The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWaterfront Advisory Board 1983 ~ ~ H-1 , the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD 11-APRIL-1983 H/83 The Waterfront Advisory Board met at the Authority Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on Monday, 11 April, 1983, commencing at 9:30 a.m. PRESENT Chairman Edward Fulton Vice-Chairman W.G. McLean Members W.G. Barber L.A. Braithwaite, Q.C. M.J. Breen Mrs. F. Cruickshank o G. Fleet M.D. Lipton, Q.C. S.A Macpherson G.F.R. Norton Alex Robertson John Sewell G.B. Sinclair M.M. Smith, Q.C. Authority Chairman Mrs. F.E. Gell Authority Vice-Chairman E. V. Kolb MINUTES Res U Moved by: W.G. Barber Seconded by: M.D. Lipton THAT the Minutes of Meeting i2/82 be approved. CARRIED. PROGRESS REPORT AND OVERVlEW OF 1983 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME A slide presentation was made depicting the following: Humber Bay West progress of work by the boating clubs; .new launching ramps built in 1982; Colonel Samuel Smith Park access road under construction Bluffers Park:. .work completed by the boating clubs; Authority construction of access road to the eastern headland; .Shoreline management work at Kingsbury and Harding Avenues, and other sites. .Aquatic Park: preparation of a master plan will be undertaken in the near future. 1983 BUDGET CONSTRAINT IMPLICATIONS The Administrator, Water Resource Division, outlined constraints imposed by the Ministry of Natural Resources, and noted that it was hoped that some cash flow may be reinstated. Res. t2 Moved by: M.D. Lipton Seconded by: M.M. Smith THAT the report on the 1983 Budget Constraint Implications be received. CARRI ED . . R-2 -2- AUTHORITY CAPITAL FUNDING -Report from The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Council Res. lJ3 Moved by A. Robertson Seconded by: Mrs. F. Cruickshank THAT extract from Clause No.1 contained in Report No 7 of the Metropolitan Executive Committee, adopted by Council of The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto at its meeting held March 15, 1983, be received; AND FURTHER THAT the Waterfront Advisory Board affirms the pOlicies, goals, and objectives of the Waterfront Development Program and Shoreline Management Program as stated in the Authority's Watershed Plan, adopted by T~e Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority by Resolution ~a9 of ~ee=ing ~6/80, held December 5, 1980, and recommends that these policies, goals, and objectives form the basis of any review of the Authority's waterfront programmes CARRIED LAKEFRONT OWNERS ASSOCIATION -Correspondence re Ontario Regulation 170 and a new duplex at #387 Lake Promenade Mrs. Flora Voisey spoke in support of correspondence forwarded to the Authority, and expressed appreciation to the Authority Chairman, the Waterfront" Advisory Board, and staff, for their consideration of the above matter Res. i4 Moved by Mrs F Cruickshank Seconded by: G.F R. Norton THAT the letter dated February 21, 1983, received from the Lakefront Owners Association, together with the staff communication, be received; THAT staff be directed to formulate a response to the Lakefront Owners Association's letter relating the essence of the major points addressed in the staff communication; THAT the sub-committee examining possible revisions to the Conservation Authorities Act be requested to consider the feasibility of including 'right of notice' provisions for adjacent landowners and corresponding avenues of appeal for applications under the Fill, Construction, and Alteration to Waterways Regulation; AND FURTHER THAT the Borough of Etobicoke be so advised. CARRIED. WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 1982-1986 Res *5 Moved by W.G. McLean Seconded by A. Robertson THAT the staff report on the status of the Lake Ontario Waterfront Development Project 1982-1986, and the Shoreline Management Project 1984-1986, be received; AND THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT (a) The Ministry of Natural Resources be requested to give early approval to an extension of the Waterfront Development Project for 1984, involving a provincial cash flow allocation of $1,100,000.00; (b) The Ontario Municipal Board be requested to approve the Project, pursuant to Section 24 of the Conservation Authorities Act; (c) When approved, the appropriate Authority officials be authorized to tak& whatever action is required in connection with the project, including the execution of any documents. - CARRIED SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROJECT 1984-1986 Res. #6 Moved by W.G Barber Seconded by S.A. Macpherson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT the Shoreline Management Project 1984-1986, as appended as Schedule nA" of these Minutes, be adopted; - -3- H-3 AND FURTHER THAT the following action be taken in connection therewith (a) The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be designated as the benefiting municipality on the basis set forth in the project; (b) The Government of the Province of Ontario be requested to approve the project and a grant of 55% of the cost; (c) The Ontario Municipal Board be requested to approve the project pursuant to Section 23 of the Conservation Authorities Act; (d) When approved, the appropriate Authority officials be authorized to take whatever action is required in connection with the project, including the execution of any necessary documents CARRIED BELLLAMY ROAD RAVINE EROSION CONTROL PROJECT Res jp Moved by J Sewell Seconded by M D Lipton THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT the Bellamy Road Ravine Erosion Control Project, as appended as Schedule IIB" of these Minutes, be adopted; AND FURTHER THAT the following action be taken in connection therewith (a) The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be designated as the benefiting municipali ty on the basis set forth in the project; (b) The Government of the Province of Ontario be requested to approve the project and a grant of 55% of the cost; (c) The Ontario Municipal Board be requested to approve the project pursuant to Section 23 of the Conservation Authorities Act; (d) When approved, the appropriate Authority officials be authorized to take whatever action is required in connection with the project, including the execution of any necessary documents; (e) Subject to the receipt of provincial and municipal approvals, the staff be directed to prepare development agreements with the agencies involved regarding the details of additional design studies, property acquisition, tendering, construction supervision, financial and other arrangements; ( f) No work proceed until the owners of property south of the tunnel intake shaft have agreed to deed the land below the top of slope to the Authority; . AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Waterfront Advisory Board during 1983 if difficulties are encountered in negotiations with property owners in connection with the Bellamy Road Ravine Erosion Control Project; (g) The Borough of Scarborough be requested to enact ravine protection legislation CARRIED AQUATIC PARK PLANNING TASK FORCE -Draft Terms of Reference Motion Moved by J Sewell - Seconded by D G Fleet THAT the membership of the Aquatic Park Planning Task Force include a representative of "Friends of the Spit" THE MOTION WAS ---------------------------------------------------- NOT CARRIED H-4 -4- Res. #8 Moved by G B Sinclair Seconded by M J Breen THAT the Terms of Reference for the Aquatic Park Planning Task Force, as appended as Schedule "e" of these Minutes, be received and forwarded to the Task Force for review; AND THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT the Terms of Reference for the Aquatic Park Planning Task be approved, subject to the comments of the Task Force CARRIED KEATING CHANNEL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UPDATE Res #9 Moved by Mrs. F Cruickshank Seconded by S A Macpherson THAT the staff report on the Keating Channel Environmental Assessment be received CARRIED AQUATIC PARK LANDFILLING Res. #10 Moved by J Sewell Seconded by M M Smith THAT the staff report on Aquatic Park Landfilling be received CARRIED NEW BUSINESS The Chairman announced that all future meetings of the Board will commence at 9 30 a m Mr Fleet expressed his appreciation of staff reports taking the form of slide presentations TERMINATION On motion, the meeting terminated at 12 25 P m , Apr il 11 Edward Fulton W A. McLean, Deputy General Manager Chairman Acting Secretary-Treasurer KC H-5 SCHEDULE "A" SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROJECT 1984 - 1986 APRIL 1, 1983 H-6 CONTENTS OF BRIEF PAGE PURPOSE 1 BACKGROUND AND POLICIES 2 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 3 1984 - 1986 PROGRAM 6 COSTS AND FINANCING 8 APPROVALS 9 H-7 - 1 - PROJECT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT 1984 - 1986 PURPOSE The purpose of this Project is to permit The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to exercise the powers afforded by The Conservation Authorities Act, R S 0 1970, Chapter 78, as amended, to establish and undertake, in the area over which it has jurisdiction, a program designed to further the conservation, restoration, development and management of the natural resources of the waterfront in accordance with the Shoreline Management Program of the Watershed Plan The Project covers the three-year period 1984 - 1986 The goal of the Authority through this Project is to "undertake a comprehensive program of shoreline management designed to prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk of hazard to life and property, while cognizant of the natural attributes of the lakefront setting " H-8 - 2 - BACKGROUND The Authority has been responsible for the implementation of the Waterfront Plan for the Metropolitan Toronto region since 1970 Shoreline management measures were a component of that responsibility and were addressed in the two Five Year Projects, 1972-1976 and 1977-1981 Shoreline management works were undertaken in each municipality along the waterfront involving total expenditures of approximately $2,200,000 An additional $900,000 has been spent under the 1982-1983 Shoreline Management Project The importance of shoreline management measures has steadily increased as residential areas in particular are becoming increasingly threatened by shoreline erosion. The Authority decided in 1980 to prepare a separate program for Shoreline Management within the Watershed Plan in an effort to raise the level of awareness of the problem and secure stronger support for solutions The shoreline management measures employed to date can be classified into two components prevention and protection Efforts have been made to ensure that new developments are cognizant of the hazards of shoreline erosion and flooding Adequate setbacks and/or suitable shoreline protection have been employed to provide for maximum feasible protectio~ of new developments The protection of lives and property in previously developed areas has been pursued by a combination of protection and/or acquisition. Shoreline protective works have been installed in some instances to reduce erosion rates and increase the useful life of structures In other instances it has proven to be most economical to acquire endangered properties and allow natural erosion processes to proceed It may also be necessary to acquire properties since the erosion problem is ~o severe to be solved through protective works POLICIES The policies and operational criteria of the Authority governing shoreline works are enunicated in detail in the Shoreline Management Program of the Watershed Plan H-9 - ~ - LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The following is a sector by sector analysis of the proposed shoreline management measures to be implemented by the Authority The sector locations are shown on Fig 1 It should be noted that the areas detailed below are to be considered as a pool of priority sites which the Authority maintains and reviews on an annual basis Erosion is very dynamic in nature and as such, the Authority must be able to react as site conditions change It is for this reason that all waterfront sectors are included in the project At this point in time the most hazardous sites are located in the Scarborough sector and as such a more detailed list is provided. The elements of the Authority's Shoreline Management Program related to prevention of development in hazardous locations are common to a 11 sectors and are not ~eiterated here Borough of Etobicoke The extent of residential development combined with the physical characteristics of the shoreline have resulted in extensive successful efforts by individual property owners to protect the shoreline on a lot by lot basis Few serious erosion or flooding hazards exist in the Borough and the Authority's role has, therefore, primarily centred on protection of publicly owned land such as small parks This role is expected to continue, although specific sites have not been identified at this time Privately owned lands are also eligible for shoreline protection by the Authority provided that the operational criteria established in the Shoreline Management Program can be met This Project also includes shoreline maintenance of structures constructed as part of the Lake Ontario Waterfront Development Program. City of Toronto It is proposed that shoreline management works be undertaken at Gibraltar Point on Toronto Island. The proposed works are expected to include a shoreline revetment, groynes and beach nourishment Borough of Scarborough The most serious hazards resulting from shoreline erosion in the Authority's area of jurisdiction are located in the Borough of Scarborough Numerous locations have been identified where serious hazards either already exist or are developing As indicated earlier, the following is the list of sites requiring early attention In all cases under existing conditions these sites are more critical than any in the other sectors This however cou ld change with water levels and number and severity of storms H-lO - 4 - Lakehurst Crescent Fallingbrook Drive South Marine Drive Guildwood Parkway Crescentwood Road Kingsbury Crescent Springbank Avenue Wynnview Court Fishleigh Drive Pickering/Ajax Shoreline hazards in this sector have been minimized by the Authority through acquisition of substantial sections of the shoreline prior to development Erosion of these valuable public areas is proceeding and may require measures from time to time to reduce the rate of loss There are no specific sites identified for work at present although numerous sites are proposed for monitoring to determine erosion rates Implementation Criteria The following criteria will be followed by the Authority in the design and construction of erosion control works (a) The major emphasis in the undertaking of protective works will be to control erosion due to wave action. The required works will be designed in consideration of maximum expected lake levels as well as peak storm conditions; (b) Consideration will be given to bank stabilization techniques to be combined with toe protection in areas where additional protection is required to retain slopes at steeper than natural angles; (c) Shore protection will be carried out on a design block basis Design blocks are shoreline segments with physical characteristics which permit the segment to be protected as a unit The characteristics to be considered include shoreline configuration, construction access, bank condition, talus formations and wave energy climate, among others (d) Shoreline protection will be installed on a technical priority basis related to the safety of property and structures within the limitations of funding, approvals, construction access and property acquisition priorities shall be based on technical criteria including, but not necessarily limited, to the following - distance from top of bank to structure - rate of slope retreat - extent of groundwater seepage , r... " {, .......u lAY WfST . .. M .... . . . ~ \_-ETOB \COll-E \ _~ 3D.. \ \ ( ...... 1 1 :._ -.. t I ; . E-rJlj . _ . . i _ l J .1: . 'OJ ; ~ I ,! --. ~ ~... \ ' - ) J' - 7 ... - r~ <}. \ ~ . .' I... I ; ... wi ..._ .J..1..... ,! .... . i '-- _, t l. 1. ~ _ -M -... .. '" I. ~ .... ~ _ I . 1 J : ~I I '-. ~ I r /1-t1lfp1{.1'J.\~!h~l_- - fc ) ~ "' I ! Jsi : J . . , Iff ,1 "~I_'1-.~lJ ~El< d : . .-rt1J1" 'l,];F.?J..---'" '-... · ", . . I '1f'!/!Il~J - ') b .. ~ u : t"=: I { f .?ft.) ,,':J"!J ~ "-. ......... I .-.......: .. M T ~:-- ~ It--- - ~"'r:,:? ------, .. M . w: .. M ~""""",: _ _ -.2 CUllA-....... ~ : ......- ~! u .. lAST "'*" ~ 42" . 1~ I .. M : PIC'" 1fIIk..'7- " .......,... : " e R : ~~ '" w : lNG/AJAX SECTOR------7 : . ... ,.O~: : : SEC; : :~ SCARBOROUGt'I : : SHOREL INE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM - SECTOR LOCATION FIG. I :c I I-' I-' H-12 - 5 - - height and steepness of slope - soil composition - vegetative cover, type and extent - evidence of previous movement - condition of toe of slope; (e) priorities for protection will be reviewed and approved by the Authority on an annual basis; (f) Existing waterfront public lands provide valuable recreational opportunities and, in many cases, serve as buffer zones between the shoreline and private lands Therefore, the balance between funding allocated for protection of public and private lands is an important relationship which should be approved annually by the Authority; (g) In cases where private property is involved, the Authority shall require title to the land for a nominal sum or an easement where applicable, and in addition may require a suitable financial contribution from the benefiting owner(s); (h) The Authority will assist in developing technology and distributing information which will aid property owners in limiting the erosion of the bank after the toe protection is installed - 6 - H-13 1984 - 1986 PROGRAM As indicated, the selection of sites for remedial work is done on a priority rating basis The continual monitoring of the sites contained in the pool of sites, particularly in the Scarborough Sector, enables the Authority to carry out remedial works where the greatest need has been demonstrated Based on the information to date, the proposed three year program will concentrate on the South Marine Drive area in Scarborough along with the completion of works at Lakehurst Crescent in 1984 It is anticipated that the time to complete the works at South Marine Drive will exceed the duration of this Project As a result, extensions to this Project will be required to continue at South Marine Drive and to deal with the other sites on the priority list A major component of the Authority's approach to shoreline management, as indicated, is acquisition. This allows the Authority the ability to acquire properties which are in hazardous situations as a result of shore and bluff erosion and where remedial measures cannot be justified, from an economic basis Any property acquisition will be done in accordance with the Authority's Land Acquisition Program. Funding for waterfront hazard lands, however, will be raised as part of this Project In order for the Authority to carry out remedial works, appropriate engineering and soils studies are a necessity Environmental concerns must also be addressed as part of any design and construction program. Funding is therefore required to carry out preliminary engineering designs, environmental inventories, geotechnical studies and slope monitoring studies Minor remedial works have also proven to be very effecti ve in reducing bluff or toe erosion Through this component of the program the Authority can provide a "stitch in time" approach to many areas with the result that expensive remedial works may not be required in the future Such approaches as vegetation establishment, bluff drainage or beach nourishment have proven to be very successful and it is intended to continue to use this approach Funding for the three aspects of shoreline management is proposed on an annual basis as follows Major Remedial Works $ 575,000 Minor Remedial Works $ 15,000 Surveys and Studies $ 20,000 Acquisition $ 120,000 $ 730,000 The selection of sites for the annual work program will be finalized as part of the annual budget preparation However, as indicated, work will be concentrated at Lakehurst Crescent and South Marine Drive over the next three years Details of these two sites following below and are illustrated by photos 1 and 2 H-14 - 7 - Lakehurst Crescent The shoreline protection works at this site will be finalized as part of the 1984 work prog ram. This work when completed will have provided protection to eight homes The protection will consist of bluff toe protection only Phase II of the works estimated at $200,000 00 will complete this site Bluff Height - 55m. Length of Shoreline - 400m. Potential Loss - 8 homes or $1,200,000 Total Cost - $450,000 Projected 1984 Cost - $200,000 South Marine Drive The first phase of protection works for this section is proposed for 1983 Again this section of shoreline is located in the Scarborough Bluff area Protective works are required to prevent the loss of 28 houses, a townhouse complex, and an apartment tower Very high rates of erosion are being experienced in this area with land being lost at 1 4 to 28m/year The value to be placed on the affected properties is very difficult to assess The relatively low cost of protective measures and the high degree of hazard more than justify remedial works The 1984 program will protect 200 m of shoreline at an estimated cost of $375,000 00 The total estimated cost is $4 4 million Problem - Bluff erosion due to wave action Height of Bluff - 50m. Length of Shoreline - 1050m. - 200m. proposed for protection in 1983 Erosion Rate - 1 4 - 2 8 m/yr Effects - Potential loss of 28 private homes, a townhouse complex and an apartment tower Cost - $375,000 00 for Phase I in 1984 As indicated earlier, work will not be completed at this site by the end of the Project A subsequent Project will be developed however, prior to the end of 1986 to continue with the Authority's Shoreline Management Program. - 8 - H-l5 COSTS AND FINANCING Costs Implementation of the Shoreline Management Project 1984 - 1986 is estimated to require expenditures of $730,000 in each year for a total estimated cost of $2,190,000 The costs of the Project include legal and survey fees, land acquisition, engineering and geotechnical studies, site supervision and all materials, labour, equipment etc associated with the construction Financing It is proposed that the funds required for this Project be raised on the basis of 55% grant from the Province of Ontario and 45% from The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto as benefiting municipality Annual funding requirements are therefore as follows Province of Ontario $ 401,500 Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto $ 328,500 TOTAL $ 730,000 Total Funding for 1984 - 1986 Province of Ontario $1,204,500 Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto $ 985,500 TOTAL $2,190,000 H-16 SCHEDULE liB" THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY BELLAMY ROAD RAVINE EROSION CONTROL PROJECT '" APRIL, 1983 8-17 CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND 2 Design Objectives 2 Alternative Solutions 3 Recommended Solution 3 PROJECT TIMING 4 COST ESTIMATES 5 , H-l8 - 1 - BELLAMY' ROAD RAVINE EROSION CONTROL PROJECT INTRODUCTION This Project was developed by the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to propose erosion control measures in Bellamy Road Ravine in the Borough of Scarborough The Project summarizes the nature of the problems, highlights the possible solutions, presents a construction program and suggests a shared funding arrangement Bellamy Road Ravine is a steep valley cut into the land between Kingston Road and the Lake Ontario shoreline approximately mid-way between McCowan Road and Markham Road It has an overall length of approximately 1,050 m along which the bottom elevation drops about 96 m (Fig 1) Thirty-five homes are located around the perimeter of the ravine on lots which extend into the ravine in most cases As a result, most of the lands affected by erosion are privately owned with the exception of a road allowance which extends from Ravine Drive through the bottom of the ravine to the lake The ravine was probably originally formed by a watercourse creating a small gully when it flowed over the edge of the bluff to the lake As erosion continued in the soft material of the bluff the gully grew deeper and wider Erosion of the side walls of the ravine was accelerated by groundwater emergence at several points. Over many centuries the side slopes of the ravine reached angles that would allow vegetation to be more or less permanently established and the ravine may have been entirely vegetated prior to the time when the surrounding land was first cleared for agricultural purposes As the watershed of the stream was developed for agricultural and eventually residential uses the frequency of flows and the volume of water carried by the stream increased substantially The bottom of the ravine eroded downwards causing instability in the side slopes and leading to gradual loss of vegetation and eventually loss of table land around the ravine (see photos) The invert of the ravine continues to deepen at this time and most of the vegetation has been lost from the slopes in the lower part of the ravine Table land is being lost at an alarming rate in the southern parts of the ravine and similar losses will become evident in the central and northerly portions if the instability in the lower slopes is allowed to affect the upper slopes H-19 PROJECT FOR EROSION CONTROL ON THE BELLAMY RD. RAVINE LAKE ONTARIO .,. FIG. I H-20 BELLAMY ROAD RAVINE LOOKING NORTH FROM LAKE ONTARIO TOWARDS KINGSTON ROAD I BELLAMY ROAD RAVINE LOOKING SOUTH TOWARDS LAKE ONTARIO ~ I N . ~ ~ IV ~~'r IV , - 'e;.. . .... . .'Lr.AJ,y RoAo RAVINE tooKI'G SOUTO ""WAllOS LAK. O'TAOIQ H-23 - 2 - BACKGROUND Concern about the erosion in Bellamy Road Ravine is not recently developed The same problem was considered in discussions among the Township of Scarborough, the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the Authority in 1964 As a result, the Township of Scarborough constructed a rock filled, timber crib drop structure to stop further retreat of the ravine towards Kingston Road It was decided not to involve the Authority in any erosion control works at that time The designation of the Authority as the implementing agency for the Waterfront Plan in 1970 resulted in renewed interest in Bellamy Ravine It was identified as a significant potential pedestrian access link from the residential areas at the top of the bluffs to the lakeshore Various Authority programs prepared since that time have referred to the importance of the area but as the erosion continued the potential for a pathway connection, prior to implementation of major erosion control works, disappeared The 1982-1983 Shoreline Management Project identified that the Authority could be involved in the erosion control works in the ravine in cooperation with the efforts of the Borough of Scarborough to control the storm water The concern of the Borough of Scarborough for the steady deterioration of the ravine resulted in several actions The drop structure was replaced in 1981 to ensure that the upper end of the ravine was not undermined In addition, an engineering study was commissioned in 1979 to investigate the erosion problems and recommend remedial measures This study by Acres Consulting Services Limited examined several alternative means bf stabilizing the ravine These alternatives are outlined later in this project Design Objectives There are several design objectives which should be used in the development and evaluation of alternative remedial measures The objectives are summarized as follows (1) eliminate future down cutting of the ravine i e stop the gradual deepening of the invert of the valley; ( 2) stabilize the side slopes of the ravine; (3) protect and enhance remaining vegetative cover and re-establish vegetation in areas where slope angles can be flattened sufficiently to allow vegetation to be effective; (4) continue to protect the upper end of the ravine where previous works have prevented rapid erosion towards Kingston Road; H-24 - 3 - (5 } improve wildlife habitat; and (6) establish a hiking trail through the ravine in the long term Alternative Solutions The study by Acres Consulting Services Limited in 1979 examined a wide range of approaches to control the stormwater including the following (1) tunnel scheme - a tunnel could be used to intercept stormwater at the location of the existing drop structure and divert it around the perimeter of the lower portion of the ravine and discharge it into Lake Ontario Filling of the lower portion of the ravine and slope stabilization measures could be undertaken after the water was diverted around the ravine; (2) culvert scheme - a corrugated steel pipe sewer could be installed in the base of the ravine to conduct stormwater from the existing drop structure to Lake Ontario The sewer would require a number of drop structures to negotiate the steep gradient in the ravine without exceeding suitable flow velocities in the pipes Pipe construction would be followed by filling in the lower portion of the ravine and bank stabilization measures; and (3) gab ion lined channel - fill material could be placed in the bottom of the ravine up to a level above which stable slopes could be built A channel lined with gab ion baskets could then be built in the upper part of the fill to carry the stormwater flows to Lake Ontario As in the other schemes the fill materials to be placed would have an approximate depth of 15 metres Recommended Solution The Borough of Scarborough considered the alternatives available on the basis of the design objectives as well as the construction feasibility and long term maintenance implications Serious concerns were identified with regard to the feasibility and safety of constructing either the culvert scheme or the gabion channel scheme within the ravine while contending with the instability of the valley slopes and the stormwater discharge flows which would be present on occasion throughout the construction period In addition, the Borough felt that maintenance costs associated with either the culvert or the channel scheme would be considerably higher than for the tunnel scheme On the basis of these considerations it was concluded that the tunnel alternative combined with filling and bank stabilization measures was the best solution Figures 2 & 3 H-25 K SECTION -REMED ?/ IAL WORKS TUNNEl. I NTAKE SHAFT LEGEND: ......... ~~D:T~~L CR~ST E m. ViN~!RT l~ltO R~ZONT1.'i.V. ... POTENTIA BOTTO'" ROM 0. _._ AS8UMINOL 3 CREST !L!V ~ I VERTIC.10RIZONTAL' _ _ VIN! aoTTO'" FRO" 0. - _ ROAO ALLOWANCE MAIN TUNNEL ~ ~ II I \ ::J <..., DISCHARGE TUNNEL Q:. m.tropol ".nIQfonloend Orl1.AR 10 ~:~~~~~:~Avn4E ~'f. €. FIG.2 " SEPT. 1982 NEL ALIGNMEN ~T 7 ! I p:: I N CTl 110 110 LEGEND rn W[,t.OOWCL..fff Till 160 160 G HtORNCLIHf fORMATION uPPER ~ ;,"" . ;!S[:~!: ': '~ ., ,',' - ~ ~ \" ~ ' .. I: '~:.l ;,..... ~Y~;~]'d'~~ ~. ;,Mo' .. SEMINARY TIll 150 150 CD (/) Tu TU (/) THOANCl/.Fff FORMATION lOWEA W W II: -;:-;-r-- ~~~ -t- .. 7";":;'-,.. ~ 7 .....,..........----,,~ II: t- t- I~ :'~..:.I w w : .CD..:. SUHNYflROOI( TILL ~ 140 ~"~~~~4t-.-~.~~ ,~-......~~~-...c..-~~ 140 ~ Z 11:= GRANULAR- z W - 'l"L - SCUIBOAOOGH FORMUION SAND Z DRAIN' ' Z 0 0 G t= 130 ~~;;;-:-: .. " ;. ~..~-:-r-::-:- . Tr7"o-:-rro ~ ~~ .....,;..:---a:-~ 130 i= SCARBOROUGH FORMATION CLAY ~ <l fii '~h > w w D ...J ...J RANDO" Fill W . . . . . . . w 120 ~~~~.~..~:~~:~~..:...::..r~~~ ~~~~'~..L-&..o-.f~...............~.=-;--r.. 120 . 55' " ~ 110 S5 . 110 . , ! " : .' 100 . . , . 100 SLOPE REMEDIAL WORKS LOWER SECTION OF RAVINE SCALE I 500 TO i NEXT t ROAD _~ M~ 11O~: ~ ~b ;A;;;;L~R ~~ - I RANDOM FILL I ---1~- ---------- -- ---- LINED I DITCH ~ --- RlPRAP PROTECTION PLAN THE CORPORATION OF THE BOROUGH OF SCARBOROUGH 1~~lm I FIG. 3 5TUD~ Of EROSION CONTROL BElLAMY RAVINE SCALE I 500 H-27 - 4 - PROJECT TIMING There are clearly two components to this Project The first component deals with collecting and diverting storm runoff around the ravine while the second deals with reducing erosion in the ravine to save or prolong the lives of existing dwellings The first component of the work can be done immediately but the second component involves works to be done over a longer period This distinction in the type of work involved and the uncertainty associated with the estimated cost and timing of the future ravine stabilization works, necessitates that funding for the Project be developed in two phases Phase I would involve the construction of the sewer and dropshaft along with erosion control works from Kingston Road to the proposed inlet structure and along a tributary ravine that is eroding the easterly slope through Sylvan Park There would also be some re-vegetation to attempt to stabilize appropriate areas of the main ravine Since the ultimate solution to the overall erosion problem is as yet unclear Phase I would provide funding for additional geotechnical studies, environmental inventories and assessment, preliminary engineering and public participation The results of these additional studies will enable the Authority to develop Phase II of the remedial works and to prepare and process a separate Project for funding of the further remedial measures It is proposed that funding for Phase I of the Project be raised on the basis of a 55% grant from the Province of Ontario on a special project basis, and 45% from the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto as benefiting municipality Funding for Phase II would be proposed on the same basis Phase I Stage 1 - involving the construction of the intake shaft, main tunnel, main dropshaft, discharge tunnel and outfall works at Lake Ontario Stage 2 - involving the upper section remedial works and such further erosion control works as are determined to be necessary including the Sylvan Park tributary ravine Appropriate engineering and environmental studies to determine type, cost and timing of Phase II FUNDING Province Metro Total Stage 1 1,450,000 797,000 653,000 Year 1 $1,450,000 $ 797,000 $ 653,000 Year 2 $3,170,000 $1,744,000 $1,426,000 Stage 2 Year 1 $ 100,000 $ 55,000 $ 45,000 Year 2 $ 300,000 $ 165,000 $ 135,000 g~~2~2~222 g~~~H~22~ g~~~~2~222 H-28 - 5 - COST ESTIMATES All cost estimates presented here are derived from estimates prepared by Acres Consulting Services Limited in the December 1979 report entitled Study of Erosion Control, Bellamy Ravine, Scarborough, Addendum 1 The estimates for tunnel components of the work are as provided by the Borough of Scarborough Works Department in March 1983 and are in 1983 dollars Main Dropshaft, Discharge Tunnel, Outfall works at Lake Ontario $1,450,000 Intake Shaft, main tunnel $3,170,000 Total for all underground works $4,620,000 The costs of the erosion control works are derived from the Acres cost estimates with 10% per year added for inflation Upper Section Remedial Works and Slope Restora- $400,000 00 tion $400,000 TOTAL COST $5,020,000 ---------- ---------- Implementation of the first phase of the Bellamy Road Ravine Erosion Control Project 1984-1985 is est~ated to cost $5,020,000 00 as detailed above The costs of the project include legal and survey fees, land acquisition, engineering and geotechnical studies, site supervision and all labour, materials, equipment, etc associated with the construction FINANCING It is proposed the funds required for this project be raised on the basis of a 55% grant from the Province of Ontario and 45% from the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto as benefiting municipality Total funding requirements for phase I are as follows Province of Ontario $2,761,000 Municipality of 2,259,000 Metropolitan Toronto $5,020,000 H-29 SCHEDULE "e" THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE AQUATIC PARK PLANNING TASK FORCE MARCH, 1983 H-30 DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE AQUATIC PARK PLANNING TASK FORCE PURPOSE To provide technical input and to assist the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) in the preparation of a master plan for the Aquatic Park Waterfront Area taking into account engineering, environmental, social and economic factors BACKGROUND Aquatic Park is a man created spit of land. The Toronto Harbour CO!Tllllissioners initiated work in the late 1950s with the ultimate intent of creating a breakwater for a new outer harbour In 1979 the Harbour Commissioners embarked on the creation of an addition to Aquatic Park in the form of a 3 cell endikement The endikement serves as a dredgeate disposal area for material removed from the vicinity of the mouth of the Don River Work on the endikement is to be completed by 1986 In the 1970s it was determined that the Toronto Harbour Commissioners did not require the land base of Aquatic Park for port related activities As a result, through the use of a consulting consortium, the MTRCA produced a conceptual master plan for the site in 1976 The plan proposed a variety of uses including; boating, swimming, fishing, camping, picnicking, water skiing, and wildlife viewing through the creation of a natural area at the western tip of the site , Through the standard review and approval process of the MTRCA. a number of issues were raised The major issues which preclude any development of the site are ownership, stabilization of exterior shorelines and the securing of a public roadway to the site from the City of Toronto Since the initiation of the planning process for Aquatic Park in 1974, site conditions have changed through natural succession to the point that today's conditions are greatly different than those in the early 1970s A variety of flora species now occupy the site in addition to a number of bird species, in particular ring-bill gulls As well, the site is used as a migratory stop over for other species In January of this year, the MTRCA determined it to be appropriate to initiate a new master planning exercise for Aquatic Park To this end, the MTRCA was of the opinion that a task force would be of benefit to the process and at its meeting #19/82 (January 12, 1983) . the Executive Committee of the MTRCA adopted the following resolution H-31 - 2 - "Res #403 THAT a task force be established to assist the Authority in the preparation of a master plan for Aquatic Park; THAT the task force liaise with those agencies or groups having an interest in Aquatic Park; THAT the Authority appoint Mr W A. McLean, Deputy General Manager, to the task force as Chairman; AND FURTHER THAT the Metropolitan Toronto Parks & Property Department, the Metropolitan Toronto Works Department, the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, the City of Toronto Planning Department, The Toronto Harbour Commissioners, the Ministry of Natural Resources, and the Ministry of the Environment, be invited to appoint staff representatives to serve on the task force " OVERVIEW OF THE PLANNING PROCESS The planning exercise for Aquatic Park will be undertaken as a typical MTRCA master plan The process will involve a review of background/site data, analysis of demand, establishment of constraints, identification of alternatives and suggested preferred alternative Preparation of the plan will be under the direction of MTRCA staff with consulting groups being retained on an lias required" basis The master plan will be required to address the requirements of The Environmental Assessment Act The process will provide opportunity for public participation through public meetings and/or open houses, as well as contact with major interest groups STUDY AREA The study area will consist of Aquatic Park proper, including the endikement area for dredgeate disposal However, Aquatic Park will be planned in light of existing and future uses and possible interactions with the north shore of the Outer Harbour from Cherry Beach to the Hearn plant discharge, the triangle land area at the base of Aquatic Park and the Main Sewage Treatment Plant lands H-32 - 3 - MAJOR TASKS In providing input and assistance to the MTRCA throughout the master planning process, the Task Force is charged with the following major functions (1 ) to provide technical expertise and advice to the MTRCA throughout the master planning process; ( 2) to present the stated positions of their respective municipalities/agencies, when appropriate; (3 ) to ensure that appropriate other staff of their respective municipalities/agencies are adequately informed throughout the process; (4) to review the membership of the Task Force and make suggestions for expansion or contraction as the Task Force sees fit or as situations present themselves; (5 ) to provide comment and input to the suggestions brought to the Task Force; (6 ) to assist in the identification of current, outstanding issues involving the Aquatic Park area and make suggestions as to appropriate ways of resolving them; ( 7) to comment on the adequacy of the study area in light of the interests and positions of their respective municipalities/agencies; (8) to receive written comment and hear delegations as input into the planning process, when appropriate, and to make suggestions thereon to MTRCA staff; (9 ) to assist the MTRCA in presentations/public forums, where appropriate; ~- H-33 , the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD 9-SEPTEMBER-1983 #2/83 The Waterfront Advisory Board met at the Authority Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on Friday, 9 September~ 1983, commencing at 9:30 a.m. PRESENT Chairman Edward Pul ton Vice-Chairman W.G. McLean Members M J. Breen Mrs F. Cruickshank S A. Macpherson G.F.R. Norton Alex Robertson G. Bruce Sinclair Authority Chairman Mrs. FE. Gell Authority Vice-Chairman E.V Kolb ABSENT Members W G. Barber L.A. Braithwaite, Q.C. - D.G. Fleet M.D. Lipton, Q.C. John Sewell M'. M. Smi th, Q C. . MINUTES Res #11 Moved by: G.B. Sinclair Seconded by: S.A. Macpherson THAT the Minutes of Meeting #1/83 be approved. CARRIED. PROGRESS REPORT A slide presentation was made by Mr. B.E. Denney of the following Humber Bay West: .work by boating clubs) complete .new launching ramps, ) Colonel Samuel Smith .landfill progress since starting Waterfront Area date of June 1st Bluffers Park:' .work completed by boating clubs: .Authority construction of access road, parld.ng; lot, and' landscaping, Ajax Waterfront .landscaping by Authority forces, and development of Authority lands in agreement with Wimpey Construction Aquatic Park:, .prepar.a,tion. of Mas.ter Plan under way Shor~line Management work at Soutrr Marine Drive' and Fallingbrook Drive. c.... Res. #12 Moved by: G.B. Sinclair Seconded by: W.G. McLean THAT the Progress Report be received. CARRIED. , H-34 -2- 1984 PRELIMINARY BUDGET ESTIMATES Res #13 Moved by G B Sinclair Seconded by M J Breen THAT the 1984 Preliminary Budget Estimates for the Waterfront Section, Water Resource Division, be received, AND THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT the 1984 Preliminary Budget Estimates, as appended as Schedule "A" of these Minutes, be included in the 1984 Preliminary Budget Estimates of the Authority CARRIED COLONEL SAMUEL SMITH WATERFRONT AREA -Park Name Res #14 Moved by Mrs F Cruickshank Seconded by G B. Sinclair THAT the waterfront park at the foot of Kipling Avenue in the City of Etobicoke now be identified as the "Colonel Samuel Smith Waterfront Area", AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to inform the appropriate parties and take the necessary measures to give effect thereto CARRIED ENVIRONMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS STUDY Res #15 Moved by A Robertson Seconded by W G. McLean THAT the staff communication and summary dealing with the Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) Study be received CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Res #16 Moved by G B Sinclair Seconded by S A Macpherson WHEREAS there have been numerous attacks on female members of the public in the area of the Etobicoke Creek, AND WHEREAS it is a matter of grave concern for public safety that the path system from Marie Curtis Park to Horner Avenue be completed, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the staff be directed to report to the Executive Committee concerning (a) the status of the Etobicoke Creek Linear Park System, (b) the Metropolitan Corporation including in the Metropolitan Park system that portion of the Etobicoke Creek extending from Marie Curtis Park to Horner Avenue CARRIED. The following matters were discussed 1 The possible addition of houseboat colonies as a year-round facility to the terms of reference for Aquatic Park 2 Production of a brochure with map delineating the existing bicycle path system in Metro Edward Fulton W A McLean Chairman Acting General Manager KC , Page V-I I 1984 BUDGET ESTIMATES THE WATER RESOURCE DIVISION I This Division is responsible for the carrying out of the approved water management policies and programs I of the Authority, as they apply to the river systems and the Lake Ontario Waterfront, including - administration of the Flood Control Program; , i - administration of the Authority's Erosion and Sediment Control Program, including the Lake I Ontario Shoreline; I - administration of the Storm Water Management Program; ..... - administration of the Waterfront Development Program; I i - the development and operation of a Flood Warning System; - technical advice and direction concerning the enforcement of the Author! ty' s fill regulations and development control; - the administration of the Authority's plan review function related to the Authority's fill and construction regulations in co-operation with the member municipalities and the Province of Ontario; - long range planning and policy development related to Divisional responsibilities; - ~~vironmental monitoring and review of flood control and waterfront projects; Ul () ::I: t'l tl C . r t'l ::I: ~ I " :>0 w : U1 ----- ---- . ::c I w 0'\ I P age Y.::.lQ 1984 BUDGET ESTIMATES DIVISION Water Resource PROGRAM Erosion Control PURPOSE To minimize the hazards of erosion to life and property within the valley systems and the Lake Ontario shoreline 1984 OBJECTIVES - Erosion Control work on the East Branch of the Highland Creek - To carry out remedial protection works on a priority basis on the major valleys within Metropolitan Toronto - To carry out the first phase of the Bellamy Road Ravine Project. - To carry out remedial measures on a priority basis along the Lake Ontario shoreline. - To carry out remedial works on a priority basis on the major valleys in the Region of Peel. - To carry out remedial works on a priority basis on the major valleys in the Region of York. - To carry out remedial works on a priority basis on the major valleys in the Region of Durham. I - To continue to update and augment the current erosion inventories and priority lists. I FUNDING ~ The Highland Creek, Metro Erosion Control, Bellamy Road Ravine and the Shoreline Management Projects are Metro Toronto benef i t i ng and receive a 55% grant from the Province of Ontario. The Peel, York, Durham erosion control projects are Peel, York and Durham benefiting respectively and receive a 55% grant ( The priorization study is a generally benefiting project and receives a 55% grant from the Province. , i FINANCIAL COMMENTS I:' OBJECTIVE CLASSIFICATIONS Haterials Salaries Supplies Ii Real Services Survey Ii & Wages Utilities Equipment Property & Rents Legal TOTAL $ lqR1 OR 17 PageV-ll 1984 BUDGET ESTIMATES DIVISION: Water Resource Program Erosion Control 1984 BUDGET SOURCES (F FINAOCING 1983 BUDGET 1983 AC'IUALS PROORAM NET PROVIlCIAL MUNICIPAL EXPENDITURES REVENUES EXPENDITURES GRANT LEVY OTHER EXPENDI'IURES REVmUES EXPENDI'IURES REVENUES ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ $ Bellamy Road 1,550,000 1,550,000 852,500 697,500 - Shoreline 610,900 610,000 335,500 274,500 582,500 Management 'roTAL 2,160,000 2,160,000 1,188,000 972,000 582,500 ::c I w -../ , , ::I: I w C>> , Page 4 EROS ION CONTROL CAPITAL WORKS AND SECTION 24 M A fJ PRO P 0 SED TOT~L E X PEN D I T U RES 1 SURVEYS AND STUDIES (IF ISSUED) I 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 and beyond I LIST IN ORDER OF PRIORITYj I INCLUDE A PROJECT FILE FOR EACH I ' 1 Lakehurst 200,000 2 South Marine Drive 37 5,000 375,000 375,000 375,000 375,000 3 Coatsworth Cut Dredging (Major Haint.) 125,000 4. Ashbridgea Bay (Haj Ma in ) 30,000 5 Highland Creek (Maj Main ) 40,000 6 Prioriz. & E A Inventory 27,000 7. Env. Studies Aquatic 13,000 , 8 Wave Climate Study 35,000 9 Gwendolen Crescent M.A C 35/82 105,000 10 Highland Creek 01 235,000 11 Raymore Drive M.A C 35/82 204,000 12 Moore Vale Ravine M.A. C 35/82 40,000 13. 14 Forest Path M.A c 35/82 42,000 14 Alder Rd Geotech. M.A. c 35/a2 11,000 15 Buttonville M.A C 85/81 20,000 16 Highland Creek '2 .. 305,000 350,000 350,000 17 Scott Street M A C 87/En 18,000 18 Green River Park M.A C 86/81 5,000 . - I - TOTAL 1,830,000 - .- --- - + --- -- - - - - , Page 9 SECTION 24 H A. Q PROPOSED TOT A L E X PEN D I T U RES PROGRAM (IF ISSUED) 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 and beyond SPECIALS Bellamy Rd. Ravine (See criteria and include a project file for each 1 '(a) Detail Eng. 100,000 (b) E.A. & Geotech. 100,000 (c) Works 1,350,000 3,470,000 SPECIALS TOTAL * NON-ELIGIBLE COSTS (ELIGIBLE FOR SUPPLEMENTARY GRANT CALCULATION) 1 Projects Involving Grants from other Provincial Agencies 2 Federal/Provincial Agreements (Non-Federal Share) ] Net Conservation Area Maintenance 4 Other (Specify) NON-ELIGIBLE TOTAL GRAtm tOTAL . :I: See Guidelines for definition of Non-Eligible Costs I w \0 -- - ::c I ~ 0 1984 BlDGE'l' Page V-14 DIVISION: Water Resource 1984 BUDGET 9JURCES OF FINAN.:ING 1983 BlDGE'l' 1983 ACl'lIALS PROGRAM NET PROVIOCIAL MUNICIPAL EXPENDITURES REVENUES EXPENDITURES GRAm' LEVY OTHER EXPDlDI'lURES REVENUES EXPENDITURES REVENUES $ $ ~ ~ ~ ~ -$ T ~ $ Waterfront Administration 269,000 269,000 132,000 137,000 211,239 Lake Ontario Waterfront Developnent 1,810,000 150,000 1,660,000 830,000 605,000 225,000 1,531,261 150,000 ..... rorAL 2,079,000 150,000 1,929,000 962.000 742.000 225,000 1. 742,500 150.000 . 1983 08 30 Page V-15 1984 BUDGET ESTIMATES DIVISION Water Resource PROGRAM Waterfront Administration PURPOSE To provide administrative, planning, biological and engineering staff necessary for implementing Waterfront projects 1984 OBJECTIVES - To proceed with design and construction of waterfront areas. - To proceed with planning and approval submissions for future waterfront works FUNDING This is a shared program, 50% of the funds being available from the Province of Ontario and the balance being funded from the general levy on all participating municipalities. ~ FINANCIAL COMMENTS OBJECTIVE CLASSIFICATIONS Materials Salaries Supplies & Real Services & Wages Utili ties Equipment Property & Rents TOTAL $ ::I: I 1"1'11 I) P 17 "" .... 0 :c I 0f>- t-..> 1984 BUDGET Page y=!! DIVISION: water Resource Program: waterfront Administration 1984 BUDGET SOURCES OF FINAN::ING 1983 BtDGET 1983 1ICTUALS ACTIVITY NET PROVIOCIAL MUNICIPAL EXPENDITURES REVENUES EXPENDITURES GRAN!' LEVY OTHER EXPENDITURES REVENUES EXPENDITURES REVENUES $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Salaries 179,952 179,952 89,976 89,976 132,075 Benefits 60,000 60,000 30,000 30,000 58,164 Travel 9,000 9,000 4,500 4,500 9,000 Data Processing 5,048 5,048 2,524 2,524 5,000 General Expenses 10,000 10,000 5~000 5,000 7,000 W.F. Workshop 5,000 5,000 5,000 -., TOrAL 269.000 269.000 132,000 137.000 211.239 . 1983 1)8 30 Page V-17 1984 BUDGET ESTIMATES DIVISION Water Resource PROGRAM Lake Ontario Waterfront Development PURPOSE The purpose of the Waterfront Plan is to create, on the Lake Ontario shoreline, within the area of the Authority's jurisdiction, a handsome waterfront, balanced in its land uses, which will complement adjacent areas, take cognizance of existing residential development and make available, wherever possible, features which warrant public use. 1984 OBJECTIVES - Continue development at Colonel Samuel Smith Park and East Point Park. - Complete development at Humber Bay West - Continue development of Ajax Waterfront - Construct changehouse and washroom at Bluffers Park Phase II ~ FUNDING This is a shared program, 50% of the funds being available from the Province of Ontario and the balance being funded from the Waterfront Capital Levy on all participating municipalities. FINANCIAL COMMENTS: OBJECTIVE CLASSIFICATIONS Materials Salaries Supplies & Real Services & Wages utili ties Equipment Property & Rents TOTAL $ ::I: I 1983 IJA P ~ , w , , ::c I ",.. ",.. Page Y::ll 1984 BlDGET DIVISION: Water Resource Program: Lake ontario Waterfront Deve10prent - Capi tal 1984 BUDGET OOURCES OF FINAOCING 1983 BlDGE'l' 1983 ACTUALS ACI'IVITY NET PROVINCIAL MUNICIPAL EXPENDITURES REVENUES EXPENDITURES GRANT LEVY Of HER EXPENDITURES REVmUES EXPENDITURES REVENUES 48tOOO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I? I? ~ scr.lSnith 150,000 337,000 168,500 168,500 400,000 150,000 Humber Bay West 100,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 130,000 Aquatic Park Master Plan 62,000 62,000 31,000 31,000 40,000 Bluffers TOplands 100,000 Bluffers Park Phase II 510,000 510,000 255,000 30,000 225,000* 330,000 East Point Park 400,000 400,000 200,000 200,000 344,261 Ajax Waterfront 60,000 60,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 ' Sundry Sites 55,000 55,000 27,500 27,500 \'1 !:'. WOrkshop 10,000 10,000 5,000 5,000 East Point E.A. 50 ,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 ~ite Planning 10,000 10,000 5,000 5,000 En,! Studies 66,000 66,000 33,000 33,000 72,000 I !"'.ude Olrtis 55,000 Irl5hbridges's Bay 5,000 =-etticoat Creek 5,000 I.>re Dev Prop. 20,000 i TOTAL 1,810 000 150,000 1,660,000 830,000 605,000 225,000 1,531,261 150,000 K Levies on hand. 19q) 08 30 ( 1) *Note - Includes $150,000 Revenue . ( 2) Total does not include $1,045,000 in pro9ra~ administrat~on {3) Total does not include $300,000 for acquisition Page 6 See Waterfront Open Space Acquisition project file OUTDOOR RECREATION CAPITAL WORKS AND SECTION 24 H.A. 8 PRO P 0 SED l' 0 T t\ L E X PEN D I T U RES SURVEYS AND STUDIES (IF ISSUED) 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 and beyond LIST IN ORDER OF PRIORITY; Include an Appropriate Project File (See Guidelines) 1 Col Sam Smith 487,000* 500,000* 550,000* 550,000* 2 Ajax Waterfront 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 4 Sundry - CLMD 31,150 5 Sundry - Waterfront Sites 55,000 315,000 330,000 430,000 6 Environmental Monitoring 66,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 7 Aquatic Park Master Plan 62,000 - - - 8 Boyd Master Plan E A 25,000 - - - 9 Feasibility Study Claire~ li11e 35,000 - - - 10 Site Planning Boyd 10,000 - - - .J .. 11 East Point E A 50,000 - - - 12 Site Planning W F Areas 10,000 - - - 13 Site Master Planning CL~ 10 Areas 34,000 - - - 14 Humber Bay 10q,000 30,000 - - 15 Clairville - Washroom Ref Booth 200,000 - - - . 16 Blufferll Phase II 510,000 300,000 . 200,000 - 17 Heart Lake 80,000 - - - 18 Rifle Range 3:L500 - - - 19 Indian Line Campground E xpansion 120,000 - - - 20 East Point 400,000 500,000 537,000 600,000 ;c TOTAL 2,366,650 I ~ . ---