, cross country skiing and other modes of active use transportation. In addition to trails, the parks also feature short and long -term camping and RV facilities, swimming pools, splash pads, fishing ponds, fully serviced manicured spaces for gatherings and picnics, and comfort amenities. Specialized facilities include a BMX bike park, Treetop Trekking experiences and indoor facilities for special events, such as green weddings and corporate gatherings. Conservation Parks also serve as host sites for TRCA programming, including family programs, workshops, public and private events, and festivals. There are no Ontario provincial parks located within TRCA's jurisdiction, although adjacent municipalities /watersheds with a provincial park include the Credit, Georgina /Lake Simcoe, Mono, Oakville, and Oshawa /Darlington. Some provincial park offerings such as camping, day use, trails, and natural heritage programming present direct competition to TRCA offerings. However, TRCA conservation areas offer unique opportunities to visitors and tourists in the form of private/ public events such as adventure and endurance races. Provincial park fees are structured differently than TRCA fees making direct comparison difficult. On May 4, 2011, the federal government announced the creation of the Rouge National Urban Park. This site, located within the Rouge Watershed, consolidated TRCA, federal, and provincial lands into a new site under federal management. Parks Canada is responsible for further development and administration of Rouge Park and it is anticipated that site offerings and constraints will be more similar to those of provincial parks. Stressors and Opportunities Research indicates strong links between experiences in nature and key academic, health, social and environmental outcomes. As many TRCA conservation parks are situated in locations where access is motor vehicle dependent, rural TRCA conservation parks disproportionately benefit families with the time and resources to travel to the park site. TRCA is pursuing opportunities to improve park access and diversify visitation through partnerships with organizations like Park Bus (provides transportation from Toronto's core to specific TRCA parks), and through the creation of trail connections for active -use travel. Further opportunities exist to reduce barriers to access for populations facing constraints to participation in outdoor recreation and TRCA may explore new potential partnerships with TTC and other transit providers to this effect. TRCA pursues opportunities to better engage all demographics of the Toronto region in outdoor activities. Through conservation parks initiatives and associated infrastructure, TRCA seeks to provide supportive physical and social environments in order to encourage participation in recreation and help build strong, caring communities. In doing so, TRCA seeks to equitably improve individual and social health and wellbeing indicators among Toronto region citizenry. Many of TRCA's conservation parks were established over 59 years ago. As a result, a high proportion of existing park infrastructure is now reaching the end of its lifecycle and requires renewal or replacement. Insufficient funding for infrastructure and its attendant risk to human safety and visitor experience poses a stressor to TRCA's objective of increasing the number and duration of visits to Conservation Parks. Volatility in fuel prices and Canadian dollar exchange rates may result in more Toronto region residents choosing to spend vacations or other leisure days near their primary residence ( "staycations "). Accordingly, increases in the number of area residents seeking single -day outings present an opportunity for conservation parks to increase attendance and revenue generation. Funding TRCA Conservation Parks are funded through operating levy and user fees. Direct Actions and Activities Conservation Parks manages the administration and upkeep of conservation park sites. Actions include the maintenance and upkeep of parks infrastructure, staffing and programming of site facilities, the development of new programs and partnerships. In addition to site - specific infrastructure (for example, the BMX bike park at Bruce's Mill), infrastructure at conservation parks sites include extensive trails, all- season buildings, over 65 seasonal buildings and /or washrooms, three pools or splash pads, 56 picnic sites, and over 600 campsites. In 2014, more than 700,000 visitors were hosted at these park sites. The majority of day -use visitors were travelling from areas within the GTA. Offering the closest camping and RV sites to downtown Toronto, TRCA's conservation parks connect to an important segment of the travel and tourism market by offering easy access to Toronto region shops, attractions, and amenities. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities • TRCA's Land Management and Trails programs coordinate with parks to ensure lands and trails are maintained to the appropriate SOP standard • Community Engagement, Family Programming, and Festivals and Events offer activities and programming that supplement the park visitor experience Level of Investment Tourism and Recreation (2015) ($000) Waterfront Parks 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 - 413 - - Conservation Parks 6,552 - 4,000 1,119 1,433 - Trails 4,095 13 - 3,769 - 288 25 - Bathurst Glen Golf Course Sources of Revenue 149 Gross Black Creek Pioneer Village Surplus/ Expenditures Govemment Events and Festivals 2,460 79 2,747 - - - (366) - Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees services Levy Levy Waterfront Parks 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 - 413 - - Conservation Parks 6,552 - 4,000 1,119 1,433 - Trails 4,095 13 - 3,769 - 288 25 - Bathurst Glen Golf Course 1,239 149 1,090 - - - - - Black Creek Pioneer Village 3,775 231 1,371 - - - 2,173 - Events and Festivals 2,460 79 2,747 - - - (366) - 21,850 2,232 9,218 5,315 1,820 3,265 Key Outcomes • More visitors to natural spaces more often and for longer periods of time • Increased demographic diversity of Conservation Park attendees • Attendees rank their Conservation Park experience as "good" or better • Maintaining I improving partnerships in support of financial sustainability Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Develop additional partnerships with public and private entities to offer unique outdoor experiences at Conservation Parks • Continue to offer accessible Conservation Parks amenities and programming to all visitors • Continue addressing park infrastructure needs on a priority basis • Continue to examine the costs, revenues, and attendee profile of individual parks to identify service refinement alternatives that increase and diversify attendance and reduce barriers Outlook TRCA will continue to manage its conservation lands to ensure that communities and partners have sustainable access to protected conservation lands, parks, valleys and stream corridors. In addition to daily operations, the activities of Conservation Parks will focus on increasing and diversifying sources of revenue — additional partnerships with private and public sector partners will be sought to offer unique experiences and amenities at park sites. TRCA will also continue to pursue opportunities to bundle Conservation Parks membership into package offerings containing complementary goods and services. Internally, TRCA will continue to evaluate its park programming and seek to more uniformly distribute its offerings across the seasons. Waterfront Parks Objectives: • Provide sustainable and accessible nature -based recreation and tourism experiences for residents and visitors • Enable behaviours that foster individual and social health and well -being including: • Active living through active recreation • Connections to nature through recreation • Enhance equality, inclusion, and access to natural environment settings for populations facing constraints to participation • Deliver a high quality visitor experience • Draw and retain regional tourism visitation by developing high quality waterfront parks and trails Program Features Positioning TRCA is a significant waterfront landholder with jurisdictional authority over the Lake Ontario shoreline (less the Central Waterfront). In combination with TRCA's standing expertise in park development, project management, erosion and landform works, integrated shoreline management, environmental assessment, and public engagement; TRCA provides uniquely comprehensive, streamlined, and value -added waterfront park development offerings that mitigate municipal partner risk and associated expense. Context TRCA's jurisdiction includes 60 linear kilometres, and 231 total wetted kilometres of Lake Ontario shoreline. TRCA's shoreline property holdings include 648 ha of the waterfront's terrestrial watershed. The majority of TRCA's terrestrial holdings have been converted into public greenspace and waterfront park amenities including Colonel Samuel Smith Park, Mimico Waterfront Park, Humber Bay Park Complex, Ashbridges Bay Park, Tommy Thompson Park, Bluffer's Park, and Port Union Waterfront Park. Many of TRCA's waterfront park holdings contain stretches of the Waterfront Trail network. Free and accessed by many millions of users each year, the Waterfront Trail extends over 1,600 km along the Canadian shores of Lake Ontario, Lake Erie, and Lake St. Clair and the Niagara, Detroit and St. Lawrence Rivers; the trail connects 75 communities, over 405 parks, and natural areas including wetlands, forests and beaches. The sediments that make up the Toronto region shoreline are generally a mixture of sands, silts, clays, tills, and gravels. These materials are highly erodible; only with shoreline hardening initiatives have the contours of Toronto's shoreline become fixed. In many areas the shoreline has been modified, and /or new lands created, with the use of construction rubble and and /or soils excavated for construction (collectively referred to as Iakefill). While TRCA has monitored and controlled the chemical integrity of Iakefill materials since 1988, materials deposited prior may contain some degree of contamination. Where present, contaminated fill becomes problematic when released into surrounding ecosystems and taken up by organisms. Ongoing monitoring protocols ensure any changes to waterfront chemical profiles are rapidly identified. Stressors and Opportunities TRCA's waterfront park infrastructure consists largely of materials and works that prevent shoreline erosion and undermining. Examples include breakwalls, seawalls, and shoreline features constructed with armour stone. Although robust, these works are subject to continual weathering by wave action, and many of the structures have reached or exceeded their design life, resulting in the need for regular monitoring and maintenance to reduce risks including, but not limited to, marine navigation, public property and buildings, roads and services, the exposure and release of contaminated fill, and public safety. Because funding for waterfront infrastructure repair has not kept pace with emerging need, current options include significant capital investment or continued deterioration of waterfront assets. While municipal partners have been increasing funding to address this deficit in recent years, both acute and chronic events continue to pose challenges. Acute stressors include both known events, such as the pending incorporation of Leslie St. Spit land into Tommy Thompson Park with estimated infrastructure costs of $20M, as well as predicted events such as the increased frequency and intensity of storm damage resulting from climate change. Chronic stressors include ongoing deterioration of existing assets and increased asset stock and liability resulting from new park construction. Accordingly, the cost of waterfront park maintenance and remediation are anticipated to increase for the foreseeable future. Waterfront parks are free, aesthetically pleasing, and transit accessible spaces through which citizens and visitors partake in active and passive recreation, enjoy formal and informal events and festivals, and access terrestrial and aquatic natural environments. As climate change increases temperatures and summer heat events increase in intensity and duration, waterfront parks (in particular those with swimmable beaches) will increase in importance as locations for citizens to mitigate heat - related stress. Continued and increased investment in maintaining safe and attractive waterfront parks are an important opportunity to increase attendant benefits to individual and social health and wellbeing while mitigating liability risk. Coordination of shoreline works with landside infrastructure improvements offer the benefits of reducing construction, coordination, and permitting burdens, reducing the risk of erosion and undermining to renewed landside assets, and the delivery of a consistent, high quality park user experience. Waterfront park planning and implementation offers significant opportunities for the creation of aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Formally set aside as a park in 1973, Tommy Thompson Park has since been recognized as a globally significant Important Bird Area for its role as a stopover site during spring and fall migrations. Similarly, aquatic works such as the habitat and wetland at Spadina Quay increase feeding and breeding sites for resident fish populations (in turn supporting local recreational fisheries). The continued deliberate and directed implementation of habitat works at waterfront park locations poses the opportunity to directly enhance local biodiversity, habitat connectivity, and climate resilience. These activities also contribute to the delisting of the Toronto region as a bi- national Great Lakes Area of Concern. The expertise of TRCA's Waterfont Park Program is recognized and accessed by several partner municipalities and other Conservation Authorities; TRCA now enters into agreements to assist with projects in which it holds experience. To this end, TRCA is currently providing technical and project management expertise to the Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project, a new waterfront park along the eastern Mississauga shoreline. Through these opportunities TRCA is enhancing already strong partnerships while reducing project cost and uncertainty for municipal partners. Funding Funding for waterfront parks is obtained primarily through municipal levy and contract services. Level of Investment Tourism and Recreation (2015) ($000) Waterfront Parks Conservation Parks Trails Bathurst Glen Golf Course Black Creek Pioneer Village Events and Festivals 3,729 Sources of Revenue 10 1,546 Gross - Surplus/ Expenditures Government - 1,119 1,433 - 4,095 13 - 3,769 Deficit 25 Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating 231 1,371 - and Other Fees Services 79 Levy Levy (366) 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 413 - 6,552 - 4,000 - - 1,119 1,433 - 4,095 13 - 3,769 288 25 1,239 149 1,090 - - - - - 3,775 231 1,371 - - - 2,173 - 2,460 79 2,747 - - (366) 21,850 2,232 9,218 5,315 1,820 3,265 Direct Actions and Activities Waterfront Parks staff partner with municipalities in the planning, implementation, and management of waterfront parks. Roles include facilitating consultation and master planning processes, providing project management services, developing funding and budget management strategies, addressing legal matters arising from new park creation, and ongoing stakeholder communication and outreach. Internal coordination with TRCA Erosion Management staff ensures waterfront park maintenance work is carried out on a priority basis. A condition assessment and priority ranking of infrastructure within waterfront parks is maintained and updated annually or as conditions require, such as following a significant weather event. These priority rankings provide the rationale for TRCA's annual and long -term work plans maintenance and remedial works at waterfront parks to reduce risk to public safety, property and infrastructure. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities • Watershed and Waterfront Plans help guide park development, implementation, and stakeholder engagement thereof • Erosion Management evaluates and addresses erosion /undermining risks identified along the waterfront, including those located in waterfront parks • Restoration and Regeneration staff contribute and collaborate in the development and implementation of Waterfront Parks to realize terrestrial and aquatic habitat opportunities • Land Securement staff address property - related matters that may occasionally arise in the waterfront park development process Key Outcomes • Reduced risk to human and ecosystem health • Reduced risk to essential structures and infrastructure • Reduced risk to safety and marine vehicles from sedimentation and hazards to navigation • Improved terrestrial and /or aquatic habitat • Improved outdoor experience and recreational use of the waterfront Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Continue development of the Scarborough Waterfront Project and, if approved, the Scarborough Bluffs West project • Conduct revitalization projects at Humber Bay Park (east and west) • Continue to implement the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan • Conduct annual and post -storm monitoring of TRCA's infrastructure within waterfront parks to generate a prioritized list of maintenance and remedial works to be undertaken in 2017 and beyond. Outlook TRCA will continue to develop and revitalize waterfront park amenities and infrastructure in accordance with municipal interests and funding. No major changes to the function or operation of this program area are anticipated. Trails Objectives: • More people engaging with nature more often • A network of greenspace and green infrastructure that weaves through every community to connect a healthy and resilient landscape • Increased financial resilience for TRCA through stable and diversified funding Program Features Positioning TRCA continues a decade's long legacy of public land acquisition to protect and manage valley and stream corridors, flood plains, the Lake Ontario shoreline lands, wildlife, vegetation and environmentally significant areas. This system should be further developed to reach its potential to provide sustainable nature -based recreation experiences for a growing population and support healthy communities, interpretation of natural and cultural heritage, links with local neighborhoods and connections to surrounding watersheds and regions. As the largest landowner in the Greater Toronto Area, TRCA is well positioned to be a leader in the planning, implementation and management of safe, enjoyable recreational trail experiences for area residents and visitors while ensuring that natural and cultural heritage resources are protected. TRCA's trail management activities compliment TRCA's aim to provide nature -based recreation experiences for a growing population while protecting and restoring the form and function of existing ecological systems. As the broader socio- ecological context of the region continues to change, TRCA management systems must remain flexible and able to adapt to these changes. Context TRCA's trails are valuable infrastructure that provide myriad of public benefits and recreation opportunities. TRCA owns and operates over 600 kilometres of local and inter - regional trails across its jurisdiction. These are travel destinations themselves but also provide invaluable links between other TRCA, municipal and community facilities. These assets must be managed in a way that addresses TRCA's liability and risk while also offering accessible and enjoyable recreation experiences. TRCA and its municipal partners manage trails, conservation areas and parks within communities, continuously linked along the ravine system, and ultimately linked with trails on the Lake Ontario shoreline. TRCA employs best management practices and environmental stewardship, through the establishment of land management and master plans, to protect and conserve the valuable natural and cultural heritage attributes within each of its nine watersheds Stressors and Opportunities Faced with declining quality of much of the greenspace in the region and increased demands for this essential resource by a rapidly growing urban population, now is the opportune time to rethink greenspace as an integrated system. Through thoughtful planning and action we will help develop a network of greenspace for the Toronto region that maximizes community wellbeing and protection of our local ecosystems. This will include helping people become healthier and happier by promoting appropriate access to existing nature and by creating new green infrastructure in urban areas. To ensure that future generations also benefit from greenspace, we will also create awareness of the need to invest in its long -term management and renewal. Funding Funding for Trails is obtained primarily through contracted services and municipal levy Direct Actions and Activities In addition to developing and maintaining a jurisdiction -wide trail strategy and associated policies, this program includes site specific trail planning, development, management, and monitoring activities. These initiatives are undertaken with the assistance of government and non - government staff, formal trail partners and /or public volunteers and stewards. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities • TRCA's Land Management program is directly coordinated with Trails actions on lands where public access is permitted • Land Securement program initiatives bring new lands into TRCA ownership and can facilitate local or regional trail connection objectives • Conservation Parks and Field Centres include high - intensity public uses such as campgrounds, swimming facilities, educational programing and facilities etc. However, the basic trail planning and management requirements and for these lands are still consistent with a broader trail and public recreation framework for all TRCA lands • Stakeholder Engagement and Community Stewardship activities are involved in the development and implementation of trail management plans and programs Level of Investment Tourism and Recreation (2015) ($000) waterfront Parks Sources of Revenue 1,760 Gross 413 - Surplus/ Expenditures Government 4,000 - - 1,119 1,433 - Trails 4,095 13 Deficit 288 25 Grants User Contract 1,090 - Capital Capital Operating 3,775 231 and Other Fees Services 2,460 Levy Levy - (366) waterfront Parks 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 413 - Conservation Parks 6,552 - 4,000 - - 1,119 1,433 - Trails 4,095 13 - 3,769 288 25 Bathurst Glen Golf Course 1,239 149 1,090 - - - - - Black Creek Pioneer Village 3,775 231 1,371 - 2,173 Events and Festivals 2,460 79 2,747 - (366) 21,850 2,232 9,218 5,315 - 1,820 3,265 Key Outcomes • Contribute towards a healthy and active community • Address TRCA's liability and risk as a trail provider • Provide safe, accessible and sustainable trail opportunities where appropriate Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Complete final draft of TRCA's Trail Strategy • Initial inventory of trails on new property acquisitions and lands not previously assessed • Ongoing audit of authorized trails • Ongoing assessment and abatement of hazard trees along authorized trails • Coordinate and implement recommendations and deliverables stemming from trail planning activities including new trail construction, improvement of existing trails, trail re- routing and trail decommissioning and restoration Outlook At present, funding support for the Trails Program is inconsistent across TRCA's jurisdiction. Where financial support is strong, trail management activities can continue to be robust, comprehensive and proactive. However, efforts should be made to pursue long term maintenance and monitoring funding which is tied to capital trail development. Where little or no support is given, trail management activities include only the most basic hazard audits and mitigation necessary to permit safe public use on select trails with the remainder of trails in that region having to be closed to public access. When there is no stable funding, ensuring comprehensive site securement or maintaining state of good repair on existing infrastructure, let alone funding the development of additional trail management or public use plans to proactively prepare for future public demand to access to greenspace, is jeopardized. Alternative management and /or funding models must besought for these areas if stable public funding is not forthcoming. Despite the above concerns, TRCA continues to have some success in securing special project funding for trails on select TRCA lands as well as fee for service arrangements with municipal partners for trail planning, implementation and monitoring. These elements of the business model are readily scalable as works undertaken each year are bounded only by available funding. Black Creek Pioneer Village Objectives: • Promote cultural heritage • Community relevance • Optimized attendance • Financial sustainability Program Features Positioning Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) is a heritage site and living history museum located in the northwest end of Toronto. BCPV is an important part of the city's cultural fabric, sharing with visitors the regional history of mid - nineteenth century village life. As a popular Toronto heritage attraction, BCPV encourages increased tourism traffic to its host community while conducting diverse internal operations to advance museum best practices. Context BCPV is a living history museum owned and operated by TRCA. BCPV opened to the public in 1960 with a small collection of buildings, including five heritage structures that remain on their original sites. Since 1960, BCPV's collection of heritage buildings has increased with the addition of more than thirty pre- Confederation buildings relocated from surrounding municipalities. BCPV's collection has also expanded to include of heritage -breed farm animals, heirloom plants and the extensive curated collections. BCPV is the largest living history museum in the City of Toronto. Constructed in the mid- 1980s, BCPV's visitors' centre supports BCPV operations and accommodates site usage demands. The centre offers office space for TRCA staff, meeting rooms and banquet spaces for corporate bookings and private events, and lunch space for visiting school groups. The centre also contains a gift shop, selling hand -made and locally- sourced products and the McNair Gallery, where curated exhibits and extensive storage space BCPV's collection of more than 50,000 artifacts. BCPV carries out diverse activities in the areas of collections, programming, and business services while welcoming a variety of users, including families with children, students, adults, seniors, tourists, community groups, private and corporate clients, and commercial photography and filming clients. Stressors and Opportunities As a steward of Canadian history and regional heritage, TRCA works to preserve BCPV's historic buildings and collections through ongoing maintenance and infrastructure improvements. These works include both minor alterations and substantial upgrades to ensure that all structures meet accessibility requirements, are maintained in a state -of -good- repair, and support the development of new programming. While the maintenance and improvement of BCPV's heritage buildings supports the viability of museum operations and the financial sustainability of the site, it also correlates to an continually increasing financial burden borne largely by TRCA and the City of Toronto. Despite maintaining diverse revenue streams, the cost of building maintenance far exceeds revenue generation at BCPV. This imbalance represents a considerable stressor, as financial analysis indicates that the removal, replacement, and /or significant retrofit of BCPV's structures is a more viable option than continued maintenance and upgrades. Although opportunities for funding have been pursued, those that have been secured in the past have not been sufficient enough to effectively mitigate the financial burden of site maintenance. TRCA recognizes BCPV's financial situation as an opportunity to pursue more innovative programming and initiatives that meet the dual objectives of increased revenue generation and enhanced visitor experiences. As these opportunities are identified, pursued, and developed, TRCA needs consider the constraints, higher sunk costs, and higher risk associated with activities at BCPV as compared to more contemporary sites. On the whole, this increased risk presents an obstacle in TRCA's search for more lucrative business models and offerings. TRCA must strategically navigate the situation to secure a viable and sustainable future for BCPV. At present, TRCA is exploring the possibilities and limitations associated with the branding of goods, services, and experiences linked to BCPV's narrative and public image. TRCA will continue to pursue licensing, co- branding, and /or co- production opportunities with commercial enterprises to increase revenue generation and public awareness of BCPV while seeking additional opportunities for greater promotion and business development. Funding Funding for Black Creek Pioneer Village is obtained primarily through operating levy and user fees. Direct Actions and Activities BCPV is open to the public between May 1" and December 23rd, as well as during March Break. Through a full calendar of village programs, special events and exhibits, TRCA hosts catering to its approximately 135,000 annual visitors, including 50,000 school children. During BCPV's open season, the site hosts daily village programming such as hands -on activities, interactive demonstrations, history games, guided walks, and beer samples in the Historic Brewery, in addition to special events and programs. Throughout the calendar year —from January through to December —BCPV offers education programs for school groups, historic workshops for the public, and exclusive activities for TRCA members. BCPV also caters year -round to a variety of corporate and private clients as a site for meetings, conferences, weddings, special events, and commercial photography and filming. BCPV's McNair Gallery, open to the public during Village operating hours, houses a permanent collection of artifacts and showcases a variety of special exhibits. Many of these exhibits are presented and /or developed in partnership with fellow organizations and institutions and often change annually. The BCPV Gift Shop also operates around the hours of the Village, offering visitors souvenirs, local and hand -made items, traditional candy and sweets, prepared foods, housewares and seasonal decor, books, children's toys, and other unique goods for sale. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities • Family Programs and Events and Festivals co- produce programming to enhance the BCPV visitor experience Level of Investment Tourism and Recreation (2015) ($000) Waterfront Parks Conservation Parks Trails Bathurst Glen Golf Course Black Creek Pioneer Village Events and Festivals 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 - 413 - - 6,552 - 4,000 - 1,119 1,433 4,095 Sources of Revenue - 3,769 Gross 1,239 Surplus/ Expenditures Government 3,775 231 1,371 - 2,173 2,460 Deficit 2,747 - Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 - 413 - - 6,552 - 4,000 - 1,119 1,433 4,095 13 - 3,769 - 288 25 - 1,239 149 1,090 - - - - - 3,775 231 1,371 - 2,173 2,460 79 2,747 - - (366) 21,850 2,232 9,218 5,315 1,820 3,265 Key Outcomes • Natural, cultural, and built heritage of the Toronto region is preserved and shared • Visitors are offered more interactive and engaging museum experiences at BCPV • Visitor demographics demonstrate maintained or enhanced demographic diversity • Strategic partnerships and promotions lead to greater awareness of BCPV, increased site visitation, increased revenue generation, and greater financial sustainability Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Continue ongoing grounds and building maintenance, artifact conservation, and infrastructure improvements • Continue the development and delivery of interactive village programs, exhibits, and special events • Continue to examine the costs, revenues, and attendee demographic profile of BCPV to identify service refinement areas • Continue to work towards increasing and diversifying attendance as well as reducing barriers to access • Continue to seek ways to be relevant to the local community • Begin to implement the new BCPV Vision and BCPV North Lands Master Plan • Develop additional partnerships with commercial entities to offer unique BCPV branded products, services, and experiences • Effectively market unique BCPV branded products, services, and experiences to target audiences Outlook TRCA will continue to pursue BCPV financial sustainability through improvements to existing business models and the development of new revenue streams. Continued invest in human, technological, and financial resources will streamline and support BCPV daily operations through enhanced project management, technological, and operational efficiencies. TRCA is currently working on implementing the BCPV Vision and BCPV North Lands Master Plan. The BCPV North Lands Master Plan recommends improvements to flood control measures, protection of existing heritage structures, the introduction of interactive programs on site, and the creation of three precincts: natural heritage, cultural /agricultural heritage and a commercial development site. The BCPV Vision incorporates the recommendations of the BCPV North Lands Master Plan while outlining detailed objectives for creating a more engaging and innovative village experience. Immediate next steps include implementing a fundraising campaign, completing a detailed business plan (including a marketing plan and an operating budget), completing an interpretive plan, and implementing key projects associated with the BCPV Vision and BCPV North Lands Master Plan. Bathurst Glen Golf Course Objectives: • Promote positive behavioral change to foster individual and social health and well -being • Protect and restore ecosystem health and function • Optimize attendance • Financial sustainability Program Features Positioning The Bathurst Glen Golf Course (Bathurst Glen) is a golfing facility that encouraging the use of the natural environment for recreational purposes while fulfilling TRCA's mandate to protect and enhance the natural environment. Context Situated within Oak Ridges Corridor Park, the Bathurst Glen facility includes an 18 -hole executive course and driving range, a pro shop, rentals, and food services. Bathurst Glen holds Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program certification in recognition of its support of terrestrial habitat and environmental integrity objectives. Stressors and Opportunities Executive golf courses in or near Richmond Hill compete with Bathurst Glen for local clients. The development of innovative and unique products and playing opportunities provide an opportunity to encourage attendance and repeat visits. Bathurst Glen possesses opportunities to enhance its repeat customer base through the development of loyalty programs and new value -added programming. Other client -based opportunities include the development of new partnerships with school groups, day camps, and youth groups to build upon its established coaching offerings. The Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary certification process requires that Bathurst Glen Golf Course be recertified every three years. As biotic and abiotic environmental stressors increase, the combined effects of these stressors may have a detrimental effect on the health and quality of Bathurst Glen's natural environment and standing within the Audubon program. The Bathurst Glen Golf Course Program implements best management practices and uses the protection of the natural environment as education opportunities for its community of users. Through these actions, it is hoped that the community will become increasingly knowledgeable and engaged in the sustainable management of land, water, wildlife, and other natural resources on a golf course. Funding Funding for the Bathurst Glen Golf Course is obtained through user fees, with the province covering the cost of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park through a provincial levy. Direct Actions and Activities Bathurst Glen's golf course and the driving range facility currently serve over 50,000 people annually including adults, youth, and school groups. In addition to playing opportunities, Bathurst Glen offers adult and youth couching programs, skills development opportunities, introductory programs for new Canadians, and other focus clinics throughout the season. The Bathurst Glen environmental program hosts three community planting and monitoring events throughout the year. These activities engage approximately 50 volunteers in the planting of shrubs, installation of nest boxes, and construction of pollinator habitat. Additional interpretative hikes and group discussions are attended by local community members and interest groups. An educational component (based around the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program) is delivered to junior camps and teaches junior golfers about the importance of the natural environment and environmental management. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Bathurst Glen Golf Course is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Restoration and Regeneration assists in the development and maintenance of quality terrestrial habitat Level of Investment Tourism and Recreation (2015) ($000) Waterfront Parks Sources of Revenue 1,760 10 1,546 Gross Conservation Parks Surplus/ Expenditures Government 1,090 - - - Black Creek Pioneer Village 3,775 231 Deficit - - 2,173 - Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating 21,850 2,232 and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Waterfront Parks 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 413 - Conservation Parks 6,552 - 4,000 - 1,119 1,433 Trails 4,095 13 - 3,769 288 25 Bathurst Glen Golf Course 1,239 149 1,090 - - - Black Creek Pioneer Village 3,775 231 1,371 - - - 2,173 - Events and Festivals 2,460 79 2,747 - - - (366) - 21,850 2,232 9,218 5,315 1,820 3,265 Key Outcomes • Provide positive and memorable outdoor recreation opportunities • Maintain Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary certification • Develop a sense of well -being through community contribution to the natural environment • Protect water quality • Financially sustainability Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Continue to implement best management practices to encourage wildlife habitat and protect natural resources for the benefit of the community, wildlife and recreation. • Continue public engagement and education on best management practices, including planting and monitoring events with the local community. • Continue developing partnerships within the community and with TRCA's other service groups. Outlook The implementation of best management practices in sustainability, including maintained Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary certification, will be continue to be a priority as TRCA seeks to demonstrate leadership, commitment and high standards of environmental management in the golfing industry. In addition to independently pursuing increased customer experiences and offerings, TRCA will also focus on the creation of new partnerships - both within the community and in association with TRCA's other recreational offerings - to increase both the facility's financial sustainability and customer experience. Events and Festivals Objectives: • Promote positive behavioural change that fosters individual and social health and well -being • Enhance access to nature -based recreational experiences • Financial sustainability • Optimized event and festival attendance Program Features Positioning Events and Festivals promote community involvement and recreation in TRCA's natural spaces while generating revenue that supports TRCA's program delivery and financial sustainability. With significant experience delivering festival and event programming, TRCA can host and promote of large -scale events in manner that maximizes revenue and engagement, enjoyment, learning, and customer satisfaction. Context TRCA owns many public use facilities including ten conservation areas, three campgrounds, Bathurst Glen Golf Course, Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright Centre for Conservation. Each site hosts various annual events and festivals, many of which are organized in collaboration with TRCA partners. The majority of TRCA's facilities possess the capacity to host single and multi -day festivals and events without the need for significant additional staffing or site infrastructure. TRCA public use facilities are accessible during their respective operating seasons, and most charge a modest entrance fee for general admission. The majority of events and festivals at TRCA facilities can be enjoyed with the payment of general admission, while others require advance ticket purchases or the payment of a special admission fee. Private events are also regularly held at TRCA facilities, such as green weddings, social, and corporate events, and do not alter general site access. Public access to TRCA facilities during operating hours is never strictly prohibited when either public or private events are taking place on the site. Stressors and Opportunities Events and Festivals are most frequently hosted at TRCA Conservation Parks and other TRCA site with public amenities. To the greatest extent possible, TRCA manages these events — in particular those hosted by private external organizations — to mitigate and minimize negative accessibility and experience outcomes for other site users. As open areas and greenspace become less available, TRCA expects an increase in site requests from organizations seeking events and festival space. Successful balancing completing user group demands will be required to ensure TRCA continues to deliver high quality experiences for all. Funding Events and Festivals are entirely self- funding and consistently generate profit. Admission fees (general or special rate) are charged on TRCA event and festival days. Private rental rates vary depending on event size, participation, and intensity. Often, TRCA is able to secure additional programming funding when event or festival themes and content advance external partner mandates. Direct Actions and Activities Events and festivals hosted by TRCA may align with broader socio - cultural themes and practices, and /or support education and learning, but are not specifically designed for educational purposes. The main objective of TRCA events and festivals is to engage the public, offer entertainment value, and promote celebration and enjoyment. TRCA hosts approximately 40 events annually, with an estimated 120 event days each year. Private events, for which TRCA rents out the use of venues, land, or both, include adrenaline races, corporate events, and green weddings. Approximately 350 private events are conducted each year across 2 hosting sites (Kortright Centre for Conservation and Black Creek Pioneer Village). Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities • Conservation Parks provide a venue for Events and Family Programming Level of Investment Tourism and Recreation (2015) ($000) Waterfront Parks 3,729 Sources of Revenue 10 1,546 Gross - - Surplus/ Government - 4,000 - - 1,119 1,433 - Trails Expenditures Deficit - 3,769 Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating - - - - - and Other Fees Services 1,371 Levy Levy 2,173 - Waterfront Parks 3,729 1,760 10 1,546 - 413 - - Conservation Parks 6,552 - 4,000 - - 1,119 1,433 - Trails 4,095 13 - 3,769 288 25 Bathurst Glen Golf Course 1,239 149 1,090 - - - - - Black Creek Pioneer Village 3,775 231 1,371 - - - 2,173 - Events and Festivals 2,460 79 2,747 (366) 21,850 2,232 9,218 5,315 - 1,820 3,265 Key Outcomes Event and festival participants garner experiences leading to improved indicators with respect to: • Citizenship behaviors, including environmental stewardship and social cohesion • Health and wellness outcomes • Revenue from event and festival activities Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Business development to promote TRCA's Conservation Parks as ideal destinations for event and festival rental venues • Installation of infrastructure at Claireville Conservation Area to create a new event venue • Continued planning and execution of existing annual festivals and events Outlook TRCA will continue to work with internal and external proponents to promote its diverse public use facilities as ideal locations to host festivals and events; open spaces, existing infrastructure, and experienced staff make festivals at TRCA unique and memorable. With a focus on promoting a greater number of space and venue rentals, TRCA will continue to secure revenue to fund programming and operations while contributing to organization growth and financial sustainability. Policy Development and Review Development Planning and Regulation Permitting Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 572 Policy Development and Review Objectives: • Implement an integrated watershed -based approach within the existing planning policy framework • Identify and /or develop best - practices and policies for advancing sustainability principles within planning and development processes • Ensure the best available science and planning practices, including integrated watershed management, is incorporated into local, regional, and provincial /national planning and decision making processes • Prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk to life and property from flooding and erosion • Improve watershed health Program Features Positioning TRCA holds legislated and delegated roles in planning, development and environmental assessment approvals processes as a commenting body, provincially delegated reviewer for natural hazards, service provider, regulatory authority, resource management agency and landowner. Policy and Development Review provides in -house expertise to ensure TRCA operates at the state -of- practice with respect to policy and legislation development, review, application, and response. Context TRCA's jurisdiction includes 9 watersheds, 60 kilometres of the Lake Ontario shoreline, 15 provincially designated Special Policy Areas (SPAs) and 42 flood vulnerable areas (FVAs), and 18 lower, upper and single tier municipal governments. Almost without exception, TRCA's jurisdiction (including SPA'S and FVAs) is under pressure from redevelopment, intensification and growth planning exercises. In response, TRCA provides input to the municipal policy development and decision making processes that guide growth, redevelopment and intensification throughout TRCA's jurisdiction. TRCA guidance and responses are guided by The Living City Policies for Planning and Development in the Watersheds of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (LCP). The LCP document is consistent with the requirements of federal, provincial and municipal legislation including the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry's `Policies and Procedures for CA Plan Review and Permitting Activities'. Based on state -of- the - science watershed research, monitoring, and management practices, the LCP meets provincial natural hazard, natural heritage and water management policy interests while contributing to high quality urban design in municipal growth planning and the advancement of the green economy. LCP implementation is supported by TRCA's Planning and Development Procedural Manual; this document includes a suite of technical guidelines and checklists to assist landowners, developers and applications through the planning and regulatory process and ensure quality service to stakeholders. Stressors and Opportunities TRCA is frequently faced with requests for complex policy, development and infrastructure reviews associated with rapidly developing greenfield communities, intensifying urban centres and revitalization of historic communities within flood vulnerable areas. This complexity is amplified by multiple layers of federal, provincial and municipal plans, policies and regulations as well as diverse and pressing stakeholder considerations. Further, municipal partners and provincial ministries are increasingly requesting TRCA's expertise to assist with such projects. Provided TRCA funding can sustain sufficient senior technical and project management capabilities at sufficient levels, TRCA's participation in these requests represent an important opportunity to integrate TRCA, municipal, and provincial objectives into the design and realization of healthy, resilient, and climate adaptive communities. Funding Policy Development and Review is funded solely through municipal capital levy. Direct Actions and Activities Policy Development and Review ensures that TRCA's Planning and Development service area is supported by a current policy framework. This includes maintaining the Planning and Development Procedural Manual in support of the LCP, developing and updating technical guidelines /checklists to reflect current watershed science and best management practices, and developing streamlined protocols for planning and permitting processes. In addition to supporting policy development and review, Policy Development and Review planning ecology and compliance teams also provide technical support and enforcement capabilities for all Planning and Development program areas. In support of TRCA's Conservation Authorities Act (Section 28) permitting responsibilities, TRCA planners, ecologists and engineers analytic expertise of new technical information that might affect the screening of permit applications and assessment of planning and development activities. Information reviewed - and the implementation products and tools thereof - are used by municipal partners in official plans and zoning by -laws updates; it also informs municipal growth, intensification and redevelopment/revitalization studies. In addition, Policy Development and Review coordinates the internal expertise required in the development of comprehensive long -term strategies and solutions to manage the flood risk in Special Policy Areas and flood vulnerable areas. TRCA proactively responds to emerging planning and regulatory trends and issues. External environmental policy advisory services include participation on federal, provincial, municipal and Conservation Ontario initiatives, committees and special projects. Where appropriate and /or necessary, TRCA acts as a convener or liaison between government partners to ensure coordination and consistency. TRCA reviews municipal official plans, secondary plans, zoning by -laws, and participates on steering committees for a variety of municipal planning and policy initiatives. Ongoing training and support is provided to municipalities in support of the Memorandum of Understanding for the provision of policy, planning and technical expertise and the implementation of The LCP. Similar ongoing training is provided to TRCA staff, stakeholders (BILD, public, etc.) on topics related to planning and regulatory functions and services and development trends and issues. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Policy Development and Review is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Watershed and Waterfront Plans, Report Card, Climate and Extreme Weather Impact inform the development of the Living City Policies • Water Resource Science, Flood and Erosion Management inform the development of the Living City Policies Ecosystem Planning and Research, Restoration and Regeneration, Biodiversity Monitoring inform the development of the Living City Policies Level of Investment Planning Development and Review (2015) ($000) Development Planning and Regulation Permitting 4,137 150 4,492 - - - (505) Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 3,183 1,141 691 108 348 895 Policy Development Review 821 632 189 141 1,291 5,183 108 980 579 Key Outcomes • Policy, planning and technical needs of TRCA and its municipal partners are adequately supported • TRCA planning and integrated watershed science, engineering /ecology /technical insights are reflected in municipal official plans, strategies, growth planning exercises and other relevant studies, documents and projects • Impact of new development and urban intensification and revitalization on water quality, erosion, flood risk and ecosystems is minimized or eliminated • Planning and Development processes yield healthy, sustainable communities resilient to the effects of urbanization and climate change and possessing an effective regional transit systems incorporating active transportation through a connected greenlands system Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Continue policy development and review to support TRCA's legislated, mandated and delegated responsibilities in policy, planning and environmental review, permitting and construction compliance • Work cooperatively with municipal partners to incorporate the latest science revealed through TRCA's integrated watershed research in municipal policies in order to guide growth, redevelopment and intensification throughout TRCA's jurisdiction • Provide environmental policy advisory services through participation on provincial, municipal and Conservation Ontario policy related initiatives, committees and special projects to facilitate current and responsive approaches to emerging planning and regulatory trends and issues within TRCA's watersheds Outlook TRCA's Policy Development and Review function is expected to continue supporting TRCA's legislated and delegated roles and responsibilities in the planning, development and environmental assessment approvals process. With the province currently reviewing of several acts and plans related to planning and development — as well as and the MNRF having recently initiated a review of the Conservation Authorities Act - Policy Development and Review will continue engaging in these review processed and seeking to ensure that TRCA interests are represented. Any legislative updates or amendments coming out these provincial review processes that hold implications to TRCA's roles and responsibilities will be incorporated into TRCA's policies, procedures and guidelines. Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Development Planning and Regulation Permitting 4,137 150 4,492 - - - (505) Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 3,183 1,141 691 108 348 895 Policy Development Review 821 632 189 141 1,291 5,183 108 980 579 Key Outcomes • Policy, planning and technical needs of TRCA and its municipal partners are adequately supported • TRCA planning and integrated watershed science, engineering /ecology /technical insights are reflected in municipal official plans, strategies, growth planning exercises and other relevant studies, documents and projects • Impact of new development and urban intensification and revitalization on water quality, erosion, flood risk and ecosystems is minimized or eliminated • Planning and Development processes yield healthy, sustainable communities resilient to the effects of urbanization and climate change and possessing an effective regional transit systems incorporating active transportation through a connected greenlands system Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Continue policy development and review to support TRCA's legislated, mandated and delegated responsibilities in policy, planning and environmental review, permitting and construction compliance • Work cooperatively with municipal partners to incorporate the latest science revealed through TRCA's integrated watershed research in municipal policies in order to guide growth, redevelopment and intensification throughout TRCA's jurisdiction • Provide environmental policy advisory services through participation on provincial, municipal and Conservation Ontario policy related initiatives, committees and special projects to facilitate current and responsive approaches to emerging planning and regulatory trends and issues within TRCA's watersheds Outlook TRCA's Policy Development and Review function is expected to continue supporting TRCA's legislated and delegated roles and responsibilities in the planning, development and environmental assessment approvals process. With the province currently reviewing of several acts and plans related to planning and development — as well as and the MNRF having recently initiated a review of the Conservation Authorities Act - Policy Development and Review will continue engaging in these review processed and seeking to ensure that TRCA interests are represented. Any legislative updates or amendments coming out these provincial review processes that hold implications to TRCA's roles and responsibilities will be incorporated into TRCA's policies, procedures and guidelines. Development Planning and Regulation Permitting Objectives: • Prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk to life and property • Protect Toronto region's physical and natural heritage in community building • Ensure the best available science, planning, and design practices, including integrated watershed management, is incorporated into ongoing planning and development permitting approvals • Facilitate TRCA's acquisition of land containing important natural features and /or natural hazards • Deliver a helpful and knowledgeable customer experience Program Features Positioning TRCA derives its responsibility for its review of development and construction proposals from the Conservation Authorities Act, Section 28, Ontario Regulation 166106, and subsequent provincial and municipal Memoranda of Understanding. Projects reviewed range from individual site permits to major development and city building initiatives. As natural hazard and natural feature experts within the planning and development process, TRCA provides technical expertise to its respective municipal partners and serves as a public commenting agency to municipal and provincial governments. When required or requested, TRCA defends municipal partner policies and environmental interests at Ontario Municipal Board hearings. Through the community planning and permitting processes TRCA seeks to acquire, protect and enhance areas that contain natural hazards and /or significant natural heritage features. Under provincial policy, lands containing such features are not eligible for development and, as a result, are negotiated into the public realm for open space and green infrastructure purposes. For private sector clients, TRCA offers a value -added solicitor - realty service to respond to requests regarding TRCA's interest in specific lands prior to real estate transactions. Context Natural hazard features within TRCA's jurisdiction include major ravine systems and attendant slope stability issues, creek erosion, river meander belts, 60 kilometres of Lake Ontario shoreline, and 21,448 hectares (53,000 acres) of regulated floodplain. TRCA Development Planning and Regulation Permitting operate in accordance with, and through delegated authority for all or parts of, the Conservation Authorities Act, Ontario Regulation 166106: Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, the Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement, the Environmental Assessment Act, and Memorandums of Understanding between the TRCA municipal and provincial governments. TRCA planning and permitting functions specifically extend to development proposed in Special Policy Areas and Flood Vulnerable Areas. TRCA also advises municipal partners on applications made under the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, Greenbelt Act, and other applicable legislation. Stressors and Opportunities According to the Ministry of Finance, the "...Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is projected to be the fastest growing region of the province, with its population increasing by almost 3.0 million, or 45.8 per cent, to reach over 9.4 million by 2041. The GTA's share of provincial population is projected to rise from 47.6 per cent in 2013 to 52.9 per cent in 2041 "' In managing this growth and demand, TRCA and its municipal partners will be 1 http: //w .fin.gov.on.w /en/ economy /demographics /projections/ ironto and Region 6nservatlon Hisiness gopsis Rational 2015 -2019 Development Planning and Regulation Permitl challenged to mitigate regional -scale risk to public health arising from long -term and /or permanent ecosystem damage. Examples of such risk include degraded surface and ground water, loss of forests and wetlands, and diminished biodiversity. Acute natural hazard risks, in particular those posed by downstream flooding, may also increase along with attendant risks to natural, social, and economic systems and assets. Current trends indicate that development pressure will continue to radiate toward and into the headwaters of TRCA's jurisdiction. Should development and urbanization disrupt headwater hydrology or hydrogeology, significant downstream effects including compromised groundwater storage and drastically altered river /creek flow regimes may be expected. Such changes could result in impacts to public safety, significant infrastructure costs to downstream municipalities, and economic losses to individual landowners as natural features are degraded and costs increase. TRCA integrated environmental planning and technical input addresses the avoidance of many cumulative impacts that would otherwise threaten existing neighborhoods and potential growth for new communities. Funding The Development Planning and Regulation function is operated on a fee - for - service basis supplemented minimally by municipal levy. The program currently operates at more than 90% cost - recovery; 100% cost recovery is targeted for the 2016 new fee review, and is adjusted every 2 years as workload shifts occur. Direct Actions and Activities Planning and ecology expertise supports municipal environmental planning by providing recommendations on how development should proceed and how to maintain, enhance or restore the natural environment. Decisions are made after engaging TRCA's in -house water resource engineering, hydrology, geo- environmental and ecology experts. Development proposals and applications within or adjacent to natural areas and natural hazards are also reviewed to ensure consistency in the application of the Planning Act, the Conservation Authorities Act and the Provincial Policy Statement. Volumes of planning and permit applications continue to be high and they are becoming more complex as lands with multiple environmental sensitivities become valuable enough to trigger development pressure. The increasing urbanization of the Toronto region is reflected in the 622 planning and 710 permit new applications that the team received in 2014, as well as over 20 new communities planned as part of growth initiatives. Through the planning process, Development Planning and Regulation staff may identify lands appropriate for acquisition under the TRCA's Living City Policies and /or Greenlands Acquisition Project. These lands are unsuitable for development because of the presence of natural hazards and /or significant natural features. In such scenarios, Planning and Development staff identify the lands to be conveyed and broker introductions between landowners /developers and TRCA Property staff to effect conveyance at nominal cost to TRCA. Innovative stormwater and flood management, and landscape restoration solutions are also integrated into community design and the resolution of detailed community plans and construction permitting. Development Planning and Regulation staff also review permit applications made under Ontario Regulation 166106. By applying the "tests" of the regulation within or adjacent to natural areas and natural hazards staff provide direction to landowners, developers, and their respective consultants to ensure there is no impact to flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land. As required TRCA seeks to manage natural hazards, protect natural heritage features, and represent the environmental interests of the Province and its municipal partners at Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearings. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Development Planning and Regulation is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Planning and Policy staff work with municipal and other government partners to ensure the best available science, planning, and design expertise are incorporated into relevant plans, policies, and strategies • Environmental Assessment Planning staff ensures coordination between public infrastructure works and private development projects • Water Resource Science and Biodiversity Monitoring staff provide data and analysis in support of defensible planning and permitting decisions • Watershed Studies and Strategies staff synthesize watershed conditions and provide ecosystem -scale perspective on watershed opportunities and vulnerabilities • Property and Risk Management staff completes land transactions for properties identified for conveyance to TRCA • Restoration Services staff assesses and implement restoration needs on acquired sites and implement erosion control works where municipal funding is secured Level of Investment Planning Development and Review (2015) ($000) Development Planning and Regulation Permitting 4,137 150 4,492 Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 3,183 1,141 691 Policy Development Review Key Outcomes 821 108 (505) 348 895 632 189 8,141 1,291 5,183 108 980 579 • Prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk to life and property • Protect and enhance Toronto and Region's physical and natural heritage • Ensure the best available science, planning, and design practices, including integrated watershed management, is incorporated into ongoing community planning and development permitting. • Facilitate TRCA's acquisition of land containing important natural features • Deliver a quality customer experience Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Development Planning and Regulation Permitting 4,137 150 4,492 Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 3,183 1,141 691 Policy Development Review Key Outcomes 821 108 (505) 348 895 632 189 8,141 1,291 5,183 108 980 579 • Prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk to life and property • Protect and enhance Toronto and Region's physical and natural heritage • Ensure the best available science, planning, and design practices, including integrated watershed management, is incorporated into ongoing community planning and development permitting. • Facilitate TRCA's acquisition of land containing important natural features • Deliver a quality customer experience Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Implement an integrated watershed -based approach to planning and permit review that adds value to existing and future policy frameworks and aligns with sustainable community objectives. • Work cooperatively with municipal, provincial, development stakeholders in the implementation of TRCA's planning and regulatory function. • Increase procedural transparency and streamline the review and approval process (where appropriate). • Provide environmental planning and technical expertise and information in the areas of ecology, water resources engineering, geo- environmental engineering, hydrogeology, archaeology, property services, research and development, conservation lands, restoration services and watershed management in accordance with legislated planning and permitting responsibilities. Outlook TRCA's Development Planning and Regulatory Permitting function is expected to continue functioning in a manner similar to current operations with enhanced collaboration across divisions. Collaborative efforts will continue between TRCA and municipal partners to develop and integrate strategies for watershed protection, ecological design, and other sustainability considerations into land use planning. To meet 100% cost - recovery objectives, TRCA will update its application fee schedule in 2016 and 2018; it will also concurrently pursue internal process and information technology enhancements that increase operational efficiency and /or the customer experience. Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting Objectives: • Protect and enhance Toronto region's physical, natural, and cultural heritage • Ensure the best available science and planning practices, including integrated watershed management are incorporated into ongoing infrastructure planning and development permitting • Prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk to life and property from flooding, erosion, and other natural hazards • Deliver a high quality customer experience, ensuring solutions are both environmentally sensitive and fiscally conscientious Program Features Positioning TRCA is a commenting agency under environmental assessment legislation including the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, as well as a regulator under the Conservation Authorities Act. This dual role positions TRCA to offer value -added environmental assessment consulting services that reduce proponent uncertainty and risk. TRCA's pre and post- submission environmental assessment advisory, review, and permitting services are extended to public and private proponents on a fee - for- service or contract basis. By entering into dedicated service agreements and operating on a full cost - recovery model, TRCA is able to maintain and provide dedicated review teams, thereby ensuring high levels of in -house expertise that, in turn, result in faster and higher quality service for all clients. Context Environmental assessments are undertaken when a project has the potential for negative environmental, social, and /or economic impacts. Public and private infrastructure projects currently undergoing environmental assessment within TRCA's jurisdiction reflect a considerable era of growth- related infrastructure that includes roadways, highways and transit systems, oil and gas pipelines, and water and wastewater services. Multiple major infrastructure projects are underway in each of TRCA's partner municipalities. For municipal projects, TRCA is a commenting agency under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act and issues construction permits under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. Under Ontario Regulation 166/06, TRCA reviews and approves detailed designs associated with approved EA projects. For proponents for whom TRCA permits are non - binding, such as crown agencies, TRCA may undertake a Voluntary Project Review to ensure similar standards of review and evaluation are applied to areas of public interest. Where events or circumstances pose an immediate and dire risk to municipal infrastructure, TRCA follows its Permission for Emergency Infrastructure Works Protocol. Under this condition TRCA provides support and permitting to partner agencies in the absence of a full, pre- construction environmental assessment. Projects considered both minor and routine are subject to TRCA's Permission for Routine Infrastructure Works Protocol. While projects governed by the municipal Class Environmental Assessment process represent approximately 80% of TRCA's environmental assessment work load, TRCA also reviews projects under individual environmental assessment process, as well as the various class environmental assessment processes or exemption regulations for private and public clients. Stressors and Opportunities In addition to issues independent to aging infrastructure, climate change scenarios for the Toronto region include the increased frequency and duration of intense storm events that pose attendant risks to public and private infrastructure. Increased stormwater flows and flooding is expected to increase the frequency of repair and renewal for failed or vulnerable municipal infrastructure. Because of the historical practice of locating infrastructure in valleylands, a practice no longer permissible for current infrastructure twinning or replacement, environmental assessments for infrastructure replacement often include infrastructure relocation considerations. These stressors have already increased, and are expected to continue increasing, the complexity and workload associated with environmental assessment and permit file review. Current federal and provincial economic strategies have focused on infrastructure development and renewal as a preferred source for economic stimulus spending. While such infrastructure creation and renewal poses many advantages for municipalities and their citizens, the growth in environmental assessment demand associated with these projects has been considerable. Environmental assessments proceed on irregular schedules involving multiple stages involving high variability in staffing expertise and intensity /duration of effort required. In the absence of sufficient staff capacity, this type of operational demand will result in the inability to provide expedited reviews during peak workload periods. These stressors are expected to continue to increase with the pace of growth pressures and the complexity and workload associated with environmental assessment and permit file review. Creative streamlining measures, funding for technical reviewers and new working relationships need continued development to ensure service delivery standards are maintained. Funding Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting is operated on an at -cost, fee - for - service, full -cost recovery basis. Clients with a high volume of EA projects, and /or those who face time constraints, have the option of entering into Service Agreements with TRCA to ensure project needs are met. This funding model increases TRCA's overall capacity to ensure a complete planning and technical review staff compliment, provide continuous improvements to service delivery processes and timelines, increase knowledge and partnerships, and reducing wait and review times. Direct Actions and Activities Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting review of environmental assessment documents and applications to ensure the best available science and planning practices are incorporated. This function is supported by TRCA expertise in environment assessment and land use planning, ecology, water resources engineering, hydrogeology, geotechnical, and watershed management. Document review activities are supported by onsite technical and regulatory staff visits to enhance recommendations and ensure permit compliance in the project planning and implementation phases, respectively. Comments and recommendations are provided to proponents under fee - for - service or dedicated service agreement arrangements. TRCA currently holds ten dedicated service agreements with proponents; this model enables public and private sector clients to mitigate EA procedural uncertainly and risk for high volume and /or time constrained projects. Dedicated service agreements also provide TRCA with a more accurately estimate of the type and intensity of pending EA and, in turn, reduces the risks of under - staffing. In addition to dedicated service agreements, EA Planning and Permitting staff reviews projects for an additional 12 municipal clients, utility companies, provincial ministries, and private developers on pay -as -you go, fee -for service process. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Policy Development and Review work with municipal and other government partners to ensure the provides the best available science, planning, and design expertise are incorporated into relevant plans, policies, and strategies as well as oversee permit compliance and enforcement activities • Water Resource Science, Biodiversity Monitoring, and Waterfront and Watershed Plans and Strategies provide the evidence -based analysis to support the application of an integrated watershed perspective in the EA process • Erosion, Restoration and Regeneration, and Property Management provides technical expertise that support the success of risk mitigation and project implementation strategies Level of Investment Planning Development and Review (2015) ($000) Development Planning and Regulation Permitting 4,137 150 4,492 Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 3,183 1,141 691 Policy Development Review 821 108 - (505) 348 895 632 189 8,141 1,291 5,183 108 980 579 Key Outcomes • Service delivery standards are consistently met or exceeded • Public and private infrastructure is created, enhanced or maintained through an integrated environmental approach that is respective of project costs • Local ecosystem quality and function is protected, mitigated or enhanced Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Work with municipal, provincial, and private development stakeholders in the implementation of TRCA's environmental assessment planning and permitting function • Provide environmental planning and technical expertise and information in the areas of ecology, water resources engineering, geotechnical engineering, hydrogeology, archaeology, property services, research and development, conservation lands, restoration services and watershed management in accordance with environmental assessment planning and permitting responsibilities • Increase procedural transparency and streamline review and approval process (where appropriate) Outlook TRCA's Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting function is expected to continue in a manner similar to current operations. Program and process efficiencies will continue to be pursued, however it is anticipated that additional technical and environmental assessment planning staff will be required to maintain and /or improve current levels of service. TRCA will also seek to build and expand relationships with public and private infrastructure providers to ensure environmental assessment services are meeting regulatory, ecological, and client needs in approaches to project management and review that are both timely and cost effective. Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contrail Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy Development Planning and Regulation Permitting 4,137 150 4,492 Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting 3,183 1,141 691 Policy Development Review 821 108 - (505) 348 895 632 189 8,141 1,291 5,183 108 980 579 Key Outcomes • Service delivery standards are consistently met or exceeded • Public and private infrastructure is created, enhanced or maintained through an integrated environmental approach that is respective of project costs • Local ecosystem quality and function is protected, mitigated or enhanced Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Work with municipal, provincial, and private development stakeholders in the implementation of TRCA's environmental assessment planning and permitting function • Provide environmental planning and technical expertise and information in the areas of ecology, water resources engineering, geotechnical engineering, hydrogeology, archaeology, property services, research and development, conservation lands, restoration services and watershed management in accordance with environmental assessment planning and permitting responsibilities • Increase procedural transparency and streamline review and approval process (where appropriate) Outlook TRCA's Environmental Assessment Planning and Permitting function is expected to continue in a manner similar to current operations. Program and process efficiencies will continue to be pursued, however it is anticipated that additional technical and environmental assessment planning staff will be required to maintain and /or improve current levels of service. TRCA will also seek to build and expand relationships with public and private infrastructure providers to ensure environmental assessment services are meeting regulatory, ecological, and client needs in approaches to project management and review that are both timely and cost effective. School Programs Family Programs Professional Training and Development 583 School Programs Objectives: • Promote positive behavioral change to foster individual and social health and well -being • Increase current and future uptake of municipal initiatives such as recycling, energy and water savings, and stormwater and pollution mitigation • Enhance social equity and equalize access to youth environmental education and leadership development experiences • Contribute to integrated TRCA Community Outcome objective Program Features Positioning TRCA designs and delivers environmental education programs that complement provincial curriculum outcomes and objectives. This approach leverages TRCA's long- standing relationships with district school boards to co- create programming tailored for both classroom and TRCA field trip locations. With the ability to attract secure philanthropic funding, TRCA provides subsidized curricular enhancement to Toronto region schools. These conditions enable TRCA to reach diverse student populations and efficiently target students and classrooms in priority neighborhoods. Context TRCA has historically provided extended environmental education experiences through week -long programming at its three field centres, as well as offering in -class visits and hosting field trips and festivals at conservation parks. The Toronto District School Board (TDSB) also operates field centres for its students on TRCA land; TRCA avoids competition with TDSB field centres by focusing on hosting students from other jurisdictions. TRCA hosts single -day field trips at its Kortright Centre for Conservation, Black Creek Pioneer Village and Tommy Thompson Park sites. The population of enrolled K -12 students in the Toronto region is predicted to be stable and /or grow in coming years. This dynamic suggests TRCA programs will face predictable market numbers and will need to increase in scale to maintain equivalent levels of service delivery. School Programs require a high human capital complement and productivity gains are not expected; school program delivery costs are expected to increase accordingly. Stressors and Opportunities Research clearly demonstrates strong links between experiences in nature and key academic, health, social and environmental outcomes. Each year, however, proportionally fewer Toronto region youth have ready access to, and /or spend time in, the natural environment independently or through TRCA programming. Growing economic polarization exacerbates nature deficit in the classroom context; the top barriers identified by teachers to booking field trips to TRCA centres are program and transportation costs. Despite field trip booking costs being comparatively low (-$2.50 /student per programming hour for field trips; -$5.25 /student per programming hour at field centres), classes with students unable to afford field trips are increasingly likely to be denied exposure to the natural environment (TRCA in -class visits are free). Such an outcome would reduce the anticipated health, academic and social outcomes for these youth while diminishing social and environmental outcomes at local and regional scales. Currently philanthropic sector interest in youth and the environment mitigate the effects on economic disparity on equitable program delivery. Charitable grants significantly enhance the delivery of programs to at -risk youth and /or classrooms in priority neighborhoods. While TRCA will continue to engage with the charitable sector, the risk of reinforcing social inequality through lack of access to programming is significant should external funding be reduced or discontinued. Funding School board and /or user fees cover a considerable portion of program expenses for many initiatives. TRCA programs are also supported through municipal levy and capital funding, provincial and federal grants(s), and private or philanthropic funding. Direct Actions and Activities Program offerings are most frequently delivered through some combination of classroom sessions, field trips to natural environments, or a combination thereof. Approximately 7,000 students per year participate in overnight Feld centre programs, over 35,000 embark on a TRCA field trip, and approximately 20,000 are engaged though in -class activities. Beyond K -12 classrooms, TRCA offers niche programs that support Ontario educational requirements. The Conservation Youth Corps directs high school students required volunteer hours toward local public interest environmental projects, while the Kortright Centre delivers curriculum -based content and general environmental education programs for homeschooled students and preschoolers, respectively. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities • Educational infrastructure maintains and enhances educational program delivery facilities located in natural areas • Family and community engagement programs provide extension activities for youth and their families to access mediated natural experiences. In future, these activities will be further integrated with or oriented toward community outcomes and objectives Level of Investment Education and Outreach (2015) ($000) School Programs Sources of Revenue 1,673 Gross 2,523 Surplus/ Expenditures Government 50 54 - 2,512 (65) - Professional Training and Development Deficit 1,230 Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy School Programs 7,802 1,673 3,023 243 2,523 746 (406) Family Programs 2,551 50 54 - 2,512 (65) - Professional Training and Development 2,258 1,230 520 45 - 415 48 - 12,611 2,953 3,597 288 - 5,450 729 (406) Key Outcomes • Behavioral changes (measured short-term and predicted long -term) in student participants lead to improved indicators with respect to: • Citizenship behaviors, including environmental stewardship and social cohesion • Health and wellness outcomes • Academic achievement • School program access is provided on an equitable manner across the jurisdiction without regard to socioeconomic circumstance • Programming options in support of provincial curriculum objectives are available to diverse student learner categories (ECE through post- secondary) • Identified TRCA Community Objectives are advanced Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Initiate redesign of current School Program content and infrastructure to support Community Activation Centre and Youth Hub implementation • Continue operation of all current class and student programming initiatives • Strengthen new and existing relationships with traditional and non - traditional school board partners • Diversify philanthropic funding base; increase absolute and per student values of philanthropic funds received Outlook For increased effectiveness and efficacy, TRCA's ability to provide and promote nature -based experiences for youth will be further extended beyond discrete in -class or field trip experiences. TRCA is currently in the process of re- configuring school programming and infrastructure to serve community scale objectives. Field centres will be transformed into community hubs that offer diverse programming to across a wider demographic spectrum. Curricular content will introduce and integrate community themes and linkages. As this programming is brought online, school program outcomes and indicators for school programs will extend beyond the individual and be integrated and harmonized into broader sets of objectives. Family Programs Objectives: • Promote positive behavioral change to foster individual and social health and well -being • Enhance access to facilitate outdoor experiences • Contribute to integrated TRCA Community Outcome objectives Program Features Positioning Family Programs utilize TRCA landholdings and infrastructure to offer affordable, educational, family- oriented programming in a natural setting. Because Family Programs take place in expansive natural areas generally inaccessible by transit, they do not compete directly with indoor informal education programming such as museums and science centres, and /or with programming in urban, transit - accessible park locations. Rather, Family Programs seek to enhance the richness and educational value of the attendee experience at TRCA conservation parks and natural areas. TRCA Family programs are differentiated from TRCA Events and Festival offerings by their regular scheduling, programmed educational content and conducted primarily in an outdoor setting Context Family Programs are hosted at TRCA sites with the requisite of onsite staffing and/ or site infrastructure. Some onsite infrastructure, for example maple sugar shacks, have been installed at TRCA sites for the specific purpose of facilitating public programming. Because Family Programs are hosted at conservation parks or similar sites it is anticipated that participant demographics are similar. The population of TRCA's jurisdiction is over 4.5 million, of which over 700,000 are children between infant to 14 years of age; the maximum predicted local market size for family programs is approximately 600,000 families. In addition to this market, TRCA is actively seeking to expand its audience by attracting families from outside its jurisdiction. Stressors and Opportunities In general, Family Program delivery is constrained by audience uptake, available space at the hosting venue, qualified program delivery staff and funding available to support the programming. Family Programs offer a mediated discourse within and about the natural environment. As such, they represent an important tool for engaging those unaccustomed to spending time in the natural environment, a safe and low intensity introduction to Toronto region's natural spaces. Designing and tailoring Family Programs meet niche interests and needs may pose an opportunity to increase audience scope and scale. Research clearly demonstrates strong links between experiences in nature and key academic, health, social and environmental outcomes. Each year, however, proportionally fewer Toronto region families have ready access to, and /or spend time in, the natural environment. Family Programs seek to motivate and enable families to be increasingly comfortable and interested in spending time in the natural environment. Because they are frequently offered at sites requiring vehicle access, however, Family Programs currently disproportionately benefit families with the time and resources to travel to programming sites. Families unable to marshal the requisite time and resources to travel are less likely to partake in natural environment programming. Funding Admission fees for Family Programs range from being free to $25 per person. Select Family Programs are funded in part through municipal capital. Direct Actions and Activities Family Programs offer year round informal educational programming at Conservation parks and other TRCA lands that is delivered in a family - friendly manner. Each year TRCA delivers approximately 50 Family Programs from 22 different program offerings at 11 different sites including Tommy Thompson Park, Kortright Centre for Conservation, Bolton Camp, McVean Farm, and Cold Creek. Enrollment/participation in each Family program includes approximately 1 -2 TRCA facilitators and 10 to 350 participants. Many Family Programs are seasonal in nature, such as maple syrup programming in the spring, learn -to -fish programs in the summer, fall colours festival and family day winter carnival. Others are offered year round and engage a particular audience type such as parent and tot programs or parents who have children with physical or cognitive impairments (Nature Therapy program). Some are culturally significant (Halloween and Christmas Family programs) or focus on a particular area of natural interest such as astronomy or specific flora and fauna. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities • Conservation Parks provide a venue for Family Programs events • School Programs and Community Engagement initiatives serve as important preliminary or supplementary outreach and engagement mechanisms Level of Investment Education and Outreach (2015) ($000) School Programs Sources of Revenue 1,673 Gross - 2,523 Surplus/ Expenditures Government 50 54 - - 2,512 (65) - Professional Training and Development Deficit 1,230 Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy School Programs 7,802 1,673 3,023 243 - 2,523 746 (406) Family Programs 2,551 50 54 - - 2,512 (65) - Professional Training and Development 2,258 1,230 520 45 - 415 48 - 12,611 2,953 3,597 288 - 5,450 729 (406) Key Outcomes • Behavioral changes in participants leading to: • Improved citizenship behaviors, including environmental stewardship and social cohesion. • Improved health and wellness outcomes. • Increased likelihood to spend time in natural areas. • Increased interest in participating in other TRCA programming. • Family Program offerings are available and of interest to diverse participant categories. Key Activities — 2016- 2019 • Continue to design and deliver Family Program offerings under the five themes of recreation, culture, festivals, play and nature /environment. • Introduce Forest School inspired programming, parent and tot programs, and large scale family event offerings at appropriate areas that have been identified to have the greatest need. • Continue to learn from, and /or develop partnerships with, agencies that have delivered successful accessibility and inclusion programs, hold a proven record of high program uptake and client satisfaction rates, and /or are delivering innovative environmental programming for families. Outlook In coming years TRCA Family Programming will evolve from spatiotemporally discrete events to rich community- centric programming. In addition to programming offered at TRCA park sites, new and existing TRCA facilities such as Bolton Camp and TRCA Field Centres will be transformed into Community Hubs; the Community Hub format will enable individuals and groups to take a more active role in the design, delivery, and consumption of public programming. Community Hub design is also anticipated to drastically increase awareness, attractiveness, centrality, and accessibility of public programming sites to larger and more diverse audiences. Professional Training and Job Development Objectives: • Reduce knowledge barriers to the uptake of environmental best practices including: • Sustainable technologies and low impact development (LID) • Environmental protection • Measurement and monitoring • Enhance social equality and equalize access to environmental careers for new Canadians • Contribute to integrated TRCA Community Outcome objectives Program Features Positioning TRCA utilizes subject matter expertise and associated staff experts to offer specialized free and /or low -cost professional training and development programs to private and public sector clients. Programming is offered in fields where use of program content advances TRCA's mission and objectives. Where possible, TRCA uses its public /non - profit status to secure federal /provincial funding for program design and delivery. TRCA utilizes in -house staff expertise to assist new Canadians in their preparation for, and connection with, engineering, geoscience, planning, and environmental science workplaces. This program addresses current and future shortages in labour pools from which TRCA draws significant quantities of talent. Context TRCA holds niche expertise in industries including sustainable development and buildings, sustainable technology, low impact development (LID), hydrogeology, and environmental monitoring. Through its research partnerships, TRCA also holds current specialized expertise on the installation, operation, and performance of current- and next - generation sustainable technologies and practices. Canada receives over 260,000 new Canadians each year, of which approximately 30% settle in the Greater Toronto Area. Continued immigration to the Toronto region provides ongoing needs and opportunities for training and experience programs for foreign trained professionals. Over the next 25 years, immigration is expected to account for all increases in Ontario's working age population and will be a major source of future labour force growth. The Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and International Trade (MCIIT) provides funding to TRCA to work with internationally trained environmental professionals to secure employment in their field. Stressors and Opportunities Interest in single and multi -day professional development programs fluctuates as a function of technology development and uptake. Significant changes in technology, best practices, and /or policy could significantly increase or decrease programming demand. Since TRCA operates short-term training and development programs on a highly responsive, cost - recovery model, it is anticipated that technical or policy changes would only alter course content and not overall resource investment and /or revenues. Provided the Toronto region continues to attract new Canadians, job development programs for skilled newcomers will continue to receive sustained or increased participant demand. As discussed in Outlook (below), MCIIT funded programming is subject to funding vulnerabilities in its current operating model as well as opportunities for redesign and increased integration with TRCA programming. Funding Single and multi -day workshops are offered at a modest profit margin. Participant fees range from $50 to $500, and fully cover program delivery costs. The development and update of program curricula may be funded through one -time or ongoing support from federal and provincial partners. Multi -month training and development programs for new Canadians are provided at cost and funded primarily by the provincial MCIIT. The average participant cost for these programs is $399. Direct Actions and Activities TRCA offers single and multi -day workshops to public and private sector participants on topics that include the design and installation of low impact development technologies, renewable energy practices, and sediment and erosion control. TRCA program offerings convey knowledge and skills that increase participant competencies and offerings, mitigate risk, and /or grant professional accreditation. The Professional Access into Employment (PATE) program is a 12 -16 month professional training and development program for foreign trained professionals funded by MCIIT. The PAIE program is undertaken by participants on a part-time basis and includes approximately 230 direct programming hours that include Canadian professional and workplace skills updates, mentorship, an internship, and permanent job placement services. Professional categories for what TRCA currently offers the PAIE program are engineering, geoscience, planning and environmental science; these represent areas in which TRCA holds considerable expertise, internal staff resources and professional contacts. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities The Living City Transition and Water Resource Science programs house much of the in -house research and expertise that provide the content and state -of- the - practice knowledge that inform professional development course content Level of Investment Education and Outreach (2015) ($000) School Programs Sources of Revenue 1,673 Gross - 2,523 Surplus/ Expenditures Government 50 54 - - 2,512 (65) - Professional Training and Deficit User Contract Development Capital Operating 520 45 415 Grants 12,611 Other 3,597 288 5,450 729 (406) Fees Services Levy Levy and Other School Programs 7,802 1,673 3,023 243 - 2,523 746 (406) Family Programs 2,551 50 54 - - 2,512 (65) - Professional Training and Development 2,258 1,230 520 45 415 48 12,611 2,953 3,597 288 5,450 729 (406) Key Outcomes • Increased private and public sector implementation of technologies and practices that advance TRCA objectives • Increased local capacity and competitiveness in green industries • Achievement of Community Objectives including awareness, employment and well -being Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Professional training and development programming in response to market deficiencies and demands • Redesign the foreign- trained worker training and development program to reduce per participant cost, increase community objectives, and increase integration with evolving TRCA community outreach and job development programs Outlook Single and multi -day training and development programs will continue to be offered in areas where specialized TRCA expertise and market demand intersect. TRCA's job development and training programs will evolve to be more tightly integrate with complementary TRCA programming and effectively target community needs at scale. The current reliance on program funding from MCIIT will be mitigated by bundling foreign- trained professional job development programming with new youth employment initiatives; this program expansion is anticipated to meet wider community needs, achieve economies of scale and diversify external funding sources. Populations served will both expand and become more concentrated as professional outreach to new Canadians integrates with TRCA's broader multicultural programming, and client populations expand from the individual to the family unit. Program objectives will accordingly be incorporated with TRCA's integrated Community Objectives. TRCA will also address market preparedness issues with prospective employers to reduce the intensity of effort required for successful job placement while creating incentives for employers for defray program costs. The Living City Transition Program Community Engagement 593 The Living City Transition Program Objectives: • Accelerate the implementation of environmentally sustainable technologies and practices in the residential, institutional, commercial, and industrial (ICI) and agricultural sectors • Accelerate sustainable practice uptake and implementation by Toronto region citizens • Increase the economic well -being of Toronto region citizens and business by increasing viability of local green economy business and industry • Contribute to the growth of regional Green Economy and sustainability by scaling up sustainability programs and providing Green Jobs Program Features Positioning TRCA's status as both a public and non - profit entity enables it to deliver sustainability programs that require significant public assets, diverse partnerships, and innovative non - profit funding models. TRCA leverages this unique combination of capacities, in conjunction with 50+ years of city - building and sustainable technology expertise, to create network -based sustainability initiatives in contexts otherwise prone to one or more market failures. Context In past, TRCA watershed plans and other environmental strategy documents have incorporated assumptions with respect to anticipated development, the rate and ratio of implementation of and /or retrofit to environmentally sustainable best practices, and attendant environmental conditions and outcomes. Since the release of its first watershed plan, however, TRCA has observed limited uptake of sustainable practices; causes behind this observation include higher implementation expense, absence of performance validation and /or regulatory/policy incentives, lack of best practices knowledge, and lack of relevant community structures and expectations in support sustainable practice implementation. Stressors and Opportunities The population within TRCA's jurisdiction is anticipated to increase from 4.5M to 4.8M ( -6.8 %) between 2014 and 2019. The attendant need for growth in both local /regional housing and employment will increase demands on systems at the local, regional, and global scale; taxed systems include ecological, social, hydrological, energy, and waste management. By the same account, retrofit and Greenfield opportunities are essential opportunities to ensure the sustainability of watersheds with context of rapid urbanization and climate change. The degree to which Toronto and Region can accommodate this growth - while maintaining favorable living conditions - will in part determine its status as a desirable location for economically advantageous, highly skilled labour industries. Regional, national, and international policy changes are anticipated to continue to create economic opportunities for companies operating within green economy sectors. By reducing local barriers to green technology commercialization and uptake, TRCA seeks to support regional competitiveness in these globally expanding industries. Funding Funding for the living city transition program is obtained through municipal levy, government grants, donations and user fees. Toronto ancilljion Conservation Dsiness Synopis motional 2015 -2019 T6 Living City Transition Program Direct Actions and Activities TRCA operates an extensive sustainable technology testing and verification facility at the Kortright Living City Campus (LCC). This facility is used to test and verify the performance of sustainable building, energy, and low impact development (LID) technologies under local geologic, hydrologic, and climate conditions. Data from the Kortright LCC (and similar initiatives managed offsite) are provided to industry and government in support of policy changes to incentivize sustainable technology implementation. Within the ICI sectors, TRCA convenes several networks (based on proximity, industry, or a combination thereof) to promote the creation and uptake of sustainability focused corporate social responsibility initiatives. These networks seek to accelerate the identification, adoption, and sharing of sustainable best practices and on the ground demonstrations within their membership. TRCA staff also work with individual members /clients on a fee - for - service basis to identify, evaluate, and implement medium- to large -scale sustainability initiatives and monitor their respective successes. Within the commercial agricultural sector, TRCA engages directly with individual landholders. Through subsidized expertise and implementation support, TRCA seeks to accelerate the adoption of agricultural best practices and reduce habitat and water quality threats to the surrounding landscape. Within urban neighborhoods, TRCA leases land and promotes the development of both for - profit and non - profit community agricultural initiatives. At the neighborhood scale, TRCA engages directly with citizens and community organizations to test and verify best practices for sustainable technology adoption and behavioral change. Distinct from traditional community stewardship activities, Sustainable Community programming seeks to understand how community factors — including socio- economic and community characteristic variables - affect the uptake and longevity of sustainable behaviors. Practices or interventions found to strengthen desirable community characteristics and increase and /or accelerate metrics of sustainability are shared and scaled to other community sites. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities The Living City Transition Program area is supported by the following TRCA activities: Watershed and Waterfront Plans delineate desired targets and end - states • Community Engagement activities foster local environmental stewardship behaviors and promote behavioural change that fosters individual and social health and well -being • Report Cards Level of Investment Sustainable Communities (2015) ($000) Living City Transition Program 5,003 1,595 299 561 - 2,548 Community Engagement 2,516 236 18 158 - 2,112 (8) 7,519 1,831 317 719 - 4,660 (8) Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy 5,003 1,595 299 561 - 2,548 Community Engagement 2,516 236 18 158 - 2,112 (8) 7,519 1,831 317 719 - 4,660 (8) Key Outcomes • Corporate sustainability initiatives in diverse sectors accelerate the iteration and uptake of effective sustainability measures • Technologies for improving energy and water efficiency, and reducing stormwater impacts, are identified and broadly implemented within region and beyond • Economic performance and competitiveness of the Toronto region's green technology /services sector is increased • Toronto region food security, including the urban agriculture sector, is strengthened • Neighbourhoods develop social capital while improving reducing their environmental footprint • Green jobs Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Develop and implement new Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plans • Continue to expand the Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program, including seeking designation as a non - profit D- entity • Continue to implement, promote, and expand Community Transformation, urban agriculture, and corporate sustainability projects • Scale up Eco- Business Zones to encompass attractive and appropriate business parks and centres within partner municipalities Outlook The Living City Transition Program will continue to be a high potential growth area in the coming years. Each initiative within this program area is readily scalable (throughout Toronto region and beyond) provided adequate business models - and sufficient client -based funding sources therein - are identified. This opportunity imbues the Living City Transition programs with the highest potential for rapid experimentation, iteration, and associated learning. Provided TRCA and current funding partners tolerate the uncertainly associated with innovation processes, the Living City Transition program has the potential to provide the system -wide sustainability practices needed to transform the Toronto region into a sustainable urban centre. Community Engagement Objectives: • Maintain and expand an informed citizenry capable of providing feedback on local and regional initiatives with environmental implications • Foster local environmental stewardship behaviors and initiatives • Promote positive behavioral change that fosters individual and social health and well -being Program Features Positioning For over 50 years, TRCA has been trusted by municipal partners and citizens to deliver environmental stewardship programming and support. Many community engagement activities involve consultation on, or participation in, plans, strategies, and project development. To meet community and partner needs, TRCA provides integrated, at -cost community engagement services to municipalities with the value -ads of economies of scale and consistency in regional approach and application. Context TRCA serves a population of over four million citizens across 20 municipalities. This population is expanding - the population of the GTA increases at an annual rate of —1.4 %. Community engagement activities are in large part directed to support TRCA's nine watershed plans and strategies, as well as individual projects in support of these initiatives. Stressors and Opportunities The increasing size and diversity of the GTA population concomitantly increases the scope and scale of resources required to meaningfully engage a given proportion of citizens. Accordingly, TRCA's ability to engage citizens within its jurisdiction will decrease if community engagement resources remain static. This poses a threat not only to program objectives including heath, environment, community cohesion, but also undermines the fundamental principle of informed participation in consultation and collaborative planning. Failure to actively engage with the diversity of the GTA population would continue to disproportionally favour the perspective of existing known contacts and participants (and the particular demographics these groups represent) at the expense of the wider whole. The demographics of those regularly participating in outdoor initiatives are increasing in age. Addressing intersectionality of age with other characteristics - including ethnicity and socioeconomic status - in community outreach and engagement activities continues to pose a challenge and requires outreach initiatives targeted toward underrepresented groups. TRCA views both targeted and non - targeted outreach activities as an opportunity to ensure participants engaged through TRCA initiatives are reflective of the entire Toronto region community. Advances in communications and internet technology allow for the production and dissemination of increasingly niche outreach strategies; communications products can be delivered to wider audiences at lower per capita cost. The engagement of public audiences through remote technology, however, cannot fully replace engaging audiences at specific sites and fostering the social, health, and stewardship benefits of active participation and engagement. Funding Funding for Community Engagement activities is funded primarily through Municipal Levy with minor contributions from charitable foundations and government grants. Participating individuals and organizations are not charged fees because to do so is inappropriate and /or would increase barriers to participation. Direct Actions and Activities TRCA directly engages citizens through participation in planning and consultation discussions, community restoration activities such as tree plantings, and residence - specific programming addressing indoor and outdoor sustainability initiatives. Each year TRCA hosts over 60 events in across the jurisdiction. For certain joint projects, TRCA serves as a community liaison and mediator on behalf of municipal partners. As noted above, TRCA seeks to ensure engaged populations reflect the diversity of the broader Toronto region. To this end, specific populations are targeted by TRCA for active introduction to TRCA sites, services, and objectives. By way of example, the Multicultural Connections Program works with faith communities and newcomer centres to give 7,500 new Canadians each year a mediated introduction into Toronto area ecosystems and outdoor recreational sites. TRCA also administers a "Volunteer @TRCA" program and internet platform that connects interested participants with volunteer opportunities. Complementary TRCA Actions and Activities The Community Engagement program area is supported by the following TRCA activities: • Watershed and Waterfront Plans direct the sites and objectives of community outreach and consultation activities School programs and /or family programs serve as an introduction to TRCA's objectives and program offerings Level of Investment Sustainable Communities (2015) ($000) Living City Transition Program Community Engagement Key Outcomes 5,003 1,595 299 561 - 2,548 2,516 236 18 158 - 2,112 (8) 7,519 1,831 317 719 - 4,660 (8) Citizens and community groups, reflecting the cultural diversity of the Toronto region, have an understanding of conservation and watershed management issues and participate in and /or support conservation programs Citizens are motivated to organize and undertake independent initiatives that complement TRCA and partner objectives, benefit local environmental conditions, and /or advance their own physical and social well -being Sources of Revenue Gross Surplus/ Expenditures Government Deficit Grants User Contract Other Capital Operating and Other Fees Services Levy Levy 5,003 1,595 299 561 - 2,548 2,516 236 18 158 - 2,112 (8) 7,519 1,831 317 719 - 4,660 (8) Citizens and community groups, reflecting the cultural diversity of the Toronto region, have an understanding of conservation and watershed management issues and participate in and /or support conservation programs Citizens are motivated to organize and undertake independent initiatives that complement TRCA and partner objectives, benefit local environmental conditions, and /or advance their own physical and social well -being TRCA watershed plan development involves a wide variety of stakeholders from public, private and non - profit sectors, community groups and the general public. A large network of volunteers contribute to TRCA projects and programs while gaining experience in the environment field Private and public sector stakeholders, including TRCA partner municipalities and communities, are aware of anticipated climate change effects in the Toronto and understand how they might mitigate these effects Key Activities — 2016 -2019 • Develop and implement a new framework to increase the engagement of stakeholders in TRCA watershed planning and watershed plan implementation • Build capacity and assist neighbourhoods, businesses, governments and non - government organizations to identify and implement strategies and actions that facilitate and accelerate their progress towards socially, environmentally and economically resilient communities • Modify programming, as appropriate, to incorporate climate change mitigation and adaptation information • Continued program delivery of the Volunteer @TRCA program, community stewardship programs, and Multicultural Connections Program Outlook TRCA will continue to proactively seek to engage with a broad cross - section of the Toronto region population. To this end, the Community Engagement program will continue to develop; test, and implement engagement tools and programs that help partner municipalities achieve sustainable communities. RES. #A212 /15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed Joseph & Wolf Lebovic Jewish Community Campus, CFN 41509. Acquisition of property located west of Bathurst Street and north of Rutherford Road, in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River watershed. (Executive Res. #8116/15) Moved by: Matt Mahoney Seconded by: Jennifer Innis THAT 1.96 hectares (4.83 acres), more or less, of vacant land located west of Bathurst Street and north of Rutherford Road, in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, said land being Part of Lot 17, Concession 2 and designated as Parts 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 12 on Plan 65R- 35616, be purchased from the Joseph & Wolf Lebovic Jewish Community Campus; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the lands free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements and existing lease; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A213 /15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Carruthers Creek Watershed Kinsale Properties Ltd., CFN 54648. Acquisition of a conservation easement located north of Highway 7 and east of Balsam Road (3160 Highway 7), in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Carruthers Creek watershed. (Executive Res. #8117/15) Moved by: Matt Mahoney Seconded by: Jennifer Innis • I F THAT a conservation easement for the protection of the environmental features and functions of an irregular shaped parcel of land containing 1.89 hectares (4.68 acres), more or less, being Part of Lot 4, Concession 6 and designated as Parts 2 to 12, inclusive, on a Draft Plan of Survey prepared by Ivan B. Wallace, Ontario Land Surveyor Ltd., under their Drawing No. 5- 11189, dated September 23, 2015, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, located north of Highway 7 and east of Balsam Road be purchased from Kinsale Properties Ltd.; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) acquire the conservation easement free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and execution of documentation. CARRIED Section II — Items for Authority Information RES. #A214/15 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Ron Moeser THAT Section II item 10.2.1 — Toronto Islands — Hanlan's Point Boardwalk Improvements, City of Toronto, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #10/15, held on October 16, 2015, be received. CARRIED 601 Section III — Items for the Information of the Board RES. #A215/15 - GOOD NEWS STORIES Overview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities from July through September, 2015. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Giorgio Mammoliti THAT the summary of Good News Stories from July through September, 2015 be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND As per Authority direction during 2006, a report covering highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) activities is provided to the Authority quarterly. The stories for July through September, 2015 are as follows: July /August • City of Mississauga's Civic Centre betters the Town Hall Challenge target of 20 ekwh /sqft by 16% and they still expect to save even more energy before the end of the challenge later this year. • TRCA's Updated Assessment Report was approved by the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change on July 24th. This completes the technical work under the Clean Water Act that began in 2005. • The Source Protection Plan for Credit Valley Conservation, Toronto and Region Conservation, and Central Lake Ontario Conservation was approved as of August 17, 2015. This important policy document will take effect as of December 31, 2015, thereby leading us into the implementation phase of work under the Clean Water Act. • 30 high school girls participated in the Girls Can Too program initiative at the Bolton Camp site during summer 2015. Spearheaded by three female university students, the program promotes trades jobs and environmental learning to young women in grades 9 - 12. • More than 400 people attended the second annual open house event at Bolton Camp on August 13, 2015. The free family event showcased the cabin and trail restoration work the students employed in the Student Summer Employment Program accomplished and featured an outdoor movie screening. • Stewardship staff received $8,300 from the Markham Environmental Sustainability Fund to engage newcomers in a "Habitat through the Seasons" program this winter and next spring. Stewardship staff has a long standing partnership with Markham Museum to help them create programming for residents and school groups that visit the site. • This summer, Stewardship staff partnered with the Township of King and the Nature Conservancy of Canada to lead weekly community walks to explore trails throughout the Township this summer. There were 70+ residents engaged on four walks and one walk was featured in the Toronto Star - http: / /www.thestar. com /news /i nsig ht/2015 /08 /22/wild -in- the - city- birds - bees - flowers- trees -an d -a- red - spotted - newt.html • On July 91h, Kortright hosted an evening family bat program. Participants learned about the different types of bats, their amazing adaptations and observed some captive species up close. Participants headed out into the field with a bat expert and used their newfound bat knowledge to locate wild species on the property. This event was well received and booked to capacity. 602 • Kortright offered themed summer day camps for children ages 5 -14 years of age during July and August. Kortright has seen steady growth of its summer camp programming over the past four years and in 2015 had a record year of 700 registered campers. Themed weeks this year included Amazing Animals, Leadership Adventure Camp, Spy Camp, Survival Camp, Music and Art in Nature, Incredible Insects, History week and Leadership in Training. • On July 14th, City of Toronto Mayor John Tory, federal Finance Minister Joe Oliver and Ontario Infrastructure Minister Brad Duguid announced a $5 million City- funded due diligence study to confirm project costs, risks, phasing and design elements, in order to satisfy the levels of government to contribute funding of $1 billion to flood mitigation, naturalization and associated infrastructure plan at the mouth of the Don River. This due diligence study combines the outcomes of the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Environmental Assessment (EA), and the Lower Don Lands Servicing and Transportation Master Plan Class EA. • Education staff hosted 13 conservation authorities in a two -day workshop focussed on supporting Special High Skills Major programs through education experiences and certifications. Staff from the Ministry of Education, Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, Conservation Ontario, Grand River Conservation and TRCA presented on successful models of engagement, including Innovation, Creativity, and Entrepreneurship (I.C.E.) training. • In partnership with York Region District School Board, education staff delivered a multi -day Djembe drumming workshop at the Swan Lake Centre. Feedback supports the promotion of similar workshops next summer. • Bike tours educating the public on the restoration projects at Tommy Thompson Park, commenced in July. A great turnout to August's tour is encouraging for future cycling opportunities. • Town of Caledon Council approved TRCA staffs recommendation to begin a new SNAP (Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan) in Jaffrey's Creek subwatershed in west Bolton. The Town and TRCA will leverage existing resources to secure additional funding to support the Action Plan which will be developed with partners and the community over the next two years. • Black Creek Pioneer Village's (BCPV) summer day camps had the best year ever. In particular, the new themed weeks "Crafty Cooks" and "Treasure Island Mystery Week" both sold out. • The July 18/19 "Quilts at the Creek" special event at BCPV was a wonderful event on a hot summer weekend. Over 270 quilts were on display this year. • A new exhibit opened at BCPV this year; "Sporting Canadians: 150 Years of Sports Fashion," was launched to coincide with the Pan Am and Para Pan Am Games and was enjoyed by many visitors to the Village this summer. • While conducting terrestrial biological inventories in support for the upcoming Carruthers Creek watershed plan, biologists have made some important discoveries that add to our knowledge of the biodiversity for the Toronto region. Flora biologists discovered sessile- fruited arrowhead (Sagittaria rigida) at the Carruthers coastal marsh which is a species thought to be locally extirpated. This is the first TRCA record for this species since 1913 when it was recorded at Toronto Island. In addition, fauna biologists observed a fisher in the middle reaches of the watershed; further evidence of this species' incursion into the Toronto region. Fishers have only been observed in the East Duffins Headwaters of the TRCA jurisdiction. • Newly established meadow vegetation monitoring plots at Bob Hunter Memorial Park reveal that the original meadow restoration at this site in 2011/12 has been highly successful as native prairie grasses and forbs are overwhelmingly dominating the vegetation cover. 603 Meadow habitat that is large in size and of high quality is a lacking feature in the Toronto region so the success of this project adds increased opportunities for both flora and fauna species. • Merlin appears to be the latest addition to the list of birds of prey that are adapting well to urban life in the region. After a failed nest attempt in 2014, merlins in Brampton have produced young - great news if you are a merlin or a fan of falcons, not so great if you are a house sparrow or a starling. • An orchid species, early coral root (Corallorhiza trifida), was discovered while collecting data at a monitoring site in the Town of Richmond Hill. This is only the 4th known location identified in the TRCA jurisdiction over the past 60 years. It is a species of regional conservation concern for TRCA (L -rank L1) because of its specialized habitat requirements and sensitivity to hydrology changes. • The third known location in the TRCA jurisdiction for squaw -root (Conopholis americana) was discovered in Highland Creek. This is a species of regional conservation concern (L -rank L1) that is found in higher quality forest areas so it was quite surprising to find it still present in the urban portion of the jurisdiction. • TRCA's Partners in Project Green assisted Molson -Coors with securing a 2016 capital budget of $250,000 to install a 715 mZ greenroof on their Etobicoke plant. • TRCA received a $51,000 grant from the Metcalf Foundation in support for Partners in Project Green's open electric vehicle network project. • Partners in Project Green's largest electric vehicle charging station installation is underway - 24 charging points. Orlando Corporation has begun work on the $150,000 project at their Heartland Town Centre retail development in Mississauga. • Ash tree recovery pilots successfully completed at the Richmond Hill Operations Centre (500 trees) and Markham Operations Centre (100 trees). Lumber donated in -part to Toronto Waldorf School's wood working program. • In the aftermath of an oil spill in Mimico Creek, businesses from the Pearson eco- business zone rallied to offer cash and in -kind to help with clean up efforts.www. partnersi n projectg reen.com /news /pearson -busi ness -comm u nity- steps -u p -after- m i mico- creek - oil -spit I/ • TRCA, in partnership with Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) and Credit Valley Conservation (CVC), hosted eight Learn to Fish events this summer that engaged 475 participants. • The Conservation Youth Corps (CYC) high school volunteer program engaged 240 participants this summer. A total of 8,400 TRCA volunteer hours were accumulated over the six week program. • The Humber team partnered with the Friends of the Pan Am Path to deliver five of the Pan Am Path Art Relay events along the Humber River supporting its local partners and City of Toronto in celebration of Arts and Culture associated with the Legacy of the Pan Am Games. Over 930 people attended the five events. • Supporting the Weston -Mt. Dennis Community Association, Party at the Pond saw over 300 participants enjoy learn -to -fish programming at Topham Pond. Humber staff set up a booth at the event and ran a silicon fish stamp painting activity attracting many young participants. • TRCA partnered with Black Creek Community Farm to deliver the Annual farm festival in July. The event was an overwhelming success introducing local residents to the farm and celebrating fresh local food. 650 people attended the event. • In collaboration with King Township Museum and Archives, King Libraries and Arts Society King, TRCA welcomed 100 grade 5 students to the Museum for a day of celebration of the Humber River and unveiled a Canadian Heritage River System Designation plaque on site recognizing the heritage of the Humber River. •IE • The Humber, Etobicoke - Mimico and Don watershed councils held an appreciation event celebrating the successes of the councils and all of the accomplishments achieved. • The Explore Claireville and Explore King walking series were launched this summer. These regular programmed walks attracted over 120 participants to get active and explore their local greenspaces. Many new discoveries were made and an appreciation for nature was felt by all. Through TRCA's Nature Accessibility Program, staff launched a pilot senior's engagement program. The pilot will take place over 2015 at Unionville Home Society - Senior's Community Centre and DelManor - Senior's Residence and consists of a series of workshops with curriculum aimed at reconnecting seniors with nature. • Humber staff presented on TRCA Urban Agriculture Policy and Program at Grey to Green Conference in Toronto which had an agricultural theme. • Humber Watershed Specialist appointed to Niagara Escarpment Biosphere Reserve Network Terms of Reference Working Group to establish a network around promoting the Niagara Escarpment and its designation as a United Nations Biosphere Reserve. • The Living City Farm at Kortright piloted a Farmers' Market this summer, selling fresh farm produce to visitors at Kortright. The market received a great response and has been extended to November 2015. • The Black Creek Community Farm is now delivering fresh farm produce to staff at 101 Exchange who have subscribed to their Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) program. • Phase I of the San Romanoway outdoor revitalization project was implemented, including a 63 plot allotment garden and Toronto's largest urban orchard, supported with rainwater harvesting. Phase I also included a beautiful shade arbour, pollinator gardens, and naturalization areas with hundreds of native shrubs and trees. • Residents of San Romanoway graduated from a three -month fruit tree care certification program. At the end of the course each student adopted a fruit tree to care for, under the direction of two paid orchard leaders from the community. Four teams of graduates are offering their services, for cash or in -kind fruit contributions in the neighbourhood's single family homes. • 50 residents and a childcare centre signed up to receive a plot at the San Romanoway garden. Residents developed the garden rules and were trained on urban agriculture and garden management. • 90 volunteers participated in the San Romanoway revitalization project, donating 935 hours of work. • The Harvest the Rain Program booked 185 home consultations to help residents green their homes since the program inception. Home consultations include advice and resources to reduce energy and water, manage stormwater, reduce flooding, plant trees and participate in urban agriculture and community cohesion programs. In the summers of 2014 and '15, TRCA's Surplus Harvest Program collected from 25 homes in the Black Creek Neighbourhood a total of 505 lbs. of excess fruits and vegetables from residents' backyard trees and gardens and donated it to meal programs at San Romanoway apartment towers. • 54 new edible balconies were implemented in three high rise apartment towers. The program offered free training and materials, and five residents were hired as community leaders to mentor their neighbours. • Inter - generational skills and knowledge sharing events were held and led by Black Creek SNAP homeowners for other residents of the area. These include: a seed saving workshop and two tree care workshops, covering topics such as pruning out disease, pole pruning and sulphur spraying. • Black Creek SNAP homeowners donated 44M2 of garden for food production by a local community group. [T*IR TRCA Planning staff was fortunate to participate in two opportunities this summer to promote to the Crombie Panel and senior provincial staff, the value of conservation authorities in implementing the provincial plans currently under review (Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM), Greenbelt, Growth Plan, Niagara Escarpment): 1. Staff co -led a tour of the ORM and Greenbelt highlighting success stories about protection policies, land securement and stewardship efforts in the Happy Valley Forest, as well as identifying issues needing to be addressed such as large scale fill sites, Greenbelt land removal requests and natural heritage system impacts from infrastructure, such as the future GTA West highway. 2. Staff made presentations on the conservation authority (CA) roles in watershed, land use and infrastructure planning, along with staff from other CA's who presented on CA roles in natural heritage systems planning, environmental monitoring, water and hazard management, funding and governance. The Ontario Archaeological Society will be presenting TRCA with an award for Excellence in Cultural Resource Management. The award recognizes TRCA's deep commitment to preservation of cultural heritage and for practicing and promoting heritage and conservation of cultural heritage for over 50 years. TRCA was profiled in Environmental Science and Engineering Magazine for the success of our Lake Ontario Evening in educating the public about the proliferation of plastics in water bodies. September • Toronto has adopted the York -Peel- Durham - Toronto (YPDT) groundwater database as their borehole management system for the Don Mouth implementation; the first significant use of the YPDT database by the City of Toronto. • TRCA has received a $30,000 per month increase to its Google Advertising Grant and now receives $40,000 per month of in -kind advertising on the Google Adwords network. • Ceremony held with donors Ross and Lorna Milne for dedication of the William Dennison Forest Preserve, a 50 acre parcel of land on Innis Lake Road in Caledon. • TRCA's Environmental Monitoring and Data Management section was fortunate to have an intern from the Environmental Visual Communications Co -op program at Fleming College. The student was able to collect excellent photographs and video content related to a variety of TRCA's field related activities throughout the summer months. • Gatineau Hydro Corridor Meadow has been highly successful in restoring unproductive hydro corridors into productive habitat. • Completed The Bond Lake bioswale project at Bond Lake Public School in partnership with York Region and the York Region School Board. • Completed the Woodbine Beach rain garden and butterfly meadow at Ashbridge's Bay, as part of the Blue Flag program. • Received $24,000 from the Ministry of Transportation in support of electric vehicle network. • Dagmar trails were developed, in partnership with Durham Mountain Biking Association. Trails completed with 6,000 hours of volunteer trail building, which is the largest of its kind in Canada. • Kick off meeting held for development of ravine strategy for Toronto. The process will include engagement of non - governmental organizations to look at priorities. • Heritage plaques are being unveiled across the Humber watershed to celebrate the Humber Canadian Heritage River designation. • Fifteen corporate and public sector teams participated in the Heart Lake Dragon Boat festival. •ie • The City of Brampton expressed their thanks to CVC and TRCA for jointly completing a composite Natural System as phase 1 of the Brampton's Natural Heritage and Environmental Strategy for their Official Plan. • Caught eight Atlantic salmon of which four are naturally reproducing on their spawning run up the Duffins Creek. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: October 5, 2015 607 RES. #A216/15 - CONSTRUCTION SITE COMPLIANCE UNDER THE CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT Policy and Procedural Overview. An overview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) compliance procedures related to the issuance of permit applications under the Conservation Authorities Act. Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT the staff report on Construction Site Compliance under the Conservation Authorities Act be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #8/15, held on September 25, 2015, Resolution #A194/15 was approved, in part, as follows: ...AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to report back on policies and procedures used to supervise construction done under the Conservation Authorities Act. RATIONALE A primary objective of TRCA is to prevent loss of life and property due to flooding and erosion. TRCA administers a natural hazard and feature based Regulation that captures watercourses, river and stream valleys, the Lake Ontario Shoreline and wetlands. TRCA's permitting process is mandated under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. The Regulation currently administered by TRCA is Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended: Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses. Pursuant to the Regulation, a permit is required from TRCA for the following activities: a) straightening, changing, diverting or interfering in anyway with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse, or for changing or interfering in any way with a wetland; b) development, if in the opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution, or the conservation of land may be affected by the development. Types of Construction TRCA is actively involved in construction related activities, whether it is in relation to large scale restoration projects undertaken by Restoration and Infrastructure staff on TRCA lands, partnership projects related to remedial works on public properties, or through private development projects administered through TRCA's Planning and Development staff. Protection of life and property from flooding and erosion hazards is dependent on natural system protection, restoration and remediation, inclusive of valley and stream corridors, wetlands, watercourses and shorelines. Development and redevelopment should contribute to the prevention, elimination and reduction in risk from flooding, erosion and slope instability. • 0 • Restoration and Infrastructure Projects: TRCA has a long- standing management program to monitor erosion and instability -prone areas, and to implement stabilization works such as the maintenance of existing erosion control structures (e.g. retaining walls, revetments) along TRCA's rivers, valleys and shoreline that protects public greenspace, park amenities and municipal infrastructure. Most projects follow a set Environmental Assessment process, go through detailed design, and ultimately on to permitting and project implementation. This program is extended to the protection of private property in extreme cases where homes and other essential structures have been confirmed as at -risk by erosion or instability. All erosion control work is also subject to all necessary municipal, provincial and federal approvals before being implemented. In addition, TRCA, in partnership with other agencies, non - government organizations and the public, helps to protect and increase the amount of fish and wildlife habitat available through naturalization initiatives, wetland creation and weir mitigation projects. Planning and Development Permits: Planning and Development staff review two types of applications consisting of private proponents (ie: landowners, developers and institutions), as well as a full range of municipal infrastructure and transportation undertakings. Proposed development applications on private lands are assessed to determine if the proposal falls within the TRCA Regulation limit, meet the tests of the legislation, and are in accordance with TRCA programs and policies. Proposed works vary from projects that are minor in nature, due to their size and location, to large scale proposals ranging from the development of subdivisions to the installation or repair of municipal infrastructure, such as roads or servicing projects. Prior to permit issuance or construction, complex files go through a comprehensive planning process (e.g. Planning Act and /or an Environmental Assessment), while smaller proposals will become stand -alone permits coordinated with the municipality (ie: Building Permits). Planning and Development: (Private and Municipal Proponents) Each private development application submitted to the TRCA is unique. The specifics of each property, the extent of environmental features and constraints, the complexity of the proposal and compliance with TRCA policies determines the required assessment of the proposal. Planners organize site visits, circulate proposals to appropriate technical staff, coordinate review comments and communicate the recommendations or issues to the proponent. Planners utilize the Planning and Development Procedural Manual and The Living City Policies for Planning and Development in the Watersheds of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to ensure each proposal is complete and to assess the viability of a project based on TRCA policies and regulation. When all concerns have been addressed to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, planners determine what permit conditions will be imposed on the proposal to aid with ensuring compliance with the project, prior to recommending permit approval to the Executive Committee. Permits are directly tied to comprehensive construction drawings. As required, Planners play an integral role in supporting TRCA compliance objectives: • act as liaison between proponent and compliance initiatives; • act as project managers on applications and approved permit files; • assist in resolutions to violations - negotiate policy requirements, provide expertise on strategy meetings, issuance of permits and /or restoration plans; • process required permit re- issuances for expired/ expiring permits; • process required permit revisions; •IR • provide expert witness testimony associated with TRCA prosecutions; and • assist in policy and procedural initiatives to aid in prioritizing workload; • liaise with member municipality (ie: Building Permit requirements). Enforcement and Compliance Enforcement officers play an important role in the management of natural hazards and features within TRCA watersheds. Officers periodically inspect construction projects and file reports for works approved under the Regulation. In cases where works are carried out without proper authorization, officers will notify the proponent of the infraction, issue violations and may initiate legal proceedings when necessary to ensure compliance. The primary role of Enforcement staff is to ensure compliance with the Regulation, approved permit drawings and conditions, as well as the policies adopted by TRCA. It is the ultimate responsibility of the proponent to oversee all aspects of the construction project, including project management, tendering and contractor oversight, and to ensure overall compliance with the permit requirements of TRCA, as well as municipal, provincial and federal legislation. TRCA is not responsible for full construction site supervision on permitted projects; rather officers undertake the following major tasks: • conduct compliance audits on TRCA permit approvals; • develop and maintain effective client relations with partnering agencies, industry professionals and stakeholders; • consult with municipal, provincial and federal partners regarding infractions of applicable by -laws or pertinent legislation; • negotiate resolutions to compliance issues; • address complaints and conduct investigations into infractions; and • initiate legal action when necessary. As a result of increased development pressures and stakeholder concerns, measures have been adopted to focus compliance initiatives on priority issues; to engage in cooperative working relationships; to balance workloads; and to streamline procedures. Each officer meets an aggressive target number of permit inspections every year. A system for prioritizing site inspection requirements has been implemented where TRCA permits are being classified as either "complex or standard" to allow for increased staff time to more sensitive files and non - compliant sites based on the ecological and geotechnical sensitivity, flood risk, erosion risk, hydrogeological sensitivity, planning issues, and the size and scope of a particular development site. Permit inspections in the complex permit criteria include sensitive watercourse crossings, large municipal infrastructure projects, large residential or commercial subdivision files, and works near top of bank. Standard permits include high pressure directional drilling projects, large landscaping projects, single residential development and repairs to municipal infrastructure. Enforcement officers regularly interact with TRCA technical and planning staff during the execution of their duties, and work cooperatively to: • share information regarding sensitivities associated with development projects; • ensure compliance with key elements of development approvals; • attend site meetings /compliance audits, non - compliance inspections and /or violation sites; 610 • conduct impact assessments and review voluntary restoration and mitigation proposals; • provide witness testimony for TRCA prosecutions; and • aid in staff development and training opportunities. In 2014, the current enforcement team, consisting of four enforcement officers and a manager, collectively conducted 4,830 permit inspections on 1,113 active permit sites, issued 96 violations, conducted 210 violation site inspections, and negotiated the successful resolution of 40 violation sites. Officers initiated two new prosecutions, a process generally reserved for properties where negotiated resolution is not possible, and the offence is significant in nature requiring remediation. These take multiple years to resolve and a tremendous effort from TRCA staff. Partnering Agencies TRCA strives to work collaboratively with our member municipalities and provincial and /or federal agencies during the coordination of development applications as well as during compliance initiatives on issues of mutual interest. TRCA staff regularly interacts with municipal building, by -law and property standards departments, municipal ravine and natural feature protection staff, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, Environment Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada to advise of non - compliant sites, coordinate compliance efforts, and to advise of infractions under their legislative purview. Private proponents, along with their professional consultants, must manage their construction projects to be in compliance with other municipal, provincial or federal legislation. Currently, TRCA is engaged with the City of Toronto Natural Ravine and Protection staff to explore improved compliance initiatives and protocols and to better address greenspace encroachment issues. In addition, staff is currently engaged with King Township and their recent initiative of an "Environmental Consultation Team" to explore future compliance and partnership opportunities. Compliance Trends and Initiatives Violations within TRCA's jurisdiction range from minor infractions involving ancillary structures or landscape works to major site alterations resulting in significant environmental impacts. More recent trends are with residential landowners blatantly disrespecting TRCA's regulatory jurisdiction and permitting processes, coupled with significant limitations existing within the Conservation Authorities Act relating to legislative compliance constraints. TRCA, in conjunction with Conservation Ontario, continues to identify legislative limitations to the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry, and to request amendments to the Act in order to bring compliance tools in line with other applicable legislation, including: • Stop Work provisions and Order to Comply provisions; • increased fines; • rehabilitation /restoration requirements for development infractions; • methodology for cost recovery for prosecutions; and • methodology for putting liens on property for significant issues. 611 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Irrespective of the legislative limitations, Planning and Development staff has been building a comprehensive list of standard conditions for all TRCA approved permit sites in addition to project specific conditions to be imposed on more complex proposals in order to improve overall compliance. Staff will report to the Authority on this initiative. Report prepared by: Brian Moyle, extension 5229 Emails: bmoyle @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Brian Moyle, extension 5229 Emails: bmoyle @trca.on.ca Date: October 21, 2015 612 RES. #A217/15 - 2015 FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT TO AUGUST 31, 2015 Information is provided on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's financial performance as of August 31, 2015 with projections for the year. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) 2015 Financial Progress Report as of August 31, 2015, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND As part of TRCA's financial management process, staff is presenting to the Budget/Audit Advisory Board the 2015 financial progress report. The report covers the period from January 1, 2015 through to August 31, 2015 and includes projections for the year. RATIONALE Key Operating Results The 2015 Operating results indicate a surplus of approximately $928,000 for the year. Attachment 1 lists the larger anticipated variances by division with a summary explanation. Key Capital and Special Project Progress Within the capital budget, no major deficits or surpluses are anticipated beyond decisions to spend in advance and recoveries of prior year deficits. Approximately half of the prior year deficits, totaling $600,000, will be recovered in 2015. Projects which will hold a deficit at year end include the retrofits at Albion Hills Field Centre, Black Creek Pioneer Village and Claremont Field Centre as these were large multi -year projects. Funding will be available in 2016 to manage the Black Creek Pioneer Village and Claremont deficits. The Albion Hills deficit of approximately $210,000 which resulted from unforeseen site conditions requiring an upgrade to the fire alarm system to meet current safety requirements will be dealt with as part of the year end process. A majority of capital projects will vary from budget normally due to timing as projects span multiple years, delays in permits, agreements or approvals, and /or delays cause by weather conditions. The status of a number of larger projects can be found in Attachment 2. Report prepared by: Janice Darnley, extension 5768 Emails: jdarnley @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232; Janice Darnley, extension 5768 Emails: rgambelluri@trca.on.ca; jdarnley @trca.on.ca Date: October 16, 2015 Attachments: 2 613 Attachment 1 2015 Operating Variance Division (Surplus) Explanation Deficit CEO's Office 59,000 Increased costs due to Shoreham building vacancy Education and Outreach 171,000 Education programs experiencing lower than expected group size and bookings for regular weekdays and weekends Parks and Culture (146,000) Conservation Parks revenues will be higher than budgeted especially at Indian Line due to TransCanada Pipeline campers; at Heart Lake and Bruce's Mills due to Tree Top Trekking; at Albion Hills from parking fees for the Pan Am games Planning, Greenspace and (350,000) Unanticipated additional revenue generated through Communications permit and planning fees. Planning and policy salaries to be unders ent due maternity leave. Restoration and Infrastructure (682,000) Inland fill revenues are higher than anticipated due to contractors' accelerated work schedules at Brock South, Bruce's Mill and Tommy Thompson Park Watershed Strategies On budget Net Operating Surplus (928,000) 614 Attachment 2 2015 Capital and Special Projects Project Approved Projected Expense Status Expense Budget Variance (under budget)/ over budget Greenspace Land 3,307,000 On budget Purchase of priority properties Acquisition within TRCA jurisdiction in 2015. Major Facilities 3,298,000 On budget 101 Exchange work substantially Retrofit/Office completed by December 31, 2015. Accommodation Valley Erosion 3,200,000 1,417,390 Additional work required to protect Hazards Toronto Water infrastructure at Downsview Dells below Whitburn Crescent. Additional work covered by prior year carryforward and funding in other erosion projects. Guildwood 1,950,000 (1,840,000) Delay due to legal agreements and Parkway approvals. Work expected to proceed in 2016 requiring all funds available. SWMP 1,900,000 (1,895,000) Awaiting approvals to proceed. Maintenance — Lower Duck Pond Living City 1,847,000 (1,517,000) Awaiting municipal servicing Campus design and permits. Majority of Development construction will take place after 2015. Erosion Work 1,650,000 (71,000) Expenditures adjusted to match Major revenues. Maintenance 2014 1,500,000 (254,000) Project covers channel work at Enhancement Black Creek, Yonge York Mills, Flood Control Sheppard and Lavender Creek. Channel Spending in line with available Maintenance funds. Flood Remedial 1,477,000 (1,188,000) 5 year work plan developed to Work address the 8 priority flood risk sites in Peel Region. Majority of carryforward funds will be used by end of 2016. Eco- Business 1,381,000 (153,000) Variances in expenses attributed to Program delay in collective project implementation as well as the new website development. 615 Amberlea 1,322,000 (43,000) Surplus to be carried forward to Environmental June 2017 for warranty work. Assessment Fishleigh — 1,300,000 On budget Completion of shoreline Midland Road stabilization work and slope buttressing to protect homes at 81 and 83 Fishleigh Drive, as well as a portion of Fishleigh Drive. Bolton Camp Site 1,250,000 On budget Peel Region staff leading servicing. Improvements - Work is underway on survey and Servicing design. Construction anticipated to commencespring 2016. Regional 1,246,000 (53,000) Small carryforward anticipated to Watershed cover expenses related to Monitoring additional data analysis and Program reporting in 2016 Toronto Parks: 1,218,000 (705,454) This is an annual cost recoverable additional sites program with the City of Toronto. Annual budget fluctuates as sites are prioritized and identified by the City to TRCA throughout the year as needed. Conservation 1,134,000 (163,000) Mainly proceeding as scheduled, Land Care — Peel except Trail Strategy as it awaits Region the Greenspace Strategy framework to be developed. ORM Developer 1,100,000 (1,063,000) Planning for ongoing trail head and Compensation trail construction, stewardship and restoration. Implementation will start in 2015 and continue into 2016. Watershed 1,000,000 300,000 Additional expenditures funded Erosion from the 2014 carryforward. Monitoring and Activities include inspection of Maintenance — 300+ hazard sites, completion of York Region several infrastructure protection projects, ongoing work at Main Street Environment Assessment. • * RES. #A218 /15- COST CENTRE ACCOUNTING Implementation of Cost Centre Accounting. Staff was asked to review the feasibility of implementing a cost centre accounting approach at Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: John Sprovieri THAT Section III item 10.3.1 - Cost Centre Accounting, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #10/15, held on October 16, 2015, be received. CARRIED Section IV — Ontario Regulation 166/06, As Amended RES. #A219 /15 - SECTION IV — ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Chris Fonseca THAT Section IV — Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, item 10.4, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #10/15, held on October 16, 2015, be received. CARRIED NEW BUSINESS RES. #A220 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: ROUGE PARK GATEWAY David Barrow Matt Mahoney THAT the update by Jack Heath on a charrette being held in November on the Rouge Park Gateway be received. CARRIED RES. #A221 /15 - ROUGE PARK PROPERTIES Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT staff be directed to investigate establishing a management agreement for Cedarena and Locust Hill School House and report back. CARRIED 617 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:06 a.m., on Friday, October 30, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks • i Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Authority Meeting #10/15 was held at TRCA Head Office, on Friday, November 27, 2015. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:40 a.m. PRESENT Kevin Ashe Member Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member David Barrow Member Vincent Crisanti Member Jennifer Drake Member Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Maria Kelleher Member Matt Mahoney Member Mike Mattos Member Jennifer McKelvie Member Gino Rosati Member John Sprovieri Member Jim Tovey Member I'i1--1-11 :1.1t1 Paul Ainslie Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Justin Di Ciano Member Chris Fonseca Member Rob Ford Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Glenn Mason Member Ron Moeser Member Linda Pabst Member Anthony Perruzza Member RES. #A222/15 - MINUTES Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Mike Mattos THAT the Minutes of Meeting #9/15, held on October 30, 2015, be approved. CARRIED 619 DELEGATIONS (a) A delegation by Al Duffy, representing FarmStart, in regard to item 10.1.1 - Correspondence and Executive Committee Recommendation. (b) A delegation by Gill Evans, tenant, former Glassco Lands, in regard to item 10.1.1 - Correspondence and Executive Committee Recommendation. RES. #A223 /15 - DELEGATIONS Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT above -noted delegations (a) and (b) be heard and received. CARRIED (a) A presentation by Darryl Gray, Director, Education, Training and Outreach, TRCA, in regard to item 7.2 - Future Directions in Education at TRCA. (b) A video presentation of Tragedy to Triumph - An Ash Tree Success Story. http://www.trca.on.ca/news-media/news/releases/214395 RES. #A224 /15 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jennifer McKelvie THAT above -noted presentations (a) and (b) be received. CARRIED CORRESPONDENCE (a) A letter dated November 16, 2015 from Michael N. Durisin, Brattys Barristers and Solicitors, in regard to item 10.1.1 - Correspondence and Executive Committee Recommendation. (b) A letter dated November 24, 2015 from Christie Young, Founder and Executive Director, FarmStart, in regard to item 10.1.1 - Correspondence and Executive Committee Recommendation. 620 RESMA225115 - CORRESPONDENCE Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT above -noted correspondence (a) and (b) be received. CARRIED 621 CORRESPONDENCE(A) BRATTYS LLP BARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS PLEASE REFER TO: Michael N. Durisin (Ext: 349) Email: mdurisin @bratty.com Telephone: (905)760-2600 By email and courier November 16, 2015 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 101 Exchange Avenue Vaughan, Ontario L4K 5R6 Attention: Michael Fenning Associate Director, Property and Risk Management Re: Glassco Lands City of Vaughan Dear Mr. Fenning, Our firm acts for a client who is most interested in leasing the above lands (and if available other lands owned /managed by TRCA) located in the Pine Valley /Major Mackenzie area and known as the Glassco Lands. We understand that TRCA policy is to use RFPs to ensure that TRCA attains uses for lands that are most supportive of near urban agriculture at market rents ie that RFPs are contemplated for determining the best uses and highest rents for TRCA lands. Our client is interested in responding to an RFP or otherwise providing an offer for the Glassco Lands and possibly additional lands should they be available. We would appreciate from you details and information on how our client would be able to submit a proposal to lease these lands and whether an RFP will be issued with respect to the Glassco Lands. Your attention to this matter would be most appreciated. Regards Cc TRCA Board 7501 Keele Street, Suite 200 Vaughan, Ontario L4K tY2 622 T 905 - 760 -2600 F 905- 760 -2900 www.bratty.com CORREPONDENCE(B) November 24, 2015 Dear Chair and Members of the Toronto Region Conservation Authority: Re: Agenda Item 10.1.1 In 2008, FarmStart partnered with the TRCA to create the McVean New Farmers Project on the historic McVean property located within the Claireville Conservation Area, owned by TRCA. This project was the first of its kind in Canada, leading the way towards sustainable local agriculture that support a new generation of farmers, services the needs of growing urban communities while protecting local green space and eco systems. In 2008, 15 hectares (37 acres) were leased to FarmStart on a 5 -year rolling lease (meaning we have 5 years notice). This lease was the first of it's kind with the TRCA and was a requirement by FarmStart to invest in and operate our Start -Up Farm Facility. We have been involved in the development and introduction in 2008 of TRCA's first Sustainable Near - Agriculture Policy, through your consultation and putting it into practice on our McVean Star -Up Farm was influential in the policy. The TRCA Urban Agriculture Policy states: "Sustainable near urban agriculture on TRCA lands includes the use of diverse crops and innovative and sustainable agricultural production methods (i.e., a combination of appropriate technology, environmental goods and services, beneficial management practices, community shared agriculture, and community gardens.)" The Policy also sets out provisions with respect to leases on lands owned and directly managed by TRCA and provides that as lands become available (through leases that have been terminated or cancelled) TRCA will investigate suitable sustainable near urban agriculture opportunities and/or advertise through a "Call for Proposals ". Additionally, the policy permits existing tenants to apply for lease extensions for periods up to five years at time of renewal, but does not bind the TRCA to granting lease extensions for any period, whether long or short. We are writing to you today because we have been made aware that you are considering a 3 -year lease with the Evans family, with the suggestion that they will develop some kind of near urban agriculture project of on the "Glassco Lands ". While we are very supportive 623 of TRCA's interest in encouraging near urban agriculture, we continue to be concerned about the following: • The lack of transparency or any clear lease review process. • The legacy of indefinite year -to -year leases (particularly those in subleasing arrangements, hobby farming or chemical dependent commodity production), with no lease structure and no clear and regular review to encourage the best use or review market rental rates. • The lack of a proactive review of the Near Urban Agricultural policy and the lack of an Implementation Plan that identifies particularly well suited lands and the steps towards transition. FarmStart, established in 2005, develops flexible programs that can encourage and provide a new generation of farmers with the resources, tools, and support necessary to not only get their businesses off the ground, but to thrive. We work primarily with New Canadians, young people from non -farm backgrounds, and second career farmers (from farm or non farm backgrounds). While there are many challenges facing new entrants in agriculture today, there are also many exciting opportunities. These new farmers have connections and passion that can bring innovation and renewal to our agricultural sector. They are serious entrepreneurs who are aiming to build viable and sustainable farm livelihoods. We develop Training Farms, Start -up Farms and Business Development Facilities. We work 'on the ground' with new farmers to provide critical support including access to land, infrastructure, and equipment as well as technical training, business planning skills development, mentorship during the first years of their enterprise start -up. To date, we have directly supported 56 new farmers to date, from 18 different countries, 2/3 of whom are still farming today. We currently have 12 new farm enterprise at the McVean Start -Up Farm who are currently seeking an affordable and accessible longer term land tenure arrangement. We also offer a range of training and resources for prospective, exploring, planning, start up and re- strategizing farmers. In the last 4 years we have had over 5,000 people participate in our courses and workshops. And we run a matchmaking website www.farmlink.net that currently has almost 1000 active farm seekers and only 300 land opportunities. There is a dearth of accessible, affordable and productive farmland that can support these new and innovating farmers and we have encouraged the TRCA to be proactive in making its many farmlands available. 624 FarmStart has repeatedly expressed interest in accessing other appropriate farmlands to expand our Start -Up farms and to make them available to our establishing farmers. We have repeated been told that lands will only become available if current tenants decide to stop. We have been offered the development and use of lands such as Albion Hill, which would require huge amounts of capital upgrade and provide very little working acreage, or Kortright and Black Creek, both have very small agricultural acreage and mixed purpose including public education or community involvement. We have continued to ask for access to farmlands that provide the commercial, ecological, near -urban farmers that we work with, more isolated and appropriate amounts and quality of working acreage, as well as potential housing and barns or outbuildings. And we are very surprised that an extension of the lease on these lands would be under consideration without any open RFP or even any communication. Especially since they proposed intended use is to do what FarmStart has done successfully on lands we rent from you (as well as other land owners). FarmStart has repeatedly expressed interest in accessing other appropriate farmlands to expand our Start -Up farms and to make them available to our establishing farmers. We have repeated been told that lands will only become available if current tenants decide to stop. We have been offered the development and use of lands such as Albion Hill, which would require huge amounts of capital upgrade and provide very little working acreage, or Kortright and Black Creek, both have very small agricultural acreage and mixed purpose including public education or community involvement. We have continued to ask for access to farmlands that provide the commercial, ecological, near -urban farmers that we work with, more isolated and appropriate amounts and quality of working acreage, as well as potential housing and barns or outbuildings. These Glassco Land are very well suited to our the needs of our farmers and we would be very interested in being part of an open RFP process. We are very surprised that an extension of the lease on these lands would be under consideration without any open RFP or even any communication. We are writing at this time to request the TRCA: 1. Make available a detailed inventory of the lands they hold and the state of the lease arrangements. 2. Develop a proactive lease review process and Agricultural Action Plan, that considers and identifies the best public, ecological and productive use of the lands under TRAC management. 3. Not grant any lease extensions of existing leases, more than 6 -12 months, until that staff be directed to undertake the long overdue review of the sustainable near urban agricultural policy. 625 This review was to have been completed in 2013, and is necessary to ensure fairness and transparency, and to provide increased support for sustainable near urban agriculture. Matters to be addressed include: a) What is the process for evaluation of existing lease renewal requests to ensure they are dealt with in a transparent and businesslike manner? b) What criteria are applied to existing tenants to determine whether their operation supports current TRCA goals for near urban agriculture? c) How is the determination of "fair market rent' established on each lease renewal, and, for long term renewals, how is "fair market value" determined for the term of a long term lease? d) Should existing leases periodically be subject to requests for proposals, to ensure current initiatives, and market rents, be brought to the attention of staff and The Authority Board? This request is made at this time since a review of the agenda discloses an item recommending a lease of a large portion of lands known as the "Glassco Lands" to the current tenant. The agenda item is 10.1.1, and seems to consist of merely a letter from the existing tenant, and an Executive Committee recommendation. A review of the available materials online, including the agenda for the Executive meeting, discloses no staff report, analysis, review or similar assessment of the request for this long -term lease extension. No assessment is available to determine whether the existing operation satisfies and advances the goals for near urban agriculture, how fair market rent is to be established, and whether other uses might be better. Again, we ask that before the TRCA extend any of these year to year leases, the TRAC prioritize a long overdue review of the Policy on sustainable near urban agriculture and the development of an accountable and appropriate Action Plan. Sincerely, Christie Young Founder and Executive Director FarmStart • O-i Section I — Items for Authority Action RES. #A226/15 - APPOINTMENT TO TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Region of Durham. The Secretary- Treasurer advises that a new appointee to TRCA, representing the Region of Durham, has been duly appointed and is entitled to sit as a Member of this Authority until the 2016 annual meeting when all appointments for the period of the Annual Authority Meeting for 2016 to the Annual Authority Meeting for 2017 will be confirmed. Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Jack Ballinger THAT Kevin Ashe be recognized as a Region of Durham Member of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for the term of Council, and as such is duly appointed and entitled to sit as a Member of this Authority until Annual Authority Meeting #1/16, scheduled to be held on February 26, 2016, or until his successor is appointed. CARRIED RATIONALE On December 17, 2014 Durham Region Council appointed Jennifer O'Connell to TRCA for the term of Council. On October 19, 2015, Jennifer O'Connell was elected as MP for Pickering- Uxbridge and as such cannot represent the Region of Durham. On November 4, 2015, Durham Region Council appointed Kevin Ashe to replace Jennifer O'Connell as a Durham Region appointee to TRCA, for the term of Council. Each year at the annual meeting the Secretary- Treasurer advises who is entitled to sit as Members of the Authority for the upcoming year. Due to the change in membership, such advisement needs to be provided at the November 27, 2015 Authority meeting, to be effective until Annual Meeting #1/16, scheduled to be held on February 26, 2016. The Secretary- Treasurer is therefore duly advising that Kevin Ashe is duly appointed to sit as a Member of the Authority, effective November 27, 2015. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks @trca.on.ca Date: November 5, 2015 627 RES. #A227 /15 - FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN EDUCATION AT TRCA Community Education and Learning Activities. Report on history of education at TRCA and future directions in community education and learning activities. Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jennifer McKelvie WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) had provided learning, outreach and stewardship programs and activities for schools and communities of the Toronto region since 1953; AND WHEREAS Building The Living City, TRCA's 2013 Strategic Plan identified community engagement and education as critical components of developing a sustainable city region; AND WHEREAS TRCA is able to act as a facilitator to bring a diverse set of government, education and social service agencies together to establish a new framework for collaboration, THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLED THAT the Community Learning and Achievement Model be endorsed as a framework for future community learning and engagement activities at TRCA; THAT TRCA education centres be redeveloped into community engagement centres with an emphasis on local participation in program development and delivery; THAT TRCA establish urban activity zones as mechanisms to improve program delivery within urban areas, and support increased community engagement and participation in community sustainability activities; THAT TRCA, in collaboration with The Living City Foundation, improve private and public funding support for TRCA activities related to the Community Learning and Achievement Model and community engagement centres; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA's member municipalities, regional school boards and applicable social and community service agencies be so advised. AMENDMENT RES. #A228 /15 Moved By: Jim Tovey Seconded By: Matt Mahoney THAT the following be inserted before the last paragraph of the main motion: THAT the Small Arms building at Arsenal Lands be considered within the context of a Community Engagement Centre; THE AMENDMENT WAS [Iwo] CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: CARRIED WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) had provided learning, outreach and stewardship programs and activities for schools and communities of the Toronto region since 1953; AND WHEREAS Building The Living City, TRCA's 2013 Strategic Plan identified community engagement and education as critical components of developing a sustainable city region; AND WHEREAS TRCA is able to act as a facilitator to bring a diverse set of government, education and social service agencies together to establish a new framework for collaboration, THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLED THAT the Community Learning and Achievement Model be endorsed as a framework for future community learning and engagement activities at TRCA; THAT TRCA education centres be redeveloped into community engagement centres with an emphasis on local participation in program development and delivery; THAT TRCA establish urban activity zones as mechanisms to improve program delivery within urban areas, and support increased community engagement and participation in community sustainability activities; THAT TRCA, in collaboration with The Living City Foundation, improve private and public funding support for TRCA activities related to the Community Learning and Achievement Model and community engagement centres; THAT the Small Arms building at Arsenal Lands be considered within the context of a Community Engagement Centre; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA's member municipalities, regional school boards and applicable social and community service agencies be so advised. BACKGROUND Conservation education has been viewed as an integral part of the work of conservation authorities since the inception of the conservation authority movement. At the London Conference in 1944 delegates from across Ontario, including municipalities, government officials, the agriculture sector, the education system, and representatives of naturalist and conservation organizations convened to study and propose a response to a range of pressing issues related to natural resource management. Presented as the culmination of the London Conference were a series of resolutions that ultimately led to the formation of Ontario's conservation authorities in 1946. Key to the principles contained within the resolutions was the specific recognition that conservation authorities should have as their principal function "the bringing about of coordination and co- operation amongst all agencies in Ontario carrying on and promoting conservation projects ". 629 In addition to resolutions related to land acquisition, flood control and conservation projects, there were two activities that addressed the need to improve both professional expertise related to conservation, and the engagement of students throughout the educational system in Ontario. The two activities of Resolution 1 that related to steps conservation authorities should take as it pertains to education are: R.1 (f) Assisting in the training of technical personnel for the carrying out of conservational work; and R.1 (g) Fostering the direction of adequate attention to all phases of the conservation of natural resources in all the educational work of the province of Ontario. Education at TRCA Education programming at TRCA commenced in May 1953, when the Humber Valley Conservation Authority partnered with York Memorial Collegiate Institute to deliver the first camp school experience in the Village of Bolton in the Town of Caledon. This learning program was developed and delivered with the understanding that such a program would inspire appreciation and awareness of conservation practices and approaches and would lead to improved stewardship at the local community level. Since 1953, TRCA has continued to develop new and innovative programs and facilities across the region's watersheds based on the collaborative model first proposed during the 1944 London Conference. Attachment 1 contains a short chronology of TRCA's educational history. Throughout TRCA's history, education, training and outreach programs at TRCA have been developed in collaboration with a wide range of partners, including school boards, municipalities, federal and provincial governments, non - government organizations (NGOs), social service agencies, and others. These programs have been designed to not only develop knowledge, but provide opportunities to translate this learning into action at home, as well as in the school, community and workplace. These programs respond to an evolving curriculum within the formal education system, as well as shifts in industry, immigration and demographic trends. Today, TRCA's education activities reach over 150,000 learners annually. RATIONALE Building The Living City Strategic Plan (2013) identified education and community engagement as key objectives and mechanisms through which to achieve our strategic goals. Section 5: Foster sustainable citizenship, focuses on improving the awareness of and commitment to sustainability by the region's residents: Education and citizen participation are fundamental to the development of The Living City. We must increase awareness and give people both the tools and the opportunities to make choices that support sustainable community- building. Involving a broad cross - section of the population will encourage on -going input to sustainable community - building and empower all residents to create a healthy and sustainable city region. 630 In response to a need to affect greater, more rapid sustainability outcomes within the communities TRCA serves and to establish stronger links to the shared strategic priorities of TRCA's municipal, provincial and federal governments, school boards, social service agencies and others, TRCA has undertaken a process to shift our education and stewardship delivery approach to a community engagement and learning model. The Community Engagement and Learning Model supports improved community outcomes and represents a move away from a program- specific delivery model in which individual classes or schools participate in a discrete, or individual, learning program with little follow up or connection to community outcomes, to an integrated learning model where specific community needs are addressed through thoughtful planning, engagement and service delivery. The Community Learning and Achievement Model strengthens learning partnerships from across the education, government and social service sectors by creating a framework for collaboration and establishes key service areas for improved outcomes. These service areas allow TRCA and our partners to identify priority focus areas and invest resources strategically. The service areas covered within the Community Engagement and Learning Model include: • early learning years; • elementary and secondary schools; • post- secondary schools (colleges and universities); • professionals and the workforce; • families; • seniors; • new Canadians. The key driver of the shift towards a Community Learning and Achievement Model is the desire to respond to specific needs of each category of service area, which includes improving the long term sustainability of communities, academic and employment outcomes, changing demographics (immigration and aging patterns), health and activity levels, and others. This new learning model is people- centered, identifying specific needs, while establishing a network of community activity centres and services to support individual and collective success. In the example of the elementary and secondary school service area, programming to support this group would include: • school field trips; • in- community engagement activities and school sustainability programs; • education and mentorship opportunities; • employment and training programs for youth; • community and professional capacity building. This suite of programming will be integrated across the learning career of the student and focus on improving access to and participation in programming that supports long term student success and contributes to the improved sustainability of the Toronto region. Community Engagement Centres In November of 1962, at the sod - turning event that launched the construction of Albion Hills Field Centre, the Honourable William G. Davis, stated that "conservation is more than a subject, be it taught in or out -of- doors ". Fifty -three years later, TRCA is preparing to reimagine the spaces we engage residents in, in a way that provides a further increased return on the value of these public assets and facilities. 631 Historically, TRCA's education centres were developed in the greenspaces that surround the urban areas of Toronto, ostensibly to provide participating students with access to the natural environment. Through the Community Learning and Achievement Model, TRCA's education centres will undergo a transformation, becoming TRCA's "community centres'; places where residents and community members can learn, engage, participate and explore. A key element of this transformation of TRCA's education centres into community engagement centres is the continued development and facilitation of strong partnerships with organizations such as district school boards, regional and local municipalities, the YMCA of Greater Toronto, the Leacock Foundation, Harbourfront Centre, Centre for Urban Ecology at Humber Arboretum, Toronto Zoo, Parks Canada, Evergreen Brick Works, social and community service agencies, colleges, universities and others. Through these existing partnerships, and new collaborative opportunities with other organizations, TRCA is putting in place the program partnerships to animate the existing facilities as vibrant, vital activity centres. Current education centres that would undergo a transformation into community engagement centres include: • Albion Hills Field Centre in Caledon; • Claremont Field Centre in Pickering; • Kortright Centre for Conservation in Vaughan; • Lake St. George Field Centre /Swan Lake Centre in Richmond Hill; • Black Creek Pioneer Village in Downsview; • Proposed New TRCA Head Office in Downsview. Building on the transformation of TRCA education centres into community engagement centres, is the creation of a network of urban activity zones where TRCA can deliver programming in the communities where residents live. These urban activity zones will align with Province of Ontario work related to community hubs and be located in and around spaces owned or operated by TRCA's partners. They will be utilized to not only engage residents and community members with the local natural environment, but also establish connections within their own communities. This will be achieved by creating additional spaces within urban areas of York, Durham, Peel and Toronto through partnerships that target communities with high potential for engagement and change. The creation of community engagement centres and urban activity zones will allow TRCA to transition from a nature - based, fixed location program model, to the Community Learning and Achievement Model, which is a dynamic, multi - disciplinary approach. Examples of program opportunities this new model will facilitate include: • youth employment and entrepreneur mentoring and training programs; • new Canadian engagement and employment training activities; • pop -up green technology seminars; • pop -up maker - spaces related to sustainable technologies and environmental sciences; • arts and culture activities, such as outdoor youth theatre and music performances, exhibits and installations; • youth innovation retreats and incubators; • family- friendly activities, such as canoeing, nature hikes and games; • inter - generational cooking and canning classes that highlight local foods; • camps and community group programming. 632 A key element of the development of TRCA's Community Learning and Achievement Model, along with community engagement centres and urban activity zones is a bottom up, or community -led, approach to engagement and development of new programming and services. By engaging TRCA's partners and the community from the outset, TRCA is able to maximize use of the centres while improving economic and learning outcomes in the community. This process will be facilitated and enabled by the development and support of social enterprises and community program partnerships that allow local community members, groups and organizations to take an increased stake in programming at TRCA's centres, while developing small enterprises or businesses that provide a social or community good. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total investment in community education, training and outreach activities at TRCA is $12.6 million in 2015. This amount represents a significant investment in the future sustainability of the Toronto region. Funding for TRCA education programs is derived from a wide range of sources, including: • User Fees — Fees paid by students, parents, schools or school boards, professionals, businesses and others to support learning at TRCA education centres and through TRCA training programs. • Agreements — Formal partnership or lease agreements for the provision of learning opportunities for students and professionals from a range of sectors, including school boards, colleges, universities, corporations and others. These agreements provide for a range of learning opportunities, including the lease of space, provision of classroom space, provision of teaching expertise, etc. • Municipal Levy — Tax base operating funding in support of education and staff training program development, delivery and support that is not funded through other means. • Municipal Capital — Municipal capital funding supports both ongoing capital retrofit projects at TRCA education facilities, as well as special program funding, including Peel Environmental Weeks, Peel EcoSchools, The Living City Classroom, Water Festivals, Community Transformation Programs, sustainable technology evaluation and training programs, and others. • Provincial Funding — Funding in support of bridge training programs for foreign trained professionals and new Canadians, as well as Trillium Foundation Grants that support outreach and stewardship activities. • Federal Funding — Capital funding for major retrofit projects, including Claremont Field Centre Accessibility Upgrades. • Private Fundraising —The Living City Foundation is a key component of TRCA's education long -term funding model. • Research Partnerships — Joint funding programs with colleges, universities and building technology companies to undertake research and reporting related to the performance of new and emerging sustainable technologies. In order to continue to engage and support the growing needs of community members, while developing new models for engagement and learning both in the community and at TRCA engagement centres, TRCA and our partners will require additional resources, either financial or in -kind. 633 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Work has begun on developing a draft framework and curriculum for the Community Learning and Achievement Model, with a proposed pilot encompassing the Town of Caledon communities and schools, and targeted high potential communities in Toronto. Through these pilot processes, TRCA is bringing together key government, education and social service stakeholders that will contribute to the integrated learning model in support of community outcomes and allow TRCA to reach more members of TRCA's communities in more meaningful ways. Building on recent experience with Bolton Camp and the redevelopment of this site into a space that reflects and responds to community needs, TRCA has begun the process of bringing key stakeholders together to reshape and reimagine how TRCA's current education centres are transformed into community engagement centres. The outcome of these collaborative processes will be engagement and learning spaces that reflect community needs through programming and offer improved opportunities for more people to share unique experiences. In addition to the re- creation of TRCA education sites into community engagement centres, initial work is underway to explore partnership opportunities to strengthen TRCA's presence within urban areas through the creation of urban activity zones, and establish stronger community connections as the Community Learning and Achievement Model is developed and implemented. TRCA, in partnership with The Living City Foundation and government, school board and social service partners, will need to seek out and source new public and private funding opportunities to support both the Community Learning and Achievement Model and the development of community engagement centres. These funding programs will strive to leverage the strong contribution already being made to the range of programs currently offered by TRCA and partners, and grow the collective impact of this work. Report prepared by: Darryl Gray, extension 416- 791 -0327 Emails: dgray @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Darryl Gray, extension 416 -791 -0327 Emails: dgray @trca.on.ca Date: November 11, 2015 Attachments: 1 634 Attachment 1 TRCA's Educational History 1953: First Camp School at Bolton 1960: Black Creek Pioneer Village opened, providing for preservation and interpretation of significant cultural resources in the region. 1963: Albion Hills Field Centre opened, providing a permanent home for multi- day /overnight conservation education programming for schools from across the region. 1968: Cold Creek Conservation Field Centre opened with an emphasis on recreation and sportsmanship (closed 1990). 1970: Claremont Field Centre opened, providing multi- day /overnight conservation education programming in Durham Region. 1974: Boyd Field Centre opened in partnership with local school boards, creating a new model for collaboration in education (closed 2001). 1979: Kortright Centre for Conservation opened, providing day field trips and family programming related to the environment, natural science, and renewable energy. 1979: Lake St. George Field Centre opened, building on the partnership model established at the Boyd Field Centre, providing additional multi- day /overnight learning opportunities for students of the area school boards. 1980: TRCA adopts a comprehensive Watershed Plan to support future watershed programs and planning, including directions related to community relations and education. 1992: Yellow Fish Road launched, bringing awareness to issues around water quality to local communities. 1999: Watershed on Wheels launched, bringing TRCA's watershed -based learning into classrooms across the region. 2000: Earth Rangers Centre opened at the Kortright Centre for Conservation, establishing new partnership related to education, youth engagement and green buildings. 2004: TRCA publishes The Living City Curriculum, a guide for teaching and learning in The Living City. 2005: Ontario EcoSchools, building on an existing Toronto District School Board program, is launched through a partnership between TRCA, York University and seven Ontario school boards. 2006: Sustainable Schools and Greening Retail programs are launched, key activities in TRCA's efforts in transforming specific economic or service sectors. 635 2006: TRCA establishes PAIE (Professional Access into Employment), a bridge training program that supports internationally - trained environmental professionals in gaining employment in their chosen field. 2006: First reports by STEP (Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program) released, launching a new performance evaluation and sustainable technology training program at TRCA. 2007: TRCA awarded bid to host the World Green Building Council, a significant step in advancing local and global activities and awareness related to green building practices. 2008: The Archetype Sustainable House is constructed at the Kortright Centre for Conservation, providing research and demonstration capabilities to support improved sustainability practices within the building industry. 2011: Ontario EcoCentres, a certification program focused on improving sustainability performance of outdoor education centres across Ontario, is launched in partnership with the Toronto Zoo, Parc Downsview Park, the Centre for Urban Ecology at Humber Arboretum, Conservation Halton and Peel District School Board. 2014: The Living City Policies is approved by TRCA's Authority Board, providing a policy framework for development within TRCA's area of jurisdiction, including provisions for education and learning partnerships on TRCA land. 2014: Summer programming established at Bolton Camp, a historic camp in the Humber Watershed, with an emphasis on community engagement in recreation, arts, and culture. Site and program redevelopment is led through student and community engagement. 2014: Swan Lake Centre for Conservation opened in partnership with the York Region District School Board, providing additional day visit learning opportunities for students in York Region and facilities for professional training, learning and camp programs. • e RESMA229 115 - PARTERS IN PROJECT GREEN: A PEARSON ECO- BUSINESS ZONE 2016 - 2018 Terms of Reference. Approval of the 2016 -2018 Terms of Reference for Partners in Project Green's Executive Management Committee, Performance Committees and Service Centres; and, membership of the Executive Management Committee. Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Jack Ballinger THAT the Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee, Performance Committees and Service Centres Terms of Reference, as outlined in Attachment 1, be approved; THAT the appointment of members to Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee as outlined in the staff report, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT staff work with the Executive Management Committee to fill vacancies in the Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee and subcommittees. CARRIED BACKGROUND Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco- Business Zone was developed by the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), the Region of Peel, City of Toronto, City of Brampton, City of Mississauga and Toronto and Region Conservation (TRCA) to transform the lands surrounding Toronto Pearson into an internationally recognized community of eco- friendly businesses. A Partners in Project Green Steering Committee was first established in 2008 in response to a recommendation in the approved Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco- Business Zone Strategy, 2008. After two successful terms, an Executive Management Committee and four subcommittees were established in -lieu of the original Steering Committee to yield more focused results as prescribed in the program's revised strategy introduced in 2013. To date, the new governance structure has proven effective in driving meaningful actions and innovation throughout the Pearson Eco- Business Zone and across the Greater Toronto Area. At Authority Meeting #3/13, held on April 26, 2013, Resolution #A61/13 was approved as follows THAT the "Partners in Project Green: Strategy Update "report, as appended, be approved; THAT the Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee, Performance Committees, and Service Centres Terms of Reference, as appended, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the appointment of members to Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee as outlined in the staff report, be approved. 637 December 315% 2015 will mark the end of a successful two -year term for all Partners in Project Green governance committees, and the new year represents an ideal opportunity to revisit programs and explore new collective infrastructure projects to further elevate the program's ambitious goals. With this in mind, at Executive Management Committee Meeting #4/15 held on October 7`", 2015, it was approved, in part, that revised Partners in Project Green terms of reference be submitted to the Authority for approval; that a two -year term extension for the Executive Management Committee be approved as permitted in the 2013 -2015 Terms of Reference, Section 3.4; and, that staff work with Executive Management Committee members to reconstitute the balance of Partners in Project Green committees based on future program priorities. RATIONALE 2016 - 2018 Terms of Reference — Key Revisions Based on observations and lessons learned over the past two years, members of the Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee have endorsed a number of changes to the terms of reference as outlined in Attachment 1, with the primary objective of enhancing: • formal commitments to Partners in Project Green; • meeting attendance; • senior -level representation; • delegation management; and, • collective project support. 2016 - 2018 Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee Membership The following appointments are proposed for the 2016 - 2018 Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee (below). It is strongly believed that maintaining a core group of current Executive Management Committee members will ensure knowledge continuity and facilitate the forming process of new Performance Committees and Service Centre Committees. Staff has confirmed with members regarding their interest to continue representing their organization on the Committee. Business Leaders 1) Mike Brandt, Chief Financial Officer, Monteco Group, representing Ontario Environment Industry Association 2) Gordon Brown, Associate -Vice President, DC Optimization, Canadian Tire 3) Michelle Brown, Vice President, Property Management, Bentall Kennedy 4) John Coyne, Vice President, Legal & External Affairs, General Counsel, Unilever Canada 5) Jonathan Davies, Director, Government Markets, General Electric Canada 6) Hillary Marshall, Vice President, Stakeholder Relations and Communications, GTAA 7) Vacant* 8) Vacant* Note: *Currently working to identify best candidates to fill vacant seats. Municipal Leaders 1) Chris Fonseca, Councillor, Region of Peel (appointed by Regional Council, 2013) 2) Doug Whillans, Councillor, City of Brampton (appointed by Municipal Council, 2015) 3) Mike Layton *, Councillor, City of Toronto (appointed by Municipal Council, 2015) 4) Vacant, City of Mississauga Representative* (in replacement of Mayor Crombie) Note: *Currently confirming their appointment/re- appointment. TRCA 1) Brian Denney, Chief Executive Officer Credit Valley Conservation 1) Mike Puddister, Deputy CAO and Director, Watershed Transformation Advisory Members (3 optional seats) 1) Learie Miller, Advisor, Environmental Planning, Region of Peel 2) Brad Chittick, Former AVP, Supply Chain Major Projects, Canadian Tire 3) Sean Brady, Director, Business Development, IESO DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff to submit appointment requests to City of Toronto and City of Mississauga in order to formalize municipal committee representation. Staff will also work with Executive Management Committee members to fill vacancies and reconstitute Performance and Service Centre subcommittees. Report prepared by: Alex Dumesle, extension 5316 Emails: adumesle @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Alex Dumesle Emails: adumesle @trca.on.ca Date: October 30, 2015 Attachments: 1 639 Attachment 1 BMPV cr" PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN A PEARS N ECO- RUSINE5S ZONE 2016 -2018 Terms of Reference: Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee, Performance Committees, and Service Centres 1. Background Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco- Business Zone was developed by the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), the Region of Peel, City of Toronto, City of Brampton, City of Mississauga and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to transform the lands surrounding Toronto Pearson into an internationally recognized community of eco- friendly businesses. The Partners in Project Green Steering Committee was first established in 2008 in response to a recommendation in the approved Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco - Business Zone Strategy, 2008. After two successful terms, five governance committees were established in lieu of the original Steering Committee to yield more focused results as prescribed in the program's revised strategy introduced in 2013. To date, the new governance structure has proven effective in driving meaningful actions and innovation throughout the Pearson Eco - Business Zone and beyond. 1.1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Direction At Authority Meeting #10/15, held on November 27, 2015, Resolution # X.X was approved, in part, as follows: ... THAT the Partners in Project Green Executive Management Committee, Performance Committees, and Service Centres Terms of Reference, as appended, be approved; ... 2. Vision The vision of Partners in Project Green is to transform the Pearson Eco- Business Zone into an internationally recognized community known for its competitive, high performance and eco - friendly business climate. 3. Executive Management Committee 3.1 Mandate Reporting to the TRCA Board (Appendix A), the Executive Management Committee will be established as a subcommittee to TRCA with the purpose of: assisting businesses in the Pearson Eco- Business Zone to improve their financial and environmental performance; • retaining and attracting green investment in the Pearson Eco- Business Zone; and, acting as a catalyst for new ideas, innovation, excellence and improvement in the employment lands encompassed by the Pearson Eco- Business Zone. 1 1 P a g e . = 1 la IN 141 N 3.2 Roles & Responsibilities Specifically, the Executive Management Committee will be primarily responsible for: • providing leadership and communication among Partners in Project Green members and supporters; • acting as a spokesperson for Partners in Project Green; • reviewing and approving the Partners in Project Green strategy and programs as required; • reviewing and approving the Partners in Project Green budget; • monitoring overall Partners in Project Green priorities and performance; • publishing an annual report; and • providing legal, governance and issue - resolution guidance relating to Partners in Project Green activities. Secondary responsibilities shall include: • facilitating access to strategic partners and advisors; • where appropriate, serving as a resource and contact for media and government relation inquiries; • appointing Chairs to Subcommittees (i.e., Performance Committees and Service Centres); and • facilitating, initiating and directing resources to Subcommittees. 3.3 Structure Supported by the Secretariat, the Executive Management Committee will have a Chair and Vice -Chair (or two Co- Chairs at the discretion of the Committee), and will be comprised of fifteen (15) Voting and as many as three (3) Advisory Members. 3.3.1 Executive Management Committee Voting Members The Executive Management Committee will consist of fifteen (15) Voting Members including the Chair and Vice - Chair, senior -level representatives of the founding agencies (TRCA, GTAA, Region of Peel and the City of Toronto), strategic partners, members of the business community and a number of government representatives as follows: • GTAA (one (1) voting representative) o One voting member will be selected from the executive leadership team at the GTAA. 21 Page 641 3.4 BMPV • Business Community Leaders (Maximum of eight (8) voting representatives) o Eight members drawn from representatives of the Pearson Eco - Business Zone business community. • TRCA (one (1) voting representative) o The Authority Chair or other designated member of staff (Chief Executive Officer or the Director of Watershed Management). • Credit Valley Conservation (One (1) voting representative) o The Credit Valley Conservation Chair or other designated member of staff (Chief Administrative Officer) • Municipality Leaders (Four (4) voting representatives) o One representative (Councillor or Designate) from each of the municipalities financially supporting PPG programming such as the Region of Peel, City of Toronto, City of Brampton and City of Mississauga. 3.3.2 Executive Management Committee Advisory Members In addition to Voting Members, up to three (3) Advisory Members can be invited to join the Executive Management Committee and support its activities. • Federal, Provincial and /or Municipal Governments (Maximum two (2) advisory representatives) o One Member of Provincial Parliament, and /or one Member of Parliament, and /or one municipal representative, and /or senior staff representatives from all levels of government may be invited to participate. • Business Community (Maximum one (1) advisory representative) o An additional Advisory Member may be drawn from the Pearson Eco- Business Zone, representatives of the business community, and /or industry associations at the request of the Voting Members of the Executive Management Committee. Appointment Process Membership on the Executive Management Committee will be drawn from organizations with connections to the Pearson Eco- Business Zone based on the following criteria: • Involvement with Partners in Project Green — the organization must be a formal member of Partners in Project Green; and, • Sector — whether the organization represents a critical sector within the Pearson Eco- Business Zone; or 642 31 Page pmpv • Organizational leadership on sustainability — whether the organization has shown sustainability leadership; or • Location — whether the organization is operating and /or has a connection to the Pearson Eco- Business Zone. Executive Management Committee members will be appointed for a two -year, renewable term by TRCA. Municipalities and other levels of governments will be formally requested to make appointments and all proposed appointments will be presented to the Authority for formal approval. The Chair and Vice -Chair will be elected by the members of the Executive Management Committee. Delegation of Committee roles & responsibilities shall not be encouraged, and managed by exception. All delegations will be subject to approval by Committee Chairs. 3.5 Chair and Vice -Chair The Executive Management Committee Chair and Vice -Chair (or Co- Chairs) will provide leadership in building a shared vision and community commitment for moving forward with a blueprint for action. The Chair will have the following additional responsibilities: • being the primary spokesperson for Partners in Project Green at public and official functions; • presiding over Executive Management Committee meetings, setting the agenda and generally ensuring the effectiveness of meetings; • recruiting Subcommittee members; and • facilitating progress on Partners in Project Green initiatives in collaboration with working group chairs. In the absence of the Chair, the Vice -Chair will perform the above functions. 3.6 Business Community & Municipality Leaders Business Community and Municipality Leaders appointed to the Executive Management Committee, excluding the Chair and Vice - Chair, will be required to sponsor a Subcommittee (i.e., Performance Committee or Service Centre). As such, Business Community and Municipality Leaders will have the following additional responsibilities: • assuming the responsibilities of Chair or Vice -Chair for a given Subcommittee; • recruiting and appointing Subcommittee members; 41 Page 643 BUPV • communicating strategic directives issued by the Executive Management Committee to the Subcommittee; • facilitating progress on Subcommittee initiatives; • monitoring Subcommittee progress and performance and reporting to the Executive Management Team; and • championing green economic development in the Pearson Eco- Business Zone. 3.7 Meetings The Executive Management Committee will meet at least four (4) times per year, roughly every three (3) months. Meetings are anticipated to be approximately two (2) hours in length — at the discretion of the Executive Management Committee — and an agenda will be distributed in advance of meetings. It is anticipated that members will commit at least four (4) days per year to prepare for and attend Executive Management Committee meetings as well as the Annual General Meeting (AGM). The Chair will have the discretion to call additional conference call meetings if required. 3.8 Reporting The Executive Management Committee is responsible to the broader region and community and the overall goals of Partners in Project Green. It will be accountable to the goals of Partners in Project Green by ensuring measurable goals are set and monitored, assessed and reported. The Executive Management Committee is a subcommittee of TRCA and will regularly update the Authority on the status of Partners in Project Green initiatives, and provide updates to municipal councils and the GTAA board as requested. 3.9 Quorum & Governance A quorum will consist of voting members in numbers greater than or equal to one -third of the total number of voting members on the Executive Management Committee. Consensus -based decision making will be the preferred procedure. Formal decisions will be based on a simple majority vote. In the event of a tie, the Chair will cast the deciding vote. TRCA Rules of Conduct and Purchasing Policies will be adhered to as required. 4. Performance Committees 4.1 Mandate Reporting to two (2) Executive Management Committee members (Appendix A), Performance Committees will be established as subcommittees to the 51 Page ZE 4.2 4.3 4.4 Executive Management Committee task - oriented and formed based priorities to: BMPV As such, Performance Committees will be on Executive Management Committee • Contribute to the realization of the Partners in Project Green vision and Executive Management Committee mandate; and • Contribute to the successful development and implementation of new and existing Partners in Project Green programs and initiatives. Roles & Responsibilities Specifically, Performance Committees will be responsible for: • advising staff on key Partners in Project Green sector specific issues; • providing sector and subject -area expertise to inform the design and /or execution of key Partners in Project Green performance area programs; • providing market intelligence and recommendations for new performance area program opportunities; • leading the design and /or execution of initiatives and collective projects in line with Partners in Project Green strategic objectives; • owning program performance metrics and reporting progress to the Executive Management Committee; and • serving as ambassadors for the program among peer /industry groups. Structure Including the Chair and Vice - Chair, every Performance Committee will be comprised of seven (7) to twelve (12) senior -level representatives who have a particular interest in and /or expertise relevant to the major challenges of the corresponding performance area (Appendix A). Appointment Process Membership on Performance Committees will be drawn from organizations with connections to the Pearson Eco- Business Zone based on the following criteria: • Involvement with Partners in Project Green Project —the organization must be a formal member of Partners in Project Green Project; and, • Sector — whether the organization represents a critical sector within the Pearson Eco - Business Zone; or, • Organizational leadership on sustainability — whether the organization has shown sustainability leadership; or, • Location — whether the organization is operating and /or has a connection to the Pearson Eco - Business Zone. e 61 Page BMPV Members of each Performance Committee will be appointed for a two -year, renewable term by the Performance Committee Chair. Performance Committee Chairs will be appointed by the Executive Management Committee. Delegation of Committee roles & responsibilities shall not be encouraged, and managed by exception. All delegations will be subject to approval by Committee Chairs. 4.5 Chair and Vice -Chair Performance Committee Chairs and Vice - Chairs will be business community or municipal representatives taken from the Executive Management Committee. In order to ensure broad representation, the Chair and Vice -Chair of any given Performance Committee shall not share the same company affiliation. In general, Chairs and Vice - Chairs will provide leadership on specific initiatives and effective communication between the Executive Management Committee and Performance Committee, and among Performance Committees as appropriate. The Performance Committee Chair will have the following additional responsibilities: • being the primary spokesperson for the Performance Committee at public and official functions; • setting work program and meeting schedule in collaboration with Performance Committee members and the Secretariat, and presiding over Performance Committee meetings; • recruiting Performance Committee members; • monitoring Subcommittee progress and performance and reporting to the Executive Management Team; and • championing green economic development in the Pearson Eco- Business Zone. In the absence of the Chair, the Vice -Chair will perform the above functions. 4.6 Meetings Performance Committees will meet at least four (4) times per year including the Annual General Meeting (AGM), roughly every three (3) months or at the call of the Chair. Meetings are anticipated to be two (2) hours in length and an agenda will be distributed in advance of meetings. It is anticipated that members will commit at least four (4) days per year to prepare for and attend Performance Committee meetings as well as the AGM. The Chair will have the discretion to call additional conference call meetings if required. 71 Page • e la IN 141 N 4.7 Reporting Performance Committees are responsible to the broader region and community and the overall goals of Partners in Project Green. They will be accountable to the goals of Partners in Project Green by ensuring that all goals relevant to a given Performance Committee and approved by the Executive Management Committee are carefully monitored, assessed and reported. Performance Committees are subcommittees of the Executive Management Committee and will regularly update the Executive Management Committee on the status of Performance Committee initiatives based on a predetermined reporting schedule. 4.8 Quorum and Governance A quorum will consist of at least one -third of the members of the Performance Committee, including at least one of the two Chairs. Consensus -based decision making will be the preferred procedure. Formal decisions will be based on a simple majority vote. In the event of a tie, the Chair will cast the deciding vote. TRCA Rules of Conduct and Purchasing Policies will be adhered to as required. 4.9 Staff Liaison Additionally, the Region of Peel, City of Toronto, City of Brampton and City of Mississauga will be requested to designate appropriate staff to liaise with Performance Committees as required. 5. Service Centres 5.1 Mandate Reporting to the Executive Management Committee, Service Centres will be established as subcommittees to the Executive Management Committee (Appendix A). As such, Service Centres will be task - oriented and formed based on Executive Management Committee priorities to: • contribute to the successful development and implementation of new and existing Partners in Project Green self- sustaining profit centres; and • contribute to the realization of the Executive Management Committee's mandate. 5.2 Roles and Responsibilities Service Centre committee Roles and Responsibilities will be developed by staff, as required, with approval form the Executive Management Committee. UUM 647 6. Secretariat The Executive Management Committee, Subcommittees and their Chairs will be supported by a secretariat led by Partners in Project Green staff from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. The Secretariat will provide facilitation, project and program development and implementation, research and policy analysis, administrative and recruitment support, financial management and communications. 7. Funding Executive Management Committee and Performance Committee members will contribute their expertise as in -kind services. Compensation for transportation will be provided for attendance at meetings according to TRCA policy where these are not covered by their agency or other source. Core funding for Partners in Project Green will come from both public and private sector organizations, with specific funding for programs and projects being sought from a variety of funding sources. 91 Page DMO PUP APPENDIX A - Governance Structure and Delivery Chain The following figures illustrate Partners in Project Green governance structure and intended value delivery chain. TRCA F EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Business and /or Municipal Leaders X8 I I • i< I — Performance Areas Chairs 1. Energy Performance 2. Water Stewardship 3. Waste Management 4. Communication & Engagement PERFORMANCE COMMITTEES GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE 1. Executive Management Committee [15 -18] • GTAA X1 • Business Leaders X 8 • Municipalities X4 • TRCA X1 • CVC X1 • Optional advisory members X3: from business community and government 2. Performance Committees [7 -12 /committee] • Chairs from Executive Management Committee 3. Service Centres [7 -12 /centre] • Chairs from Executive Management Committee PPG Business Leaders X3 Ad Hoc Committees Chairs 1. Service Centre 1 2. Service Centre 2 SERVICE CENTRES MEETINGS 1. Executive Management. Committee [4 meetings] • 3 in-person + AGM • Additional conference calls as required 2. Performance Committees [4 meetings] • 3in- person /conference calls +AGM 3. Service Centres [As required] GLOSSARY • AGM Annual General Meeting • CVC Credit Valley Conservation • PPG Partners in Project Green • TRCA Toronto Region Conservation Authority LEGEND • Direct report • Performance accountability with operational independence Figure 1 - Governance Structure 1 1 P a g e • , • TRCA BOARD EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Business and /or Municipal Leaders X8 Performance Areas Chairs 1. Energy Performance 2. Water Stewardship 3. Waste Management 4. Communication & Engagement PERFORMANCE COMMITTEES Program Pilot Projects Campaign Champions � J� MEMBERS • AMBASSADORS • MEMBERS • ECO- SOLUTION PROVIDERS • PPG MANAGER t I Mil I Business Leaders X3 Ad Hoc Committees Chairs 1. Service Centre 1 2. Service Centre 2 SERVICE CENTRES Consortiums Training & Engagement Partnerships Figure 2 - Governance Delivery Chain 650 J Value Added Services 21 Page COMMITTEE SPONSORS Chair & Vice - Chair Business Community Representation Municipality Representation Expert Representation PPG Staff PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE DIRE • Sr. Executive X2 Municipal Councilor • Sr. Executive X2 Municipal Councilor/ Designated Sr. Staff • Other Business Leaders xa X1 -4 • Other Municipal Staff (e.g. Economic Dev.. Director) • Conservation Authority Specialist X1 -3 . Industry Subject Matter Expert • NGO X1 PPG Project Manager /Coordinator Pilot Projects I Program Campaign Champions I R F • AMBASSADORS • MEMBERS • ECO- SOLUTION PROVIDERS Training & Engagement Consortiums Partnerships Figure 3 — Typical Performance Committee Structure and Delivery Chain SUM 651 RES. #A230 /15 - KORTRIGHT CENTRE MUNICIPAL SERVICING PROJECT Pine Valley Municipal Service Works. Award of Contract #10001003 for supply of all labour, equipment and materials necessary for municipal servicing along Pine Valley Drive to the Kortright Centre property line, in the City of Vaughan. Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT Contract #10001003 be awarded to TACC Construction Ltd. for municipal site servicing along Pine Valley Drive, in the City of Vaughan at a total cost not to exceed $488,324.00, plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 15% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractor that submitted a tender; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the agreement including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. AMENDMENT RES. #A231 /05 Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT the first paragraph of the main motion be amended to read: THAT Contract #10001003 be awarded to TACC Construction Ltd. for municipal site servicing along Pine Valley Drive, in the City of Vaughan at a total cost not to exceed $488,324.00, plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications, subject to confirmation of the requested additional funding by York Region Council as part of its 2016 budget deliberations; THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: THAT Contract #10001003 be awarded to TACC Construction Ltd. for municipal site servicing along Pine Valley Drive, in the City of Vaughan at a total cost not to exceed $488,324.00, plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications, subject to confirmation of the requested additional funding by York Region Council as part of its 2016 budget deliberations; 652 THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 15% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractor that submitted a tender; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the agreement including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. BACKGROUND The Kortright Centre opened in 1979 and is located in the City of Vaughan on 325 hectares of woodlands, wetlands and natural spaces. The Centre hosts approximately 135,000 visitors annually, offers over 50 environmental education programs, and delivers 30 sustainable technology workshops for the public, trades and industry or working professionals. The current wastewater septic system at the Kortright Visitor Centre is towards the end of its functional lifespan (37 years). TRCA has been advised that obtaining an approval permit from the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change to replace the septic system would be difficult, costly and would result in a shutdown of the Centre for an unspecified period of time. The existing servicing which includes an on -site well and septic system, as well as a separate well and septic system for the Archetype House do not have an adequate supply and have high maintenance costs due to hard water scaling. The Centre is also prone to water capacity disruptions, which have led to shutdowns of its facilities. The proposed municipal servicing would eliminate current issues and allow for a timely and cost efficient infrastructure upgrade to the Kortright Centre. In 2012, TRCA established a business arrangement with the Building Research Establishment in the United Kingdom to create an Innovation Park at The Living City Campus. The objective of this proposed not - for - profit project is to act as an industry resource for sustainable construction by showcasing several sustainable technologies to local and international developers, manufactures, designers and contractors. Through its partnership, TRCA aims to work with its municipal and corporate partners to expand its existing sustainable housing demonstrations, research and education projects. As part of the overall plan, TRCA has proposed to upgrade its existing infrastructure which includes extending water and sanitary municipal services along Pine Valley Drive to the Kortright property line. This would allow for future connections from the property line to various buildings at the Kortright Centre including the Visitors Centre, Archetype House, Innovation Park, rental property, maintenance workshop, greenhouse /barn, and the Peregrine Foundation. RATIONALE This project is aligned with leadership strategies number eight and ten in TRCA's strategic plan. Through gathering and sharing the best urban sustainability knowledge and accelerating innovation, this project will assist TRCA in its commitment to continuous innovation and creating new ways to coordinate the engagement of academics, researchers, the building industry and municipal experts to more effectively infuse new science, an understanding of complex systems, innovation and on- the - ground experience into urban planning, design and governance in the Toronto region. 653 Tender #10001003 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http: / /www.biddingo.com /) on September 30, 2015 with a mandatory site information meeting held on October 7, 2015.Tender packages were sent to the following seven contractors: • Esposito Bros; • Four Seasons Site Development; • HDC Services Ltd.; • Midome Construction Services; • TACC Construction Ltd.; • Tedescon Infrastructure Ltd.; and • Verticial Horizons Contracting. The Procurement Opening Committee opened the Tenders on October 26, 2015 with the following results: Tender #10001003 Kortright Centre Municipal Servicing Project — Pine Valley Municipal Service Works BIDDERS TOTAL (plus HST) TACC Construction Ltd. $488,324.00 HDC Services Ltd. $557,800.00 Restoration and Infrastructure staff reviewed the bid received from TACC Construction Ltd. against its own cost estimate and has determined that the bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements as outlined in the contract documents. Further assessment by TRCA staff of TACC Construction Ltd.'s experience and ability to undertake similar projects was conducted through reference checks which resulted in positive feedback that TACC Construction Ltd. is capable of undertaking the scope of work. Based on the bids received, staff recommends that TACC Construction Ltd. be awarded Contract#10001003 for site servicing along Pine Valley Drive, in the City of Vaughan for a total amount of $488,324.00, to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus a 15% contingency, plus HST, it being the lowest bid that meets TRCA specifications. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funds required to complete this project are available through the Kortright Campus Development account #425-01. Report prepared by: Michelle Guy, extension 5905 Emails: mguy @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Aaron J. D'Souza, extension 5775 Emails: ajdsouza @trca.on.ca Date: November 10, 2015 654 RES. #A232/15 - MAIN HUMBER RIVER AT HUMBER STATION ROAD PROJECT South of Castlederg Sideroad, North of King Street Town of Caledon. Construction of remedial works at the Main Humber River at Humber Station Road Project, Town of Caledon, in the Region of Peel Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Jack Ballinger THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to enter into an Agreement with Town of Caledon to undertake construction of remedial works at the Main Humber River at Humber Station Road Project; THAT authorized officials be directed to take the necessary action to implement any agreements, including obtaining needed approvals and the signing and execution of documents; AND FURTHER THAT the Town of Caledon be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 2012, TRCA staff reported concerns of slope erosion and instability along a localized section of the Humber River adjacent to Humber Station Road south of Castlederg Sideroad and north of King Street, in the Town of Caledon. The site extends approximately 170 metres along the embankment of the main Humber River. Subsequent site inspections identified increasing bank deterioration and atypical amounts of fine sediment and road run -off entering the watercourse as a result of the erosion. TRCA also noted increasing damage to the road surface and exposed geotextiles. Town of Caledon staff flagged this area as a high priority due to public safety concerns associated with the erosion and requested TRCA's assistance in finding a viable solution. At Authority Meeting #7/12, held on September 28, 2012, Resolution #A162/12 was approved as follows: THAT TRCA staff be directed to commence a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) for the preferred erosion control protection works of Humber Station Road, south of Castlederg Sideroad, north of King Street, Region of Peel, and facilitate construction of the preferred alternative; THAT as part of the EA process staff is directed to undertake public consultation, as well as assess environmental impacts including public safety, road improvements, stream naturalization and fish habitat; THAT authorized officials and staff be directed to take all necessary actions to implement the foregoing, including the signing of agreements or other legal documents deemed necessary in order to retain the required engineering consulting services, subject to approval of the Town of Caledon; THAT TRCA involvement be subject to funding being available from the Town of Caledon, AND FURTHER THAT the Town of Caledon be so advised. 655 In May of 2013, TRCA, in partnership with the Town, began investigating design options to stabilize the eroded embankment. The planning and design phases were completed in accordance with the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) under the requirements of a 'Schedule B' project for Municipal Roadways. As part of the Class EA process WalterFedy and Terraprobe were retained to complete detailed review of the geotechnical conditions of the project site and assist with the development of alternative long -term remedial solutions. During the Class EA six design options were identified and evaluated. The preferred design option chosen to move forward to implementation was chosen for the following reasons: i) construction activities would be less intrusive to aquatic habitat than other options; ii) the least amount of grading would be required on the embankment slope relative to other options; and, iii) there would be the least impact to vegetation communities upstream and downstream of the immediate construction area relative to other options. The Class EA was filed with the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change for 30 day public review on May 14, 2015. On June 12, 2015 the public review period closed without receipt of any Part II Order requests thus allowing the project team to move forward with implementation. Detailed design subsequently was initiated by TRCA at the request of the Town of Caledon, and is nearing completion. The Town of Caledon has indicated that they would like TRCA to undertake the construction of remedial works on their behalf. It is anticipated this work would begin in the spring of 2016. RATIONALE The project site is located on land owned by Town of Caledon. Based on TRCA's expertise, ability to undertake the planned works, in -depth knowledge of the sensitive site conditions and the project design, TRCA is best suited to lead the project. FINANCIAL DETAILS TRCA will enter into an Agreement with the Town of Caledon to cost share the construction of the project, based on an estimated budget of $500,000 excluding HST. Town of Caledon will fund the required road improvement work, and TRCA will fund the construction of embankment works through funds available from the Region of Peel Climate Change Mitigation Capital Budget under account code #129 -38. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Implementation of the preferred design option involves rebuilding and paving approximately 145 m of the existing road in its current location, and installing an approximately 100 m long armourstone retaining wall between the river and roadway. The design also includes improved shoulders and guardrail installation to provide a safe roadway for travel by motorists. The armourstone retaining wall design will protect the toe of the slope and stabilize the river bank that extends to Humber Station Road. Further stability of the river bank and retaining wall interface will be facilitated through installation of appropriately designed toe protection and bioengineering. The restoration plan prepared by TRCA will return the site to pre- construction condition or better, and include appropriate habitat features such as log structures. • e Construction of in -water works for the Humber Station Road Project is planned to commence after July 1, 2016 and be completed by September 15, 2016, in accordance with the cold water fisheries timing window. Completion of road works (including grading and paving) and restoration of the project site will continue into the fall of 2016. Sediment and erosion controls will be implemented during construction to prevent material and fine silts from entering the Humber River. The construction of the works will be undertaken on Town of Caledon land. During construction, access to the site will be from Humber Station Road. Detours will be required during construction to redirect traffic. A traffic plan will be prepared and approved by Town of Caledon prior to commencement of works. The road embankment at the Humber Station Road project site is showing signs of continued erosion, which may be exacerbated by increased precipitation and freeze -thaw associated with the winter and spring months. This may result in the need for emergency works to be undertaken at the site prior to the planned commencement date. The site will be monitored for signs of failure by Town of Caledon as required under Ontario's Minimum Maintenance Standards (MMS) Regulations. If it is determined that emergency works are required prior to the planned construction timeline, staff will work with Town of Caledon staff to implement the required works, including any required permits and approvals. As it relates to approvals for procurement of goods and services, this will include Section 6 of TRCA's Purchasing Policy, which reads as follows: An event that is determined to be a threat to health, safety and welfare of persons or property- requires the maintenance of essential service, protection and security of TRCA interests or mitigation of a liability or prevent serious delays or further damage; and requires the immediate purchase and delivery of goods and services. In the event of an emergency purchase the CEO or designate is authorized to act immediately and where the amount exceeds $50,000 to report to the Executive Committee and /or Authority at the earliest opportunity within the approval requirements of this Policy. Report prepared by: Natalie Seniuk, extension 5655 Emails: nseniuk @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Nxalie Seniuk, extension 5655 Emails: nseniuk @trca.on.ca Date: November 4, 2015 Attachments: 1 657 Attachment 1 Q.` h. w0; Ga . RESTORATION EA ewe RArpLH,4 Y... h It 4,y s® Legend �RMWMAW +,, onserva Lion Roads inr The Living City — River TRCA Property 210 10.5 0 210 Meters �v wa ® Queen s Printer far Ontar and Sts licensors. [2 912] May Not be Repmduced without Permissloa- THIS 6 NOT A PLAN OF SU RVEY. 356 658 RESMA233 /15 - 2016 FEE SCHEDULE FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND PROGRAMMING Approval of the 2016 Fee Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming. Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Jack Ballinger THAT the 2016 Fee Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming be amended as set out in Attachment 1, and become effective January 1, 2016, with the exception of student program fees at Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright Centre for Conservation, which become effective September 1, 2016 to coincide with the school year. CARRIED BACKGROUND Each year staff conducts a review of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Fee Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming to determine any changes. The review of fees is based on value provided, market conditions, like industry program fees and sustainable operations. RATIONALE The following outlines the proposed fee increases and restructuring which are detailed in Attachment 1. A copy of the full proposed 2016 Fee Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming is provided as Attachment 2. • Increase camping fees at Albion Hills, Glen Rouge and Indian Line campgrounds to reflect the cost of program delivery. Hydro and water servicing fees continue to increase. Camping permit fees at Albion Hills and Indian Line have not been increased since 2010; fees at Glen Rouge increased for the first time in 2015, for serviced sites only. • Increase student half day and full day programs at Black Creek Pioneer Village to continue to provide sustainable program offerings. Programs are becoming more interactive as TRCA begins to implement the vision of the "new Black Creek ". As a result, staff training has increased along with higher product delivery /program costs. • Change Kortright weekend and evening public programs to a set rate in lieu of using individual program pricing. • Restructure Kortright student program fees from per student rate to a group rate in order to be in line with the fees structure of other environmental education providers. Report prepared by: Amanda Perricone, extension 5252 Emails: aperricone @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 Emails: dedwards @trca.on.ca Date: October 13, 2015 Attachments: 2 659 Attachment 1 Item Description 2015 Base (Plus Taxes ) 2015 Gross (Including Taxes 2016 Base (Plus Taxes) 2016 Gross (Including Taxes 6.0 For a permit to occupy an individual un- serviced campsite, inclusive of general admission; 6.1 at Albion Hills, per night. 27.00 30.51 29.00 32.77 6.2 at Albion Hills, per week. 162.00 183.06 174.00 196.62 6.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days). 540.00 610.20 580.00 655.40 6.4 at Indian Line, per night. 28.50 32.21 30.50 34.47 6.5 at Indian Line, per week. 171.00 193.23 183.00 206.79 6.6 at Indian Line, per month (28 days). 570.00 644.10 610.00 689.30 6.7 at Glen Rouge, per night. 27.00 30.51 29.00 32.77 6.8 at Glen Rouge, per week 162.00 183.06 174.00 196.62 6.9 at Glen Rouge, per month (28 days). 540.00 610.20 580.00 655.40 6.10 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 6.1,6.4 or 6.7 3.00 3.39 3.00 3.39 7.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite, with water and hydro hook -ups, inclusive of general admission; 7.1 at Albion Hills, per night. 32.50 36.73 34.50 38.99 7.2 at Albion Hills, per week. 195.00 220.35 207.00 233.91 7.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days). 650.00 734.50 690.00 779.70 7.4 at Albion Hills, per season. 2275.00 2570.75 2,380.00 2,689.40 7.5 at Indian Line, per night. 34.00 38.42 36.00 40.68 7.6 at Indian Line, per week. 204.00 230.52 216.00 244.08 7.7 at Indian Line, per month (28 days). 680.00 768.40 720.00 813.60 7.8 at Indian Line, per season. 2720.00 3073.60 2,880.00 3,254.40 7.9 at Glen Rouge, per night. 34.50 38.99 36.50 41.25 7.10 at Glen Rouge, per week. 207.00 233.91 219.00 247.47 7.11 at Glen Rouge, per month (28 days) 690.00 779.70 730.00 824.90 7.12 at Glen Rouge with 50 amp hydro service, per night. 37.50 42.38 39.50 44.64 7.13 at Glen Rouge with 50 amp hydro service, per week. 225.00 254.25 237.00 267.81 7.14 at Glen Rouge with 50 amp hydro service, per month 28 da s . 750.00 847.50 790.00 892.70 7.15 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 7.1, 7.5,7.9 or 7.12 3.00 3.39 3.00 3.39 8.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite with water, hydro, and sewage hook -up inclusive of general admission; 8.1 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per night. 39.00 44.07 41.00 46.33 8.2 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per week. 234.00 264.42 246.00 277.98 8.3 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per month 28 da s . 780.00 881.40 820.00 926.60 8.4 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per night. 44.00 49.72 46.00 51.98 8.5 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per week. 264.00 298.32 276.00 311.88 8.6 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per month 28 da s . 880.00 994.40 920.00 1,039.60 8.7 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 8.1 and 8.4. 3.00 3.39 3.00 3.39 .•l 661 2015 2015 2016 Base 2016 Item Description Base Gross (Plus Gross (Plus (Including Taxes) (Including Taxes ) Taxes Taxes 17.0 For general admission to the Black Creek Pioneer Village, per day; 17.6 For each student participating in a half day program, 10.50- 10.50- 11.00- 11.00- subject to a minimum of twenty persons. 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 17.7 For each student participating in a full day program, 15.50- 15.50- 16.00- 16.00- subject to a minimum of twenty persons. 18.50 18.50 19.00 19.00 21.0 For general admission at the Kortright Centre for Conservation; 21.4 For each child ages four to fourteen participating in a 6.00 6.78 weekend or evening public program. 21.5 for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age 11.00- 12.43- 12.00 13.56 participating in a weekend or evening public program. 13.00 14.69 21.6 for each senior sixty years or over participating in a 10.00 11.30 6.00 6.78 weekend or evening public program. 21.7 For each regular half day school program to a 8.00- 8.00- 200.00 200.00 maximum number of 30 participants. 9.00 9.00 Per group Per group Per person Per person 21.8 For each regular full day school program to a 15.00- 15.00- 375.00 375.00 maximum number of 30 participants. 19.00 19.00 Per group Per group Per person Per person 21.9 For each self - guided group with children fourteen 87.50 87.50 years of age or under visiting as part of an organized group under supervision during regular operating season. Subject to a maximum group size of thirty persons. 21.10 For each additional participant after the maximum 3.50 3.50 group number of thirty participants, in conjunction with item 21.9 21.11 For each specialized half day program to a maximum 220.00 248.60 number of 30 part ici ants 21.12 For each specialized full day program to a maximum 400.00 452.00 number of 30 participants 21.13 Booked programmed groups using grounds for self- 50.00 50.00 guided activities during non - programming time on same day as booking. Subject to a maximum group size of thirty persons. 21.14 For each additional participant after the maximum 2.00 2.00 group number of thirty participants, in conjunction with item 21.13 661 TRCA 2016 Fee Schedule Public Facilities and Programming Conservation Areas ..................................................................................... ............................... items 1 to 15 Black Creek Pioneer Village ...................................................................... ............................... items 16 to 19 Kortright Centre for Conservation ............................................................. ............................... items 20 to 22 Conservation Memberships ................................................................................. ............................... item 23 Discounts.................................................................................................. ............................... items D1 to D3 The majority of fees listed in this Fee Schedule take effect January 1, 2016 with the exception of student program fees which take effect September 1, 2016 to coincide with the school year. The following outlines the fee increases and restructuring: • Camping Fees at Albion Hills, Glen Rouge and Indian Line Campgrounds increased • Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) student half day and full day programs increased • Restructure Kortright weekend and evening public programs to a set rate fee • Restructure Kortright student program fees from per student rate to a group rate. Updated material may be distributed from time to time to include supplementary fees which are related to specific program activities, or to reflect changes to the schedule. 662 TRCA 2016 Fee Schedule - Definition of Terms 1 Age categories Four general age groups are used throughout the fee schedule as follows: Adult - any person from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age. Child - any person from five to fourteen years of age. Child (pre - schoolers) - any person four years of age or under. Senior - any person sixty years of age or over. Some exceptions to this general age categorization apply to specific fee schedule items and are detailed under those items. 2 Conservation Area The term Conservation Area applies to Albion Hills, Bruce's Mill, Boyd, Glen Haffy, Heart Lake and Petticoat Creek. Also included in this definition are the public campgrounds at Albion Hills, Glen Rouge and Indian Line. For the purposes of this fee schedule, the definition does not include the Kortright Centre for Conservation or Black Creek Pioneer Village. 3 General admission General admission allows for basic access to a specified TRCA venue(s) during a designated operating period(s). Other fees may be charged in addition to, or in lieu of, general admission fees for certain facilities, programs or operating periods, as identified in this fee schedule or under various operating policies. 4 Group Camper Applies to members of an organized group staying overnight at a Conservation Area by permit. 5 Day Camper Applies to members of day cares, day camps, schools or the like, who are visiting a Conservation Area during the regular operating day. 6 Operating policies This fee schedule is provided as a general summary of fees applied by the TRCA at its various operating venues. It does not provide, nor is it intended to provide, complete information as to the various regulations and operating policies in effect at these venues which may relate to individual fee schedule items. Daily, seasonal and program operating schedules, and minimum group size requirements are among these policies. 7 Discounts and premiums Any fee may be subject to a discount or premium at the discretion of the appropriate Manager. 8 Supplementary fees Not all fees are considered to be part of the TRCA's fee schedule as approved by the Authority. Some are set independently of that schedule. The sale of retail merchandise or the provision of incidental services represents the most common examples of such fees. 9 Student Programs Student programs are designed for children aged 14 years and under. 10 Conservation Membership — all of TRCA public use facilities and venues, including all TRCA Conservation Areas, Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright, as well as Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) Conservation Areas. 663 TRCA 2016 Fee Schedule - Contents active transportation users ......................... Conservation Areas ............................................................... D.3 aquatic facilities - daily admission Petticoat Creek, Heart Lake, Albion Hills ............ ...........................12.0 anglingfee ............................... ...........................Glen Haffy ...................................................................... 2.0 boat rentals .................. ............................... Conservation Areas ............................................................... 4.0 camping - day campers .............................. Conservation Areas................................ ............................... 5.0 camping - group .............. .........................Albion Hills, Indian Line........................... ............................... 10.0 camping - public camping .............Albion Hills, Glen Rouge, Indian Line ................................... 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 camping - supplementary fees...... Albion Hills, Glen Rouge, Indian Line ..................... ............................9.0 fees for extra campers and parking for extra cars cross - country skiing - equipment rentals .......... Albion Hills ..................................... ............................... 14.0 cross - country skiing - group rate ....................... Albion Hills ........................................................... 14.3,14.4 cross - country skiing - trail fees ........................ Albion Hills ....................................... .. ............. ........ ......13.0 day campers ................ ............................... Conservation Areas............... see camping - day campers (5.0) Dickson Hill School ................ ............................... BCPV ........................................................................ 17.8 educational tours - BCPV tour program ................ BCPV ............................................................... 17.6, 17.7 educational tours - ........................................ Kortright ........................................................... 21.7 - 21.14 fishing - Fly Fishers Club Membership ...............Glen Haffy ...................................................................... 3.3 fishing - public ponds .............. ...........................Glen Haffy ...................................................................... 3.0 fishing - pond rentals ..................... Glen Haffy Headwaters Trout Ponds .................................................. 3.0 general admission - BCPV ..... ............................... BCPV ........................................................................ 17.0 general admission ....... ............................... Conservation Areas................................ ............................... 1.0 generaladmission ................................................ Kortright .............................................................. 21.1 -21.3 group discounts ......... ....................Conservation Areas, BCPV, Kortright ................................................. D.1 guidedtour ............................. ............................... BCPV......................................... ............................... 19.0 maple syrup tours .............. ............................... Bruce's Mill .................................... ............................... 15.0 memberships - site specific .... ............................... BCPV......................................... ............................... 18.0 memberships ............. ....................Conservation Areas, BCPV, Kortright ............................................... 23.0 memberships - site specific .................................. Kortright..................................................................... 22.0 parking.................................... ............................... BCPV ........................................ ............................... 16.0 parking.................................. ............................... Kortright ....................................................................... 20.0 picnics - group picnic sites ................. Conservation Areas /Kortright ..................... ............................... 11.0 skiing ...................................................................... ............................... see cross country skiing (13.0, 14.0) special needs persons ..................Conservation Areas, BCPV, Kortright ................................................. D.2 swimming - daily admission ....... Petticoat Creek, Heart Lake, Albion Hills ............. ............................... 12.0 • m Item Description 2016 Base (Plus Taxes ) 2016 Gross (Including Taxes 1.0 For general admission at Conservation Areas, per day; 1.1 for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age at Conservation Areas. 5.75 6.50 1.2 for each senior sixty years of age or over at Conservation Areas. 4.87 5.50 2.0 For fishing at Glen Haffy; 2.1 per day, for each person fifteen years of age or over, exclusive of general admission. 5.09 5.75 2.2 per day, for each person from five to fourteen years of age, exclusive of general admission. 2.52 2.85 2.3 per day, for each person four years of age or under, exclusive of general admission. 0.00 0.00 2.4 for each person fifteen years of age or over, in a group with a reservation, including angling fee and general admission, per day, subject to a minimum group size of 20 persons. 7.50 8.48 2.5 for each person five to fourteen years of age, in a group with a reservation, including angling fee and general admission, per day, subject to a minimum group size of 20 persons. 3.25 3.67 2.6 for the use of a fishing pond at Glen Haffy Conservation Area for up to 75 persons including general admission angling fee, and picnic shelter. 795.00 898.35 2.7 for each additional persons 25 or fewer in conjunction with item 2.6. 212.00 239.56 3.0 For a permit for the use of a fishing pond at the Glen Hatfy Headwaters Trout Ponds, including general admission and the use of row boats; 3.1 for up to 75 persons per day 895.00 1011.35 3.2 for each additional 25 or fewer persons per day 245.00 276.85 3.3 for a membership to Headwaters Fly Fisher's Club. 525.00 593.25 4.0 For the rental of a canoe, pedal boat or rowboat where available, per hour. 12.39 14.00 5.0 For each day camper, not overnight, per day, inclusive of general admission. 3.50 3.50 6.0 For a permit to occupy an individual un- serviced campsite, inclusive of general admission; 6.1 at Albion Hills, per night. 29.00 32.77 6.2 at Albion Hills, per week. 174.00 196.62 6.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days). 580.00 655.40 6.4 at Indian Line, per night. 30.50 34.47 6.5 at Indian Line, per week. 183.00 206.79 6.6 at Indian Line, per month (28 days). 610.00 689.30 6.7 at Glen Rouge, per night. 29.00 32.77 6.8 at Glen Rouge, per week 174.00 196.62 6.9 at Glen Rouge, per month (28 days). 580.00 655.40 6.10 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 6.1,6.4 or 6.7 3.00 3.39 • • , Item Description 2016 Base (Plus Taxes ) 2016 Gross (Including Taxes 7.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite, with water and hydro hook -ups, inclusive of general admission; 7.1 at Albion Hills, per night. 34.50 38.99 7.2 at Albion Hills, per week. 207.00 233.91 7.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days). 690.00 779.70 7.4 at Albion Hills, per season. 2,380.00 2,689.40 7.5 at Indian Line, per night. 36.00 40.68 7.6 at Indian Line, per week. 216.00 244.08 7.7 at Indian Line, per month (28 days). 720.00 813.60 7.8 at Indian Line, per season. 2,880.00 3,254.40 7.9 at Glen Rouge, per night. 36.50 41.25 7.10 at Glen Rouge, per week. 219.00 247.47 7.11 at Glen Rouge, per month (28 days) 730.00 824.90 7.12 at Glen Rouge with 50 amp hydro service, per night. 39.50 44.64 7.13 at Glen Rouge with 50 amp hydro service, per week. 237.00 267.81 7.14 at Glen Rouge with 50 amp hydro service, per month (28 days). 790.00 892.70 7.15 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 7.1, 7.5, 7.9 or 7.12 3.00 3.39 8.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite with water, hydro, and sewage hook -up inclusive of general admission; 8.1 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per night. 41.00 46.33 8.2 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per week. 246.00 277.98 8.3 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per month (28 days). 820.00 926.60 8.4 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per night. 46.00 51.98 8.5 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per week. 276.00 311.88 8.6 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per month (28 days). 920.00 1,039.60 8.7 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee specified in item 8.1 and 8.4. 3.00 3.39 9.0 In addition to basic camping fees as specified in items 6.0, 7.0, 8.0; 9.1 for a permit to park an additional vehicle, per night. 10.00 11.30 9.2 for a permit to park an additional vehicle, per season. 75.00 84.75 9.3 for each additional person occupying a campsite over and above the campground's specified site limit, per night. 5.00 5.65 10.0 For a permit to occupy a group campsite at Albion Hills, Glen Rouge, or Indian Line for a group of up to twenty persons, inclusive of general admission; 10.1 for a permit to occupy a group campsite for a group of up to twenty persons, inclusive of general admission; 250.00 282.50 10.2 for each additional person per night, in conjunction with a permit issued under item 10.1. 5.00 5.65 11.0 For a permit for the use of a group picnic site, exclusive of general admission; 155.00- 500.00 175.15- 565.00 • • e Item Description 2016 Base (Plus Taxes) 2016 Gross (Including Taxes) 12.0 For admission to aquatic facilities exclusive of general admission; 12.1 per day at Albion Hills, for each person two years of age or over. 3.32 3.75 12.2 per day at Petticoat Creek and Heart Lake, for each person two ears of age or over. 4.20 4.75 13.0 For the use of cross - country ski trails at Albion Hills, inclusive of general admission; 13.1 for each person from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age. 14.60 16.50 13.2 for each child five to fourteen years of age. 8.19 9.25 13.3 for each child four years of age or under. 0.00 13.4 for each senior sixty years of age or over. 11.95 13.50 13.5 for a family of one or two adults and their children who are fifteen years of age or under. 35.40 40.00 14.0 For the rental of a cross - country ski equipment package consisting of skis, boots and poles; 14.1 for each person fifteen years of age or over, per day. 17.25 19.50 14.2 for each child fourteen years of age or under, per day. 12.00 13.56 14.3 for each person fifteen years of age or over, in a group with a reservation, including trail fees, per day, subject to a minimum group size. 25.00 28.25 14.4 for each person fourteen years of age or under, in a group with a reservation, including trail fees, per day, subject to a minimum group size. 12.00 13.56 15.0 For a guided tour at Bruce's Mill during the maple syrup program, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons. 6.50 735 16.0 For parking at Black Creek Pioneer Village, per vehicle, per day, exclusive of general admission. 6.19 7.00 17.0 For general admission to the Black Creek Pioneer Village, per day; 17.1 for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age. 15.00 16.95 17.2 for each child from five to fourteen years of age. 11.00 12.43 17.3 for each child four years of age or under accompanying their family. 0.00 17.4 for each senior sixty years of age or aver. 12.00 13.56 17.5 for each student fifteen years of age or over, with student identification. 12.00 13.56 17.6 For each student participating in a half day program, subject to a minimum of twenty persons. 11.00- 14.00 11.00- 14.00 17.7 For each student participating in a full day program, subject to a minimum of twenty persons. 16.00- 19.00 16.00- 19.00 17.8 For each student participating in a Dickson's Hill School program, per day, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons 11.00 11.00 667 18.0 Black Creek Pioneer Village Membership valid for general 2016 2016 admission, inclusive of parking fees, to Black Creek Pioneer Base Gross Village; (Plus (Including Taxes ) Taxes 18.1 for each individual. 60.00 67.80 18.2 for four individuals or a family of one or two adults and their 95.00 107.35 children. 19.0 For a Guided Tour at Black Creek Pioneer Village, as part of a tour group with a reservation, including general admission; 19.1 for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age, subject to a 16.50 18.65 minimum group size of twenty persons. 19.2 for each senior sixty years of age and over, subject to a minimum 15.50 17.52 group size of twenty persons. 20.0 For parking at the Kortright Centre for Conservation, per 3.54 4.00 vehicle, per day, exclusive of general admission. 21.0 For general admission at the Kortright Centre for Conservation, per day; 21.1 for each child fourteen years of age and under. 0.00 0.00 21.2 for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age. 5.75 6.50 21.3 for each senior sixty years of age or over. 4.87 5.50 21.4 For each child ages four to fourteen participating in a weekend or 6.00 6.78 evening public program. 21.5 for each adult from fifteen to fifty -nine years of age 12.00 13.56 participating in a weekend or evening public program. 21.6 for each senior sixty years or over participating in a weekend or 6.00 6.78 evening public program. 21.7 For each regular half day school program to a maximum number 200.00 200.00 of 30 participants. 21.8 For each regular full day school program to a maximum number 375.00 375.00 of 30 participants. 21.9 For each self - guided group with children fourteen years of age or 87.50 87.50 under visiting as part of an organized group under supervision during regular operating season. Subject to a maximum group size of thirty persons. 21.10 For each additional participant after the maximum group number 3.50 3.50 of thirty participants, in conjunction with item 21.9 21.11 For each specialized half day program to a maximum number of 220.00 248.60 30 participants 21.12 For each specialized full day program to a maximum number of 400.00 452.00 30 participants 21.13 Booked programmed groups using grounds for self - guided 50.00 50.00 activities during non - programming time on same day as booking. Subject to a maximum group size of thirty persons. 21.14 For each additional participant after the maximum group number 2.00 2.00 of thirty participants, in conjunction with item 21.13 22.0 Kortright Centre Membership valid for admission, inclusive of parking fees, to the Kortright Centre for Conservation; 22.1 for an Individual Membership. 50.00 56.50 22.2 Family & Friends Membership; admission for up to six individuals 85.00 96.05 ITOOPOO 23.0 Conservation Parks Membership valid for general admission 2016 2016 to all TRCA and CVC Conservation Areas, Kortright Centre Base Gross for Conservation, and Black Creek Pioneer Village; (Plus (Including Taxes ) Taxes 23.1 for an Individual Membership. 75.00 84.75 23.2 Family & Friends Membership; admission for up to six 135.00 152.55 individuals. DA At Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright Centre, fifteen percent (15 %) off regular per person admission fees, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons, exclusive of guided tours. D.2 Fifty percent (50 %) off general admission fees for special needs persons and their attendants to a maximum ratio of 1:1. D.3 Free general admission for Active Transportation users to TRCA Conservation Areas as per TRCA Admittance Policy • • S RES. #A234 /15 - HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED HYDROLOGY UPDATE Approval to adopt the Humber River Watershed Hydrology Update as prepared by Toronto Region Conservation Authority Engineering Services staff and Civica Infrastructure Inc. Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Jack Ballinger THAT item 7.7 — Humber River Watershed Hydrology Update be deferred to Executive Committee Meeting #12/15, scheduled to be held on December 4, 2015. CARRIED RES. #A235 /15 - CORRESPONDENCE (Executive Res. #8127115) Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jim Tovey WHEREAS J. Grant Glassco donated 482 acres of land to Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario on September 18, 1968; AND WHEREAS J. Grant Glassco and Willa Glassco entered into an agreement with her Majesty the Queen on September 17, 1968 whereby the parties agree to preserve, maintain and develop the lands in perpetuity in the same manner, to the same standard and for the same general purpose as lands vested in The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, now Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and that Her Majesty the Queen has the right to assign its rights to the Ontario Heritage Foundation, now Ontario Heritage Trust (OHT); AND WHEREAS Willa Glassco, OHT and TRCA entered into an agreement dated July 23, 1969 for the development, maintenance and administration of the subject lands for a period of 25 years with the right to renew for an additional 25 years which expires on July 22, 2019; AND WHEREAS TRCA entered into the first rental arrangement with the Evans family in 1969 which has continued since that time; AND WHEREAS the Evans family has requested a longer term lease; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a lease with the Evans family for approximately 136 acres of the former Glassco lands, in the City of Vaughan, for a four year term to expire on July 22, 2019; THAT the lease payments be at fair market value for the term of the lease; 670 THAT the lease be on terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA's solicitor, staff and OHT; THAT staff be directed to initiate discussions with OHT for the continued management of the subject lands by TRCA; THAT subject to successful negotiations with OHT, staff enter into discussions with the Evans family for a long term lease of the Glassco lands; THAT staff report back to the Executive Committee at a future date regarding the results of these discussions; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. RES. #A236/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed Douglas J. Reddington, on Behalf of Bantendale Developments Ltd. (In Trust), Deemar Investments Ltd. and Reddington Property Management Ltd., CFN 34424. Donation of three adjoining parcels of land located west of Regional Road 50 and north of Patterson Sideroad, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011- 2015 ", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #8128115) Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT Toronto and Region Conservation (TRCA) accept the donation from Douglas J. Reddington, on behalf of Bantendale Developments Ltd. (In Trust), Deemar Investments Ltd. and Reddington Property Management Ltd., of three adjoining parcels of land totaling 10.21 hectares (25.24 acres), more or less, of vacant ecologically sensitive lands, being Part of Lots 26 and 27, Concession 6 ALBION, all of Blocks 36 and 51, Registered Plan 43M -755, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel and designated as Parts 1 to 22, inclusive, on a Draft Plan of Survey prepared by Marshall Macklin Monaghan Ontario Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Drawing No. 20.03567 -1, dated December 5, 2003; THAT an income tax receipt be made available to Douglas J. Reddington, on behalf of Bantendale Developments Ltd. (In Trust), Deemar Investments Ltd. and Reddington Property Management Ltd. for the appraised value of the donated lands in accordance with the guidelines set out by Canada Revenue Agency; 671 THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT TRCA extend its appreciation and thanks to Douglas J. Reddington, on behalf of Bantendale Developments Ltd. (In Trust), Deemar Investments Ltd. and Reddington Property Management Ltd. for their generous donation; THAT Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred TRCA incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A237/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed Sorbara / L &M Garden G.P. Inc., CFN 47777. Acquisition of property located west of Tenth Line and south of Hoover Park Drive (deleted main street) in the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River watershed. (Executive Res. #B129115) Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT 10.71 hectares (26.48 acres), more or less, of vacant land located west of Tenth Line and south of Hoover Park Drive (deleted main street) in the Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, said land being Part of Lot 32, Concession 9 and designated Parts 1, 2 and 3 on Registered Plan 65R- 35938, be purchased from Sorbara/ L &M Garden G.P. Inc.; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 672 RES. #A238/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek Watershed Marshall Homes, CFN 54785. Acquisition of property located to the rear of 1423 Rougemount Drive, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015', Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek watershed. (Executive Res. #8130115) Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Matt Mahoney THAT 0.13 hectares (0.31 acres), more or less, of vacant land located at the rear of 1423 Rougemount Drive, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, said land being Part of Lot 27, Registered Plan 228 and designated as Part 3 on a Draft Plan of Survey prepared by J. D. Barnes Ltd., under their Reference No. 14 -25- 953 -01, dated July 6, 2015, be purchased from Marshall Homes; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the lands free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 673 Section III — Items for the Information of the Board RES. #A239/15 - DEVELOPMENTS IN FLOOD MANAGEMENT IN CANADA Government, Research and Insurance Industry Activities. Recent activity related to flood management policy and practice by the federal and provincial governments, the insurance industry, and the research community, and TRCA involvement in that activity. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Colleen Jordan WHEREAS at Authority Meeting #8/15, held on September 25, 2015, the Authority requested that Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff report back at a future Authority meeting on developments in flood management in the federal and provincial governments, as well as more information on the Canadian Strategic Research Network FloodNet and current activity of the insurance industry; AND WHEREAS staff was also requested to describe how TRCA is engaged in these developments and activities; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the staff report on developments in flood management practice and research in Canada and in Ontario, and TRCA's connection to these, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND One of TRCA's most important functions is to provide its partner municipalities and communities with comprehensive services to manage flooding and flood risk, including riverine and coastal flood hazard mapping, planning and regulation services, flood forecasting and warning, and the construction and operation of flood control infrastructure. TRCA and other conservation authorities (CA) are mandated to provide these critical services and to reduce the risk to life and property from flood hazards by the Conservation Authorities Act and Regulations, as well as conservation authorities' delegated provincial responsibility for natural hazard and floodplain management. Interest in flood management has increased significantly in the past few years, particularly in light of increasing awareness of the potential impact of climate change on flooding and flood risk, as well the outcomes of dramatic rainfall and flooding events such as those in Toronto and Calgary in the summer of 2013. In response, there has been important new activity by the federal government, the insurance industry and research community related to flood management that may affect how TRCA and other CAs conduct their flood management programs. This report provides an update on these developments and describes how TRCA staff is engaged in that activity and is representing the interests of the Authority. Recent Developments in Canada Federal Government The federal government has not been significantly active in the area of flood and flood risk management since the mid 1990's. Prior to that point, the government operated the Flood Damage Reduction Program (FDRP) to support mapping of flood hazard areas through cost - sharing with provincial governments. Despite the program being defunct, many aspects of floodplain mapping in Canada, including in Ontario and the TRCA jurisdiction, continue to follow the specifications set forth in the FDRP. 674 In 2014 and 2015, the federal government again became active in flood management through development by Public Safety Canada (PSC) of the National Floodplain Management Framework, which will modernize standards and methods for preparing floodplain maps across Canada, and for developing databases of flood - vulnerable assets. PSC is releasing $200 million across Canada over the next five years to support the updating of floodplain mapping and associated products, with $16 million available in 2015/2016. TRCA staff was consulted in the development of the framework, and have maintained contact with PSC. Staff has prepared applications for up to $300,000 of funding in 2015 and 2016 for undertaking risk assessments and updating TRCA's vulnerable structures database. Staff also plans to submit applications for funds in subsequent years. Provincial Government In Canada, the bulk of responsibility for flood management falls to the provinces, or their proxy in cases such as Ontario where some responsibility is delegated to CAs. The Ontario government provides policy direction on floodplain management in the Provincial Policy Statement, issued under the authority of the Planning Act Section 3. 1, and directs development to areas outside of hazardous lands adjacent to river and stream systems which are impacted by flooding and /or erosion hazards. Conservation Authorities, including TRCA, have been delegated responsibility by the Ontario government to apply the direction of the planning act with respect to flooding hazards. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) outlines the procedure and standards to be used for floodplain mapping in Ontario through its Technical Guide - River & Stream Systems: Flooding Hazard Limit, which was last updated in 2002. Conservation Authorities, including TRCA, follow these guidelines when developing floodplain mapping for their jurisdictions. There has not been any significant activity in the Ontario government related to flood management in recent years. The 2014 updated Provincial Policy Statement indicated that "planning authorities shall consider the potential impacts of climate change that may increase the risk associated with natural hazards" but no further direction on how this is to be accomplished has been provided. TRCA and several other CAs have determined that the MNRF Technical Guide does not provide adequate guidance to address complex emerging issues in floodplain mapping, including the impacts of climate change as well as increases in flood risk created in Ontario's urban and urbanizing watersheds as a result of extensive development. TRCA staff has formed a working group with Conservation Ontario to examine these issues and to make recommendations to MNRF in this regard, although it has been challenging to get Ministry participation in these discussions. In the meantime, TRCA is developing updated approaches to watershed modelling and floodplain mapping that can address the challenges of climate change and unprecedented watershed urbanization. This includes staff leading the development of a new technical guideline document for flood plain mapping that will be used by six conservation authorities with highly urban watersheds, ensuring consistency across jurisdictions until such time as MNRF updates its guidelines. The document is currently being finalized and is expected to be released in early 2016, which staff will report to the Authority on. 675 TRCA staff has also provided detailed comments about how the challenges of climate change, urbanization and floodplain risk may be addressed through the Coordinated Review of Ontario Land Use Plans, including input to the panel chaired by David Crombie. Staff also works closely with departments in the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change on efforts to improve climate change adaptation and stormwater management policies, which, it is hoped, will indirectly help address flood management issues and influence provincial flood management policy. Insurance Industry The insurance industry in Canada has been actively lobbying for at least 10 years for increased investment in flood management, and in particular in floodplain and flood hazard mapping. Their interest stems largely from a realization that flood events resulting in major insurance payouts are increasing, and that these are likely to increase more into the future given the expected increases in extreme rainfall and flooding with climate change. The industry has indicated that current flood hazard mapping in Canada does not give them the information they need to accurately price products like basement flood insurance. It is important to note that prior to 2015, insurance companies in Canada did not provide residential insurance coverage for overland flooding, including the types of riverine and coastal flooding that are managed by CAs. The insurance industry has primarily been concerned with what is typically called urban flooding, flooding that results from intense rainfall that overwhelms storm sewers and /or flows into the sanitary sewer system, often causing backup of water into the basements of homes. Damages from this type of flooding are insured, and can result in major costs to insurance companies; for example, insured losses from the July 8, 2013 Toronto storm were nearly one billion dollars. As a result, the industry has been calling for better identification of urban flood hazards and the management of these, so that they can better understand and manage their financial exposure. They are also actively promoting homeowner awareness of urban flood issues and lot -level measures that can be undertaken to reduce urban flood risk. Urban flooding is a challenging issue for which, in Ontario, there is no organization or level of government that is clearly responsible. While municipalities are often held liable by insurance companies and residents as it is typically municipal infrastructure that is implicated in urban flooding events, at present no level or department of government has been assigned responsibility for management of the issue. There are therefore no broad policies or programs in place in Ontario for mapping, regulating, forecasting, warning or remediation related to urban flooding. While some TRCA partner municipalities such as the cities of Toronto and Markham have created programs to identify and remediate urban and basement flooding areas, they have done so on their own without technical or financial support from higher levels of government. An important recent development in the Canadian insurance industry is that as of 2015 many insurance companies are now offering, or are considering offering overland flood insurance products to cover damage from riverine, coastal and other types of overland flooding. Many insurers feel that there is an increasing need for this kind of product and some suspect that the federal or provincial governments will require them to provide such coverage in the near future, and therefore they are taking proactive steps to determine how they can provide overland flood insurance on their own terms. As such, their interest in the activities of TRCA and other CAs, particularly floodplain maps, has increased significantly in the past year. TRCA staff has recognized that the Canadian insurance industry is an important potential ally for improving flood management for: a) calling attention to the important work that TRCA and other CAs do in mapping and managing riverine flood risks, b) helping to call attention to the emerging and unresolved issue of urban flooding, and • of c) advocating for the consideration of climate change impacts in all forms of flood management and mapping. As such, staff maintains a number of contacts throughout the industry. Staff works closely with the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction (ICLR), the insurance industry's research centre, to share information and to help develop tools for improving flood management in a variety of contexts. TRCA staff members coordinating the Ontario Climate Consortium have also connected the consortium's academic researchers with the ICLR, have undertaken research projects for the Insurance Bureau of Canada, and collaborated with individual insurance companies on a number of occasions. TRCA staff has also met with the Insurance Bureau of Canada to share information on the approaches and methods used in undertaking floodplain mapping. TRCA has also partnered with individual insurance companies to call attention to flood management challenges, for example partnering with Intact Insurance through the University of Waterloo to monitor and assess the benefits of channel naturalization in Peel Region on reducing flooding and erosion risk. The Insurance Bureau of Canada's (IBC) has also developed a Municipal Risk Assessment Tool (MRAT) to identify the probability of urban flooding. It uses a variety of information inputs to statistically predict the probability of flooding. The MRAT is reliant upon data that is available publicly from national, provincial and local municipal sources. The methodology of the MRAT has not been made public, there is very little update by municipalities and the usefulness of this tool is yet to be proven. Moving forward, staff will continue communication and collaboration with industry representatives and will monitor new developments closely. Conservation Ontario Initiatives In 2014, Conservation Ontario (CO) Council approved the establishment of the Conservation Ontario Flood Business Case Working Group with objectives: 1. to engage with the provincial government; 2. to engage with the federal government on the National Assessment of Floodplain Mapping and proposed National Floodplain Management Framework; 3. and given the current interest of the insurance industry to develop overland flood insurance for Canada; a) engage with the industry to advance the Flood Business Case including updating of flood plain mapping, and b) develop guidance protocols in response to requests for information from the insurance industry. Various TRCA staff continue to support CO and other CAs in a coordinated response to data and information requests and look into opportunities for collaboration. TRCA staff is also participating in Natural Resources Canada (NrCan) Floodplain Mapping Tech Committee activities through Conservation Ontario. 677 State of Flood Management Research and Advancement — FloodNet As described in further detail in the report from staff at the September 25`h, 2015 Authority meeting, FloodNet is a newly formed research network of the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) that will receive $5 million of research funding over the next five years. It is a nation -wide consortium of universities and industry partners that represent one of the most advanced efforts in the world to advance research and development initiatives related to flood forecasting, warning and flood management. The network lead is Dr. Paulin Coulibaly of McMaster University, who is an active participant in the Ontario Climate Consortium coordinated by TRCA. Staff has worked previously with Dr. Coulibaly on projects to examine the impacts of climate change and extreme rainfall on flood risk in the Toronto region and in southern Ontario, and TRCA staff, Christine Tu, has been recently appointed to the FloodNet Board of Directors. TRCA is providing significant input into a number of the network research projects, and TRCA watersheds are the focus of a Year 1 project on flood forecasting and warning systems. Staff will continue their engagement in the research network throughout its five year period and will report back to the Authority on significant developments. Report prepared by: Ryan Ness, extension 5615; Christine Tu, extension 5707, Michael Heralall, extension 5703, and Rehana Rajabali, extension 5250 Emails: rness(ai)trca.on.ca, mherallal(cDtrca.on.ca, rraiabali(cDtrca.on.ca, ctu(cDtrca.on.ca For Information contact: Ryan Ness, extension 5615, Rehana Rajabali, extension 5250, Emails: rness cDtrca.on.ca, rraiabali(cDtrca.on.ca Date: November 10, 2015 • i Section IV — Ontario Regulation 166/06, As Amended RES. #A240 /15 - SECTION IV — ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Jack Ballinger Seconded by: David Barrow THAT Section IV — Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, item 10.4, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #11/15, held on November 13, 2015, be received. CARRIED NEW BUSINESS RES. #A241 /15 - AGRICULTURAL LEASES Moved by: Jennifer Innis Seconded by: Colleen Jordan THAT staff report on issues related to agricultural leases with respect to terms, conditions of leases and criteria of Requests for Proposals. CARRIED TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:04 a.m., on Friday, November 27, 2015. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 679 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Authority Meeting #11/15 was held at TRCA Head Office, on Friday, January 8, 2016. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:32 a.m. PRESENT Paul Ainslie Member Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member Vincent Crisanti Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Blase Vice Chair Chris Fonseca Member Rob Ford Member Jennifer Innis Member Matt Mahoney Member George Mammoliti Member Glenn Mason Member Mike Mattos Member John Sprovieri Member Jennifer Drake Member Jennifer McKelvie Member Kevin Ashe Member ABSENT David Barrow Member Justin Di Ciano Member Jack Heath Member Colleen Jordan Member Ron Moeser Member Jim Tovey Member Gino Rosati Member Anthony Perruzza Member Linda Pabst Member Rodney Hoinkes Member Maria Kelleher Member CONFLICT OF INTEREST Kevin Ashe declared a conflict of interest in regard to item 8.1 — White Sun Developments Ltd. as he is an equity member of Whitevale Golf Club, which is an adjacent property to the subject property. • i l RES. #A242 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Matt Mahoney Chris Fonseca THAT the Minutes of Meeting #10115, held on November 27, 2015, be approved. CARRIED REGION OF DURHAM REPRESENTATIVE ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Jack Ballinger was nominated by Kevin Ashe. RES. #A243 /15 - MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS Moved by: Kevin Ashe Seconded by: Glenn De Baeremaeker THAT nominations for the Region of Durham representative on the Executive Committee be closed. CARRIED Jack Ballinger was declared elected by acclamation as a Region of Durham representatives on the Executive Committee, for a term to end at Annual Meeting #1/17. • i Section I — Items for Authority Action RES. #A244/15 - WHITE SUN DEVELOPMENTS LTD. Conveyance of Land for the Construction of the Future Whitevale Road Bypass, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Duffins Creek Watershed , CFN 54480. Receipt of a request from White Sun Developments Ltd. on behalf of the Regional Municipality of Durham for conveyance of land required for the construction of the future Whitevale Road Bypass, east of Altona Road, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Duffins Creek watershed. Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Paul Ainslie THAT WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from White Sun Developments Ltd. (White Sun) on behalf of the Regional Municipality of Durham (Durham) to convey land required for construction of Whitevale Road Bypass, located in the proposed Seaton Community east of Altona Road, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Duffins Creek watershed; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with White Sun and Durham in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a parcel of TRCA -owned land containing 0.50 hectares (1.23 acres), more or less, be conveyed to Durham for construction of Whitevale Road Bypass, said lands being Part of Lot 30, Concession 4 and designated as Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 on a Draft Plan of Survey prepared by J. D. Barnes Ltd., under their Reference No. 10 -25- 370 -04, dated November 3, 2015, subject to the following terms and conditions: i) the sale price be $470,000.00 to be paid by White Sun to TRCA, and in addition White Sun shall reimburse any legal, survey and other costs incurred by TRCA to complete this transaction; ii) an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of White Sun; iii) a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166106, as amended, be obtained by Durham prior to commencement of construction of the Whitevale Bypass; iv) White Sun and Durham is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims related to injury, damage or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from this conveyance; v) any additional considerations as deemed appropriate by TRCA staff or its solicitor; THAT conveyance be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; • i AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND White Sun has formally requested conveyance of TRCA -owned land required for construction of the future Whitevale Road Bypass, located east of Altona Road in the Seaton Community of Pickering. The alignment of the future Whitevale Road Bypass has been confirmed through a TRCA staff review of the Region of Durham's Environmental Assessment application for the regional infrastructure project. The subject lands form part of a larger parcel and were acquired from the Ontario Realty Corporation and Whitevale Golf Course, under the Greenspace Protection and Acquisition Project, 1996 -2000, Duffins Creek watershed. Staff has carried out negotiations with White Sun's representative, Christopher Matson of Matson, McConnell Ltd., Land Management Group, and White Sun has agreed to a payment of $470,000.00 for the TRCA land required for the future Whitevale Road Bypass, plus applicable survey, legal and other costs incurred by TRCA. A plan illustrating the location of the subject lands is attached. FINANCIAL DETAILS It is proposed that the compensation obtained from this sale be utilized for the purchase of priority properties under the Greenlands Acquisition Project, 2016 -2020 and for TRCA's long term head office accommodation project. Report prepared by: George Leja, extension 5342 Emails: gleja@trca.on.ca For Information contact: George Leja, extension 5342, Jae R. Truesdell, extension 5247 Emails: gleja@trca.on.ca, jruesdell@trca.on.ca Date: December 3, 2015 Attachments: 1 Ffeoex O= \9 PO Legend - Subject Property 0 i� d J d d udd �1 Conservation for The Living City - v 9 Y .x `r —1 - -�J eaxa o�rno d RESMA245 /15 - ADVISORY PANEL ON THE COORDINATED REVIEW OF THE FOUR PROVINCIAL PLANS Report Recommendations. To identify the key recommendations from the Advisory Panel Report on the Coordinated Review of the four provincial plans as they relate to TRCA interests. Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Vincent Crisanti THAT the Advisory Panel members be congratulated for hearing the messages of conservation authorities (CA) and addressing them in a thoughtful manner in their report; THAT the Province of Ontario is strongly encouraged to amend the four provincial plans that are the subject of the coordinated review in a manner that is consistent with the recommendations of the Advisory Panel; AND FURTHER THAT this report and attachments be circulated by the CEO's office to TRCA's member municipalities, the secretariat for the coordinated review, the Premier of Ontario and ministers at the ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Natural Resources and Forestry, Agriculture and Rural Affairs and Environment and Climate Change. CARRIED BACKGROUND On February 27, 2015 the Government of Ontario launched the coordinated 10 -year review of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Niagara Escarpment Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan. An advisory panel, chaired by Mr. David Crombie, was appointed to lead the consultation for this review and provide recommendations to the Province of Ontario for any amendments needed to the four plans. At Authority Meeting #3/15 held on March 27, staff reported on the provincial process for the review, as well as what staff had been doing to prepare for the review. Part of that preparation was coordinating with the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC) to prepare a Report Card on the Environmental Health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands, which was released immediately after the 10 -year review launch by the Province. At Authority Meeting #6/15, held on June 26, 2015, Resolution #A99/15 was approved, which formalized TRCA staff comments that were submitted to the Province to meet the May 28`n deadline. Following the submission of TRCA comments to the Province, staff engaged with Advisory Panel members and provincial staff on several occasions to promote and expand upon TRCA positions, as outlined in the submission. Some of these opportunities included: • A tour of key locations on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) and Greenbelt (GB) in the Town of Caledon and King Township on July 20`n. • An afternoon of presentations with Conservation Ontario and staff of other CAs on September 9`n to showcase the roles of conservation authorities in the plans' implementation, land use and infrastructure planning, water and hazard management, natural heritage systems planning, watershed planning and environmental monitoring. • Providing text and photographs to populate the Advisory Panel report with a number of sidebars and vignettes to help illustrate the issues and recommendations identified. • • Responding to follow up phone calls and emails to answer specific questions about watershed planning and headwaters protection. RATIONALE The report of the Advisory Panel was released to the public on December 7, 2015 ( http:// www .mah.-gov.on.ca /Pacie10882.aspx). It is a 180 page document that provides a summary of the stakeholder submissions and the public input received from the 17 town hall meetings held across the region. Over 19,000 letters and submissions were received from the public, municipalities and other organizations. The report sets out a number of strategic directions within the context of the current population (9 million) and employment (4.5 million jobs) of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH), growing to 13.5 million and 6.3 million respectively, by 2041. The strategic directions encompass many inter - related ideas that work together to achieve the objectives of the four plans. The six strategic directions contain many recommendations each that are proposed as an integrated approach to improve and implement the plans. They include: 1) Building complete communities; 2) Supporting agriculture; 3) Protecting natural and cultural heritage assets; 4) Providing Infrastructure; 5) Mainstreaming climate change; and 6) Implementing the plans. Many of the total of 87 recommendations relate to topics that were prominent in TRCA's comments submitted to the Province, such as climate change resilience, watershed planning and green infrastructure. These are areas where TRCA has been and continues to be a leader, making us ideally positioned to help TRCA's municipal partners and others to achieve the recommendations. Many of the recommendations are also aligned very well with TRCA's The Living City Policies document, as approved by the Authority in November, 2014. A summary of the key drivers of particular interest to TRCA for each of the six strategic directions is provided below. Specific recommendation numbers from the Advisory Panel report are noted, with a synopsis of those recommendations included in Attachment 1. The Advisory Panel report should be referred to for the specific text of the recommendations. A summary of several issues and areas of concern about the report and its future implementation is described after the summary of the six strategic directions. 1) Building Complete Communities The Advisory Panel's report sets out the key concepts from the Growth Plan as the basis for its recommendations. These include encouraging intensification and redevelopment within existing built boundaries to limit urban sprawl and protect farmland and natural systems; promoting transit, complete streets and active transportation with a mix of housing types and land uses, including adequate amounts of open space, to achieve vibrant, healthy communities; and increasing energy efficiency and food security while reducing gridlock and greenhouse gas emissions. Key recommendations include promoting the use of green infrastructure; working towards a net -zero energy state; developing an interregional trails strategy; building low carbon, complete communities; ensuring the safety of communities from natural hazards as intensification occurs; better matching the designation of new greenfield lands with growth forecasts; and, requiring comprehensive watershed or subwatershed plans to inform where and how to grow. Attachment 1 includes a synopsis specifically for Recommendations # 1, 4, 14, 17, 18, 19 and 20. ••e 2) Supporting Agriculture The report notes the significant contributions to the GGH economy from the agri -food sector, the continued loss and fragmentation of agricultural lands outside of the Greenbelt, leapfrogging of development over the Greenbelt and land- banking by developers, investors and foreign purchasers that drive up land prices and limit opportunities for new farmers. The report also highlights the challenges experienced by farmers to increase farm viability by including value -added processing, retailing and agri- tourism, as well as the cost of environmental protection measures such as studies and setbacks from watercourses. Key recommendations include increasing support for local food and developing near -urban agriculture strategies; aligning terminology of the four plans with Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) terminology to provide greater flexibility for on -farm diversified uses, while maintaining environmental protection measures; and, providing education, awareness and policy interpretation about the plans for farmers through a one - window liaison specialist. One of the sidebar /vignettes in the report showcases the TRCA- FarmStart near -urban agriculture project on the McVean Farm at the Claireville Conservation Area in Brampton. Attachment 1 includes a synopsis specifically for Recommendations # 32, 33, 34, 36, and 37. 3) Protecting Natural and Cultural Heritage The Advisory Panel report recognizes the importance of natural systems in providing ecosystem services such as water filtration, flood and erosion control, recreation opportunities, conserving biodiversity and carbon sequestration, as well as their vulnerability to a changing climate. The report also notes the importance of cultural heritage to help sustain our sense of identity, enhance community appeal, convey a sense of place and create opportunities for recreation and tourism. Similarly, the report notes the importance of aggregates to our lifestyles, infrastructure and built heritage, while recognizing the need to minimize impacts to the environment and the host community. Several sidebars /vignettes supplied by conservation authorities are included in this section of the report — one for the Duffins Creek watershed that highlights the benefits of modelling various future development/protection scenarios and the multiple benefits that could be achieved by increasing natural cover; and another about the partnership to restore and enhance rare tallgrass prairie and oak savannah ecosystems in the Rice Lake Plains at the eastern end of the Oak Ridges Moraine. Additionally, the CAMC Report Card on the Environmental Health of the ORM and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands is mentioned several times. Key recommendations from this section of the report include considering whether the application of the strong water resources protection policies of the ORM and Greenbelt plans should be applied broadly across the Growth Plan lands; requiring (sub) watershed plans to inform all new major growth planning initiatives; developing a natural heritage systems enhancement strategy for the entire area of the four plans; increasing access to and resources for landowners for education, stewardship and restoration; strengthening the protection of cultural heritage resources with better guidance on the preparation of cultural and archaeological management plans; improving the management of filling with excess soil; and, considering the prohibition of aggregate extraction in areas that would require perpetual water management after extraction is completed. Attachment 1 includes a synopsis specifically for Recommendations # 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 and 48. Ffeoeb 4) Providing Infrastructure The report of the Advisory Panel notes the infrastructure deficit of Ontario municipalities of at least $60 billion; the guiding principles from the Growth Plan to optimize the use of existing and new infrastructure to support growth in a compact, efficient form; the need for integrated and coordinated planning and decision - making for infrastructure and land use; the need to proactively identify and protect both provincial and municipal infrastructure corridors; and the challenges in moving goods and people in a gridlocked road and underbuilt public transit system. Significantly from TRCA's perspective, the report notes the critical need to make infrastructure, including stormwater management systems, resilient to climate change. Key recommendations include direction to municipalities to undertake climate change vulnerability risk assessments informed by (sub) watershed plans; amending Growth Plan policies to require comprehensive subwatershed based stormwater master plans, including the evaluation of cumulative impacts; and updating all plans with policy direction for the use of green infrastructure and low impact development (LID) techniques in retrofitting existing urban areas, while including funding for green infrastructure and environmental mitigation measures as part of provincial infrastructure investments. Attachment 1 includes a synopsis specifically for Recommendations # 49, 53, 54, 55, 56 and 58. 5) Mainstreaming Climate Change This section of the report outlines how the four plans work in conjunction with other provincial directions such as the Big Move and the PPS to achieve a low- carbon, resilient GGH. Intensification, density targets and transit policies play an essential role in greenhouse gas (ghg) reduction. The protection of agricultural lands and natural systems act as carbon sinks and provide green infrastructure functions to increase resilience to extreme weather events. The report recognizes that both mitigation and adaptation measures are required to address climate change and that continuous refinements to all provincial plans and strategies will be required on a regular basis to update the plans with new science, policies and actions. Key recommendations in the report include adding references to climate change mitigation and adaptation in the vision, goals and policies of all four plans; encouraging energy retrofits of existing buildings; and, requiring municipalities to prepare climate change plans and update their official plans with ghg reduction targets, strategies for achieving them and reporting on progress. Attachment 1 includes a synopsis specifically for Recommendations # 67, 68 and 70. 6) Implementing the Plans The report identifies how the series of provincial plans and initiatives, including the four plans, the PPS, The Big Move and other related legislation that are layered over the GGH geography, has made understanding the relative hierarchy within the overlapping policy frameworks very complex, leading to delayed implementation and increased costs due to time and resources spent at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). This section of the report seeks to present "...opportunities to improve integration, provide clarity to the policy frameworks and streamline implementation, while maintaining provincial interests in land use planning and ensuring that the high standards currently set by the plans are not compromised." Key recommendations described in the report include establishing a provincially led process to grow the Greenbelt and to resolve boundary and designation concerns; preparing guidance documents to assist in plan implementation; establishing a sufficiently resourced secretariat within the provincial government to ensure effective coordination in implementing the plans and recommendations in the Panel's report; and establishing an "oversight forum" to monitor and report on plan implementation and deliver public education about the plans. Attachment 1 includes a synopsis specifically for Recommendations # 71, 72, 73, 75, 77, 79, 80, 84, 85, 86 and 87. General Areas /Issues of Concern While staff views the report and recommendations in a very positive light overall, there are never - the -less some general issues as well as specific recommendations that could prove challenging. Some examples include: • The recommendations are often high - level, with few specifics on how the changes will occur and how they will be better than current similar policies at achieving the desired outcome • While some recommendations are proposed for implementation during the current review period, many others have a five year implementation time frame. This could lead to a loss of momentum, lack of ongoing funding commitments or changing priorities. • A number of the recommendations require a budget and staffing resources commitment from the Province, with the level and duration of this commitment not yet known or confirmed. • Recommendations calling for the preparation of guidelines, new mapping, preparing and delivering educational materials, monitoring and oversight of implementation are areas of interest to and expertise by conservation authorities, but means to funding CA participation is not addressed. • In recommendation # 73, the process to address designation and boundary concerns of the plans as they relate to specific lands, appears to be a process to be conducted only by the Province and municipalities. FINANCIAL DETAILS Staff is engaged in this policy analysis work as per the normal course of their duties. No additional funding is proposed. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE There is no request from the Province to receive comments on the Advisory Panel report. The next steps are for the Province to take these recommendations and prepare a draft set of amendments that they would propose for the four plans. The Province would then consult widely on their proposed plan amendments. The timing for this is anticipated to be before the end of winter 2016 for the Province to release their proposals, followed by a consultation period — possibly 60 or 90 days - then finalize the plan amendments sometime in the summer of 2016. Staff will report back to the Authority at the key points in the process as described above. In the interim, staff is continuing to be engaged in the process in several ways. On the release of the Advisory Panel report a press release was sent out by TRCA (Attachment 2) which identified how the report recommendations can help prepare the Toronto region for the new climate era. Additionally, staff will continue to meet as opportunities arise, with Conservation Ontario, the CAMC, the Greenbelt Foundation, the Ontario Greenbelt Alliance, the 2015 Review Summit Group, other environmental groups and with TRCA's municipal partners, to discuss our reactions to the report and other actions we can take to promote the recommendations of the report. . 6 Staff has also recently received confirmation of approval of a grant proposal from the Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation to prepare an Action Plan for Ecological Enhancement across the Greenbelt (details in a companion report on this agenda). This project mirrors recommendation #44 from the Advisory Panel report to develop a natural heritage system enhancement strategy for the area of the four plans, including priorities and resources to implement securement, stewardship, restoration and enhancement of natural heritage features, linkages and functions. Report prepared by: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: dburnett @trca.on.ca For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: dburnett @trca.on.ca Date: December 14, 2015 Attachments: 2 • MOO Attachment 1 Synopsis of Selected Recommendations from Advisory Panel Report "See the Advisory Panel report for specific details and complete text of their recommendations" Building Complete Communities 1) All new development (greenfield and in existing urban areas) should incorporate... green infrastructure, protection of viable, healthy natural heritage systems, urban agriculture and access to local foods, and measures to work toward a net -zero state by reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. 4) Develop a trails strategy in consultation with municipalities and CAs. 14) Increase density targets for designated greenfield areas to support increased transit service, and mitigate climate change impacts through the development of low- carbon, complete communities. 17) Establish consistency between the Growth Plan and the PPS by stating that the natural hazard policies of the PPS apply to matters under the Growth Plan, including intensification. Consider changes to prohibit appeals to the OMB of provincial decisions regarding SPAs. Prohibit the creation and approval of new SPAs. Update provincial technical guidelines for dealing with flooding and erosion hazards. Continue to update, expand and modernize stream flow forecasting models and flood warning gauge infrastructure. 18) Develop a better, uniform and transparent method for undertaking land needs assessments. 19) Continue to consider expansions to settlement boundaries only at the time of municipal official plan updates. De- designate lands and adjust settlement boundaries accordingly where municipalities have an over - supply of designated lands. 20) Establish stronger criteria to control settlement area expansion and to limit the conversion and fragmentation of agricultural lands. Implement source water protection plans. Require comprehensive watershed or subwatershed plans to identify and protect a healthy viable natural heritage system and maintain water quality and quantity. Incorporate measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase resilience to climate change. Supporting Agriculture 32) Increase support for local food and near urban agriculture strategies. 691 33, 34)Align agricultural terminology in the 4 plans with the PPS terminology, provide greater flexibility for on -farm diversified uses while maintaining protection of ecological, hydrological and geological features and functions. 36, 37) Provide education, issues awareness and policy analysis about the Plans to farmers and the public through a one window liaison specialist in a municipality, CA or enhanced agricultural advisory committee. Protecting Natural and Cultural Heritage 40) Exploring whether the water resources policies of the ORMCP, GBP, LSPP or SWPs should be more broadly applied to the Growth Plan. 41) Strengthen protection of water resources through undertaking integrated watershed management plans and sub - watershed planning to inform the development of official plans, block plans and secondary plans. Watershed plans should address: climate change mitigation and adaptation and resilience to increased flood risk; source water protection plans and their science; water budgets; stormwater management; protection measures for healthy natural heritage systems and aquatic ecology; cumulative impacts of development; protection measures from natural hazards; targets and measures to protect water quality & quantity; 5 years of environmental monitoring data to inform the (sub) watershed plan; and monitoring requirements to evaluate the success of plan implementation and the state of watershed health. 42) Develop provincial guidance on watershed planning, including monitoring of water and natural heritage. 43) Providing provincial guidance and requiring mapping, identification and monitoring of natural heritage systems at multiple scales with local systems mapped via (sub) watershed plans prior to approval of block or secondary plans. 44) Develop a NHS enhancement strategy for the area of the 4 plans, including priorities and resources to implement stewardship, securement, restoration and enhancement of NH features, functions and linkages; incorporating the Greenbelt Plan's NHS policies and overlay approach into the Growth Plan; apply the mitigation hierarchy and consider applying best practices and emerging compensation protocols; develop a strategy for broader provincial and continental NHS connections (such as A to A, Kawartha highlands, Carolinian Canada, Great Lakes shorelines). 45) Increase access to education and resources for landowners, farmers and the broader public to engage in stewardship and restoration activities to enhance the NHS. 46) Improve the management of excess soil with best practices and provincial support from the strategic framework currently in development by the province, and the effective use of current planning, municipal and CA tools and permits. 692 47) Consider prohibiting aggregate extraction in areas that would require perpetual water management after extraction is completed. Provide stronger policy and better guidance on protecting the ecosystem during extraction and in the rehabilitation stages. In siting aggregate extraction sites, apply the mitigation hierarchy to NHS and investigate how compensation might be applied. 48) Strengthen the protection of cultural heritage resources by updating guidance on the preparation of cultural plans and archaeological management plans; protect heritage attributes such as views, vistas and viewsheds; incorporate heritage conservation goals through adaptive re -use during intensification of existing urban areas. Providing Infrastructure 49) Require integrated planning and decision - making for land use and infrastructure to develop sustainable options, taking into account stormwater and planning for natural systems, watershed plans and climate change, among other things. 53) Consider improved approaches to designate and protect provincial and municipal infrastructure corridors. 54) Provide policy direction in the plans and technical guidance to undertake municipal climate change vulnerability risk assessments, informed by (sub)watershed plans, to guide the design of resilient infrastructure and reduce flood damage. 55) Update the Growth and Greenbelt Plans to require comprehensive, sub - watershed based stormwater master plans for greenfield areas prior to any new major development and within 5 years for intensification areas such as urban growth centres. The SWM master plans should be consistent with (sub) watershed plans, evaluate cumulative impacts and include requirements for green infrastructure and low impact development techniques. 56) Update the plans to provide policy direction for the use of green infrastructure and LID techniques in retrofitting existing urban areas. 58) Include funding for green infrastructure and environmental mitigation measures as part of provincial infrastructure investments. Mainstreaming Climate Change 67) Include climate change mitigation and adaptation in the vision, goals and policies of the 4 plans. 68) Require municipalities to prepare climate change plans and update official plans with greenhouse gas reduction targets, strategies for achieving them and reporting on progress. 70) Encourage energy retrofits of existing buildings. 693 Implementing the Plans 71) Establish a provincially led process to grow the Greenbelt, based on ecological and hydrological significance, source water protection priorities, carbon sequestration opportunities, etc. 72) Establish a provincially led process to designate urban river valleys. 73) Within the time frame for this review, address boundary and designation concerns associated with the existing plans through the policy proposals and recommendations contained in this report. 75) Streamline the policy framework of the 4 plans to the extent possible to increase clarity and consistency, harmonized to the highest standards of the plans; using the terminology of the PPS where possible and clarifying the policy hierarchy among the PPS and the 4 plans and other area - specific provincial plans. 77) Limit appeals to the OMB of OP, OPA, zoning by -law and intensification /density targets that are in conformity with the provincial plans. 79) Enhance implementation of the 4 plans by preparing guidance to interpret and implement them (through technical backgrounders and case studies). 80) Province should provide clarity on the types of background studies that are eligible for cost recovery in a development charges by -law to facilitate innovative and sustainable approaches to providing infrastructure. 84) Develop a comprehensive monitoring program for the GGH, focused on measuring the outcomes of the policies in the 4 plans. 85) Ensure there is a sufficiently resourced secretariat at the province to ensure effective coordination of all players in the implementation of the plans and to address the recommendations in this report. 86) Create and adequately resource an "oversight forum" to monitor and report on plan implementation and deliver public education about the plans, with reps included from CAs and many others. 87) Develop an education and outreach program targeted to specific groups and audiences that will explain the intent of the 4 plans, their benefits and ways to achieve their goals. Fools-TA For Immediate Release Expert Advisory Panel Recommendations Can Help Prepare Toronto Region for the New Climate Era Dec. 8, 2015, Toronto, ON — Implementation of recommendations made to the Ontario government by the Four Plans Advisory Panel will improve collective efforts to address the serious challenges facing the Greater Toronto Area in the new climate era. As the regional agency responsible for watershed health in the most urbanized region in Canada, Toronto and Region Conservation, (TRCA), looks forward to working with all stakeholders in implementing the recommendations in support of its vision for The Living City. Among recommendations in the report "Planning for Health, Prosperity and Growth," released yesterday, the Advisory Panel on the Coordinated Review of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Greenbelt Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Niagara Escarpment Plan, cites the need to preserve natural heritage, implement watershed/ sub - watershed planning policies and adopt more robust climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. TRCA Board Chair Maria Augimeri said the panel did an admirable job strengthening the work of TRCA and other conservation authorities. "This is a critical time," Augimeri said. "These recommendations underscore the importance of what we do every day — overseeing the integrity of land and water across our jurisdiction and protecting natural systems from the pressures of urban development. They leverage TRCA's value to residents as we address growth and climate change." The Four Plans Advisory Panel addresses the effectiveness of the Four Plans in balancing population growth with the protection of valuable resources. The report suggests tangible ways to curb urban sprawl and protect natural heritage. It also examines the impacts of climate change — more frequent severe storms and the need for bolstered flood management and infrastructure policies. Led by former Toronto Mayor, David Crombie, the panel advised the adoption of the recommendations within a five- year period. "It's clear that through public deliberations, stakeholder presentations and written submissions, this panel listened and understood what was important to the people," Brian Denney, TRCA CEO said. "We appreciate the panel's collaborative approach and look forward to the Ontario government implementing these recommendations through various mechanisms in the near future." The report focuses on six strategic directions for moving forward, including building complete communities, supporting agriculture, protecting natural and cultural heritage, providing infrastructure, mainstreaming climate change and implementing the plans. Emphasis is also placed on the use of green infrastructure and the very real challenges that will come from the expected growth of our region to an estimated 13.5 million people by 2041. • RES. #A246/15 - CAMPGROUND RESERVATION SOFTWARE AND CALL CENTRE SERVICES 2016 -2017 Award of contract for a campground reservation software system for 2016 -2017. Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Jack Ballinger THAT Contract #10000443 for Supply of Campground Reservation Software and Call Centre Services for 2016 be awarded to Camis Inc. for a cost of $58,000.00, plus $7,000 contingency, with an option to renew for 2017 under the same terms and conditions, pending approval by both parties, for a total two -year cost of $116,000.00 plus $14,000.00 contingency, it being the highest ranked proposal meeting Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) requirements; AND FURTHER THAT authorized staff be directed to take the necessary action to implement the contract including the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA is the operator of Albion Hills, Indian Line and Glen Rouge campgrounds. Successful campground operations and annual revenues depend on an on -line reservation and call centre service that allows clients to reserve their sites ahead of time and staff to manage site availability and client information. The current reservation software and call- centre provider agreement expired on December 31, 2015. The new software and call- centre provider will be able to support the following requirements: • allow clients to make online , mobile device, call centre and in -park reservations, changes and cancellations; • allow staff to check in and process clients when they arrive on site; • manage campground site inventory; • sell point -of -sale items, vehicle permits and additional visitor permits at the campground; • produce comprehensive sales, inventory and statistical reports; and • market additional products and service to existing clients via email and online advertising. RATIONALE The Request for Proposal (RFP) documentation for Campground Reservation Software and Call Centre Services was publically advertised on July 31, 2015 via the website www.biddingo.com. The following ten firms downloaded the RFP documents: • 247 Labs Inc.; • AAT Inc.; • Camis Inc.; • CM Inc.; • Jolera; • Powerland Computers; • The Active Network; • US eDirect Inc.; • Value Labs; • Ming E Business. • 6 • Proposals closed on August 20, 2015 and were opened by TRCA staff (Kate Pankov, Lesley Adams and Amanda Perricone) on August 21, 2015. Proposals were received from two firms as follows: FIRM PROPOSED ANNUAL COST EVALUATION SCORE Camis Inc. $58,000.00 93% Value Labs $372,054.00 43% Staff evaluated the proposals based on: • conformance with the RFP terms; • experience and qualifications; • understanding the scope of work; • expertise and availability of personnel; and • reasonableness of cost. On September 17, 2015, TRCA staff met with Camis Inc. to view a presentation of the software and receive clarification on any questions and operating procedures. Staff was satisfied with the software presentation, schedule discussions and call centre parameters that were discussed. Growing on TRCA in -house development and implementation of an on -line store and a picnics and education booking system, staff intends to develop an internal reservation system, but until that can be completed, TRCA requires an external system for Campground Reservation and Call Centre Services. It is for this reason that the contract has been structured as a one year contract with an optional one year renewal. Camis Inc. currently provides campground reservation software and call centre solutions to Parks Canada, Ontario Parks, British Columbia Parks, Hamilton Conservation Authority, Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Parks, Nova Scotia Provincial Parks, Upper Thames River Conservation Authority and many others. Camis Inc. exclusively provides campground reservation software and call centre services, and is the leader in this industry. Therefore, staff recommends award of Contract #10000443 to Camis Inc. for the Campground Reservation and Call Centre Services for 2016, with an with option to renew for 2017, under the same terms and conditions, pending approval by both parties for an annual cost of $58,000.00, plus $7,000 contingency, for a total two -year cost of $116,000.00 plus $14,000.00 contingency, it being the highest ranked proposal meeting TRCA requirements. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funds are allocated in the 2016 and 2017 operating budgets for Albion Hills, Glen Rouge and Indian Line campgrounds. TRCA charges users a reservation fee that in turn pays for most of the cost of the software. Average annual revenues from the reservation fees collected amount to approximately $55,000; the remainder of the funds required is allocated within the 2016 and 2017 operating budget. 697 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Once a contract has been executed, TRCA staff will work with Camis Inc. in order to launch the project by March of 2016. Report prepared by: Kate Pankov, extension 6418 Emails: kpankov @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Kate Pankov, extension 6418 Emails: kpankov @trca.on.ca Date: December 17, 2015 RES. #A247 /15 - HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED HYDROLOGY UPDATE Approval to adopt the Humber River Watershed Hydrology Update as prepared by Toronto Region Conservation Authority Engineering Services staff and Civica Infrastructure Inc. (Executive Res. #8134115) Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Chris Fonseca THAT the Humber River Watershed Hydrology Update (June 2015) prepared by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and Civica Infrastructure Inc. be approved; THAT TRCA staff be directed to update stormwater quantity (flood) control criteria for the Humber River watershed using updated results from this study; THAT staff be directed to disseminate the final watershed results and documentation to municipal staff and the development industry through an update to TRCA's Stormwater Criteria; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to apply the results from the Humber River Watershed Update to update floodline mapping on a priority basis. CARRIED Section II — Items for Authority Information RES. #A248 /15 - SECTION II — ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Glenn Mason THAT Section II item 11.2.2 — Source Protection Planning, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #12/15, held on December 4, 2015, be received. CARRIED Section III — Items for the Information of the Board RES. #A249/15 - LAKEVIEW WATERFRONT CONNECTION PROJECT Phase 2 — Implementation. Status update on the implementation of the Moved by: Jennifer Drake Seconded by: Jennifer McKelvie THAT the update on Phase 2 — Implementation for the Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project (LWC) is an initiative led by Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) and the Region of Peel (RoP) and has received project management support by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). The goal of the LWC is to restore the eastern Mississauga shoreline by creating a new natural waterfront conservation area through the use of clean excess fill generated from municipal infrastructure projects. Over the past five years, the Authority has supported TRCA's involvement in the LWC project through the feasibility study, environmental assessment (EA) and detailed design phases of the work: At Authority Meeting #11/11, held on January 27, 2012, Resolution #A274/11 was approved, in part, as follows: ...THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to provide Project Management and Technical Services for the coordinated EA for the Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project on behalf of CVC, subject to all terms and conditions being finalized in a manner satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors;... At Authority Meeting #9/13, held on November 22, 2013, Resolution #A187/13 directed TRCA staff to proceed, in part, as follows: ...THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with Region of Peel and /or Credit Valley Conservation to provide project management, detailed design, technical and construction management services in support of the implementation of the LWC Project, the scope of work and work schedule which shall be developed and agreed upon by the three agencies, on a fee for service basis, subject to all terms and conditions being finalized in a manner satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors; THAT authorization be granted to access the project site from Lakeshore Road East through TRCA -owned property at the Arsenal Lands, City of Mississauga (1352 and 1400 Lakeshore Road East), if required,... ...THAT TRCA staff be directed to take the necessary action to implement any agreements, including obtaining any necessary approvals for the stockpile, and the signing and execution of all documents, le i THAT staff continue to work cooperatively with City of Mississauga staff to support, and move forward with, the Arsenal Lands Master Planning and Implementation process during, and following, the LWC EA process, and the subsequent implementation of the LWC EA; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report back as required during the implementation of the LWC Project with regards to further TRCA involvement. At Authority Meeting #6/15, held on June 26, 2015, Resolution #A121/15 was received advising the Authority that LWC Project EA received provincial approvals on May 27, 2015. The LWC Project team is now approaching the end of the design phase for the LWC. On October 22, 2015 and on November 13, 2015, RoP and CVC, respectively, received direction to proceed with implementation of the LWC, and to enter into all necessary agreements, including a tri -party agreement between the three agencies, to advance the construction of the LWC Project. Project Overview Through the Environmental Assessment the following goal and objectives were developed for LWC: "To create a new natural park that will establish ecological and public linkages on the eastern Mississauga waterfront." • Naturalization — Establish a diverse range of native terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem habitats and ecological linkages in a degraded area of the eastern Mississauga waterfront • Access — Create safe and accessible public linkages for access to and along the waterfront while allowing for compatible recreational, educational and cultural heritage opportunities • Compatibility — Ensure that the LWC is compatible with existing infrastructure • Coordination — Coordinate with and inform other local planning and development efforts • Fiscal Viability — Use an innovative funding approach that seeks to maximize public benefit and value by reusing locally generated fill from Regional and City capital works projects to create this new natural park The development and evaluation of alternatives resulted in the identification of the preferred alternative in Attachment 1. During the LWC EA process, a construction access route was identified to the east of the G.E. Booth Wastewater Treatment Facility, which accessed the Arsenal Lands from Lakeshore Road, and followed a route along the Waterfront Trail to Marie Curtis Park Beach. The preferred alternative will create 26 hectares of high quality habitat including natural meadows, new beach, coastal forest, coastal wetlands and estuarine habitat, and island habitat for shorebirds. The various habitat features will enhance the quality and function of the shoreline for a range of resident and migratory species, many of which have been steadily decreasing throughout North America. It will provide diverse fish habitat for all species, in a highly altered shoreline (Attachment 1: Table 1 and Figure 1). 700 Since spring 2014, the LWC Project Team has been advancing the detailed designs for the LWC Project including detailed coastal and stream engineering works, refinements to the terrestrial and wetland grading plans, establishment of the detailed planting plans, and the public realm specifications, such as trail standards, outlooks and seating areas, and boardwalks (Attachment 2). Final designs are nearing completion and permit and land access /transfer issues are underway. A key item of work that the LWC Project Team has undertaken is to negotiate an alternative construction access route with Ontario Power Generation (OPG), and have now reached an agreement in principle to use the eastern portion of their lands (Route 1 c), instead of the original route proposed in the EA (Route 2) to the east of the GE Booth wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) (Attachment 3). This new route requires an amendment to the LWC EA, as per the conditions outlined in Chapter 9. This new route goes through much lower quality habitats, has much lower impacts on public use of the Waterfront Trail, Arsenal Lands and Marie Curtis Park, lower potential impacts on built- heritage features, and promotes early establishment of habitats in the LWC Project. The new route does have a higher cost which has been deemed acceptable by the Region of Peel as being good value for money to avoid the identified potential impacts to the public and built and natural environments. Other issues related to the new route are tied to the need for a temporary stream crossing, the absence of signaled intersection at Lakeshore, and a more challenging terrain to establish two -way construction traffic are deemed to all have engineered solutions to address. Potential bobolink habitat also presents timing implications on construction access road construction. Overall, the new route (Route 1c) is deemed afar superior route and will unencumber TRCA -owned lands (Arsenal Lands) from the need of providing 7 -10 years of construction access for the project to the east of the GE Booth WWTF. RATIONALE TRCA has been identified by Region of Peel and CVC as the lead agency for constructing and undertaking the construction project management for the LWC Project. CVC will continue to act as the lead for communications and fund raising, permit and land acquisition, and EA compliance monitoring. Region of Peel continues to provide the majority of funds and is anticipated to provide the majority of fill for the land creation process. It is anticipated that the access road construction will commence in the winter of 2016, with the first confinement cell construction commencing on July 1, 2016. TRCA intends land creation activities to formally commence in fall 2016 with the completion of the first confinement cell. To facilitate this aggressive schedule, TRCA staff will proceed with the development and execution of the Phase 2 tri -party agreements with CVC and RoP. FINANCIAL DETAILS Total project implementation costs are now estimated at $60 million, including land acquisition, construction, communications, monitoring /EA compliance and overall project management. Recovery from capital projects is estimated at $24 million resulting in a required net contribution from the Region of Peel of $36 million, as follows: 701 Estimated LWC project costs Activity Total Estimated Costs Detailed Design $1,200,000 Property Acquisition and Access Road Construction $2,908,000 Construction /Restoration, Communications, and EA Compliance and Monitoring $42,952,000 Project Management TRCA/CVC $4,700,000 Corporate Surcharge $2,500,000 Contingency $5,432,000 Recovery - $23,600,000 Total 1 $36,100,000 Funding for the implementation of the Lakeview Waterfront Connection will be provided to TRCA by Peel to cover staff time and related expenses on a fee for service basis (outside normal funding envelope) including construction, EA compliance monitoring support, communications support, project management, property acquisition support and restoration support. TRCA staff will be responsible for construction and construction project management and administration, and will provide an advisory and supporting role on the other key elements of work. Accordingly, a tri -party agreement will be required between CVC, TRCA and ROP to facilitate implementation of the LWC. The tri -party agreement will outline specific roles and responsibilities for CVC, TRCA and ROP related to the above, including direct invoicing of TRCA to ROP (and CVC to ROP). Phase 2 construction and construction management costs will be tracked through the 252 -xx series of accounts. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • Finalize designs. • Support CVC in obtaining necessary permits. • Support CVC and RoP in land acquisition and access agreements. • Execute necessary agreements for the Phase 2 construction with CVC and RoP. • Complete EA Amendment required for new construction access route. • Support CVC on ongoing consultation. • Initiate stockpiling activities for construction rubble (on RoP property). Report prepared by: Ken Dion, extension 5230 Emails: kdion @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ken Dion, extension 5230 Emails: kdion @trca.on.ca Date: November 25, 2015 Attachments: 4 702 Attachment 1 MPMIE CUR715 RR —7 m£' iREA9TMEMLPIARi OPG 1FMO9 Area Meadow 11.8 Beach 1 S S a Wetlands 7.7 2 � 0.8 Total 26 Figure 1. Preferred Alternative LWC EA (2014) Table 1: LWC Area of Habitat Types Habitat Type Area Meadow 11.8 Beach 1 Forest 4.6 Wetlands 7.7 Rocky Islands 0.8 Total 26 703 Attachment 2 Figure 2. Grading and habitat plan (November 2015) Figure 3. Sample habitat features (November 2015). 704 Attachment 3 0 z. Route 2 Figure 4. Proposed new Route 1c in comparison to LWC EA Route 2. 705 Attachment 4 PROJECTTTLE. LAKEVIEW WATERFRONT CONNECTION PROJECT CvC COPYRIGHT TORONTO ®ION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY PRINTINQ DATE 2o1511 -10 FILE d - \Corr, No(AEFCVQ\ KEFEW WATERFRONT, oo 4 owg Region of Peel cons"er anon wekkikq (ON you mew ;ry 11TIJE LAYOUT & GRADING PLAN 20,5„ -,9 RES. #A250/15 - OAK RIDGES MORAINE AND ADJACENT GREENBELT LANDS Creating an Action Plan for Ecological Enhancement across the Greenbelt. Creating an Action Plan for ecological enhancement across the Greenbelt. Moved by: Jennifer Drake Seconded by: Jennifer McKelvie THAT the staff report on the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Report Card on the Environmental Health of the Oak Ridges Moraine and Adjacent Greenbelt Lands (Report Card) was prepared by the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC) and reported on at Authority Meeting #3/15, held on March 27, 2015. Resolution #A34/15 was approved, including that staff report back to the Authority on the creation of an Action Plan to implement the recommendations of the Report Card. Given the success of the Report Card, the CAMC was approached by the Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation to submit a funding proposal to undertake a follow -up project. The purpose of the new project is to create an Action Plan to identify, guide, coordinate and source funding for a suite of actions to improve or restore the ecological health of Greenbelt lands and waters that will, over time, result in improved grades from those identified in the Report Card. Further, implementation of the Action Plan will improve the capacity of ecosystems to adapt to, as well as to mitigate the impacts from, climate change. The main objectives of the project are to: • set management priorities based on the findings from the Report Card; • identify implementation projects /programs through the review of existing scientific studies (subwatershed plans, technical reports, pollution control plans, fish management plans, etc.); • create a (sub) watershed -based schedule for implementation of short, medium and long term projects, relative to the 10 -year review cycle of the Oak Ridges Moraine, Greenbelt and Niagara Escarpment plans; and • to establish an evaluation and monitoring framework to track and report on project success. Project Team The project will be undertaken by 13 conservation authorities (CAs) with watersheds encompassing the Greenbelt. Initially, a group of nine CAs formed the CAMC in 2000, with a mission to advance the science and understanding of the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) and to work towards government, agency and community support for the conservation and protection of the form, function and linkages of the ORM. Four additional CAs with watersheds encompassing the Niagara Escarpment are joining with the CAMC to undertake this project across the entire Greenbelt. The additional CAs include Conservation Halton, Hamilton, Niagara Peninsula and Grey Sauble. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total cost of the project is $144,930, with half of the funds being provided by the Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation, and half provided as in -kind contributions by the CAs involved in the project. 707 NEXT STEPS The project is expected to be completed in 2016 and carried out in four phases: • Background Review (Jan -Apr): confirm management priorities and criteria for project selection and prioritization; develop CA- specific long list of potential projects; engage with local stakeholders and potential partners. • Data Analysis (Apr- June): each CA to apply management priorities and selection criteria to formulate their "Top 3" list of priority projects; technical team to review lists and recommend to CAMC the subset of key projects that CAMC should champion. • Stakeholder Consultation and Report Production (May- Sept): CAMC to hold a workshop with stakeholders and partners to discuss criteria, management priorities and receive input on the priority projects; begin the process of securing project implementation partners and potential funding opportunities. • Communication of Findings (Sept -Dec): submit final report to the board of each CA with a recommendation to further distribute the report to municipalities and other stakeholders; distribute to CAMC mailing list; schedule follow -up tours for decision makers, funders, partners, landowners, etc. for select "showcase" projects upon their successful completion and /or to promote their initiation. The project seeks to implement Recommendation #44 from the Advisory Panel report on the Coordinated Review of the four Provincial Plans, to: Strengthen protection of natural heritage systems by developing a natural heritage system enhancement strategy for the area of the four plans, including priorities and resources to implement securement, stewardship, restoration and enhancement of natural heritage features, linkages and functions. Report prepared by: Kathy Padgett, extension 5687 Emails: kpadgett @trca.on.ca For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: dburnett @trca.on.ca Date: December 15, 2015 RES. #A251/15 - SECTION III — ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD Moved by: Paul Ainslie Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT Section III item 11.3.1 — Wetland Conservation in Ontario: A Discussion Paper, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #12/15, held on December 4, 2015, be received. CARRIED WE: Section IV - Ontario Regulation 166/06, As Amended RES. #A252/15 - SECTION IV - ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: John Sprovieri Seconded by: Rob Ford THAT Section IV item 10.4 — Ontario Regulation 166/06, As Amended, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #12/15, held on December 4, 2015, be received. CARRIED TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:43 a.m., on Friday, January 8, 2016. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 709 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Authority Meeting #12/15 was held at TRCA Head Office, on Friday, January 29, 2016. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:34 a.m. Kevin Ashe Member Maria Augimeri Chair Jack Ballinger Member Vincent Crisanti Member Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Jennifer Drake Member Chris Fonseca Member Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Maria Kelleher Member Matt Mahoney Member Mike Mattos Member Jennifer McKelvie Member Ron Moeser Member Linda Pabst Member Anthony Perruzza Member Gino Rosati Member Jim Tovey Member ABSENT Paul Ainslie Member David Barrow Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Justin Di Ciano Member Rob Ford Member Rodney Hoinkes Member George Mammoliti Member Glenn Mason Member John Sprovieri Member RESMA253115 - MINUTES Moved by: Ron Moeser Seconded by: Jim Tovey THAT the Minutes of Meeting #11115, held on January 8, 2016, be approved. CARRIED 710 (a) A presentation by Joe Lobko, Partner, DTAH Architects Limited, and Brian Denney, Chief Executive Officer, TRCA, in regard to item 7.1 - Long Term Office Accommodation Project. (b) A presentation by Kat Runnals and Michael Spaziani, Small Arms Society, in regard to item 7.11 - Rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building Project. RES. #A254 /15 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT above -noted presentation (a) be received. RES. #A255 /15 - Moved by: Seconded by: PRESENTATIONS Jim Tovey Colleen Jordan THAT above -noted presentation (b) be received. CARRIED CORRESPONDENCE (a) A letter dated January 21, 2016 from Marianne Berube, Executive Director, Wood Works, in regard to item 7.1 - Long Term Office Accommodation Project. RES. #A256 /15 - CORRESPONDENCE Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT above -noted correspondence (a) be received. CARRIED 711 CORRESPONDENCE (A) January 21, 2016 Mr. Brian Denney, P.Eng., CEO Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 101 Exchange Avenue Vaughan Ontario, L4K 5R6 Dear Mr. Denney, Re: Proposed Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Head Office. I am writing this letter to offer our support and endorsement for the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Head Office project located at 5 Shoreham Drive in Toronto. Wood WORKS! is an industry led initiative of the Canadian Wood Council. The program encourages Canadian communities and building owners to take pride in, and showcase the wide and innovative use of quality wood products produced from the best - managed forests in the world. Recent advancements in new Canadian products, code changes and technical capacity within Ontario to take advantage of wood's attributes in green building have brought wood to the forefront in design innovation. We are interested in supporting the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Head Office building and thank you for sharing a preview of the project. This project is bound to set new standards in sustainable design and spur new growth in the Ontario commercial construction market using wood products. Wood WORKS! would be pleased to offer our technical resources to ensure the building is realized and help you overcome challenges you might face. Consideration for an Ontario Wood WORKS! case study will be reviewed and encouraged once the building is completed. This is an exciting example of wood design and we look forward to seeing it complete. Sincerely, MLt-�- Marianne Berube Executive Director North Bay. Toron7l 2 60 Commerce Court, P.O. Box 5001, North Bay, ON P1 B 8K9 Ph: 705 495 0347 . Fax: 705 495 6279 . Toll Free: 1- 866 - 886 -3574 . www.wood- works.org Section I — Items for Authority Action RES. #A257/15 - LONG TERM OFFICE ACCOMMODATION PROJECT Report on project status and recommendation to approve in principle, a project for the construction of a new TRCA head office to be built at 5 Shoreham Drive, based upon the schematic design developed by DTAH. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Linda Pabst THAT a project to build a new Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) head office at 5 Shoreham Drive, based upon the schematic design developed by DTAH be accepted in principle, with the condition that staff be directed to: • approach TRCA member municipalities for new funding support for the construction of a new head office building based upon the design developed by DTAH Architects Limited; • initiate a competitive procurement process for a consulting team to lead detail design; • confirm financing and borrowing opportunities and strategy (i.e. public private partnerships, liquidation of assets, government grants and support from industry partners etc.); • proceed with an Expression of Interest (EOI) for the Black Creek Pioneer Village parking lot site, which may consider a design /build option for a new TRCA head office, as part of a potential public private partnership, in accordance with the parameters attached as Attachment 5; and • report back at Authority Meeting #4/16, scheduled to be held on May 27, 2016 on member municipality funding support, financing strategy, outcome of procurement process and EOI. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA has grown considerably since its main office at 5 Shoreham Drive was constructed in the 1970's. Growth coupled with a lack of adequate office accommodations resulted in long term, chronic space shortages; poor working conditions; less efficient business practices as a result of dispersed staff and lack of adequate meeting space to provide optimal customer service. Some of these issues were addressed with the lease of 101 Exchange Avenue in Vaughan; however a long term head office solution must be identified prior to the end of TRCA's current six -year lease (2021). The purpose of the Long Term Office Accommodation Project and the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group (LTOAWG), established on May 23, 2008 by Authority Resolution #A126/08, is to determine the office accommodation needs of TRCA over the next 30 years and recommend a comprehensive, cost effective solution. This process began prior to 2003 with the creation of a task group on office accommodation created by TRCA's Management Committee. The task group's mandate was to research and report on options to serve TRCA office needs in the long term. One of these options was the use of office space at Parc Downsview Park. 713 From 2003 to 2015 (timeline is presented in Attachment 1), staff has brought forward evidence to support the justification for a larger, long term head office solution for TRCA, as well as multiple long term head office options. These options have included building a new office, leasing required space and purchasing an existing office building. Staff has also considered several financing and funding options, such as, loan financing, public private partnerships, sale lease back, land lease and land sale. A 2006 report prepared for TRCA by CB Richard Ellis Limited Realtor Valuation & Advisory Services (CBRE) noted the 100% ownership model to be the most cost effective solution for TRCA. Furthermore, staff has met with like- minded organizations such as Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, York University, Toronto Transit Commission, York Region, the YMCA, and private land developers, owners and managers to pursue potential partnership and synergy opportunities. While there remain obvious synergies with many of these organizations, no opportunities have been formalized. A list of proposed solutions previously brought forward by staff has included the following: • current lease opportunity at 101 Exchange Avenue, Vaughan (2015 to 2021); • lease of office space Parc Downsview Park 2004 to 2015; • proposed and rejected purchase of a building location at 1235 Ormont Drive, City of Toronto (2011); • proposed construction of a building on the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) site (2006 and 2008); and • potential partnerships such as with Parc Downsview Park, York University and Regional Municipality of York. None of the aforementioned has resulted in a long term solution. During this time (2003 to 2015), as a result of TRCA's regulatory responsibility and commitment to providing an optimal level of customer service, office space requirements have continued to increase. In 2008, a report completed by Integra Architects Inc. (Integra) noted a requirement for an approximately 120,000 square foot building to accommodate 326 staff members, assuming continued growth at 5% per annum (it is important to note that 5% was the actual average annual staff growth from 2004 to 2014). In 2015, staff calculated that by 2021 a head office building would be required to accommodate 446 staff members (assuming 5% annual growth). The current interim head office at 101 Exchange Avenue cannot accommodate 446 staff and TRCA does not have any other existing options. In 2006, 2008 and 2013, with the support of the LTOAWG, staff completed studies for the construction of a long term head office building at the BCPV parking lot site (Integra Architects Inc. 2008 design presented in Attachment 2). This option was investigated based on the strategic location of the property at the centre of the TRCA jurisdiction and its proximity to public transit, Black Creek Pioneer Village and institutional partners such as York University. With the expansion of TTC subway service to York University, the surrounding community is also expected to undergo rejuvenation. A 2008 report completed by Integra Architects Inc. noted associated benefits for TRCA to construct a new head office facility, these included: • improve workplace standards (comparable to current regional /municipal standards); • allow for growth and future mandate requirements; • build for TRCA uses and requirements, including improved public meeting spaces; • maintain asset - ownership of a facility (land and structure); • achieve a cost effective solution; 714 demonstrate green building initiatives; establish a learning and education space; and enhance cultural and community opportunities. In 2014, after examining the existing planning and zoning permissions on both sites, it became apparent that developing a new headquarters building on the BCPV parking lot site would involve more challenging planning approvals and involvement of as yet undetermined partnerships with other organizations supportive of TRCA's mandate, and it would not be possible to construct a new headquarters within the six year term of the 101 Exchange lease. At Authority Meeting #2/15, held on February 27, 2015, the Authority approved appointment of new members to the Working Group and selecting the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive as the preferred site for the new headquarters, as follows: THAT the Chair of the Authority (Maria Augimeri), Jack Heath, Ron Moeser, Jim Tovey, Michael Di Biase, Giorgio Mammoliti, Colleen Jordan, Anthony Perruzza, Ben Cachola, Glenn De Baeremaeker and any another other TRCA Members who are interested, be appointed to the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group (LTOAWG) until the end of their current term of appointment to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) or until their successor is appointed, THAT the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive be selected as the preferred site for TRCA's new headquarters building, AND FURTHER THAT staff prepare a report for consideration at Authority Meeting #2115, scheduled to be held on February 27, 2015 for award of a preferred source contract to DTAH for the development of a Master Plan for the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) parking lot site, and the schematic design and costing of a new corporate headquarters building on the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive. At the same meeting, the Authority also approved award of a preferred source contract to DTAH for the development of a Master Plan for the BCPV parking lot site, and the schematic design and costing of a new corporate headquarters building at 5 Shoreham Drive. Therefore, in 2015, DTAH was retained by TRCA to complete a two- phased planning and design approach for 5 Shoreham Drive and the BCPV site that would put TRCA in a position to pursue funding options, site plan approval and building permits, and construct a new headquarters prior to the expiry of the lease at 101 Exchange Avenue. Phase 1 was to establish a master plan for both sites, north and south of Shoreham Drive, building on the existing conceptual development framework completed by DTAH in 2013 /2014 and examining options to accommodate a future development partner that could include an office user, residential development or other institutional and community uses, while considering the ongoing operational needs of Black Creek Pioneer Village. Phase 2 was to develop a schematic design and construction cost estimate for a new +/- 100,000 square foot headquarters on the 5 Shoreham Drive site. 715 As directed by the Authority in February 2015, staff under the direction of the LTOAWG, and with the assistance of DTAH began an intensive planning and design process for the BPCV and 5 Shoreham Drive properties. The process included the development of a project charter with objectives for TRCA's long term head office; a sustainability charter to evaluate proposed designs against; building program and needs assessment; consultation with potential stakeholders such as York University, Tennis Canada, City of Toronto, Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, and TRCA staff; design workshops with DTAH's consulting team; development of independent construction costs by A.W. Hooker and Eastern Construction; and life cycle cost assessments. It is important to note that construction costs estimates were within +/ -$1 million dollars of each other. TRCA head office project objectives were identified as follows: • strategic location at the geographic centre of Toronto region; • cost effective and efficient to operate; • demonstrate and positively influence actions of others; • positively impact ecology and society; and • be a great place to work. As part of the building program and needs assessment, staff built upon previous work completed as part of the planning and design of TRCA's interim head office. Staff, with the assistance of DTAH researched trends in office space and determined that using a flexible and efficient open plan design for 100,000 square feet of office space would be suitable to accommodate staff levels in 2021 and allow for future growth. Under the direction of the LTOAWG and TRCA staff, DTAH's schematic design is a six - storey, 190,254 square foot building at 5 Shoreham Drive, comprised of 100,000 square feet for office and support functions and a 90,254 square foot, three level underground parking garage (Attachment 3). The resultant design supports TRCA's business and provides accessible customer service by meeting requirements for office, meeting, collaboration, lunchroom, demonstration, central filling, shipping /receiving and storage spaces. The structure of the building also features a low- carbon wood and concrete hybrid system; and is proposed to achieve Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) platinum certification and WELL Building certification. Key building features are as follows: • Flexible and adaptive spaces, including moveable partition walls. • Application of passive house design principles (i.e. simple design, well insulated building envelope, with few to no breaks i.e. terraces). • Optimizes the solar orientation (i.e. slants to the southeast) to allow for appropriate amount of daylighting in the building and solar energy production on the roof. • Allowance for up to three floors of underground parking that could accommodate +/- 223 spots. • Designed to achieve LEED New Construction NC Platinum certification and WELL Building New Construction Silver certification. • A proposed surface parking lot ( +/ -60 spots) area in the City of Toronto right of way located to the east of the site, that would be built and designed in partnership with Tennis Canada. • Structural Design: a composite wood and concrete solution, that if built, would use 60% less concrete than a conventional concrete structure, reduce the weight by 50 %, significant reduction in construction site waste and carbon retention (approximately 200 kg of CO2/M2). Opportunity to prefabricate concrete deck slabs, which could result in construction time saving. 716 • Wood structure would extend through the roof to provide a cantilever feature that would support photovoltaic panels. • Mechanical design: building to be heated and cooled through a combination of air source heat pumps and a geo- exchange system. Hot and cool air will be distributed through the building via variable speed drives for fans and pumps, as well as using an under floor air delivery system. • Roof mounted photo voltaic (PV) panels that could provide up to 5% of the total building energy load. Opportunity to add additional PV panels in future as the technology improves. • Greenroof system on top of building and over ramp to underground parking. • Rainwater harvesting for on -site use (i.e. toilets and irrigation). • Site plan to manage on -site runoff (at surface) for between the first 25 mm to 32 mm of local rainfall events. DTAH also developed a master plan for the BCPV parking lot site, which tested the capacity of the site to support various development scenarios (these will be tested through the proposed release of an Expression of Interest in early 2016). At the LTOAWG meeting held on July 24, 2015, DTAH presented the schematic design and preliminary construction cost estimate. LTOAWG members directed staff to assemble life cycle cost information for the proposed schematic design and compare it to other options such as purchase of an existing building and continue to lease. At the LTOAWG meeting held on November 13, 2015, staff, along with Joe Lobko of DTAH and Bruce Wills of CBRE reported back with an updated build new construction cost estimate; 30 year life cycle cost estimates, operating cost estimate, intangible benefits for each TRCA head office option; a financing proposal for the build new option; and overview of Toronto region commercial building market availability based on existing and previous five year conditions. LTOAWG members agreed with the staff recommendation that the lease option is not a cost effective long term solution and that it should be removed from further consideration. Staff presented that the purchase of an existing building was comparable in price to the build new option; however, with higher risks and less benefits, largely based on the fact of the limited suitable supply. Staff presented that the build new option as designed by DTAH, is also forecasted to have the lowest utility and carbon operating costs. The LTOAWG directed staff to revise the cost analysis and provide more detail on aspects related to past head office design studies (i.e. Integra 2008), parking, existing buildings for sale and funding options. At the LTOAWG meeting held on December 4, 2015, staff reported on parking demand estimates and supply options; offered a comparison between the 2008 Integra design and the 2015 DTAH design, and provided updated financing information. Parking demand estimates and supply options were developed by BA Consulting Group, with the support of staff. It is estimated that staff will require 278 parking spots (based on 65% of staff reporting that they anticipate driving to work in 2021 and assuming 85% daily attendance rate as identified in BA Consulting Group surveys completed in 2015), with the potential overtime for this number to be reduced to demand for 192 spots once subway, improved bus and bike routes come online. Parking is proposed to be accommodated on and off -site (BCPV parking lot), as follows: • +/ -220 spaces for fleet and staff via on -site underground parking; • 60 spaces via a surface parking lot positioned in the right -of -way between the property and Tennis Canada for staff and visitor use; and • up to 100 spaces at Black Creek Pioneer Village for temporary overflow parking. 717 Staff noted that the BCPV has historically accommodated 5 Shoreham Drive overflow parking and the continuation of this process in 2021 is not anticipated to have significant impacts. Parking demand and supply options will be further assessed in the detail design phase of the project. Staff reported that the 2015 DTAH design is more efficient and scaled down compared to the 2008 Integra design. DTAH's design is built upon passive house principles, a simple design, well insulated, that limits opportunities for energy loss (for example terraces which were predominantly featured in the 2008 design). Staff has brought forward some positive concepts from 2008, such as the need to achieve a high environmental and social design standard, and improved customer service experience. At the December 4, 2015 LTOAWG meeting, staff confirmed that they would continue to identify and explore opportunities for the purchase of an existing building or one that was set to begin construction in the near term. Staff expressed caution that based on discussions with CBRE, the purchase existing option may not be cost effective and could subject TRCA to increased risk (i.e. 2021 schedule not met, location not acceptable and unknowns during build -out). Staff recommended that the build new option at 5 Shoreham Drive be accepted as the preferred alternative. LTOAWG directed staff to revise the cost analysis, provide more detail on parking and prepare parameters for an Expression of Interest for the proposed development of all or a portion of the BCPV parking lot. At the January 15, 2016 LTOAWG meeting, staff presented a revised cost analysis that included capital, operating and maintenance expenses for each TRCA head office option (i.e. build new at 5 Shoreham, purchase existing and lease). Staff also presented a revised parking summary and figure (as presented as Attachment 4) and draft parameters for an Expression of Interest for the BPCV parking lot (Attachment 5). The revised analysis supported the staff recommendation that the build new option is comparable to or less than the other options. Furthermore, the build new option provides greater benefits and less risk to TRCA and TRCA funding Municipalities. RATIONALE Since before 2003, TRCA has been studying the opportunity for a new head office to resolve issues of long term office accommodation including aging infrastructure, poor working conditions, and lack of adequate meeting space to deal with customer service needs. Staff has recommended that the build new option at 5 Shoreham Drive be adopted as a project, and that direction be provided to proceed. Justification for this recommendation is as follows TRCA has a long standing requirement for a long term head office to accommodate current and future staff, to provide optimal customer service and support as mandated under TRCA regulatory responsibilities, and to improve operational efficiencies (i.e. less travel for staff between TRCA offices). TRCA interim head office has demonstrated the operational improvements and efficiencies that can be achieved through a single, larger, TRCA Head Office. 2. The building at 101 Exchange Avenue while serviceable, an excellent showpiece of staff dedication to build a positive work environment, and the efficiencies that can be achieved through the creation of larger head office; is not a long term solution. TRCA has signed a six -year lease with the building owner and the size of the building (60,000 square feet) is not adequate to accommodate future TRCA growth and lease renewal is not certain. 718 3. Build new at 5 Shoreham Drive, based on the design prepared by DTAH, is the preferred solution. The building will meet LEED platinum certification and WELL Building Certification. It should contain three levels of underground parking and will be combined with a proposed shared surface lot with Tennis Canada. As recommended in a 2006 CBRE report, the building should be owned, 100% by TRCA. The new build option meets all TRCA objectives. Key benefits and notes to support the build new option include, but are not limited to the following: Continuing to lease is not a cost effective solution to TRCA's head office problem. The lease option has the highest costs over the life of the project. Continue to lease also includes many other disadvantages such as: no asset at end of lease term, location and availability subject to market availability and TRCA may be subjected to frequent relocations. Table 1 in Attachment 6 provides a detailed list and comparison of benefits and negatives for the lease option. Purchase of an existing building, while comparable in price to the build new scenario, is negated by an increase in risk to TRCA (negative benefits presented in Table 1 Attachment 6). III. TRCA has undertaken an extensive property search using the services of CBRE, to find leasable and existing buildings for purchase. In 2015, CBRE provided existing and historic (2010 to 2015) sales data. CBRE has provided data for all of the TRCA jurisdiction, with a high priority placed on the geographic area of North York and Vaughan with requisite transportation and transit requirements. The search confirmed limited availability of buildings that would meet TRCA objectives. These include location, environmental benefits of building and cost effectiveness. Also of note, most existing buildings available for purchase have tenants, which TRCA would have to manage, this would result in increased cost and schedule delays (i.e. time to wait for existing tenants leases to expire). IV. The build new option, based on the DTAH design has the lowest estimated operating costs (utility and carbon). Staff has assumed an annual savings of approximately $77,000 when compared to a standard Toronto market building. V. The build new option based on the DTAH design includes innovation features that demonstrate environmental and social responsibility to the development community and serve to reduce TRCA's operating costs. For example, the building will feature a raised floor system (i.e. cables and duck work distribution within floor as opposed to ceiling space), well insulated envelope and electro- chromic glass system that self -tints to control sunlight exposure into the building. These features contributed to the lower forecasted operating costs and lower overall capital investments required for the building's mechanical and electrical systems. 719 VI. The wood and concrete hybrid structure of the proposed building will result in lower carbon emissions during construction and during the production of building materials. A wood structure building would demonstrate application of the recent changes to the Ontario Building Code to allow six - storey wood structure buildings in Ontario. Wood structure buildings have the potential to transform the Ontario building sector for the better: wood is a renewable resource that has multiple environmental benefits (less carbon emissions, which supports the Government of Ontario and Government of Canada's transition to a low carbon future); social benefits (less construction related vehicular traffic during construction); a cost effective solution for mid -rise buildings, that could support Government of Ontario density targets; and it supports Ontario jobs (wood is Ontario's second largest industry after automotive sector). VII. A LEED Platinum certified building is anticipated to deliver the following benefits: lower operating costs, increase staff productivity; public demonstrations of corporate sustainability; high quality building = higher building /asset value in future; TRCA can charge higher rental rates should it decide to rent out a portion of the building; the building will ultimately result in a higher overall return on investment compared to a non -LEED building. 4. While there remain obvious synergies with many of the likeminded organizations TRCA has met with to date, no opportunities have been formalized. TRCA will continue to explore the partnership opportunity, for example through the issue of an Expression of Interest for the Black Creek Pioneer Village parking lot site (Appendix 5), which will include a design build option for a TRCA head office. Staff caution, that given TRCA's timeline of requiring a new head office space for occupancy in June 2021, the prospect of securing a partnership, design and build in that timeframe is limited and would place added risk exposure on TRCA. Therefore, staff recommend that the Authority approve a project to build a new TRCA head office building at 5 Shoreham Drive, based on the design completed by DTAH, on the condition that staff be directed to: • approach TRCA member municipalities for funding support; • complete a competitive procurement process for a consulting team to lead detailed design; • prepare a financing strategy; and • report back to Authority in May 2016. The detailed design consulting team procurement process will consist of two phases. The first to identify a short list of a maximum of three qualified consulting teams, and the second a Request for Proposals for those prequalified in Phase 1. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff requests direction to proceed with: • approach TRCA member municipalities for new funding support for the construction of a new head office building based upon the design developed by DTAH Architects Limited; • initiate a competitive procurement process for a consulting team to lead detail design; 720 confirm financing and borrowing opportunities and strategy (i.e. public private partnerships, liquidation of assets, government grants and support from industry partners etc.); proceed with an EOI for the Black Creek Pioneer Village parking lot site, which may consider a design /build option for a new TRCA head office, as part of a potential public private partnership, in accordance with the parameters attached as Attachment 8; and report back at Authority Meeting #4/16, scheduled to be held on May 27, 2016 on member municipality funding support, financing strategy, outcome of procurement process and EOI. FINANCIAL DETAILS The finance proposal for the build new option is for an upset limit of a $70 million capital asset outlay. A breakdown of project funding sources is presented in Attachment 7. Of the $70 million upset limit, $20.5million is from existing sources and $49.5 million would be from new TRCA member municipal funding sources. New municipal funding has been approved by Peel. Asks to Durham, Toronto and York are pending; however, staff suggests that they could accommodate the annual funding amount from these municipalities, within existing capital envelopes (pending permission from the municipality). A breakdown of annual funding contributions, over a 33 year financing period, from TRCA member municipal partners, as per the 2016 current value assessment formula is presented in Attachment 7. TRCA member municipality funding will include capital, to contribute towards principal repayments, and operating, to cover interest costs. Staff has assumed that growth in operating funds will be at inflation and capital funding will remain at a constant level over a 33 year financing period. Staff has estimated that over the first 10 years of building occupancy, there will be more space than required by TRCA. Therefore, the finance proposal includes a 10 year (2022 to 2031) rental revenue of $4.9m for 16,000 square feet of the building (one floor). Staff discussions with financial institutions have noted the cost of borrowing to be in the order of 3.75 %. Staff will continue to explore financing and borrowing opportunities. Report prepared by: Ethan Griesbach, extension 5364 Emails: egriesbach @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ethan Griesbach, extension 5364 Emails: egriesbach @trca.on.ca Date: January 12, 2016 Attachments: 7 721 Attachment 1 TRCA Head Office Project Timeline 2003 At Executive Meeting #11/03, held on Friday, December 5, 2003, Resolution #6188/03 stated: THAT staff be directed to explore opportunities for additional office accommodation with Downsview Park and other organizations; AND FURTHER THAT staff report on these opportunities and make appropriate recommendations to the Business Excellence Advisory Board at the earliest opportunity The staff report noted that TRCA has been exploring various options to deal with the immediate office needs as well as long term solutions. A task group on office accommodation was established by TRCA's Directors Committee to research and report on options to serve the TRCA office needs in the long term, looking out more than five years. This is linked to the TRCA sustainability agenda and the need in the long term to ensure TRCA's commitment to a sustainable office solution. For example, a building utilizing all available sustainability features or perhaps a partnership with another organization sharing similar values. 2004 At Authority Meeting #12/04, held on Friday January 20, 2004, Resolution #A28/04 stated: THAT approval in principal be granted for TRCA to enter into a lease of office space with Downsview Park, subject to terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA and its solicitors and subject to availability of funding; AND FURTHER THAT staff of TRCA be directed to conduct the negotiations for the lease and report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board at such time as lease in final form can be recommended to the Authority. Subsequently, at Authority Meeting #4/04, held on April 30, 2004, Resolution #A112/04 was approved, in part, as follows: THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a lease with Parc Downsview Park Inc. ( Downsview Park) and Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada Represented Herein By The Department of National Defence (DND), for office space located at 70 Canuck Avenue, City of Toronto; THAT the term of the lease be for 60 months (five years);... 722 2006 TRCA retained CB Richard Ellis Limited Realtor Valuation & Advisory Services (CBRE) to complete an assessment for a proposed new head office building at 1000 Murray Ross Parkway (Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) parking lot site). The report developed scenarios included an approximately 90,000 square foot Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) platinum certified building, supplied with a total of 356 parking stalls met through surface and underground installations. The financial assessment concluded that the 5 Shoreham Drive property and associated building could be sold or leased to support the new development at BCPV; and that 100% ownership by TRCA, of the new building, would have the lowest nominal costs, as opposed to other funding structures such as a joint venture, sale lease -base, land lease and land sale. 2008 At Authority Meeting #3/08, held May 23, 2008, Resolution #A126/08 was approved as follows: THAT a Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group consisting of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Members representative of the participating municipalities including the Chair, be created to support and guide staff in development and implementation of the Long Term Office Accommodation project; THAT staff include in the 2009 -2013 capital budget projections funding for the project; THAT at Authority meeting on May 23, 2008, members be asked to indicate their interest in servicing on the Working Group which will include Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, Councillor Ron Moeser and Councillor Maria Augimed; AND FURTHER THAT the working group and staff report back to the Executive Committee no later than December 31, 2008. The purpose of the Long Term Office Accommodation Project is to determine the office accommodation needs of TRCA over the next 30 years and recommend a comprehensive, cost effective solution. Staff with the support of CBRE and Integra Architect Inc. (Integra) undertook a strategic planning assessment, which culminated in the development of a business case report for a new TRCA head office on the BCPV lands. The proposed development would provide 120,000 square foot gross floor area, with approximately 20,000 square feet available for third party lease. The building would be built to a high environmental standard (i.e. LEED platinum certification), include numerous greenroof terraces and be supported by approximately 300 parking spaces supplied both below and at grade. 723 2009 At Authority Meeting #3/08, on held May 23, 2008, Resolution #A295/08 was approved as follows: That staff be directed to: 1. Begin the preliminary site planning and design phase for the location of new office space, meeting City of Toronto's Green Development Standard, LEED standard or equivalent, to be located in the parking lot vicinity of BPVD; 2. Finalize a detailed business and financial plan to secure funding for the project; 3. Work with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority funding partners to determine funding opportunities and requirements; AND FURTHER THAT the working group and staff report to the Executive committee at regular intervals on the status of the project. 2010 Staff noted that the Integra design may be too ambitious and may not receive financial support by TRCA's municipal partners. LTOAWG advice to staff was to consider other options to meet long term office requirements, these included: build a new less than 120,000 square foot building to meet current space requirements, not long term; adaptive reuse of industrial /institutional site; lease with York Region, mixed use project (commercial, residential, redevelopment of BCPV lot); purchase of existing office site; short term lease of additional space near 5 Shoreham Drive; and establish virtual office space. LTOAWG members recommended that staff explore purchase of an existing office site, lease with York Region and adaptive reuse of industrial /institutional site options. 2011 Staff brought forward an opportunity to purchase an existing building located at 1235 Ormont Drive, City of Toronto. With the support of LTOAWG members and the Authority, the option was pursued by staff; however, funding support from all of TRCA's participating member municipalities was not obtained. 2013 DTAH Architects Limited (DTAH) was retained by TRCA, as the design team to prepare integrated conceptual development plans for the parking lot at BCPV. Various international case studies were analyzed, and options for the development of the site were prepared and presented to the LTOAWG in December. At that meeting, the LTOAWG directed staff to investigate alternative methods of financing the proposals, and to refine a preferred alternative, with direction to examine the existing Shoreham office site further. 724 2014 DTAH in partnership with N. Barry Lyon Consulting, was retained by TRCA to examine financing options and begin refining the preferred alternative. During this time, pressures about TRCA's lease at the Downsview Office rose to the forefront, and the opportunity to lease a temporary interim head office facility at 101 Exchange Avenue for a six year term came forward. A new leasing arrangement at 101 Exchange Avenue was approved at Authority Meeting #2/14, held on March 28, 2014. All staff from the Downsview and Head Office locations was relocated, as well as some groups from other TRCA office locations. The relocation of staff to 101 Exchange Avenue provides efficiencies, a better working environment, and changes the options and time available for developing TRCA's new, permanent headquarters. After examining the existing planning and zoning permissions on both sites, it became apparent that developing a new headquarters building on the BCPV parking lot site will involve more challenging planning approvals and involvement of as yet undetermined partnerships with other organizations supportive of TRCA's mandate, and it would not be possible to construct a new headquarters within the six year term of the 101 Exchange Avenue lease at this location. 2015 DTAH was retained by TRCA to complete a two- phased planning and design approach for 5 Shoreham Drive and the BCPV site. Phase 1 was to establish a master plan for both sites north and south of Shoreham Drive. This built on the existing conceptual development framework completed by DTAH in 2013/2014 and examined options to accommodate a future development partner that could include an office user, residential development or other institutional and community uses while considering the ongoing operational needs of Black Creek Pioneer Village. Phase 2 was to develop a schematic design and construction cost estimate for a new +/- 100,000 square foot headquarters on the 5 Shoreham Drive site. Phase 2 puts TRCA in a position to pursue funding options, site plan approval and building permits, and construct a new headquarters prior to the expiry of the lease at 101 Exchange Avenue. At Authority Meeting #2/15, held on February 27, 2015, the Authority approved appointment of new members to the Working Group and selecting the existing Head Office site at 5 Shoreham Drive as the preferred site for the new headquarters, as follows: THAT the Chair of the Authority (Maria Augimeri), Jack Heath, Ron Moeser, Jim Tovey, Michael Di Biase, Giorgio Mammoliti, Colleen Jordan, Anthony Perruzza, Ben Cachola, Glenn De Baeremaeker and any another other TRCA Members who are interested, be appointed to the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group (LTOAING) until the end of their current term of appointment to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) or until their successor is appointed; At the same meeting, the Authority also approved award of a preferred source contract to DTAH for the development of a Master Plan for the BCPV parking lot site, and the schematic design and costing of a new corporate headquarters building at 5 Shoreham Drive. 725 Attachment 2 W r ate, ' r d Js r� image 4 Location adjacent to Black Creek c'ioneer Wage entrance. c w wbe -Y°ra �n 4'ri21vM . 'MThMa S IwfA ON 4. OtbLo4Y 9 rvlvw ldtplK •!NKlS � � +�tLhR1�tT t PPMMAAkSm Owl 726 T Attachment 3 Y TRCA HQ x i TRCA Long Term Office Accommodation Committee Presentation Site Analysis: HQ Legend 0 Ravine landscape 0 Treectivegetateci areas Existing crossing O Trail head - - - - -- Top/ bottom of bank 0*4 Stengthen connection ••••� between York University, TRCA and Ravine <...j Informal pedestrian crossing location <..... Views over the valley Existing overland drainage patterns - - - -- Zoning boundary 1 To Black / Creek Farm h Shoreham Drive 727 Zone of mini disturbance dtah Tennis Canatla C� Site Plan s 1 Woodland Walk 2 Rain Gardens 3 Demonstration Garden 4 Meadow 5 Greenway, . 6 Ravine Terrace 7 Lookout 8 Trail Colpnection Black 9 Service CoArt Creek 10 Parking Court Ravine 11 Permeable Paving 12 Gardens / Bee Apiary (Phase 2 Site) Shoreham Drive 9 2 i 4 10 5 2 Site Section L r a r m e 0 C i30� f� m a 1 Tennis Canada dtah 728 Building Section Ground Floor Plan + Typical Floor Plan "® �y- n - • • v c c v _ _ _ I_ e __ _ - __ _ __-. WAR 729 dtah dtah P1 Parking Level n E 0 m E G ■o � Em ■o ■o .,, RR RR RR mm R® — + TOTAL63 SPACES o c= c e c c c R® / R® dtah P2 -P3 Parking Levels ❑ ❑ o o ❑ o o ❑ m m ■ TOTAL 80 SPACES 730 dtah 3D View of Entry 3D View of Entry dtah dtah 731 3D View of Entry j A, 3D View of Typical Office Floor rg r,�yl it 1YQ _� tt i l � � IF 732 � p r i, i � 1 dtah and dtah 3D View of Ravine Terrace f 3D View from Black Creek Ravine Edge dtah dtah 733 Parking Court Detail Existing: Potential: +/- 96 Spots 159 spots Z 10,40, Or 11111111111115 dtah 734 Attachment 4 TRCA Parking Analysis of 5 Shoreham Drive and 1000 Murray Ross Parkway Summary: The proposed new TRCA head office building will have an estimated capacity of +/- 500 building occupants. Based on the estimated number of building occupants, approximately 363 parking spaces will be required. This parking demand forecast has been calculated based on 2015 survey data collected by TRCA's Transportation Consultant, BA Group. Of the 363 parking spaces, 25 spaces would be allocated for visitors and 60 for TRCA fleet vehicles. The applicable City of Toronto zoning by -law would require 194 parking spaces. According to BA Consulting Group, any less than 217 on -site spaces (2.34 spaces per 100 mz) could reduce market value of the building. Parking is proposed to be accommodated on and off -site (Black Creek Pioneer Village parking lot), as follows: +/ -220 spaces for fleet and staff via on -site underground parking; 60 spaces via a surface parking lot positioned in the right -of -way between the property and Tennis Canada for staff and visitor use; and up to 100 spaces at Black Creek Pioneer Village for temporary overflow parking (please refer to Figure 1 for map). It is estimated that over time, parking requirements may be reduced to +/- 277, as staff and visitors switch to a less auto centric modes of transportation. This will be supported by improved public and active transportation infrastructure (i.e. subway, bus and on- street cycling lanes). As this occurs, TRCA will rely less on the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) Parking Lot for overflow parking. The BCPV parking lot site currently has +/ -700 parking spaces, and could likely accommodate more subject to a re- design and improved layout of spaces. Approximately 150 parking spaces can be accommodated over 1 acre of land or +/- 1000 parking spaces for a 7 acre parcel of land such as the BCPV lot. On average, 200 spaces are required to meet BCPV weekday needs (i.e. visitor and BCPV staff). The remaining spaces are available to the public (i.e. York University students). In 2014, $457,000 was generated in parking lot revenue and in 2015 $565,000. It is estimated that another $200,000 could be generated in annual revenue if current non - paying users were charged (i.e .TRCA staff, wedding clients, volunteers and other clients). TRCA has historically relied on the BCPV parking lot to accommodate overflow parking from the head office located 5 Shoreham Drive and, as noted, staff propose that this practice resume in 2021 with the opening of the new head office building. The practice is anticipated to be temporary, for the reasons identified herein. Lastly, BA Group does not anticipate significant future BCPV parking lot revenue increases due to reasons addressed below, and is another factor in the Staff recommendation that the BCPV parking lot can be used to accommodate temporary overflow parking for the proposed head office at 5 Shoreham Drive. 735 Notes: Zoning By -Law Parking Requirements • 5 Shoreham Drive is subject to North York Zoning By -law 7625 = 194 spaces (2.08 spaces per 100 mZ gross floor area). TRCA Parking Demand Surveys — Existing at 101 Exchange with +300 staff • Peak — 257 cars, with average of 215 cars observed during May 2015 and July 2015 surveys (staff and visitors). • 80% of staff (240 cars) drive to work according to 2015 staff survey completed by BA consulting. TRCA Parking Demand — Proposed 5 Shoreham with +500 staff, assuming 85% daily attendance, as recorded at TRCA Interim Head Office in 2015 • 363 parking spaces estimated to be required (278 staff + 25 visitor + 60 TRCA fleet). • 65% of staff (278 cars) plan to drive (BA Consulting 2015 staff survey). • 45% (192 cars) could be achieved (through improved public and active transportation infrastructure i.e. subway, bus and on- street bike lanes) based on York University Secondary area transportation data. Proposed Parking Supply for Redeveloped 5 Shoreham • +/ -220 parking spaces in three (3) storey underground parking garage. • +/- 60 parking spaces at surface lot shared with Tennis Canada. • +/ -100 parking spaces at BCPV. • $11 - 13.2 m estimated cost for underground parking. Black Creek Pioneer Village Parking Lot • 7 acre parking lot. • Approximately 700 parking spaces, with potential for more if properly designed. Approximately 150 parking spaces per acre is typically possible. • 200 parking spaces required for BCPV staff and visitors. • Weekends and evenings events could require most of the parking lot. Black Creek Pioneer Village Parking Lot Revenue • $457,826 in 2014. • $565,000 in 2015. • BA Group does not anticipate significant future revenue increases due to: opening of subway, cheaper parking options at TTC commuter lots at the Black Creek Pioneer Village and 407 Stations, York University has a parking space surplus and demand anticipated to drop from students with subway. York University uses approximately 5,000 of their 8,000 spaces. 736 • Notwithstanding BA Group's comments, TRCA does anticipate some revenue increase in 2016 and beyond, as a result of the newly installed automated gate system, which will allow for TRCA to capture loss revenue resulting from the unattended parking booth after- hours. Proposed Parking Supply Options 2 ACRES FOR: 99' +/ -200 LOTA SPECIFICTO "9 ... BCPV PARKING LOT BCPV 0 '- TOTAL LOT = 7 ACRES + / -100 LOT TO PROVIDE - TEMPORARY OVERFLOW FOR /p 5SHOREHAM si TENNIS CANADA + /- 60 -LOTC 5SHOREHAM� UNDERGROUND +/- 220 - LOT D , PARKING GARAGE .4 J� ✓ ./' Q Metes a0 `; N bron[Odntlfl¢yinn Conservation fo.Tne>,iyinCrt Figure 1: Proposed parking supply for redeveloped 5 Shoreham Drive. 737 Attachment 5 DRAFT 01/08/2016 Preliminary Parameters for a Request for Expression of Interest (EOI) for the Redevelopment of the Parking Lot at 1000 Murray Ross Parkway, Toronto, Ontario Vision: Innovative, sociallyjust, culturally rich, and ecologically restorative, mixed use, urban redevelopment that demonstrates Toronto and Region Conservation's (TRCA) Living City Vision and Policies. Opportunity: TRCA is seeking an innovative and experienced partner(s) to design, build, manage and finance the redevelopment of the parking lot at 1000 Murray Ross Parkway (known as the Black Creek Pioneer Village Parking Lot Site), hereafter referred to as the "property ". Please refer to Figure 1 for a map of the property. This is an exciting opportunity to redevelop a parcel of land, in an area scheduled for rejuvenation with the onset of the Toronto Transit Commission subway extension through the community to Vaughan. TRCA's ideal partner(s) will have both the vision and expertise to realize a sustainable, mixed -use, urban district, through a master plan process that benefits the property and broader community and demonstrates innovative and rich city building ideas and principles. The property is a 2.8 hectare (7 acre) parcel of land, currently used as a gravel and asphalt surfaced parking lot that serves TRCA's Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) and TRCA's former Head Office located at 5 Shoreham Drive (located south of the property). The 5 Shoreham site is 1.6 hectares (4 acres) with a buildable land area of approximately 0.67 hectares (1.65 acres). As part of the response to this EOI, potential partner(s) may choose to present an opportunity for how they may support TRCA in the development of a new Head Office at 5 Shoreham Drive, as part of the redevelopment of the property. Structure of EOI: This EOI is comprised of two phases: Phase 1 is to identify a short list of a maximum of four (4) qualified potential partners; and Phase 2 is a Request for Proposals (RFP) from those selected in Phase 1. The document herein begins Phase 1. TRCA requests qualifications and a high level summary of a respondent's vision for the parking lot at 1000 Murray Ross Parkway. Detailed business cases of for the proposed vision will be requested in Phase 2. An RFP for those selected in Phase 1 will be issued under a separate document, at a later date. Development Framework: Any redevelopment of the property shall adhere to the framework presented below. TRCA requires that this proposed undertaking be: innovative; dynamic; strive to enhance the entry way into BCPV and York University; and compliment streetscapes of BCPV and York University. Therefore, TRCA anticipates that the planning framework will be 738 informed and advanced through a master plan process, and through our discussions with the successful partner(s), the City of Toronto and the public. The preliminary development framework is as follows: Sustainability: Shape the redevelopment of the property as a model sustainable, creative community. All four pillars of sustainability (economic, social, cultural and environmental sustainability) need to drive the revitalization of the property. Incorporate planning and design characteristics from the following standards or equivalents: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Version 4 or better; Living Building ChallengeTm 3.0 or better; Living Community Challenge TM 1.0 or better; JUST TM; WELL Building Standard® Declare®; One Planet Living; Envision Rating System ®. Parks, Open Space, Public Realm and Natural Heritage: An ecological design and landscape -based strategy for revitalization is the fundamental core of the objectives for this property. This strategy focuses on the creation of high - quality, interconnected and ecologically functional open spaces. Incorporation of sustainability practices such as innovative storm -water management; and increased access to natural light within the urban fabric, balanced with expanded tree canopy are important. The open space system should include native species, and be designed to seamlessly integrate with and enhance the adjacent Black Creek ravine system. Mobility: A comprehensive forward- thinking mobility strategy must take full advantage of existing and planned transit service and inclusive transportation infrastructure currently under construction by Metrolinx, Toronto Transit Commission and York Region Transit. The property should support a variety of transportation modes, with an emphasis on public and active transportation to encourage ease of mobility, access to recreation activities and enhanced public health. The property should be well connected with a thoughtful interior transportation network aligned with its future urban form and sensitive integration with the surrounding area. Land Use: A variety of land uses will be considered to transform the property into a vibrant and active destination. Future land uses should reflect meaningful economic opportunities, build upon existing cultural assets, and contribute to the existing and planned uses in the wider neighborhood (i.e. BCPV, York University, and Black Creek Community). Built Form: A landmark property, it has the potential to be transformed into a model, sustainable and resilient creative urban district. Interesting, diverse and iconic design excellence founded on its surrounding context and existing, as well as future users is paramount. The redevelopment will enhance the "front door" to BCPV, as well as, compliment BCPV and York University streetscapes. Impacts on BCPV and the wider neighborhood must be mitigated. 739 Roles and Responsibilities: • Toronto and Region Conservation - Provide support and guidance in the obtainment of the necessary municipal Zoning and /or Official Plan Amendments and /or Site Plan Control approval. - Provide support and guidance in public engagement. - Provide support and guidance on real estate matters. The preferred option for this development opportunity would be a long term lease, however, a sale of a portion of the property may be considered. - Provide support and guidance in the application of sustainable development, ecological design and low impact development technologies. - Participate and have final approval of the development framework. Successful Proponent - Design, build, finance and maintain the project. - At minimum accommodate for weekday parking demands of 200 TRCA parking spaces for BCPV staff and visitors; and 100 temporary overflow parking spaces for TRCA's proposed head office at 5 Shoreham Drive. To be studied further and revised accordingly. - Apply for and obtain necessary municipal Zoning and /or Official Plan Amendments and /or Site Plan Control approval. - Complete the necessary public engagement. - Lead and participate in the process to develop the framework and adhere to the requirements. City of Toronto Requirements: The proposed redevelopment is subject to City of Toronto planning approval. The City has in preliminary discussions asked TRCA to demonstrate "innovative and out -of -the box thinking" to meet and preferably exceed the City of Toronto Green Standards with on -going monitoring of environmental performance and to provide new and enhanced community amenities for the surrounding priority neighborhood. Planning Context: - The property is designated as Parks and Open Space Areas under the City of Toronto Official Plan and Open Space — Recreation Zone under the City of North York By -Law No. 7625 - Surrounding lands are influenced by the York University Secondary Plan, York University Master Plan and Vaughan Steeles West Secondary Plan (OPA 620) Distribution: - Post on Biddingo and MERX. - Direct distribution to potential partners. - Advertisement in local and national media sources. 740 Figure 1 Property map with redevelopment parcel outlined in red. r r � I 1000m to TTC 1500m to TTC Black Creek. Pioneer Village I ` It York ••,,, I ..•� ••: � `,, University I i Welcome I Centre Block 11 Greek I`o� e� Farm of Ilk TRCA HQ � H4 O e f' y ahem •., .....:' Tennis Shot ✓ ----�� Canada 741 Attachment 6 Table 1: Benefit Analysis TRCA Head Office Options Continue to Lease Purchase Existing Build New at 5 Shoreham Negative Impacts Highest 30 year life cycle costs High retrofit costs Slightly higher capital costs compared to some purchase existing options No asset at end of 30 years Unknowns that can increase cost Location subject to market availability and Location subject to market availability and may not meet TRCA objectives may not meet TRCA objectives Possible multiple relocations, resulting in increased costs, low staff morale, loss of Less opportunity to showcase TRCA goals productive, staff retention & customer and objectives frustration Less efficient, resulting in higher operating Less efficient, resulting in higher operating costs costs Benefits No initial larger capital outlay Opportunity to improve environmental Efficient: lower operating costs, lower carbon performance of an existing asset Retain ownership of an asset Location: central and accessible for staff and clients by transit Lead transformation of the Black Creek Community Proximity to York University and BCPV Allows for access to nature, greenspace and trails Healthy building environment for customers and staff Demonstration building to showcase Living City Policies Adaptable to changes in TRCA's mandate and services 742 Table 2: TRCA Head Office Operating Cost Estimates Notes: Market Average = Average building that may be available on market (not LEED or Toronto Green Standard) Estimated Energy Cost = Tier 1 Toronto Green Standard, Building EUI (ekWHlsflyr) Estimated Energy Cost ($lyr) Estimated Energy Cost ($ 130yr) Savings From Market Comments /Source Carbon MNECB = Model National Energy Code for Buildings Average Market Average 32 $ 225,000.00 $ 8,743,464 $ Toronto Average Good New Build 23 $ 165,000.00 $ 6,571,300 $ 2,172,165 Tierl Bldg. 33 %< MNECB TRCA New Build — Low Op Cost 17 $ 125,000.00 $ 5,133,510 $ 3,609,954 Modeled at 13ekWh /sf TRCA New Building - Low Op Carbon 13 $ 154,000.00 $ 6,324,484 $ 2,418,980 Modeled at 10ekWh /sf Notes: Market Average = Average building that may be available on market (not LEED or Toronto Green Standard) Good New Build = Tier 1 Toronto Green Standard, TRCA New Build - Low Op EUI (ekWHlsflyr) Cost = Lowest operating cost option, heating completed with natural gas boiler and cooling with electric air source heat pumps heating - boiler, cooling - air source heat pumps TRCA New Build - Low Op =Low operating carbon air source heat pumps and ground source heat pumps to heat and cool. Backup natural gas boiler for -20 to -10 degress celcious outdoor temperature Carbon MNECB = Model National Energy Code for Buildings Table 3: TRCA Head Office Operating Carbon Cost Estimate Notes: Market Average = Average building that may be available on market (not LEED or Toronto Green Standard) Estimated Carbon Cost = Tier 1 Toronto Green Standard, Building EUI (ekWHlsflyr) Operating Carbon TonnesNr Estimated Carbon Cost ($ 130yr) Savings From Market Comments /Source Carbon MNECB = Model National Energy Code for Buildings Average Market Average 32 $ 400.00 $ 621,757 $ Toronto Average Good New Build 23 $ 300.00 $ 466,318 $ 155,439 Tierl Bldg. 33% <MNECB TRCA New Build — Low Op Cost 17 $ 200.00 $ 310,879 $ 310,879 Modeled at 13ekWh /sf TRCA New Building - Low Op Carbon 13 $ 130.00 $ 202,071 $ 419,686 Modeled at 10ekWh /sf Notes: Market Average = Average building that may be available on market (not LEED or Toronto Green Standard) Good New Build = Tier 1 Toronto Green Standard, TRCA New Build - Low Op = Lowest operating cost option, heating completed with natural gas boiler and cooling with electric air source heat pumps heating - boiler, cooling - air source heat pumps Cost TRCA New Build - Low Op =Low operating carbon air source heat pumps and ground source heat pumps to heat and cool. Backup natural gas boiler for -20 to -10 degress celcious outdoor temperature Carbon MNECB = Model National Energy Code for Buildings 743 Attachment 7 2016 CVA Apportionment of New Funding for Build New at 5 Shoreham Drive Option TRCA New Head Office Project: Proposed Annual Municipal Funding Contributions: Municipality • Apportionment , Amount Mono 0.0081 $122 Adjala - Tosorontio 0.0067 $101 Durham 2.8247 $42,371 Special request will be made, but can accommodate within $800,000 capital envelope. Peel 11.3733 $170,600 Provision exists within current capital envelope. Toronto 64.3620 $965,430 Additional funding of $2m available in 2023 cycle. TRCA requires permission from the City to reallocate funds for this project. York 21.4252 $321,378 Request for additional funding pending, but can accommodate, if necessary, within existing $5m envelope. TOTAL 100.00 $1,500,000 - 33 Year Financing Period $49,500,000 744 RES. #A258/15 - RULES OF CONDUCT Amendment to Voting Method. Amendment to TRCA's Procedures for Election of Officials from secret ballot to open voting. Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Kevin Ashe THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Procedures for Election of Officials (Appendix A to TRCA's Rules of Conduct) be amended so that the voting procedures for election of officers be by open voting; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to make all required changes to Appendix A for the Chair, Vice Chair and Budget/Audit Advisory Board positions to bring into effect, and report back on recommended procedures for the Executive Committee. CARRIED BACKGROUND As per the Conservation Authorities Act, each conservation authority (CA) elects from its membership a chair, vice chair and an executive committee. Any additional committees of the Authority are prescribed for in each CAs Rules of Conduct; in this regard, TRCA has a Budget/Audit Advisory Board. Subcommittees or working committees generally follow the Rules of Conduct, but do not have elections for positions so this recommended change does not apply. RATIONALE Staff recommends changing the voting procedures from secret ballot to open voting for the Chair and Vice Chair of the Authority, and positions on the Executive Committee and Budget/Audit Advisory Board for the following reasons: 1. Increased transparency in the election process. Public agencies are increasingly being driven toward open data and to being proactive in disclosure of information to provide more clear, open and transparent processes, and this proposed amendment to the Rules of Conduct entails proactive disclosure. 2. It is in keeping with the Municipal Act, 2001, whereby secret ballots may occur for the head of council of an upper -tier municipality or their presiding officer for meetings, but in all other instances open voting is required. The only exemptions to this are when meetings can be held in closed session, yet the election process does not meet the criteria for exemption. To be in keeping with this Act, by -laws for the regions of Peel and York have been updated in recent years to adopt open voting for the regional chair positions. The Region of Durham Chair and the Mayor of Toronto are elected officials so such a procedure does not apply. 3. To streamline meetings where elections are held, so that the audience does not need to sit through a lengthy ballot counting process and potentially multiple votes, when no other activities can take place. Staff therefore recommends this process be implemented for full transparency. 745 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA's Procedures for Election of Officials (Appendix A to TRCA's Rules of Conduct) would need to be changed to adopt this new procedure. Although approval of procedures has been delegated by the Authority to the Chief Executive Officer, and the Rules of Conduct allows the Chair of the Authority to designate procedures for elections while generally following the procedures as set out Appendix A, this change is being brought to the Authority for approval in principle, while recommending that staff make all required changes to the procedures document. Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks(&trca.on.ca For information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: kstranks(@trca.on.ca Date: January 11, 2016 746 RES. #A259 /15 - PLANNING AND PERMITTING ADMINISTRATION COST RECOVERY Assessment of cost recovery and service delivery supporting the 2016 -2017 Planning, Permitting and Environmental Assessment Review Services Fee Schedules. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Jennifer Innis WHEREAS, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff established the 2014 -2015 fees schedules for all plan review services that aimed to achieve a 100% cost recovery target for the development review functions within the Planning and Development section; AND WHEREAS staff has committed to monitor the trends in submission demand, level of service, revenue collection and cost recovery for the transition period to 100% cost recovery and report back to the Authority on the status of cost recovery; AND WHEREAS TRCA follows the guidelines from the provincial Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry's Policies and Procedures for Charging of Conservation Authority Fees and TRCA's Fee Policy Guideline 2009, where a base fee adjustment for cost of living is required every two years, in addition to provision of a comprehensive level of service /cost recovery assessment; AND WHEREAS TRCA has discussed the proposed new fee schedule and cost recovery assessment with the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) prior to seeking Authority approval; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the fee adjustment proposal be approved as outlined within this report and that new 2016 -2017 fee schedules be effective immediately. AMENDMENT RES. #A260 115 Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Jennifer Innis THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: AND FURTHER THAT staff review the protocols for small proposals in special policy areas and report back to the Authority. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff established the 2014 -2015 fees schedules for all plan review services that aimed to achieve a 100% cost recovery target for the development review functions within the Planning and Development section; 747 AND WHEREAS staff has committed to monitor the trends in submission demand, level of service, revenue collection and cost recovery for the transition period to 100% cost recovery and report back to the Authority on the status of cost recovery; AND WHEREAS TRCA follows the guidelines from the provincial Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry's Policies and Procedures for Charging of Conservation Authority Fees and TRCA's Fee Policy Guideline 2009, where a base fee adjustment for cost of living is required every two years, in addition to provision of a comprehensive level of service /cost recovery assessment; AND WHEREAS TRCA has discussed the proposed new fee schedule and cost recovery assessment with the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) prior to seeking Authority approval; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the fee adjustment proposal be approved as outlined within this report and that new 2016 -2017 fee schedules be effective immediately; AND FURTHER THAT staff review the protocols for small proposals in special policy areas and report back to the Authority. BACKGROUND Through its Planning and Development function, TRCA regulates development in valley and stream corridors, wetlands, flood and erosion prone areas, and along the Lake Ontario shoreline, and reviews and comments on development proposals and applications within or adjacent to these natural areas. By doing so, TRCA aims to prevent, eliminate or reduce the risk to life and property from flooding, erosion and slope instability, and to encourage the protection and enhancement of natural systems. Planning and Development provides municipalities with advice on applications made under the Planning Act and the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, applications made pursuant to the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, the Greenbelt Act, and other applicable legislation. Planning and Development provides technical and scientific expertise to support the environmental planning function of municipalities, as well as assist the development community and individual landowners to make informed decisions on how development should proceed and how to maintain, and enhance or restore the natural environment. Through this function TRCA assists the development community and the public to prevent and mitigate natural hazard -based risks, while maintaining and where possible enhancing the health of TRCA's watersheds. In many cases, TRCA has formal memoranda in place with our municipalities through which the TRCA acts as technical environmental advisors to the municipalities through the plan review process. TRCA also has the delegated responsibility to represent the provincial interest for Section 3.1 (Natural Hazards) of the Provincial Policy Statement through the plan review process. As part of TRCA's plan review service, TRCA's planners coordinate the integration of TRCA's Planning and Development technical team of engineers, ecologists and hydrogeologists as well as enforcement and compliance staff. TRCA's work is supported by the policy team, as well as property, geomatics and records staff. In a similar fashion to TRCA's municipal partners, Planning and Development assesses fees for TRCA's services. These fees are to recover the costs of delivering the services, and historically TRCA has recovered less than 100% of the actual cost. i Fee Planning and Development staff received direction from the Authority in 2011 to achieve full cost recovery for eligible Planning and Development services. Through the changes to the fee schedules between 2010 and 2014, Planning and Development has substantially achieved full cost recovery in 2015 for the development review function, and it is projected that TRCA will achieve 100% cost recovery through the proposed 2016 -2017 fee schedules for the development review function. Current Fee Schedules The last comprehensive fee schedule adjustment and cost recovery assessment for TRCA's Planning and Development function took place in May, 2014. At that time, the 2014 -2015 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule was approved by the Authority (Resolution #A72/14). That fee schedule was created based upon trends of submissions for planning and permitting review and an assessment of the potential forecast of submissions — setting a new approach for fee recovery targeting a 100% revenue stream for development related submissions. The cost of service delivery was also assessed on a projected basis at that time. Planning and Development staff has monitored the project review demands and revenue flow over the last two years to determine TRCA's current level of service and cost recovery. TRCA has conducted an assessment to meet the Province of Ontario's guidelines and TRCA's Planning, Permitting and Environmental Assessment Fees Policy /Guideline 2009 in preparing this report. The Planning and Development section includes four sub - groups — Planning and Regulation Development Review, Policy and Development Regulation, Environmental Assessment Planning, and Compliance functions. These professional teams review all development and infrastructure projects affected by TRCA's regulation and mandate, from strategic policy planning, development and environmental assessment review through to construction compliance. Primary Objectives for the 2016 -2017 Fee Schedules Planning and Development staff assess the volume and evolving nature of the applications that TRCA processes on an on -going basis. Based upon this, TRCA has identified priority areas to be addressed in this fee schedule update. Accordingly, there are four primary objectives for this fee schedule review: 1. fulfill Authority direction with respect to achieving 100% cost recovery; 2. incorporate a cost of living increase of 5% (2.5% increase for two years); 3. provide for some additional funding for addressing staffing deficiencies, where required to meet service delivery standards and per planner /technical staff file ratios; 4. provide additional opportunities to address expedited review requests. RATIONALE Trends in Workload and Service Delivery Planning and Development has assessed the workload volume and types of application reviews conducted for both 2014 and 2015. Planning and Development continues to experience a consistently high volume of planning and permitting applications, including large scale Secondary Plans, Block Plans and associated MESP (Master Environmental Services Plans), as well as technically complex submissions. Many of these applications are part of new growth area projects, such as North Markham, North Leslie, North East Brampton, Vaughan Blocks 41 & 27, Vaughan Mills Centre, Stouffville Expansion Area, Buttonville, Langstaff and Markham Centre. TRCA has also observed that the nature of the applications is changing. Some of these changes include: 749 • increasing complexity and duration of planning applications require more senior staff involvement and more staff resources; • increasing demand for expedited review and faster clearances has put pressure on TRCA teams, and frequently exceeds TRCA's current capacity; • all files are 'high priority' files; • Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) appeals with environmental issues as a result of "failure to decide" continues to increase, diverting TRCA review efforts away from the standard review stream; • as the scope of submission increases, fewer submissions are sufficiently integrated; • the combination of increasing complexity of submissions, expedited timelines and workload volume is reducing the quality of the submissions that TRCA is receiving; • project management gaps; • development, infrastructure, expedited reviews, OMB, new growth areas are managed by the same team at TRCA, resulting in competing workloads and deadlines for the same team members. Attachments 1 and 2 provide the comparative summary of submissions by municipality and by TRCA review team for the last few years including 2014 and 2015. The following is a brief summary of the volume of files. In 2014 and 2015, Planning and Development: • processed more than 1,000 new permits; • processed more than 600 new planning applications in addition to carry-over files; • reviewed 333 infrastructure projects in 2014 (in addition to permits) — a steady increase from 129 projects in 2011; • processed an average of 1,000 solicitor /realtor enquiries. Additionally, TRCA Planning and Development: • actively participates in OMB hearings affecting TRCA's interests — increased from 18 in 2011 to 52 in 2014; • continues to be an active participant in new community planning for an average of 15 -20 new communities. Planning Applications The volume of new planning applications has remained stable over the last five years with a milestone year in volume in 2012 for "base" planning applications. From 2013 -2015, the volume of planning applications has remained consistent — over 600 new planning applications per year, with a fluctuation of about 3% per year. Between 2010 and 2015, the numbers of applications in the City of Markham, Town of Whitchurch-Stouffvi Ile and Township King have grown the most. In terms of volume of applications, the City of Toronto, Town of Richmond Hill, City of Vaughan, City of Markham and Town Caledon had the highest numbers of planning applications submitted to TRCA, respectively. All other municipalities remained steady or had fluctuating numbers of applications. The volume of OMB hearings associated with the applications has increased. 750 Permit Applications The number of TRCA (Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended) permit applications that have been received has steadily increased over the last five years. Since 2009, a new'norm' has been established in which - in each year thereafter - more than 1,000 TRCA permit applications have been received. From 2009 to 2014 the number of permit applications remained consistent, with approximately 2 -3% variation each year. In 2015 TRCA received the highest number of permit applications of any year on record, with 1,192 permit applications received. This represents a 14% increase in the number of permit applications submitted, over 2014 numbers. Between 2013 and 2015, the volume of permit applications has increased in the rapidly expanding York Region municipalities of Vaughan, Richmond Hill and Markham and King, while permit numbers have remained strong and have grown within the City of Toronto (particularly Etobicoke, East York and North York). Within the other areas of TRCA's jurisdiction, including TRCA's portions of Durham Region, Peel Region, and other areas of York Region, the permit application numbers have remained consistent or have increased at a slower pace. With the significant volume of new permits, as well as on -going permits, TRCA's compliance team conducted a total of 4,843 permit site inspections in 2014. Large -Scale Planning Projects and Infrastructure Growth area MESP's tied to new growth, secondary plan and block plan projects consumed a huge effort in 2014 and 2015 with 25 projects of various scales. A significant workload volume will continue for these growth areas spread through Caledon, City of Brampton, Vaughan, Markham, Richmond Hill and the developing Seaton community in 2016 and 2017. The number of OMB hearing efforts has increased significantly as an outcome of several Official Plan Reviews in Richmond Hill, City of Mississauga, Brampton and Vaughan, as well as site - specific appeals. TRCA senior staff was actively involved in 52 hearings in 2015, inclusive of mediations and negotiations, with an additional six Official Plan OMB appeals with multiple appellants (Vaughan, for example, has 67 appellants with conservation related issues). TRCA Development Planning and Policy teams are working together to complete 14 flood vulnerable Special Policy Area updates. These include the Woodbridge, Toronto, Brampton (Bram East), Bolton, Lake Wilcox in Richmond Hill, and the initiation of the Mississauga (Dixie Dundas and Dixie) SPA reviews. These SPAS are often in areas needing development revitalization, and where development applications need input with updated hydrology modeling and risk assessment direction. This is a ground breaking work effort tailored to assist municipalities to set land use and development directions within flood vulnerable communities — particularly with the increasing concerns about severe storms and the impacts on older communities that are flood prone. A major shift in service demand continues with increases in expedited reviews driven by the applicants, the municipalities and /or by OMB appeals. Even certain MESP processing has been reviewed through OMB timetables which have put enormous pressure on senior staff time to not only review but attend mediations, strategic meetings and negotiations with TRCA's lawyers, as well as conduct repetitive engineering modeling reviews to input into complex negotiations. These service delivery pressures are being felt by not just TRCA but by our municipal partners. TRCA's efforts save municipalities significant amounts of money for technical input and legal managing of important environmental issues through the OMB. 751 Fluctuations commonly occur with "base" planning and permitting applications from year to year, but a major shift to process growth area studies with municipal partners will be a huge part of a rapidly increasing workload for 2016 -2017. Senior project management and technical capabilities are required from TRCA to support these complex efforts both for greenfield and urban intensification. Staff is projecting that there will be significant effort required in the planning of the future urban areas of Brampton, Caledon, Vaughan, King, Markham, Richmond Hill, Seaton and the intensification areas within Toronto and Mississauga, for 2016 -17, on top of the regular base submissions. Plan review continues to be technically complex as applications move into more sensitive landscapes with water balance considerations involving engineering modeling updates, geotechnical and hydrogeology expertise. TRCA's engineering and hydrogeology staff complement is under increasing service pressure. Environmental Assessment Trends In the suburban municipalities, there has been a steady increase in the number of regional and local infrastructure master plans, as well as, environmental assessment permitting. There has been steady growth in transit related projects, as well as utility projects that include gas lines and telecommunications. With 25 communities currently in the planning stages, it is anticipated that this growth will only continue to increase in future years. In developed communities, particularly Toronto, there has been a steady increase in the number of emergency works projects. This relates directly to the fact that old and failing infrastructure was historically built in valleylands. As the rivers and streams downcut and meander over time (a factor of natural process and exacerbated by poorly situated infrastructure and the effects of climate change), the infrastructure is left exposed. Repair to these pipes and bridges is becoming more complex, as well as, more urgent. As the city continues to intensify, the stress on the older infrastructure will also continue to increase, and it is fully anticipated that the trend in increased emergency projects will continue. Regardless of whether the infrastructure is serving suburban or urban nodes, the complexity of the TRCA review has also changed significantly to account for changes in science and information. Geomorphic assessments, political inputs, redevelopment/intensification occurring in regulated areas including flood vulnerable sites, ecologically sensitive or hazardous areas are all major factors in infrastructure development today. There is also a growing change in partnership opportunities between infrastructure providers and TRCA's Restoration and Infrastructure division, from monitoring, to planting and stream realignments. These new synergies between the TRCA and the infrastructure provider to work together in the project construction phase provides essential expert services for challenging construction sites, saves public funds and timing delays to support public infrastructure and private community development. TRCA provides our municipal partners with service agreements, with a dedicated planning and technical review team, detailed service delivery standards, project tracking and reporting, monthly team meetings, and weekly in -office staff support. The fees are negotiated annually through the municipal capital delivery programs, including water and wastewater, roads and transit services. Service agreements began in 2015, and are currently in place with York and Peel regions, the City of Brampton, Enbridge Gas, Metrolinx Rapid Transit Implementation (RTI), Metrolinx-GO and the Toronto Transit Commission for the Toronto -York Subway Extension (TYSSE) project and are continually refined to meet shifts in service demands. Cost Recovery Analysis Cost recovery applies to the majority of the planning function. Some exclusions continue to be funded by municipal levy and environmental assessment service agreements. 752 In 2011, the fees assessed by Planning and Development recovered approximately 55 -60% of the cost of delivering the services. In 2011, Authority direction was given to work toward 100% cost recovery, and a comprehensive assessment of TRCA's fees was completed in 2011 to support the transition to full cost recovery. Based upon this assessment, updated fee schedules were put into place for 2012 -2013. Based upon these fee schedules, TRCA achieved just over 80% cost recovery for eligible Planning and Development services for 2012 -2013. In 2014, the second comprehensive fee schedule update was completed, and this fee schedule remains in place today. Staff analysis indicates that the revenues attained from TRCA's fees over the 2014 -2015 period recovered in excess of 90% of the costs of delivering eligible services (2014) and achieved 100% cost recovery of eligible services in 2015. Between 2011 and 2013/2014, the Environmental Assessment team has increased their agreement -based revenue from approximately $1.2 million in 2011 to $1.8 million. Service agreements achieve 100% cost recovery, but non - service agreement operating budgets have achieved 40 -50% cost recovery through fee collection and are primarily funded by levy contributions. With the proposed revisions to the 2016 -2017 fee schedules, as outlined in this report, and reflected in the associated fee schedules, staff expects that TRCA will maintain 100% cost recovery for eligible services. Proposal for 2016- 2017 Cost Recovery In addition to an inflationary increase, it is recommended that TRCA should not increase all fees but should adjust those application types that are putting more time /cost pressure on the staffing complement. This strategy is projected to reach and maintain 100% cost recovery. The strategy includes: • a 5% cost of living increase that applies to most fees (based upon a 2.5% per year increase); • minor increases to individual fees that are not meeting cost recovery; • additional fee categories where the existing fee schedule has gaps that are too large between the categories — which are not adequately addressing the range of applications that TRCA processes; • additional optional fee categories, to reflect increasing demand for expedited services; • providing a broader menu of fee categories, addressing some of the gaps in the current fee schedule. Negotiations must also continue with municipal partners to build customized budgets for special urban revitalization studies outside the standard fee based structure (e.g. Flood Vulnerable Areas, urban MESP areas). In addition, it is recommended that TRCA's new proposed fee schedule for 2016 -17 include several minor modifications based on our discussions with staff and stakeholders about improved implementation, streamlining and housekeeping. The cost of living inflationary increase will generate about $200,000 of additional revenue for next year. In order to continue to meet the conflicting demands on TRCA's technical staff team, additional staff will be required. Although substantial increases are not proposed in the proposed 2016 -2017 fee schedules, modifications to some of the fees that are not currently covering the cost of delivering the service are expected to provide some additional revenue to meet TRCA's 100% cost recovery target. If planning and permit application volumes continue into the 2016 -2017 period, additional revenues may be available to initiate the process of bolstering TRCA's technical review team, as required. 753 The Fee Collection Challenge Achieving 100% cost recovery is a constantly evolving target, as Planning and Development staff cannot control the number of files and permit applications that are submitted to TRCA for review. Forecasting is not perfect, and 100% cost recovery must include a margin of flexibility, as TRCA is only able to collect fees to cover the cost of the services that TRCA provides, and cannot run a surplus over multiple years. As such, TRCA will need to continue to update our fee schedules on a regular basis, to respond to changes in the number and type of applications that TRCA receives. Based upon staff predictions for the number of files that TRCA can expect to receive over the 2016 -2017 period, the changes proposed in this updated fee schedule are expected to achieve 100% cost recovery. All planning departments in conservation authorities and municipal governments experience fluctuations in types of applications and the roller- coaster of revenue generation due to changes in volume and complexity of applications versus the standard of service delivery. While Planning and Development has met its revenue targets for 2015, and substantially met its targets in 2014, factors outside of TRCA's control may influence our ability to achieve 100% cost recovery from year to year in the future. It is clear that potential future reductions in volume will affect revenue. Planning and Development staff will continue to monitor performance in achieving 100% cost recovery, and on a biannual basis, will adjust and adapt TRCA fee schedules as required, to respond to changing market forces. Staff will also continue to work on mechanisms for recovering the cost of TRCA service delivery in areas, such as the following, which are on -going challenges for cost recovery: • The loss of adequate fee coverage attributed to planning processes for complex files, MESP's and special studies supporting growth areas including phasing of work, expedited requirements, inadequate or repetitive submissions, lack of project management, landowner complications and professional integration of technical findings. These workpath deviations have been out of staff's control. • Lack of mechanisms to collect fees for unusual or prolonged and challenging processes e.g. OMB, Special Policy Area reviews, flood vulnerable growth area negotiations, extended construction periods for permits and management of infractions /lack of compliance. Planning and Permitting Fee Schedule In addition to an inflationary increase, the focus of the proposed changes to the 2016 -2017 Planning and Permitting fee schedules are principally for the following purposes: • provide greater clarity for fee categories and services to provide a more clear understanding for all involved, and to ensure that the fee assessed covers the service; • provide greater clarity on the application of fees, which were not adequately addressed in the fee schedule; • provide a balanced approach: — some minor fees increased to better cover the work involved.; — new fee categories are proposed to provide for more appropriate fee options where options do not presently exist in the fee schedule for small -scale projects. Key areas of change The following key changes are proposed to the 2016 Planning Fee Schedule: • clarifications to definitions of types of applications (what's included and limitations); 754 • inclusion of a small fee for file continuation — recognizing the extended lifespan of some complex and large -scale projects.; • increases to minor site plans; • changes to subdivision size categories; • incomplete submission fee; • greater clarity around site visits; • changes to SPA/floodplain application fees; • addition of OMB collaborative resolution fee; • removal of screening assessment in some categories Permitting The following key changes are proposed to the 2016 Permitting Fee Schedule: • addition of scoped category; • increase in minor permit fees; • change to expedited review fee; • addition of voluntary violation resolution fee; • changes to minor works. Environmental Assessment Fee Schedule • cost of living increase; • integration of enhanced true cost accounting for delivery of services; • compliance monitoring — clarification for additional site visits; • costs associated with the review of additional submissions, site visits or meetings that occur beyond the service level provided for in the fees. Attachments 3, 4 and 5 provide the updated proposals for the Planning, Permitting and Environmental Assessment Fee Schedules, inclusive of the recommendations included above. Discussion with BILD and Municipal Partners The building industry (represented by BILD) has been very helpful in providing their input into TRCA's planning and permitting fee schedules. As part of the fee review process Planning and Development staff consults with BILD to attain their comments on the proposed changes. A formal presentation was provided to BILD representatives on November 23, 2015 to discuss the draft planning and permitting fee schedules. At the presentation BILD representatives were provided with copies of the draft fee schedules for their comments and consideration. BILD provided a response letter on December 21, 2015 with their comments. TRCA staff has discussed the comments with BILD staff, and has made one adjustment to the proposed planning fee schedule in response to their comments. With this revision, it is TRCA staffs understanding that BILD does not object to proposed planning and permitting fee schedules. Staff also consulted with its municipal partners through their regular meetings. Level of Service Planning application timelines are usually led by the municipal process, however, TRCA works to meet our 30 -45 day turnaround for standard applications, with some exceptions for very complex files or where unusual technical assessments are required e.g. engineering modeling. Permitting applications also maintain an 80 to 90% adherence to provincial time guidelines. The Environmental Assessment team tracks and reports on a tight service delivery standard for its service delivery partners, and meets these standards 80 -90% of the time. For non - service delivery partners, the standards are met approximately 70% of the time. 755 York Region is the fastest growing area of TRCA's jurisdiction, with the highest volume of planning applications within TRCA's jurisdiction. York Region is split between two development planning teams at TRCA for better coverage, however, there are significant pressures for file review and has been addressing over double the volume of planning and permitting files that other regional municipalities forward for TRCA's input. TRCA's review team will need to be enhanced to maintain requisite service levels and review time standards within York Region. The following detailed summary provides an overview of the service delivery tied to current guidelines for Planning and Development submissions. Staff believes that TRCA's service delivery is generally excellent under current workload pressures and the complexity of applications. Peel and York Planning Review teams: • Standard /Straight forward applications: includes standard permits, Committee of Adjustment, site plans and condominium applications, very high consistency with service delivery guidelines - 90 %+ compliance. • Rezoning applications and Official Plan Amendments (OPA): Very high, 90 %+ compliance. • Subdivisions: 75% compliance. Variance typically the result of incomplete or premature applications, and very complex subdivisions. Straight forward subdivisions have very high compliance. • MESPs less complex: generally meeting the 30 -60 day review time (close to 60 days) Resubmission generally taking about 30 days, depending upon complexity. Overall compliance 80 -90 %. Typical reason for variance, workload volume both within and between teams. • MESPs, Complex: Typical review time 90 -120 days, where 100% completed within 120 days, 75% completed within 90 days, and approximately 60% completed within 60 days. Typical reasons for variance - lack of integrating of components of MESP, incomplete and piecemeal MESP submissions, errors in the submission, time delay between submission by developer to municipality and TRCA's receipt, and balancing workload. The following service delivery comments are provided for Toronto and Durham: • Straightforward applications, includes standard permits, minor variances, site plans: Very high consistency with service delivery guidelines. 100% compliance. Typical minor works are turned around in about two weeks from complete application; variances are turned around within municipal deadline which is typically 20 days from date of notice. • Rezoning applications, OPAs, complex land division applications, major permits, permits associated with violations: Very high. 90 %+ compliance. In Toronto there is a strict "complete application determination" process which helps to speed up the process. The Town of Ajax and City of Pickering also require pre - consultation meetings. • Subdivisions: Very high. 90 %+ compliance. In Pickering typical delays for the application are the result of incomplete or premature applications, and very complex subdivisions. Straight forward subdivisions or fully complete applications have very high compliance. Clearance of Draft Plan Conditions is usually done in a matter of days. 756 Review times are complicated by incomplete applications, which results in overall delays for the proponent. However, once complete, compliance is very high. Planning and Development staff has observed an increasing trend of unconsolidated technical reports and submissions, and a lack of comprehensive project management on large -scale projects. Efficiency in Operations The plan review teams for Toronto /Durham, Peel/York East and York West continued to run as lean as possible in 2014 -15 with minor staffing adjustments to redistribute staffing skills covering submission demands. In 2015 the York East/Peel and York West planning teams were adjusted by 0.5 full time equivalent (FTE) staff (contract) to assist in back - filling senior staff. The following overview provides just a snapshot of the planning team coverage and numbers of new applications per year /per planner /per team (2015): Pee/ /York East Team (includes Markham and Richmond Hill) New Planning and Concept Applications: 362 Permits: 274 Total new files — exclusive of Large -Scale projects, OMB, Policy Initiatives: 655 (managed by 7 FTE) + Carry-over files (approx. 50 %): Additional 318 Toronto /Durham Team (includes Ajax, Pickering, Uxbridge) Planning Applications 218 Permits 399 Total new files — exclusive of Large -Scale projects, OMB, Policy Initiatives: 648 (managed by 5.5 FTE) + Carry-over files (approx. 50 %): 308 Vaughan/York West Team (includes Aurora, King, Whitchurch- Stouffville) Planning Applications: 195 Permits: 201 Total files — exclusive of Large -Scale projects, OMB, Policy Initiatives: 426 (managed by 5.5 FTE) Carry-over files (approx. 50 %): 198 In addition to the above, Planning and Development staff assisted with the resolution of 63 violations in 2015. Each TRCA planner is managing between 100 -150 files per year including a significant carry- over file base from previous years. This does not include responsibilities for other strategic efforts to assist municipalities such as internal and external committees, pre - consultation and development application review collaborations, working meeting with applicants, OMB, policy initiatives, SPA projects, etc. While TRCA has prioritized additional senior involvement for major files, TRCA continues to find pressures with accommodating a workload that comes from multiple municipalities concurrently; each with expectations of expedited reviews for their priority files. In fact, with all municipalities well into their growth plan community plan projects, and gearing up for even more community plans driven by landowner objectives, the multiple pressures will necessitate an infusion of funding tailored for additional technical staff, and senior staff time. 757 The unscheduled "randomness" of applications, re- submissions and the short turnaround expectations for commenting and meetings with agencies has become difficult to coordinate and provide manpower, even with strident streamlining efforts completed every year. A greater level of project management has to be established between the municipalities, TRCA and the landowner teams to work through the processes constructively with high quality submissions, collaborative discussions and realistic scheduling expectations. The Enforcement/Compliance team has been in transition, with retirements. Re- structuring of staff responsibilities and balancing of workload is taking place within refined officer positions and new field boundaries. This re- structuring will result in a re- distribution of field responsibilities and capabilities within the five- officer team, as well as, succession planning for future. The Environmental Assessment team has remained steady with their base workload for lower tier and agency infrastructure, and service agreements for several municipalities in Peel, York, Brampton and Toronto. TRCA continues to expand service delivery capability through new service agreements to foster more responsive service delivery and dedicated staff involvement in submission review. Streamlining Efforts during 2014 -2015 Planning and Development continues to work to improve many areas of daily operations, increase efficiency, and enhance customer service. Key areas of focus for 2014 and 2015 were around streamlining TRCA processing of applications, and further developing and enhancing our pre - consultation framework. Planning and Development staff believes that effective pre - consultation is vital to our efficiency and effectiveness, and to ensuring that the public and the development community have important information on potential constraints and opportunities on their properties, from which to make informed planning decisions. As part of TRCA's pre - consultation framework, we implement a six -prong approach to pre - consultation, the foundation of which is based upon making TRCA's information and requirements known as early in the planning process as possible. To do so, TRCA offers the following services: 1. Property Enquiry Service/ Concept Development Applications - Through this service, property owners and the development community can enquire about constraints and opportunities on their properties on an expedited basis, which may involve site visits with TRCA technical staff, and culminate in customized formal TRCA correspondence, which can be used for their planning purposes. 2. Solicitor - Realtor Enquiry Service —Through this service, solicitors and realtors can receive a standardized screening letter, outlining TRCA's interests in a property on an expedited basis. 3. Participation in the municipal pre - consultation process — Planning and Development staff participate in a pre- screening review of materials, and attend meetings with municipal staff and proponents to discuss TRCA interests, and potential constraints, prior to a planning application being submitted to the municipality. Through this service, proponents are aware of TRCA's requirements prior to the submission of an application, leading to more complete applications, and a more efficient process. 758 4. Priority file strategy meetings with senior municipal planning staff — Planning and Development staff continue to pursue opportunities to establish regular, on -going meetings with key senior municipal planning staff to discuss applications, and to strategize, to enhance collaboration and consistency. In 2014 -2015, Markham and Caledon joined TRCA's list of municipalities for which this process has been established. 5. Walk in service — Planning and Development staff continue to provide a well -used walk in service, in which property owners can visit TRCA's Planning and Development counter at any time during regular business hours, and talk to a planner about their property. 6. An increasing array of web -based services for self- screening, and enquiries — given the large size of TRCA's jurisdiction, it is important to provide opportunities for the public to have access to initial screening tools and TRCA information without having to make the trip to TRCA's Head Office. TRCA's Regulation mapping is now on -line, on TRCA's website, which allows residents to enter their address to get an initial indication of whether their property is Regulated, or is within TRCA's areas of interest. The first phase of TRCA's enhanced digital services has also been implemented, providing proponents with the opportunity to contact TRCA staff through the website, and even start their planning or enquiry process while they are on -line. Enhancing the services available is an on -going process, and TRCA looks forward to offering additional services in the near future. In 2014 and 2015, Planning and Development staff worked on a number of initiatives to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of each component of our pre - consultation framework, including seeking streamlining and enhancement opportunities for TRCA involvement in the municipal pre - consultation process, seeking additional opportunities for senior staff collaboration meetings, enhancing TRCA's walk in and web -based services. Internal Process Improvements In 2014, The Living City Policies were approved, which provide the framework for TRCA's work in Planning and Development. The Living City Policies incorporate current day best practices and innovation in environmental planning, and provide a cohesive, transparent framework for TRCA's Planning and Development function. Modifications to the Conservation Authorities Act in 2013 provided for additional opportunities to delegate decision making on routine and standard Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, permits to staff. Planning and Development staff has taken advantage of these tools, which allow for the majority of TRCA permits processed by Planning and Development staff to be approved at a staff level. The result has been a significant streamlining of TRCA processing of permit applications, which has substantially reduced the processing time for routine and standard permits. As part of TRCA's internal streamlining process, we have continued to work to improve our file tracking system to assist in processing and co- ordination of applications. This is an on -going initiative which will continue to examine opportunities to optimize the way in which TRCA processes applications. 759 Value Added Services TRCA staff continues to be involved in a significant number of OMB hearings, and continues to respond to and attend negotiations for OMB hearings where TRCA has no control over the triggers or process timing. TRCA's expedited reviews and participation with municipalities assist the process and have usually allowed environmental issues to be mediated out of the hearing process, with benefits to the municipality and the applicant. TRCA has been successful with these OMB endeavours with very limited legal assistance, with the involvement of TRCA's experienced senior planning staff. As a result, TRCA is able to minimize and carefully manage our legal fee budget. The technical collaborative that TRCA senior staff provides in all areas of environmental planning, engineering and ecology saves the municipalities the cost of individualized consulting and peer review funds associated with meeting complex legislative requirements and high service demand from the development industry. Opportunities and Value Added 2016 -2017 Planning and Development staff continually seeks opportunities to improve TRCA's level of service. The following are some priority areas that staff will further explore in 2016 -2017: • additional senior participation in working sessions to problem solve (e.g. emerging issues — groundwater, water balance); • continue to build upon regular senior level file review meetings with municipal partners to coordinate and speed -up review; • project management assistance for some teams to get through complex approvals /site design and scheduling; • expedited reviews within the capacity of our staffing; • training sessions, (e.g. technical submission requirements, enhancing the quality of submissions), and specialized consulting requests. Report prepared by: Quentin Hanchard, extension 5324 Emails: ghanchard(a_trca.on.ca, For Information contact: Quentin Hanchard, extension 5324, Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214 Emails: ghanchard(otrca.on.ca, cwoodland(obtrca.on.ca Date: January 29, 2016 Attachments: 5 760 Attachment 1 SUMMARY OF PLANNING APPLICATION RECEIVED BY COMMUNITY 2010 -2015 Measure 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 New Planning Applications 658 682 659 622 632 Carry Forward Applications (40 %) 263 273 263 249 253 New Permit Applications 1020 1032 1064 1047 1192 Carry Forward Applications (20 %) 204 206 212 209 253 Permits Issued 966 944 970 930 1194 Minor Works Issued 290 282 277 254 292 Environmental Assessments 140 103 71 88 83 Environmental Master Plan Studies 3 3 3 7 1 Routine Infrastructure Issued 87 97 156 149 192 EA Permits Issued - - 127 124 128 Solicitor Inquiries 1017 964 949 1045 956 Concept Development Inquiries 152 163 170 150 153 Violations Issued 77 93 131 96 63 Permits Inspected - - 3857 4843 4254 Active OMB /MLC Hearings 18 41 31 52 51 Active Environmental Tribunal - 2 2 2 2 Master Environmental Servicing 14 17 18 15 25 Special Planning 25 24 30 31 30 Official Plan Exercises 6 5 7 6 6 761 Attachment 2 SUMMARY OF PLANNING APPLICATION RECEIVED BY COMMUNITY 2010 -2015 Local Municipality 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Adjala -Tos. 1 0 0 2 0 0 Ajax 14 12 12 15 14 11 Aurora 1 0 1 1 1 0 Brampton 31 57 65 46 55 39 Caledon 37 55 68 93 60 64 King 28 22 32 32 28 39 Markham 45 66 56 51 71 71 Mississauga 6 15 28 25 26 19 Mono 0 1 1 2 2 2 Niagara Esc. Com. 12 11 7 12 11 5 Pickering 25 26 24 21 6 18 Richmond Hill 84 115 157 129 124 110 Toronto 133 134 118 94 94 128 Uxbridge 6 7 5 12 3 3 Vaughan 103 130 114 112 118 98 Whitchurch -St. 7 5 19 10 5 27 Durham Region (region apps.) 0 1 0 0 0 0 Peel Region (region apps.) 0 1 0 2 1 0 York Region (region apps.) 0 0 2 0 3 0 Other SUB TOTAL: 533 658 709 659 622 633 Add Concept Development 159 152 172 167 190 152 TOTAL: 692 810 881 826 812 785 REGIONAL MUNICIPALITIES Peel Region 86 139 168 178 153 128 York Region 268 338 381 335 350 347 Durham Region 45 46 41 48 23 20 Toronto 133 134 118 94 94 128 PLANNING TEAM Adjala, Brampton, Caledon, Markham, Miss., Mono, Richmond Hill 216 320 382 360 349 300 Aurora, King, Vaughan, W hitchu rch- Stouffvile 139 157 166 155 152 163 Ajax, Pickering, Toronto, Uxbridge 178 179 159 142 117 160 762 Attachment 3 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For ,,Toronto and Region PERMITTING SERVICES For Development, Interference with Wetlands & Alterations To Shorelines & Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166/06) for The Living City - IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES 2016 -2017 Introduction TRCA's Fee Schedule for Permitting Services for Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166/06) was adopted by Resolution #A237/13 of the Authority on XXXX, 2016. The Fee Schedule adheres to the Provincial Ministry of Natural Resources Policies and Procedures for Charging of Conservation Authority Fees, the TRCA's Fee Policy Guideline 2009, and the range of planning services consistent with TRCA's Memorandums of Understanding with area municipalities. The Fee Schedule includes a broad spectrum of fee categories within each application type to accurately cover the scale of work. The lower fees apply to minor and less complex applications, and modest scale efforts. Higher fees apply to more complex applications requiring a higher level of regulatory and technical review. The Fee Schedule also includes fees for services that assist with streamlining processing and approval efforts for the applicant, such as phased approvals, expedited review charges, red line revision processing (where possible), and a project management assistance fee. Administration of Applications and Fees (General Notes): 1. All permit application submissions and associated fees must be administered through the Planning and Development Division of TRCA. 2. General inquiries and negotiation of fees will be directed through TRCA's planning area managers and the Senior Director, Planning and Development on issues of interpretation and scoping of work requirements. 3. Pre - consultation - A pre - consultation meeting with TRCA staff to determine the scope of issues for the permit application is mandatory. TRCA processing fees will be determined based on a predetermined scope of work. If through the application processing, the scope of the application changes, fee adjustments will be determined. All applications must be deemed complete, inclusive of fee submission, prior to commencement of submission processing. 4. Fee appeal process - Any dispute of fee calculations that can not be resolved through consultation with TRCA's Senior Director, Planning and Development and /or CEO's office, can be appealed through the Budget/Audit Advisory Board and /or the Authority. Delegation format is recommended for an appeal. 5. Any refunds, where applicable, will be approved by the Senior Director, Planning and Development. 6. The permit fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the TRCA. In the event that the permit fee is not paid at the time of filing an application, the current fee as of the time of issuance of the permit must be paid prior to issuing a permit. 7. The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees should the review require a substantially greater level of effort. Peer reviews may also be required for shoreline works, geotechnical, and specialized modelling and may be charged to the applicant. 8. All permits are issued for two years. Requests for a permit issuance beyond the standard two year time period, (up to 5 years), will be subject to an additional fee of 50% of the current fee for each additional year to cover compliance monitoring and will require Executive Committee approval. 9. On a one -time basis, applicants may apply for a permit extension provided such requests are made 60 days prior to the expiration of an Ontario Regulation 166/06 permit. In the Application for Permit Re- issuance, applicants shall set out the reasons for which an extension is required. Requests for a permit extension /re- issuance beyond the standard two year time period, (up to 5 years), will be subject to an additional fee of 50% of the current fee for each additional year to cover compliance monitoring and will require Executive Committee approval. 10. TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees related to regulatory legislation changes or updates. 11. Expedited Review Additional Charge applies only to unanticipated circumstances requiring fast - tracked approvals (primarily clearance), and can only be approved by Senior Director as staffing capability allows. 12. TRCA staff will process permit applications in accordance with Board approved policies and procedures, as per Authority Resolutions A/198/13, A199/13 and Al 03/15, (i.e. Major, Standard Delegated, Minor Works, Routine Infrastructure Works). Permit fees are determined by TRCA as set out in this schedule based upon the scale and scope of the component of the project, independent of the administrative review process. Page 1 of 7 Revised to: 763 112212016 3:03 PM Attachment 3 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For ,,Toronto and Region PERMITTING SERVICES For Development, Interference with Wetlands & Alterations To Shorelines & Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166/06) for The Living City - IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES 2016 -2017 Definitions Minor Ancillary (outside of hazard) — applies to projects that are partially or wholly within TRCA's Regulated area, but are entirely outside of all hazards (erosion, slope stability, floodplain). Applies to a single structure, resurfacing, individual site landscaping, with minor intrusion into Regulated Area. Does not include grading works, outfalls, habitable structures, or removal of features. No technical required. Site visits and meetings are not included. If a site visit or meeting is required, the application will be considered to be Minor, Standard or Major. Completion of a Concept Development application prior to submitting for a Minor Ancillary Permit is recommended. Minor Ancillary Residential - only applies to non - habitable minor ancillary structures and landscaping only applications that are outside of all hazards, valley and stream corridors and are (entirely) setback a minimum of six metres from all hazards, and for which a technical review is not required. Does not include a site visit. Minor — projects for which a letter /response is required from TRCA (e.g. is located adjacent to a natural feature or natural hazard area) which may affect the program or policy interests of the TRCA, and may require a site visit from a TRCA planner (only) or up to one meeting involving a TRCA planner .without TRCA technical staff.. Projects include ancillary structures such as decks, sheds, garages, and pools and placement of less than 30 cubic metres of fill. A maximum of one submission is included, after which, additional fees will apply. Completion of a Concept Development application prior to submitting for a Minor Permit is recommended. Standard — projects that meet TRCA policies, and require scoped technical review related to one technical discipline (e.g. review of letter report. Projects include additions, minor additions or ancillary works in the floodplain, structures or buildings that are not within or directly adjacent to flooding or erosion hazards, and placement of fill (over 30 cubic metres) and associated grading /fill placement. May include one meeting or site visit with up to two staff members. A maximum of two submissions are included, after which, additional fees will apply. Completion of a Concept Development application prior to submitting for a Minor Permit is recommended. Major— projects that meet TRCA policies, and require technical analysis is required in up to two technical disciplines (e.g. standard Environmental Impact Statement review and /or water management screening and assessment, or standard geotechnical review). Projects include additions, new structures or buildings; works in the floodplain and placement of fill (over 30 cubic metres) and associated grading /fill placement, and may include up to one site visit and one meeting. A maximum of two submissions are included, after which, additional fees will apply. Complex— projects which are significant in geographic area, and /or for which submission of several applicable technical studies is required to demonstrate that TRCA or partner municipality program and policy interests can be met. Complex projects generally require more complex ecological, geotechnical, water resource engineering, hydrogeological, or fluvial geomorphic studies and assessment. Complex projects may require up to three technical team or planning meeting, and two or less site visits. Projects include major additions (greater than 50% of the original ground floor area), new structures or buildings; works in the floodplain; and the placement of 30 cubic metres or more of fill. A maximum of three submissions are included, after which, additional fees will apply. Additional charges will apply for additional meetings or site visits. Page 2 of 7 Revised to: 764 112212016 3:03 PM TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For PERMITTING SERVICES For Development, Interference with Wetlands & Alterations To Shorelines & Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166106) January, 2016 Fee Schedule for Ontario Regulation 166/06 Applications Application Type Application Fee New Fee Notes Works on Private Residential Property Minor Ancillary Residential 200" minor $380 Minor $440 standard $770 Standard $820 Major $1850 Major $1850 (new Complex $5,250 category) Complex $5250 (no change) Municipal EA Projects See TRCA Administrative Fee See TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for Environmental Schedule for Environmental Assessment and Infrastructure Assessment and Infrastructure Permitting Services Permitting Services Municipal Development Projects $1,210 $5,500 (NOT EA related) Utilities See TRCA Administrative Fee • Single residential Schedule for Environmental • Development project based Assessment and Infrastructure Permitting Services Page 3 of 7 Revised to: 765 1/22/2016 3:03 PM TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For PERMITTING SERVICES For Development, Interference with Wetlands & Alterations To Shorelines & Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166106) January, 2016 Application Type Application Fee New Fee Notes Projects on Subdivision Lands, Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Properties, Recreation and Other Projects (per component). Ancillary Structures Must be outside of all hazards and valley Minor Ancillary — Single Structure Only* (new) $820 and stream corridors, and are setback a minimum of six metres from all hazards. See definitions on Page 2. Minor Ancillary** - Other (per component, Ancillary $2,000 See definitions on Page 2. Structures, Resurfacing, Individual Site Landscaping) - (new) Minor Projects: • Small -scale topsoil stripping/ individual property per project $4,200 $5,500 temporary stormwater management • Minor outfalls • Minor Improvements (trails, minor recreational facilities, etc.) Standard Projects: • Standard topsoil stripping /temporary stormwater per project $8,400 $8,950 management • SWM Ponds and associated outfalls • Standard Road Crossings • Major Grading /Earth Works • Minor In- stream Remediation Works • Alterations /Restoration of Wetlands Major Projects: • Major Outfalls per project $17,700 $18,600 • Major Road Crossings $17,700 $18,600 • Natural Channel Modifications $17,700 $18,600 • Major filling (Subdivision, Commercial, Employment, $19,680 $20,700 Institutional, others Complex Projects: • Relocation of Stream Corridor /New Channel Design $19,680 $20,700 Complex Fill Project $25,000 - $75,000 Page 4 of 7 Revised to: 766 1/22/2016 3:03 PM TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For PERMITTING SERVICES For Development, Interference with Wetlands & Alterations To Shorelines & Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166106) January, 2016 Application Type Application Fee New Fee Notes All applications located in a Special Policy Area (SPA)will minor 25% Minor (Ancillary Structures) 25% be charged a 50% or 100% premium on the applicable major 75% Standard 50% Includes travel time. First site visit is included as part fee. time) $350 Major /Complex 100% of processing. Multiple field assessments, stakings Permit Revisions — % of current fee. residential minor /major 25% Individual residential 50% and negotiations are charged separately. This is not a mandatory fee. This is a guidance tool at the request (team staff) others 50% Others of the applicant. GIs Fee - $501hour+ HST data Minor revisions 25% preparation Major revisions 50% - $30 + HST per .pdf or hard Revision with Re- Issuance 75% Permit Re- Issuance (Extension) -Ont. Regulation 166/06 50% of current fee 50% Major or Complex Permit Application with Letter of sheet (CAD) $1000 in addition to all other Undertaking - $125 + HST per digital permit fees. Other Applicable Fees Application Type Application Fee New Fee Notes Additional Site Visit Charges: Up to 3 hours (including travel Includes travel time. First site visit is included as part Planner Only (minor only) time) $350 $350 of processing. Multiple field assessments, stakings (Scoped staff — up to 2) (Scoped staff— up to 2) up to'/ day $735 up to 1 day $1,470 $775 $1550 and negotiations are charged separately. This is not a mandatory fee. This is a guidance tool at the request (team staff) $2,730 $2570 of the applicant. GIs Fee - $501hour+ HST data No Change preparation - $30 + HST per .pdf or hard copy digital floodline map sheet (CAD) - $125 + HST per digital floodline map sheet (CAD) Page 5 of 7 Revised to: 767 1/22/2016 3:03 PM TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For PERMITTING SERVICES For Development, Interference with Wetlands & Alterations To Shorelines & Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166106) January, 2016 Application Type Application Fee New Fee Notes Engineering Data Request - $100 + HST for HEC -RAS No Change modelling files associated with each floodline map sheet - $225 + HST per map sheet (Combined hydraulic and modelling files) Fish Timing Window Extension $5,775 $6065 Emergency Works $4,330 100% premium, in addition to applicable Emergency Works fee to be added to applicable or as negotiated permit fee. permit fee. Red Line Revisions by TRCA minor $735 $775 major $1,575 $1655 Waterfront Development additional $1,575 - $2,625 $1655 -$2760 To be determined based on scope. charge for shoreline engineering peer review. Optional Expedited Review additional minor 25% 100% additional premium The Expedited Review charge applies to special charge (Director approved) — major 50% circumstances around fast - tracked conditions for plan Percentage of current fee. registration and completion of conditions to meet unanticipated circumstances. Applied only on Director's approval and as workload allows. This generally applies to efforts that are required to be completed within 1 - 2 week period. Optional Expedited Permit Issuance/ Additional 50% of current fee - Issuance Re- issuance (Director Approved)) timelines will be identified at the time of the request, based upon capacity of TRCA staff at that time. Additional Meetings 25% TRCA will charge a fee directly to the applicant when additional meetings are required /requested beyond the number included in the base permit fee. The landowner will be notified of additional fees. Page 6 of 7 Revised to: 768 1/22/2016 3:03 PM TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For PERMITTING SERVICES For Development, Interference with Wetlands & Alterations To Shorelines & Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166106) January, 2016 Application Type Application Fee New Fee Notes Repeat Submissions — Percentage of 50% TRCA will charge a fee directly to the applicant when current fee for each additional technical reviews of required studies, plans, drawings submission 100% - Minor Ancillary and models go beyond the number of allotted submissions. first submission and 2 re- submissions. Notification will be provided in writing to the landowner where possible. For Minor Ancillary applications, only one submission is included in the application fee. Any additional submissions will be subject to a new application fee. Project Management Assistance minor $1,575 - $5,250 To be Negotiated. To be determined based on scope. Project (voluntary as required) Management Assistance fee is applied to assist major to be negotiated applicants to address complex technical design issues to meet regulatory requirements. Working sessions are recommended. Compliance Monitoring: • Permit Non - compliance $2,310 $2425 Fee to resolve each issue, exclusive of permit revision • Compliance Reports - Clearance Letter $170 $225 fee. Dependent upon Scope of violation • Negotiated Restoration Agreement To be determined Voluntary compliance related to 200% of related fee resolution of violation (only where supported by TRCA staff) Page 7 of 7 Revised to: 769 1/22/2016 3:03 PM Attachment 4 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES IMPLEMEI4 JN GUiDEL11NES DRAFT 2016 -2017 Introduction N Toronto and Region Conservation for The Living City- TRCA's Fee Schedule for Planning Services was approved by Resolution # of the Authority on January XXXX, 2016. The Fee Schedule adheres to the Provincial Ministry of Natural Resources Policies and Procedures for Charging of Conservation Authority Fees, the TRCA's Fee Policy Guideline 2009, and the range of planning services consistent with TRCA's Memorandums of Understanding with area municipalities. The Fee Schedule includes a broad spectrum of fee categories within each application type to accurately cover the scale of work. The lower fees apply to minor and less complex applications, and modest scale efforts. Higher fees apply to more complex applications requiring a higher level of planning and technical review. This Fee Schedule provides a layered approach, in which base fees are presented in the categories in the front portion of the fee schedule, with additional fees for specialized work in the back portion. These additional fees, (e.g. additional technical review, site visits and meetings) beyond the base fees, may apply. Where possible, TRCA staff will identify as early as possible when additional fees are necessary. We recommend that applicants with more complex applications familiarize themselves with the additional fees that may apply. The Fee Schedule also includes fees for services that assist with streamlining processing and approval for the applicant, such as phased approvals, expedited review, red line revisions (where possible), and project management assistance . Administration of Applications and Fees (General Notes): 1. All planning application submissions and associated fees are administered through the Planning and Development Division of TRCA. 2. General inquiries and applicability of fees will be directed through TRCA's planning Senior Mangers or Associate Directors on issues of interpretation and scoping of work requirements. 3. A pre - consultation meeting with the municipality and TRCA staff to determine the scope of issues for the planning application should be held. TRCA processing fees will be determined based on a predetermined scope of work. If, the scope of the application changes throughout the review process, then fee adjustments will be determined. All applications must be deemed complete, inclusive of fee submission, prior to commencement of the review process. 4. Fee appeal process - Any dispute of fee calculations that can not be resolved through consultation with TRCA's Senior Director, Planning and Development and /or CEO's office, can be appealed through the Budget/Audit Advisory Board and /or the Authority. Delegation format with justification of appeal request is recommended. 5. Any refunds, where applicable, will be approved by the Director, Planning and Development. 6. The application fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the municipality. The clearance fee will be paid directly to the TRCA prior to a request for final clearance of an application. All payments must be made within 30 days of TRCA notification in writing. If application fees have not been paid at the time of submission of the application, fees will be assessed in accordance with the fee schedule in place at the time in which payment occurs. Interest will be charged and accumulated beyond 30 days. 7. Re- submission fees will be billed directly by the TRCA and must be paid prior to final clearance of an application. Only one set of fees applies when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. a combined Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By -law Amendment and Subdivision application), however, planning and permit fees are separate. For combined planning applications, the highest rate of fees applies. Separate fees apply if the applications are received more than 3 months apart. For Minor concept development applications (only) that are immediately followed by associated permit applications, a credit of up to $100 of the Minor Concept Development fee may be applied to the permit application, at the discretion of the TRCA Planner. 8. The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees or adjust fees should the review require a substantially greater level of effort or for development application scenarios not captured in the Fee Schedule. Custom fees will be negotiated for optional expedited review or unique circumstances for large scale or complex review efforts. Peer reviews may also be required for shoreline works, geotechnical and specialized modeling and may be charged to the applicant. TRCA reserves the right to re- assess fee requirements after one year of processing planning applications. Additional fees can be charged after one year and for excessive delays. 9. TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees to reflect new planning or regulatory legislative requirements. 10. Base geotechnical and hydrogeology review is included. Applications will be subject to an additional fee for complex reviews and advisory services. TRCA will inform applicants as early as possible in the process. The standard additional charge is $2,100 and the major additional charge is $3,150 - $4,725 based on scope. 11.Any application that is inactive for 2years or more is considered dormant by TRCA and a new application (or top -up) for processing and fee purposes is required. 12. Federal Fisheries Act changes: Modifications have been made to the fee schedules to reflect recent amendments to the Fisheries and Oceans Canada's (DFO) Level III partnership agreement under the Fisheries Act for development review applicants. TRCA will continue to Page 1 of 12 Last Updated: Friday, January 22, 2016 770 Attachment 4 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES IMPLEMEI4 JN GUiDEL11NES DRAFT 2016 -2017 N Toronto and Region Conservation for The Living City- deliver services directed toward the protection, restoration and management of aquatic systems, including fish and fish habitat as an integral part of its watershed management and regulatory responsibilities as well as agreements with Ministry of Natural Resources and our memoranda of understanding with municipalities. Fish habitat information and field data will be provided to applicants as needed for the new Fisheries Act self assessment process or any DFO authorizations. 13. Application fees are due at the time of submission of the application. If application fees have not been paid at the time of submission of the application, fees will be assessed in accordance with the fee schedule in place at the time in which payment occurs. Administration of Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP) Applications The Fee Schedule sets a base fee across the jurisdiction as follows: Proposals 25ha or less: $ 7,875 Base Fee Proposals greater than 25ha: $15,750 Base Fee 1. A baseline charge of $475 per gross hectare is applied to each application. The gross area includes natural systems. 2. An additional project management fee will be added to cover meetings for committee and team coordination, as well as, general meeting sessions (Range $25,000 - $50,000). The following apply to MESP applications: 1. The Fee Schedule assumes an average 2 year timeframe for MESP completion. TRCA reserves the right to re- evaluate the MESP scope of work and progress related to fee status after a two year process. Additional fees will be added for extended timeframes and associated multiple reviews. Payment due for changes in scope and timeline at the 2 -year review date. Standard and Non - standard MESPlsubwatershed Studies: Standard fee agreements — all new fee calculations will follow the base guidelines set herein with associated meeting coordination allowances at the study outset. Timeline schedules and Terms of Reference set with the municipalities and landowners will assist in work flow and anticipated work program completion. All studies will be re- evaluated at the 2 -year milestone (or as agreed in a Terms of Reference or upfront agreement) for changes in scope, extent of coordination, and anticipated cost to complete remaining stages of work. Extended project delays may need re- evaluation on an annual basis to fairly determine project progress and adjust work program scoping with the municipality and landowner group participation. All evaluations will be provided in writing. Fees are required to build capacity for complex reviews and to meet service delivery needs for all. Non - Standard fee agreements — On occasion, study review requirements need to be adjusted to unique circumstances to assist the municipality and /or landowners meet new conditions or timing considerations. These adjustments need to be incorporated into a non - standard MESP /subwatershed fee agreement to address variables in scheduling, numbers of reviews or staggered submissions, phasing, additional unanticipated technical reviews, updates and transitional files, reasonable expedited requirements. Changes to the base standard costing agreements will be negotiated on a time allowance basis upfront in a new process (when known) or at key annual evaluation milestones in active processes as noted above. 2. A Terms of Reference for the MESP work tasks must be prepared and agreed to by all parties including the municipality, TRCA and the proponent. 3. Fee charges apply to Residential and Industrial /Commercial Block planning. Non - participating landowners need to apply and pay the MESP component commensurate with current fee at the time. 4. All MESP fees are required at the initiation of the study or as negotiated through Terms of Reference and agreement. The following alternative milestone payment structure still provides the minimum base payment schedule of older MESP agreements and can be adjusted through agreement. MESP PHASE OF WORK PAYABLE a. Preliminary Initiation (at Project start-up) (Scoping of MESP/Terms of Reference Initiation) Base Fee applies b. Terms of Reference completion /MESP Initiation 50% payable (Includes existing conditions report/field work/First MESP Submission /Review) Page 2 of 12 Last Updated: Friday, January 22, 2016 771 Attachment 4 N Toronto and Region TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for Conservation PLANNING SERVICES for The Living City- IMPLEMEI4 JN GLJiDiZLl1N1ZS DRAFT 2016 -2017 c. Prior to First Submission Comments 20% payable d. Prior to issuance of final MESP approval by TRCA (Maximum 3 review submissions) 30% payable 5. All official plan amendment, zoning and draft plans of subdivision fee requirements that evolve out of the Secondary/ Block Plan process and MESP process apply separately as per TRCA's approved Fee Schedule at the time of submission. No additional per lot charges will apply on draft plans of subdivision if an MESP is completed, approved and paid for. 6. Plans of subdivision that have not been studied under the MESP process will be charged an additional fee of $105 per unit, over and above the subdivision base and clearance fees (see schedule). Subdivisions not included as part of original MESP /Block Plan approval will be charged on a per unit basis for updated plans. 7. Construction permits for works under TRCA's provincial regulation are charged separately at the time of detailed design and construction of draft plan components (such as stormwater management facilities, road /bridge crossings, pipe boring and drilling works, stream channel works, etc). Definitions The following definitions apply to applications to determine fee review category: Screening Letter — Projects that do not affect the program or policy interest of the TRCA and for which a clearance letter is being requested. Clearance may be provided in an e-mail. Site visits, meetings and technical or policy review are not included, One submission of screening information is included. If the submission materials are updated or amended, a new fee will be applied. Screening Assessment — projects for which a letter is required from the TRCA (i.e. is located adjacent to a natural feature or natural hazard area) but the proposal does not affect the program or policy interests of the TRCA and technical review comments are not required. One submission is included. If the submission materials are updated or amended, a new fee will be applied. Site visits and meetings are not included, If a site visit or meeting is required, the application will be considered to be Minor, Standard or Major. Minor— projects for which a letter /response is required from the TRCA (for properties located adjacent to a natural feature or natural hazard area) which may affect the program or policy interests of the TRCA, and for which comments from the TRCA may be provided. Minor projects may require technical review related to only one technical discipline. Up to one site visit or meeting with a TRCA Planner is included. Up to two submissions (initial and final) are included. Minor Subdivision (less than 5ha) are those with ten or fewer lots, for which a technical review is not required by TRCA, however, TRCA's participation is necessary. Standard — projects that meet TRCA policies, and require scoped technical analysis in up to two technical disciplines (i.e. scoped EIS review and /or water management screening and assessment, or standard geotechnical review). Up to one meeting and one site visit with a TRCA Planner and one TRCA technical staff member is included. Up to three submissions are included. Major— projects which are significant in geographic area, and /or for which submission of multi - disciplinary technical studies are required to demonstrate that TRCA or partner municipality program or complex policy interests can be met (e.g. ORM, Rouge Park, NEC). Major projects generally require more complex ecological, geotechnical, water resource engineering, hydrogeological, or fluvial geomorphic studies and assessment. Major projects may require a site visit and up to two technical team or planning meetings. Up to three submissions are included. Complex — projects for which a full suite of applicable technical studies are required to demonstrate consistency with TRCA or partner municipality program or complex policy interests (e.g. ORM, Rouge Park, NEC). Complex projects typically involve extensive modifications to the landscape. Complex projects may also be characterized by one or more of the following: a. The need for up to three working meetings and up to three submissions; b. The need for additional TRCA technical assessments (i.e. technical modeling refinements); C. Extensive technical study review in one or more of the following:, including complex hydrogeological, fluvial geomorphology; natural channel design, wetland interference, environmental impact studies; Or, d. Require more than one day of TRCA fieldwork. Page 3 of 12 Last Updated: Friday, January 22, 2016 772 Attachment 4 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES IMPLEMEI4 JN GLJiDELiNES DRAFT 2016 -2017 N Toronto and Region Conservation for The Living City- Additional Fees Unless otherwise stated, site visits are not included in the fees assessed for all screening letters and screening assessments, "Minor" applications in all categories, and Solicitor - Realtor enquiries. Should site visits be required, or be requested for applications in these categories, additional site visit fees will apply, in accordance with the site visit fees prescribed in this Fee Schedule. Incomplete /unconsolidated Submissions - A submission for review is deemed to be "incomplete" where TRCA has identified requirements, and the application has not met all requirements. The following scenarios are examples of situations in which an application may be deemed incomplete or unconsolidated: 1. Where all technical or supporting studies that are required to meet TRCA's submission requirements have not been provided with the application; 2. Where component studies are submitted in a piecemeal fashion, 3. Where the findings and analysis in component reports are not integrated in a multi- discipline submission (e.g. where an Environmental Impact Study, Functional Servicing Report, and Hydrogeological report are packaged together and each report has not considered the findings of the others), Applicant Driven Formal Modification - A fee for an "applicant driven formal modification" will be charged where plans are submitted for review after the application has been formally circulated by, or received planning approval from the municipality, and TRCA review is still in progress/ on- going. File Continuation - Applicable to files that continue beyond two years from the date of submission of the application. At two years, and two year intervals thereafter, if the applications are still in the review or approval process, application fees will need to be topped -up to current fees in the applicable fee schedule at that time. This is to be completed through a re- evaluation of the status of the application and scope of the review remaining, to review the need for any additional fee requirements. Major and Complex Files without Prior MESP (non- subdivision) — Where Major or Complex files, (Rezoning Applications, Official Plan Amendments, Site Plans — not including subdivisions which are addressed separately) are submitted without an MESP, and an MESP has not been completed for the area within the past 10 years, may be subject to additional review fees. At the time of application, where possible, TRCA staff will identify whether additional fees are applicable. Additional charges will apply for additional meetings or site visits. Additional meetings will be assessed the same fee as additional site visits, inclusive of travel and preparation time, in accordance with the site visit fees identified herein. Page 4 of 12 Last Updated., Friday, January 22, 2016 773 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES PROPOSED AREAS FOR REVISION 2016 Fee Schedule for Planning Services Application Type Application Fee PROPOSED APPLICATION Clearance Fee PROPOSED FEE CLEARANCE FEE Screening letter $85 $100 $0 $0 (Residential /Minor projects) Screening letter — other minor $85 $100 agencies or parties major $150 $ 250 complex $250 $ 1,000 Vulnerable Areas Screening $85 $90 Fees (Source Water Protection) Source Water Protection — new services Solicitor /Realtor Screening $290 $325 Service Page 5 of 12 Last Updated: Friday, January 22, 2016 774 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES PROPOSED AREAS FOR REVISION 2016 Application Type Application Fee PROPOSED APPLICATION Clearance Fee PROPOSED FEE CLEARANCE FEE Concept Development/ minor $275 Minor $350 $0 $0 Property Inquiry — residential concept $750 Standard $790 $0 $0 Residential standard $2,625 Major $3,215 $0 $0 major $5,775 Complex $6,065 technical review $1,000 Additional technical review $1,050 expedited real estate expedited real estate review $3,000 review $3,150 ((NEW)) Concept Development/Property Inquiry — Commercial, Industrial, Institutional Minor $750 $0 standard $2,625 $0 major $5,775 $0 Complex Application specific fee Variance screening assessment $315 See notes minor $525 minor $550 $0 ((NEW ))Industrial /Commercial /S $D ubdivision /Institutional - minor $1,050 $0 major $1,680 major $1,765 Consent/Severance /Land screening assessment $315 $550 $0 $0 Division (per lot) minor $1,260 $1325 $0 major $4,995 $5345 $0 Page 6 of 12 Last Updated: Friday, January 22, 2016 775 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES PROPOSED AREAS FOR REVISION 2016 Application Type Application Fee PROPOSED APPLICATION Clearance Fee PROPOSED FEE CLEARANCE FEE Single Residential Site Plan Minor $735 Minor (outside of hazard) $790 $0 $0 Standard $1250 $250 major $3,060 major $3215 $665 $700 Complex $5775 $1675 Site Plan minor $1,470 $2,050 $1,000 $1,050 standard $5,250 $6,050 $1,575 $1,675 major $18,375 $20,000 $3,940 $4,150 complex $27,565 $29,050 $3,940 $4,150 Multi -Unit Building Site Plan standard $15,910 $16,700 $5,460 $5,750 (Rental, Condominium, major $41,020 $43,000 $15,040 $15,800 Mixed Use) complex $47,250 $50,000 $15,040 $15,800 Official Plan Amendment screening assessment $315 $490 $0 $0 (OPA) minor $1,680 $2200 $0 $0 standard $7,350 $8200 $0 $0 major $10,920 $12000 $0 $0 complex $15,330 $20000 $0 $0 Zoning By -law Amendment/ screening assessment $315 $490 $0 $0 Rezoning (ZBA/RZ) minor $1,680 $2000 $0 $0 standard $7,350 $8000 $0 $0 major $10,920 $12000 $0 $0 complex $15,330 $20000 $0 $0 Condominium Agreement $2,500 $5,250 Clearance - Admin /Registration Page 7 of 12 Last Updated: Friday, January 22, 2016 776 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES PROPOSED AREAS FOR REVISION 2016 Application Type Application Fee PROPOSED APPLICATION FEE Clearance Fee PROPOSED CLEARANCE FEE Draft Plan of Subdivision less than 5ha (Residential /Industrial/ Minor * ** $6,000 $2,625 Commercial Subdivision) Standard $18,900 $20,000 $5,460 $5,735 Major $34,125 $35,000 $15,040 $15,800 ** *Minor -see definition. Complex $45,935 $48,000 $15,040 $15,800 5ha to 10ha Standard $27,300 $28,655 $12,035 $15,800 Major $45,935 $48,250 $15,040 $15,800 Complex $53,810 $56,500 $15,040 $15,800 10ha to 25ha Standard $36,750 $38,600 $12,035 $15,800 Major $49,800 $15,040 $15,800 Complex $53,810 $56,500 25ha and greater Standard $45,935 $48,250 $15,040 $15,800 Major $49,800 $54,990 $15,040 $15,800 Complex $59,900 $59,900 $15,040 $15,800 For subdivisions with no MESP produced within the last 10 years, the subdivisions will be considered to be Major or Complex. Complex subdivisions without a current MESP will be subject to an additional per unit fee of $105 /unit Per ha (if applicable) $475 /ha Page 8 of 12 Last Updated., Friday, January 22, 2016 777 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES PROPOSED AREAS FOR REVISION 2016 Application Type Application Fee PROPOSED APPLICATION Clearance Fee PROPOSED FEE CLEARANCE FEE Clearance fee for Additional standard $2,625 Standard - Within One Year Subdivision Phases (NEW) * ** $2,760 with new technical ** *within one year of original information $5,250 Standard $5,250 subdivision clearance with new technical information: Standard clearance fee Golf Courses, Aggregate $21,000 $22,050 (base fee)* $0 Pits or Large -scale Fill $40,000 $42,000 (base fee)* Operations *subject to additional technical review and project management services fees, as applicable. Block and Tertiary Plans Base fee 25ha or less $7,500 $7,875 $0 and Master Environmental Base fee > 25ha $15,000 $15,750 Servicing Plan (MESP)(Residential & Comprehensive $475/ha $475/ha Industrial /Commercial) & Project Management Fee & Project Management Fee $25,000- $50,000 $25,000 - $50,000 Urban MESP & Negotiated in a Terms of Negotiated in a Terms of subwatershed study Reference Agreement. Reference Agreement. Page 9 of 12 Last Updated: Friday, January 22, 2016 778 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES PROPOSED AREAS FOR REVISION 2016 Application Type Application Fee PROPOSED APPLICATION FEE Clearance Fee PROPOSED CLEARANCE FEE Optional Expedited Review $0 $5,000 - 20,000 Pre - consultation technical team site visit $2,730 per review` This is not a mandatory fee. This is Optional Expedited Review $0 Negotiated based upon scope of applicant. Inflationary increase only. for MESP subwatershed or work and availability. New Category. Pre - consultation Technical Team Meeting major file' Up to 1/2 day (including travel time) ((NEW)) Optional Expedited Additional 75% premium of $2870 Clearance (2 weeks)' applicable fee. ((NEW)) Optional Expedited Additional 150% premium of Clearance (1 week)' applicable fee. *as workload allows. Subject to availability of staff, and subject to Director approval. Other Applicable Fees Description Fee Notes Pre - consultation — meeting (Planner only) no charge Inflationary increases only. Pre - consultation technical team site visit $2,730 $2870 This is not a mandatory fee. This is a guidance tool at the request of the applicant. Inflationary increase only. ((NEW)) New Category. Pre - consultation Technical Team Meeting Up to 1/2 day (including travel time) $1550 Up to 1 day (including travel time) $2870 Page 10 of 12 Last Updated., Friday, January 22, 2016 779 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES PROPOSED AREAS FOR REVISION 2016 Page 11 of 12 Last Updated., Friday, January 22, 2016 • Includes travel time. First site visit Additional Site Visit Charges (Scoped staff) up to '% day $735 $775 is included as part of processing. (Scoped staff) up to 1 day $1,470 $1550 Multiple field assessments, stakings (team staff) per day $2,730 $2870 and negotiations are charged separately. This is not a mandatory fee. This is a guidance tool at the request of the applicant. *Scoped staff - includes the planner and up to one more discipline. Applicant Driven Formal Modification (requiring minor $1,095 $1500 See Definitions on page 3. Current re- circulation) major $3,675 $5000 fees low — not reflective of cost. Incomplete submission/ unconsolidated Minor $1000 submission coordination — per submission. All Others $5,000 - $10,000 Additional Submissions — eachsubmission Minor $1,000 beyond the third submission All others $2,500 - $10,000 All applications located in a Special Policy Area minor 25% Minor 50% and (will be charged a major 75% major 100% premium on the applicable fee). File Continuation All Files Top -up to current cost in fee Applicable to files that continue schedule beyond two years from the date of submission of the application. File Reactivation standard files $525 $550 To reactivate files that have been large files /OMB $1,000 $1050 inactive for 2 years or more. Waterfront Development additional charge for $1,575 - 2,625 $1655 -$2760 To be determined based on scope. shoreline engineering peer review GIS Fee - $50 /hour + HST data No Change preparation - $30 + HST per .pdf or hard copy digital floodline map sheet (CAD) - $125 + HST per digital floodline map sheet (CAD) Page 11 of 12 Last Updated., Friday, January 22, 2016 • TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for PLANNING SERVICES PROPOSED AREAS FOR REVISION 2016 Engineering Data Request - $100 + HST for HEC -RAS No Change modelling files associated with each floodline map sheet - $225 + HST per map sheet (Combined hydraulic and modelling files) Optional Provincial Plan Conformity — technical $250-$1000 Minor $250 Fee scoped as per application advisory Major $500-$1000 issue. Not a mandatory fee. Change to: Optional Terms of Reference Review (EIS, Provincial Plan conformity, Master Plan — not related to an MESP) technical advisory Archaeological screening — on TRCA lands only $500+ HST $525+ HST Works on TRCA's lands require an archaeological assessment by a TRCA Archaeologist. Through the screening process, the archaeologist will determine if any investigation is required. Additional fees will be charged for archaeological investigations. Collaborative meetings and technical review $5,000 - $20,000 Not a mandatory fee. Dependent related to settlement, when applicable upon number of TRCA staff involved, number of meetings and submissions. TRCA Project Management Fee (to assist with $5,000- $20,000 Not a mandatory fee. Dependent coordinating TRCA's reviews and project upon number of TRCA staff timelines associated with TRCA reviews) involved, number of meetings and submissions. Page 12 of 12 Last Updated., Friday, January 22, 2016 781 Attachment 5 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES February 1, 2016 0 Conservation for The Living City- Introduction TRCA's Fee Schedule for Environmental Assessment and Permitting Services was adopted by Resolution #A237/13 of the Authority Board on January 31, 2014. The Fee Schedule was developed in consultation with municipalities through an assessment of service delivery which adheres to the Provincial Ministry of Natural Resources Policies and Procedures for Charging of Conservation Authority Fees, the TRCA's Fee Policy Guideline 2009, and the range of Environmental Assessment (EA) or Infrastructure Review services consistent with TRCA's Service Delivery Agreements and /or Memorandums of Understanding with area municipalities or agencies. The Fee Schedule includes a broad spectrum of fee categories within each application type to accurately cover the scale of work. The lower fees apply to minor and less complex applications, and modest scale review efforts. Higher fees apply to more complex applications requiring a higher level of EA and technical review. The Fee Rnhadule also inGludes fees General Notes 1. All EA and permit application submissions and associated fees must be administered through the Planning and Development Division of TRCA. 2. General inquiries and negotiation of fees will be directed through TRCA's EA Associate Director or the Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications on issues of interpretation and scoping of work requirements. 3. Pre - consultation - A pre - consultation meeting with TRCA staff to determine the scope of issues for the EA or permit application is recommended for standard or complex applications. TRCA processing fees will be determined based on a predetermined scope of work. If through the review process, the scope of the application changes, fee adjustments will be determined. All applications must be deemed complete, inclusive of fee submission, prior to commencement of submission processing. 4. Fee appeal process - Any dispute of fee calculations that cannot be resolved through consultation with TRCA's S e n i o r Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications and /or CEO's office, can be appealed through the Budget/Audit Advisory Board and /or the Authority. Delegation format with justification of appeal request is recommended. 5. Any refunds, where applicable, will be approved by the EA Associate Director or the Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications. 6. The application fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the TRCA. Applications will not be processed until fees are received unless approved by the TRCA's EA Associate Director or the Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications. 7. All permits are issued for two years. Requests for an initial permit issuance beyond the standard two year time period, (up to 5 years), will be subject to an additional fee of 50% of the current fee for each additional year to cover compliance monitoring and will require Executive Committee approval. 8. On a one -time basis, applicants may apply for a permit reissuance /extension provided such requests are made 60 days prior to the expiration of an Ontario Regulation 166/06 permit. In the Application for Permit Reissuance, applicants shall set out the reasons for which an extension is required. Requests for a permit extension / reissuance beyond the standard two year time period, (up to a total of 5 years), will be subject to an additional fee of 50% of the current fee for each additional year to cover compliance monitoring and will require Executive Committee approval. 9. Generally, only one set of fees applies when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. an EA Property Screening or Inquiry or an Ontario Regulation 166/06 Permit Application). The highest rate of fees applies. However, when there are two separate approvals required, such as a permit and site plan review, two separate fees are applied in accordance with the respective fee schedules. 10. TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees should the review require a substantially greater level of effort (e.g., Environmental Management Plan Review). Peer reviews may also be required for shoreline works, geotechnical and specialized modeling and may be charged to the applicant. 11. All application fees (except EA Property Screening or Inquiry) include one initial site visit, if needed, up to '% day for minor or standard files and up to 1 day for major or complex files. 12. Specific Service Delivery Agreements take precedent over the fee schedule. 13. For Class Environmental Assessments, the schedules or categories specific to the respective class EA document or environmental assessment review procedures of utility boards or commissions, such as oil or gals pipelines, or electricity generation, will be applied. 14. Planning Act application rates can be found in the TRCA Planning Services Fee Schedule. 15. Routine Infrastructure Works Application review is subject to the respective TRCA procedure. 16. Emergency Infrastructure Works Application review is subject to the respective TRCA procedure. Page 1 of 14 782 v (EA201405 -R1] Attachment 5 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and Toronto and Region INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES 0 Conservation IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES February 1, 2016 for The Living City- 17. Development activities within regulated areas that are on lands owned by, and /or conducted by, a provincial or federal agency, are exempt from the regulatory approval process under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. As such, permits in accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06 are not required. Notwithstanding, the TRCA Voluntary Project Review process may apply as per #6 of the Proponents and Projects Exempt from the TRCA Regulatory Approval Process below, and review fees will be charged. It should be noted that other legislation and approvals may apply to these projects and it is the responsibility of the proponent to obtain such approvals. 18. Development activities within regulated areas that are conducted by proponents identified through legislation as being exempt from the regulatory approval process under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act, do not require permits in accordance with Ontario Regulation 166106. Notwithstanding, the TRCA Voluntary Project Review process may apply as per #6 of the Proponents and Projects Exempt from the TRCA Regulatory Approval Process below, and review fees will be charged. It should be noted that other legislation and approvals may apply to these projects and it is the responsibility of the proponent to obtain such approvals. 19. Unless noted above ( #17 or 18) development activities within regulated areas, watercourse or wetlands on lands through which an easement, or other form of permission, has been obtained from a crown agency are not exempt from the regulatory approval process of the Conservation Authorities Act. This includes, but is not limited to municipal, gas, oil, electricity or utility projects. 20. Minor project review means that no or limited technical Natural Heritage Impact Studies and engineering review reports are required as part of the submission, together with detailed design drawings if appropriate; standard project review means that scoped technical studies or reports are required as part of the submission (such as hydrology, ecological, stormwater), together with detailed design drawings if appropriate. Major and complex project review means that comprehensive technical studies or reports are required as part of the submission (such as meander belt, hydrogeology, geotechnical, environmental impact studies) together with detailed design drawings if appropriate. 21. TRCA has extensive environmental and cultural data that is available for use by the proponent, subject to the waiver of a legal disclaimer and the provision of user fees. Where there are data sharing agreements in place, municipalities are exempt from these fees and the data will be provided free of charge. All others are expected to purchase data as per the fee schedule. Current data sharing agreements are in place with all municipalities in t h e TRCA jurisdiction, as well as the Ministry of Natural Resources, and various service agreement partners. Proponents and Projects Exempt from the TRCA Regulatory Approval Process 1. In accordance with the Crown Agency Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. 48, s.1, and the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. 27, the following Crown corporations or agencies are exempt from the regulatory approval process under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. • Metrolinx • GO Transit • Hydro One* (and local subsidiaries, such as Brampton Hydro One) • Ministry of Transportation • Ontario Realty Corporation (Infrastructure Ontario) • Ministry of Natural Resources • Greater Toronto Airports Authority • Pare Downsview Park A memorandum of understanding (MOU) has been negotiated with Hydro One and Conservation Ontario and applies to all conservation authorities, including TRCA. The MOU prescribes the communication process to be followed between Hydro One and conservation authorities, as well as best management practices that may be implemented by Hydro One when carrying out construction or maintenance operations. Consultation with conservation authorities is required prior to all planned and emergency activities. It is acknowledged that conservation authorities may charge review fees. Permission to enter is required for works on conservation authority-owned lands, including access. Page 2 of 14 783 �} v a7 (EA201405 -R1] Attachment 5 TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES 0 Conservation February 1, 2016 for The Living City- 2. In accordance with the Canadian Transportation Act *, railways are exempt from the regulatory approval process under section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act for works essential to railway operations: • Canadian National Railway • Canadian Pacific Railway * Under the provisions of the Canadian Transportation Act, CN and CP railway companies are exempt from the regulatory approval process under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act for all works that are essential to railway operations. These works include, but are not limited to, watercourse alterations and diversions, culvert and bridge modifications, and the construction of tunnels, embankments, bridges and roads. However, the railway is to do as little damage as possible and is to restore watercourses as near as possible t o its former condition. 3. In accordance with CPC- 2 -0 -03 — Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems, antenna systems and towers (e.g., Rogers, Bell and TELUS), are exempt from Environmental Assessment Act, Planning Act, and Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act processes and requirements and are the direct responsibility of Industry Canada. Notwithstanding, there are provisions for stakeholder consultation that generally applies to all new towers greater than 15 metres in height. Proponents of these facilities will often use the site plan process under the Planning Act to facilitate such communication. 4. Environmental Assessment Act Requirements: If projects are subject to a federal or provincial environmental assessment, review fees will be charged. 5. Planning Act Requirements: If proponents are subject to review under the Planning Act, or seek approval under the Planning Act on a voluntary basis, review fees will be charged. 6. Detailed Design Requirements: TRCA Permits: These proponents are exempt from the TRCA regulatory approval process (i.e., permits in accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06 are not required), TRCA Voluntary Project Review: Proponents may seek TRCA review on a voluntary basis. In such cases, TRCA will charge review fees to compensate for its time. In cases where the proponent requires TRCA Voluntary Project Review for a particular project, TRCA will charge the proponent review fees to compensate for its time. Fisheries Act Approvals: Prep....,.. is a responsible for ebtaining a Oate a ,all Independent of Torn fForn TR.C.A. as to whether the project is likely to cause '�se4ous harm to fi&hL'- in these Proponents are responsible for obtaining appropriate approvals independent of TRCA under the Fisheries Act Self- Assessment process. A proponent can voluntarily seek confirmation from TRCA as to whether the proposal project includes the appropriate measures to avoid causing harm to fish and Fish habitat as per the requirements of the DFO Self- Assessment process. Federal and Provincial Endangered Species Act Approvals: Proponents are responsible for obtaining appropriate approvals independent of TRCA. Page 3 of 14 784 v (E4201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 National and Ontario Energy Board Applications 1. National and Ontario Energy Board Applications are a matter of exclusive federal or provincial jurisdiction, respectively, with the board itself being responsible for all decisions. Through these processes, proponents are required to consult community stakeholders, including conservation authorities. TRCA can choose to comment on these applications through the commenting process established by the NEB or OEB. While there are no provisions that would allow TRCA to charge review fees for participation in a NEB or OEB process, if conditions for NEB or OEB approval specifically require TRCA involvement, appropriate fees will be negotiated on a project specific basis. 2. On a case by case basis, an NEB or OEB application may also be subject to the federal or provincial Environmental Assessment Act. In these cases, the appropriate review fee will be charged. 3. These projects are not exempt from provisions under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act and as such, proponents are not exempt from review fees or the TRCA regulatory approval process (i.e., permits in accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06) are required. 4. These proponents may or may not be exempt from approvals under the Fisheries Act or the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and are responsible for obtaining the appropriate approvals independent of TRCA. IR annoFdRRAP with the self assessment provisions of the Rsheries Act, through the permittwig- praGessTIRGAwIll .,a,,: p eGt i6 likely to G p hAFm to fish A proponent can voluntarily seek confirmation from TRCA as to whether the project proposal includes the appropriate measures to avoid causing harm to fish and fish habitat as per the requirements of the DFO Self - Assessment process. Page 4 of 14 785 C v J (EA201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Fee Schedule for Environmental Assessment Review Application Type Application Fee Revised Fee 2016 Notes Master Plan Minor $11,550 Minor $12,130 Subject to negotiation Standard $20,475 Standard $21,500 Major /Complex $28,875 Major $26,150 Complex $30,020 Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014 b) Separation of Major /Complex; new Major Fee Individual EA $28,875 $30,020 Subject to negotiation Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014 Class EA— Minor $5,775 Minor $9,105 Schedule/ Standard $12,075 Standard $12,680 Category C or Major /Complex $18,480 Major $20,340 equivalent Complex $22,970 Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014 b) Increase to reflect accurate costing of site visits and meeting times (previously undercharged) c) Separation of Major /Complex; new Major Fee Class EA— Minor $5,515 Minor $5,790 Schedule/ Standard $9,345 Standard $9,810 Category B or Major /Complex $12,810 Major $12,195 equivalent Complex $13,745 Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014, except "Major" which has a slight reduction b) Separation of Major /Complex; new Complex Fee EA Addendum Reports Minor $2,100 Minor $2,205 Standard $3,045 Standard $3,195 Major /Complex $3,990 Major /Complex $5,760 Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014 b) Additional charges to Major /Complex to reflect use of entire technical team; add the word "Complex' Page 5 of 14 786 C v �% (EA201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Additional Site Visit up to 1/2 day $735 Minor $1,405 The first site visit is Charges up to 1 day $1,470 Standard $2,605 included as part of Major /Complex $4,125 the application review fee Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014 b) Additional charges to the planning time associated with booking meetings, reviewing materials and reviewing minutes. c) Standard fee is new Additional Meeting In TRCA Offices: Standard meetings Charges Minor /Standard $990 are included in EA Major /Complex $1,565 standard service delivery. Additional meetings may be In Client/Consultant/Municipal required at the Offices: proponent's request. Minor /Standard $1,405 Major /Complex $2,225 Increases reflect: a) New fees EA Property Screening $280 $295 To be deducted from or Inquiry q r' Increases reflect: he application fee if additional review is a) 5% increase from 2014 required. GIS Fee - $50 /hour + HST - $50 /hour + HST data Municipalities, data preparation preparation Ministry of - $30 + HST per. pdf or - $30 + HST per .pdf or Natural hard copy digital flood hard copy digital flood line Resources line map sheet (CAD) map sheet (CAD) and service - $125 + HST per digital - $125 + HST per digital agreement flood line map sheet flood line map sheet partners are (CAD) (CAD) exempt - $100 for HEC -RAS - $100 for HEC -RAS modelling modelling files associated files associated with each with each flood line map flood line map sheet sheet Page 6 of 14 787 v (EA201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Fee Schedule for Permit Review Ontario Regulation 166/06 Permit Application Application Type Application Fee N °re' Revised Fee 2016 Notes Individual or Service Service Minor - EA Service Municipal Class Agreement $3,045 Agreement $3,195 Delivery assumes two EA or Schedule Minor $4,200 Minor $4,410 submissions (including B & C or Standard $8,400 Standard $8,820 final) equivalent Major $14,175 Major $16,060 Standard /Major /Compl Complex '$15,750 Complex * $17,240 ex - EA Service Delivery assumes three submissions Increases reflect: (including final) a) 5% increase from 2014 b) Major /Complex — increases ' A site specific discussion reflect accurate staffing related to size and costs complexity of the application will be Municipal Class EA— Service Service EA Service Delivery Schedule A/A+ or Agreement $1,260 Agreement $1,325 assumes two equivalent. Minor $2,625 Minor $3,475 submissions Major $3,990 Standard $4,190 (including final) Major $6,750 Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014 b) Increase to reflect accurate staff costing of site visits c) Separation of Major /Complex; new Standard category; New Major Fee Routine Infrastructure Service Agreement $370 Service Agreement $390 EA Service Delivery Works Minor $790 Minor $1,750 assumes two Major $1,470 Major $2,500 submissions (including final) Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014 b) Increase to reflect accurate staff costing of site visits Emergency $4,330 100% of current fee T-e he added tethe Infrastructure Works appligabl permit Increases reflect: FAYFAW fee a) Charge Double the Regular Fee to Meet requirements of Reflect Expedited TRCA Emergency Service and account Infrastructure Works for additional Protocol. Enforcement & Compliance DFO Offsetting Advice To be determined To be determined Subject to negotiation Page 7 of 14 7 Q Q I vv (EA201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Permit Screening or $280 $295 To be deducted from the Screening Increases reflect: permit review fee if a a) 5% increase from 2014 permit is required TRCA Archaeology $500 + HST $525+ HIST Works on TRCA's lands Screening — TRCA Increases reflect: require an archaeological Lands Only a) 5% increase from 2014 assessment by a TRCA Archaeologist. Through the screening process, the archaeologist will determine if an investigation is required. Additional fees will be charged for archaeological investigations. GIS Fee -$50 /hour + HST data -$50 /hour + HST data Municipalities, preparation preparation Ministry of Natural - $30 + HST per .pdf or hard -$30 + HST per .pdf or hard Resources and copy digital flood line map copy digital flood line map service agreement sheet (CAD) sheet (CAD) partners are exempt -$125 + HST per digital flood -$125 + HST per digital flood line map sheet (CAD) line map sheet (CAD) -$100 for HEC -RAS -$100 for HEC -RAS modelling modelling files associated files associated with each flood with each flood line map line map sheet sheet Additional Submissions 25% for each 25% for each additional additional submission submission Additional Site Visit up to Y day $735 Minor $1,405 The first site visit is Charges up to 1 day $1,470 Standard $2,605 included as part of the Major /Complex $4,125 application review fee Increases reflect: a) 5% increase from 2014 b) Additional charges to the planning time associated with booking meetings, reviewing materials and reviewing minutes. c) Standard fee is new Page 8 of 14 7 Q (� I v�7 (E4201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Additional Meeting In TRCA Offices: Standard meetings are Charges Minor /Standard $990 included in EA standard Major /Complex $1,565 service delivery. Additional meetings may be required at the proponents request. In Client/Consultant/Municipal Offices: Minor /Standard $1,405 Major /Complex $2,225 Increases reflect: b) New fees Note 1: Application Fee - The original permit is issued for 2 years. For permit issued for a longer time period (up to 5 years), the permit reissuance /extension fee of 50% of the original permit fee will apply for each additional year (i.e., each of years 3, 4 and 5). These fees cover the compliance monitoring fees. All permit reissuances /extensions require Executive Committee approval. Page 9 of 14 790 I (EA201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Fee Schedule Voluntary Project Review Note2 Application Type Application Fee Revised Fee 2016 Notes Individual or Service Service Minor - EA Service Municipal Class Agreement $3,045 Agreement $3,195 Delivery assumes two EA or Schedule Minor $4,200 Minor $4,410 submissions (including B & C or Standard $8,400 Standard $8,820 final) equivalent Major $14,175 Major $16,060 Standard /Major /Comp) Complex '$15,750 Complex '$17,240 ex - EA Service Delivery assumes three submissions Increases reflect: (including final) c) 5% increase from 2014 d) Major /Complex - increases ` A site specific discussion reflect accurate staffing related to size and costs complexity of the application will be conducted. Municipal Class EA- Service Service EA Service Delivery Schedule A/A +or Agreement $1,260 Agreement $1,325 assumes two equivalent. Minor $2,625 Minor $3,475 submissions Major $3,990 Standard $4,190 (including final) Major $6,750 Increases reflect: d) 5% increase from 2014 e) Increase to reflect accurate staff costing of site visits f) Separation of Major /Complex; new Standard category; New Major Fee Routine Infrastructure Service Agreement $370 Service Agreement $390 EA Service Delivery Works Minor $790 Minor $1,750 assumes two Major $1,470 Major $2,500 submissions (including final) Increases reflect: c) 5% increase from 2014 d) Increase to reflect accurate staff costing of site visits Emergency $4,330 100% of current fee peke added tethe Infrastructure Works appl cable- permit- Increases reflect: ., Fee b) Charge Double the Regular Fee to Meet requirements of Reflect Expedited TRCA Emergency Service and account Infrastructure Works for additional Protocol. Enforcement & Compliance DFO Offsetting Advice To be determined To be determined Subject to negotiation Page 10 of 14 791 (EA201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 PBFm't -Site Screening $280 $295 To be deducted from the or Clearance Increases reflect: permit review fee if a b) 5% increase from 2014 permit is required TRCA Archaeology $500 + HST $525+ HST Works on TRCA's lands Screening —TRCA Increases reflect: require an archaeological Lands Only b) 5% increase from 2014 assessment by a TRCA Archaeologist. Through the screening process, the archaeologist will determine if an investigation is required. Additional fees will be charged for archaeological investigations. GIS Fee -$50 /hour + HST data -$50 /hour + HST data Municipalities, preparation preparation Ministry of Natural - $30 + HST per. pdf or hard -$30 + HST per .pdf or hard Resources and copy digital flood line map copy digital flood line map service agreement sheet (CAD) sheet (CAD) partners are exempt -$125 + HST per digital flood -$125 + HST per digital flood line map sheet (CAD) line map sheet (CAD) -$100 for HEC -RAS a) $100 for HEC -RAS modelling files associated modelling files with each flood line map associated with each sheet flood line map sheet Additional Submissions 25% for each additional 25% for each additional submission submission Additional Site Visit up to 1/2 day $735 Minor $1,405 The first site visit is Charges up to 1 day $1,470 Standard $2,605 included as part of the Major /Complex $4,125 application review fee Increases reflect: d) 5% increase from 2014 e) Additional charges to the planning time associated with booking meetings, reviewing materials and reviewing minutes. f) Standard fee is new Page 11 of 14 792 I �i (EA201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Additional Meeting In TRCA Offices: Standard meetings are Charges Minor /Standard $990 included in EA standard Major /Complex $1,565 service delivery. Additional meetings may be required at the proponents request. In Client/Consultant/Municipal Offices: Minor /Standard $1,405 Major /Complex $2,225 Increases reflect: c) New fees Note 1: Voluntary Project Review - The activities of all federal and provincial Crown corporations are exempt from conservation authority permitting activities under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act and under Ontario Regulation 166/06 — Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses. Projects on lands owned by a Crown corporation and on behal of a Crown corporation are also exempt (see `Proponents and Projects Exempt from the TRCA Regulatory Approval Process #1 "on page 2). Recognizing this exemption, and in the absence of the formal permitting process, Crown corporations may voluntarily request TRCA to review and comment on detailed design activities associated with project construction, maintenance or emergency activities. fill npi -AA "RnFieug han;q to 9sh"as the -RdAF the Pg�,;Fiqg Ant. and �A : - per sehE assessment pr,9GeRg' Proponents are responsible for obtaining appropriate approvals independent of TRCA under the Fisheries Act Self - Assessment process. A proponent can voluntarily seek confirmation from TRCA as to whether the project proposal includes the appropriate measures to avoid causing harm to fish and fish habitat as per the requirements of the DFO Self- Assessment process. Page 12 of 14 793 (EA201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Fee Schedule for Revisions and Permit Reissuances /Extensions Application Type Application Fee Notes Notes 2016 modifications Minor $2,100 Revision to Ontario Regulation 166/06 Minor /Standard change - 25% of EA Service Delivery assumes two Permit current fee submissions. Major /Complex change - 50% of Major $14,005 assumes three submissions. current fee Revision to Voluntary Project Review Minor /Standard change - 25% of EA Service Delivery assumes two current fee submissions. Major /Complex change - 50% of process; appropriate fees will current fee Ontario Regulation 166/06 Permit 50% of current fee for each See General Notes #8 on page 1. Reissuance /Extension (one -time only) additional year (note added for clarity; no change proposed) 2014 Revision to MNR Fisheries Timing $5775 TRCA will review request and if Window — Request for Extension $6,065 appropriate, provide clearance if a accurate staff costing Fisheries Timing Window Extension is required to facilitate project Increases reflect: implementation. i) Separation of new a) 5% increase from 2014 Note that MNR is responsible for timing Complex Fee window modifications related to Repeat Submission 25% for each additional endangered aquatic species. Fee Schedule for Environmental Management Plans Application Type Application Fee Revised Fee 2016 Notes Environmental Minor $2,100 Minor $4,380 Service agreement partners are Management Plan Standard $5,775 Standard $8,845 exempt. EA Service Delivery Major $11,550 Major $14,005 assumes three submissions. An EMP may be required as part of Complex $17,035 the Voluntary Project Review process; appropriate fees will Increases reflect: apply. g) 5% increase from 2014 h) Increase to reflect accurate staff costing of site visits i) Separation of new Complex Fee Repeat Submission 25% for each additional for each additional submission ission F Page 13 of 14 794 (E4201405 -R1] TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2016 Fee Schedule for Compliance Monitoring* Application Type Application Fee Notes Permit Non - Compliance — Additional 100% of applicable Fee to resolve each issue. Unauthorized Works permit fee or fees Fee includes up to two site visits. As needed, "Additional Site Visit' fees will be charged. Permit Non - Compliance — Authorized Additional 50% of applicable Fee to resolve each issue, exclusive of Works permit fee permit revision fee. Fee includes up to two site visits. As needed, "Additional Site Visit' fees will be charged. Additional Site Visit Charges up to 1/. day Additional fees will be charged to $775 projects where ongoing compliance warrants follow -up visits: up to 1 day $.1478 1. Up to two site visits are included as $1550 part of the initial permit or voluntary project review application. 2. Up to one site visit fee is included in Increases reflect: the revision fee. a) 5% increase from 2014 3. Up to one site visit fee is included in the permit reissuance /extension fee. Environmental Management Plan To be determined Subject to negotiation Compliance Review of Compliance Reports Included in the permit review fee Review and comment on compliance reports as required through the permitting or Voluntary Project Review processes. Negotiated Restoration Agreements To be determined Based on the scope of compliance issue. * Note: Service agreement partners are not exempt from Compliance Monitoring Fees unless otherwise noted in specific agreements. Page 14 of 14 795 (EA201405 -R1] RES. #A261/15 - DENISON ROAD WEST MAJOR MAINTENANCE PROJECT Contracts #10001349 and #10001348. Award of Contracts #10001349 and #10001348 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,500 tonnes of 150 — 300 mm gabion stone, and approximately 5,500 tonnes of 3 — 5 tonne armourstone, respectively. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Jennifer Drake THAT Contract #10001349 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,500 tonnes of 150 — 300 mm gabion stone to the Denison Road West Major Maintenance Project in the City of Toronto, be awarded to Glenn Windrem Trucking for a total unit price of $31.40 per tonne and a total cost not to exceed $141,300.00, plus a contingency of 10% to be expended as authorized by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; THAT Contract #10001348 for the supply and delivery of approximately 5,500 tonnes of 3 — 5 tonne armourstone to the Denison Road West Major Maintenance Project in the City of Toronto, be awarded to B -Town Group for a total unit price of $54.15 per tonne and a total cost not to exceed $297,825.00, plus a contingency of 10% to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; THAT should staff be unable to achieve an acceptable contract with the awarded suppliers, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other suppliers that submitted quotations, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take all necessary actions to implement the foregoing, including the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND The erosion issues affecting the east valley wall of the Humber River below Denison Road West and Sykes Avenue have been of concern to TRCA for several years. An armourstone and rip rap revetment, approximately 350m in length, was constructed by TRCA in 1981 to provide toe protection along the lower slope. Despite the toe protection, severe storms such as those on August 9, 2005 and July 8, 2013 have seen water levels overtop the armourstone and scour the lower slope, triggering failures. In 2009, TRCA retained Golder Associates Limited to undertake a geotechnical assessment along the east bank of the Humber River below Denison Road West and Sykes Avenue. The purpose of the assessment was to evaluate the stability of the slope and the condition of the existing armourstone wall, and to determine the Long Term Stable Slope Crest ( LTSSC) position in relation to the residential properties and dwellings on the tableland. The LTSSC determined through the geotechnical assessment showed there is currently a long term risk to the properties and dwellings along the tableland. The report stated that ongoing slope instability is expected to continue if slope stabilization and erosion control measures are not implemented. The Golder report included several conceptual slope rehabilitation designs, and TRCA determined that the options involving constructing a higher toe protection wall in conjunction with upper slope stabilization works were the most feasible. The Golder report was used to inform a Request for Proposal for a Detailed Design of Erosion Control Works issued by TRCA in 2015. 796 In August 2015, TRCA retained Terraprobe Incorporated to undertake a detailed design for erosion control works that will protect the lower slope to the Regional Flood Elevation. The purpose of the design is to provide more robust toe protection and mitigate risk to the residential properties located on the tableland. The project area is located along a 170 metre section of the lower slope of the valley wall at the rear of 48, 50, 52, and 66 Denison Road West, as well as 28 Sykes Avenue, in the City of Toronto. Terraprobe's design recommended a replacement armourstone retaining wall, measuring approximately 6.5 metres in height, with gabion stone backfill. The wall will extend at least 0.3 metres above the Regional Flood Elevation and will be embedded a minimum of 0.6 metres into the shale riverbed. Although it is less common to design to the Regional Flood Elevation, given the risk to the properties on the tableland along Denison Drive and Sykes Avenue, and the increasing frequency of storms that are surpassing the 100 year flood elevation, the Regional Flood Elevation was determined to be appropriate at this site by TRCA technical staff. The lower slope is primarily TRCA property, and the upper slope is located on private property. Upper slope stabilization works are to be planned and implemented in accordance with the Conservation Ontario Class Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects process at a later date. The 3 -5 tonne armourstone will be used to construct the proposed armourstone retaining wall. The 150 — 300 mm gabion stone will be used to provide the drainage layer for the proposed armourstone retaining wall. RATIONALE Request for Tender #10001349 and #10001348 were publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http: / /www.biddingo.com /) on Friday, December 11, 2015, and quotation packages were sent to 27 suppliers as follows: • Allstone Quarry Products Inc.; • Arnts: The Landscape Supplier; • Bot Aggregates Limited.; • Brent Quarry; • Brock Aggregates Inc.; • B -Town Group; • Cambridge Aggregates; • CDR Young's Aggregates Inc.; • Dufferin Aggregates; • Earthco Soil Mixtures; • Fowler Construction; • Glenn Windrem Trucking; • J.C. Rock Limited; • nmental Inc. • J. Jenkins & Son Landscape Contractors Limited; • James Dick Construction Limited; • Lafarge Canada; • Maxwell Stone; • Miller Paving Limited; • Natural Stone Source Ontario; • Nelson Aggregate Co.; • R.W. Tomlinson Limited; • Redstone Quarries; • Rock Valley Natural Stone; • St. Marys Cement; • Stonescale Quarry and Fabrication • Strada Aggregates; and • TBG Enviro The Procurement Opening Committee subsequently opened tenders on Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 1:00 PM with the following results: 797 Contract #10001349 - Supply and Delivery of Approximately 4,500 tonnes of 150 — 300mm Gabion Stone BIDDER TOTAL UNIT PRICE (Plus HST) TOTAL VALUE OF CONTRACT Plus HST Glenn Windrem Trucking $31.40 $141,300.00 Dufferin Aggregates $33.92 $152,640.00 Brock Aggregates Inc. $36.50 $164,250.00 Bot Aggregates Ltd. $39.00 $175,500.00 James Dick Construction Ltd. Disqualified Disqualified TBG Environmental Inc. Disqualified Disqualified Contract #10001348- Supply and Delivery of Approximately 5,500 tonnes of 3— 5 Tonne Armourstone BIDDER TOTAL UNIT PRICE (Plus HST) TOTAL VALUE OF CONTRACT Plus HST B -Town Group $54.15 $297,825.00 Glenn Windrem Trucking $56.75 $312,125.00 Cut Above Natural Stone $57.00 $313,500.00 CDR Young's Aggregates Inc. $57.56 $316,580.00 Bot Aggregates Ltd. $74.00 $407,000.00 TBG Environmental Inc. Disqualified Disqualified TBG Environmental Inc. and James Dick Construction Ltd. were disqualified, as they did not acknowledge Addendum #2, which was issued on December 17, 2015. Based on the tenders received, staff recommend that Glenn Windrem Trucking be awarded Contract #10001349 for the supply and delivery of approximately 4,500 tonnes of 150 — 300mm gabion stone for the unit cost of $31.40 per tonne and a total cost not to exceed $141,300.00, plus HST; staff further recommend that B -Town Group be awarded Contract #10001348 for the supply and delivery of approximately 5,500 tonnes of 3 — 5 tonne armourstone for the unit cost of $54.15 per tonne and a total cost not to exceed $297,825.00, plus HST; they being the lowest bids meeting TRCA staff specifications. These contracts are subject to a 10% contingency to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff. This project is aligned with leadership strategy number two in TRCA's new strategic plan, as ensuring that life and property is protected from the hazards of flooding and erosion is an important aspect of managing our regional water resources for current and future generations. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for this project is available from the City of Toronto through TRCA's capital budget for erosion major maintenance in account 134 -25, and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, through the Water and Erosion Infrastructure (WECI) 2015 -2016 Program, up to a maximum amount of $250,000. Report prepared by: Nivedha Sundararajah, 647 - 201 -8463 Emails: nsundararaiahAtrca.on.ca For Information contact: Ashour Rehana, 647 - 808 -6542 Emails: arehana(&trca.on.ca Date: January 8, 2016 affool RESMA262 /15 - GHFFA ASSET MAPPING PROJECTS Data Management Services. Authorization to proceed with amendments to the Agreement for Agricultural Professional Services with 4DM Inc., for continuation of the Golden Horseshoe Food and Farming Alliance Asset Mapping project. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Jennifer Drake WHEREAS on November 6, 2014, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) was authorized to enter into an agreement for Agricultural Professional Services with 4DM Inc. to complete the Data Collection and Analysis of Food and Farming Assets in the Golden Horseshoe, to an upset limit of $40,000.00, plus HST; WHEREAS on April 8, 2015, Greater Golden Horseshoe Food and Farming Alliance (GHFFA) requested an increase of $31,000.00, plus HST to the upset limit, for a total upset limit of $71,000.00, plus HST, to accommodate a scope change including increased open source data search and processing, as well as the development of a centralized, web- driven data model at the request of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs ( OMFRA); WHEREAS GHFFA received funding form OMFRA in March 2015 to further expand the size of the study area and scope of work to capture the Greater Golden Horseshoe geography, resulting in an additional $30,000.00, plus HST included in the total project budget; THERFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the contract for Agricultural Professional Services to complete the Data Collection and Analysis of Food and Farming Assets in the Golden and Greater Golden Horseshoe, be increased to an upset limit of $101,000.00, plus HST; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 10% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance, if deemed necessary; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take all necessary actions to implement the foregoing, including the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND In October 2014, TRCA, on behalf of GHFFA, retained 4DM Inc., through a competitive process to conduct data collection modelling and mapping of agrifood assets across the Golden Horseshoe. The project included data standardization, data collection and processing, data modelling, mapping and gaps analysis. As a part of the project, existing data was further refined and the existing database structure was updated. New data collection, from existing municipal project partners, third party and open data sources, was a key part of the project. New data was assessed and processed for completeness, quality, consistency and format, then uploaded to the database structure. 799 RATIONALE As the project progressed, it became clear that project funds set aside for purchasing data were not required, but that free, open source data collected by the team required effort to process for completeness, quality verification, consistency and standardization with the data model. This data processing of open source data was consistent with the processing services 4DM was providing as part of the original scope of work. As such, staff recommended that the original scope of work be expanded to include processing of collected open source data for completeness, consistency and standardization with the project data model for a total additional value of $11,000. Additionally, the project captured the attention of OMAFRA, who is interested in using the data collected as part of this project to support appropriate policy planning and decision - making in the growth plan area of the Greater Golden Horseshoe geography. OMAFRA asked to be included in the project for provision of: • initial collection of open source data for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; • processing of the data for upload to the database; • inclusion of the data points in the web -based mapping. This represented $20,000 of the previous $31,000 scope change. Upon receipt of the initial results of the work described above, OMAFRA requested to be included further in the project by applying the complete project approach to the Greater Golden Horseshoe region. The opportunity to work with OMAFRA as part of the project is a great success for the GHFFA, and OMAFRA will provide funds for their portion of the work. This represents an additional $30,000 of the scope change, bringing the overall total to $101,000. Given 4DM's understanding of the requirements to complete the project in a timely manner, GHFFA and TRCA staff is recommending that the original contract be extended to include the above tasks. The additional work will result in the end date of the overall project schedule of March 31, 2016, to align with the OMAFRA Transfer Payment Agreement. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total value of the contract extension, for the additional, stepped tasks described above, will be $30,000, plus HST, bringing the total contract cost to $101,000, plus HST. The original contract was valued at $40,000, plus HST, plus the previously approved scope change of $31,000. This additional amount is required to complete the remaining work. Funds required to complete the additional work under the current contract are available within Golden Horseshoe Food and Farming Alliance accounts. The funding is y from the Transfer Payment Agreement signed by TRCA on behalf of GHFFA. Report prepared by: Sonia Dhir, extension 5291 Emails: sdhir(atrca.on.ca For information contact: Sonia Dhir, extension 5291 Emails: sdhir(a)trca.on.ca Date: January 11, 2016 .II RESMA263 /15 - NASHVILLE CONSERVATION RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN Final endorsement of the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Jennifer Drake WHEREAS the draft Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan dated June 2014 was approved in principle at Authority Meeting #6/14 by Resolution #A116/14; AND WHEREAS the draft Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan dated June 2014 was endorsed in principle by the Township of King and the City of Vaughan, as well as received by the Region of York; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Nashville Conservation Reserve be officially approved and implemented accordingly; THAT the Region of York, the Township of King and the City of Vaughan be so advised; AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff work with the Region of York, the City of Vaughan, the Township of King and the surrounding community to foster an integrated stewardship approach on the property. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #6/14, held on July 25, 2014, Resolution #A116/14 was approved as follows: THAT the draft Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan dated June 2014 be approved in principle; THAT the draft Plan be circulated to the Township of King, the City of Vaughan and the Region of York requesting endorsement of the Plan; THAT following circulation, staff report back to the Authority to confirm endorsement of the final Plan; THAT the lands referred to as "Nashville Conservation Reserve ", be renamed and referred to as the "Nashville Conservation Reserve'; AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff proceed to implement the 'immediate' projects outlined in the management plan document, in partnership with project stakeholders. The Nashville Conservation Reserve (NCR) Management Plan provides direction to protect, conserve and restore the valuable ecological features and functions of the property, while guiding the current and future uses of the conservation land. The plan recognizes that engaging local residents and creating a stewardship mindset in the community is essential for the future health of this natural area. Furthermore, the development of a trail plan that will allow visitors to enjoy and appreciate the NCR is a key component of the management plan. iI Following the approval in principle of the NCR Management Plan by the Authority, the Plan was presented to King Township, City of Vaughan and the Region of York with the purpose of obtaining endorsement. Municipal approval was crucial to the Plan as there are several ongoing projects in the area that will put increased environmental stress on the lands, including demand for access and recreation. Developers have several plans to build communities in proximity to Nashville and have the potential to impact the hydrology of the site, which many natural systems depend on. In addition, TRCA staff has been working with TransCanada Pipelines Limited, who has determined the need for an additional pipeline that will traverse through Nashville. Finally, the GTA West Highway Environment Assessment, while currently on hold, still has the potential to be approved and the highway constructed through the NCR. These future impacts underscore the need for careful planning, responsible management, and, above all, restoration of the disturbed lands. The central goal is to mitigate environmental impacts and improve and protect the integrity of natural systems within and surrounding NCR. On January 12, 2015, TRCA presented the NCR Management Plan to the Council of the Township of King. At the same meeting, Council considered Parks, Recreation and Culture Department Report Number PRC- 2015 -07 advising on the development of the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan. The Council received the Parks, Recreation and Culture Report as information and recommended that the NCR Management Plan dated September 2014, prepared by TRCA, be approved in principle. The following recommendations were approved: a) That report PRC - 2015 -07 be received as information; and b) That the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan ... be supported in principle. On April 8, 2015, TRCA presented the NCR Management Plan to the Committee of the Whole (Working Session) of the City of Vaughan. At the same meeting, the Committee considered staff report No. 15 and recommendations submitted by City of Vaughan staff advising on the development of the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan. The following recommendations were approved: a) That the presentation from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority be received; and b) That the Draft Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority be endorsed in principle with the understanding that future planned transportation and utility corridors will be required and may impact this plan. On May 14, 2015, TRCA presented the NCR Management Plan to the Committee of the Whole of the Regional Municipality of York. Following the presentation, recommendations were made by the Committee of the Whole and were sent to Council for approval. Regional Council, at its meeting held on May 21, 2015, adopted the following recommendations of Committee of the Whole regarding TRCA's deputation on the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan. a) Receipt of the deputation from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority regarding the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan. b) Referral of this item to staff for a future report. i I On October 15, 2015 Report No. 16 of Committee of the Whole was adopted, without amendment, by the Council of The Regional Municipality of York. The recommendation of this report was for Council to contribute 50 per cent of the total cost of acquisition, to a maximum of $1,414,500, including all costs and disbursements, to TRCA, toward purchasing the 44.2 hectare Dalton property and expand the Nashville Conservation Reserve. Recommendations within this report dealt with supporting the strategic Nashville Conservation Reserve Dalton property acquisition. The report also satisfied the May 2015 Council direction to report back on the TRCA deputation regarding the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan. York Region staff acknowledged continuing to work with TRCA on this project. Since the endorsement in principle by the Authority, TRCA staff has been working to complete priority goals set out in the management plan document. One of the first goals of the plan was to establish a stewardship committee, which occurred in July 2015. The NCR Stewardship Committee's mandate is to assist TRCA in implementing the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan, provide a forum for public input, and help TRCA determine priority implementation actions as set forth in the Plan. To date the committee has had an extremely positive impact on the project, with three meetings being held in 2015. Approximately 20 to 25 community members attended each meeting with local and regional council members in attendance. In addition to regularly scheduled meetings, two public events took place in support of the NCR Management Plan. The first was a trail building event in which 25 local community members helped build 1.5 kilometres of trail. The second was a public hike with 30 people in attendance. TRCA staff has also been working to keep Nashville safe for the public to use. Hazard trees were removed along trail corridors and boundaries, and trails and boundaries were audited for encroachments and other safety concerns. The data collected from the inventory and audit of NCR in 2015 revealed that the increased presence and management of the property by TRCA has resulted in an overall decrease of encroachments. The following table provides a summary of the inventory and implementation work. Table 1: 2015 Inventory and Audit Results and Completed Implementation Work Waste Hazard Tree Hazard Tree Trails Fencing Encroachments Removal Removal Removal Audited Audited (boundary) (trails) 1 tonne 2 5 24km 12km 3 previous audits: 189 (2009), 182 (2010), 49 (2012), 22 2014 RATIONALE TRCA has obtained official endorsement in principle from the Township of King and the City of Vaughan and support from the Region of York. TRCA also has the NCR Stewardship Committee, as well as community and stakeholder advocates who are passionate and supportive about the Plan and property. Implementing this plan will signify TRCA's commitment to work with our partners to achieve shared goals and objectives. Municipally, this plan provides pedestrian and cycling trails that have been determined to be essential to the growth of communities surrounding NCR. The Plan also supports York Regions' vision and strategy of creating healthy communities and a sustainable natural environment. i I In addition to moving us towards The Living City Vision, the Management Plan will also help to implement several objectives of TRCA's 10 -Year Strategic Plan, most notably, 'rethinking greenspace to maximize its value'. This Plan will help develop a network of greenspace for the Toronto region that maximizes community well -being and protection of our local ecosystems. This will include helping people become healthier and happier by promoting appropriate access to existing nature and by creating new green infrastructure in urban areas. The fundamental objective of creating the NCR Management Plan was to put in place specific instruction and direction on how to mitigate the environmental impacts caused by ongoing and future development surrounding the property. This includes residential developments, utility infrastructure and transportation corridors. These future impacts underscore the need for careful planning, responsible management, and above all, restoration of the disturbed lands. The successful stewardship of this valuable greenspace is crucial to the health of the Humber River watershed and as such, it is recommended that the Authority approve the Nashville Conservation Reserve Management Plan. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The successful implementation of the NCR Management Plan will require the efforts of TRCA and its partners. The following planning actions will be taken by TRCA: • Report back to the municipalities with a letter that outlines the successful endorsement of the Plan from all partners. • Undertake details plans for future recommended implementation projects • Write funding proposals and seek additional funds for plan and project implementation. The following is a list of implementation projects that will be started in 2016: • Natural Surface Multi -Use Trail Construction (Phase 1 - Huntington /Kirby to Cold Creek); • Hiking /Equestrian Trail Construction (Trail Hub Area); • Design and Construction of 30 Car Parking Lot (Huntington and Kirby); • Lookout Node Construction (1); • Primary Trailhead Construction (1); • Primary Trail Hub Construction (1); • Secondary Trailhead Construction (1); • Regulatory Signage Installation; • Gate and Fencing Installation/ Repair; • Garbage Removal; • Hazard Tree Inspection. FINANCIAL DETAILS The development of trails, related infrastructure, and the protection and enhancement of NCR is a large scale project that will be developed in three phases. Subject to further analysis, detailed plans and funding availability — implementation of the NCR Management Plan is estimated to cost $3.3 million over a period of 12 years. TRCA's York Region Land Care Program has budgeted $45,800 to cover the cost of implementation projects and community engagement activities in 2016. These funds are available in accounts 442 -08, 442 -09, 442 -10, 442 -11, 442 -12 and 442 -13. For Information: Adam Dembe, extension 5939 or Mike Bender, extension 5287 Emails: adembe @trca.on.ca Date: January 14, 2016 •1A RESMA264 115 - CANADA CULTURAL SPACES FUND Funding Application Submission for Black Creek Pioneer Village. Board approval and authorization of a funding application submission to the Canada Cultural Spaces Fund. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Jennifer Drake WHEREAS the federal government, led by the Department of Canadian Heritage, provides funding to support the purchase of specialized equipment and /or the costs of renovations for arts and heritage spaces through the Canada Cultural Spaces Fund; AND WHEREAS project applications and the name of the signing authority for the applicant must be duly authorized or endorsed by a resolution of the Authority and submitted as a component of the application; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) submit a funding application to the Canada Cultural Spaces Fund to support the purchase of a new environmental control system at Black Creek Pioneer Village; THAT the signing authority of TRCA's Chief Financial Officer, Rocco Sgambelluri, be acknowledged as a requirement of the funding application submission; AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as required. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Department of Canadian Heritage offers the Canada Cultural Spaces Fund (CCSF), a funding program aimed at improving physical conditions for arts and heritage related creation, presentation, preservation and exhibition, and to increasing and improving access for Canadians to performing arts, visual arts, media arts, museum collections and heritage displays. CCSF supports costs associated with construction and /or renovation of arts and heritage facilities, and the acquisition of specialized equipment for eligible organizations. CCSF identifies eligible projects as construction and /or renovation projects, and specialized equipment purchases related to cultural infrastructure projects intended for professional arts and /or heritage activities. CCSF will finance up to 50% of eligible project expenses for successful applications, with the following pertaining directly to TRCA's potential project: • environmental control systems; and • installation costs and initial training related to the operation of specialized equipment. CCSF accepts applications on an ongoing basis. Project applications and the name of the signing authority for the applicant must be duly authorized or endorsed by a board resolution. The resolution must be submitted at the time of the application. TRCA would like to submit a funding application for a new environmental control system to ensure the safety and preservation of the artifact collections that are stored and /or displayed in the Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) Visitors' Centre. • 1 Project details, costs and grant percentages provided below are preliminary and may be updated as staff work through the application process. RATIONALE Approximately 50,000 historic artifacts are stored at Black Creek Pioneer Village. Many artifacts are displayed at the Visitor's Centre within the McNair Gallery or stored in one of two storage rooms located on the ground level of the facility. These artifacts are more sensitive or fragile and are preserved by an environmental control system that maintains a stable temperature and humidity at a level that corresponds with professional collections management standards. BCPV is a recipient of the Community Museum Operating Grant (CMOG) from the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, and as such, is provincially mandated to maintain professional collections management and conservation standards. With so many pieces of the South Central Ontario region's past in its care, BCPV is committed to the responsible stewardship of Ontario's history and heritage. BCPV has identified a pressing need to replace the Visitor Centre's aging environmental control system, which is responsible for maintaining the climate of the facility's two artifact storage rooms and the McNair Gallery. There are two critical roles of environmental control systems for collections conservation: 1) Maintaining climate stability —the consistency of temperature and humidity is essential to the maintenance and safety of historic collections. Fluctuations in humidity and temperature lead to deterioration of artifacts and are therefore extremely problematic in collections management. Depending on the kind of artifact, fluctuations in humidity in particular can cause swelling, warping and cracking, among other kinds of damage. 2) Maintaining a safe level for humidity and temperature also prevents deterioration. For example, when humidity is too high, mold can grow on materials, such as textiles. Since 1984, an existing environmental control system has helped maintain an optimal climate for BCPV's artifact storage and display areas; however, over the past several years, a growing number of system deficiencies have been noted. Temperature and humidity readings that are recorded daily by equipment in the Registration Department show that the current unit can no longer reliably maintain a steady humidity and temperature. For example, the ongoing unit malfunctions cause high spikes in temperature and humidity in summer and risk the long -term preservation of BCPV's artifacts. Further compounding the challenge is that maintenance costs must be expended annually and replacement parts are difficult to source and purchase due to the 30+ year age of the unit. With increasing upkeep costs, growing obsolescence of required parts, and recorded inconsistencies in the climate of the facility's storage and display areas, the existing unit is beyond its useful life. It is no longer functioning optimally as an efficient, effective or sustainable option for BCPV. FINANCIAL DETAILS The budget for this project is $150,000. TRCA is seeking 50% ($75,000) from CCSF. The remainder of the funding is available from the City of Toronto within the Black Creek Pioneer Village capital account number 503 -01. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA staff will complete and submit a funding application to CCSF in February 2016. •ISM Should the funding application be successful, the project will be presented to the Authority for further approvals as required. Report prepared by: Stephanie Demetriou, extension 6424 Emails: Sdemetriou(a)trca.on.ca For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 Emails: Dedwards(a)trca.on.ca Date: January 15, 2016 i 1 RESMA265 115 - BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE HISTORIC BREWERY Contract Renewal. Award of contract renewal between Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Pioneer Brewery Limited to continue the operation of the Black Creek Historic Brewery. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Vincent Crisanti WHEREAS the brewery has become an important part of the Black Creek Pioneer Village's (BCPV) educational programming; and AND WHEREAS the involvement of Pioneer Brewery Ltd (PBL) through its subcontractor, Trafalgar Ales and Meads has generated sufficient revenue through retail sales to substantially offset costs associated with the educational programming so that while incurring a net deficit in the past, the proposed agreement will produce a marginal surplus beginning in 2016 and grow in the future as a result of a substantial reduction in overhead costs, renegotiated royalty fees and the availability of additional retail outlets; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a three -year contract with Pioneer Brewery Limited be approved to continue to operate the Black Creek Historic Brewery through its subcontractor, Trafalgar Ales and Meads at an annual administrative cost of $82,400.00, plus HST for a three -year total of $247,200.00, plus reasonable inflationary annual adjustments, plus HST; THAT the contract be subject to the necessary terms and conditions satisfactory to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and, as necessary, its solicitor; AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the necessary action to implement the contract including the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND On April 29`h, 2009, TRCA and Pioneer Brewery Ltd (PBL) signed an agreement to jointly operate the Black Creek Historic Brewery (BCHB) from June 10, 2009 to December 31, 2015 through its subcontractor Trafalgar Ales and Meads. At Executive Committee Meeting #10/08, held on December 12, 2008, Resolution #8168/08 was approved, in part, as follows: THAT a contract with Trafalgar Ales and Meads to establish and operate a pioneer brewery and museum at Black Creek Pioneer Village be approved, at a cost not to exceed $92,000 annually, plus applicable taxes and reasonable inflationary adjustments;... BCHB, operated by PBL, has become an integrated and essential feature of BCPV. Situated at the heart of the Village in the Halfway House Inn, the Historic Brewery provides an experiential educational opportunity for visitors to BCPV and helps draw thousands of people to the Village on an annual basis. Visitors interact with BCPV's historical interpreters and take part in interactive education programs to explore the history of beer, brewing and society in 19`h century South Central Ontario. They may also taste and purchase specialty ales made onsite that mimic popular historic brews. For many, this multifaceted experiential offering is a primary driver of visitation to BCPV. • f • Programming Daily Public Programs BCHB offers the Historic Brewery Tour and Beer Sampler. Led through the Village by a costumed educator, participants in the Historic Brewery Tour learn firsthand about the beer - making process through a series of entertaining and educational interactive experiences. For visitors seeking a less- structured approach to the brewery experience, the Beer Sampler allows visitors to sit by the bar and enjoy a casual conversation with BCHB's historical interpreters about beer, brewing and historic society while sampling a variety of traditional ales. Corporate Programs BCHB is host to corporate groups that book special visits to BCPV to experience the brewery and its related team - building and educational corporate programs. Brewery Adult Apprenticeship This highly experiential offering is one of BCPV's most popular and immersive adult programs. Adult apprentices spend the day working alongside the Brewmaster and partaking in every step of the brewing process as they help craft a unique batch of ale. Staff will focus on promoting the immersive and educational brewery apprenticeship program and assessing the possibility of developing related offerings. Operations BCHB operates as a small -scale craft brewery that specializes in the production of historically inspired ales. Visitors enjoy samples of the beer or purchase it in 2L growler bottles. BCHB brews brown ale, India Pale Ale, porter and stout, and features specialty seasonal ales that are made monthly during BCPV's operating season. In 2016, additional liquor licenses will be acquired to permit beer to be sold by the glass in BCHB and alongside food offerings in the Gift Shop as this is a highly requested service. Branding The BCHB branded ales, available commercially at LCBOs and other vendors, leverage and expand the Black Creek brand while providing key marketing outreach to a wide audience. Royalties earned through sale of this beer provide revenue that helps to sustain the educational programs available at BCPV. These ales are produced in the modern brewing facility of Trafalgar Ales and Meads, as subcontracted by PBL. Being awarded the Gold Ontario Brewing Award for the BCHB Pumpkin Ale provided additional opportunities to increase Black Creek's brand awareness. Unique Partnerships TRCA has partnered with Ontario Group of Touring Companies to create The Ultimate Canadian Craft Beer Experience. Nationally recognized with the prestigious Canadian Signature Experience designation, this tour attracts additional visitors to BCPV and promotes it internationally. BCHB recently partnered with the Archives of Ontario to produce Benson's Strong Ale. This beer was made from a 200 year old beer recipe found in the Archives' records and is currently being sold through the LCBO. Whiskey & Spice partnered with BCHB to produce Porter Pepper Mustard, an artisanal small -batch mustard sold widely throughout the GTA. Partnerships such as these enhance BCHB's educational offerings, promote the learning of Toronto's history, and expand BCPV's marketing reach. TRCA will continue seeking new partnership opportunities for BCHB. i 1 RATIONALE TRCA would like to renew its contract with PBL to ensure that BCHB continues to operate as a dynamic, distinct and highly popular feature of BCPV —one that has helped further several of BCPV's organizational goals. Specifically, BCHB has allowed BCPV to: • engage new audiences, such as craft beer enthusiasts and adult men, who now make up a distinct segment of BCPV's clientele; • demonstrate its social value and create community links by connecting to contemporary audiences in culturally relevant ways; and • promote the heritage of South Central Ontario through the immensely successful and experiential brewery program offerings. Between 2009 and 2015 revenue for the brewery fell short of initially anticipated targets. The shortfall is partially attributed to the depressed economic climate, which has had an impact on US tourism and attendance. Additionally, corporate group sales were not as robust as anticipated during the business planning phases of BCHB. BCHB's business model is unique to TRCA; rather than hire staff to operate a brewery, BCHB contracts out the services and experience of a professional brewer. The vast majority of the annual expenditures ($82,846 in 2015) accounts for this expense. This business model was selected because TRCA staff has neither the experience nor skills required to operate both the onsite brewery and the brewing operations that take place at Trafalgar Ales and Meads. In addition to brewing, PBL staff has the expert knowledge required to complete the administrative work associated with the operation of a brewery in Ontario. Furthermore, the specialized skills and knowledge brought to the project by an onsite professional brewer adds enormous educational value that enhances the visitor experience to BCHB. Staff proposes the retention of this aspect of the agreement with PBL because it provides the interactive and educational aspect of the program while ensuring the beer meets professional standards. Over the past seven years, BCHB has introduced unique educational programs that have received extremely favourable reviews from participants. BCHB has added a new educational component to BCPV's public program offerings that are unique in Canada. To sustain these programs, BCHB has also introduced several revenue streams to BCPV, including programming sales, branded merchandise sales, additional admissions and parking sales, and revenue associated with beer sales. These revenue streams have helped offset some of the overhead costs associated with BCHB operations; however, there is potential to develop new sources of revenue and enhance existing ones. Moving forward, TRCA plans to position BCHB for greater financial sustainability through negotiated changes to its contract with PBL and through opportunities for new market entry, branding and experiential program development. The following four key changes to the previous contract agreement will ensure BCHB is better positioned for long -term financial sustainability: 1. Shorter length of contract term: TRCA and PBL will enter into a three -year agreement for production of BCHB branded beer onsite at BCPV and externally at a commercial facility. A shorter contract term will allow TRCA to re- assess the brewery operation and re- negotiate any terms as may be required to accommodate changes associated with the new Black Creek Pioneer Village and emerging retail beer markets. i l 2. Additional retail outlets: In addition to sales through the LCBO, The Beer Store became a primary vendor in 2015 with 27 stores selling BCHB branded ales. In 2016, grocery stores will also be added as additional retail outlets as a result of recent changes that have permitted the sale of craft beers through new retailers. Industry projections suggest that beer sales through grocery stores will grow exponentially over the next few years. These additional retail outlets will increase the availability of BCHB branded ales and introduce new streams of revenue to BCPV. 3. Increased royalty payments: PBL will pay an increased royalty to TRCA for beer sold through the LCBO ($0.60 per litre until previous year's sales volume has been met; $0.50 per litre thereafter. Currently, PBL pays a royalty of $0.40 per litre) and The Beer Store ($0.50 per litre instead of currently paid $0.40 per litre). PBL will also pay royalties to TRCA for all other commercial sales based on a price negotiated on a case -by -case basis. 4. Direct reduction to overhead costs: Rather than pay an annual equipment rental fee of approximately $20,000 /year, TRCA will pay a maintenance fee of $4,000 /year and will purchase the brewery equipment outright from PBL for a nominal price of $2.00 (thereby nullifying the rental fee). FINANCIAL DETAILS Black Creek Historic Brewery — Expenditures and Revenue Projections for 2015 to 2018 2015* 2016 2017 2018 Total Program Expenditures $118,982 $95,602 $105,297 $100,801 Gross Revenue $98,037 $120,694 $130,332 $143,614 Net Revenue $20,945 $25,092 $25,035 $42,813 * Estimated values for 2015 as expenditures and revenue detail are pending completion. The 2015 numbers shown above are approximate. The expenditure decrease between 2015 and 2016 can be attributed to renegotiated contract overhead costs. The gross revenue increase can be attributed to the aforementioned renegotiated contract retail (LCBO and The Beer Store) royalty payments, as well as increased BCPV retail sales, sale of beer "By the Glass" and growth in experiential program offerings. Report prepared by: Wendy Rowney, extension 5407 Emails: Wrowney @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672 Emails: Dedwards @trca.on.ca Date: January 12, 2016 811 RES. #A266/15 - URBAN CAPITAL (RIVER CITY 3) INC. Request for Limiting Distance Agreement City of Toronto, Don River Watershed, CFN 54791. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the City of Toronto are in receipt of a request from Urban Capital (River City 3) Inc. to enter into a Limiting Distance Agreement for lands located on the south side of Eastern Avenue and west of Bayview Avenue in the City of Toronto, Don River watershed. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Jennifer Drake WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the City of Toronto are in receipt of a request from Urban Capital (River City 3) Inc. (Urban Capital) to enter into a Limiting Distance Agreement required for the construction of a residential condominium, located in the Don West Lands, south of Eastern Avenue and west of Bayview Avenue, City of Toronto, Don River watershed; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with Urban Capital and the City of Toronto in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a Limiting Distance Agreement with Urban Capital relating to TRCA and City of Toronto -owned land containing a total of 0.269 hectares (0.664 acres), more or less, of vacant land, described as Block 8, Plan 66M -2473, City of Toronto, on the following basis: (a) the price to be paid by Urban Capital shall be $48,000.00; (b) Urban Capital shall be responsible for all legal, survey and other costs associated with completing the transaction, including any fees required for municipal approvals (such as minor variance application, Site Plan Control application, etc.) as deemed necessary by the City of Toronto; (c) TRCA lands affected by the agreement are approximately 9 metres in width and the 38 metres in length; (d) The building restrictions on the approximately 342 square metre strip of TRCA land are to be satisfactorily defined to ensure that normal park operation, paths, trails, etc., are guaranteed without restriction; (e) This agreement does not restrict City of Toronto or TRCA staff from exercising their normal planning review and commenting responsibilities; (f) The agreement is to continue and be binding upon TRCA so long as the new construction / renovation remains in place; (g) The agreement will be revoked or terminated upon receipt of written notice from the City of Toronto that the new construction / renovation has been removed or no longer exists; 812 AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documentation. CARRIED BACKGROUND Urban Capital has formally requested that TRCA and the City of Toronto enter into a Limiting Distance Agreement that is required for the construction of a residential condominium building in the Don West Lands adjacent to the Don West Flood Protection Landform. To allow a substantial amount of glass on the side of the proposed building, the City of Toronto requires that the abutting landowner agree not to construct a building within a certain distance of the property line. City of Toronto Legal and Parks, Forestry and Recreation staff have been consulted and are in agreement with the proposed Limiting Distance Agreement. The subject lands form part of a larger parcel containing the Don West Flood Protection Landform, comprised of both TRCA and City of Toronto -owned land. The current zoning on the adjacent TRCA land is Public Open Space and prohibits any form of buildings or structures with the exception of passive, recreational -type development such as pathways and trails. In addition, the TRCA property is situated within the regional storm flood plain of the Don River; consequently, structural development would be precluded at this site. Therefore, the Limiting Distance Agreement will not result in any detrimental impact on the subject TRCA land nor the current use of the property. Attached is a plan showing the location of the subject lands FINANCIAL DETAILS It is proposed that the compensation obtained from this agreement be utilized for the purchase of priority properties under the Greenlands Acquisition Project 2016 -2020 and for TRCA's long term head office accommodation project. Report prepared by: Nigel Holder, extension 5859 Emails: nholder @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Nigel Holder, extension 5859, Jae R. Truesdell, extension 5247 Emails: nholder @trca.on.ca, jruesdell @trca.on.ca Date: January 19, 2016 Attachments: 1 813 r i I Legend L�c c Jc 0 E T PROP RTY. Toronto and Region 0W Conservation for The Living City - u p iu u c � r•• RES. #A267/15 - GREAT LAKES PROTECTION ACT AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Legislation Passed to Keep the Great Lakes Drinkable, Swimmable and Fishable. Ontario has passed the Great Lakes Protection Act (the Act) which will strengthen the Province of Ontaris's ability to keep the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River clean, as well as to protect and restore the waterways that flow into them. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Jennifer Drake THAT the Province of Ontario be congratulated on successfully passing the Great Lakes Protection Act after years of extensive partner and public consultation; THAT in recognizing there is a great deal of work to be done, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) recommends that the Province begin addressing those issues that pose the most serious threats to each of the Great Lakes; THAT TRCA's current programs and initiatives, and the role TRCA can play in the implementation of the Great Lakes Strategy, as articulated in this report, be shared with the Province; THAT the Province be requested to invite TRCA, Conservation Ontario and other conservation authorities to participate at Great Lakes Guardian's Council meetings as they provide a distinct watershed perspective for each of the Great Lakes; THAT the Province be strongly encouraged to include funding for the implementation of the Great Lakes Strategy in the 2016 Ontario Budget; THAT the provincial and federal governments be encouraged to look for innovative ways for their initiatives to complement each other so that they can maximize outcomes for the benefit of the Great Lakes; AND FURTHER THAT this report be circulated by the CEO's Office to the Premier of Ontario and Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change and TRCA's partner municipalities. CARRIED BACKGROUND After years of partner and public consultation, the Great Lakes Protection Act received Royal Assent and was passed into law on November 3rd, 2015. Passing the Act enables the Province to address significant environmental challenges to the Great Lakes, including climate change, harmful pollutants and algal blooms. The Act will also: • Establish a Great Lakes Guardian's Council to provide a collaborative forum for discussing and gaining input on issues and priorities relating to the Great Lakes. • Allow the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change to set environmental targets and enable communities to address local problems. • Require the establishment of monitoring programs on a number of water quality indices where needed, as well as regular public reporting. • Require consideration of traditional ecological knowledge in decisions made about the health of the Great Lakes if offered by First Nations or Metis communities. CW Enshrine Ontario's Great Lakes Strategy, the Province's action plan on the Great Lakes, as a living document to be reviewed every six years and reported in the legislature every three years. The Act establishes the Great Lakes Guardian's Council which is a forum with the objective of helping to improve collaboration and coordination among partners. The Guardian's Council will identify priorities for actions to achieve the purposes of the Act; identify potential funding measures and partnerships; and facilitate information sharing to achieve the purposes of the Act The Council will also provide an opportunity to obtain input, establish targets, set criteria for selection and prioritization of the geographic areas for which initiatives will be developed. The Act allows for the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change to set targets and to create action plans related to Great Lakes issues. According to the Act the Minister is required to set at least one target to support the reduction of algal blooms within two years of the Act becoming law. No other timelines or targets have been set, however the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change may direct a public body (provincial agency, municipality or conservation authority) to provide information to assist in the establishment of a target and in the determination of actions to achieve said target. The Act also allows for the development and implementation of 'geographically - focused initiatives' (GFIs) to address issues that are a priority in a specific location. A GFI would be developed by a municipality, conservation authority or the Province, subject to extensive consultation, and would be approved by Cabinet. Among other inclusions, a GFI must consist of: • a legal policy (or policies) or a recommendation for a shoreline regulation; • description of the applicable geographic area; • objectives of the initiative; • methods to assess achievement of objectives; • a financing strategy; and • benefits and costs to the implementing body. Proposals and ideas for a GFI may come from a variety of sources including local communities, members of the public, First Nations and Metis communities, and government commitments and agreements. The Minister may respond to an idea by initiating the GFI process. The initiation of the GFI process consists of the pre - consultation phase (consultation with other Great Lakes ministers, First Nations and Metis communities, local municipalities, MPPs, conservation authorities). If the decision is made to direct the development of a proposal, the proposal is submitted to the Minister, the Minister consults with other Great Lakes ministers, and the proposal is posted to the Environmental Registry for comment. Once the Minister approves the proposal the GFI is developed through additional consultation, and incorporates existing studies and regulations as they pertain to the area. Once this stage is complete and a draft of the GFI is developed, the Minister refers the draft GFI to Cabinet, and Cabinet makes a decision on whether or not a GFI should be established. The Great Lakes Strategy is designed to focus provincial resources across ministries, and to enhance collaboration and engagement with other governments and the broader Great Lakes community. The Strategy includes Ontario's portion of the geography of lakes Superior, Huron, Erie and Ontario, their connecting rivers, the St. Lawrence River, Ottawa River and surrounding watersheds and groundwater. Actions identified with the Strategy to protect and restore the Great Lakes -St. Lawrence River Basin ecosystem are organized around the Great Lakes Goals: 1. engaging and empowering communities; • •� 2. protecting water for human and ecological health; 3. improving wetlands, beaches and coastal areas; 4. protecting habitats and species; 5. enhancing understanding and adaptation; and, 6. ensuring environmentally sustainable economic opportunities and innovation. The Strategy also indicates how the Province will be measuring performance against these goals. The provinces will report on progress after three years, and review the Strategy in year six. Regular reviews of the Strategy will allow the Province to respond to emerging issues and new science, and to establish new milestones on the way to reaching the Great Lakes Goals. Strong science will continue to be essential to defining issues and suggesting solutions. Research and monitoring partnerships provide the knowledge to set priorities, establish Great Lakes targets, and guide effective Great Lakes protection and restoration. Many provincial ministries work together to care for the Great Lakes. These ministries work together at all levels to integrate government policy and programs for the Great Lakes. Several ministries share resources and coordinate efforts and science to implement agreements on Great Lakes. This Strategy builds on that work. The actions in this Strategy will be led by the Ministries of the Environment and Climate Change, Natural Resources and Forestry, Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Municipal Affairs and Housing, Infrastructure, Aboriginal Affairs, Economic Development and Innovation, Tourism, Culture and Sport, Health and Long -Term Care, Transportation and Intergovernmental Affairs. Strategy Vision and Goals Healthy and resilient Great Lakes, their shorelines and their watersheds, have an effect on virtually every aspect of life in Ontario. Much progress has been made but there is considerable work left to do. Focus must be applied to the areas along the coastline that need priority attention. Ontario's vision is one of healthy Great Lakes for a stronger Ontario — Great Lakes that are drinkable, swimmable and fishable. To achieve this vision, the Province is seeking to protect and restore the ecological health of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River Basin. The Strategy has put forward a number of goals to realize this vision. Engaging and empowering communities — to create opportunities for individuals and communities to become involved in the protection and restoration of the ecological health of the Great Lakes -St. Lawrence River Basin. This goal focuses on providing opportunities to enjoy, benefit from and connect with the Great Lakes. Individuals and communities can play a part on the Great Lakes by collaborating on setting direction, and by taking action. The Great Lakes Guardian Community Fund provides funding for many small -scale local community actions to restore and protect the Great Lakes. Building awareness by creating more opportunities for all Ontarians to experience the Great lakes, and to build a sense of connection with the ecosystem and with the Great Lakes history and culture. The Province will continue to engage the Great Lakes community to facilitate information sharing, identify priorities for targeted action, identify potential partnerships, and to strengthen and build relationships. 817 2. Protecting water for human and ecological health — to protect human health and wellbeing through the protection and restoration of the ecological health of the Great Lakes -St. Lawrence River Basin. The Province works to protect and conserve the interconnected system of watersheds and groundwater in the Basin, and the variety of life those waters support, from the cumulative impacts of threats such as climate change, urban growth, growing water use and large volume water diversions. Ontario also works to significantly reduce and, where possible, end the discharge of harmful pollutants into the water, air and land of the Great Lakes ecosystem. Reducing excess phosphorus is an essential element for improving Great Lakes water quality. There will be opportunities to improve stormwater approaches such as "green infrastructure ", including constructed wetlands; and better protection of sources of water. 3. Improving wetlands, beaches and coastal areas — to protect and restore wetlands, beaches, shorelines and other coastal areas of the Great Lakes -St. Lawrence River Basin. Wetlands, beaches, waterfronts and other coastal areas are where people meet the lakes, but also where pressures on the lakes are most evident, in the form of unwanted algae, contaminated sediment, shoreline alterations and other impairments caused by human activity. Nearshore areas are the most biologically diverse and productive area in the lakes — restoring and protecting them will have lake -wide benefits. Ontario will work with partners to focus action on priority geographic areas. 4. Protecting habitats and species — to protect and restore the natural habitats and biodiversity of the Great Lakes -St. Lawrence River Basin. Biodiversity is the variety of life on earth and for the Great Lakes Basin this includes thousands of wetlands, unique ecosystems, more than 150 native fish species, and thousands of native plants. Habitat loss, invasive species and loos of connectivity of natural systems are the main threats to biodiversity. 5. Enhancing understanding and adaptation — to advance science relating to existing and emerging stressors, such as climate change, that improves understanding and management of the Great Lakes -St. Lawrence River Basin. Science is essential to target and prioritize actions to protect and restore the Great Lakes ecosystem. Great Lakes protection is a long term challenge, so monitoring programs are also key to assessing progress, evaluating the effectiveness of policies, programs and partnerships, and adapting them as necessary over time. Scientists must also explore new and innovative ways of obtaining, analyzing and communicating the most current information. Action on Great Lakes climate change impacts is a priority under the Great Lakes Strategy. 6. Ensuring environmentally sustainable economic opportunities and innovation — to enrich the quality of life in communities in the Great Lakes -St. Lawrence River Basin through the support of environmentally sustainable economic opportunities and innovation and through environmentally sustainable use of natural resources. To support and foster water technology innovation services and practices and to encourage sustainable Great Lakes tourism and recreation are priorities for the Province. To monitor progress on Ontario's Great Lakes Strategy, the Province is developing performance measures. They will track and report on performance measures, and will refine these measures over time. Public progress reports on the Great Lakes will be provided every three years, with reports tabled in the Legislature. These reports would include results of monitoring programs, actions taken and a description of new and emerging issues. In addition, the Act also ensures that monitoring and reporting programs are established and maintained. TRCA Programs and Activities of Interest TRCA is well positioned to play an essential role in supporting the Province in implementing the Act and Strategy. TRCA's vision for The Living City is firmly based on the four pillars of TRCA's ongoing commitment to healthy rivers and shorelines, greenspace and biodiversity, sustainable communities, and business excellence within a green economy. In keeping with this vision, TRCA's Strategic Plan (2013) advocates for the integrity of natural systems, access to greenspace and green jobs, and vibrant sustainable neighbourhoods for the health and wellbeing of the residents of the Toronto region. For almost three decades, TRCA has been providing resources, expertise and implementation support toward delisting the Toronto Harbour as an Area of Concern identified by the International Joint Commission. TRCA has worked with multiple layers of government to find solutions to complex issues and establish common benefits. TRCA's unique approach to collaboration with agencies, business and to engage and empower communities has been effectively deployed to protect water quality, improve ecological health, and protect Lake Ontario's shoreline and habitats in the watersheds of Lake Ontario. Through TRCA's regional watershed monitoring and research programs, TRCA has been able to maintain a long term comprehensive data set and watershed knowledge for evidence based decision making in TRCA's watersheds. The Great Lakes Strategy recognizes that reducing phosphorous is essential to improving Great Lakes water quality. TRCA's Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program (STEP) has been actively working to find methods to reduce nutrient releases through green infrastructure and reactive media that will help retain phosphorous and thereby reduce nutrient loading to surface waters. One of the projects currently being undertaken by STEP will evaluate the effectiveness of a reactive media incorporated within the soil media of a bioretention system to help better retain nutrients in stormwater runoff and prevent leaching of nutrients from soil media. Earlier research has shown this to be a common problem with bioretention systems. Various other projects aimed at reducing sediment discharges from construction sites provide guidance and support to ensure existing and future stormwater infrastructure is appropriately maintained. The Great Lakes Strategy also specifically mentions the work being undertaken by TRCA with regard to low impact development (LID). Since its initiation in 2005, STEP has completed over 20 detailed monitoring evaluations of green infrastructure practices. The Program has also prepared design guidance documents, produced literature reviews and developed life cycle costing tools to help accelerate adoption of the technologies. Results of the research are shared through the STEP website, an annual two day conference, e- learning courses on LID and several professional training events delivered across Ontario every year. As a member of Green Infrastructure Ontario (GIO), a group committed to the coordination, promotion and education of green infrastructure opportunities within the urban areas across the Province, TRCA staff provide knowledge synthesis and regular access to the latest in green infrastructure through on -line newsletters and postings. The work of GIO has the potential to address water quality concerns within urban watersheds, sending cleaner water to the Great Lakes and helping to restore more natural water cycles in watercourses that support lake -based fisheries and other ecosystem services. i s The Great Lakes Strategy identifies climate change as an important priority. In this context, TRCA has been advancing the understanding of science related to climate change and extreme weather, an emerging threat to our watersheds and lakes. In collaboration with York University, TRCA coordinates the work of Ontario Climate Consortium (OCC) a centre of climate change expertise that brings together a network of leading universities and practitioners to advance the science and policy needed by public sector agencies to effectively reduce climate risks and vulnerabilities. It is near unanimous that climate change is and will continue to affect the Great Lakes through changes in water quality and quantity and the corresponding ecosystem responses, however, the uncertainty surrounding these changes presents significant management challenges. Recently, the OCC played a lead role in the coordination and preparation the 2015 State of Climate Change Science in the Great Lakes Basin report which synthesizes available science on the observed and projected impacts of climate change in the Great Lakes Basin, and documents the range of climate change assessment methods used in the region. This report was initiated in support of commitments under the Annex 9 - Climate Change Impacts to account for impacts on the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Great Lakes. The body of work is an example of key guidance material for researchers, managers and decision makers alike. The OCC has also undertaken a series of climate change vulnerability assessments within the watershed, notably on natural systems and near -shore community assets that characterize and spatially reveal where vulnerabilities affecting water quality in rivers, streams and in -land lakes may ultimately contribute to increasing water quality issues within near -shore Lake Ontario. Research, assessment and knowledge dissemination, as well as managing provincial climate data sets and generating climate trends useful at the scale of the Great Lakes, are examples of key services OCC can provide in support of implementing the Great Lakes Strategy. Another critical goal of the Strategy that aligns well with TRCA programs is support of sustainable economic opportunities and innovation. TRCA's Partners in Project Green (PPG) in partnership with the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), Region of Peel and City of Toronto, aims to create an internationally recognized eco- business community centered around Toronto Pearson International Airport - Canada's largest employment area with 12,500 businesses and over 350,000 commuters (the "Pearson Eco- Business Zone'). Comprised of businesses, governmental bodies, institutions, and utilities, this community is striving to strengthen and green Toronto region's economy and beyond. PPG's water programs help to connect businesses and institutions in the Pearson Eco- Business Zone on creative new approaches to water stewardship and cutting -edge technological solutions.. In 2014 alone, Partners in Project Green interacted with more than 550 organizations in the Greater Toronto Area. Members of the PPG community, all together, diverted more than 700 tonnes of waste from landfill, reduced their annual water footprint by more than 180 million litres, and achieved more than 5,000 tonnes in greenhouse gas avoidances. From time to time TRCA staff is invited to attend binational meetings in the United States as experts in their field - these meetings cover a wide range of topics from climate change, invasive species, groundwater, integrated watershed management, stormwater LIDs, water quality, modelling, data management and GIS mapping, aquatic habitat restoration, water level regulation, Remedial Action Plan Areas of Concern, drinking water source protection, sustainability and basin wide land use planning etc. o TRCA staff are members of standing advisory committees for various Annexes of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and are also regular participants in meetings and conference calls on topics as diverse as Binational Biodiversity Conservation Strategies, State of the Great Lakes Reporting, the Internal International Year of Study for Lake Ontario and Lake Partners Management Committee for Lake Ontario. TRCA advises, supports and help implement studies identified under the Canada - Ontario Agreement (COA). TRCA experts are often called upon to assist Conservation Ontario with Great Lakes projects they are coordinating in Lake Erie, Lake Huron, Lake Superior and the St Lawrence River Basin. TRCA welcomes the opportunity to collaborate with the Province to assist in any way possible to meet the goals and objectives of the Great Lakes Strategy and its deliverables. While a great deal of work has been undertaken by many stakeholders, there is a lot of work to be done. Early success for this new legislation is very important and it is in all of our interests to show real progress on the Great lakes in the next few years. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will provide periodic updates as to how the Great Lakes Protection Act and Strategy are progressing and identify opportunities for TRCA to advance our own regional goals for watershed and waterfront ecological health through the Province. TRCA will look for opportunities to provide regional expertise and knowledge of TRCA's watersheds to the Province in order to set targets, develop performance measures and report out on progress towards the Great Lakes Strategy goals. FINANCIAL DETAILS At this time, there are no specific TRCA budgets to support this legislation. To the extent that current programs and funding will allow, TRCA will assist the Province in achieving the deliverables established in the legislation. Report prepared by: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313; Gary Bowen, 416- 271 -8944 Emails: ngaffney @trca.on.ca and gbowen @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313 Emails: ngaffney @trca.on.ca Date: January 15, 2016 821 RES. #A268/15 - REHABILITATION OF THE SMALL ARMS INSPECTION BUILDING PROJECT Request to City of Mississauga for Support of a Partnership Project. Request to City of Mississauga for support of a partnership project between the Government of Canada, Region of Peel and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority that will include a City funding commitment of $2.5 million to support partial rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building and up to $1 million over five years, towards the ongoing operation of the building. Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Colleen Jordan WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) acquired the culturally significant Small Arms Inspection Building in 1992, as part of a larger strategy to create a regional waterfront park; AND WHEREAS the Small Arms Inspection Building was designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, by City of Mississauga Council on May 13, 2009; AND WHEREAS the designation under the Ontario Heritage Act places responsibility on TRCA as the building owner, to protect the building and the structure's key heritage attributes; AND WHEREAS TRCA has secured a total of approximately $2.5 million from contributions from the Region of Peel, the Government of Canada and the balance of funds remaining from the original purchase and rehabilitation of the site, towards a total estimated cost of phase one of the building restoration of $5.0 million; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to submit a formal request to the City of Mississauga for support of a partnership project between the Government of Canada, Region of Peel and TRCA, that will include a City funding commitment of $2.5 million to support partial rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building and up to $1 million over five years, towards the ongoing operation of the building; THAT staff enter into discussions with City of Mississauga staff to negotiate the terms and conditions of the support, which may consider the option of transferring legal ownership of the building from TRCA to the City; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back at Authority Meeting #4/16, scheduled to be held on April 22, 2016, to confirm the City of Mississauga's response to TRCA's request for support. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Small Arms Inspection Building is located at 1352 Lakeshore Road, in the Lakeview community of Mississauga. TRCA acquired the 43,000 ftZ (4,000 mz) building in 1992 as part of the 16 hectare (39 acre) property referred to as the Arsenal Lands, which was purchased for the purposes of developing a regional waterfront park that would link Mississauga and Toronto. 822 The Small Arms Inspection Building and surrounding grounds have played an important role in Canada's history. According to a Heritage Impact Statement completed in 2009 for TRCA, the building was constructed as a wartime project, and comprises of three distinct components: a two- storey front administration wing, a bridge with one and two - storey components and an adjoining rear one - storey inspection plant. The building is the last remaining building of a larger munitions plant that was erected on the site to manufacture firearms used by allied forces overseas during World War II. In 1940, Small Arms Limited was incorporated as a crown company to operate the plant. By 1942, the facility was in full production, and at the height of employment in 1943, the factory employed up to 5,500 workers in three shifts, with women making up 65% of the workforce. Further information pertaining to the history of the building and surrounding grounds, as well as the building's heritage attributes is available upon request. The City of Mississauga Heritage Advisory Committee recommended that the property be designated under the Ontario Heritage Act and was approved by City Council on May 13, 2009. Since that time, the rich history of the site and its importance within the Lakeview community, has inspired a community- driven and TRCA supported plan to reinvent the building. The proposed vision championed by a group of local residents, known as the Small Arms Society, is for the building to be transformed into a centre for arts, culture, heritage and science. This vision is expected to achieve many benefits including: • transition of the Lakeview community from an industrial use, into a vibrant mixed -use community; • attraction of small businesses to the Lakeview community; • contribution to the health, vibrancy and diversity of the community; • preservation and interpretation of the remaining heritage features that represent the Lakeview area's contribution to the war efforts in WWI &WWII; • promotion of education and research related to sustainable urban design and planning; • enhancement of public amenities and connected network of regional parks and natural open spaces that bridge Toronto and Mississauga on the Lake Ontario waterfront; and • promotion of art, dance, theatre and culture. To support the community vision and to abide by the preservation requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act, TRCA staff has led numerous initiatives to confirm capital and operating costs, potential financing strategies and tenants for the rehabilitated building. At Authority Meeting #4/12, held on May 25, 2012, Resolution #A78/12 was approved as follows: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to enter into discussions with Region of Peel staff to include in the 2013 -2022 TRCA capital budget for Peel Region, $2million in special funding for rehabilitation of the Arsenal Building, former Canada Post Corporation property, City of Mississauga. With the generous support of the Region of Peel, TRCA has been able to fund asbestos removal, mold remediation, conversion of the fire suppression system, undertake general maintenance to keep the building secure and replacement of the building's roof. 823 In 2014, TRCA staff retained LGA Architectural Partners to develop a schematic proposal for revitalization of the building (architectural drawings available upon request). The design presented by LGA included large conditioned and unconditioned open spaces in the south part of the building, as well as washroom facilities that could serve building and future Arsenal Lands park users. The north part of the building was proposed by LGA to be multi -use space that could support office, artistic, cultural and institutional users. In 2014, following the work completed by LGA, TRCA staff led an Expression of Interest (EOI) process, seeking submissions from qualified potential partners, with their vision for the redevelopment of the building. Proposed uses submitted to TRCA through the EOI included a submission from the Small Arms Society, and proposals for a private school, an innovation hub and a museum to commemorate Canada's military heritage. Analysis of the submissions by TRCA staff and through consultation with City of Mississauga staff suggested that the proposed uses did not satisfy one or more of the following requirements: • did not meet intended vision for the building as a community space; • did not have adequate capital and operating funding in place to realize the proposed vision; and /or • did not have a complete business plan in place. Therefore, TRCA staff did not enter into an agreement with any of the respondents. In 2015, TRCA staff submitted an application for funding through the Canada 150 Community Infrastructure Program (CIP 150), administered by the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev) for a partnership project between the Government of Canada, Region of Peel, City of Mississauga, Government of Ontario for the redevelopment of the Small Arms Inspection Building into a centre for arts, culture, heritage and science. The application was intended for an initial phase of the project that would realize redevelopment of the south part of the building, a space of approximately 18,000 ftZ (1,670m2). According to the CIP 150 Guidelines, the program permitted a Government of Canada contribution of up to 50% of total eligible project costs; however, priority may be given to those projects that require a contribution of only 33 %. The support of the City of Mississauga is critical in order to achieve the funding contributions specified in the CIP 150 guidelines. TRCA's CIP 150 application was successful, and the Government of Canada approved a non - repayable contribution of up to $1,000,000 for a project to rehabilitate the south part of the Small Arms Inspection Building (Phase 1). At Authority Meeting #9/15, held on October 30, 2015, Resolution #A202/15 approved the project as follows: WHEREAS in September of 2015, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) received funding approval for FedDev Ontario for the following projects form Canada 150 Infrastructure Program (CIP 150): • Rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building — Phase 1 • Improvement of Claremont Field Centre • Installation of Fitness Trail at Heart Lake Conservation Area • Expansion of Petticoat Creek Aquatic Facility; AND WHEREAS projects approved for funding must be duly authorized or endorsed by a resolution of the Authority; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the aforementioned projects approved for funding by FedDev Ontario be approved in principle; • A AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as required. To support the intended vision approved at Authority Meeting #9/15, at Authority Meeting #10/15, held on November 27, 2015, Resolution #A227/15 on Future Directions in Education at TRCA was amended by Resolution #A228/15 as follows: THAT the following be inserted before the last paragraph of the main motion: THAT the Small Arms building at Arsenal Lands be considered within the context of a Community Engagement Centre; Staff has been directed to collaborate with the The Living City Foundation to improve private and public funding support for TRCA activities related to community engagement centres; which now include the Small Arms Inspection Building. RATIONALE The redevelopment of the Small Arms Inspection Building is an exciting opportunity to promote the rejuvenation of Mississauga's Lakeview community. It is an opportunity to commemorate and celebrate local and national history, while moving toward a sustainable and prosperous future. Lakeview is slated for renewal under the City of Mississauga's ongoing Inspiration Lakeview and Local Area Plan planning processes. Under the Local Area Plan (adopted by City Council on September 16, 2015), there is consideration for a Special Site on the Arsenal Lands to allow for additional uses such as community facilities, a conference centre, commercial school, restaurant and secondary offices. Furthermore, as presented in the table below, the proposed building vision complements the City of Mississauga's Lakeview Local Area Plan themes: Local Area Plan Themes Building Redevelopment Contributions Reconnect Citizens to the Waterfront Serve as a gateway from the urban parts of the community into the waterfront. Establish itself as a 'destination' that will draw people to the waterfront. Community Health Provide a vibrant and innovative space for meeting, learning, communicating and reflection. Distinct Neighborhoods — Preserve Heritage Complement, recognize and promote the Features Buildings key heritage attributes, its role within the Lakeview community and its role within Canada's military and economic development history. Under Phase 1 of the building redevelopment proposed works include replacement or upgrades to the following components: • electrical system; • plumbing system; • mechanical system; • , • interior finishes; • windows; • site servicing; • fire safety; • accessibility; and • parking and site access. Capital funding from the City is required to support the aforementioned building and site access upgrades. Furthermore, it is anticipated, that funding will also be required to support the first five years of the building's ongoing operating budget. Since TRCA is the building owner, one option for the management structure could be as follows: • TRCA maintains overall project management control of Phase 1 of the redevelopment project and implementation of the vision. • City of Mississauga will provide support during Phase 1 of the redevelopment. • City of Mississauga —with support from local community groups such as the Small Arms Society - will be responsible for the ongoing operation and management of the building space redeveloped as part of Phase 1. Given that the proposed role of the building as a multi - purpose community hub is more traditionally a municipal leadership responsibility; another option for project management could involve transferring ownership of the building to the City. Under this scenario, TRCA staff would support City staff in implementing the vision for the building, including facilitating access to the existing funds available for rehabilitation of the building and the City would take on responsibility for managing all other aspects of the building's redevelopment and ongoing operation. Ownership of the larger Arsenal Lands is proposed to remain with TRCA. FINANCIAL DETAILS It is estimated that the Building will require, at minimum, a capital investment of approximately $12 million to renovate and redevelop the property to support a sustainable and dynamic multi -use facility; of which approximately $5 million in capital funding would be required for Phase 1. The proposed capital investment has been informed through building condition reports prepared for TRCA in 2003, 2006 and 2013, and TRCA's experience with other building renovation projects. Funding sources for Phase 1 are proposed as follows: Amount Source Status $1.2 million Region of Peel Committed in 2012: Amount that remains from $2.Omillion in special funding through 2013 -2022 TRCA capital budget. $500,000 TRCA — Canada Post Committed $1 million Government of Canada — Pending agreement Canada 150 Community documents from Government Infrastructure Program of Canada $500,000 Funding from agreements Pending City of Mississauga made under Section 37 of Council resolution Planning Act — City of Mississauga • •j Amount Source Status $2 million Special Funding - City of Mississauga Pending City of Mississauga Council resolution $5.2 million TOTAL DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA will request a City of Mississauga capital investment of $2 million in special funding and $500,000 from agreements made under Section 37 of the Planning Act for the partial rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building (Phase 1) and support of up to $1 million over five years, towards the buildings operating budget. Staff will discuss with City of Mississauga staff the feasibility of the City providing support for the partnership project, as well as the terms and conditions of the support. Staff will continue to explore additional funding opportunities for the building redevelopment, which may include provincial support and identify potential tenants for the building that would achieve the intended vision. Report prepared by: Ethan Griesbach, extension 5364 Emails: egriesbach @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ethan Griesbach, extension 5364 Emails: egriesbach @trca.on.ca Date: January 26, 2016 RES. #A269/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed 33 Wigston Place, Vaughan, CFN 55067. Acquisition of property located east of Bathurst Avenue and south of Regional Road 7 in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York Region, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015," Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River watershed. (Executive Res. #8141/15) Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Chris Fonseca THAT 1.664 hectares (4.113 acres), more or less, of vacant land, located east of Bathurst Avenue and south of Regional Road 7, said lands being Part of Lot 34, Concession 1 and designated as Part 1 on Registered Plan 65R -35944 and Part of Lot 34, Concession 1 and designated as Part 1 on Registered Plan 651l be purchased from Igor Kotler (Owner); THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; 827 THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A270/15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek Watershed 1967 Woodview Avenue, CFN 55036. Acquisition of property located south of Finch Avenue and west of Altona Road, municipally known as 1967 Woodview Avenue, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015," Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek watershed. (Executive Res. #8142115) Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Chris Fonseca THAT 0.849 hectares (2.098 acres), more or less, of vacant land, located south of Finch Avenue and west of Altona Road, municipally know as 1967 Woodview Avenue in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, said land being Part of Lot 18, Registered Plan 329, designated as Part 3 on Registered Plan 40R- 28868, be purchased from Giuseppe Gareri, Vincenzo Figliano, Palma Barbieri and Catarina Barbieri (Owners); THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED owes RES. #A271 115 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component Humber River Watershed Infrastructure Ontario, CFN 54893. Acquisition of property located north of Finch Avenue and east of Kipling Avenue in the City of Toronto, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015," Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #8143/15) Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Chris Fonseca THAT 7.683 hectares (18.984 acres), more or less, of vacant land, located north of Finch Avenue and east of Kipling Avenue in the City of Toronto, said land being Part of Lot 36, Concession A, designated as Parts 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of Draft Plan of survey prepared by Ivan B. Wallace, Ontario Land Surveyor Ltd., Dwg: 1- 0219 -R v1, dated December 11, 2015, be purchased from Infrastructure Ontario; THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A272 /15 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011 -2015 Waterfront Component, Scarborough Sector 347 -355 Centennial Road, City of Toronto, CFN 54870. Acquisition of property located south of Kingston Road and east of Meadowvale Road in the City of Toronto, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011 - 2015," Waterfront Component, Scarborough Sector. (Executive Res. #8144/15) Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Chris Fonseca THAT 0.071 hectares (0.177 acres), more or less, of vacant land, located south of Kingston Road and east of Meadowvale Road in the City of Toronto, said land being Part of Lots 37, 38 and 39, Registered Plan 3255, designated as Part 5, Part 9 and Part 16 on a Draft Plan of survey prepared by D. Popa Surveying, Ontario Land Surveyor, Job 14 -467, dated January 20, 2015, be purchased from Taryn Properties Inc., John Scharkov and Theodora Scharkov (Owners); i THAT the purchase price be $2.00; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements; THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A273/15 - CITY OF BRAMPTON Transfer of Permanent Easements Etobicoke Creek Watershed, CFN 55062. Receipt of a request from the City of Brampton to transfer permanent easements that are no longer required by TRCA, located at 58, 64 and 66 Main Street South, in the City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, Etobicoke Creek watershed. (Executive Res. #8145/15) Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Chris Fonseca WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the City of Brampton to transfer permanent easements, located at 58, 64 and 66 Main Street South, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with the City of Brampton in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT permanent easements containing a total of 0.222 hectares (0.547 acres), more or less, located at 58, 64 and 66 Main Street South, City of Brampton be transferred to the City of Brampton, said easements being instrument number BR 33520 and instrument number BR 31737; THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, in addition all legal, survey and other costs be paid by the City of Brampton; THAT the City of Brampton is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the transfer of this easement; THAT said transfer be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; O AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED RES. #A274115 - CITY OF TORONTO Request for Permanent Easement Required for Storm Sewer Construction City of Toronto, Don River Watershed, CFN 55037. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement for the construction of a new storm sewer at Harryetta Gardens, located west of Bathurst Avenue and south of Steeles Avenue, in the City of Toronto, Don River watershed. (Executive Res. #8146115) Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Chris Fonseca WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement for the construction of a new storm sewer, located west of Bathurst Avenue, south of Steeles Avenue, in the City of Toronto; AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with the City of Toronto in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of 0.057 hectares (0.142 acres), more or less, be granted in favour of the City of Toronto, said lands being Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Registered Plan 66R- 28355; THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, in addition all legal, survey and other costs be paid by the City of Toronto; THAT the City of Toronto shall fully indemnify and save harmless TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or loss of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the granting of this easement or the carrying out of construction; THAT said easements be subject to the approval of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED 831 RES. #A275115 - THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEEL Conveyance of Land for the rehabilitation of The Gore Road, from Patterson Sideroad to Highway 9, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, Humber River Watershed, CFN 54891. Receipt of a request from the Regional Municipality of Peel for conveyance of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority -owned lands required for the rehabilitation of The Gore Road, from Patterson Sideroad to Highway 9, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res. #B147115) Moved by: Michael Di Blase Seconded by: Chris Fonseca WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the Regional Municipality of Peel for conveyance of land for the rehabilitation of The Gore Road, from Patterson Sideroad to Highway 9, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, Humber River watershed; AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with the Regional Municipality of Peel in this instance; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT two parcels of TRCA -owned land containing 0.166 hectares (0.411 acres), more or less, required for the reconstruction of The Gore Road, in the Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, said land being Part of Lot 31, Concession 4 and designated as Part 1 on Draft Plan of Survey prepared by J.D. Barnes Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Reference No. 15 -30- 796 -00 -17 (Part of Pin 14346 -0029) and; Part of Lot 32, Concession 3 and designated as Part 1 on Draft Plan of Survey prepared by J.D. Barnes Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Reference No. 15 -30- 796 -00 -36 (Part of Pin 14345- 0014), be conveyed to the Regional Municipality of Peel; THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, in addition to all legal, survey and other costs be paid by the Regional Municipality of Peel; THAT the Regional Municipality of Peel is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from this conveyance or the carrying out of construction; THAT an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the Regional Municipality of Peel; THAT a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval, in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines; THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by the Regional Municipality of Peel prior to commencement of construction; 832 THAT said conveyance be subject to approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED Section IV — Ontario Regulation 166/16, As Amended RES. #A276/15 - ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Moved by: Matt Mahoney Seconded by: Jennifer Innis THAT Section IV item 10.2 — Ontario Regulation 166/06, As Amended, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #13115, held on January 15, 2016, be received. CARRIED TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:12 a.m., on Friday, January 29, 2016. Maria Augimeri Chair /ks 833 Brian Denney Secretary- Treasurer