Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-19_Minutes_Board_of_Directors _2019-03-29Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Board of Directors Meeting #3/19 was held at TRCA Head Office on Friday, March 29, 2019. The Chair, Jennifer Innis, called the meeting to order at 9:34 a.m. PRESENT Jennifer Innis Chair Jack Heath Vice -Chair Maria Augimeri Member Paul Ainslie (in: 9:38 a.m.) Member Kevin Ashe Member David Barrow Member Ronald Chopowick Member Vincent Crisanti Member Joanne Dies Member Paula Fletcher Member Gordon Highet Member Linda Jackson Member Jim Karygiannis Member Maria Kelleher (in: 9:37 a.m.) Member Mike Mattos Member Jennifer McKelvie Member Steve Pellegrini Member Gino Rosati Member Jason Runtas Member ABSENT Dipika Damerla Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Jennifer Drake Member Chris Fonseca Member Michael Ford Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Michael Palleschi Member Anthony Perruzza Member Rowena Santos Member The Chair recited the Acknowledgement of Indigenous Territory. RES.#A29.19 - Moved by: Seconded by: MINUTES Steve Pellegrini Ronald Chopowick THAT the Board of Directors approves the minutes of Meeting #2/19, held on February 22, 2019. CARRIED RES.#A30.19 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Jim Karygiannis Seconded by: Joanne Dies THAT the Board of Directors receives the staff presentation under Agenda Item 6.1., pertaining to Agenda Item 9.3. CARRIED 2019 Bolton Ice Jam Flooding Presented by: Rehana Rajabali, Senior Manager, Flood Risk Management March 29, 2019 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Presentation Outline • TRCA Flood Forecasting and Warning Program • Ice Jams Explained • TRCA River Ice Monitoring Program and Communications • Bolton Ice Jam of March 15 • TRCA Support to Municipal Response • Next Steps The information contained in this presentation is copyright © Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 1 2 Flood Risk Management at TRCA PREVENTIC & MITIGATIC RECOVEF 1EPAREDNESS :SPONSE PREVENTION & PREPAREDNESS RESPONSERECOVERY� MITIGATION Limiting exposure to risk: • Implementing TRCA's regulations and policies Reducing Risk • Operating a flood forecasting and warning program • Maintaining flood control infrastructure • Creating a flood protection strategy for vulnerable areas • implementing redmedial works projects Understanding the Risks: • Climate, geology, watershed response and potential for climate change Documenting the Risks: • Floodplain mapping, identification of flood vulerahle areas TRCA's Flood Contingency Plan Emergency Plans Emergency Operations Centre Training Public Education • Provide Flood Forecasting and Warning (issuing flood messages) • Operate flood control infrastructure • Communicate information and advice • Data management Flood Event Documentation and lessons learned Storm analysis Ice Jams / Ice Dams • Typically occur during spring thaw and rainfall • Broken ice cover, pieces flow downstream • Very site specific: accumulate at obstructions, bridges, bends, or sometimes just against other ice • Can develop rapidly • Can have multiple jams form and release in the same place • The sudden release of an ice jam can cause problems downstream as it can pile up farther down Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 4 TRCA River Ice Monitoring Program WATERSHED CONDITIONS STATEMENT WATER SAFETY DATE: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 22,2019 TIME: 3:00 PM ISSUEDTO: SCHOOL BOARDS, MUNICIPALITIES, LOCAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES, LOCAL POLICE, EMERGENCY SERVICES AND MEDIA Watershed Conditions Statement - Water Safety Weather Conditions: Toronto antl Regan Conservation advises Envacnment Canada has lerecasted total ignA pnation as high as 1S2o mm (or Sahuday evening immugM1 N Surgay morning In Vie Greater Toramo Area_ Ther Is abv a potential Iry a quick meting convective soon dellvenng additional rannad Temperatures are expected to reach levels above freezing on Saturday and are epecled to remain vvch above the freezing mark ihn ugh To Sunday late evening. Damaging mood mM gusts as high as SU to 1 W klrMr have been firecasted to develop Sunday aftemmn_ Given the wheat snowpacs, expeCed mklfaq increased mmpeuAums,, ah high Mods sndwmeft can be expected over Vie weekend. There is also a potential for ice jam break-up. Most avers and streams currently have partial to full oecover, therefore Me rainfall and snowmen may poteMully lead to Ice{ams and localized flooding near culverts, Doge pars, and meanders. [ce-Jam canditlons are dilAaltt to predict thus [Here a same uncertainty regarding Vie potential for ice -jams and associated flooding. Currently, Ice Jams ant localized flooding M1ave been mbssved at die Humber River al Broca or (Vaughn) and the Lower Humber at Old MITI Comoro). Thele is also an Ice jam that has been observed in When at ICmg a and Old IOng Ed Issues: Due m the LAM propitiation expected on Saturday and Sunday or the embody of me GTA along walh snowmen caised by incrocang tenpemmrg, and due to Ne potential for ice breakup, all evens sarin the GTA may experience higher flmvs and water levels, resulting in potential flooding and llaza f cus Toronto and Region Conservation Authority FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT RIVER ICE CONDITIONS OUTLOOK Friday, March 8, 2019 This communication is intended to inform municipal staff and operational departments of present and forecasted over ice conditions within TRCA rivers and streams, and implications for ice -jams andlorflooding that may result. Currently, forecasted weather conditions for this weekend and into next week are trending towards above zero degrees for daytime high temperatures starting on Sunday, March 10th. There is also the possibility of some rainfall for Sunday. The wrient forecasted conditions indicate a MODERATE potential for ice break-up and ice -jamming. Significant ice cover persists in TRCA watercourses and active ice jams remain in the Humber River at King Street in Bolton, Beds Dove in Vaughan, and in the vicinity of Old Mill in Toronto. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority The Usual Suspects Ice Jam Monitoring Locations SIMCOE r Cons0kon The Lirine City 1 I[elam Mannaring vrionrvt el o>a " nnurvrz, • r • 3 i� L.rke Ovnrfu Humber River at Old Mill Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 1 6 Ice Jams in Bolton Feb 7 —From drone A t° mb Feb 5 — From resident Feb 21 — River Watch March 7 (upstream at Hickman) March 15 (-10AM) — River Watch Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Flood Response - March 15 • March 14 — rainfall received throughout watershed • March 15 AM — water levels in most of jurisdiction receding, TRCA visits King Street at 9:55 AM and sees open water • March 15 late afternoon — OPP and Town of Caledon begin evacuations in Bolton Core. TRCA subsequently receives reports of flooding from a resident. TRCA staff dispatched to site and connected with Caledon Fire Chief to support the incident response • TRCA Staff remained on-site from 9:15 PM March 15 through 7:00 PM March 16 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 9 TRCA Tools • Flood extents similar to a 1:500 year event, but caused by a completely different issue (ice blocking flow in the channel) • Used our technical tools to support the town's emergency response and evacuations Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 1 10 TRCA Tools Toronto and Region Conservation Authority I 11 • � M �: `✓✓ � T ' c_ 5�. ei fJ� �d < I �... _ _ ,Y .h�E �''I.'�.�C 1 '# Win' �_ a m%� � '�./' .. \ �Y .. '. ';tl�.. _ . .� i ��"= '� �+�► "� �. -�_, � _ T � . �� �� -roc :.. �,,. • ' • s ''- - ..,,P,r , .. '' f,a Ice Jam Removal - March 16 Flood Infrastructure Staff provided guidance on an effective jam removal strategy Town of Caledon undertook mechanical removal using excavators Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 13 .fir. Post -Event Analysis Drainage Area Affecting BOLTON CORE ®m , .. Hnre,lnn", .�­u ® �. � N3Mmurze � rkotl Wl�rtrapk CNse� C3 S ..tt . m many 1 0 1 2 3 4km ® N March 15 afternoon — evacuations begin in Bolton Core March 15 mid-day — high flows pass through �Igrave Caledon Enterprise: several residents are impacted by flooding on James Street. - Tracey Lehman/photo Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 16 Next Steps • Commission retrospective study • Use the eyes in the skies: expand use of drone, helicopter, or even satellite imagery for future river ice monitoring • Debrief with the Town of Caledon to review incident response procedures • Continue to engage with partners and public in flood vulnerable areas Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 17 www.trca.ca Toronto and Region Conservation Authority RES.#A31.19 - CORRESPONDENCE Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Jennifer McKelvie THAT the Board of Directors receives the correspondence under Agenda Item 7.1. CARRIED DTORONM becMMplat oil, MUM,; unioe IOlaril,,, Iof Council Secretariat Support City Hall, 1221 Floor, V O 100 Queen $Jeer West Imorao, Orrtalia 1015H A2 RECEIVED February 11, 2019 FES 19 2019 Mr. John MacKenzieCEM � CMiei Executive Officer Turunto and Region Conservation Authority 101 Exchange Avenue Vaughan, Vaughan L4K 5R6 Dear Mr. MaCKenmiu: SaEject: Memoer Motion c.0 Tummy Thumpaun Park Sh.ttle Survfuu Uhi s. warRiss City Clerk Tei. +io-ouz-rv3z Fa.: 41 6-392-29W e-mail: Rlarilyn. i onw roromo.ce web: www.toron,o.ca In reply please qu=: R—wf.: 19-MM2.4 Ciry Council on January 30 and 31, 2019, considered this Item, and a copy i3 attached fur your Infvrmatlon yr apprvprlate activn. Yours truly, for City erk M. TufVbb Attachment C. City Manager 2019-01-30 Dcciaiv,..s - City WTUHUffM Driii5ion5 City Cuundi Memaer Motons - meut;nij 2 MM2.4 I ACTION Adopted Ward: 14 i utttmy i namtium Park 5Fiattlu 5erviva - 6y caanaillar Paola Flvtcnar. *Gevnae8 6y councillor Ana Hailao city cvanail UUu6ion City Council on January 3v and 31, 2vly, adZ;YtZ5 the ruhz;..i..g: 1. City Cu..cil forward to the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer avid the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services the request from the Toronto and region Conservation Authority for $130,000 from the City on an annual basis to operate a public shuttle service in Tommy Thomt,son Park for consideration as Part r f the 2019 Bud6ut Pr:,e:,ss. 5autmaFy r ommy t nom.son Park on the Leslie Street SYit is a ,em used by thousands of r,ez; ,Ic frm all walks of lite and for many purposes: field naturalists; birding_: walking- tlshiug; sailing- and bikine. It is a t. e pa..disc tr;. u.,tivc a.d passive rucrcation. In Iy8y, the To.o.do and Region Cun3cc,vatiott Authmity completed an extensive environmental assessment and Flannine process which resulted in the eratiun et tnz; Tz;....., Thompson Park Master Plan whose main objectives are to: - preserve significant species; - protect enviromnentally siguiliCant areas: - enhance aquatic Uaii ta...Cst.lal naDitat; and - enhance public recreational opportunities. I.v 1992, the Masten Plai...as app.uvcU .vim a„ a...M..dmci.t that the "Master Plan for Tommy Thompson Park include a public transit component to ensure access to the Leslie Street Spit`. The 1995 O,Qer in Council approving the Maste, Platt expanded on this: "The Meaupolitan Toronto and Region Crnscrvation A..thcrity or the park operating agony will develop a public consultation process tar park users regarding the type and operation of the park transportation service". There was a public shuttle bus service in Tommy Thompson Pa,k but it was eanc;clled in 2011. The reinst«tcmz;nt uf the pabiiz sh,.ttlZ; Das i.. Timmy Thc;mp3c;n Parx Dc a great service to the public, especially Tor those with mobility issues as well as the sailing club and the birding community. As the operator of the Tommy Thompson Park_ the Toronto and Region Conset nation Authority has r�qucst�d tu..ds t.om the City ut Tu.u.du to tazilitat-, the reintrodu-,tion of a shuttle service, one that meets Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act regulations, to Page 1 of 2 2019-01-30 Dzrisimz - City Cuurrc;1 improve public accessibility within the park, to enhance public reweational opportunities and ro impro a safety for the erowine number of visitors. In Dcccmocr z;f 2018, tnc Tz; ,..t–� W.d Region Conservadon AULhoriLy completed a cost eSLimare for rhe aperudun of a shuule service during hz;ura when To......y ThvnrpsZ;.. Park ;s upc., tu the public. The annual operating cost will Loral $130,000.00, which includes capiral recavery. 6acRuroand InTvrmUMA (city UOURa.il) Member Motion MM2.4 kMLtp:..www.toronto.ca legtlocs mmis z'v ia mm ogrt1 EacRgrountlnie-iZa8va.PU �Janua., 29; 2019 Fiscal IMFact Statement from the Chief Finw.v;ril Offrzer rind Treasurer thttp:ii.—.toronto. ca/legdocs/mmis/2019/mm/bgrd/backgroundfile-124148. pdrl Page 2 of 2 Section I — Items for Board of Directors Action APPOINTMENT OF INFORMATION AND PRIVACY OFFICER Approval to appoint the Clerk and Manager, Policy as the Information and Privacy Officer pursuant to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and to authorize the delegation of powers and duties to same. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick WHEREAS pursuant to subsection 49(1) of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.56, as amended (the Act) and Section 14 of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Board of Directors Administrative By- law, the Chair of TRCA is designated as head, and a staff member shall be designated by resolution to act as TRCA's Information and Privacy Officer for the purposes of the Act, THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA's Clerk and Manager, Policy be appointed as TRCA's Information and Privacy Officer; AND FURTHER THAT the Chair, as head, shall delegate to the Information and Privacy Officer, in writing, all powers and duties of the head under the Act; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA's Chief Financial and Operating Officer be appointed as an alternate Information and Privacy Officer for matters in which the Clerk and Manager, Policy is absent or has a conflict of interest with respect to the exercising of powers and duties; AND FURTHER THAT RES.#A167/18 be rescinded, effective as of the date of passing of this resolution. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Act outlines the duties of local governments, including municipalities, school boards, police commissions, conservation authorities and other local boards, in respect to access to information rights and the protection of privacy. An institution, legislated under the Act, elects or appoints among themselves an individual or a committee to act as head of the institution, tasked with overseeing the administration of the legislation and ensuring compliance with the legislation and regulations. The responsibilities of the head pursuant to the Act are operational in nature and include but are not limited to: • providing access decisions in response to requests for information; • adhering to time limits and notification requirements for information requests; • considering representations from third parties affected by requests; • determining the method of disclosure of information; • responding to requests for correction of personal information; • calculating and collecting fees for information requests; • where necessary, defending decisions made under the Act at an appeal; and • administering the privacy protection provisions of the Act. Section 14 of TRCA's Administrative By -Law designates the Chair of the Board of Directors to act as head of TRCA, and it provides that the Board shall by resolution designate a staff member to act as TRCA's information and privacy officer for the purposes of the Act. Further, subsection 49(1) of the Act states that, "a head may delegate in writing a power or duty granted or vested in the head to an officer or officers of the institution." In the municipal and conservation authority context, responsibility for decisions made under the Act and for overseeing the administration of the Act within the institution is typically delegated to a Clerk or the senior administrative officer with oversight of the access and privacy program. In the past, TRCA's Clerk and Senior Manager, Corporate Records was responsible for supervision of the organization's privacy program and was appointed as Information and Privacy Officer. This authority was temporarily assigned to the Chief Financial and Operating Officer at the October 26, 2018 Board of Directors meeting (RES.#A167/18), while the recruitment for the Clerk and Manager, Policy position was underway. The Information and Privacy Officer in turn has delegated certain powers and duties to staff in the Corporate Records and Information Technology Management business units. RATIONALE Staff recommend that the Clerk and Manager, Policy be appointed as the Information and Privacy Officer, with all of the powers and duties of the head as identified in the Act, and with direct oversight of TRCA's access and privacy program. Once appointed and delegated the powers and duties of the head, the Information and Privacy Officer will delegate to the Corporate Records and Information Technology Management business units in writing such responsibilities as deemed appropriate. Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan This report supports the following strategy set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan: Strategy 7 — Build partnerships and new business models Report prepared by: Andrew Farnsworth, extension 5671 Emails: andrew.farnsworthna.trca.on.ca For Information contact: Michael Tolensky, extension 5965 Emails: mtolenskv(cDtrca.on.ca Date: March 5, 2019 RESMA33/19 - BOLTON BERM REMEDIATION STUDY In the historic village of Bolton there is a system of flood control infrastructure to protect it from riverine flooding. TRCA recently completed a comprehensive study to assess the hydraulic performance and structural integrity of this system. The study also explored opportunities to enhance the level of flood protection. This report summarizes the results of the assessment taking into account observations from the recent March 15th -16th, 2019 event including proposed next steps and implementation considerations. Moved by: Gordon Highet Seconded by: Jack Heath THAT staff be directed to disseminate the study report and all information developed from the Bolton Berm Remediation Study to Engineering staff at the Town of Caledon and Region of Peel; THAT TRCA immediately undertake general repairs and maintenance to the Bolton flood control infrastructure as recommended in the study report as option 1 at a cost of approximately $75,000; THAT TRCA immediately initiate the detailed design process for the preferred restoration plan, option 3, at an estimated cost of $150,000; THAT TRCA, in consultation with the Town planning for the preferred restoration plan so that implementation can occur in 2020; of Caledon and Region of Peel initiate ncluding public consultation and budgeting AND THAT TRCA make a funding request to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry's Water and Erosion Control Infrastructure program to help fund the preferred restoration plan; Jennifer Innis vacated the Chair's seat to bring forward an amendment to the main motion. Vice - Chair Jack Heath assumed the Chair's seat. AMENDMENT RESMA34/19 Moved by: Jennifer Innis Seconded by: Gordon Highet THAT the main motion be amended to insert the following paragraphs: THAT staff report back on opportunities to accelerate the timeframe for implementation; THAT staff report back on the impact of Special Policy Area flood proofing efforts for buildings; THAT staff incorporate a maintenance access into the design process that integrates a multiuse trail on the north side of the Humber in the Bolton Core area; AND THAT staff work to increase protection through the detailed design process associated with the preferred option and to report back with any additional cost to increase protection. CARRIED RESULTANT MOTION THAT staff be directed to disseminate the study report and all information developed from the Bolton Berm Remediation Study to Engineering staff at the Town of Caledon and Region of Peel; THAT TRCA immediately undertake general repairs and maintenance to the Bolton flood control infrastructure as recommended in the study report as option 1 at a cost of approximately $75,000; THAT TRCA immediately initiate the detailed design process for the preferred restoration plan, option 3, at an estimated cost of $150,000; THAT TRCA, in consultation with the Town planning for the preferred restoration plan so that implementation can occur in 2020; of Caledon and Region of Peel initiate including public consultation and budgeting THAT TRCA make a funding request to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry's Water and Erosion Control Infrastructure program to help fund the preferred restoration plan; THAT staff report back on opportunities to accelerate the timeframe for implementation; THAT staff report back on the impact of Special Policy Area flood proofing efforts for buildings; THAT staff incorporate a maintenance access into the design process that integrates a multiuse trail on the north side of the Humber in the Bolton Core area; AND THAT staff work to increase protection through the detailed design process associated with the preferred option and to report back with any additional cost to increase protection. CARRIED Jack Heath vacated the Chair's seat. Jennifer Innis assumed the Chair's seat. BACKGROUND The historic village of Bolton, (intersection of King Street and Queen Street), in the Town of Caledon is located within the valley corridor and floodplain of the Humber River. This area has a long history of flooding with 233 structures susceptible to flooding during a Regional Storm event. Due to the flood vulnerability of the community, the historic village of Bolton was designated as a Special Policy Area (SPA) to allow for the continued viability of existing uses and address the significant social and economic hardships to the community that would result from strict adherence to provincial policies concerning development in a floodplain. Flood protection measures were constructed in the 1980's to provide flood protection up to and including the 500 -year flood. These flood protection measures include: • a diversion channel, parallel to King Street through Humber Lea Road to convey higher flows; • a box culvert at Humber Lea Road; • a concrete crib wall installed upstream of King Street on the east bank; and • earth berms constructed along the south side of the Humber River from the bridge by Old King Road to Queen Street. These measures helped to minimize impacts to properties from flooding as evidenced by their performance during recent events. While the March 15" event exceed the capacity of the river to convey flows the above infrastructure remained intact during the recent flooding. Additional study to confirm performance is currently underway. In 2013 the Town of Caledon initiated the "Bolton Special Policy Area Review" with the purpose of: • reviewing the SPA boundary in light of new floodplain mapping information developed by TRCA; • undertaking a comprehensive assessment of flood risk within the SPA; • the preparation of a Planning Justification Report; and, • the preparation of an Official Plan Amendment, implementing Zoning By-law, and Site Plan Control Provisions. During the SPA update process, TRCA identified that a comprehensive assessment of the flood infrastructure was needed given the age of the infrastructure and changes in the watershed. At TRCA Authority meeting #2/18, Friday March 23, 2018 (Item 7.3), TRCA received authorization to undertake an assessment of the flood control infrastructure. This assessment, titled "The Bolton Berm Remediation Study", fulfills TRCA's commitment to assess the state of the flood control infrastructure within the Bolton SPA for the Town of Caledon. The intent of the Bolton Berm Remediation Study was to characterize flood conditions within the SPA, asses the level of service and structural competency of the existing flood infrastructure, and to develop a preliminary restoration strategy for the Bolton flood control berms. Key project deliverables included: • A 2D hydraulic flood model for the area using the MIKE Flood hydraulic modelling platform; • the completion of a number of technical assessments including Geotechnical, Structural, and Fluvial Geomorphology; • An existing Conditions summary report; and • A Restoration/Remediation study report. RATIONALE In April 2016, TRCA retained Valdor Engineering to undertake the Bolton Berm Remediation Study. TRCA's Request for Proposal as well as Valdor's project proposal provided study goals and objectives, a detailed work plan, and schedules. Key components of the study work plan included: 1. the development of a coupled 1 Dimensional and 2 Dimensional (1 D -2D) hydraulic model for the study area; 2. geotechnical field investigations and assessment of the stability of the Bolton berms under various conditions and failure modes; 3. structural investigations of a TRCA owned crib wall to quantify its current condition and structural stability; 4. fluvial geomorphic investigation of the flood control channel to quantify the interaction between the flood control channel and the berms; and, 5. a detailed characterization of the flooding within the study area including the identification of flood zones and the mechanisms of flooding to aid in the development of restoration options. The components of the overall study and assessment results were completed and presented in two summary reports titled: • Bolton Berm Remediation Study— Existing Conditions Report (Valdor, 2017); • Bolton Berm Remediation Study, Restoration/Remediation Alternatives Report (Valdor, 2018). Existing Conditions Report The existing flood control berms were designed in the 1980's to provide flood protection up to the 500 -year flood. The results of the revised hydraulic model determined that the flood control berms fall short of this target. The western -most berm provides flood protection up to the 350 - year flood and the eastern berm provides flood protection up to the 100 -year flood. Factors contributing to the reduced level of flood protection include lower berm elevations compared to the design elevations due to settling at a number of locations and less sophisticated hydraulic modeling methods used as part of the original design process. Hydraulic modelling also revealed that water circumvents both berms due to flows exceeding channel capacity at the upstream end, causing flows to spill into areas previously thought to be protected by the berms. The Bolton Berm Existing Conditions report recommends that options to rehabilitate and restore the berms to provide 500 -year level of flood protection should be investigated for future consideration and implementation. The Existing Conditions Report also identified a number of minor berm deficiencies based on field and geotechnical investigations. The deficiencies include excessive vegetation, minor deterioration of berm toe protection, a number of blocked/missing flap gates, minor sediment and debris in culverts. Further, the geotechnical stability analysis indicated the berms do not meet current Factor of Safety (FOS) engineering design standards for a number of loading conditions. As such, some structural repairs are required as part of the restoration plan. The Existing Conditions Report noted that the western berm is lower than design elevations by up to 10 cm and that the eastern berm is lower than design elevations by up to 30 cm. This is primarily a result of a lack of freeboard being incorporated into the original design. Current standards now require applications of freeboard into design. Restoration/Remediation Alternatives Report The Bolton Berm Remediation Study, Restoration/Remediation Alternatives Report examined five options to rehabilitate the berms to address all the deficiencies described above and to enhance the level of flood protection provided. The options including an estimated cost to implement are as follows: Option 1 — General Maintenance Requirements with Current Level of Flood Protection (100 -year Storm) - $75,000; Option 2 — Rehabilitation Providing Flood Protection up to the 350 -year Storm - $401,000; Option 3(a) — Rehabilitation Providing Flood Protection up to the 500 -year Storm - $690,000; Option 3(b) — Rehabilitation Providing Flood Protection up to the 500 -year Storm and meet all FOS requirements - $940,000; and, Option 4 — Remediation Providing Flood Protection for Greater than the 500 -year Storm - $1,150,000. It is important to note that Option 1 is required at minimum to meet current engineering standards for flood control berms. Options 2-4 will increase the level of flood protection and can only be considered once Option 1 has been implemented. Based on thorough evaluation of the remediation options and feedback from Town of Caledon staff, the preferred approach to restoring flood protection is to implement Option 1 immediately and begin the planning and engineering for Option 3(b) so that implementation can begin in 2020. The cost to undertake the planning and engineering for Option 3(b) is an additional $150,000, bringing the total to $1,090,000, plus an additional $75,000 to implement Option 1. Proposed phasing for the overall restoration plan project is as follows Phase 1 — through 2019 and into 2020 TRCA staff will initiate repairs and replacement of flap gates, repair culvert end treatments and clean culverts where required; Phase 2 — in 2019 TRCA will initiate and complete the design process to (1) restore and raise the flood berm west of Humber Lea Road and east of Queen Street and (2) restoration activities for the diversion channel. Staff anticipates that the implementation of Phase 2 works will commence in 2020, subject to funding and construction scheduling; and Phase 3 — the design of Phase 3 will be combined with the design process for the Phase 2 and will include (1) restoring and raising the flood berm and (2) raising the crib wall east of Humber Lea Road. Implementation of Phase 3 is anticipated to commence in 2021 subject to funding and construction scheduling. Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan This report supports the following strategies set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan: Strategy 1 — Green the Toronto region's economy Strategy 2 — Manage our regional water resources for current and future generations Strategy 4 — Create complete communities that integrate nature and the built environment FINANCIAL DETAILS The total estimated cost to design and implement Option 1 and 3(b) is $1,165,000. Operating accounts 108-01 (Flood Infrastructure Operation, Maintenance and Supervision) and Capital Account 107-03 (Flood Control Infrastructure Maintenance) will be used to undertake the immediate repairs and maintenance as recommended in the report at a cost of approximately $75,000. Peel Capital Account 129-19 (Flood Remedial Works) includes a budget provision to undertake the detailed design and permitting process for Option 3(b) at a cost of $150,000. The total estimated cost to implement option 3(b) is $940,000. This work is eligible for funding under the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) Water and Erosion Control funding program (WECI). Funding for 50% of the restoration program ($470,000) will be pursued through the WECI program and the remaining funds ($470,000) will be allocated in the 2020 and 2021 budget under Peel Capital Account 129-19 (Flood Remedial Works). RESOLUTIONS TRCA staff will implement the general maintenance works as recommended as part of the Bolton Berm Remediation Study immediately. TRCA staff will continue to work through the detailed design process including meeting with representatives from the Town of Caledon and Region of Peel to disseminate study results, and gather input for the design process. Further, TRCA staff will finalize implementation costs based on the results from the detailed design process and will ensure budget has been allocated in 2020 and 2021 to implement Phases 2 and 3 of the restoration plan. Report prepared by: Nick Lorrain, extension 5278 Emails: nlorrain@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Nick Lorrain, extension 5278 Emails: nlorrain@trca.on.ca Date: March 12, 2019 RESMA35/19 - VENDOR OF RECORD ARRANGEMENT FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO SPILLS AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE Award of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 10008804 for a Vendor of Record (VOR) arrangement for emergency response to spills and disposal of hazardous waste. Moved by: Linda Jackson Seconded by: David Barrow WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is engaged in a variety of programs and projects that require a standby spills response contractor to provide on -demand spills cleanup and hazardous waste material disposal services; AND WHEREAS TRCA solicited proposals through a publicly advertised process and evaluated the proposals based on the criteria outlined in this report; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to establish a Vendor of Record arrangement with QM LP (dba QM Environmental) and Accuworx Inc. for the supply of emergency spills response and hazardous waste disposal services for a period of two (2) years with an option in TRCA's favor to renew for one (1) further year; AND THAT if a situation is present, where the vendors of record are not available for a particular project, that staff be allowed to follow the Procurement Policy; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may be required to implement the contract, including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA undertakes over $53 million in construction services per year, often near to or within sensitive natural areas, shorelines or sensitive marine environments. In addition to these construction services, TRCA operates several education facilities, parks, campgrounds and conservation areas across over 17,000 ha of land. Together, TRCA's construction and various land management activities pose a low frequency, but potentially very high consequence spills risk. The Environmental Protection Act requires that the owner or controller of a spilled pollutant take every practicable action to prevent and eliminate negative effects of a spill, including actions to restore the natural environment to its original state. The costs of complying with these requirements can be substantial and in most cases, the sooner action is taken to both contain and subsequently clean a spill, the better the cost of spill response can be controlled. In order to finance the costs of responding to spills TRCA has purchased various forms of environmental impairment insurance on both project specific and program wide scales. While insurance provides a means to pay for the cleanup and potential liability of a TRCA caused spill, it does not provide an immediate response to spills. TRCA staff emergency action plans include protocols to responding to various spills scenarios, and while to date TRCA has not caused a spill beyond staff's direct ability to respond, TRCA does regularly work within high consequence environments such as valley and stream corridors, shorelines and marine environments, and in some cases near to utility corridors. These types of environments have the potential of making containment of certain types of spills very difficult, and if quantities are significant, potentially beyond TRCA's response capabilities. In addition to the exposure of spills risk, TRCA's land management operations are exposed from time to time with the need to handle large quantities of hazardous waste or other environmental contaminants. Some examples of waste that TRCA has had to handle or dispose of in the past included volatile chemicals, designated substances, drug lab waste, biohazardous materials, compressed gas canisters and many others. The handling of certain kinds of hazardous materials can pose a significant environmental as well as health and safety risk to TRCA staff. Where TRCA has had to enlist the services of hazardous waste contractors in the past, the costs have been significant. TRCA requires emergency spills response and hazardous waste disposal on a VOR basis in order to provide a more robust response plan to both spills risk as well as its existing hazardous waste exposure. By establishing a VOR arrangement for emergency spills response and hazardous waste disposal, vendors are authorized to provide these services for a defined period of time and with fixed pricing. Staff may contact any vendor on the list with the expertise and experience required for their project or program requirements. Vendors will be required to provide all resources required to service the divisional or program needs in accordance with applicable laws, codes, standards, terms and conditions of the VOR agreement. The VOR arrangement will be subject to annual review in order to confirm that the vendors are providing an adequate level of service and to update any applicable insurance, certifications, or policies of the vendors. RATIONALE RFP documentation was posted on the public procurement website www.biddingo.com on September 25, 2018 and closed on October 26, 2018. A total of 9 firms downloaded the documents and 3 proposals were received from the following vendors: • QM LP (dba QM Environmental); • Accuworx Inc.; and • Salandria Ltd. An Evaluation Committee comprised of staff from Property and Risk Management and Restoration Projects reviewed the proposals. The criteria used to evaluate and select the recommended Proponents included the following: Criteria Weight Proponent's Information 10% Key Personnel 10% Experience and Qualification 30% Scope of Services Capabilities 30% Sub -Total 80% Pricing 20% Pub -Total 20% otal Points 100% Through the evaluation process it was determined that Accuworx Inc. and QM LP (dba QM Environmental) are first and second highest scoring vendors meeting the qualifications and requirements set out in the RFP. Therefore, staff recommends that contract No. 10008804 be awarded to Accuworx Inc. and QM LP (dba QM Environmental). Proponent's scores and staff analysis of the evaluation results can be provided in an in -camera presentation, upon request. Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan This report supports the following strategic priority set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan: Strategy 7 — Build partnerships and new business models FINANCIAL DETAILS TRCA has no major spills response costs on record. A review of the last three years of exposure show that staff had to expend $40,000 to address hazardous waste dumping on TRCA lands. Due to our expansive land holdings, TRCA is exposed to significant uncertainty in potential cleanup and disposal costs. An increase or decrease in workload will have an impact on the value of this contract. All vendors on the VOR list understand both the potential cost and resource implications associated with changes in workload. The goods and/or services will be provided on an "as required" basis with no minimum hours guaranteed. Vendors may increase hourly rates annually, to a maximum of the preceding year's Ontario's Consumer Price Index as published by Statistics Canada. Costs associated with major spills are likely to be covered by TRCA's various pollution insurance policies, however the deductibles would be charged to the program responsible for the loss at hand. Hazardous waste cleanup costs and/or deductibles are likewise to be allocated to the responsible business unit for the affected facility. Staff will report to the Board of Directors on any costs incurred by TRCA net of insurance recoveries which exceed CEO authorization limits. Report prepared by: Adam Szaflarski, extension 5596 Emails: aszaflarski@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Adam Szaflarski, extension 5596 Emails: aszaflarski@trca.on.ca Date: February 27, 2019 RESMA36/19 - VENDOR OF RECORD ARRANGEMENT FOR OPERATED HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT RENTAL Award of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 10020047 for a Vendor of Record (VOR) arrangement for supply of operated heavy construction and associated specialty equipment from April 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020 Moved by: Linda Jackson Seconded by: David Barrow WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is engaged in a variety of programs/projects that require the utilization of operated heavy and specialty construction equipment; AND WHEREAS TRCA solicited proposals through a publicly advertised process and evaluated the proposals based on the criteria outlined in this report; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to establish a Vendor of Record arrangement with Sartor Environmental Group Inc., Dynex Construction Ltd., Valefield Contracting Inc., TMI Contracting and Equipment Rental Ltd. and Trisan Construction for the supply of operated heavy construction equipment during the contract period for one (1) year with the option to extend for an additional year; THAT if a situation is present where the vendors of record are not available for a particular project, that staff be authorized to follow the Procurement Policy; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may be required to implement the contract, including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED 7C. Team kk TRCA requires operated heavy construction equipment rental for completing a variety of engineering, habitat restoration, and trail building projects throughout TRCA's jurisdiction. By establishing a VOR arrangement for the rental of operated heavy construction equipment, vendors are authorized to provide these goods and/or services for a defined period of time and with fixed pricing. In accordance with the contract documents for this VOR arrangement, staff may contact any vendor on the list with the expertise and experience required for their project or program requirements. Furthermore, where the suppliers on the VOR are not available for a particular project within the timelines required for TRCA to meet its deliverables, staff are authorized to procure the required goods and/or services following TRCA's Procurement Policy. Vendors will be required to provide all resources required to service the divisional or program needs in accordance with applicable laws, codes, standards, terms and conditions of the VOR agreement. RATIONALE RFP documentation was posted on the public procurement website www.biddingo.com on February 11, 2019 and closed on Feburary 25, 2019. Two (2) addendums were issued to respond to questions received. A total of twenty (20) firms downloaded the documents and six (6) proposals were received from the following vendors: • Sartor Environmental Group Inc.; • Dynex Construction Ltd.; • Valefield Contracting Inc.; • TMI Contracting and Equipment Rental Ltd • Trisan Construction; and • Superior Disposal An Evaluation Committee comprised of senior staff from the Restoration and Infrastructure Division reviewed the proposals. The criteria used to evaluate and select the recommended Proponents included the following: Evaluation Criteria Minimum Score Maximum Score Proponent Information and Executive Summary 15 30 Organizational Experience 40 50 Equipment Stock 10 20 Total Points 65 100 Superior Disposal was disqualified because they failed to provide a technical proposal and therefore received a score of nil, however the five remaining vendors achieved the minimum score required in each of the evaluation categories outlined above, and meet all other qualifications and requirements set out in the RFP. Staff therefore recommends that Contract No.10020047 be awarded to Sartor Environmental Group Inc., Dynex Construction Ltd., Valefield Contracting Inc., TMI Contracting and Equipment Rental Ltd. and Trisan Construction. Proponents' scores and more information regarding the evaluation process can be provided through an in -camera presentation upon request. Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan This report supports the following strategic priority set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 — Manage our regional water resources for current and future generations The operated heavy construction equipment and specialty equipment procured under this VOR arrangement are used to implement a variety of projects which aim to mitigate flooding and erosion hazards, build waterfront parks as well as restore and enhance aquatic and terrestrial habitat in the Toronto region. Strategy 7 — Build partnerships and new business models The operated heavy construction equipment rented under this VOR arrangement are used for assisting our municipal partners with a variety of environmentally sensitive projects. FINANCIAL DETAILS Based upon a review of projects scheduled for implementation during the contract period, the anticipated value of the requested goods and/or services under this contract is approximately $5,000,000. An increase or decrease in workload will have an impact on the value of this contract. All vendors on the VOR list understand both the potential cost and resource implications associated with changes in workload. The goods and/or services will be provided on an "as required" basis with no minimum hours guaranteed. Vendors may increase hourly rates annually, to a maximum of the preceding year's Ontario's Consumer Price Index as published by Statistics Canada. Funds for this contract are identified in a variety of capital and cost recoverable project accounts. Report prepared by: Alex Barber, extension 5388 Emails: alex.barber@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Moranne McDonnell, extension 5500 Emails: moranne.mcdonnell@trca.on.ca Date: March 1, 2019 RES.#A37/19 - NEW ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING — PROCUREMENT STRATEGY FOR CONSTRUCTION AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL STATUS Update on the proposed procurement strategy, sustainability design specifications for the construction tender and status of the Site Plan approval process of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) New Administrative Office Building Project. Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Maria Kelleher THAT the proposed procurement strategy outlining Board of Directors authorizations and tender schedules be approved in principle; THAT the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group comprised of Board of Director representatives be dissolved due to the stage of this project and upcoming Board of Director reports on this project; THAT the project update on the Site Plan approval process and design specifications to be included in the construction tender to ensure the construction of the project meets TRCA's sustainability expectations and City of Toronto requirements be received; THAT staff provide a report on May 24, 2019 Board of Directors meeting on the 90% construction document estimate, including construction management fixed fees, fixed construction general conditions cost and tender results to date; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back on the total construction and Construction Management Services costs at the time construction tenders are fully received. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Long Term Office Accommodation Project and the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group (LTOAWG), was established on May 23, 2008 by Authority Resolution #At 26/08, to determine the office accommodation needs of TRCA over the next 30 years and recommend a comprehensive, cost effective solution. Following numerous studies and reports from this working group, on February 27, 2015 Resolution #A23/15 approved 5 Shoreham Drive as the preferred site for the new headquarters and on February 24, 2017, staff reported at Authority Meeting #1/17 that all six of TRCA's participating municipalities, had approved the Project and the allocation of $60,000,000 in new and existing capital funding. In May 2017, TRCA retained Jones Lang LaSalle Canada (JLL) as its project managers for the Project. In September 2017, TRCA retained the services of an integrated design team, led by ZAS Architects and Bucholz McEvoy Architects, to proceed with the development of the project design, planning and approvals, and construction administration. This was followed by a Request for Qualifications and Proposals which resulted in the selection of Eastern Construction Company Limited to provide pre -construction services throughout the design and procurement stages and to provide construction management services for the construction of the new facility which includes the issuance of tenders to various construction trades, as approved through Resolution #A216/17 on November 17. 2017. Throughout the planning and design process the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group, comprised of Board of Director representatives, and supported by TRCA staff, provided valuable advice and oversight. The Working Group asked questions and provided advice to shape the design and sustainability elements of the new administrative headquarters particularly during earlier phases of the planning and design of the project. As this project is now at an advanced stage and the Board of Directors will be regularly updated and engaged through information and approval reports, staff are of the view that the Long Term Office Accommodation Working Group can be dissolved and have put forward a recommendation to this effect in this report. As part of the Site Plan approval process, TRCA's design team and municipal planning consultant (SvN) has been coordinating the building design submission and satisfying comments from various City of Toronto departments as required by the Site Plan approval process. Simultaneously while pursuing Site Plan approval, the design team is continuing with detailed design and costing exercises in an integrated design approach involving the construction managers to prepare for the tendering phase. RATIONALE Acting as TRCA's Construction Manager, Eastern Construction Company Limited (Eastern) will manage the tendering of all trade contracts. Eastern's contract has two phases as follows: • Phase 1 Pre -Construction & Tendering: Eastern is currently providing pre -construction services under a Construction Management (CM) contract valued at $180,000, per Resolution #216/17. Pre -construction services will continue for all elements of the Project, until such time as the tendering phase of the construction work packages is 100% complete. • Phase 2 Construction Management Services During Construction: this phase will be awarded following the tendering of the major trades, and confirmation that the construction budget and overall project budget is within the Board approved budget, and will include the following two components: o Fixed Component: Includes Eastern's fixed fees (a fixed percentage mark-up of 1.9% on direct construction costs plus HST) and fixed general conditions under the CM contract. These fees are currently included as estimates in the CM contract, and will require adjustment based on the final approved construction budget and agreed project schedule. o Actual Cost Component: this amount is based on the final construction budget, which will be based on the tendered value of the major construction trades after the majority of the tendering is completed. All trade tendering processes will be conducted by Eastern in compliance with TRCA's procurement policy. As such, Eastern will manage the procurement process which, when necessary, will include a prequalification process and provide recommended prequalified firms for approval by TRCA staff. Eastern will then issue tenders to prequalified trades, close the tenders, conduct tender evaluations, and make recommendations of award to TRCA. Staff anticipate authorizing Eastern to engage two design assist trades (within the limits of authorized approval) prior to the finalization of the CM budget. These design assist tender packages include the mass timber structure package and the water wall system package, due to the specialized nature of the products, long lead times, and integrated nature of the design components that have to be finalized in order to facilitate completion of the design process. A report to the Board of Directors at the May 24, 2019 meeting will provide an update on the following: • 90% construction document estimate • Construction management fixed fees • Fixed construction general conditions cost • Tender results to date A subsequent report to the Board of Directors is anticipated to be issued on June 21, 2019, prior to the commencement of construction. This report will outline the total construction and Construction Management Services costs based on the outcome of all received tenders. Site Plan Application Update SvN Planners is guiding the design team to complete the third and what is expected to be the final site plan submission, to be made the week of March 18, 2019. The project requires a Minor Variance Application to address three variances identified by the City for the following: • Reduction of the on-site parking requirement from 172 parking spaces to 44 parking spaces. • Reduction in the required loading spaces from 3 to 2. • Reduction of one of the loading spaces from the required 11 m x 3.6m to 6m x 3.6m. The minor variances will be before the Committee of Adjustment on March 28, 2019 with a final outcome to be determined in late April 2019, pending any appeals regarding the minor variances. Sustainability Goals The tender documents (drawings and specifications) continue to maintain the high sustainability standards set for the Project. The documents include design features that ensure the Project meets: • LEED Platinum v4 • WELL Silver • Toronto Green Standards (TGS) Level 2 • Zero Carbon Ready • All wood to meet the requirements of Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC). PEFC wood is equivalent to Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification. According to Focal Engineering's energy modelling report for TGS, the Project at completion will be one of the most energy efficient commercial buildings in North America. Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan This report supports the following strategies set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan: Strategy 1 — Green the Toronto region's economy Strategy 10 — Accelerate innovation FINANCIAL DETAILS Although funding available for the project totals $63,538,000, TRCA continues to work towards a budget of $60,000,000, with the $3,538,000 in funding as made available by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry to be applied to the cost of construction financing. If the total $60,000,000 in funding is not required from TRCA's partner municipalities, then the amount/term of their obligations will be reduced accordingly. Further to this point, TRCA staff continue to review and apply for provincial, federal and other funding opportunities through various grants and programs and was recently notified that TRCA has been shortlisted for consideration under the NRCan Green Construction through Wood Program grant. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The upcoming key procurement milestone dates are as follows: • Prequalification of Early Packages Tenders Mar 18-29 • Tender of Early Packages (mass timber structure/water wall system) Early Apr • Prequalification of Major Subtrade Packages Mar 25—Apr 8 • Issue Tender Documents o Stage 1 Tender site works, structural, glazing, mechanical, electrical Apr 9 —15 o Stage 2 Tender all remaining scope Apr 16 — 29 • Board approval of CM budget and CM contract and Stage 1 Tender Award May 24, 2019 • Board approval of Stage 2 Tender Award Jun 21, 2019 Project Phases Duration Site Plan Approval Jun, 2018 —Jul, 2019 Building Permit Feb, 2018 — Oct, 2019 Tender Contract Documents Apr, 2019 —Jun, 2019 Award Construction Contracts Apr, 2019 — Jun, 2019 Construction (assumes partial bldg. permits) Apr, 2019 — Jun, 2021 Occupancy Mar, 2021 — Jun, 2021 Report prepared by: Jed Braithwaite, extension 5345 Emails: jed.braithwaite@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Jed Braithwaite, extension 5345; Aaron D'Souza, extension 5775 Emails: jed.braithwaiteAtrca.on.ca; aidsouza0trca.on.ca Date: March 18, 2019 Attachments: 3 Attachment 1: LEED v4 for BD+C: New Construction and Major Renovation Attachment 2: WELL Building Standard v1 — Silver Certification Attachment 3: CaGBC — Zero Carbon Building Standard LEED v4 for BD+C: New Construction and Major Renovation Project Status Report by Green Reason Inc. Project Name: TRCA Head Office January 23, 2019 n � � wP' � 8r a°� STATUS ACTION ACTION BY green reason 1 0 0 Integrative Process 2 credit Site Development- Protect or Restore Habitat 2 3 Energy analysis being documented by Tnssolar. Water analyses for site water/cistem being completed by Green Reason to complete the Integrative Process Worksheet m 1 2 2 credit Integrative Process 1 S&C. Plumbing portion by Integral. and to follow up with the consultants for further information as Green Reason 1 creat Heat Island Reduction 2 needed. nnnLocation 1 1 Credit Site Assessment 1 and Transportation 16 credit Sensitive Land Protection 1 2 credit Site Development- Protect or Restore Habitat 2 3 credit Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses 5 3 2 2 credit Access to Quality Transit 5 1 creat Heat Island Reduction 2 credit Bicycle Facilities 1 1 credit Light Pollution Reduction 1 S&C to confirm if targets are achievable based on current credit Reduced Parking Footprint 1 1 TMIG to update analysis and LEED Rainwater Event Calculator credit Green Vehicles 1 New building is on previously developed portion of she Building situated close to Shoreham to provide direct pedestrian access towards plaza at Jane and Shoreham. Confirmed at least 8 uses are within 800 m walking distance from the main entrance. 3 points based on current bus schedules (August 2018). Next threshold is likely out of reach. Bike network within 180m. Current design meets requirements in terms of number of bicycle parking spaces and showers, based on finalized building occupants count (473). 24 covered long-term bike parking and 4 showers will be provided. Short-term bike parking is driven by TGS requirements (24 short -tens bicycle parking provided) 40% reduction from Parking Consultants Council baseline met with 113 dedicated parking, min. bylaw is not exceeded; LEED Calculation based on 44 parking spaces provided onsite: required 3 carpool spaces (5%) which are indicated on DD drawings. Based on 44 onsite parking spots, required (5%) 3 green vehicle spots (in preferred location) plus 1 charging stations (2%) (morerequired by code.) that needs to be separated from green vehicles or carpool parking spaces. Required Prer y Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Required Requires ESC plan conforming to EPA General Construction Permit 2012 or local code if more stringent. Documentation on soils, topography, hydrology provided by S&C. Green Reason completing review to confirm compliance. S&C considers it achievable to preserve 40% of greenfield and ensure 30% of rest of site is planted with native/adapted species with restored soil. more than 3U% of site as pedestnan-oriented open space, As part of value engineering, the green roof size was reduced to 30% (minimum required bylaw) but the project was no longer able to manage the stormwater runoff for the 98th percentile of rain (29.5mm). The green roof has then been increased to 60%. However, TMIG estimates that even with the current design, it is unlikely to achieve the third LEED point. The team is currently reviewing other options (increasing the size of the cistern) Green roof will cover 2/3 of the roof, the remaining roof will be covered with SRI membrane. High SRI unit pavers will be provided for parking, with some shade trees. Parking will not be covered. MBII indicated the credit is achievable and design will comply. No action at this time. n/a No action at this time. n/a Green Reason to review bus schedule at a later date. Green Reason No action at this time. 1 Credit Site Assessment 1 2 with green vehicles) credit Site Development- Protect or Restore Habitat 2 1 ZAS Credit Open Space 1 2 1 credit Rainwater Management 3 2 creat Heat Island Reduction 2 1 design. credit Light Pollution Reduction 1 Documentation on soils, topography, hydrology provided by S&C. Green Reason completing review to confirm compliance. S&C considers it achievable to preserve 40% of greenfield and ensure 30% of rest of site is planted with native/adapted species with restored soil. more than 3U% of site as pedestnan-oriented open space, As part of value engineering, the green roof size was reduced to 30% (minimum required bylaw) but the project was no longer able to manage the stormwater runoff for the 98th percentile of rain (29.5mm). The green roof has then been increased to 60%. However, TMIG estimates that even with the current design, it is unlikely to achieve the third LEED point. The team is currently reviewing other options (increasing the size of the cistern) Green roof will cover 2/3 of the roof, the remaining roof will be covered with SRI membrane. High SRI unit pavers will be provided for parking, with some shade trees. Parking will not be covered. MBII indicated the credit is achievable and design will comply. No action at this time. n/a No action at this time. n/a Green Reason to review bus schedule at a later date. Green Reason No action at this time. Na Ensure site plan shows 3 carpool spaces (that do not overlap ZAS with green vehicles) No action at this time. ZAS No action at this time. n/a Green Reason to complete review and follow up with the team Green Reason as necessary. S&C to confirm if targets are achievable based on current S&C design. S&C to confirm if targets are achievable based on current S&C design. TMIG to update analysis and LEED Rainwater Event Calculator TMIG and confirm current volume of managed stormwater runoff. S&C to confirm if current landscape design is meeting credit S&C requirements for site areas. MBII to provide updates and confirm if design is meeting credit MBII requirements. - S&C to provide updates on outdoor water use reduction Required Prer, Outdoor Water Use Reduction Required Irrigation will only be provided for green roof, with no site irrigation. This should result in more than 30% water - Integral to provide calculations and volumes for rainwater - S&C reduction in LEED calculation. cistern and above ground rainwater tank for food garden - Integral irrigation Required Prer" Indoor Water Use Reduction Required Mechanical design brief and discussions to date confirms very low flow plumbing fixtures will be specified. No action at this time. We Required Prer, Building -Level Water Metering Required Water metering will be provided for whole -building water usage. No action at this time. n1a i 1 Credit Outdoor Water Use Reduction 2 Cistern to be provided for roof irrigation - expected to achieve at least 50% reduction for 1 pt. 2nd pt is typically Please refer to prerequisite "Outdoor Water Use Reduction" - S C difficult to achieve. Above ground rainwater tank will provide irrigation for the vegetable garden. above. - Integral Current design with proposed ultra-low flow fixtures indicates water use reduction of 48.41% (5 points). The 5 1 credit Indoor Water Use Reduction 6 team is considering the option of using urinals for further water use reduction, equal or higher than 50% (6 ZAS to confirm ff urinals will be installed. ZAS points) 1 Crean Water Metering 1 Integral have confirmed that metering achievable for at least 2 of irrigation, reclaimed water, indoor plumbing Integral to confirm how design meets the credit requirements Integral fixtures, DHW, etc. Review of 50% CD drawings located only water meter for domestic cold water. 'MMM Energy Required Prer" Fundamental Commissioning and Verification Required JLSR have provided a review of the DD report. Design Team and TRCA to address comments/questions of ZAS / TRCA / Integral / MBII the DD Review and provide clarification Required Pi Minimum Energy Performance Required DD stage energy model report confirms prerequisite is achievable, No action at this time. n/a Required Prer, Building -Level Energy Metering Required MBII indicated this is achievable. No action at this time. n/a Required Prerey Fundamental Refrigerant Management Required HVAC equipment will not contain CFCs as all new equipmentbeing provided. No action at this time. nue 6 credit Enhanced Commissioning6 Monitoring -based Cx and Building Envelope included in Cx RFP. Please refer to prerequisite "Fundamental Commissioning and Please refer to prerequisite "Fundamental Verification". Commissioning and Verification". 18 Crean Optimize Energy Performance 18 As per Transsolaes DD Report, current design expected to achieve 57% energy cost savings over ASHRAE Please refer to the Prerequisite "Minimum Energy Trenssolar 90.1-2010 baseline design and achieve all the 18 points of the credit. Performance" above, 1 credit Advanced Energy Metering 1 MBII indicated it is achievable to capture all points that represent 10% or more of total annual consumption. MBII to confirm Htarget is still achievable and provide updates MBII 2 Credit Demand Response 2 MBII confirmed that systems can be designed for credit but will not be a lot of load to shed. Green Reason to provide information on available load- Green Reason shedding progrems. 2 1 credit Renewable Energy Production 3 Currently targeting 5% based on Net Zero Carbon Building Standard. No action at this time. n/a 1 Credit Enhanced Refrigerant Management 1 Integral confirmed refrigerants will be HFCs which have low ODP and GWP values. To provide details on selected refrigerants and Confirm I Integral design is meeting credit requirements. TRCA have confirmed they will purchase green power and carbon offsets as necessary. TRCA have noted 2 credit Green Power and Carbon Offsets 2 that they have existing agreements with Bullfrog for electricity and natural gas which meets the credit No action at this time. n/a requirements. =nn rResources Required red, Storage and Collection of Recyclables Required Dedicated storage and recycling for typical recycling streams, plus batteries, mercury -containing lamps and e- ZAS to indicate locations of collection bins for at least two ZAS waste. waste stream (batteries, mercury lamps and e -waste) Required Prereq Construction and Demolition Waste Management Plano Required Requirement for CWM plan with 5 waste streams. No action at this time. n/a 3 2 creat Building Lifa-Cycle Impact Reduction 5 3 pts for Lifecycle assessment, 2 other pts for building reuse are not considered achievable. LCA study not ZAS to coordinate with Green Reason on the next steps to ZAS / Green Reason currently included in project scope. initiate LCA. 1 1 credit BPDO - Environmental Product Declarations 2 Products not yet specified, but expecting to incorporate at least 20 with EPDs, 2nd point Considered low Green Reason to coordinate with Eastern and ZAS to review Green Reason I Eastern / ZAS / BMCEA maybe. credit requirements 1 1 Crean BPDO - Sourcing of Raw Materials 2 Products not yet specified, but expecting to incorporate many products with recycled content, regional Content, Green Reason to coordinate with Eastern and ZAS to review Green Reason / Eastern / ZAS / BMCEA FSC, etc. credit requirements 1 1 credit BPDO - Material Ingredients 2 Products not yet specified, HPDs and equivalent Considered more difficult to achieve than EPDs. Green Reason to coordinate with Eastern and ZAS to review Green Reason / Eastern I ZAS / BMCEA credit requirements. Divert demolition and construction waste in at least 4 streams and achieve 75% diversion - no visual 2 credit Construction and Demolition Waste Management 2 inspection. The team is considering to re -use the concrete slab of the existing building as landscape element No action at this time. n/a for some of the pathways. This Could contribute to the waste diversion Calculations as material diverted from landfills. F67 9 1 1 ' indoor Environmental Quality Required Paay Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Required ASHRAE 62.1 2010 required by building code. USGBC CIR 10461 allows no airflow monitor for small systems No action at this time. n/a under 1000 CFM. Required Prerq Environmental Tobacco Smoke Control Required No smoking near entrances, air intakes and operable windows plus compliant signage. No. action at this time. 1 1 Cadu Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies 2 Intef]ml/ZAS/BME have confirmed CO2 sensors, entryway systems (grilles), and MERV 13 fliers (or No action at this time. equivalent). 3 cadn Low -Emitting Materials 3 Specify adhesives, sealants, paints, coatings, composite wood, flooring, insulation & furniture. Also a WELL Green Reason to coordinate with Eastern and ZAS to review precondition. credit requirements. 1 cadu Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan 1 IAQ management plan will be implemented during construction. Green Reason to coordinate with Eastern and ZAS to review credit requirements 2 cavi, Indoor Air Quality Assessment 2 Construction schedule will affect achievability. New IAQ testing requirements are more stringent and include Green Reason to coordinate with Eastern and ZAS to review more contaminants. credit requirements 1 caau Thermal Comfort 1 UFAD system may be argued to provide control but combination radiant heat/cooling with UFAD ventilation Green Reason to finalize CIR. may require a CIR to clarify credit requirements are being met. GRI drafted CIR and reviewing documentation. 1 1 Crede Interior Lighting 2 MBII indicates that i pt for lighting quality is achievable as well as controllability in lighting design. Furnitures MBII to confmr how the current design is meeting the credit expected to include task lighting at workstations, requirements for Option 2, Lighting Quality. 2 1 credit Daylight 3 As per Transsolaes DD report, it may be not be possible to achieve the credit. ASE currently tracking at 36% BMCEA to provide more details (photos, drawings, specs.) for over the threshold of 10%. Green Reason drafted CIR. proposed Mobile Glare Devices. 1 Credit Quality Views 1 Credit conflicts with TGS requirement -Views cannot be claimed for fritted or filmed glass - GRI drafted CIR Green Reason to finalize CIR. and currently exploring the pilot credit Bird Collision Deterrence option. Considered challenging as design does not include ceiling, but could be investigated further in tandem with 1 Cade Acoustic Performance 1 WELL. Preliminary acoustic report to be revised based on current CD set and LEEDMELL requirements ZAS to provide updates. (provided by GRI). n/a n/a Green Reason / Eastern / ZAS / BMCEA Green Reason / Eastern / ZAS / BMCEA Green Reason / Eastern / ZAS / BMCEA Green Reason MBII BMCEA Green Reason AM Green Reason currently explonng options for Innovation credits. Options under considerations are the Pilot 5 Cmdn Innovation 5 Credit "Bird Collision Deterrence" and Innovation Credits "Green Building Education Program", "WELL No action at this time. n/a Features", "O+M Starter Kit", "Purchasing Lamps", "Occupant Survey". 1 Cr.du LEED Accredited Professional 1 LEED BD+C APs are involved in project. No action at this time. n/a Automatically awarded if corresponding credit is achieved. Automatically awarded if corresponding credit is achieved. Certified: 40 to 49 points, Silver: 50 to 59 points, Gold: 60 to 79 points, Platinum: 80 to 110 This scorecard is intended to serve as a benchmarking tool to assess potential LEED v4 performance. It does not confirm a LEED rating nor guarantee credit compliance. This document is the sole property of Green Reason Inc. and is only to be used for the project listed above. This document is not to be used in any other capacity without the expressed consent of Green Reason Inc. WELL Building Standard vl - Silver Certification Project Status Report Project Name: TRCA New Head office January 23, 2019 u green reason NAME DESCRIPTION STATUS ACTION ACTION BV .eaWre 01. Air qualitystandards � IAO pre -testing to be implemented before performance k The following donations are met: verification. Part 1. Standards For Volatile Substances a. Formaldehyde levels less than 27 ppb. Formaldehyde and VOC emissions can be No action at this time. nue b. Total volatile organic compounds less than 500 pglm' preventedlreduced by selecting products and materials as required by Feature 04 is IAQ pretesting to be implemented before performance as The following conditions are met: verrfi Part 2. Standards For Particulate Matter And a. Carbon monoxide less than 9 ppm. 03. CO end Oa levels should not represent an issue for the and b. PM2.5 less than 15 pg/m'. No action at this time. No Inorganic Gases c. PM 10 less than 50 pglm2. project. However, PM levels will mostly depend on Ne d. Ozone less Man 51 ppb. implementation of construction pollution management recticas as required by Feature 07. Part 3. Radon The following reactors are met in projects with regularly occupied spaces at or below grace: IAQ pre -testing not required before performance No action at this time. me a. Radon less than 0.148 BgIL (4 PCVL) in the lowest occupied level of the project, verification. re 02. Smoking Ban T Part 1. Indoor Smoking Ban Building policy or local code reflects the following: Required by law. No action at this time. No a. Smoking and the use of a-ci areftes is prohibited inside the protect. Signage is present to indlcata: a. A smoking ban within 7.5 in [25 fill (or the maximum extent allowableby local widest) of all enhances, operable windows and building air intakes. Part 2. Outdoor Smoking Ban b. A smoking ban on all decks, patiosr balconies, rooftops and other regularly occupied exterior building Required signage to be included in signage package. No action at this time. nla spaces. Locations to be coordinated with LEED requirements. c. The hazards of smoking, in all areas beyond 7.5m of Ne building enhances (if smoking is permitted in this areas). These signs are to be placed along all walkways with a distance of not more than 30 in 1100 ft between signs. ure 03. Ventilation Effectiveness One of the following requirements is met for all spaces: a. Ventilation rates comply with all requirements set in ASHRAE 62.1-2013 (Ventilation Rate Procedure Integral to confirm if Option b or IAQ Procedure). ASHRAE 62.1 2010 requiretl by building code. Initial will be pursued and it the Part 1. Ventilation Design b. Projects comply with all requirements set in any procedure in ASHRAE 62.1-2013 (including Ibe discussions indicate that Option b will be our compliance curenl design meets the Integral Natural Ventilation Procedure) and demonstrate that ambient air quality within 1.6 km [1 m7 of the pathway. feature requirements. building is compliant with either the U.S. EPA's NAAQS or passes the Air Quality Standards feature in Me WELL Building Standard for at least 95% of all hours in the previous year. For all spaces 46.5 m2 [500 ill or larger with an actual or expected occupant density greater than 25 People per 93 W 11,000 fp], one of the following requirements is met: a. A demand controlled ventilation system regulates the ventilation rate of outdoor air to keep hi l to confirm design Part 2. Demand Contacted! Ventilation carbon dioxide levels In the space below 800 ppm (measured M 1.2-1.8 in [46 ft] above the Option a considered achievable. meets the requirement of Integral floor. Option a. b. Projects that have met the Operable windows feature demonstrate that natural ventilation is sufficient to keep carbon dioxide levels below 800 ppm (measured at 1.2-1.8 in [4-6 ft] above the Bwr) at Bugling intended occupancies. After the HVAC system is installed, the following requirement is met: Testing and balancing will be completed ager substantial Part 3. System Balancing a. After substantial completion and prior to occupancy, the HVAC system has (within Me last 5 years), completion and pdorto occupancy.. No actjon at this time. Na or is scheduled W. undemo testing antl balancing. Feature 04. VOC Reduction The VOC limits of newly applied paints and coatings meet one of the following requirements: a. 100% of installed products meet California Air Resources Board (CARE) 2007, Suggested Commit Measure (SCM) for Architectural Coatings, or South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD) Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason) Part 1. Interior Paints And Coatings Rule 1113, effective June 3, 2011 for VOC content. Achievable, ovedaps with LEED requirements meeting with Eastern and Eastern / b. At minimum 90%, by volume, meet the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Standard ZASBMCEA. ZAS/BMCEA Method v1A-2010 for VOC emissions. a Applicable national VOC content regulations or conduct testing of VOC content in accordance with ASTM D2369-10: ISO 11890, part 1: ASTM D6886A3 or ISO 11890.2. The VOC limits of newly applied adhesives and sealants meet one of the following requirements: a. 100% of installed products meet South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1168 for VOC content. Volatile organic compound (VOC) limits correspond to an effective date of July 1, Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason I Part 2. Interior Adhesives And Sealants 2005 and mle amendment date of January 7, 2005. Achievable, ovedaps with LEED requirements with Eastam and Eastern / b. At minimum 90%, by volume, meet the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Standard ZASIBMCEA. ZASIBMCEA Method v1.1-2010 for VOC emissions. c. Applicable national VOC content regulations or conduct testing of VOC content in accordance with ASTM D2369-10; ISO 11890, part 1; ASTM D6886-03; or ISO 11890-2. The VOC emissions of all newly installed flooding must meet all lima set by the following, as applicable: Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason I Part 3. Flooring a. California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Standard Method v1.1-2010. Achievable, ovedaps with LEED requirements with Eastern and Eastern / ZASIBMCEA. ZASIBMCEA The VOC emissions of all newly installed thermal and acoustic insulation inside the waterproofing Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason I Pad 4. Insulation membrane must meet all limits set by the following, as applicable: Achievable, ovedaps with LEED requirements with Eastern and Eastern / a. California Department of Public Health CDPH Standard Method 0.1-2010. ZASIBMCEA. ZAS/BMCEA The VOC emissions of at least 95% (by wail of all newly purchased furniture and fumishini within the project scope must meet all limits set by the following, as applicable: Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason I Part 5. Furniture And Furnishings a. ANSIIBIFMA e3-2011 Furniture Sustainability Standard sections 7.8.1 and 7.6.2, tested in Achievable, ovedaps with LEED requirements with Eastern and Eastern / accordance with ANSI/BI FMA Standard Method M7.1-2011. ZASIBMCEA. ZAS/BMCEA b. Califomu De ailment of Public Health CDPH) Standard Method v1.1-2010. If recirculated air is used, the following requirements are mel in ventilation assemblies in the main air Mechanical Eng. indicated that carbon impregnated Pad 1. Filter Accommodation ducts for recirculated air: a. Rack space is available and rack location identified for future implementation of carbon finers or fitters could be considered, but also recommend Integral to provide updates on Integral combination particlelcarbon filters. considering AAP that allows a standalone air purifier in current design and strategies.. b. The mechanical system is s¢ed to accommodate the additional filters. lieu of a section in the decentralized ERV units. One of the following requirements is met: Integral initially proposed GREEN PLEAT 1", 2" & 4" a. MERV 13 (or higher) media fitters are used in the ventilation system to filter outdoor air. MERV 13 by Aerostar that will be able to ft In the ERV Integral to provide updates on Part 2. Particle Filtration b. Project demonstrates that for 95% of all hours in a calendar year, ambient outdoor PM10 and PM2.5 units. current design and strategies. Integral levels measured within 1.6 km [I m] of the building are below, the limits set in the WELL Air Quality Alternatively, the Team is also considering to install Standards Feature. MERV 13 filters on top of the water walls. To verify that the fibration system continues to operate as deafgned, projects must annually provide Pram to be implemented during Operations phase. Part 3. Air Filtration Maintenance WBl with:a. Records of air filtration maintenance, including evidence that filters have been popery maintained Requirements have been discussed during the FM No action at this time. me as rihe manufacturer's recommendations. meeting Feature 06. Microbe And Mold Control In buildings that rely on a mechanical system for cooling, one of the following requirements is met: a. Ultraviolet lamps (using a wavelength of 254 nm so as not to generate ozone) are employed on the cooling mils and drain pans of the mechanical system supplies. Irradiance reaching the cooling coil and Assumption is inspections option will be implemented Part 1. Cooling Coil Mold Reduction drain pan, including the plenum corners, is modeled. during operations phase, Requirements have been No action at this time. me b. Building policy states that all cooling coils are Inspected on a quarterly basis for mold discussed during the FM meeting growth and cleaned if necessary. Dated photos demonstrating adherence are provided to the IWBI on an annual basis. The following are not present: Pre-Inspectlon to be Implemented before performance Part 2. Mold Inspections a. Signs of discoloration and mold on ceilings, walls or floors. verification.No action at this time. me b. Signs of water damage or fin n re 07. Construction Pollution Management To prevent pollutants from entering the ventilation system, all newly installed ducts are either: Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason I Part 1. Duct Protection a. Sealed and protected from possible contamination during construction. Achievable, overlaps with LEED requirements with Eastem. Eastern b. Vacuumed out prior to installing registers. units and diffusers. To prevent pollutants from entering the air supply post-occupancy, If the ventilation system is operating Part 2 Filler Replacement during construction occurring within one year prior to Performance Verification, the following overlaps with LEED req Achievablerequirements Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason I requirement is met: , with Eastern. Eastern a. All filters are replaced prior to occupancy. To prevent building materials from absorbing water or moisture during construction occurring within one Part 3. Moisture Absorption Management year prior to Performance Verification, the following requirements are rest Not specifically required by LEED, but considered best Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason I a. A separate area is designated to store and protect absorptive materials, including but not limited to practice. with Eastern. Eastern carpets, acoustical ceiling panels, fabric wall coverings, insulation, upholstery and furnishings. The following procedures are followed during building construction occurring within one year prior to Performance Verification: Part 4, Dust Containment And Removal a. All active areas of work are isolated from other spaces by sealed doorways or windows or through Not specifically required by LEED, but considered best Green Reason to coordinate Green Reason I the use of temporary barriers. practice. with Eastern. Eastern b. Walk-off mats are used at entryways to reduce the transfer of din and pollutants. c. Saws and other tools use dust guards or collectors to capture generated dust. re 08. Healthy Entrance To capture particulates from occupant shoes at all regularly used entrances to the project, one of the following is installed and is maintained on a weekly basis: a. Permanent entryway system comprised of grilles, grates or slots, which allow for easy ZAS to provide updates on cleaning underneath, at least the width of the entrance and 3 in [10 RJ long in the primary Main entrance will have 3 in grille. Also diiscussed other current design and confirm M Pad 1. Entryway Welk-Off Systems direction of travel (sum of Indoor and outdoor length), entrances -will have grillWgre[es and extend with mats gra requirements of Option a ZAS b. Rollout mats, at least the width of the entrance and 3 m [10 ft] long in the primary direction of travel d 3 m is challenging at any location. are being met (sum of indoor and outdoor Iengi c. Material manufactured as an entryway wall system, at least the width of the entrance and 3 in 110 If Iona in the primers direction of travel (sum of indoor and outdoor IenaUl. One of the following is in place to slow the movement of air from outtloors to indoors within mechanically venfilated main building entrances: a. Building entry vestibule with two normally-closed doorways. ZAS to provide updates on Part 2. Entryway At Seal b. Revolving entrance doors. Main entrance will have vestibule. current design and confirm 9 ZAS c. At least 3 normally-shut doom that separate occupied space from the outdoors. For example, a the requirements of Option a space on the fi0h-floor could be separated by the exterlor building doors, the first -Floor elevator doom are being met and the fiffh-floor elevator doom. This option is applicable only for buildings whose entrance lobby is not a regularly occupied ure 09. Cleaning Protocol ace, A cleaning plan is created that includes a. The Cleaning Equipment and Training section of Table A4 in Appendix C. It, A list of approved product seals with which all cleaning, disinfection and hand hygiene products must comply in accordance with the Cleaning, Disinfection and Hand Hygiene Product section in Table A4 in Overlaps with LEED Green Cleaning Which b expected Part 1. Cleaning Plan For Occupied upietl Spaces C. c. A list of high-touch surfaces and schedule sanitization or disinfection as specified in the to be pursued as an Innovation point. Requirements No action at this time. rile Disinfection and SanR¢ation section in Table A4 in Appendix C. have been discussed during the FM meeting d. A cleaning schedule that specifies the extent and frequency of cleaning, Including the Entryway Maintenance section of Table A4 in Appendix C. e. Dated cleaning bas that are maintained and avaidble to all occupants. has 10. Pesticide Management Pesticide and herbicide use on outdoor plants is eliminated, or hazards are minimized through one of Overlaps with LEED Exterior Integrated! Pest the following: Management which is expected to be pursed! as an Part 1, Pesticide Use a. The creation of a pest management plan In place of pesticide/herbicide use, based on Chapter 3 of Innovation point. Requirements have been discussed No action at this time. n/a the San Francisco Environment Code Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program. during the FM meeting b. The use of hazard-anked pesticides based on screening fists described In Table A2 in Appendix C. ' re 11. Fundamental Material Safety All newly -installed building materials meet the following materials composition requirements: a. No asbestos. Design team to confine lead b. Not more than a weighted average of 0.25% lead in wetted surfaces of pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing restriction is not an issue for Part 1. Asbestos And Lead Restriction fittings, and fixtures, and 0.20% for solder or flux used in plumbing for water intended for human Asbestos will not he installed as per law any materials being specified, ZAS consumption. including plumbing and door. a Not more than 100 ppm (by weight) added lead in all other building materials. For door hardware, hardware. project teams must document attempt to meet the requirement and demonstrate a petition or a formal request has been filed with manufacturers who were unable to meet their needs. Part 2. Lead Abatement For repair, renovation, demolition or painting of projects constructed prior to any applicable laws New building. n/a his banning or restricting lead paint. Pan 3. Asbestos Abatement To reduce Imo a ds M projects constructed prior to any applicable laws banning or restricting asbestos. New building the his Part 4. Polychlorinated Biphenyl Abatement For any projects undergoing current renovation or demofflion which were re constructed or novated New buiMing. rile rile between 1 O and the insikWon of any applicable laws banning or restricting PCBs. Mercury -containing equipment and devices are restricted in accordance will the below guidelines: a. Project does not specify or install new mercury containing thernometere, switches and electrical relays. All lamps expected to be LED as per Design Brief MBII to confirm all lamps will Part 5. Mercury Limitation ItProject does not install any lamps not compliant with the low -mercury limits specified in Appendix O, However, lighting layouts and le g fixtures schedule be LED and Design team to MBI I Integral I ZAS I Table AS. Protect develops a plan to upgrade any existing noncompliant lamps to law -mercury, or drawings are not included in the DD tlrawings set DID g. confirm if any other equipment BMCEA meroury-free lamps. may have mercury. c. Illuminated exit signs only use Light -Emitting Diode (LED) or Light -Emitting Capacitor (LEC) lamps. d, No mercury vapor or probe -start metal halide high intensity discharge lamps are in use. re 12. Molstum Man mart A point -by -point narrative describes how liquid water from outside the building is addressed, responding to the nature and Intensity of wetting based an the project's site and climate, and include. the following TMIG to provide updates and Part 1. Exterior Liquid Water Management leading concems: a. Site drainage, including the impact of any site irrigation. Civil Eng. confit measures will W documented in the confirm if Me current design is TMIG b. The local water table. SWM and Servicing Design Brief, meeting precondition c. Building penetrations (especially windows and plumbing/electrical m ehaniral penetrations). requirements. d. Porous building materials connected to exterior sources of liquid water. A point-ty-point narrative describes how liquid water from interior sources is addressed, including these leading concems: Design team to provide further a. Plumbing leaks. informationinformation and confine Pan 2. Interior Liquid Water Management b. "Hard -piped" plumbing appliances (appliances such as clothes washers exposed to building water All requirements generally considered best treated. precondition re eta are ZAS /BMCEA pressure even When hat in use). a curre being met by the curent c. Porous building materials connected to interior sources of liquid water. design d. New building materials with "built-in" high moisture content or building materials wetted during construction but now on the inside of the building. A point-by-pofnt narrative describes how condensation is addressed, including these leading concerns: Design team to provide further a. High Interior relative humidity levels, particularly in susceptible areas like bath and laundry roams and Information and confirm Part 3. Condensation Management below -grade spaces. Ii Air leakage which could wet either exposed interior materials or intersfit ly "hidden materials. All requirements generally considered best practice. precondition requirements are ZAS /BMCEA c. Cooler surfaces, such as basement or slab -on -grade floors, or cfoseta/cabinets on exterior wails. being met by the current d. Oversized air conditioning units. design A paint -by -point narrative describes how moisture-loleant materials have been selected and/or moisture -sensitive materials (MSP) am being protected, considering these leading concerns: Design team to provide further a. Exposed entryways and glazing. Information and confirm Part 4. Material Selection And Protection b. Porous cladding materials. All requirements generally considered best practice. precondition requirements are 7AS / BMCPA c. Finished floors in potentially damp or wet rooms such as basements, bathrooms and kitchens. being met for a-tl by the d. Interior sheathing in damp or wat rooms. current design e. Sealing and storing of absorptive materials during construction. ture 30. Fundamental Water Quality All water being delivered to the project area except water not designated for human contact meets the Toronto generally has excellent water quality. following Water quality pre -tasting to he implemented during Pan 1. Sediment construction so that any necessary corrective action (ex. No action at this time. Na requirements: installing filters) could ba implemented before a. Turbidity M the water sample is less than 1.0 NTU. corn lesion. Toronto generally has excellent water quality. All water being delivered to the project area except water net designated for human contact meets the Water quality pre-tesfing to bit implemented during Part 2. Microorganisms following requirements: construction so that any necessary corrective action (ex. No action at this time. Na a. Total coliforms (including E. coli) are not detected in she sample. installing fitters) could be implemented before completed. Feature 31. Inorganic Contaminants as All water being deliveretl to the project area for human consumption (as least one water dispenser per project) meets the following limits: Toronto generally has excellent water quality. a. Lead lass than 0.01 mg/L. Water quality pre -testing to implemented during Part 1. Dissolved Metals b. Arsenic less than 0.01 mi construction so that any necessary connective action (ex. No action at this time. rile c. Antimony less than 0.006 mglL. installing fikers) could be implemented before d. Mercury less than 0.002 mg/L. completion. e. Nickel less than 0.012 mi f. Copper less Nan 1.O.ra/L. Feature 32Arganlc Contaminants-- - � _ All water being delivered to the project area for human consumption (al least one water dispenser par project) meets the following limits: a. Styrene less than 0.0005 mg/L Toronto generally has excellent water quality. b. Benzene less than 0.001 mg/L Water quality pre-tesfing to b , implemented during Part 1. Organic Pollutants c. Ethylbenzene less than 0.3 mi construction so that any necessary corrective action (ex. No action at this time. Ne d. Polychionnated biphenyls less than 0.0005 mg/L. installing filters) could be implemented before e. Vinyl chloride less than 0.002 mi completion. I. Toluene less than 0.15 mi g. Xylenes (total: m, p and o) less than 0.5 mg/L. h. Tatrachlomenvene less than 0.005 Paii Feature 33. Agricultural Contaminants All water being delivered to the project area for human consumption (at least one water dispenser per Toronto generally has excellent water quality. project) meats the following limits: Water quality pre-tesfing to be implemented during Part 1. Herbicides And Pesticides a. Atrazine less than 0.001 mgAL construction so that any necessary connective action (ex. No action at this time. rile b. Simazine less than 0.002 mglL installing fitters) could be implemented before a Glyphosate less than 0.70 mi completion. d. 2.4-Dichlorophenoxvacetic acid less than 0.07 mg/L. Toronto generally has excellent water quality. All water being delivered to the project area for human consumption (at least one water dispenser per Water quality pre-tesfing to be implemented during Part 2. Fertilizers project) meets the following limits: construction so that any necessary corrective action (ex. No action at this time. rile a. Nitrate less than 50 mg/L (10 mg/L as nitrogen). Installing fikers) could be implemented before Completion. Feature 34. Public Water Additives All water being delivered to the project area for human consumption (at least one water dispenser par Toronto generally has excellent water quality. project) and showerslbaths meets the following limits: Water quality pre -testing to be implemented during Part 1. Disinfectants a. Residual chlorine less than 0.8 mg/L. construction so that any necessary corrective action (ex- No action at this time. we b. Residual chlommine less then 4 mglL. installing filters) could be Implemented before completion. All water being delivered to the project area for human consumption (at least one water dispenser per Toronto generally has excellent water quality. project) meets the following limits: Water quality pre-tesfing to be implemented during Part 2. Disinfectant By-products a. Total trihalomethanes less Nan 0.08 mg/L. construction so that any necessary corrective action (ex. No action at this time. Ne b. Total haloacetic adds less than 0.06 mglL. Installing fitters) could be Implemented be/ore completion. Toronto generally has excellent water quality. All water being delivered to the project area for human consumption (at least one water dispenser per Water quality pre -testing to be implemented during Part 3. Fluorde project) meets the following limits: construction so that any necessary corrective action (ex. No action at this time. rile a. Fluoride lass than 4.0 mglL. installing fitters) could be Implemented before ompletion. .nature 38. Fruits And Vegetables If foods are sold or provided on a daily basis on the premises by (or under contract with) the project owner, then the selection includes atheist one of the following: TRCA to coordinate with kitchen operator to ensure Green Reason to Green Reason I • Part 1. Fruit And Vegetable Variety a. At least 2 varieties of fruits (containing no added sugar) and at least 2 varieties of non -fried requirements am met and service agreement is adjusted coordinate with TRCA. TRCA • vegetables. if necessary. b. At least 50% of available options are fruits (containing no added sugar) and/or non -toed vegetables. Cafeterias operated or committed by the project owner, if present, include the following design TRCA to coordinate with kitchen operator to ensure interventions: requirements are met and service agreement is adjusted a. Salad bar or similar salad -providing section, positioned in a visible and accessible location. if necessary. Green Reason to Green Reason / Pad 2. Fruit And Vegetable Promotion b. Fruits and vegetables are visually apparent, either through display or through color photographs on coordinate with TRCA. TRCA the menu. Signage and action plan to promote fruit and vegetable c. Vegetable dishes are placed at the beginning of the food service line. to be reviewed further. d. Fruits or but dishes are placed in a bowl or in a stand at the checkout location. "ure 39. Processed Foods All foods, beverages, snacks and meals sold or provided on a daily basis on the premises by (or under contract with) the project owner, including in vending machines, meet the following conditions: a. Beverages do not contain more than 30 g of sugar per container. Bulk containers of 1.9 L (2 quad) TRCA to coordinate with kitchen operator to ensure Pad 1. Refried Ingredient Restrictions or larger are exempt from this requirement. requirements are met and service agreement is adjusted Green Reason to Green Reason I b. At least 50% of beverages have 1 g of sugar or less per 16 mL [1.81 g of sugar or less per 1 oz]. if necessary. Vending machines to be confirmed. coordinate with TRCA. TRCA c. No non -beverage food Rem contains more than 30 g of sugar per serving. d. In at least 50% of food offerings where a grain four is the primary ingredient by weight, a whole grain must be the primary ingredient. All foods, beverages, snacks and meals sold or providetl on a daily basis on the premises by (or under TRGA to coordinate with kitchen operator to ensure Green Reason to Green Reason I Part 2. Trans Fat Ban contract with) the project owner, including in vending machines, do not contain: requirements are met and service agreement a adjusted coonfinale with TRCA. TRCA a. Parially -hydrogenated oil. f necessary. Vending machines to be confirmed. ure 40. Food Allergies All foods sold or provided on a daily basis on the premises by (or under contract with) the project owner are clearly labeled on packaging, menus, signage, or electronic media to indicate K they contain the following allergens: a. Peanuts. b. Fish. c, c. Shellfish. TRCA to coordinate with kitchen operator to ensure Green Reason to Green Reason I Pad 1. Food Allergy Labeling Say requirements are met and service agreement is adjusted coordinate with TRCA. TRCA e. Milk and dairy products. If necessary. Vending machines to be confirmed. I. Egg. g. Wheat. h. Tree nuts. I . Gluten. Restore 41. Hand Washing The following are provided, at a minimum, at all sink locations: ZAS to confirm if disposable Part 1. Hand WashingSu Supplies a. Fragrance -free hand soap In accordance with the Cleaning, Disinfection and Hand Hygiene Product Requirements have been discussed during the FM paper towels are pad of the ZAS section in Table A4 in Appendix C. meeting design b. Disposable Paper towels air owns are not forbdden but are supplemented). One of thefollowing is provided, at a minimum, a[ all sink locations: ZAS to confirm if dispenser Part 2. Contamination Reduction a. Liquid soap In dispensers with disposable and sealed soap cartridges. Requirements have been discussed during the FM for liquid soap with disposable ZAS b. Bar soap with a soap rack that allows for drainage. meeting and sealed soap cartridges are part of the design Bathroom and kitchen sinks meet the following requirements: ZAS I BMCEA I Integral to ZAS I BMCEA / Part 3. Sink Dimensions a. The sink column of water is at least 25 cm 110 Int In length. Sinks will be designed accordingly confirm design meat the Integral b. The handwashino besin is at least 23 cm I9 ml in width and Ienoth. requirements. ure 42. Food Contamination Kitchen equipment to be mlocaledispevliad to be If new meal, fish or poultry is prepared or stored on site, mid storage spaces contain the following: reviewed for possible challenges. Part 1. Cold Storage a. At least one removable, cleanable answer or container located at the bottom of the unit, designated TRCA to coordinate with kitchen operator to confirm Green Reason to Green Reason I and labeled for storing raw meat fish and poultry, requirements Implemented. coordinate with TRCA. TRCA b. A visual display of holding temperatures to ensure accurate representation of storage temperatures. Features requirements included in the Kitchen Design RFP. nature 43. Artificial Ingredients All foods sold or provided on a daily basis on the premises by (or under contract with) the project owner are clearly labeled on packaging, nearby menus or signage to indicate if they Contain the following: a. Artificial colors. b, Artificial flavors. c. Artificial sweeteners. TRCA to coordinate with kitchen member to ensure d. Brominated vegetable oils. requirements are met and service agreement is adjusted Green Reason to Green Reason I Part 1. Art'rficial Substance labeling e. Potassium bromate. B necessary. Vending machines to be confirmed. coordinate with TRCA. TRCA f. BHA (Butylaled by lboxyanisote). g. BHT (Butylated hydroxytoluarrat I. Monosodium glutamate (MSG). L Hytlroll vegetable protein (HVP). j. Sodium nitrate and sodium nitrRe. k. Sulfites. ture 44. Nutritional Information For foods and beverages sold or provided on a daily basis on the premises by (or under convect with) Green Reason to the project owner, the following are displayed (per meal or Ham) on packaging, menus or signage: discuss with TRCA Part 1. Detailed Nutritional Information a. Total calories. Cafeteria will be provided within the building how imornation will be Green Reason / b. Macromumenl (total protein, total fat and total carbohydrate) in weight and as a percent of estimated presented - signage, menu, TRCA daily requirements (Daily Values). packaging. c. Total sugar content. " - re 45. FootlAdvertisin The following requirement is met: Part 1. Advertising And Environmental Cues a. Advertisements for any food or beverage items that do not conform to the requirements set forth in Signage to be implemented by TRCA. No action at this time. mar the Processed Foods Feature are not displayed on the premises. Using prominent displays such as etlumdonal posters, brochures or othervisual media, designated eating areas or common areas contain a total of at least 3 instances of messaging intended to achieve Part 2. Nutritional Messaging either or both of the following requirements: Signage to be implemented by TRCA. No action at this time. nor a. Encourage the consumption of whole, natural foods and cuisines. b. Discourage the consumption of sugary or processed foods and low es. Feature 53. Visual Lighting Design The following requirements are met at workstations or desks: e. The ambient lighting system is able to maintain an average light Intensity of 215 lux [20 to] or more, measured on the horizontal plane, 0.76 in [30 inches] above finished floor. The lights may be dimmed MBII to provide updates and 1. Visual Acuity For Focus in the presence of daylight, but they are able to independently achieve these levels. MBI I considers this attainable. confine if current designPart MBII b. The ambient lighting system is zoned in independently controlled banks no larger than 46.5 m' [500 meets Precondition ft'] or 20% of open floor area of the room (whichever is larger). requirements. c. If ambient light is bebw 300 lux [28 to], task lights providing 300 to 500 lux 128 to 46 to] at the work surface am available upon request. Provide a narrative that describes strategies for maintaining luminance balance in spaces, which takes into consideration at least two of me following: a. Maximum brightness contrasts between main rooms and ancillary spaces, such as condom and stairwells, if present. For example, projects may establish that, while still maintaining lighting variety, a main roam cannot exhibit 10 times greater or lesser luminance man an ancillary space. b. Maximum brightness contrasts between task surfaces and immediately adjacent surfaces, including adjacent visual display terminal screens. For example, projects may establish that, while still MBII to provide updates and Part 2. BdgMness Management Strategies maintaining lighting variety, a surface cannot exhibit 3 times greater or lesser luminance man an MBII considers I attainable confirm if current design MBII adjacent surface. meets Precondition c. Brightness contrasts between task surfaces and remote, mon-adjacent surfaces In the same mom. requirements. For example, projects may establish mat, while still maintaining lighting variety, a surface cannot exhibit 10 times greater or lesser luminance than another remote surface In Me same room. d. The way brightness is distributed across ceilings in a given room that maintains lighting variety but avoids both dark spots, or excessively bright, potentially glaring spots. For example, projects may establish that, while still maintaining lighting variety, one part of the ceiling cannot be 10 times greater or lesser luminance than another part of the ceiling in me same room. Feature 54. Circadian Lighting Desi n Light models or light calculations demonstrate that at least one of the following requirements is met: a. At 75% or more of workstations, at least 200 equivalent melanopic lux is present, measured on the vertical plane facing forward, 1.2 in [4 ft] above finished floor (to simulate the view of the occupant). MBII to provide uptlates and Part 1. Melanopic Light Intensity For Work This light level may incorporate daylight, and is present for at least the hours between 9:00 AM and MBII. considers this attainable. confirm if current design MBII Areas 1:00 PM for every day of the year. meets the PrecandNon b. For all workstations, electric lights (which may include task lighting) provide maintained illuminance requirements on the vertical plane facing forward (to simulate the view of the occupant) of 150 equivalent melanoplc lux or greater. Projects may use the lux recommendations in the required amount in place of 150. Feature 55. Electric Li ht Glare Control The following shielding angles (a= 90-cutroff angle) must be observed for lamps in regularly occupied spaces with luminance values in the ranges specified: MBII to provide updates and Part 1. Lamp Shielding a. No shielding required for less than 20,000 cclof (including reflected sources). MBII considers this attainable, confirm if current design MBII b. a: 15' for 20,000 to 50,000 rill meets Precondition c. a: 20' for 50.000 to 500,000 cd/W. requirements. d. a: 30' for 500,000 cd/mi and above. At workstations, desks, and other seating areas the following requirement is met: MBII to provide updates and Part 2. Glare Minimization a. Luminaires more man 53' above the center of view (degrees above horizontal) have luminances less MBI I considers mis attainable confirm if current design MBII than 8,090 odmi meets Precondition requirements. Feature 56. Solar Glare Control _ Al least one of the following is present for all glazing less than 2.1 in [7 ft) above me floor in regmady occupied spaces: a. Interior window shading or blinds that are controllable by the occupants or set to automatically ZASBMCFA to provide Part 1. View Window Shading prevent glare. Glare control to be provided. Consider AAP If alternative updates and confirm d AAP is ZAS I BMCEA b. External shading systems that ate controllable by me occupants or set to automatically prevent (not blinds) glare contral devices are being considered. required. glare. c. Variable opacity glazing, such as electrochromic glass, which can reduce trensmissivity by 90% or At least one of be following is required for all glazing greater than 2.1 in [7 ft] above the floor: a. Interior window shading or blinds that are controllable by the occupants or set to automatically prevent glare. ZASBMCEA to provide Part 2. Daylight Management b. External shading systems that are set to automaticelly prevent glare. Glare control to be provided. Consider AAP If alternative updates and confirm rf AAP is ZAS I BMCEA c. Interior light shelves to reflect sunlight toward the ceiling. (not blinds) glare control devices are being considered. requiretl. d. A film of micro -mirrors on the window that reflects sunlight toward me ceiling. e. Variable opacity glazing, such as electrochromic glass, which can reduce transmissivity, by 90% or more. Feature 64. Interior Fitness Circulation In projects of 2 to 4 floors, at least one common staircase meets the following requirements: Part 1. Stair Accessibility 8 Promotion a. Stairs are accessible to regular building occupants during all regular business hours. Feature stairs meet requirement; signage to be No action at this time. we b. Throughout the spare, waygnding signage and point-of-decislon prompts are present to encourage implemented by TRCA. stair use (at least one sips oar elevator bank). In projects of 2 to 4 floors, at least one common staircase meets the following requirements: a. Located within 7.5 in 125 H] of the building's main entrance, main entry check-point (e.g., welcomelreception desk), the edge of its main lobby, or edge of its main welcome arca. Part 2. Staircase Design b. Clearly visible from the building's main entrance, main entry check-point (e.g., welcome/reception Feature stairs visible from exhibHionlrecepti m space. No action at this time me desk), the edge of its main lobby, or edge of its main welcome area, or are located visually before any elevators present upon entering fmm the main entrance. c. Stair width sat at a minimum of 1.4 m [56 in] between handrails, or the width allowable by local code. In projects of 2 to 4 floors, common stairs, entryways and corridors display elements of aesthetic appeal by incoryorating at least 2 of the following throughout Ne stair a. Artwork. Part 3. Facilitative Aesthetics b. Music. Feature stairs currently are daylit with window views. No action at this time. me c. Daylighting using windows or skylights of at least 1 m' [10.8 Haj in size. MBII confined lighting requirement can be met. d. View, windows to the outdoors or building interior. e. Light levels of at least 215 lux [20 to] when the stairs are in use. f. Bio hilic elements ' ure 65. Activitir IncenlWe Proammurn. At least two of the following are implemented for all full-time employees: a. Tax-exempt payroll deductions relating to active transportation (e.g., a subsidy to purchase a Personal bicycle) or mass transit (includes public transportation) use. Direct subsidy of an equivalent amount. b. Meaningful reimbursements or incenWe payments (including non-monetary) offered for every 6- month period that an employee meets a 5Pvisit minimum to the gym or physical activity program. Some of the activity, inventive programs that are already Green Reason to review with Part 1. Activity Incentive Programs c. A meaningful subsidy offered at leas[ yearly towards participation or membership costs for finess in place at TRCA might have overlaps with some of the TRCA exeting activity GRI /TRCA activitles such as races, group fitness classes, sports teams, fitness centers, training centers, gyms, or WELL features. incentive programs studios. Direct subsidies of an equivalent amount are also acceptable. d. A meaningful subsidy offered at least yearly towards the cost of an annual bicycle share membership e. No cost or discounted physical activity opportunities or memberships, in which it can be demonstrated that 30% of occupants have utilized on a regular basis (al least weekly) over the last su months. Feature 72. Accessible Desi n The projects must demonstrate compliance with one of the following: ZAS I BMCEA to confirm Part 1. Accessibility and Usability a. Current ADA Standards for Accessible Design or comparable local code or standards. Design will meet AODA requirements design meet the ZAS / BMCEA In. ISO 21542:2011 - Building Construction - Accessibility and Usability of the Built Environment. requirements. re 73. E onomies: VisualA& 'ical Pent Visual Ergonomics The following requirement is met: Assumption is that This is stented. TRCA to confirm I TRCA a. All computer screens are adjustable in terms of height and distance from the user. requirements are being met. Al least 30% of workstations have the ability to alternate between sitting and standing positions through a combination of the following: Workstations expected to be relocated from existing Green Reason to review Pad 2. Desk Haigh Flexibility a. Adjustable height sit -stand desks. building. Adjustable desk -top stands previously further details with TRCA and Green Reason I b. Desi height adjustment stands. discussed with TRCA in order to ensure compliance with Design Team. TRCA c. Pain: of fixed -height desks of standing and seated heights (which need not be located adjacent to precondition. each other). Occupant furnishings are adjustable in the following ways: a. Workstation chair height adjustability is compliant with the FIFES 100 standard or BIFMA G1 Chaim to be relocated are adjustable -further reviewing Green Reason to review Green Reason I Part 3. Seat Flexibility guidelines. for BIFMA compliance. further details with TRCA and TRCA b. Workstation seat depth adjustabiliy is compliant with the HFES 100 standard or BIFMA G1 Design Team. guidelines. ure 74. Exterior Noise Intrusion. Each regularly occupied space meets the following sound pressure level as measured when the space Design team to ensure glazing acoustics performance Pad 1. Sound Pressure Level and adjacent spaces are unoccupied, but within 1 of business hours: is considered a factor. No action at this time. We e int a. Average sound pressure level from outside noise intrusion tices not exceed 50 tlBA. rusion do Acoustics pretesting to be implemented prior to • performance vereiftpation. . lure 76. Intermally Generated Noise An acoustic plan is developed that irlentdies the following spaces and potential sources of disruption: Design team to address how noisy and quiet zones will Preliminary acoustic repod to Part 1. Acoustic Planning a. Loud and quiet zones. be defined. Integral advised some mechanical be revised based on current ZAS b. Noisy equipment in the space. equipment may generale noise. design. The mechanical equipment system meets the following requirements once imenor build-oul is complete in the following spaces: Integral advised so" mechanical equipment may Part 2. Mechanical Equipment Sound Levels a. Open office spaces and lobbies that are regularly occupied and/or contain workstations: maximum generale noise. NC levels cannot be confirmed at this No action at this time. Na noise crketia INC) of 40. time. b. Enclosed offices: maximum noise criteria INC) of 35, c. Conference rooms and breakout rooms: maximum noise drums (NC) of 30 (25 recommended). are 76. Thermal Comfort All spaces in mechanically-ventilatetl projects (including circulation areas) meet the design, operating Tmnssolar confirmed compliance with ASHRAE 55 for Part 1. Ventilated Thermal Environment and performance criteria: mechanical and natural ventilation n/a We a. ASHRAE Standard 55-2013 Sectron 5.3, Standard Comfort Zone Compliance. Part 2. Natural Thermal Adaptation All spaces in naturalVou nd@ioned projects meet the following orHeda: n/a. For buildings that have only natural ventilation n/a Na a. ASHRAE Stantlad 55-2013 Secgon 5.4 Adaptive Comfort Model. without mechanical mating. Feature 84. Health And Wellness Awareness Explanatory guides allow occupants to familiarize themselves with and benefit from features that are Incorporated into the project, as well as gain a broader understanding of health and wellness factors Green Reason to review Green Reason I Part 1. Well Building Standwd® Guide beyond the built environment. The following is provided: TRCA considering a digital format for the guide further details with TRCA and TRCA a. A guide (available to all occupants) describing the WELL Building Standard features pursued by Me Design Team. praised. A sgbal and/or physical library of resources is provided! that focuses on mental and physical health and meets the following criteria: Green Reason to review Green Reason / Part 2. Health And Wellness Libmry a. Contains at least one book title or one magazine subscription for every 20 occupants (no more Man TRCA considers providing a digital library. further details with TRCA and TRCA 20 titles are required). Design Team. , b. Is prominentiv displaved and readily available to all occupants. ure 85. Integrative Design Green Reason conducted two main workshops with the design team and 10-20 members of Me client team Project stakeholders, including at a minimum the owner, architects, engineers and facilities across various stakeholder groups, to review program management team, meet to: and policies and TRCA certi0cation goals. Green a. Perform a values assessment and alignment exercise within the team to inform any project goals as Reason has also been having regular h -weekly design Part 1. Stakeholder Chamette well as strategies to meet occupant expectations. meetings and client meetings both of which include No action at this time. nla b. Discuss the needs of the occupants. Mousing on wellness. WELL updatesMiscussions. a Set foture meetings to stay focused on the project goals and to engage future stakeholders whojoin WELL Coach confirmed that evan M this was not the process after the initial meeting, such as contractors and sutrcontmclors, formally called as WELL Stakeholder Charette, the intent of the workshops and the meeting met the requirement of the Stakeholder champs. A written document'delailing the building's health-orlented mission is produced with the consent of all stakeholders, incorporating all of the fallowing: a. Building site selection, taking Into account public transportation. The content of the document are partially covered under Green Reason to prepare Part 2. Development Plan b. WELL Concepts of air, water, nourishment, light, fitness, comfort and mind. Me LEED credit Integrative Design. dreft document for review and Green Reason c. Plans for implementation of the above analyses and decisions. input by team members. d. Operations and maintenance plans for facility managers and building policy requirements related to wellness. Upon construction completion, Me designers, owners, managers and facilities staff must: Part 3. Stakeholder Orientation a. Tour the building as a group. To be implemented in post -construction period. No action at this time. nla b. Discuss how building operations will support adherence to the WELL Building Standard. INIfiture 86. Part Post-Omu ano Surveys In buildings with 10 or more occupants, the Occupant Indoor Environmental Quality (IEO) Survey - from the Center for the Built Environment at UC Berkeley (or approved alternative) is completed by a representative sample of at least 30% of occupants at least once per year unless otherwise noted. The survey covers the following topics of occupant satisfaction: a. Acoustics. Part 1. Occupant Survey Content b. Thermal comfort, including humidity and air flow, at least twice a year (once during Me coding Survey requirement previously discussed with TRCA; No action at this time. Na season and once during the heating season). content to be developed near construction and. c. Furnishings. d. Workspace light levels and quality. o Odom. stuffiness and other air quality concerns. I. Cleanliness and maintenance. q. Layout. Aggregate results from surveys are reported within 30 days to the following groups: Part 2. Information Reporting a. Building owners and managers. To be implemented in post -construction period. No action at this time, We b. Building occupants (upon request). a The international WELL Building Institute. ure 87. Beauty And Design I Nor— The project contains features intended for all of the following: a. Human delight. Green Reason to review Part 1. Beauty And Mindful Design b. Celebration d culture. Strategy to be reviewed and finalized with TRCA and further details with TRCA and Green Reason I c. Celebration of spirit. design team. Design Team. TRCA d. Celebration of place. e. Meanin uI int relion of public art. "tura 88. Bto hilts I -Qualitative A biophilia plan Is developed that includes a description so how the project incorporates nature through Me following: Strategy to be reviewed and finalized with TRCA and Ghana Reason to review Green Reason / Part 1. Nature Incoryoration a. Environmental elements. design team. further details with TRCA and TRCA I ZA 3 b. Lighting. Design Team. c. Spam layout. This aamnmaral la intended to aerve as a benchmarking bol to aaseas potential WELL vt pedmmaaceIt doe. not card. a WELL rating nor guarantee features compliance. This document is be sola property of Green Reason Inc. and is only to be used for the project listed above. This document is anal to be used in any other capacity wIffo It the expressed consent of Green Reason Inc. A bio hills Ian is developed that includes a description of how the ro' ct iacor tes the fallowing: p p p p p !e Pora g' Design bein Wormed b the ravine environment. g g y Green Reason to review Green Reason / IncotPoration Natures pattems throughout the design. further details with TRCA antla. TRCA/ZAS DesMn Team. JFPa�2rn A biophllla plan is developed that provides suRkient opportunities for human-nature interactions: Water walls and live plants within building: garden and Green Reason to review Green Reason I 11 re Interaction a. Within the building. trail for exterior compliance. further detells with TRCA and TRCA / ZAG b. Within the project bountlary, external to the building. Design Team. This aamnmaral la intended to aerve as a benchmarking bol to aaseas potential WELL vt pedmmaaceIt doe. not card. a WELL rating nor guarantee features compliance. This document is be sola property of Green Reason Inc. and is only to be used for the project listed above. This document is anal to be used in any other capacity wIffo It the expressed consent of Green Reason Inc. CaGBC - Zero Carbon Building Standard Project Status Report Project Name: TRCA New Head Office January 23, 2019 Information Electrical, Architecture[ IFC Drawings Description of the building and its intended use Description of the building energy systems Description of any energy imports or exports Description of the building envelope characteristics ZCB Commitment to fulfil ZCB using purchase of offsite renewable energy Intended supplier(s) Estimate of the quantity of offsite renewable energy required Estimates of the expected annual costs Carlon Transition Plan A narrative explaining why the combustion of fuels is necessary describing how building loads have been reduced describing the mechanical HVAC strategy and how components t may be adapted to accommodate non -combustion based Drawings that show provisions for future upgrades A financial comparison of the current system and a non -combustion based STATUS will provide updated anficipated meter data when final energy model is complete. Early April 2019 for 100% Contract Documents and Tender issue TS to provide IFC energy model output files which comply with ZCB energy modelling guidelines. Descriptions exist as part of various modelling reports and design briefs. Need to be consolidated into these categories. checklists, energy use data and GHG emission Requires anticipated monthly energy use data. TRCA will provide access to ENERGY STAR portfolio manager accountfor Green Reason TRCA have confirmed they will purchase green power and carbon offsets as necessary. TRCA have noted that they have existing agreements with Bullfrog for electricity and natural gas which meets ZCB standard requirements. Not applicable as the project does not rely on fuels. 1 green reason ACTION ACTION BY No action at this time. No action at this time TS to provide required descriptions at IFC stage n/a n/a TS OR to complete ZCB Workbook upon receipt of GR final data from TS. Green Reason to input preliminary meter data GR anticipated by the energy model. No action at this time n/a n/a n/a Narratives Testing results and supporting calculations for any alternative air leakage testing values used other than the default In the modelling guidelines Narratives to explain: - how TEDI has been reduced through the use of passive design measures - how TEDI has been calculated Air leakage testing requirements to be included in IFT documents. TS to provide narratives at IFC for design TS submission. No action at this time JLSR Peak Demand Modelled peak demand is part of required submittals but there is no TS to provide modelled peak performance threshold requirement to meet. final energy model is ready. mbodied carbon report that includes: Whole building LCA is also required for the LEED LCA software used Cycle Impact Reduction Elements in the building that are included in the calculation Service life of the building List of life cycle phases included Total Global Waring Potential for the building (in kg CO2eq) def commentary on any challenges meeting this requirement, as well as any Optional masures taken to reduce embodied carbon ZAS to coordinate with Green Reason on the GR/ZAS next steps to initiate LCA. No action at this time Na This report is intended to serve as a benchmarking tool to assess potential Zero Carbon Building Standard performance. This document is the sole property of Green Reason Inc. and Is only to be used for the project listed above. This document is not to be used in any other capacity without the expressed consent of Green Reason Inc. RESMA38/19 - MEETING PROVINCIAL PRIORITIES FOR REDUCING REGULATORY BURDEN AND STREAMLINING APPROVALS To provide a progress report to the Board of Directors on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff's ongoing efforts to increase operational efficiencies, streamline processes and enhance customer service, which collectively aim to support and contribute to provincial priorities to streamline the planning and development approvals process. Moved by: Linda Jackson Seconded by: David Barrow WHEREAS the provincial government intends to streamline the land use planning and development approval process to increase the supply of housing; AND WHEREAS Conservation Authorities play an important role in the planning and development review process with respect to watershed protection and hazard lands; AND WHEREAS Conservation Authorities support and can help to deliver on the Government's objective while not jeopardizing public health and safety or the environment; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the staff report entitled "Meeting Provincial Priorities for Reducing Regulatory Burden and Streamlining Approvals" be received; AND THAT the Board of Directors endorse the three key areas identified by the Conservation Ontario working group for all Conservation Authorities to: 1) improve client service and accountability: 2) increase speed of approvals; and 3) reduce the notion of "red tape" and regulatory burden, in addition to the ongoing streamlining measures being undertaken by TRCA as set out in this report; AND THAT staff be directed to work with Conservation Ontario, municipalities and stakeholders, including but not limited to the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD), to identify additional improvements and report back to the Board of Directors on the outcome of this work. CARRIED BACKGROUND In June of 2018, a new government was elected and moved quickly to implement the Plan for the People platform which included promises to: "Cut red tape and stifling regulations that are crippling job creation and growth, and ...single -window access for approvals with a hard one-year deadline" Since that time, the government has introduced a number of consultations, draft proposals and proposed amendments to legislation in support of their agenda. The Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks released the Preserving and Protecting our Environment for Future Generations: A Made -in -Ontario Environment Plan (2018) that affirmed support for conservation and environmental planning and specifically mentioned that they would: "work in collaboration with municipalities and stakeholders to ensure that conservation authorities focus and deliver on their core mandate of protecting people and property from flooding and other natural hazards and conserving natural resources". To inform the development of a Housing Supply Action Plan to increase the supply and mix of housing and streamline the development approval process, the Province recently undertook a public stakeholder consultation process. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) also introduced proposed changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe to address implementation challenges that were identified by municipal and development sectors and other stakeholders. The changes are intended to provide greater flexibility and address barriers to building homes, creating jobs, attracting investments, and putting in place the right infrastructure while protecting the environment. The Ministry is also reviewing the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement to ensure that the land use planning and development approvals process is aligned with their goals. Recently, Conservation Ontario (CO) established a small working group of General Managers (GMs) of Conservation Authorities (CAs) from across Ontario to address specific concerns that have been expressed related to the role of CAs in the planning and development approvals process (e.g. mandate, timely reviews and approvals). The CO working group has identified the following three key areas for all CAs to work on with stakeholders (municipalities, development industry, etc.) that would support the government's priorities while maintaining the mandate and important role of CAs in protecting people, property, the environment and health of Ontario's watersheds: Improve client service and accountability Increase speed of approvals Reduce "red tape" and regulatory burden Similar actions were initiated in 2007 when the provincial government created the Conservation Authorities Liaison Committee (CALC) in response to the perceived lack of clarity on conservation authority roles and responsibilities in plan review and permitting. The Committee brought together representatives from various ministries, the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD), the Ontario Home Builders Association (OHBA), municipalities, conservation authorities (including representation from TRCA), Conservation Ontario and environmental organizations. In 2010, as an outcome of the Committee's work, the Province approved a new chapter, `Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authorities Plan Review and Permitting Activities"for inclusion in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry's (MNRF) Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authorities Manual. This chapter articulates the legislative and operational framework under which CAs conduct their planning and regulatory functions, and promotes greater consistency and improved transparency in the delivery of these activities. TRCA adheres to the Policies and Procedures chapter as further described in this report. Conservation Ontario is seeking a commitment from all CAs to pursue streamlining and customer service measures in order to contribute to achieving provincial priorities and as such this report is being brought forward to the Board of Directors. Staff are taking this opportunity to provide an update on TRCA's ongoing efforts to increase operational efficiencies, streamline processes and enhance customer service, which collectively, aim to support provincial priorities. Additionally, this report includes comments and suggestions for streamlining from TRCA's submission of January 25, 2019 on the provincial consultation for Increasing Housing Supply in Ontario (ERO #013-4190). TRCA recognizes the importance of efficiency, certainty, transparency and accountability in the development and infrastructure review processes, so that quality housing supply can be brought to market in a timely and environmentally sustainable manner. RATIONALE Critical role of conservation authorities in a growing and intensifying city -region TRCA's jurisdiction is the most highly urbanized, rapidly intensifying and redeveloping city - region in the Province. As a result, TRCA has expertise and experience in addressing the integration of key provincial policy priorities such as: 1) Protecting people, property and infrastructure from the natural hazards of flooding and erosion and for protecting and restoring the natural environment; and, 2) The need for residential growth/housing supply and the substantial infrastructure projects to service growth. TRCA exercises all of its roles and responsibilities in the planning and development process in accordance with the Province's "Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authority Plan Review and Permitting Activities" (2010), as: • A regulator under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act; • 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; • One of the largest landowners (18,000 hectares) in the Toronto region; and • A source protection authority under the Clean Water Act. Where applications for new development and/or servicing fall within TRCA regulated areas, TRCA works with both private and public proponents to facilitate sustainable development and infrastructure that is adequately set back and protected from natural hazards and/or from environmentally sensitive areas. TRCA also works with our provincial and municipal partners to seek opportunities for remediation and restoration to reduce risk and increase resiliency where comprehensive redevelopment/community revitalization is proposed that includes areas of historical residential development within the flood hazard. In this way, increased housing supply is facilitated while risk is reduced and provincial and municipal policies for public safety and environmental protection are upheld. The natural resources that TRCA is charged with protecting under the Conservation Authorities Act convey many benefits to humans — these "ecosystem services" of nature become that much more important when housing is increasing/urban areas are expanding and intensifying. These ecosystem services include clean air, water, greenspace and trails for recreation and mental health. Front loading the planning process for more certainty and innovation Ultimately, the advisory and regulatory responsibilities of conservation authorities in the development process are not about slowing or preventing development and all its attendant economic benefits. Rather, they are about good environmental planning in which the municipality, the conservation authority and the development industry take a comprehensive, creative and collaborative approach early in the process. TRCA finds that when these efforts to compile all required information to make decisions are done well and made early, it leads to innovative urban designs that result in shorter review times, more timely approvals, and cost reductions in the short and long term for all stakeholders. This collaborative approach, which includes the provision of high quality information in appropriate formats at the front end of the development process, also helps to avoid appeals to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) thus avoiding delays, costs and uncertainty associated with these appeals processes. Overall, more effort upfront in the planning process to coordinate and project manage complete applications, taking into account public agency requirements, provides greater clarity, more certainty, opportunities for innovation, and better enables timely approvals of residential development and its supporting infrastructure. Providing certainty through clear policies and guidelines The provincial policy framework in Ontario clearly sets out what is important to protect and manage in the context of development and redevelopment adjacent to dynamic natural systems. Policies in the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and the Provincial Plans on natural hazards, natural heritage and water management direct municipalities on where and how to grow. In addition, the PPS guides land use planning to serve the public interest and deliver development that balances economic, environmental and social objectives. These land use policies are critical to the development of safe, healthy and affordable communities. As such, they need to be maintained and strengthened in order to provide certainty to all stakeholders in the development and infrastructure planning processes. TRCA's own policy document, "The Living City Policies" (LCP, 2014) is consistent with the provincial framework in its policy intent and supporting technical guidelines. The LCP describes all of TRCA's roles in the planning process, and directs staff participating in the review of applications under the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act, to ensure that the applicant and municipal planning authority are aware of the section 28 Regulation permitting requirements under the Conservation Authorities Act, where applicable. This helps to assist in the coordination of these planning and permitting applications to avoid ambiguity, conflict and unnecessary delay or duplication in the process. Further, TRCA works routinely with provincial agencies, (e.g., Metrolinx) utilities (e.g., Enbridge) and other public infrastructure providers, which may be exempt from TRCA's section 28 Regulation, to achieve shared objectives for sustainable infrastructure planning that supports growth in the residential sector. Municipal Context The governance model of conservation authorities as watershed -based jurisdictions facilitates coordination of local technical expertise to inform municipal decision making. It should be made clear that streamlining of CA activities alone will not be sufficient to materially improve the timelines for planning approvals. Streamlining initiatives need to be coordinated with the activities and processes of our municipal partners, as they are the approval authorities for applications under the Planning Act. Moreover, streamlining efforts are required for municipalities to respond to LPAT timelines. To this end, TRCA has begun meeting with our municipal partners to discuss opportunities for better coordination, alignment of our review timelines and priorities, improved pre -consultation and clarification of roles, responsibilities and process improvements. The leadership of our municipal partners has enabled innovation in climate change research, strategies and technical guidance tools that help solve block and site plan design challenges within developments affected by dynamic natural systems. A recent example of improving technical guidance to better inform municipal decision-making, is TRCA's comprehensive update to TRCA Regulated Area mapping. Through consulting with municipalities on updates to the mapping, staff are also soliciting municipal input on improving efficiencies in circulation and review processes of planning and building permit applications. At the same time, internally, staff are examining options for streamlining measures in its TRCA permitting review processes. These recent initiatives are timely and consistent with the government's goals and CO's pursuit for finding efficiencies, improving client service and accountability. Specific examples of actions that have been and that are being undertaken by TRCA are described below. Prior Streamlining and Service Delivery Improvements at TRCA TRCA has been hearing and responding to the suggestions of stakeholders over the past several years to introduce continuous strategic improvements (CSI) to improve customer service and streamline our processes, including initiatives such as: • New or updated Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with many of TRCA municipal partners to establish review roles and technical clearance responsibilities to improve efficiency by assisting municipalities to fulfill their responsibilities under the Planning Act and the implementation of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and provincial plans; • The introduction of Service Delivery Agreements for municipal and provincial infrastructure projects; • Permit streamlining protocols with delegated staff approval: Permissions for Minor Works (2006), Permit Re -Issuance and Permission for Routine Infrastructure (both in 2008); • Public release in 2008 of the Planning and Development Procedural Manual that provides guidelines and checklists reflecting current practices, to assist applicants in making planning and permit submissions that will comply with TRCA policies for natural hazards, natural heritage and water resources; • Board of Directors approved Fee Policy Guideline (2009), consistent with MNRF's Policies and Procedures for Charging of Conservation Authorities Fees; • Monitoring trends in submission demand, level of service, cost recovery and necessary revisions on a biennial basis and reporting to the Board of Directors on the status of cost recovery and service delivery as part of the approval process of TRCA's Planning, Permitting and Environmental Assessment Fees • Consultation with BILD for input on TRCA's Planning and Permitting fee schedules; • The Continuous Strategic Improvements (CSI) of 2013 including: o delegation to staff of permit approvals for non-complex applications (those consistent with TRCA policies and procedures) to quicken approval timelines; o the introduction of on-line credit card payments for client convenience; o the investment in improved computer hardware for planning staff to facilitate digital plan review and map creation and analysis; o the development and implementation of an automated file tracking database allowing managers to track the number of submissions by applicants and assess if review timelines are being met; o the introduction of standardized internal commenting templates to facilitate clarity in technical comments and track responses; and • A revised and updated TRCA policy document — The Living City Policies — which underwent an extensive external consultation process and was approved by the Board of Directors in 2014, consistent with provincial policies and compliant with MNRF's Policies and Procedures Manual. Current and Ongoing Streamlining and Service Delivery Improvements at TRCA TRCA continues to promote the "front loading" of the planning process by taking a creative, comprehensive and collaborative approach early on to ensure certainty and innovation to shorten review times and reduce overall costs; TRCA is investigating the use of a "Charrette" process with all parties to "triage" applications to "get to yes" faster, helping to avoid appeals, and further avoiding delays, costs and uncertainties: TRCA conducts workshops with the development and consulting community on our application requirements and technical guideline creation and training to assist proponents in preparing their submissions; TRCA policy documents, technical guidelines and mapping tools are being continuously updated and improved, in consultation with municipal and development industry stakeholders and housed on our website for easy access; TRCA's recent (Feb. 2019) reorganization of the newly named Development and Engineering Services Division will improve service delivery and centralize staff with similar corporate functions in one division to achieve operational efficiencies. This will also channel existing staff resources across TRCA to priority initiatives and services to better reflect stakeholder and partner needs, to ensure we improve client and stakeholder satisfaction and have a solution -oriented customer service approach. Some of the immediate process improvements and operational efficiencies this new division will aim to achieve include: o Integrated planning and engineering teams with dedicated site plan review teams; o Streamlined reviews for low risk understandable projects i.e. road resurfacing; o Establishing early scoping and pre -consultation sessions focused on identifying issues and required studies at the outset of the development process; o Better integration of watershed plan science to increase the level of certainty required to inform official plans, block plans and other major developments; o Updating MOUs with our municipal partners and assessing opportunities for the transfer of plan review functions from provincial ministries; o TRCA's regulation mapping project and tools to help create certainty in the development review process; o Providing tools, guidelines and standard operating procedures for stormwater management and erosion and sediment control training and certification for the development industry that will hopefully result in improved quality of submissions; o Updating the Procedural Manual to provide further clarification as to TRCA requirements, including updates to the "complete application" checklist. Process Streamlining and Service Delivery Improvement Opportunities with External Partners In the Greater Toronto Area, there may be other opportunities to streamline approvals while not compromising public safety from natural hazards and the environment. TRCA suggests further leveraging of conservation authority expertise in natural resource management for development and infrastructure, where capacity exists. In recent submissions to the Province, the following recommendations to enable more timely reviews and approval were made: Streamline provincial approvals by having CAs with expertise and capacity play a larger role in undertaking wetland evaluations and approvals, and staking of provincially significant wetlands; CAs could expand their role in wildlife management by administering fisheries timing windows and wildlife collection permits; CAs could play a role in the application of the Endangered Species Act, which could include habitat delineation, permit negotiation and issuance, timing window applications and Overall Benefit Permit planning and implementation. Through experience, science and monitoring expertise, CAs could assist in the development of a recovery strategy; and Transfer the review of Environmental Compliance Approvals along with associated resources for stormwater management under the Ontario Water Resources Act to conservation authorities that have the expertise in place and that have completed watershed plans with set stormwater management targets to ensure provincial interests are protected. Development Community TRCA staff regularly engage the development community, (BILD, developers, consultants and proponents), about the implementation and delivery of our planning and regulatory program. The development community needs to participate in and be a part of these streamlining and efficiency -finding efforts and solutions. TRCA's report on January 26, 2018 to the Board of Directors on Planning and Development Service Delivery and Fee Update, 2018-2019 (available here, pages 658-704), outlines some of the areas to improve service delivery (project management of timelines, coordination and higher quality submissions) as well as TRCA's commitment to increase efficiencies and enhance customer service. TRCA service delivery standards are based on a complete application that meets policy requirements. Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan This report supports the following strategies set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan: Strategy 7 — Build partnerships and new business models Strategy 9 — Measure performance Strategy 10 — Accelerate innovation FINANCIAL DETAILS Staff is engaged in this policy analysis work per the normal course of duty, with funding support provided by TRCA's participating municipalities to account 120-12. No additional funding is proposed to support the policy work associated with the preparation of these comments. CONCLUSION TRCA recognizes the importance of efficiency, certainty, transparency and accountability in the development and infrastructure review and permitting processes. This report identifies past and ongoing efforts to increase operational efficiencies, streamline processes and enhance customer service which collectively aim to support provincial priorities and provide benefits for municipal partners, the development community and public stakeholders. Similarly, TRCA is committed to supporting and advancing the key action items identified by the Conservation Ontario working group to ensure the delivery of our mandate and important role of CAs in protecting people, property, the environment and health of Ontario's watersheds. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA will communicate with our stakeholders on any changes to our processes regarding planning and permitting via meetings, email communications, and other means to ensure a smooth transition. Report prepared by: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: david.burnett@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Laurie Nelson, extension 5281; Sameer Dhalla, extension 5350 Emails: laurie.nelson@trca.on.ca; sameer.dhalla@trca.on.ca Date: March 25, 2019 Section III — Items for the Information of the Board RES.#A39/19 - TRCA COMMENTS TO ENVIRONMENTAL REGISTRY OF ONTARIO (ERO) 10th Year Review of Ontario's Endangered Species Act (ERO #013-4143) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's comments on the Government of Ontario's proposed amendments to the Endangered Species Act, 2007 and associated proposed implementing framework and regulations. Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Linda Jackson WHEREAS the Province of Ontario posted the proposed amendments to the Endangered Species Act for public comment on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO); AND WHEREAS the ERO imposed a March 4, 2019 deadline for submission of comments to the Province; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff report and final comments on the Ontario government's proposed amendments to the Endangered Species Act, 2007, be received; AND FURTHER THAT municipal partners and Conservation Ontario be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND On January 18, 2019, the Ontario government launched a review of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 2007, to improve protections for species at risk, consider modern and innovative approaches to achieve positive outcomes for species at risk, and to look for ways to streamline approvals and provide clarity to support economic development. The review was open for a 45 -day commenting period, which closed March 4, 2019. The discussion paper circulated for review focused on four core themes: 1. Landscape Approaches; 2. Listing Process and Protections for Species at Risk; 3. Species Recovery Policies and Habitat Regulations; and 4. Authorization Processes. RATIONALE TRCA supports its municipal partners in implementing the natural heritage policies of the Provincial Policy Statement and protects and restores wildlife habitat through its mandate under the Conservation Authorities Act. Where endangered species are affected by development, provincial staff at the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) undertake a concurrent review of planning proposals in accordance with the Act. As outlined in TRCA's submission to the Province, through research, science and expertise, TRCA has developed a number of tools and strategies that can be used to inform and support the implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Comprehensive, creative and collaborative approaches early in the planning process, including the use of such tools would facilitate better decision making, positive outcomes, greater certainty for all stakeholders, and streamlining opportunities. With TRCA's roles and experience in mind, staff submitted responses to the discussion paper questions organized under the four focus areas outlined above. Below is a summary of the key messages from staff's responses. The full submission is enclosed in Attachment 1. • A more streamlined, up -front approach to managing species at risk (SAR) on large projects would avoid delays and increase certainty, since currently feedback is deferred to detailed design or the end of a planning process, causing uncertainty and delay for large scale planning exercises. • Science being developed at TRCA on landscape connectivity, aquatic systems and road ecology could be used to inform ESA implementation. Capacity also exists at TRCA to input science into ESA -related decisions, as well as provide a feedback loop where gaps in science could be identified and filled through experience gained in the application of the ESA. TRCA's Integrated Restoration Prioritization framework is a landscape level approach to identifying ecological impairments and improving ecosystem function. While SAR are not a focus of the framework, many SAR benefit from this approach through the main restoration objectives. Other examples of landscape level approaches include TRCA's Restoration Opportunities Planning tool and TRCA's Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy. • In TRCA's experience, the delay in receiving approval for an authorization is mainly related to the ability of the limited amount of personnel who work in this area to review and respond to applicants. Different levels of authorizations could also be created where not all authorizations require ministerial approval, as the requirement for this high level of approval can cause delays. • Providing adequate frontline staff and empowering them to provide feedback throughout the planning process will aid all questions noted in the Province's Discussion Paper. Timely response and certainty would speed up all processes, which applies to identification of habitat, feedback on what works may be permitted and feedback on what Overall Benefit works would be required. • An extremely short timeline on assessing the form and success of implementation of the ESA for newly listed species would be exceedingly helpful. Deliberate documentation and sharing of information regarding the first few applications for a new species would give proponents and staff a clear understanding of what to expect through the permitting process. • Partner agencies such as conservation authorities (CAs) could be engaged to provide restoration opportunities and services to aid in the permitting process. CAs have demonstrated expertise and capacity in delivering restoration planning and implementation related to ESA. • CAs with capacity could undertake review roles for compliance with the ESA, as staff are likely already involved in the project through our roles in development planning and environmental assessment review. CAs could also assist in the development of a recovery strategy through experience, science and monitoring expertise. Relationship to Building The Living City, TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan This report supports the following strategies set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan: Strategy 8 — Gather and share the best sustainability knowledge Strategy 12 — Facilitate a region -wide approach to sustainability FINANCIAL DETAILS Staff is engaged in this policy analysis work per the normal course of duty, with funding support provided by TRCA's participating municipalities to account 120-12. No additional funding is proposed to support the policy analysis work associated with the preparation of these comments. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The enclosed comments have been submitted to the Province for consideration. Staff will continue to brief the Board on other legislative changes that result from this circulation. Report prepared by: Daniel Brent, extension 5774; Mary -Ann Burns, extension 5763 Emails: daniel.brent@trca.on.ca; mary-ann.burns@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Brad Stephens, extension 5733; Mary -Ann Burns, extension 5763 Emails: brad.stephens@trca.on.ca; mary-ann.burns@trca.on.ca Date: March 14, 2019 Attachments: 1 Attachment 1: TRCA comments to ERO #013-4143 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority March 4, 2019 BY E-MAIL ONLY (ESAreg()ontario.ca Public Input Coordinator Species Conservation Policy Branch 300 Water Street Floor 5N Peterborough, ON K9J 3C7 Re: 10th Year Review of Ontario's Endangered Species Act (ERO #013-4143) Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks' Discussion Paper on the Endangered Species Act, "Protecting and Recovering Species at Risk in Ontario," which poses questions under four areas of focus: 1. Landscape approach — species specific approach (current) vs. landscape approach 2. Listing process and protections for species at risk 3. Species recovery policies and habitat regulations 4. Authorization processes We understand the government is undertaking a review of the Act to improve protections for species at risk, consider modern and innovative approaches to achieve positive outcomes for species at risk, as well as to look for ways to streamline approvals and provide clarity to support economic development. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has an ongoing interest in protecting wildlife species and their habitat given our roles as. • A regulator under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act; • A public commenting body under the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act: • A resource management agency operating on a local watershed basis; and • One of the largest landowners in the Toronto region. In these roles, TRCA supports our provincial and municipal partners in implementing the natural heritage policies of the Provincial Policy Statement and protects and restores wildlife habitat through our mandate under the Conservation Authorities Act. Where endangered species are affected by development, provincial staff undertake a concurrent review of planning proposals in accordance with the Act. As outlined in this submission. through research, science and expertise, TRCA has developed a number a number of tools and strategies that can be used to inform and support the implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Comprehensive, creative and collaborative approaches early in the planning process, including the use of such tools. facilitates better decision making, positive outcomes, greater certainty for all stakeholders and streamlining opportunities. With TRCA's roles and experience in mind, we offer the following responses to the Discussion Paper questions. 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 IS4 Member of Conservatioo Onwio wwwArca.On.ca Public Input Coordinator Page 2 of 6 March 4. 2019 Area of Focus 1: Landscape Approaches Discussion Question: In what circumstances would a more strategic approach support a proposed activity while also ensuring or improving outcomes for species at risk? (e.g., by using a landscape approach instead of a case-by-case approach, which tends to be species and/or site-specific.) A strategic landscape approach to protecting habitat for species at risk (SAR), ensuring that populations are sustainable, and that pathways exist for population dispersion and migration, are all integral to protecting biodiversity in Ontario. Case-by-case implementation does not address these wider issues. However, in an ecosystem approach, species recovery plans and management plans are essential components to identify the required habitats for species and in turn to inform an overall landscape strategy. The introduction of a more strategic approach should not eliminate the need for the continued implementation of a case-by-case approach, given that it is necessary to protect existing populations and critical habitat areas. A more streamlined, up -front approach to managing SAR on large projects would avoid delays and increase certainty. For large scale planning exercises, such as Municipal Comprehensive Reviews, regional infrastructure master plans, provincial highway and transit corridor studies, addressing SAR as early as possible would result in better outcomes for those species and those delivering the projects. This up -front approach would also apply to watershed plans, subwatershed plans, Master Environmental Servicing Plans and Environmental Assessments associated with these large scale exercises. Early input would require clear direction from reviewers on SAR tied to earlier planning milestones. The intent here would be to "set-up" the project to satisfy ESA requirements. Currently, feedback is deferred to detailed design or the end of a planning process causing uncertainty and delay. Discussion Question: Are there existing tools or processes that support managing for species risk at a landscape scale that could be recognized under the Endangered Species Act? The protection of identified natural heritage systems that is achieved through land use planning processes can be used as a tool in support of managing for SAR at a landscape scale. Within more developed areas, the natural heritage systems contain much of the wildlife habitat and many systems identify how much habitat is required on the landscape to support biodiversity in that region. Science being developed at TRCA on landscape connectivity, aquatic systems and road ecology could be used to inform ESA implementation. Capacity exists at TRCA to input science into ESA - related decisions as well as provide a feedback loop where gaps in science could be identified and filled through experience gained in the application of the ESA. In addition, TRCA's Integrated Restoration Prioritization framework is a landscape level approach to identifying ecological impairments and improving ecosystem function. While SAR are not a focus of the framework, many SAR benefit from this approach through the main restoration objectives that address hydrological processes, natural cover, connectivity and landforms and soils. Complemented Public Input Coordinator Paae 3 of 6 March 4. 2019 by the framework, TRCA's Restoration Opportunities Planning tool is a method to inventory feasible ecological restoration projects at the watershed sub -catchment scale that include SAR considerations Another example of a landscape level approach to ecological restoration and enhancements is TRCA's Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy. This approach aims to maximize the ecological integrity of the Toronto Waterfront by identifying aquatic community potential, identifying limiting factors, evaluating opportunities and proposing actions to protect and enhance nearshore habitats, developing indices to evaluate success, and implementing projects to restore aquatic habitats across the waterfront; Aquatic SAR benefit from overall improvements to aquatic habitat. Area of Focus 2: Listina Process and Protections for Species at Risk Discussion Question: What changes would improve the notification process of a new species being listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List? (e.g., longer timelines before a species is listed.) The automatic listing provision applies only to endangered and threatened species, many of which have been special concern or vulnerable prior to their up -listing. Providing longer timelines before a species is listed is counter to the government's goal of enabling positive outcomes for SAR. A method of informing the public that a species is being considered for listing as threatened or endangered is preferable over delaying protection for a species that has been identified as requiring such protection. Discussion Question: Should there be a different approach or alternative to automatic species and habitat protections? (e.g., longer transition periods or ministerial discretion on whether to apply, remove or temporarily delay protections for a threatened or endangered species, or its habitat.) If ministerial discretion is used, it should be motivated by what the science has revealed as the level of need for protection and not by limiting encumbrance to land use planning processes. As an alternative to longer notice times or ministerial discretion, perhaps transition provisions could be established for automatic listings whereby if a planning application has reached a late stage milestone, the listing would not apply. Discussion Question: In what circumstances would a different approach to automatic species and habitat protections be appropriate? (e.g., there is significant intersection between a species or its habitat and human activities, complexity in addressing species threats, or where a species' habitat is not limiting.) A circumstance where automatic habitat protections may not be appropriate is when loss of habitat is not the reason for the threat to the species, such as declining numbers based on a disease outbreak. Discussion Question: How can the process regarding assessment and classification of a species by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario be improved? (e.g., request an additional review and assessment in cases where there is emerging science or conflicting information.) TRCA suggests that better and earlier communication by the Committee would be helpful to provide more certainty for all stakeholders. COSSARO is an independent body and should be basing all decisions on emerging science and already considering conflicting information so additional review and assessment would not be required. Public Input Coordinator Page 4 of 6 March 4, 2019 Area of Focus 3: Species Recovery Policies and Habitat Reaulations Discussion Question: In what circumstances would a species and/or Ontarians benefit from additional time for the development of the Government Response Statement? (e.g., enable extending the timeline for the Government Response Statement when needed, such as when recovery approaches for a species are complex or when additional engagement is required with businesses, Indigenous peoples, landowners and conservation groups.) As there is already flexibility built into the timeline through the development of the recovery strategy, it does not seem that additional flexibility should be required at this secondary stage. Discussion Question: In what circumstances would a longer timeline improve the merit and relevance of conducting a review of progress towards protection and recovery? (e. g., for species where additional data is likely to be made available over a longer timeframe, or where stewardship actions are likely to be completed over a longer timeframe.) Creating a longer timeline before conducting a review of progress does not seem to support the goal of enabling positive outcomes for SAR. Five years of data collection should allow researchers to assess the recovery strategy. Discussion Question: In what circumstances is the development of a habitat regulation warranted, or not warranted? (e.g., to improve certainty for businesses and others about the scope of habitat that is protected.) Habitat regulations should be created to provide clarity and certainty for everyone. It is not clear when it would not be warranted as that would lead to less clarity. Habitat regulations could be improved as they can be far too detailed in their requirements. As a result, the requirements can impede their intended function. For example, the requirement for the use of double silt fencing on Redside Dace projects can cause significant disturbance within highly sensitive habitat. The use of an alternative product often performs better in such circumstances. A similar example using Redside Dace are site level prescriptions that can be too rigid, targeting habitat requirements for one species rather than considering habitat prescriptions that benefit the entire natural system. Overall, the Province's development of recovery strategies could benefit from engaging with existing local forums such as TRCA's Regional Watershed Alliance (RWA). The RWA is a formal community- based committee that works to advance TRCA's Living City vision of sustainable communities, regional biodiversity and healthy rivers and shorelines through advocacy, knowledge sharing and collective action. For recovery strategies affecting TRCA's jurisdiction, consultation with RWA and similar forums would aid in ensuring the strategies' effective local implementation. This collaborative work would be an opportunity for integrating ESA requirements with other environmental initiatives in a given jurisdiction, achieving maximum impact. Area of Focus 4: Authorization Process Are there other approaches to authorizations that could enable applicants to take a more strategic or collaborative approach to address impacts to species at risk? (e.g., create a new authorization, such as a conservation agreement.) What changes to authorization requirements would better enable economic development while providing positive outcomes and protections for species at risk? (e.g-, simplify the requirements for a permit under s. f 7(2)d, and exemptions set out by regulation.) Public Input Coordinator Page 5 of 6 March 4, 2019 How can the needs of species at risk be met in a way that is more efficient for activities subject to other legislative or regulatory frameworks? (e.g., better enable meeting Endangered Species Act requirements in other approval processes.) Providing adequate frontline staff and empowering them to provide feedback throughout the planning process will aid all questions noted here. Timely response and certainty would speed up all processes. This applies to identification of habitat, feedback on what works may be permitted and feedback on what Overall Benefit works would be required. Perhaps these requirements could be tied to specific milestones in the environmental assessment and planning processes. A proponent should be able to proceed through such processes with certainty. Wholesale changes at detailed design can cause significant delay and poor outcomes for the protected species and natural heritage system as a whole. An extremely short timeline on assessing the form and success of implementation of the ESA for newly listed species would be exceedingly helpful. Deliberate documentation and sharing of information regarding the first few applications for a new species would give proponents and staff a clear understanding of what to expect through the permitting process. This would provide all parties more clarity on what to expect moving through the process including implementation on the ground. A critique within the first year of up -listing could aid those projects to be approved in year two and beyond. Discussion Question: What new authorization tools could help businesses achieve benefits for species at risk? (e.g., in lieu of activity -based requirements enable paying into a conservation fund dedicated to species at risk conservation, or allow conservation banking to enable addressing requirements for species at risk prior to activities.) While complicated to implement, paying into a conservation fund dedicated to SAR conservation or conservation banking (e.g., DFO's habitat bank) could provide a more strategic approach to species protection than individual activity -based requirements. Under this scenario, land acquisition to protect habitat in perpetuity, or to implement large-scale habitat restoration activities, are likely not feasible conservation options. If a fund or bank approach is not feasible, identification of Overall Benefit projects available within a given area would be helpful. The process would be quicker if a series of available projects (a catalogue) were provided to proponents. This would require efforts in advance by the Province and their partners; however, it would allow proponents to avoid having to scramble to find an appropriate project in their final push for a permit. Partner agencies such as conservation authorities (CAs) could be engaged to provide restoration opportunities and services to aid in the permitting process. CAs have demonstrated expertise and capacity in delivering restoration planning and implementation related to ESA. Discussion Question: Are there other approaches to authorizations that could enable applicants to take a more strategic or collaborative approach to address impacts to species at risk? (e.g., create a new authorization, such as a conservation agreement.) Different levels of authorizations could be created where not all authorizations require ministerial approval. The requirement for this high level of approval seems to cause time delays during the permitting process. Public Input Coordinator Page 6 of 6 March 4. 2019 Discussion Question: What changes to authorization requirements would better enable economic development while providing positive outcomes and protections for species at risk? (e.g., simplify the requirements for a permit under s. f 7(2)d, and exemptions set out by regulation.) In TRCA's experience, the delay in receiving approval for an authorization is mainly related to the ability of the limited amount of personnel who work in this area to review and respond to applicants. Therefore, in order to better enable economic development, more staff responsible for reviewing plans and providing authorizations is required. Discussion Question: How can the needs of species at risk be met in a way that is more efficient for activities subject to other legislative or regulatory frameworks? (e.g.. better enable meeting Endangered Species Act requirements in other approval processes.) The government should ensure that reviews can happen as efficiently as possible and that the fewest number of required reviewers are used. Anyone who reviews plans for compliance with the ESA must be qualified to perform this review. Conservation authorities (CAs) with capacity could undertake this role as staff are likely already involved in the project through our roles in development planning and environmental assessment review CAs could play a more prominent role in the application of the ESA through delegation by the Province, which could include habitat delineation, permit negotiation and issuance, timing window application and Overall Benefit Permit planning and implementation. CAs could also assist in the development of recovery strategy through experience, science and monitoring expertise. Thank you once again for the opportunity to provide comments on this important initiative. TRCA would be pleased to discuss these and other opportunities for enhancing certainty and efficiencies in the development and infrastructure review processes where endangered species are concerned. Should you have any questions, require clarification, or wish to meet to discuss any of the above remarks, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, John MacKe z M.Sc,(PI), MCIP, RPP Chief Executive Officer BY E-MAIL cc: TRCA: Nick Saccone, Director, Restoration and Infrastructure Chandra Sharma, Director, Community Engagement and Outreach Sameer Dhalla, Interim Director, Development and Engineering Services Laurie Nelson, Interim Director, Policy Planning Brad Stephens, Senior Manager, Planning Ecology RES.#A40/19 - REGIONAL WATERSHED ALLIANCE MINUTES Moved by: Mike Mattos Seconded by: Linda Jackson THAT the Board of Directors receives the minutes from Regional Watershed Alliance meeting #3/18, held on November 14, 2018, and meeting #1/19, held on February 13, 2019. CARRIED Meeting #3/18, held on November 14, 2018 — Minutes Link Meeting #1/19, held on February 13, 2019 — Minutes Link RES.#A41/19 2019 BOLTON ICE JAM FLOODING On March 15-16, 2019, an ice jam and subsequent flooding occurred on the Humber River between Humber Lea Road and King Street in Bolton Over 80 homes were evacuated and approximately 30 homes were negatively impacted by the flooding. This report summarizes TRCA's forecasting, warning, and response activities in relation to the event and highlights lessons learned. Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Kevin Ashe THAT the Board of Directors receives this staff report regarding the 2019 Bolton Ice Jam Flooding. CARRIED BACKGROUND In order to provide support to our municipal partners during flood events, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) operates a Flood Forecasting and Warning Program that operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The information TRCA provides plays a critical role in assisting our municipal partners in preventative decision making and maintenance works and in directing emergency response actions. Primary communication to both our partners and the public occurs through our Flood Messages, which outline the potential for flooding based on weather conditions. Detailed direct communications with municipal staff can also include site- specific information such as real-time water levels, structures and roads at risk, and expected conditions within the watershed. During the winter months, TRCA also undertakes monitoring of historical ice jam locations, and provides River Ice Outlook forecasts to our municipal partners. Ice Jams and TRCA Monitoring Ice jam flooding occurs when there is an accumulation of ice sheets or slabs that impede the flow in a watercourse. Ice jams can occur when ice cover first starts to form on a river. More commonly, they can occur during mid -winter thaws and spring rainfall events. At these times, snowmelt and rainfall raises the water level in a stream, putting pressure on the ice cover and causing it to break up. Ice pieces carried downstream with the flow can become caught at channel constrictions or bends and accumulate rapidly. Because ice jamming is a dynamic process, it is extremely difficult to predict. While warming weather patterns can point to higher likelihood of ice break-up, and while there are some areas of historical jam occurrence, the exact location of a future jam is highly unpredictable. Some locations may not experience any ice jamming at all, and other locations may experience multiple ice jams forming and then releasing over the course of a season. The sudden release of an ice jam can also result in downstream flooding as the impounded water is let loose. It is also possible for a released ice jam to re -accumulate in a different location further downstream. For these reasons, as well as due to safety concerns, ice -blasting is rarely an effective tool for managing ice jams. There are over 3,500 km of watercourse within out jurisdiction, and while an ice jam could theoretically form anywhere if the circumstances allow, there are 34 locations which have a history of ice jamming. TRCA's seasonal River Ice Monitoring program focuses on 12 high priority sites from among these. Two high priority ice monitoring locations exist upstream and downstream of the Bolton Core area where flooding occurred — specifically at Hickman Street and Glasgow Road, and further downstream between Sneath Road and Albion Vaughan Road. Throughout the season, Flood Risk Management staff issue River Ice Outlook statements to municipal partners based on field observations by Hydrometrics and River Watch staff, specifically outlining the potential for ice jams at high priority locations. In addition to River Ice Outlooks sent to municipal partners, TRCA issues an annual Spring Safety message to partners and the general public, reminding citizens of the hazards near rivers, including ice, as the weather warms. Furthermore, when winter temperatures allude to the potential for ice jams, TRCA includes specific areas of concern in flood messaging. Bolton Core Flooding The historic village of Bolton, in the Town of Caledon, is located within the valley corridor and floodplain of the Humber River. This area has a long history of flooding with 233 structures susceptible to flooding during a Regional Storm event. TRCA has a real-time stream gauge in the vicinity, at Bolton McFall Dam. There is also a Water Survey of Canada gauge located farther upstream at Palgrave. Due to the flood vulnerability of the Bolton Core community, that was largely constructed before protective policies were in place, the area was designated as a Special Policy Area (SPA). Flood protection measures were constructed in the 1980's to provide flood protection up to and including the 500 -year flood, as per the applicable special policies. As outlined in report Item 8.2 of this agenda, TRCA had already undertaken a remediation study of this infrastructure, which identified that the berm requires some capital improvements to meet its intended level of flood protection. As noted in Item 8.2, TRCA had already begun a process towards undertaking the recommended improvements to the local flood infrastructure. As of February 5th, 2019, TRCA became aware of a different ice jam location, directly upstream of King Street East and Old King Road. This location was included in all further ice monitoring visits, including aerial surveillance using drones on February 7. Photographs from the various monitoring visits illustrate that the initial jam reported on February 5 directly upstream of King Road had already begun to clear by February 21, and the field visit to the location on the morning of March 15 revealed openly flowing water directly upstream of King Street East and Old King Road. While a retrospective engineering study is necessary to confirm the exact cause of the ice jam on March 15, it appears to have been a different, subsequent jam to the one originally noted on February 5. Table 1 summarizes the various field assessments and communications to municipal partners and the public throughout the winter. Among the various communications are three flood messages that refer specifically to the initial jam at King Street at Old King Road in Bolton. Table 1: Summary of Monitoring and Communications up to March 15 Communication Type Date(s) issued Audience and purpose January 15, 23, 31; February 5, 7, 8, 15, 21, Sent to internal staff for use in daily River Ice field assessments 24, assessments and disseminating to March 7, 13 municipal staff as required Spring Safety Message March 7 Sent to public to remind of hazards near rivers during warmer weather February 1 Sent to municipal contacts to advise of river River Ice Outlook Messages ice conditions and potential for ice breakup March 8 Watershed Conditions Statement — Water Safety: Jan. 23, 24; Feb.4, 7, 22; Mar.15 Riverine Flood Messages Sent to public and municipal contacts — mentioning Ice Jam (Feb 7, Watershed Conditions primary tool for communicating flood 22, and 23 specifically Statement — Flood threats. Most of the flood messages indicate mention King Street and Old Outlook: Feb.5, 23; potential for localized ice jamming that could King in Bolton) Mar.9,13 create hazardous condifions close to any river, stream or other water bodies, etc. Flood Watch: Jan.23; Feb.4; Mar.14 Flood Warning: Feb.5 Delivered to public via multiple media Media Interviews March 11 -March 15 channels (CP24, CBC, CTV, etc.). Key messages include warming weather and higher flows creating potential for ice jams. The winter of 2019 included the accumulation of a large snowpack as well as multiple freeze - thaw cycles. Between Wednesday March 13, 2019 and Friday March 15, 2019, our jurisdiction had received approximately 20mm rain and warming temperatures reaching up to 10 degrees. These factors and the corresponding higher flows would have resulted in a higher potential for ice jams. A Flood Watch was issued on March 14, followed by a Watershed Conditions Statement — Water Safety on March 15 which remained in effect citing the potential for ice jam related flooding. As part of the ongoing ice monitoring effort, King Street East at Old King Road was visited on Friday March 15 at approximately 10 AM by River Watch staff. Photographs and field observations were provided, indicating open water conditions at the site of the previous jam. Communications as well as data logs from the upstream gauges at McFall Dam and Palgrave appear to indicate that the flooding in the Bolton Core on March 15 resulted from an ice jam situation that formed and rapidly escalated as higher flows moved through the river over the course of the afternoon and into the evening. TRCA Response Actions Where prevention is not possible, a co-ordinated mitigation effort is necessary to help safeguard lives and protect property to the extent possible. TRCA's primary capacity in a flood response situation is as a technical advisor to our partners undertaking emergency services. At approximately 7:00 PM on Friday March 15, upon receiving reports of flooding in the vicinity of King Street East at Humber Lea Road, TRCA mobilized to assist the Town of Caledon in its emergency response which it had initialized earlier that afternoon. Staff was dispatched to the site and a technical advisory was provided to the local Community Emergency Management Coordinator (CEMC); in this case the Town of Caledon Fire Chief. TRCA staff remained on site from 9:40 PM Friday March 15 through to 7:00 PM Saturday March 16, while multiple members of the Flood Forecasting and Warning program activated a remote Incident Management System structure to provide supporting analysis. At one point over 80 homes were evacuated, and many roads were flooded in knee-deep water. Key information provided by TRCA that facilitated the Town of Caledon's response included: • Maps of the 500 -year inundation zone, impacted structures, and a list of affected addresses to aid with prioritizing evacuations. The expertise of Flood Duty Officers in correlating the reports from the scene to a scenario with similar impact area was very useful. These maps were utilized by first responders from OPP and Caledon Fire and Emergency Services, and were identified as a very valuable tool. This information was provided by leveraging the data and process developed for the Flood Risk Assessment and Ranking process. • On-site technical advice and expertise to the Town of Caledon emergency contractor and Caledon Fire and Emergency Services on approaches to address the ice jam and flooding, taking into account dynamic conditions and the presence of the berm. TRCA Flood Infrastructure staff played a key role in ensuring an effective ice removal strategy. • Situation reports shared with the Community Emergency Management Coordinator, and the TRCA Senior Leadership Team, about the work being done at the site and remotely, as well as updates on upstream watershed conditions. • Key messages regarding the dynamic and unpredictable nature of ice -jam flooding utilized in communications with the media and public. After some attempts to undertake mechanical removal of the ice jam, drone footage taken on the morning of March 16 helped identify the critical pinch point in the jam as being directly behind 181 King Street. With the technical guidance provided by TRCA Flood Infrastructure staff, the Town of Caledon utilized excavators to manually remove the ice from within the channel. As water had been flowing over the top of the Bolton berm, concerns were raised regarding potential erosion of flood infrastructure. TRCA Geotechnical staff visited the site on March 16 to assess the status of the berm. While there was some indication of mild settlement, the berm was deemed stable thanks to the fact that the ground was still frozen at the time of the flood. Further monitoring for changes was recommended, as well as suggestions for erosion protection, which would be taken into account as part of the comprehensive restoration of the berm. Lessons Learned and Next Steps TRCA staff convened on March 18 to initiate the post -event analysis and continue the collection of high water marks. TRCA has also initiated the process to engage a consultant to conduct a retrospective engineering study of the jam causes. Pertinent information from this study will be taken into account for the detailed design of the preferred berm remediation option. A notable lesson learned this season was in the use of drones in surveying ice conditions both pro -actively (in February), and during the Bolton Jam event itself. Planned improvements to the River Ice Monitoring program include the use of various aerial surveillance methods, including drone, helicopter, and potentially satellite imagery in order to increase monitoring coverage area. As per the advice of geotechnical staff, the berm should continue to be monitored for any evidence of settling, and any repairs required will be completed as part of the planned rehabilitation of the berm. Together with the Town of Caledon, workflows developed during this emergency can be codified for future incident response plans. Relationship to Building the Living City, the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan This report supports the following strategy set forth in the TRCA 2013-2022 Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 — Manage our regional water resources for current and future generations FINANCIAL DETAILS Flood Forecasting and Warning efforts fall within TRCA's operating budget under account 115- 60, and improvements to Flood Risk Management programs are considered within account 115- 62. Please refer to item 8.2 for financial details regarding the berm restoration. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Please refer to item 8.2 for details of work to be undertaken as part of the berm restoration. Report prepared by: Rehana Rajabali, extension 5220 Emails: rrajabali@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rehana Rajabali, extension 5220 Emails: rrajabali@trca.on.ca Date: March 25, 2019 MATERIAL FROM EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING #2/19, HELD ON MARCH 1, 2019 Section I — Items for Board of Directors Action RES.#A42/19 - BOLTON CAMP REDEVELOPMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICING PROJECT Award of Contract 2018-096T for the installation of new water and wastewater services at Bolton Camp, Town of Caledon, in the Regional Municipality of Peel. (Executive Committee RES.#818/19) Moved by: Gino Rosati Seconded by: Gordon Highet THAT Contract 2018-096T be awarded to Earth Boring Co. Limited for the supply of all labour, equipment and materials necessary to install new water and wastewater services to Bolton Camp, in the Town of Caledon, at a total cost not to exceed $3,847,082, plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that 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 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. CARRIED Section IV — Ontario Regulation 166/06, as Amended RES.#A43/19 - EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE SECTION IV ITEMS (Executive Committee RES.#821/19) Moved by: Gino Rosati Seconded by: Gordon Highet THAT the Board of Directors receives Section IV item 11.1, Applications for Permits Pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as Amended, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #2/19, held on March 1, 2019. CARRIED RESMA44/19 - CLOSED SESSION Moved by: Gordon Highet Seconded by: Linda Jackson THAT the Board of Directors moves into closed session at 10:00 a.m., pursuant to Section C. 4. of the TRCA Board of Directors Administrative By-law, as the subject matter being considered consists of: C.4.(I) a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of TRCA, (being to discuss TRCA's position on the negotiation of the sale of TRCA-owned lands); and C.4.(e) litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals (e.g., Local Planning Appeal Tribunal), affecting TRCA, (being to discuss potential litigation pertaining to agenda items 6.1., 8.2., and 9.3.) CARRIED RESMA45/19 - Moved by: Seconded by: RECONVENE Jennifer Innis Linda Jackson THAT the Board of Directors reconvenes the open session at 10:50 a.m.; THAT the Board of Directors receives the confidential information provided by staff in closed session pertaining to agenda items 6.1., 8.2., and 9.3; AND FURTHER THAT the Board of Directors approves the confidential direction provided to staff in closed session pertaining to item 11. CARRIED ADJOURNMENT ON MOTION from Paul Ainslie, the meeting was adjourned at 10:58 a.m., on Friday, March 29, 2019. Jennifer Innis Chair /af John MacKenzie Secretary -Treasurer