The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutConservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board 1996 ~ , the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority MINUTES OF JOINT MEETING OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND THE WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/96 April 19, 1996 Page E1 The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board and the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village on April 19, 1996. The Vice Chair of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board, Lorna Bissell, called the meeting to order at 10: 15 a.m. PRESENT Maria Augimeri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair, C&RLM Randy Barber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, C&RLM Lorna Bissell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair, W&RLM lIa Bossons ................................................ Member, W&RLM Michael Di Biase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, C&RLM Lois Hancey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair, Authority Richard O'Brien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Chair, Authority Gerri Lynn O'Connor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, C&RLM Donna Patterson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, C&RLM Enrico Pistritto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, W&RLM Bev Salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, W&RLM Deborah Sword . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , . . . . . . , . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, C&RLM Richard Whitehead ............................................. Chair, C&RLM REGRETS Alan Christie ............................................... Member, W&RLM Lois Griffin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chair, W&RLM Joan King ................................................. Member, W&RLM Jim McMaster .............................................. Member, W&RLM Paul Palleschi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, C&RLM Maja Prentice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, W&RLM Paul Raina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member, W&RLM PRESENT A TION Judge Richard Donald, Mr. John Gordon, and Mr. Gary West of the Ontario Golf Association IOGAI gave a brief presentation regarding the Claireville Conservation Area Golf Course Proposal, adopted by Res. #C1/96 and Res. #W7/96 of these minutes. E2 JOINT MEETING OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND THE WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD.#1/96, April 19, 1996 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION RES. #C1/96 - CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION AREA RES. #W7/96 Golf Course Proposal Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARDS RECOMMEND TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to enter into discussions regarding the development of a partnership agreement with the Ontario Golf Association for the development of a golf course on lands within the Claireville Conservation Area; THAT in conjunction with the consideration being given to other proposals for recreational development opportunities in the Claireville area, staff be directed to consult on this concept with other agencies, community groups, and the public; THA T subject to Authority approval of the partnership agreement, a full Concept and Design Review be undertaken in accordance with the Strategy for Public Use of Conservation Authority Lands; AND FURTHER THAT the results of the concept and design review be brought forward to a subsequent joint Advisory board meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED KEY ISSUE Request from the Ontario Golf Association to enter into a partnership for the development of a state of the art environmentally friendly golf course. BACKGROUND Proposals for a golf course on Authority-owned lands south of Highway 7 and north of Steeles Avenue in the City of Brampton were considered at great length in the mid-1980's. Different proponents advanced through the approval process on several occasions and one, in fact, progressed to the point where an Order-in-Council was issued and a lease was signed. The proponent in this instance chose to abandon the project, however the principle of the suitability of the subject lands for this type of use was established through this exercise and the idea has remained as a component of the Concept Plan for the area since that time. Staff were approached by an individual who had been involved in one of the earlier failed proposals and were introduced to officials of the Ontario Golf Association. The OGA are engaged in a search for a suitable site to locate a facility they have planned to accommodate their activities. Their main objectives are to develop a tournament grade facility and a centre for the development of junior golfers in the province. JOINT MEETING OF THE CONSERVATION AND RElATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND THE WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/96, April 19, 1996 E3 The OGA is a provincial association to which most golf courses belong. It has a variety of programs aimed at improving the level of quality of both golfers and golf courses. An important aspect of their work and a major objective of the facility they wish to develop is to increase the performance and image of the golf course industry in matters concerning the natural environment. At the same time, this Authority is most interested in mitigating the potential impacts of golf course development throughout its watersheds by encouraging proper site selection, sensitive design and modern maintenance techniques for these important recreational facilities. Staff, through their involvement in a number of golf course development proposals over the years, developed a high degree of understanding and expertise in these areas. Through our discussions with OGA representatives, it became clear that we shared many environmental objectives with them and the opportunity for a partnership designed to meet those objectives was identified. The concept, which evolved, involves Authority staff becoming integral components of the design team from the outset. Through this involvement, Authority objectives such as protection of sensitive features and habitats, regeneration opportunities, reserving trail corridors and water quality monitoring would be incorporated into the fabric of the course rather than being imposed as requirements later in the design process. Access to the OGA's membership and the golf industry in general through their communications network will allow this to be framed as a 'good news' demonstration project that would improve the way in which golf courses are designed and managed in the future. In addition, Authority financial objectives would be met through rent paid for the use of our lands. The concept requires two essential decisions. First, confirmation of earlier decisions that a golf course in the location indicated above is deemed to be an acceptable use must be achieved and, once this has been established, the notion of a partnership with OGA must be agreed upon. In an effort to reach a conclusion on the first point, the Strategy for Public Use of Conservation Authority Lands was consulted. A full Phase I Concept Review was not carried out due to the very preliminary nature of the discussions however a multi-disciplinary staff team did analyse the potential of developing a golf course at this location. The knowledge gained from the process of reviewing the earlier concepts was used in applying current standards for the assessment of such developments. Specifically, the concept was measured against the goals, guiding principles and objectives of the Strategy, the requirements of the Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program, compatibility with adjacent land uses and compliance with other planning requirements. There is insufficient information at this point to analyse development and operating costs of the concept and it was deemed to be premature to discuss the proposal in a public forum. On the basis of the preliminary review carried out by staff, it was agreed that a golf course in this location, if properly designed, constructed and managed, would be an appropriate use of these lands, would constitute a valuable public asset and would present a wide variety of opportunities for fish and wildlife habitat improvement, valley system regeneration and the achievement of other public use objectives both on site and in the vicinity. The achievement of financial objectives through this development would, in addition, provide a valuable source of funding to support off- site watershed management initiatives of the Authority. E4 JOINT MEETING OF THE CONSERVATION AND RElATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND THE WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD'#1/96, April 19, 1996 In addressing the second issue identified above, the following benefits of entering into a partnership with OGA for the development of a golf course can be listed: . proactive approach to involvement in design results in more effective application of staff resources and expertise; . incorporation of Authority objectives into design through cooperative approach will be easier and more successful; . working with a willing partner which has mutually compatible objectives will maximize the demonstration potential of the project; . combining the communications efforts of the partners will maximize the penetration and effectiveness of the message into target audiences and; . participation by the Authority in the ongoing maintenance and monitoring aspects of the project will be facilitated. Realization of these benefits will require that the Authority commit to enter into a partnership agreement with the OGA so that they can justify the expense of carrying out a full screening of the concept in accordance with the provisions of the Strategy for Public Use of Conservation Authority Lands. Completion of the Phase I Concept Review, particularly the public consultation aspects, followed by the Phase II Design Review will involve a considerable investment of time and funds and will determine the feasibility of proceeding to site planning and approvals and, ultimately, project implementation. RATIONALE The Authority's participation in a partnership with the OGA has the potential to provide substantial benefits, both to our watershed management as well as financial objectives. The partnership approach has a greater capacity to achieve the two objectives in a balanced way. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The financial feasibility of operating a facility of this nature, the capacity of the OGA to raise the necessary capital to build it and the potential economic return to the Authority from participating in the project are all details which require examination. Preliminary analysis of these issues along with concept level design would occur once the principle of a partnership between the OGA and Authority had been established. Prepared by: Ken Owen, Extension 255 JOINT MEETING OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND THE WATER AND RElATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/96, April 19,1996 E5 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:55 p.m., April 19, 1996. Lorna Bissell Craig Mather Vice Chair Secretary-Treasurer pI. ~ , the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING #2/96 April 19, 1996 Page E6 The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board met in the North Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village on April 19, 1996. The Chair, Richard Whitehead, called the meeting to order at 11 :00 a.m. PRESENT Maria Augimeri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair Randy Barber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Michael Oi Biase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Lois Hancey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair, Authority Richard O'Brien .............................................. Chair, Authority Gerri Lynn O'Connor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Donna Patterson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Deborah Sword .................................................... Member Richard Whitehead .................................................... Chair REGRETS Paul Palleschi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member MINUTES RES. #C2/96 - MINUTES OF MEETING #6/95 Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT the minutes of Meeting #6/95, held February 2,1995, be approved. . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED E7 CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION RES. #C3/96 - CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION AREA Public Use Development Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Randy Barber THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to invite proposals to develop public uses in the Claireville Conservation Area south of Steeles Avenue; THAT staff be directed to consult further with other agencies, community groups and the public regarding recreational development opportunities within the Claireville Conservation Area; AND FURTHER THAT public use development proposals within the Claireville Conservation Area north of Steeles Avenue be brought back to the Authority for further consideration. AMENDMENT RES , #C4/96 Moved by Deborah Sword Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT paragraph two of the main motion be amended to read; -THA T staff be directed to continue consultation with other agencies, community groups and the public regarding recreational development opportunities and proposal calls within the Claireville Conservation Area. " THE AMENDMENT WAS ............................................. CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED KEY ISSUE Call for proposals to develop public uses in the Claireville Conservation Area south of Steeles Avenue. BACKGROUND The Facilities and Operations Division has initiated a pro-active strategy to deal with the effects of reduced funding from traditional sources. This strategy centres around the development of a variety of revenue generating initiatives while maintaining services at locations and times when they will have the most significant impact. The Claireville Conservation Area is an area of particular interest due to its location in the market place and presence of less environmentally sensitive table land, however opportunities are being examined throughout the watershed at other Authority owned lands. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 EB Five potential public use development zones were identified in the Claireville Conservation Area. A brief description of the five locations is provided below. Each location is illustrated on Figure 1. At Executive Meeting #1/96, held on March 8, 1996, Resolution # E7/96 was adopted that states, in part, "THA T staff be directed to consult with other agencies, interest groups and the public to get input regarding the suitability of the proposed public use development zones. " The Strategy for Public Use of Conservation Authority lands (1995), provides a clear framework for evaluating the acceptability of uses on Authority land. Community participation in this process is an important element. On March 27, 1996, staff hosted an information session to receive input on the proposed public use development zones in the Claireville Conservation Area. Staff advertised the information session in the Brampton, Etobicoke and Mississauga local newspapers. Signs were posted on the subject properties. Information packages were sent to 120 addresses, including local neighbours, community groups and agencies. Authority members and Humber Watershed Task Force members were also informed. Approximately 30 people attended the public meeting. The participants did not fully understand the magnitude of the Authority's financial reductions. As a result, much of the debate centred around the need to increase revenue. What we heard Revenue - Claireville produces enough revenue with existing facilities (Wild Water Kingdom, Clareville Ranch, Etobicoke Field Centrel. - Revenues should be returned to Claireville. - Claireville should not be developed to fund other Areas. Public Consultation - Citizens should mobilize to support local Conservation Areas. - Some suspicion about the Public Use Strategy was expressed. - There was a perception that the decisions had already been made. - Who is evaluating the public use development proposals? Taxes - Who funds MTRCA? - How are Conservation Area lands taxed and who does the Authority pay taxes to? General - Everyone involved should personally walk each site. - Use tableland as buffers from urbanizing areas. - Tableland provides habitat to deer and many other wildlife species - leave it alone. - Tableland is irreplaceable and could be valuable woodlots in the future. - Make no decisions for two-three years and hope for a change in government philosophy and priorities. - Sell land to environmental groups who will protect them. - Have impact studies been done to determine the potential use of the Area? - Where does the money go if land is sold? - Wouldn't it be cheaper to keep the Area closed? - What uses will be allowed? - The land is for the public, not private development. E9 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRIL 19, 1996 - The idea of public use is business - a land grab. - Selling or leasing land does not save the land. - Claireville is a unique resource - it is more valuable as it is because of where it is. - Perhaps focus public uses south of Steeles Avenue, as a compromise. - What is the mandate of the Authority under the current government? - Claireville has been the focus of development for 15 years. When will it end? - Some support in private discussions for the approach. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The Authority has an obligation to continue to adequately manage the lands which it holds in-trust for the public. Given reduced levels of municipal and provincial funding, other partnership arrangements must be investigated. In the future, staff believe that watershed management activities can be partially funded through revenues generated by recreational public use activities on carefully selected Authority properties. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE - Call for proposals for public use development in the Claireville Conservation Area south of Steeles Avenue. - Apply the Public Use Strategy to screen proposals, seek community input and report back to the Authority. - Assist in the establishment of a community advisory group to assist the Authority in future public use planning and land management activities in the Claireville Conservation Area. Report prepared by: Gary Wilkins, Ext. 211 0; () 0 z CIl m ---------- -- :II < Claireville Conservation Area }> ::! 0 z ProJ1osed DeveloJ1nlEml Zones }> z 0 ""-I :II m r }> -l m 0 ~ ,~- z 0 / J!tJ~~~1 ~ .) >. '\' \ ~ }> ." z ,/ '.~\. }> , Cl m ~ m Z, -l " }> 0 , < , " en I rr;rNJ I 0 :II -< 'e,..l. eD 1<...lllh. 0 . 111.\'1 }> ~14't..'1 6IlluA...,U...l'r :II .. II...., 0 r--jlI'AI.IVJ. "1''''11", 'It ""_II:' :Ih.aau. N l'-..vdlt411,tI ...~II.".h - lD ,:...t.:"~h...:. ''''/'lu'''l(u.l..~uJ&I.JlUI~IC(J\lU ? .. UIt,..... ..,,:. I JW..h.. }> 1.1~III'J ~UJ~' &:....Ih.~ , PllfJOSod~IOilllo" -0 :II ..ah......&.: All..... Ca:J1/1lJ( r= \'jLIVIIII..a ....}.... ...... ............",...u mil, C.Jly &.11"11011 ..... ...:.oJu). u.luJ ~ . wi..'" IU.......I.....u.>>.. luIa,,,,,,,'I.LWIloJl ......~ J PlqJOSCdC'(lIlllllon:lilI ..... lAlvclUfllllLVl'l'lIlU lD lD (, J PllfJOSOll Aclive Ol tV ::~~,:,':~~:: Ib:I OilliOll ]a IIJ ~u u ~ .u "IJ .u IUI IH u", m -~ . ..... -.- . --- ---------..---.. - ..-... - ~ -_. - -- - - - .-- 0 - - - I ~ E11 CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 RES. #C5/96 - BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE Family Admission Rate Moved by: Randy Barber Seconded by: Deborah Sword THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT a daily family admission rate not be introduced for Black Creek Pioneer Village. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED KEY ISSUE Report on creating, a family admission rate to Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV). BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #10/94, held November 25, 1994, Resolution #C32/94 was adopted, directing that a family rate not be introduced at BCPV. Staff investigated the creation of a family rate for 1995 based on attendance projections of 180,000 visitors of which 26% or 47,000 people came in family groups. This amounts to 11,000 family "units" (2 adults and their children under 151. At that attendance level and 1995 pricing, the introduction of a family rate would have resulted in an estimated minimum loss of revenue of $16,500. In 1995 admission for 2 adults and 2 children totaled $21.50. A family rate of $20 was considered; $1.50 X 11,000 families =$16,500. Beyond the revenue loss, other disadvantages, including the lack of promotional draw, changing demographics and broadened definitions of "family" and an inherent discrimination against other small groups were identified. At Authority Meeting #13/95, staff were directed to review the creation of a family rate again. FINANCIAL In 1996, attendance projections remain the same as in 1995 (180,0001, but admissions rates have increased. Families continue to represent 26% of the market. At the 1996 individual admission rate, admission for 2 adults and two children aged 5-14 is $24.00 in total. Introduction of a family rate of $20 would result in a revenue shortfall of $44,000. ($4 X 11,000 families = $44,000.1 from budget. To replace or recover this revenue, BCPV would have to attract 2,200 new family units, which would be a 20% increase in the "family" category now at 11,000. Considering attendance projections level, this would be a considerable challenge. At this critical time, BCPV faces pressure to increase self-generated revenues and reduce the amount of levy it receives by up to + $1 million annually by 1998. The creation of a family rate will reduce the current capacity of Black Creek to generate income from 26% of its market, a direction which is inconsistent with financial imperatives at this time. Report prepared by: Marty Brent, ext. 403 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E12 RES. #C6/96 - WILD WATER KINGDOM - PROPOSAL FOR ELECTRIC KARTS Moved by: Michael Di Siase Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the proposal from Wild Water Kingdom for construction of an electric kart attraction be approved. ........................ CARRIED KEY ISSUE This report recommends approval of a proposal from Wild Water Kingdom for an electric kart attraction to be constructed in 1996. BACKGROUND As part of the Authority's lease agreement with Wild Water Kingdom, major new attractions must be approved by the Authority. The Authority has approved various new attractions at Wild Water Kingdom in the 10 years since it was first constructed; including mini-golf, batting cages and additional water slides. ANAL YSIS Wild Water Kingdom has submitted the attached proposal for construction of an electric kart attraction. Staff has reviewed the proposal and recommend approval. The details of the proposal are outlined in the attached material. The terms and conditions of the existing lease agreement will apply; therefore, the Authority's requirements regarding compliance with municipal By-laws and provincial laws, insurance, site protection during construction, etc. are assured. Staff will review the detailed plans with Wild Water Kingdom as they are finalized. Mr. John Ransom, General Manager of Wild Water Kingdom has had preliminary meetings with municipal staff to review zoning, noise and other legal requirements. The attraction will meet all Brampton and Peel Region regulations. Elected officials from the area have been advised of and are in agreement with the proposal. Also, on March 27th, 1996, at a public meeting organized by MTRCA to consider recreational development of Authority lands in the Claireville area, this proposal was identified. Because the proposal involved an existing developed area south of Steeles Avenue, it was supported. The Authority's share of the gross revenues would be the same as for other Wild Water Kingdom attractions - 6%. If the revenue projections are successful, this would mean an additional revenue of $30,000 annually to the Authority. Report Prepared by: J. W. Dillane, ext 220 E13 CONSERVATION AND RELATED ~ND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 ltUd~ .K I N G D 0 M. . :1 F'!O.20.1996 Mr. Jim Dillane MetrCcolitan iorcnto & Reglen C:nservation Auttlcnty 5 Shcrenam Dr. Downsview, Ontano ~N ~ 54 Dear Sir. In ~9a9 and ~990 Wile Water Kin~:::::m :nvestec 'Neil ::ver a mlllicn dollars in the de'lelccmem of :ts Emerald Greens Scc~s and ='"'ltertalr:ment C:mplex. ThIs cr/ Amusement area of the Park features 36 ;'1oles of Mini Gelf as well as 9 professional fully autcmated Batting Ca~es. Despite :he investment anri ttlcusands of dollars subse~uentJy scent marl<etin~ the attractions. total revenue from these additicns sance 1989 is less than $iCa.oca. After consldenng these attrac:ions operating o:::sts. lacor. supplies, recalrs. utilities etc. thIs area has ~een an encrmous :isaccolntment and a tinanc:al failure. Additlcnally. over the last few ,ears. numerous ::::mcetltive fac:litles offering mini gclf and :lattlng cages as well as Incocr - Dnvlng ranges ere. have opened wIthin a sMc~ distance from the Pal1<. I.e.. Misslssauga Saseoall Werld and the Scc~sclex. As a result. revenues from the Emerald Greens attrac::ens are racldly declining . Fcr :nstance. Mini Golf and 8amng Cage revenues:n 1990 was 3146.0CO versus S6i.2C6 thiS ~ast year In an '!ffc~ to make the Emerald Greens area finar.::ally vracle . a new c::mmlrment will Oe re~:";lred Incue:ng scencing mere on :'lew attractIons. ucgrac:r:g ;:reser.r fac:litles and ne...., mari<e!lng :amcalg:':s. Pr::::::cse<:: ~ 996 new attractlens inc:ude. An E:ec:~c Ka~ Raceway and =:ec:~c Venle~e iest;:,:g iracK ~ I ":::i I 01:":. ~ Pan ~CI'.ss; 7a~5 ~."C.- ':'''eP.. Nftr 3ra".:::.., :nt'V'c ...~ :"- Tel .X~,~""':~:5 Fu .90~1;-;':071 "..CI ornc.: . W...,,"gtcn ~l'_ :JSI 0..... ~ - QlC""~ ::-tana '.~; :~ Tel '.'=:~~;-. Fu ..1SI~S~ CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND' MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E14 , . ;1 The New Sean Kart Attraction would draw visitors frcm the sutT'Ounding area ~ and most notably increase revenues use of the present amusement facilities. This inC'ease should be particularly noticeable auring the spring and fall seasons. While Wild Water Kingdom remains the only complete Water Park in the Greater Toronto Region. new water attractions added at both Ontario Place and Paramount Canada's Wonderland are certain to influence Wild Water Kingdom's attendance and revenues. By aceing sud't facilities. the Part< can continue to complete 'tislbly in Toronto's ever ::'Ianglng competitive reaeational environment Attac."ed is a detailed procosa! outlining the 2ec:nc Kart Raceway development. ThanK you and we look forward tc your favorable response. Yours Truly, JOhn Ransom General Manager -- E15 CONSERVATION AND RELATED-tAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 - . :1 Wate, oK I N G D 0 M.. I . ELECTRIC KART I II ATTRACTION PROPOSAL , II I t Jt :. II .1 II FEBRUAR\i 1996 I II J Jt IL -- . II -- - CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVI~ORY BOARD #~/96, APRil 19, 1996 E16 l'>C....,<,.X:\., ;.2c. '. ,'~<.." .... ." :<.' di'::!$fr'k$:::ll .'. ......... ..y........ " .. ....mTRODacnOl'f....~ . ... ""'0'" 'X'<'. ..... ::,.:', .:'::::.::- :.:", .:.. ....." '. ....... :.- . ...', ..::.Y.::....:..;~. ''::'.:~:;:.:.: ::j:::.::.:.;.~:::::- ',:. Experience the quiet, quick and clean world of elec:ric Propulsion and enjoy high :1 performance driving without the flammable fuels and toxic exhausts normally . associated with Go-Kart attractions. The new Electric Kart development would be a unique facility, featuring state of the art Electric Vehides, an intriguing and exciting track design and most importantfy, very environmentally friendly - with no engine noise pollution, gasoline fumes or air pollution. The facility while primarily used for general pUblic enjoyment will also be made available to various Ele~c Vehicle development groups. Preliminary discussions with members of the Electric Vehicle Association of Canada indicate that a site sue." as this could be used to test vanous E!ectric Veh,cle tec.,nclcgies as they are being developed. .".... ',;.:'; "C'C .'. . 'D . . c.: \. C'.,,'. ';"c:',';" .' '; C c. :'.<. ...' .'j,,;t.,,~;;' :"/ ::?=:SJ:IJ:..,:LOCAnONr.~&;':COaR:SE'.D'ESIGN:':::~~ " ..\ .. . . . . . The Electric Kart Attraction would be located along Finc., Ave. _ directly opposite the present Mini-Goff Entranca. The course is designed to ensure maximum safety. The extensive landscaping and colorful graphics will create an attractive environment The large oak trees presently located in this area would not be disturbed. The smaller trees would be transplanted along a berm that would be created running parallel along the Finc., Ave. property line. The course will be professionally constructed including at least 1 over pass and 1 under pass. The Track will be approximately 1 mile (5280 ft) long and will be capable of handling up to 60 Electric Karts, initially however, we will purc.,ase only 40 Karts. This type of course layout provides a very exciting attradon for the public while ensuring maximum safety. Unlike the steel guard rails used in the early 60's, the guard rail to be installed features a fresh new look - no tires etc. Attached is a Manufacurer's description of this esthetically appealing Guard Rail System. As the track will be professionally designed and engineered, all considerations regarding drainage and safety will be explored. In addition to the 1 mile Track, a smaller oval track approximately 1,000 ft. long will be constructed. This track would be for children ages 4 - 10 years to use. There would be 10 - 15 mini EleC-Jic Karts with speed restncted to approximately 4 mph. I ... E 17 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRIL 19, 1996 THE II ULTIMATE" GUARD RAIL . ~I -=-:...-., - .-..-. ~~_. ._=~,.:. ~:.~-:...: ., - .. .. .. - ~..~~:--.-.::",:,.-.. .. .-: --- The 90'S Ulok M:.tinten:1nce U alike r.l1e s:ee! gtmd r.1il used in r.l1e No p:1inti:1g of Ur:s. c!c:::..'ll.'1g at" Ste::! :ust c::u!y 1960's. tlus gIve ~ c:ie:m fresh look.J!Q tires m:trks. ~o cueing afw:u:: by old tires. ~o breeding cc.. The new look is ~Ilduc:ive to !he F:unily ground iCr pesk-y inse:::s.. Just hose :t down if it ge:s Thene p:1!ks. diny. - Cost Effective L~nd CODside:-:uion The oew poly gtmdr:1il is ':ery competitive Saves 3 fee: of ~ c::m.c::-...:.: or :lSptult in pri~ wir.l1!he old Stee! syste:n.. around tr:1ck wht::c a.ld st=i. &: tin: syste:n SltS. Works e.uC'Jy the s:u:ae in the coldest Al.:lSk.J.n Stretll?Th cnvlronme::.t or r.l1e hone=: p:1It of "4 e:us. The s:une CIl.Jteri~ r.l1er use 00 r.l1e ..:.JJ.Sk.1 pipeline Wl!h r.l1e J.biliry to \V1thsund :.hOus;l:ds of Desian Fe:::tu~ pounds of pr~. S pecilic:illy desi gned to work wi l.h :ill :::c..' s ~K.uts or ~y poiy type: aik:1rts. Scc:luse of r.l1e Convenient lime sp;1C: ~u.ired to utiliz=, it Jllows you to M1te.~ av:tilJ.ble from hundrees of ma.~ r.l1e size of your Go-K.1rt tr:lc:k md distributers Lhroughout North Ame..;c::l, We will the.~ore your pratiLs. give you the ~e of r.l1e distributor Oc:1Iest you. Inst:1l1:uion If you b:lve to gU:lrd r:lil. G~t with the: 90's & use Poly. EJ.sy to ins..:1l.l. 00 ~~ knowledge or ~~ eqwpme:1t 11ee.::ed... Up to ~400 line:r feet in The most efficienc use of MONEY. SPACE 3 d.:1ys. &mrE Re~ l:1c:em en t Eve::. if d.:1m:1g~ on high imp:lC::: .11':.:lS. simply re=nove r.l1c ~ge.:i sec".iOQ Jnd ;Jut a Qew pice:.: in. No we!cti.::tg, ~o tedious mounting - CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E18 - - The Guard Rail Cross Section rI . ;1 WImD IIW . WASIIIa ~ ) SDR 26 ~" r c:.r.&:I'~ nKC: rasr IlEA YT' T.\U. 61f Diam SDR 26 6" Diam 6" Asphalt Track ~ ------------~-- Spacer (Heieht Varies As Per ltart Type) . ~ ~,",1< ---;,--......-;~-;-.\...-;;;,.3: ~~;r;-,,~;~....~"::.~;,.J., ,,,),'" ,./. . . . . . . . . .... .." I' . . . I . .. ... .. '." .. . . . . ... . . . .. :. .. .. ...... . 0" . . . .."0 .. '. . '. .. .. 0" o' . . . :. .. .. . ., . . .' .." .. .. . . .'. .." .. . . .. : I .. .." .. .. .. .... . '. .. ." . .' ". '. .' : . .' .. . .' . . . " . . . .' (It. . . . . . . ..... .. .. e. . . .' . .. . . . . . . . .. .' . . . '. . ' or . . ". 'j :'. ..Coric:\ete.. ....: . . . .. .. .." . :r~:~'{~~:'~1 ..'. .... .'. :: . ....... .... .Fo.p.:~!~~. ..... ~.'.. : . , . . . . . . . , ., .... .' . ~ .' ' .o.'.. .. " . . " . . . '-~-~--~'-Y-":'_:-- '.' '. : . . THE POLYETHLENE GUARD RAIL SYSTE1tf . KA..RTWORLD/FKL GO KARTS E19 CONSERVATION AND RElATEDt.AND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 J'e.{... ,e,er. p".". i"'"..':C'E"!#t+:i;j'"".:,....,':,, ""',, "-"""'!i~T,r;t,~ ,........... .. ..., w.~..w:"r.:'r'~...'...~"ft..~.. '...........,....:.J:....... .~.:.~~~:..:.. .:.::.:::.:..::..::....::::.:..~~~~~~.a.AA,.&..~.~..~~;.:::'?;;~t:.~;;~~::.:.:.~~' The Elec:rt-Kart is as practical to operate as a biC'jde. Insert and turn the "Ignition" key . :J and they are ready for driving. Through the latest use in solid state controllers, energy is pulsed silentfv to the drive motor via a throttle by wire system, allowing complete contrel of the Electri-Kart's speed. The maximum speed is regulated and a remote radio frecuency type main control panel located at the Pit Stop Control Center can turn off a Kart with a simple flick of the switc.." should a driver not obey the strictly controlled rules of the track. The excitement of an Eleeri-Kart is not lost because of the lack of noise or engine sound. Elec:tri-Karts are very quick off the start and oecause of their tec!1nology, speeds can remain constant 1) The Controller Chassis - mounted under ~"e steering column, houses the motcr ~cntroller, key switc.'1, main power disconnect switc!1, and the 'amp' counter range gauge, all easily visible and ac~essibte from the driver's seat 2) The Durable DC Motor - sports sealed bea'ings and requires no maintenance with the exception of the replacement of commutator brushes every 1 or 2 years. A standard kart c..,ain drive is used to couple the motor to the 1 1/4- axle without:he use of a dutch, since the motor need not idle. 3) The high quality - sealed, lead acid batteries are housed in anodized aluminum boxes (t\vo per box) with individual fuses, visible through an Inspection window in their tops. These battery boxes slip securely into steel trays welded to the kart frame, automatically interconnecting power to the kart. Two high quality T handled tie downs are used to secure the battery while driving, and allow for quick change out of battery packs in seconds. 4) The 'Off Board' Battery Charger ac~epts two battery boxes at a time and can recharge a pack in less than thirty minutes (provided the pack is disc.'1arged less than SO%), 5) The extra heavy duty - chrome poly c.'1assis, supports the added weight of batteries while providing the standard kart handling dynamics needed to jack weight onto primary tires when turning. 8ridgestone racing tires,mounted on one piece aluminum wheels, are standard on Electri- Kart. Three separate bearing cassettes are used in supporting the rear axle, while braking is provided by a double aCing, cross vented disk brake. Padded seat and steering wheel previde the driver with a secure and comfortable driving experience. CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E20 Conslceratlon is beIng maCe :owarcs ;,avlng :ifferent :::CCi' :overs ccnstruc:ed whicn would :reate the ::::ncept of vane us :y~es of Mini Can-Am ;.(arts on the track at any give time. i.e.: Grand Pnx, TigerCat. Can-Am etc. The fiberglass melced bOcy covers wcuid be ccnstruc:ed locally. , ~I The Karts are very economlc:al ~o operate at a cost of approximately 12- 16 cents per - kilowatt power cost. Power train of the Elec:rikarts System voltage: 48 volts cacac:ty: 38 amp/hour mater. senes wound DC 3,8 hp continuous rate recharge time: 30 mInutes at 50% discharge The Chassis is wneelbase: 40.5~ overall length: 65" c~rc weIght: 342 Ibs less batteries: 182 lb. brakes: single rear axle disk . . . . . . - . ;. . - . . . . . - . . . . . \, . . \. , \. - . .& \ " ~. " \ -~ , . . - ~ F ""'- .. \. -. \ , " \ ,. , _;.J:.._' . , - . \ \ --- ~ - ; ---- -- 0.-. "/ ".- .. " ." - -"- " ", --: . - " . - . ~- - . F 0" j .. "/ ,"~. t#!.~ ", c:;~ , .,~ ., C ,'-".,", -, .6 . ......... \ . i '1;:-:... \ ",.\,,---' t ....~..... . .. ~_o' . ..... .....,.... . . ".~~::./ -. . - < . . . :.-:-. ... . .r ~ - 'w .... ~. -. . ~ .... ~~ - ~'\. - . -. :-~. '. 'I\\~ . ". ." .- -.- y ." . .J . ' - CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRIL 19, 1996 E22 ~i:~}~~~;;H~:y:.:~.~:;::::::~:.:<..:.:i~}'::;~:::::W(.::'.t:;:~':1.:!.::<::::..:::.::....:: "::~';".::'i%w:,:.~:wlim'f\e~?5: ,~~?i,~~:,.. ,,:,:,'''''.N":AGEMEJ.lfFlYSTAEPJl{m0~Y ~.:'::':'~:':;':::':":.':"~ . "':.'::;-', '::.>~):).:;;:..'''''': . ~I . The EIectri-Kart Attraction will be managed by an individual with extensive experience in operating similar Attractions. All staff would be trained in ac::ordance with the rest of Wild Water Kingdom's quality of Staff Training. At all times of operation. communication by telepncne and t'No way radio would exist with the Park's Safety Personnel. ~'if::;~::~.i::r:/.:: ;.: ::. :.::: )~;; ;...:.::~?~ :.:::::::::::: . ::.:....:..~.:.::.~~.;.:~.:.::~:::::.:: : ..?:...:...~..... :....:::;~.~::.::.~:..;.::i;.:.;:.:.4~;::.:.:t:Jt.%~. "i.::~~::::'::. ::': .:...,~ ,.' ':*":""ATrRAcrION^"MAN.AGEMEl'rJ:""'''''''~''''''': ;{:it~:;T~:L :'. ..:. ':'. ..:'. .... ....... :" .. :.... :. :.:.. ...:.,w.. :::::.,. ......... ....... .....:. ..... ,^ ,"::'" .:,....,-:.. ':;:.::~6;;:':?~':; ...,.......:.., .....,..........&....OPERATING.. .SCHEDarE,w..x-......^...,. ..,.... ~).::\f~~:::..6i::;..~ ~::' : .;. :. \~~\W&:.:::~t:;.::: SEASONAL SCHEDULE Mid April to Thanksgiving (weather permitting) . HOURS OF OPERATION 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. - Spring I Fall 10:00 a,m, -12:00 p.m, to Summer TION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E23 CONSERVA _. 4*11~..k:.::.;::.~.::k~t$:~:::"%~,~t:tk~f~&~'W'''~~ ~}dfF\\ 'o\,~:<;1ffit4f.g;:::':~-A)~IDl'lGDO . x,iW..l ;''";:~<:..::''~:,'.x"n''-:". ". .... ,,,:,':'~,,.>~_,,~-.. "O\,,,....-.--w_...,,,. .~.~~ .i*k~W~~C:llK&K1IR.1r'Abj;KA:ClIO~ :L~." . ,~.....^ W.. ... ..... ....... . ......... . .. ....',' m~~. '1 1996 PROJECTED REVENUE REVENUE - $500, 000.00 ESTIMA TED CONSTRUCTION COST TRACK 5150.000 BUILDING 5 25,000 LIGHTS S 25.000 GUARD RAIL 5 40,000 KARTS 5260, 000 MAINTENANCE EQUIP. 5 25, 000 LA.NDSCAPING S 20, 000 SERVICES 5 12,000 ENGINE:RING 5 10, 000 MISC I CONTINGENCY S 10. 000 TOTAL $567,000 CONSERV A TION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E24 RES. #C7/96 - BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE Sponsorship Development Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Deborah Sword THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the report prepared by Arts and Communications Counsellors titled, "A Strategic Approach to Revenue Generation: Preliminary Recommendations for Black Creek Pioneer ViI/age", be received; AND FURTHER THAT the sponsorship directions contained therein be developed further to identify specific recommendations for sponsorship opportunities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED KEY ISSUE Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPVl sponsorship consultant's phase one report containing overview of funding options and initial recommendations for corporate partnership directions. BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #13,95, February 23, 1996, Resolution #A327/95 staff were directed to implement the sponsorship development project with Arts and Communications Counsellors. The project is designed in three phases: 1 I strategic planning and identification of opportunities; 21 documentation and target list finalization; and 31 corporate presentations. According to the Terms of Reference for the project, the deliverable expected at the end of Phase 1 is a report presenting an overview of funding options and specifically, the intital recommendations for sponsorship and other revenue generating opportunities at Black Creek Pioneer Village. The consultant's report was received on April 15, 1996, and is attached. ANAL YSIS The initial recommendations presented are the result of a strategic planning session with staff, site visits by the consultant and follow-up information provided in response to specific questions. These recommendations represent general directions that, if found to be acceptable in principle by the Authority, would be the basis of further work in Phase II of the project, and further developed and tested in the marketplace. Following approval by the Board of these directions, the consultants will proceed to develop these concepts to their full potential and test them with target corporate prospects. Staff will be involved throughout the process and a subsequent report to the Authority will be presented in advance of Phase III - implementation of a sales program. FINANCIAL DETAILS No financial details are available at this preliminary stage. Report prepared by: Marty Brent, ext. 403 E25 CONSERVATION AND RELATED I:AND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 . :J A Strategic Approach to Revenue Generation I Pieliminary Recommendations for Black. Creek Pioneer Village I Prepared by Ar...s .& Communiations Counse!ors April 1996 CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND.MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E26 , Aru & Communic:ltions Counselors h.:ls spent conside."'able time reviewing and evaluating che opportunities for revenue generation at Black Creek Pioneer Village. This docume:tt is a preliminary overview of funding options available to Black Creek Pioneer Village. featuring where possible some or the opponunities. advantages and , ;1 c..~e.."'1ges tilat these options encompass. In partiC'.llar. initial sponsorship scenarios are suggested. based on a thorough analysis of c:..'Cisting assets. future programming, . and desired additions in the context or the currem sponsorship marketplace. An attempt has been made to identify recommendations to enhance the 1996 operations in an effort to showcase the Village and build a case for suppOrt for the ensuing campaigns in 1997 and beyond. The funding options have bee:1 grouped b~ ategory co .provide a focus for the dOC'.lIne:1.t and tile proiec~ overall. Some at me options are :!lore suitable man others. and are ::iUggested as points :'or depar::.:re ror :Ur-....1e: :nvest:gation as de:erminec. by Black C:e~k and the ~rTRC-\ Boare.. It is importmt :0 nOte that as the projec: progresses. opportunities for re./e:1.ue se:1e:ation '.vill ~e ame:tded. added and deleted from these suggestions. based on re:dbac<. crom :he Board. corporate prospe~..s and other stakeholders. Five are:lS or- possible re./e:1ue generation are re-,iewed: j A. ~rarketing : B. Donations C. Human Resources De':e!opme:".t ., D. :Vle:chandising oj ., E. Sponsorship ; , 'tVhile Am &. Communic:ltions' body of ~xpe:-Jse lies in sec-mng strategic sponsor . ~ agre::ne:1tS. our expe:ie:1c~ :lnd that of our assocates may be valuable in determining I the role or ot..i.e~ reve:1ue sources. as d~sired by :vrTRC-\. It is understood that A&CC will advise and mak~ recomme:1.d.ations wh~~e necessarY and fe:lSible. . 1 - E27 CONSERVATION AND RELATED..lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 - 1996: A Cornerstone Y(ar Tnis :,e:u- '.vHI playa c:itiC:ll role in the ~ffort to buiici a ase for suppor:: of Blae..'< C.--e:k Pione:: Village. E'q'e:ience shows that both individual and corporat~ donors . .J want co be re:lSsured that m~y are cont.'ibuting :0 a '/ibram. popular and suc::essful projec:; the goal or the 1996 ope:ations should oe :0 e..~ance and showcase the Blae.." Creek. e.."genence to build awareness and goodwill among e.'cisting marke':.S. new audienc:s. and potential patT-ners. 1. Build a Bank of Supporting Evidence A ~odv or aositive mate:ial :ihoulc. b~ ..::omcii~c. incuding testimonials :rom visitOrs, . .. . s<:'"1001 c.:'iidre:1 and for.ne: ::orpor:lte donors,:sponsors": photogr:J.phs or' vi.sitors anc. re:1tors (ie, re-;:eptions. hIm shOOtS) ~:1jo:ing :he Village :n 3. '/ar:~:y or .:lc:i....ities :J.nc. se:lSons: and favourable pubiic:t:.. mate:-ial me. :-e'.;e','/s, In .lddition :0 Jeing an esse:1tial source of mate::J.l :or marke:ing, this :nror::iJ.tion :e:lrese:;ts .:l ",.aluabie tOol for de:nonst::lting the Village':i vitality.. . De~led visitOr demographics and lifeStyle infor::1acon :s ve:;: important: to pote:ltial comorate oar-~'e:s; the": want to k..,ow pre-;::se!\" whi6 ::w"e: :narkeo:s Blac.k, C:e:k ...... .:::J can de!ive:. Tne questionnaire should incude questions on .lge. household income. ec.uCltion and location or" resic.e:1ce to compile :..,~ Jare minimum of J. vi.sitor profile. Tnis inior:nation \vi.ll also be ve::: helpful ~n dri...ing :narke:ing and ac.ve::ising campaigns for the VillJ.ge. On.:l :ie?ar:J.te ?age (to ~:1sure mcnymit:: of ~he othe: datal. visitors should be asked for names. ac.dresses and ohone numbe:s. to build a .. database ror future fundraising and marketing ~Eor:s. In orde: to colle~ as many questionnaires as possibl~. adequate fac:lities shoulC :,e 5e: up in the Visitors Ce:ltre. including a table. pens. e:c. E:1courage visitors ~o panicipate by re'.varding them wim an inc~ntive: eg.. a draw for J. one-yeu Village :n~:nb~:shlp or J. hand-made item from the boutique. ~[any specal events re?rese:1t oppor::unities for sponsorship (se~ pg. 13). Supporting material for ~:J.c." eve:1t should be compiled to b~ used in th~ sales proc=ss. including atte:1dance, kev visitor infor:TIJ.tion. testimonials. :lI'~d photo!rr:J.chs. . .:l . · It ;vas .lr:::d .iur.Jlg :JI~ .'v[.m:ir ~tra::r/' i(SSIOII :Jw: C.li~,::~" .~il'(r':'.sl1lg ;vollid .u::mpc :0 )'(c:m: a pJrocograpira:o be ~spo1tsibi( ....or ~'r~;LC:lIg .1 por-.joiilJ J1' pirlJcJf1":.pirs :0 ;,( :LSd for :"OcJl m.lr.ic':::Jlg .md spOTtSorsJup ?llrpOS(S. . .2 . CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVI~ORY BOARD #~/96, APRil 19, 1996 E28 2. ShowClSing the Village E:dsting ?rogramming fe:ltures are ~~cellent vehicles for inC'e:LSing ge:1e::ll awareness of che Village and introducing potential partne:s to me Black Creek ~"<Pe:-ie:1ce. In addition. oiven tile quality or ~ntertaining facilities and e.:memse at its disposal. the ;:). ...... , :J Village Ls ,.vell-~quipped to host a special event, wge~ed to specific groups. designed - to "prime" the sales erIon. For ~'UInple: ClJrparar:e E:l(nr A special. e.."Cc:!usive ~/ent targeted to corporate leade:ship should be staged during this se:l.Son to introduce key ~~ecutives to the Village and itS features. In addition to building aware:1ess among pot~ntial sponsors, it is a goad opportunity to d~:nonst:~te the corporate e:1tertaining raclities at Black. C:eek. G ,.,.. lfar.:.'ZOt= .:::;~n: An e'/ent hasted bv d1e VUlage on behalf or" 1 '/OUt..1- or .:ommu.'1itv-~)rie:--,te~ .. - .. .. charitable organization on be a 5t:ong tool r"or both awar::1ess-building and marke~ng. Otre:ing the raclities at reduc~d (:OSt far 1 rugh-pronle ~=-taritabie ~ve:1t (not unlike F~bruar,""s "Oasis~ rec:':ltion for the Glariubie Foundation of Toronto at " . 360. the C~ Towe:'s restaurant), could ge:1e:ate entia! media cove:age and ~nhance the Villag~'s public pe:ce:Jtlon. (A strategic alliance wi6 one or more youth-based organizJ.t:ons. ego tile Boys and Girls Oubs or Create: Toronto or Big Broth,e:s/Big Siste:s. can also represent an oppor:unity to :ihowc:tSe :.he Village to potential visitors.) Br:ngtng in suit.1ble "celebrities" - ie. an autog:-:iph signi:tg '.vith rn~ St.1rS of me about-co-end te!e'/ision se:ies "Roac to :\vonle:i ~ - will In:ac: both media and guests. while ke~ping me e':e:tt consistent with we Bla.ck. C:e~k the:ne. 3. Existing and Future Programming and Se:"vic~s B06 t..~e :e:::e:1t Visitors Sl1r:e'/s and the :\&CC "Blae:,- C:e~k. St::ue'7'\' session . .::. identified recomme:1dations to enhance progr:lmming and :ie:vices for visitors, which will suppor: any effOrt to drive attendance and ge:1e:ate sUPPOrt. Tnese includ~: . pro\iding eve:: oppor:unity for visitors to look. buy md eat; . inStilling in volunte~:s Black Creek "values" and cec;,niques for gen~:J.ting positive inte:ac~ion with visitors; - 3 " E29 CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRIL 19, 1996 . inc-e:1Sing inte!'3c~vity of the Black. Cree..lt e."tpene."lce. Relatively ine.~ensive features worth conside.'"3.tion are: . opportunities for visitors to have photographs taken with costumed volunteers (ie. perhaps a "greeter", in addition to the customer service :1 representative position currently under c:onside:.ation); . a bulletin-board mounted in the VISitors Centre, showing visitOrs enjoying the Village in different activities and seasons. Visitors should be encouraged to send in photographs to be posted on the bulletin board. . identifying every obstacle that may decrease a visitor's enjoyment. and finding ways to remove or diminish its impac:; 1996 events should be monitored and evaluated obje~jvely to de~ermine cheir success and future role. Future programming changes andlor additions ...vill be investigated on an ongQing ~a.sis. It is unde~tood chat :1ew ?rog!:lmrning :ihollld bc conside:ed only if a signinnnt pront an be ge~e::lted rOor d1e Village. - ~ - CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND-MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E30 FU11dzng Uptions . A. M~RKETING Innovative marketing strategies \vill mise public visibility or Black Creek Pione~:- . ;1 Village among e."Cisting and new audiences, which helps to drive atte:ldanc:: as well as enhance awareness among pote:ltial SUpporters. . Companies considering suppor: or Black Creek P:one:r Village ...villlook closely at the marketing and adve:tising pian and budget to evaluate the potential visibility or a partnership, Signifiant resources should be dedicated to marketing as the be:1efitS ...vill SUppOrt all othe:- effortS to ge:1e:ate revenue. Promoting the Village to Specific Groups Tnrough a direc: mail ~:lI:'.paign. distribution of Jroc.:;ures and/or ?os-ce:s. anc. c:-e:ltive roeaking ~::'O'at1e:ne:1ts (ie. a '.isit bv a cos~umed re:m:se::.utive of ::..h.e Village). Blade .. ~ ~ " . Cre~'<. Pione~: Village wI"'. t.lrge: special organizations whose members or users are the Village':i carge: marke:. In a.c.dition to historial 5oc:e:ies whic."'t are already familiar with the Village. targe:ed groups might inc!ude: community ce:1t:es ..vie..1. se:1iors and youth progr:uns . Toromo-area summer day camps . teac.1.ers' federations . seniors groups .' homes . walking dubs . garde::. club s . Big Brothers & Big Sis-ce=-s, etc . tour ope::ltors through Ontario, Canada and :he nOr"'u.1.-e:lSte:n L"nited States Direct mail campaigns to targe:ed listS can be an e.'q'e~ve but rich database of potential visitOrs. Full or por:ioned mailing lists of pare:1ting magazines, seniors publications. and me:nbe:ship lists of suitable organizations on be purchased. but Blac.'<. Creek may want to investigate building spedal. strategic relationships with these organizations ..vith a vie'.v to having BCPV mate:ial (brod'lure. special promotional coupons) included in regular mailings, and vic~-ve:sa. In ce:tain c~es. the Village may dedde it is valuabit: to ce:ue special programming to serve specific groups. For e:c.1.mple, a relationship with the new Toronto Chinese Cultural Cemre might produce a voluntee: from that organiDtion willing to lead a tour of the Village with a BCPV represe:1tative for me:nbe:s of Toronto' s Chinese community. Similarly. organizations that serve disabled people or urban children can be t.lrge:ed as pote~ti:J.l visitors. with or '.vithout spe~al ?rognmming, - 5 . E31 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 Promote: the Village Off-Site Special e.~ibitS and demonst::ltions in suitable lootlons around ~he city will introduce or re-incroduc: the VUlage to potential visitors. For ~v.4.mpie: . hold special demonst::ltions or Stage a small ~v..~ibit in downtown offic: . .'1 buildings to showase c.h~ Village to parents; offer special coupons to drive attendance; . panicipate in shopping mall programming (ie. historical component in fashion shows, costumed oroIlers at Cnrisunas to promote the Lamplight event, etc.); . be visible (booth. demonstrations) at events with similar demographics. Establish cooperative strategies (eg. coupons; or demonstration in ~"(c.'ange for the Fe: for a booth), For example: . Har:,ouriront ICdSurnme: F~stival Garde:'. shows . . . P::.re:t1:ing shows . C:an shows . Taste of TorontO . Food &. vVine F~s~:';al . Harbour:ront A..."1t:.que ~[arket . Kleinberg T\vine Festival . Markham Fair YVnile these aejvities require care:Ul planning and '/olume~r labou:. the off-site visibility will pe:lk ~e interest or ?otential viSItOrs. and build import:lI1t relationships wit..1- other .1ttnc:ions chat may le3.c co more c:e:lt:ve coss-promotional and marketing strategies, It may also provic.e oppOrtunities for ke~? volume::s ac-Jve and committed in the pre-season while kee?ing Blac!, Creek from-ai-mind for pOtential visitors. Finally, these venues may also re?resent OppOrtunities for me:c..i.andising (see pg 11 )" Create cooperative strategies with other special attractions. ego AGO. lvlc~[ic..~ae!, CNE. Parks Canada and provinc:.al parks & sites. Bundling Black Creek Pione~:- Village with othe:- at-=rac:ions through coupons. discount booklets. shared promotions and ot.~e:- marketing cools cJ.n both incre:lSe awareness among targe: marke:s and incre:lSe attendance, building in an ele:ne:'1.t of added value to the ~"<'Oe:ienc~ of these an:aejons. . - 6 - AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E32 CONSERVATION '. Some investigation intO special tour packages may be valuable. For c:..umple. a tour of historic sites of Ontario (or Toronto-area) could be created in conjunC7jon with Parks Canada and/or provincial hiStorical sites. with transpOrtation and hospitality partners. and offe:ed to oUt-of-Ontario tour operators. Or. e:dtibics from che artifact collection could tour to Ontario mu.se~ms to gene:ate awareness of the Village and drive out-of- '0 . :1 to\\n attendance. Promote the Village as an entertainment venue, beyond Village programming I<ev attractions could be sc.'1eduled co aooear at Black Creek to attra~ n~.v audiences, . . .. For e.umple, special appearances by "celebrities" (ie. as mentioned before. stars of Road to Avonlea. Jake and the Kid. etc.) for autograph-signing or re~ding5 from pe:iod lite..~ture (eg. as pan of Born co Read vV c:ek); special ~usical guests t the R4nkin Family, Sylvia Tyson. Ashley :YfacIsaac. George Fox. e~c:.) as part or a summe:- Canadian ~fusic vVc:ek. Wnile showcasing these ar-JSts mav not re:le=: me "pione~:-" e!e:nent. the Village is a pe:r-e=: setting for celebrating Can~dian C'.llt:Ural developme:n, These can also bring huge marketing/publicty benefits and cu..."stile reve:lues. whic.:'" can offse~ the COSts of equipme:lt and facJities chat may be required ror these eVe:1ts. - . I . E33 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 B. DONATIONS Donations C:ll1 re:Jresent a lucative source or revenue. and if suoDoned bv a sound .. .. . .. communictions pian. a strong awa.rene~s vehide. Although the required initial structure and investment un be tabour-intenslve. a '.veU~"':ec..lted program C:ln be :.l . II successful ~!e:nent in reve:tue ge:te:ation. Tnere are essentially three categories or donors: . Individual giving tends co occur less in response co crue ne~d and more :n response co the powe: or e:notion or the cause. If Black Creek Pione~: Villag~ can build a suitable database or pOtential individual donors. it could re:Jlize subsuntial revenue. As well. once a pe:son has been convinced of me need and urgenc::.. or the request. w.~at pe:son ce:1ds :0 gi':e igain in che tuc..ll"e. . Philanthropic gtv1ng. trom Foundations anc. 0t:.e: 5ources. ce:-.ds co :,e aligned wit...... a donations :Jrog'!':lm ..vit...... soec:nc C'ite::a .lr.d :mheres or ac:.iv~t'\" fie. .. -.. . . . Laidlaw Foundation gives primarily co ~nvironr:1enul ?rojec:sL Give:;, che values or ?rese:vat:on or" C.:madian histonc~ e..'ge::ence and ed.ucation. Black Creek Pione~: Vmag~ is well-!Jositioned co acc:ss dlis source or fund.ing - . - . Corporate giving re?rese:tts a!'. .lre:J. or ?ar::c-.Jar opportunity ror Black Cre~l<:.. ~(a.ny corpor:ltions have e:lI":'nark~d. lUto or more or' ti1e:r pre-cJ...'< doilars for donations, Incre:l.Si:tgiy ta.~ese donations are carge:ec co spe:::nc are3.S or' J.c:ivlty. and donations te~d co be ~iec (0 mark~::ng J~:1e::t5. aithough not to ~he degre~ that sDonsorshio de:11ancs. The ~a:ie ~aI". b~ mac:~ to ce:tain comoanies 'Chat . . . while me limited :narke:ing :'e:;,~tits J.\"ailabi~ =nay ?redud~ J. 'Cr'..l~ sponsorship arrange:nent. th~ir cOI".tribu'C:on to a :Jar:ic-.llar Juildina can hero co e~sure a . .;:). par: or' Canada':5 incu.Jtr:al h~:itJ.ge re:nains re?res~:lt~d at Slack Cre~k. Vehicles for donations ma;' inc!uc.~: Black Creek Pioneer Village Foundation A Foundation designed spe::ticJ.l1y tor dl~ Village .may pro\ide an opportunity to integrate th~ e.."Pe::-Jse. l~J.c~:ship and comac:::; or" a cJ.re:uIly.se!~c:ed Board into revenue campaigns. Far inStance, th~ me:nbe:s or" me ~rrent Ca.pical Campaign board may be sound ~omac:s from whic~ co build .In on-going :nd~?e~dent fund-raising Structure. Tne implications or a Bl.1ck Cre~k Foundation '.i:. th~ e..'<isting Conservation Foundation ne~d 'Chorough ~:umination co d~:~:mine me be:teEits and drawbacks. . 9 - CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND -MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E34 A restructured membership program Tne curr~::.t structure isn' t priced to match itS e."Ccelle::.t added-value. A tiered ~"VStem or membership, where benefitS are proportional to the donation~ is recommended. E:cisting membe.."S should be encouraged to recruit new members through spedal inc:::.tives. An investigation or the Parks Canada "Friends of.... (ie. Friends of Point . :1 Pele:. e~c..) should be unde:takc:n to determine if a structure or that nature on be applied to Black Creek.. ~ Direct mail campaigns Using the information complied from visitor 5UIV~/S. a database to be used in direct mail fundraising should be created. As well. additional suitable mailing listS should be obtained to create a donor base. With accurate wge".ing or the audience. strong cre3.tive and copy whic.~ conveys the need and the urgenc::, or c.ause, timely maiiings and an appropriate signer. a direc: mail ampaign can -overcome the c.~alle::.ges ~t e::.tails (ie. Strong competition in the nOt-for-?ront sec:or. donor fatigue. labour- mte::.srve se~-up) and ge:1e=-ate substantial re':e::.ue. Fundraising EventS An annual ~:e:1t - for ~'Ca.rnple. an antique auc-.ion. gala. e~c. - on build a community of suppor:ers as well as ge:1e=-ating public aware::'e5s. . .9. 1 - E35 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT .ADVISORY BO~RD #2/96, APRIL 19, 1996 c. HlIrvlAJ.'l RESOl:1tCES DEVELOPMENT One of Blac.k Creek's greatest JSsetS - and requirementS _ is itS corps of voluntee:-s. This essential group should be developed and serviced in a way that ~nsures a we!!- organized. rewarding e:cpe:i~nce for volunteer and visitor alike. . ;1 Apart from providing ~sential services at the Village. volunteers represent a critic.:1l sourc~ of revenue sUPPOrt. by producing items for sale at the Village and mrough merchandising channels. or at the very least enhancing Village programming and experienc.es by increasing :he: number of inte.."'Prete:s and '.role-playe:s", whic.1. helps to attrac: first-time and repeat visitors. As well. their help' can be e..~listed in m~!11be:ship sales. special event manage:nent. re:ail assiStance and coma(7...$ to corporate Canada. In order to build a successful volunteer progr-.un. it is citicti L.~at an ~ndivic.ual is assigned co volunteer coorcination. Tnis pe:son idendrles oppOrtunities r'or voluntee::rw:, coordinates "oositions", resoonsibilitles and sc-1.edules. and ensures that - . . vol~nte~:s J.re 5atisrled: ;:hat is. that :heir .:om::b~~;on is lc:-c....!Owledged J.nc. valued. and :he:: are stimulated ar.c. ~1.allenged :,y tileir e:'for:s. This :nay be J.n are:l for ,:of?orate underwriting or employee loan programs (through whic-1. employees are pe::nltted co work m the not-ior-?rorlt secor tor a ?e:iod of time. SUpplying ~"'Pe:-Jse and skill ::0 :he Vilbge at no COSt). It is possible t.,l,at the proposed provincial work-fare program may also provide an ~xce!lent oppo~unity for Black Creek to ac::ess skilled labour, either to produc~ goods mat C:ln be sold to ge:1~:ate re~/e:1ue for the Village or to coordinate volunte~r ~f:or.s, de?ending of t.,l,e le~:el of expe:-tise and ~xperienc~. A&CC is cur:ently investigating :his option through Julia ;\[unro. ~LP.P.. Volunteer opponunities 5hould be marke~ed through community papers. seniors organizations and publiations. se:\ic~ clubs J.nd eduational institutions. Building relationships \-vith these groups can help to aurae: desirable volume~rs. For ~'Qmple. building a relationship with a relevant program in an educational institution (college. university) to have students volunteer as par: or their curriculum requirements. in retUI:1 for access to the Village':i anifac: colle:::ion for particular lessons serves both parties well. E-asting and n~w memb~rs 5hould be approached with an a~ay'essive c.a.mpaign to invite them to p~ic:pate in me volumeer program as well. Apprenticeship. summer stuc.~nt and othe: programs to bring skilled people into the . Village operations will be pursued JS par: of the corporate par:nershlp effort. possibly in combination with suppor: or a panicular building or re:.lture. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAN[} MANAGEMENT ADVI~ORY BOARD #~/96, APRil 19, 1996 E36 D. MERCHAJ.'lD ISL.'iG People assocate the Blac..~ Creek Pion~: Village name with traditional values of quality and authe~ticity, representing a strong meraandising oppOrtunity beyond e..~ting boutique and on-site sales. . :1 ~ It is unde:stOod chat the denland for produCtS crafted by Village staff often e..~ceeds the: human resources availabl~ to meet it, and this is an issue to be addressed through voluntee: development. and corporate underwriting. if reasible. Howc:ve:. Iic::~sing the Blac..~ Creek name and image can be an avenue ror gc:ne:ating reve.~ue:. without incre:lSing the strain on produC7Jon capabilities. VVhile license agre-..:nents require deo::aiied oolic.., d~/eloome~t, ar.d :..~e ~delines and C"ite:ia :nUSt ,,-.. ::J be wc:l1 monitOred. once established the agree:ne~tS un be an eifec:i\'e tOol to e..'Cte~d the re-/e:'.ue oppo~unities and a......are:1ess into diverse :narke:s. P:-oduc:s :TIa.y inc:ude crafts (ouilts. tovs. coIle~:ibie:)). cothing md :ood 'jar:1.s, ore:lG.. cide:l. . . Options ineude: . suppl:ing ce:tain produc-..s or producr lic::nses :0 e:lc:" ~[TRC~ visitor centre.' boutique . me:c.1.andising produc-..s to related audiences: ie. Harbouriront :~tique ~[arke~. Craft shows, Food & v'line show, Sugar Plum Fair, Word on i:..'1e Street (books md maps) . using e..'Cisting connec:ions to develop new lic:::1.Se oppOrtunities (ie. \Veston's BCPV bre:J.d) . acc::ssing hlgh-~r:u~lc :narke~s, ego Yor~(dale Shopping C~ntre Indoor Farmers/Craft ~(arke~ suppl:ing "Canadian - produc: re:aiIers (ie. The Snow Goose, Canada's Four . Corne:s, etc.) . building relationships ..vith orne: boutiques (eg. AGO, museums. e~c) . building relationships ..vith specific retailers (~or~he:n Rc:t1eC"'Jons, ~(arc:i Lipman) ~(erc.handising efforts cm be tied into both the ofi-:iite aware:\ess effortS (see page 6) and direc: mail! fundraising campaigns. - 1 1 - E37 CONSERVATION AND RELATED-lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 - . E:c:clusive Suppliers Agreements with e."CC!usive supplie.~ are attached co commercial rewards (suc..~ as "category owne..~hip" ie. pouring rightS. credit card ~~usivity; and produc:: sales and c:ndorseme:lts). E."<:clusive suppliers can offer ClSh or m-kind donations, tile tatter , :J often of more value tilan tile forme:. Supplie:s may suPPOrt Black Creek specal events (ie. Tenderflake's sponsorship of the Apple Pie COntestS). but are more likely to panicipate at a more valuable level by becOming the e:cclusive supplier to the ve.'1ue as a whole. E:cclusive supplier arrangementS can be difficult co negotiate. but chis may represe:1t an area of some oppOrtunity for Balc..'< Creek Pione:: Village. A&.CC will spe:1d some time investigating dlis area in conjun~jon with Black C:ee..~ Staff. . . 1: . CONSERV A TION AND RELATED lAND-MANAGEMENT ADVI~ORY BOARD #~/96, APRil 19, 1996 E38 E. SPONSORSHIP Sconsorshio renrese:'\ts a re:lsonablv luc:uive sourc~ of rt:"/e:lUe for Black Cre~k .. ... . Pione:: Village. Corporations em access marketing. corporate affairs and ad"'e:tising . .'1 dollars to suPPOrt an affiliation ..vim a particular ve:1ue. in return for sp~c:rk b~:'\efits designed co satisfy their needs as much as possible. Benefits may include prominent - exposure on print materials. on-site signage. entertaining benefits, access to membership lists. category e.."{dusivtty and product sampling. There is mor~ pressure brought co be:lI' on the recipient organization co de!iver these benefitS and nur:ure the relationship with the sponsor; however. long-ce.."":n sponsorship agree~ents can provide a consistenc:: of reve:'\ue that annual donations annot necessarily deliver. Sponsorship pac.kages may foC"..1S on one eleme:1t or" J. ve:me or programn1ing, or J. combination or se'/e:al elements. .-\.s a rule, it is more e::ec:ive co build a ?ack~,ge or Some C::tlc.:ll mass in order to ac:ess substJ.mial re':e::ues. Small pack.1ges J.re oner'.. time-~onst.:.::1ing md !abourious ~o "se!l". mak:~g :he :e':e:1ue disDrooor::onat: :0 :he - . . ;.- e.rDrt. Sponsorship "fees" can incude cash. in-kind Jonatans J.nc. :narke~ing"ad"'e:tising suppor:. Eac., pac.kage is built to redec: a fe~ based on variables whic..~ incude: atte:'\dance. target marke~. marketing and promotion plaz:.s and budgets. and the deliverable benefits. Arts &. Communic.Jtions has ider1.tified some Dre~iminar': recomme:1dations for the . . sponsorship program at Black Creek Pioneer Village. Its is imponant to note that as the projecr progresses. sponsorship Opportunities '."ill be ame:1ded. added and de!e:ed. based on funher examination and feedbac~, from Black Creek and :\-(TRC~. Corpor:i.te prospec:s and othe: stakeholde:s. Sponsorship opportunities have bee:'\ categorized as :allows: 1. J\, [edia 2. Spedal Eve:1ts 3. EducJ.uon 4. Li\ing ~ational Treasures 5, FeJ.ture Attrac:ions 6. Suppliers . I J . E39 CONSERVATION AND RELATEDl.AND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 1. Media One oc" :he priorities of the sponsorship project ..vill be co secure adequate and suitable media ?a.r"'Ule:s. These par...T'1e:-s would work with the Village on all programming (as opposed :0 an ~','e:tt-specirlc sponsorship). In ge:te:al, matching an-"411gementS will be . :1 sought; :'"1at is. if Black Creek agrees to make a S 10 000 media buy, the sponsor would matc.~ that with another S 10 000 in space or airtime. In addition to increasing the adve:tising visibility of the Village. the incre~ed value or the media' purchase will add signific:mt value to the other sponsorship pac.luges. de!ive..~g additional visibility to certain ve:tue sponsors. Ideally, both a radio and print sponsor ..vill be seC.ll"ec. It is possible mat the pr.nt sponsor -=an be secured through sponsorship of me P~nt Snop building. Tne pr.nt sponsor .would "pay" for the sponsorship through .l =natc:.:.ung media buy aI7ange:ne:1t. Tnis will oe oursued with me ?r.nt medi.l =nOSt 5Ult.:loie :0 :.he :arae':. marke':.s of Black, .. ~ Creek (initial re~om::1enc.ltion is T7//1 Tvrollto Scar, bllt A";';'CC and BCPV suE ..vill disC'..lSS c..~is fur .l1e:) . 2. Special Events Bla.ck. C.ooeek's special events progr4ffirning is an are:l :or sponsorship. and in paniC'..1la.r it represe:1ts an are:l of pote:1tial ~namIng", whic~ :s a be~e:it that is or particular value to sponsors. .. Specially, the follo\'.ing eve:1ts are re~omrnended ror corporate sponsorship: . S~:iiors Dav (in adcition co c...~e sponsorshio bv Todav's S~niors, should it be . ... . re:1ewed in 1997, as recommenced) . Dressed to ~{ill . S~ring Fair . Fiddle:s' Contest (in addition to G. Heinl &. Co.'s sponsorship. should it be renewed in 1997) . Annual Pioneer Festival . F:lll F:lir:' Apple Har:est -. Cr:lru Show . Christmas b~. Lamplight . urgeo:ic:lie special eve:1tS. ie. the 1997 HiStory of HOt Air Ballooning Not all of these eve:1tS are spe~:fically recomme~ded for naming, but they re?rese:1t the most attraC"'jve opportunities for a sponsor to re:lc!'l target marketS. Other events may att:ac: minor sponsorship. but at a lever that is too small to justify the expense of A&CC resourc~s on BCP\"' s behalf. . t 4 " CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND-MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E40 3. Eduction - Tne educ::ltional progr:lmming at Black Creek P:one:r Village is possibly th~ most OutSunding opportunity available to pOtential :iponsors. especially given the high de:nanc. .md popularity of ::h~ progr:uns and tours. A pac<age of significant value:: and . :. otieal :nass an be de':eloped. including the Dick.son Hill 5c..'1001 program and the various cours offered to stude:1tS. Of essential impOrtance is a transportation - component. to ensure stude:1tS can access the programming offered by the Village. FW""'J1er investigation may reveal that two or three packages an be designed. carge~ed to diffe:ent types of sponsors. A&CC is comident that this \vill be a source or substantial :'e'/enue and pubiic:ty for the Village. and will inveSt conside:abi~ cime de':eloping one or :nore suitabie:: pac.luges. 4. Living ~ational Tre:lsures "Living ~ational T re:l.Sures .. is a :Jhr:lse co .:om'e'.' the: imnort.:mce or the hUr:1:ln . '. interore:e: and caItsoe:son at Blac~ Creek P:one~: Villa17e. t\n aoore:1ticeshio/ " :l . . . summe: stude:1t program and/or corporate und.e:-.vri.ting or inte:pre:ive progr:unrning may be innovative avenues for cOr'?orate panne:ship. A ?ac<age whic.~ spew co education. skills. developme:'tt and historical prese:-:ation - in fac:. re:1ec-J.ng the very v-.Jues that the Village re?rese:1ts -- may find audie:1ce in ce::ain companies. From time co time. de?e:1ding on the situation. the humar'Jinte:pretive compone:1t or" J. panic..llar building may be incegrated inca a pack...ge for dle :,uilding alone. rac~e: than as a sepante sponsorship are:l. Th,e funding for:nula for d1e:: Living ~acional T re:lSures package is ye':. co be de:em1.ined. by A&CC and BCPV toge':.he:. It is unc:e:J.r J.t this stage whe:he: it ...vill be based on a Wsalary" - ie, the sponsorship fee covers the COSt of "hiring" som~one co act as ince=?re':.er.' cr:1.ftsperson. or on some alte::1ative basis. 5. Feature AttI':J.C"'J.ons There are special buildings and ac:ivities offered at Slae< Cre:k whic.~ may be attraC"'Jve co specific indust:ies and cOr:Joration. Althowrh ide:lllv e3.ch building would . ~. have a separ3.te :iponsor. this would be .ln unre3.Son:J.biy time-const1ming and expe:1sive approac..1. wic..'1. low reve:1ues :n some cases. Some recomme:\cL1cions (J.n be made to ~[TRC-\ on ge:\er:J.ting don:.cions and/or limited sponsorship for these buildings and features, if desired. . 15 - E41 CONSERVATION AND RELATED tAND MANAGEMENT .ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 Tne attracrions recommended for sponsorship are as foHows: Special t:.'Chibits in the .\-tc~air Gallery Harness Shop (in conjunc:ion with sponsorship of the Wagon rides and an apprenticeship program. if re:lSible) . :1 Cooperag~. including an apprentice program Blacksmith Print Shoo (se: ~{edia) . Cide: :Ylill Tinsmith Apple Orc.1ard Gardens Artifac: R~se:lrch &. Restoration Laboratory Live pe:ior.nance (music.: drama) programming . 6. Suppliers In addition :0 e.."tclusive 5upplie: agre:=nentS. the:e may be some opponunity for corporntions m SUppOrt ili~ Village by supplytng :tecess;u:: ite..~1S at reduced COSt or fre:-of-charge. It is hard to estimate what kind or impac: this will have on che bOttom.- line. but ce~a.in elements are worth pursuing, Specifically: . Ptinting.' produc:ion for broc.1ure . poste:s. e~c.. . Firewood . livestOck feed . Baking staples . Chimney cleaning . Cellular phones . Reu-ofitting for disabled access . Wne:!c!1airs and orne: se:-vices for the disabled . 16 . - CONSERV A TION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVI~ORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E42 Projected Revenue It is pre:nature co :5e~ targe~5 for revenue from sponsorship ?rojec:: several Steps are still required be:"ore thi:) e:stimate an be rrulde. Speci!ic:illy. a full ~umination of the: delive.'"a.bles available to sponsors must be comple~ed and men packages will be '"test- marke~ed." to a handful or 5ele:c:ed corporate contac-..s oi.-\.&.Cc. who are able to .:1 objec-Jvely evaluate how companies in their industry might respond to the requests. . Benefits As indicated, one of the areas that will require significant ~"q'loration in the ne.."Ct two to three wee.'<s is the benefits available to corporate sponsors. It is important to differentiate venue sponsors from SUppOrters of the capital campaign. and sufficient added-value will have to be ide:1tified or cre:lted to atm.e: long-::.erm relationships \vith the cornorate secror, In orde: to c:e:lte sponsorship ?acG.ges and assign fees. in-de:nh .. e.v.arnination or at~endance and 5pedal fe:ltures or- eJ.c..1 ~':e:'.t or .It:rac:ion -...-ill be unde:-...aken. A&.CC has begun some preliminar:: work in u.1is are:l. but funhe: disc..1Ssions are necessar:: be:ore recomr:'..endations can be :I14de. Length of Sponsor Agreement A&CC will build paC-ages wnic..:' rer1ecr three-ye:lI' cornrnit..'!1ents. Howeve:, it is a reality or the marke~place that pOtential sponsors will de:11and an MOUc" clause (ie. any dedsion to terminate the soonsorship for the next veJ.r :nUS! be receive bv Black Creek .. . . Pionee: Village in writing '.vithin 6 weeks of me cose or u.1e selSon, e~c...). L Ongoing Sponsor Servicing A&CC recommends that sponsorship and deve!opment is :Juilt into the Black Creek Pionee: Village staff structure. It may be an individual responsibie for sponsor development., or it may be incorporat.ed into an existing 5t:1ff me:nbe:'s pOrtfolio. In any case, this individual would be responsible for developing and SUStaining relationships with the corporate 5ec~or and ~'<isting :iponsors, and for ensuring that the sponsorship opponunities for ~:lc.:' new programming feJ.ture or event are ~-d1aUSted. Having someone on-Staff also opens up sponsorship oppOrtunities that are tOO small to justify ~'q)ensive outside counsel. but represent none:he!ess revenue pOtencial. . 1:- . E43 CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ~V~.~OR: ~:>_~.~.D ~2/96, APRil 19, 1996 Neon Seeps A&..CC is CUI':'entl~.. "fleshing OUt" the preliminary r'eCommendations outlined in this document. sketching out pac..~ges to be as attrac::ve to potential corporate partners as possible. As well. we are calking with the provinc::al gove:nment co dete::nine if the . .'J work-fare program representS an OppOrtunity for volumee:istaif additions at the Village. In the immediate future. our priority is to detemtine the benefitS available to Black Creek soonsors. Tnis will entail some e.~nation of currem delive:ables and some .. creative thought co develop n~.v benefitS. This will help us build specific pac..'uges and assign sponsorship fees. In the meantime, we will build an initial list or corporate prosp~-s for each pac..'<age. based on rese:u-c..'1 and unde:sunding of both the ?acloge and the indusuy playe:s. Tne Blac..'< Creek Sponsorship project is nOt an ~asy one. Wnile ~e:"e is J.bsoi~te:y no question as co tile quality and appe:ti of the Village. seve:-.J faCtors make me ?rojeL": challenging: the current economic climate; the timing of me projec: (sales through the summer will be more diffiC'..llt); and competition from othe:- nOt-c'or-prorlts in all sectors: cultural. health. and education. Howe':e:, with we!l~onst..-uc~ed. re~istially- priced packages which are sua.tegic:Uly targeted. togethe: we can realize satisfying long term Corporate panne:ships for the 1997 and 1998 ope:-ating seasons. . (3 . CONSERV A TION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/96, APRil 19, 1996 E44 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11 :30 p.m., April 19, 1996. Richard Whitehead Craig Mather Chair Secretary- Treasurer pI. ~ , the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD SPECIAL MEETING #3/96 July 26, 1996 Page E45 The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board met in the South Theatre, in the Visitor's Centre at Black Creek Pioneer Village on July 26, 1996. The Acting Chair, Deborah Sword, called the meeting to order at 9:40 a.m. PRESENT Randy Barber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , , . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor ..............................................,..,... Member Donna Patterson .......,...............,...........,....'............... Member Deborah Sword . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . Member Victoria Carley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member REGRETS Maria Augimeri .,...........,.......................................,. Vice Chair Michael Di Biase ..."............,.........................,...,...,..,. Member Lois Hancey ...........,..............",......."..."...... Vice Chair, Authority Richard O'Brien . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Chair, Authority Paul Palleschi ......."........................,.,...................... Member Richard Whitehead . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chair MINUTES RES #C8/96- MINUTES OF MEETINGS #1/96 AND #2/96 Moved by: Donna Patterson Seconded by: Randy Barber THAT the minutes of The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board and The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Joint meeting #1/96 and The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board #2/96, both held on April 19, 1996, be approved. ...... CARRIED E46 CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/96, JULY 26,1996 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION RES #C9/96- PETTICOAT CREEK CONSERVATION AREA Potential Management Agreement Authorization to formally pursue discussions with the Town of Pickering regarding the possibility of placing Petticoat Creek Conservation Area under management agreement. Moved by: Victoria Carley Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor IT IS RECOMMENDED TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be authorized to write to the Town of Pickering on behalf of the Authority requesting the Town of Pickering to explore, with the Authority, the possibility of entering into a partnership for the operation and management of Petticoat Creek Conservation Area; THAT Authority staff be authorized to negotiate a suitable management agreement with the Town of Pickering for Petticoat Creek; AND FURTHER THAT any agreement negotiated be brought back to the Authority for approval. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , . . . . . . . . . . , . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . , . . . . CARRIED BACKGROUND As discussed at Executive Meeting #4/96, staff have been undertaking the development of plans to accommodate anticipated funding reductions for 1997. One avenue which is being explored in this regard, is the placing of selected Authority properties under management agreement with municipalities. Staff have had informal discussions with Town of Pickering staff regarding the possibility of placing Petticoat Creek Conservation Area under some form of agreement and, subject to Council endorsement, are interested in exploring this opportunity further. RATIONALE Unlike most of the Authority's Conservation Areas, Petticoat Creek is surrounded by residential development and serves both regional and local open space needs. The operation of Petticoat Creek is funded by Metropolitan Toronto, Mono and Adjala-Tosorontio, and the Regions of Peel, York and Durham. This funding partnership is based on the Authority's mandate to provide inter-regional recreation, however in the case of Petticoat Creek, much of the use is local in nature. Over the years, conflicts have occurred at Petticoat Creek because of the gap between local park needs and the offering which is provided at the Area. Local users have objected to paying admission fees at Petticoat Creek, despite the fact that these fees currently fund 76% of the direct operating costs of the Area. In addition the type of maintenance carried out at Petticoat Creek frequently does not meet the expectations of local park users, nor do the types of facilities offered. CONSERVATION AND RELATED lAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/96, JULY 26,1996 E47 The Authority has undergone significant funding reductions, especially in operating budgets, over the past three years. Further cuts are anticipated in 1997, and staff are seeking ways to accommodate reduced funding levels while still providing regional open space to watershed residents. The placing of Petticoat Creek under agreement would relieve the Authority of the net operating costs for the area as well as the taxes currently paid on the land. Based on preliminary discussions, it is felt that this type of arrangement would allow for Petticoat Creek to better meet local needs while the Authority could meet inter-regional recreation demand by diverting use to other underutilised locations, From preliminary discussions with Town of Pickering staff, it would appear that there is significant potential to utilize at least some of the Petticoat Creek property for badly needed amenities such as ball diamonds. This use would allow for the current casual open space uses, particularly the Waterfront Trail, to be retained, and would appear to be compatible with existing land use in the Area. FINANCIAL 1M PLICA TIONS Based on 1996 budget figures, it is estimated that placing Petticoat Creek under management agreement would reduce the Authority's operating budget by $111,000. WORK TO BE DONE A formal approach to the Town of Pickering, and approval from the Town to enter into negotiations is required. It is anticipated that any agreement approved would be put in place for 1997. Report prepared by: Andy Wickens, extension 252 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:50 a.m., July 26, 1996. Deborah Sword Craig Mather A/Chair Secretary-Treasurer pI. ~ , the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING #4/96 August 23, 1996 Page E48 The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board met in the South Theatre, in the Visitor's Centre at Black Creek Pioneer Village on August 23, 1996, The Chair, Richard Whitehead, called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. PRESENT Maria Augimeri ,..........,...,..........,.........,...,...,.......... Vice Chair Victoria Carley , . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . Member Michael Di Biase .....................................,..............,.,. Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor ,...,..............,.............................,... Member Richard O'Brien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " Chair, Authority Donna Patterson .......,...........",..........,..................,.." Member Deborah Sword . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . , Member Richard Whitehead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . , . Chair REGRETS Randy Barber . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . , . . , Member Lois Hancey .."............."............,.,............... Vice Chair, Authority Paul Palleschi ........,......................,........,...,......".,... Member MINUTES RES.JlC 1 0/96 - MINUTES OF MEETING #3/96 Moved by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Seconded by: Victoria Carley THA T the minutes of Meeting #3/96, held July 26, 1996 be approved. ,......,........ CARRIED E49 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 CORRESPONDENCE (al A letter, sent by facsimile to Chair of the Authority, Richard O'Brien, from Mr. Luciano Martin, Executive Director of Action to Restore a Clean Humber (ARCH), stating ARCHs' interest in the Claireville Conservation Area and requesting the opportunity to review and comment on any strategies or plans for the area prior to the Authority's approval (see Res. #C13/96, page E541. (bl A letter, sent by facsimile to the Chair, Richard Whitehead and Members, with comments from Metro Councillor Lois Griffin regarding Claireville Conservation Area Management plan (see Res. #C13/96, page E541. RES #C 11/9B - CORRESPONDENCE Moved by: Victoria Carley Seconded by: Deborah Sword THAT the above items of correspondence be received. . . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION RES #C12/9B - WATER BASED ACTIVITIES IN CONSERVATION AREAS Policy and Procedures Revision to the Policy and Procedures for Water Based Activities, and delegation of approval of swimming area and boating rules related to Conservation Areas to Authority Staff. Moved by: Victoria Carley Seconded by: Deborah Sword THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Policy and Procedures for Water Based Activities be revised to include Claireville Conservation Area as a designated Conservation Area where public boating is permitted; AND FURTHER THAT approval of swimming area and boating rules, as related to Conservation Areas be delegated to the Manager, Conservation Areas, . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , . . . CARRIED CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 ESO BACKGROUND In 1982, the Executive Committee of the Authority approved a "Policy and Procedures for Water Based Activities". The intent of this document was to set out in detail, policies and operating procedures related to boating and swimming on Authority-managed properties. Much of the content deals with activities at Conservation Field Centres and has been developed in consultation with the Boards of Education involved. The document also deals however, with public boating and swimming at Conservation Areas. A copy of the section of the Policy related to Conservation Area use is attached. The Policy and Procedures list those Conservation Areas which are designated for water-based activities. Currently, public boating is permitted at Heart Lake and Albion Hills. Numerous requests from the public to permit boating at the Claireville Reservoir on an informal basis, have been received. Amendments to the Policy and Procedures have been brought forward to the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board three times since 1993. For the most part, these amendments have involved minor adjustments to swimming and boating rules to reflect changed operating practices. RATIONALE Designation of Claireville Conservation Area for Boating As noted above, there is a demand for public boating access at Claireville Reservoir. Local recreational canoeists have requested use of the site as have campers at the Indian Line Campground. Provision of this type of access would be consistent with some of the preliminary objectives developed by the Humber Task Force and would help to fulfill the Authority's mandate in terms of providing interregional recreation opportunities. Limited staff resources mean that the Authority is not in a position to actively supervise boating on the reservoir. An opinion has been obtained however, from the Authority's insurers, indicating that inclusion of this kind of use would not increase the Authority's liability premium. A copy of the relevant correspondence is attached. Delegation of Approval of Swimming and Boating Rules Over the past several years Authority staff have worked to ensure that the activities available at our Conservation Areas meet the needs of visitors. This work has been driven by a desire to be customer focussed and to increase net revenues at the Authority's public facilities. A significant portion of the "Policy and Procedures for Water Based Activities" is devoted to detailed rules and restrictions concerning swimming and boating in the Conservation Areas. In order to respond effectively to market trends and rapidly changing circumstances, it is important that staff have the flexibility to adjust operating procedures as required. Since operational details for the Conservation Areas fall under the responsibility of the Manager, Conservation Areas, it is suggested that approval of these details, in terms of swimming area and boating rules, be delegated to that staff member. FINANCIAL 1M PLICA TIONS Members of the public wishing to use the Claireville Reservoir for boating will access through the campground entrance and would be subject to the Authority's regular admission charges. It is anticipated therefore that permitting boating at the Area will produce a small amount of revenue. Delegation of approval responsibility for swimming and boating rules as proposed will allow the Authority to respond to revenue producing opportunities in a timely manner, thereby maximizing potential financial benefit. Report prepared by: Andy Wickens, extension 252 ES1 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 PUBUC SWIMMING IN CONSERVATION AREAS .. 1. DESIGNATED SWIMMING- AREAS Th. AuInanty design... the fallowing to be ~praved .... far pubic swimming: Albion HIlla Conservlllion A.... Bruce's I11III Conurvlllian A.... H-.t Lake ConHrvlllian A.... P-m=- CNM Conservalion A.... 2- OPeRATING REQUIREMENTS Th. sw;.....~.g __ at Albian HiDs. Heert LaKe and Bruce's Mm CGnserv8dan Area win b. used cmty wh.. aa necessary lifesaving equipment. em.-g..CV t8tephones and signs an in piace. 3. SWIMMING AREA RULES .1 InflM1lill. objllCt:S Bf!I P_/n;mzJ up to the 11m buoy line at Albion Hills. Bruce's MOl and Hurt Lake. bl No inflatable objectS are permitted at PettiCOat C:eek C<)nservation Area. cl Approved person. floatation devices and smail vesse4 lifejacicets may be used by swimmers when properly wom and fastened. dl Organized groups may use styrof08ll'l ftuaer bo.us as instruction. aids. el c.ns. dogs or other domes1ic pets are nat aUowed in the swimming area or on th. b.ach. 11 Food, drinks and gjass objects are nat permitt8d an the beach or in the wllter. g) The use of snortceis or other artificiat bntll1hing aids is not permitted lIX~ by permits. hi Weak swimmers and non-swimmers must remain in shallow water. il Swimmers must stay off the buoy line. j) P. ants and guardians must keep a dose watch on children at aU times and an fWIy responsible far children under their care. kl Throwing rocks or sand is nat permitted. 11 Water cr.sft are nen pennithtd in the swimming area and bOa1S may be launched only from the area design.ed far launching. ml The use of fishing rods is nat permitted in and around the swimming area. nl Onty Rfeguards are pennitted on the guard chairs CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY .BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23,1996 E52 .. PUBUC BOATING IN CONSERVAllON AREAS 1. DESrGNATm AREAS BaaUng will be p_....m..J at designmed Col1RrV8lian A..... PrN.~1 own. nOlMftolOoi4ed Waa._-'l.. p_nti[fl.d at H-.n Lake CoftS8rVlnian A,.. and Albion HUla eon..vlllion A..... A sp-- ~ is requirwd for the uae of w-'__Il an oUI. AUlharity owned bodi_ of wc.r. 2- BOAllNG RU' J:C; .t uta j8dc.a or person. ftoata1ion devic:ee mat be warn by aM 12..... while on the ..... bt No diving or swimming from any w.. cnIft. c) AU bollt8rS must stay wittlin the d_gnllbld ara. dJ DOT 11ItIId irrl16rJ1JJ1. boas only, are pemrittlJd. .t No motorized boats are allowed. f1 Persons renting equipment must be 18 years of age or older. g) Persons under 18 years of age reming equipment must be accompanied by a responsible adWt.. ht No "ho~fay' in any watllr craft. i) A muirnum of three persons is Pennilted per canoe. n Persons renting Authority equipment must sign me refesse an the rentaf form. Failure to comply with boating "des shaU result in c:anc:eUation of boating privileges. E53 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 ~- ~er r- __ ReMS_~ n.C!. ..' >'~D ~ 5......... i~. .:0 B.., :in. der i-. ~ M5J 2N9 : ,~" .(". ~ :J .. 41" allll S50ll IIAY i_ 08219111 , Reea Slennouse l() _ ~(.1518~ ., PRCPE.=I'r'f OIVrSlON M. i. R. C. A. May 6, 1996 .. Me Don PriDe: Mmopolitan Toromo &: Region Conservation Authority 5 Shcreiwn Drive Downsview, Oncario MJN 154 RE; C'.aireville Reservoir Dear Don; I am :n i1:c:ipt of your ::orr:spondc:lc: dated .~rii :9, 1996 and wisn :0 coru:inn :.'lat allowtng :he pmons or C!air:ville c:unpground or other inciivicn:.ais :0 use tile C:aireville reser/air :Or rec:-::u:ion 'Nouid :lOt inC'C:1Se your lia.Cility ;rre:mu:n. However should :he JlJIhorny decide to ac:iveiy promote tile:.lSe oftltis fu:ility :m additional prcniwn wouid oe required. The Commercial Gc1cr.U Liability poliC'f heid by the Mn.CA J1ttDmaric::1l.ty covers most rec:-e:uional ac::Mrics :hat 'Nould be conduc:ed on your jn"emises. We encourage the use of:toid harntless md indemninc::aion agre::ne:ltS whc::x possible, proper ;wvcrsal signage should be installed 3I all ac=ss points :0 the reservoir Jdvising the user that the reservoir md aZ'e:1 are unsupervised and ti1at ::ttcring :he reservoir is done at :heir own risIc. I ::us: :!le enclosed v.nn be :n orce:' md should you have my questions or conc=:1.S do not hesiwe to contact me. 'None-.VIC. ~.~ .\1ara~~-lI!nr y:: nSL.:ar':a ';."III:es CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23,1996 E54 RES #C13/96 - CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN Public Use The preparation of a management plan to guide future public use development at the Claireville Conservation Area and the establishment of a Technical Advisory Committee to assist staff in the development of this plan. Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Maria Augimeri THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed to undertake Phase I of the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan, Phase I to include: 1. Review existing plans and studies within the West Humber River Sub - watershed, of which Claireville Conservation Area is a part (i.e. Humber Watershed Strategy); 2. Document existing and proposed, land use, municipal services, road classifications and property ownership; 3. Document and quantify the current public use and types of recreation activities occurring in the Claireville Conservation Area and surrounding communities; 4. Define the natural heritage system, cultural and physical resources. Define the community's needs in terms of outdoor recreation/education. Identify any information deficiencies that may exist, THAT staff be directed to establish a technical advisory committee to participate in the development of the Terms of Reference for the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan, assist In the development of the plan, and to facilitate opportunity for public input; AND FURTHER THAT the Final Terms of Reference for the Clalrevllle Conservation Area Management Plan be brought back to the Authority for approval. AMENDMENT RES....JlC 14/96 Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Maria Augimeri THA T paragraph two of the main motion be deleted and replaced with the following; THA T staff be directed to establish a technical advisory committee, which would include members of the public and interested community groups, to participate in the development of the Terms of Reference for the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan, assist in the development of the plan, and to facilitate opportunity for public input. THE AMENDMENT WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED E55 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23, 1996 - BACKGROUND The Facilities and Operations Division continues to explore regional public use opportunities to support watershed management activities. As reported in the past, the Claireville Conservation Area is an area of particular interest due to its location in the market place and presence of less environmentally sensitive table land. Nevertheless, opportunities are also being investigated at other Authority owned land throughout the watershed. At Meeting #1/96, held on March 8, 1996, the Executive Committee approved the following resolutions: Re~ #F7/9fl 'That the proposed public use development zones, as identified on the attached map of the Claireville Conservation Area, be approved in principle; AND FURTHER THA T staff be directed to consult with other agencies, interest groups and the public to get input regarding the suitability of the proposed public use development zones. ., Be~ #FR/.96 "AND FURTHER THA T staff prepare a consolidated report and report back to the Executive Committee at a later date. " On March 27, 1996, an information session was held to discuss public use development at the Claireville Conservation Area. Elected representatives, interest groups, municipal staff and residents were invited to attend. Many citizens question the need and appropriateness of developing more recreational uses at Claireville, However, there was consensus that additional recreational uses may be compatible on Authority land south of Steeles Avenue. At Meeting #3/96, held on April 26, 1996, the Authority endorsed Resolution #A66/96 which states: 'THA T staff be directed to invite proposals to develop public uses in the Claireville Conservation Area south of Steeles Avenue; THA T staff be directed to continue consultation with other agencies, community groups and the public regarding recreational development opportunities and proposal calls within the Claireville Conservation Area; AND FURTHER THA T public use development proposals within the Claireville Conservation Area north of Steeles Avenue be brought back to the Authority for further consideration. " A second meeting was held with members of the community on May 16, 1996 to discuss the terms of reference to request proposals for public uses south of Steeles Avenue in the Claireville Conservation Area. A call for proposals has since been issued. The deadline is August 22, 1996. The management plan will identify management zones that will direct future activities within the Claireville Conservation Area. Future management activities such as; natural area protection, stream enhancement, and public uses will be guided by the management zone designations. The management plan will provide a framework for decision making to provide public uses on conservation lands that balances the needs of the community with the needs of the natural landscape to survive and regenerate. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4196. AUGUST 23,1996 ES6 Staff recommend that the management plan be undertaken in two phases. Phase I will be undertaken by Authority staff and will review existing land use planning designations, policies and guidelines, The property's natural heritage system, cultural and physical resources, and existing recreational uses will be identified, Phase I will provide the necessary background information to proceed with the development of management zones and the management plan. Phase II of the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan will be the development of the management plan, A technical advisory committee will be established to review the draft terms of reference, to assist staff in the review of the Phase I information and the identification of public use development zone options within the Claireville Conservation Area, and to facilitate public input. The committee will include elected representatives, agency staff, interest groups, private businesses, and Humber Watershed Task Force members. FINANCIAL DETAILS The project will be undertaken by existing staff; however, it is estimated that approximately $5000 may be required for supplies, meeting space and other administrative costs. These funds are available from Authority reserves identified for Conservation Area capital development. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE 0 Establish a technical advisory committee to develop the Terms of Reference for the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan and assist in the development of the plan. 0 Consult regularly with the general public during the development of the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan. 0 Report to the Authority on the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan including any potential public use development zones within the study area. For information contact: Gary Wilkins (ext. 211 I BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE Business Plan Sub-Committee Report Adoption of recommendations of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Plan Sub-Committee. Moved by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Seconded by: Deborah Sword THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the recommendations of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Plan Sub-Committee be adopted; AND FURTHER THAT The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto be consulted with respect to Recommendation 4 as contained in the Report of the Sub-Committee. THERE WAS NO VOTE TAKEN ON THIS MOTION. 0 E57 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 14/96, AUGUST 23, 1996 BE~.1519.6 - MOTION TO REFER Recommendations 1 & 2 Moved by: Maria Augimeri Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor THA T Recommendations 1 & 2 of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Plan Sub-Committee Report be referred back to staff for a further report to a Special Meeting of the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board, prior to Authority Meeting #8/96, to be held September 27, 1996. . . . . , , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . , , . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . , , , . . . . , . CARRIED ElES...-JLC.16L9.6 - MOTION Recommendation 4 Moved by: Maria Augimeri Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Recommendation 4 of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Plan Sub-Committee Report. regarding the establishment of a separate fund raising entity for Black Creek Pioneer Village be recommended for approval. . . , , . . . . . . , . . . . . , . CARRIED B~9..6. - MOTION TO REFER Recommendation 3 Moved by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Seconded by: Victoria Carley THA T Recommendation 3 of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Plan Sub-Committee Report, regarding a review of the Authority's governance structure be referred to the Executive Committee and; THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE THAT a detailed governance review be initiated and reported on as soon as possible. . . . . . . . . . . . , . . , , , . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . CARRIED BACKGROUND The Business Plan Sub-Committee was formed by Resolution of Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board in February 1996. The research and discussion emanating from the Terms of Reference established are documented in the attached report. Report prepared by: Ken Owen, ext. 255 . CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23. 1996 E58 .. REPORT OF THE BLA CK CREEK PIONEER VILLA GE BUSINESS PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE JUL Y, 1996 E59 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE BUSlNESSPLAN i997-1999 .. INTRODUCTION The MTRCA adopted a corporate strategy to deal with the funding reductions experienced prior to 1995 which included a shift in resources away from public use programs and towards watershed management initiatives, The Provincial funding cutbacks announced in 1995 have created a greater financial problem for the Authority overall and have resulted in even greater pressure on the public use facilities of which Black Creek Pioneer Village is one. In the face of this pressure. and in keeping with the direction of similar operations in other jurisdictions. the Village has been challenged to change its operations in such a way as to significantly decrease its reliance on ta"{ based revenues. In response to this challenge. a Business Plan Subcommittee was strUck by the Authority in February 1996 consisting of the Chair of the A,uthority, the Chair of the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board. two members of the Advisory Board and one representative of the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. Membership of the Subcommittee appears as Appendix 1 to this report and the Terms of Reference for the Subcommittee. as approved by the Authority, appears as Appendix 2. The first meeting of the Subcommittee dealt largely with the details of the operation of the Village and from that discussion. a number of issues were identified, Following is a summary of those discussions and recommended directions for the Authority from the Subcommittee ""ith respect to the Village' s future operations. ISSUE - \-mAT IS THE MA:'iDATE OF BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE? The NCission Statement for Black Creek Pioneer Village is as follows: Black Creek Pioneer Village represents a rural Ontario village of the 1860's that illustrates through demonstration and interpretation. the relationship and importance of our natural and cultural heritage to today 's citi=ens. thereby promoting environmental stewardship as an individual responsibility. Furthermore. in practical terms, the Village consists of over 40 buildings of unique cultural and historical importance, a collection of artifacts of some 50,000 items and 40 acres of land, not to 1 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 E60 mention the asset which the staff and their individual expertise represent. Up to this point in the history of the Village as a public facility, the curatorial responsibility of the Authority towards the buildings and the collection has been the paramount consideration in making programming decisions. The Village has been, first and foremost. a museum which has attracted its visitation through quality, live interpretive programming. Hence, its billing as a 'living museum', In recent interviews conducted by Foundation staff in preparation for the capital fundraising campaign, important community leaders made it clear that, in fact, the long tradition of integrity as a significant cultural institution is one of the Village's main assets. It is this integrity which sets the Village apart from the many other attractions in the market. Unfortunately, maintaining this integrity has come at a cost, Specifically, revenue generating initiatives have been limited by restrictions placed on what was deemed to be appropriate use of cultural assets and concerns raised with respect to the impact on the facility's image by engaging in intensive, profit-oriented activities. Notwithstanding these limitations. however, the Village has still managed to post an impressive expense/revenue record relative to similar facilities. The Village currently generates 54% of its operating expense through various revenue sources which is, by far. the best ratio of any museum in the country. Of course. when judged by the standards of tourist attractions. this record would be considered to be unacceptable and would result in the closing of the facility. In light of the financial pressure confronting the Authority, public use facilities, including the Village. are increasingly being viewed as attractions rather than public amenities which contribute to Authority objectives and are having to withstand severe financial examination as a result. The fundamental issue revealed by this discussion is one of relativity - ie. to what do we compare the Village in an effort to establish operating objectives and perfonnance targets. The range of options considered by the Subcommittee are summarized as follows. Black Creek Pioneer Village as an Attraction This option is driven by the assumption that achieving financial self sufficiency is the overriding imperative and that failing to achieve this objective will result in the closure of the facility because it cannot be afforded by the public purse, It further assumes that whatever compromise to the integrity of the heritage aspects of the Village are required to meet the objective are justifiable in an attempt to avoid the catastrophic results of closure, In analysing this option it became clear that a total revision of the mandate of the Village would be required in order to meet the objective. In so doing, the concept of the Village would change radically, Provincial funding support would be withdrawn. the customer base which appreciates the values inherent in the current method of operating would likely be lost and the facility would find itself competing for customers in a well capitalized and heavily promoted private sector attractions marketplace. We would, in essence, be abandoning the one thing that sets us apart 2 E61 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23. 1996 from all the other choices consumers can make. The lack of capital for investment in new or refurbished facilities and programs would put the Village at a distinct competitive disadvantage forcing it to struggle to maintain a share Q'f the market sufficient to generate the funds needed to continue to operate, Black Creek Pioneer Village as a Muse1Am Adhering to a traditional model of Village operations which ranks heritage objectives ahead of financial targets leaves the Village vulnerable to the risk of progressive annual budget cuts ultimately resulting in too few resources to mount any kind of a credible program in a very short period of time. In fact, because the physical assets would have to be protected, initial cuts to the facility's budget would have to come from reduced staffing levels. This lack of vitality would set in motion a downward spiral of reduced visitation, lower revenues, additional staff cuts, and so on until a lack of public interest results in closure. Black Creek Pioneer Village as a :\-Iemory If too much activity results in the closure of the Village and not enough activity results in the closure of the Village, then one might assume that it is inevitable that the Village will cease operations. In examining this option for the facility, the Subcommittee quickly concluded that closing the Village would not translate into a net savings equal to the subsidy currently being paid to support the operation, The reason for this is that abandoning the historic buildings, the collection of artifacts, the Visitors Centre and the land base on which they are situated is not an option. Whether the Village is open to the public or completely inaccessible, there will be ongoing maintenance and liability costs which will have to be borne in the long term. It may be possible to negotiate the transfer of the responsibility for those costs but, regardless. the public in one fonn or another, will have to support the Village. In fact. when the scenario of closing the Village was tested by creating a budget which would be required to provide basic maintenance for the assets entrusted to the Authority, a figure of $875,000 per year was estimated, This is exclusive of any mothballing expenses which would be incurred in the first year or staff severances payable, A summary of the cost breakdown for this scenario is included as Appendix 3. Black Creek Pioneer Village as a Lively Museum The final option examined by the Subcommittee balances the Authority's need for greater financial performance with the curatorial expectations of the Village's customers while recognizing that, at some level. the public purse will have to support the maintenance of the community's investment in its culture. In this option, the Village is not just 'living' but is 'lively' to provide greater opponunities for revenue generating activities, events and facilities. It is still a museum striving to educate its 3 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 E62 customers while protecting irreplaceable cultural assets. but strategic changes to curatorial objectives will occur in order to lower barriers to the development of profitable public programming. .. This option recognizes that effectively forcing the Village into 'bankruptcy' by establishing unachievable financial targets does not s(:'rVe the public weB, and in the end, will not result in the kinds of savings hoped for by establishing the targets in the first place. It also recognizes that the sense of stability created in the minds of customers, potential partners and donors and the staff of the Village by establishing a base funding level from which to operate, is invaluable and will provide a firm foundation on which the business plan can be built over the next several years. Recommendation 1 The Subcommittee recommends that the mandatefor the ViI/age be to continue to provide quality public programming and effectively maintain the public's investment in its heritage while operating within afinancialframework which provides for stability through an annual allocationfrom the Authority equal to the estimated basic maintenance costs. And furthermore, that the balance of operating expenses be raisedfrom non-tax sources. ISSUE - WHAT IS THE PLAi.'l' FOR ACIDEVING TmS MANDATE? Having assumed that an annual allocation of$875,000 from the Authority to the Village's operation would occur, the Subcommittee examined the operating budget to determine what level of new revenue from non-tax sources would be required, They funher considered the nature of the new initiatives and operational changes which would be required to achieve these levels of revenue to assess whether their impact would be in keeping with the mandate agreed to for the Village. The report detailing a financial and operating plan developed to achieve the funding targets within a three year phase in period is attached as Appendix 4. Recommendation 2 The Subcommittee recommends that thefinancial and operating plan appended to this report form the basis for developing the Village budget over the ne.'"Ct three years. ISSUE - WHAT ORGAi."fIZA TIONAL STRUCTURE IS BEST SUITED TO SUPPORTING THE VILLAGE IN THE ACIDEVEMENT OF THE PLAi.~? The plan recommended by the Subcommittee is an ambitious one with very short time frames. For the Village to succeed in implementing this plan, it will have to adopt an entrepreneurial, pragmatic approach to the way it does business. It will have to be focused on the targets 4 E63 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23. 1996 established and the organization supporting it will have to be committed to operating in a non- bureaucratic, flexible environment in order to get the job done. ., Recognizing this reality, the Subcommittee' directed staff to examine the range of governance alternatives based on the experiences of other similar public institutions and to make recommendations for discussion. The re~rt prepared by staff is attached as Appendix 5. As additional background research, Henry Sears, a noted architectural and organizational consultant to the museum industry was retained to comment on the staff report and to provide advice to the Subcommittee. Mr. Sears' advice is summarized in his memo of May 24, 1996 attached as Appendix 6. The Subcommittee, having considered and discussed at great length the advice of staff and the consultant. rejected the recommendation that the Village be set up as a new corporation without share capital with its own, separate Board of Directors charged with the responsibilities of overseeing operations as well as fundraising. The model put forward in this recommendation was patterned directly from the recent restructuring of the O'Keefe Centre. In this concept. the Centre will be governed by a Board made up of Metro Councillors, resident company representatives and the community at large, The last group will outnumber the combination of the first two by a wide margin. Metro will lease the facility to the new corporation which will be formed by special legislation and will have a certain level of control over the Board by vinue of the terms of the lease agreement. The companion business plan to this reorganization plan provides for the subsidization of the Centre by Metro through the waiving of property taxes. In discussing this issue. the Subcommittee directed its attention to the underlying problems that the recommended new model was intended to rectify and careful consideration was given to the potential impacts that might result from moving in this direction. Having identified those impacts. alternative means of dealing with the identified problems and mitigating the potential impacts were discussed. As noted in Appendix 5. the main problem identified with the status quo is one of focus. \Vhether one is discussing operational decision making processes at the Authority or fundraising campaigns by the Foundation, the difficulty facing the Village is that decisions which should be made in the interest of the Village are always influenced by considerations external to it. In addition. with operational decisions made in one place and fundraising decision made in another, the essential coordination of these decisions is currently lacking. As noted earlier, if the Village is to be successful in the implementation of the ambitious plan which has been recommended, it will have to be able to move swiftly and effectively in new directions and, as such, will not be able to afford to deal with issues distracting it from its mission. The impacts envisioned by the Subcommittee by the recommended model were essentially twofold. The first was one of accountability of the proposed Board of Directors, The financial plan recommends a continued subsidization of the Village operation by the Authority but, other than through the terms of the lease which would be entered into, the Board would be operating 5 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 E64 outside of the control of the Authority members. The appearance that this model sets up a 'Special Purpose Body' at a time when such bodies are being heavily criticized. was judged to be a major detraction. .. The second was a concern that the model set the Village adrift from the Authority, tethered to it only by a thin and potentially tenuous lif~.line. Because the financial plan relies so heavily on the continuation of the annual subsidy from the Authority, the risk to the Village of being outside of the mainstream of Authority issues was considered to be excessive. In considering how the problems could be solved without experiencing the potential impacts identified, the Subcommittee analysed the problem in two pans. The first was how could the operational issues, particularly the streamlining and focussing of the decision making process, be addressed but do it within the Authority Structure and second, was how the fundraising function could be more effectively managed and implemented. Operationally, the Subcommittee was of the opinion that the issue identified was not unique to the Village and that a change was required for all aspects of the Authority's operation if we are to meet the challenges facing the organization as a whole. Specifically for the Village. a governance system was discussed which changes the role of the Full Authority, delegates greater decision making powers to a reformed Advisory Board and empowers management staff to a much greater extent. Conceptually, the Full Authority would approve the annual operating plan and review a report at the end of the year which details actual performance relative to the plan. Monitoring of performance within year and decisions requiring significant changes to the operating plan would become the responsibility of what is now the Advisory Board and all operating decisions consistent with the plan filed and approved by the Authority would be vested with staff The Subcommittee recognizes that a change of this magnitude is clearly beyond its Terms of Reference and will require input and discussion by the Full Authority. Recommendation 3 The Subcommittee recommends that a review of the roles and responsibilities of Advisory Boards be initiated immediately and that a new system be devised which decentralizes the governance process in an effort to streamline and expedite operational decision making throughout the Authority. With respect to the fundraising function which will also become increasingly important in the achievement of the business plan, the Subcommittee recognized the importance of recruiting individuals with specific expertise from the broader community to assist in these efforts. The dedication of such a group to the Village's ongoing fundraising needs, without concern for other projects, was also considered to be imperative. 6 E65 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 In the absence of a separate Board of Directors as had been recommended. the Subcommittee considered ways in which a fundraising group unique to the Village could be established. Obviously, this discussion considered the.existing Foundation and its ability to assist in this endeavour and. in swnmary, the options iaentified were to establish a new, separate foundation solely for the Village or establish a separate committee of the existing Foundation dedicated to the Village. The issues identified in p~ping this initiative included: . Potential duplication of administrative overhead costs if a new foundation is created. . Length of time it would take to secure the necessary charitable status for a new foundation. . Impact of a change at this point on the ongoing capital campaign for the Village. . Relationship of a separate foundation to the existing Foundation and to the Authority. . Relationship of a separate committee to the balance of the Foundation's fundraising effortS and the degree to which the committee might be allowed to operate independently of other projects. . Potential conflicts between either a separate committee or a new foundation and the operational decision making body of the Village, . Ability to attract suitably qualified individuals to participate in fundraising efforts if sufficient latitude and authority is not given to the group, The Subcommittee concluded that it is essential for the Village to have a dedicated fundraising arm but whether it resides within the existing Foundation or is established as a separate entity, requires further discussion with the Foundation. Recommendation 4 The Subcommittee recommends that a separate group of individuals from the community be established to raise funds for the Village and that the Authority immediately enter into discussions with the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto in order to determine the most effective means of implementing this recommendation. F:\FO\KEN25S\PUBLIC\BCPVSUB.REP 7 .. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23.1996 E6G .. .' .. APPENDIX 1 E67 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 .. BLACK CREEK PIONEER mLAGE BUS~SSPLANSUBCOMmnTTEE MEMBERSIDP .. AUTHORITY MEMBERS Dick O'Brien Authority Chair Richard Whitehead Chair, Conservation and Related Land Mangement Advisory Board Maria Augimeri Member, Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board Randy Barber Member, Conservation and Related Land Mangement Advisory Board CONSERVATION FOUNDATION OF GREATER TORONTO MEMBER Diane Sutter Chair, Black Creek Pioneer Village Pro Tem Committee STAFF NfEMBERS Craig Mather Chief Administrative Officer Ken Owen Director, Facilities and Operations Marty Brent Manager, Black Creek Pioneer Village .. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 E68 .. .. APPENDIX 2 .. E69 CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT .ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 .. BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILlAGE BUSINESS PlAN DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE .. OBJECTIVE OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE To work with staff in the development of a Business Plan for BCPV which will be recommended for adoption at the April 19. 1 996 Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board meeting. OBJECTIVE OF THE PLAN The Plan will: . Establish multi-year budget targets . Provide direction at a conceptual level of how these targets will be achieved . Provide a governance model for the Village In order to develop these outcomes in the Plan, the sub-comminee will: . Examine the revenues and expenses of the operation of the Village . Consider the impacts of raising or lowering these figures on Village operations . Consider the Village operations as they relate to the Authority's overall corporate strategy and direction . Consider the direction of the Authority's funding partners . Examine and recommend alternate ways of doing business that should be developed in pursuit of a more stable funding environment . ResearCh and examine a range of governance models and recommend an effective model which recognizes the need for timely and accountable decisions. .. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4196, AUGUST 23. 1996 E70 .. - APPENDIX 3 E71 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 .. ., BLACK CRFEK PIONEER VILLAGE ., BASELINE MAlNTEJ.'iAJ.'iCE COSTS June, 1996 BCPV Business Plan Subcommittee - CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 E72 Baseline Wainten:JDce Com ~Hnl'! mmntPnan~ costs ofBCPV, or core COst, is defined as me basic custOdiallevei care of!be collection (im:lnding bistcric buildings). " Core level assumptions: . core operation covers basic p1-o~on of aSSdS and lia11rility; - . cove:s minimum level custOdial ~ of 50,000 item artii3ct collection, bistcric buildings, and basic grounds m~in1'JI!'n:mce . no public access . no public programs, edn~rion programs or services . no promotion or marketing costs . no retail or rental operations . no MTRCA meetings or other services Adminimrion Costs MarerialsJ Supplies 10.000 Servicesircts 5~ 000 63.000 Colledons CJre Salaries/ii/ages (:FT - Z PT) - 132.000 MaterialS! Supplies 10.000 152.000 F3.diries md Grounds CJre SalarieS/Wages (7 IT + 4..5 PT) 210,000 MaterialS! Supplies 57,000 Services! Re:lts 133,000 tJ tili ri es 180,000 Sec:.u1ty 80 000 660,000 Total Core ~~vel Operating Cost S875,OOO Administr:lrion - office equipment, telephone, insurance, taxes, part time secretarial Collections Care. basic level includes storage in current locations, collection condition assessment. basic record-keeping for' legal purposes, preventive conservation but no active tre:mnents for damaged collections. F:u:iliries md Grounds Care- basic level includes basic utilities, routine (preventive) m~i~ance on historic buildings (no c:1pital improvemc:ms), ~linM budget of material.s and. supplies, mandatory licenses and contraCtS for equipment (e.g. elevator, mill pump, kitchen hoods and sec:.Irity ;Janels), mow cle:uing , grass cu:tting, tree trimming, and minimum grounds care. E73 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23.1996 Det:aiJed BCPV Cost Bre:akdoWll- Baseline MaiDteJwace Cost! Administr:1Iion .. part rime sec:'etarial 15,000 equipment 10,000 lI1SUI'aD.ce 28,000 taxes 10,000 .. 63,000 Collections Care CuratOr 70,000 Registrar 48,000 Pt rime labour 14,000 Materials/supplies/equipment 20,000 15~000 Facilities and Grounds C.JIe Salaries 210,000 1 tradesman.. 1 le:ui hand.. 1 labourer pit .:ie:ming Materi:ti.sJ supplies - supplies. filters. sand.. salt, sysre:n chemicals 16.500 elec:rical.r'lumcing. tools, supplies 15.500 lumber. paint. hardware, repair:nateria1s 25,000 ServiceSl Re:lts vehicie (chargeback) 19,000 inspections (hydrants, mill pump, fire en) 9,000 equipmem 2.000 Visitor C;:nrre heating/cooling system 4i,000 Visitor C~ntre equipment maintenance 1 i,500 kitchen system maintenance 6,iOO waste removal 4,.300 Village buildings preventative maintenance 2i ,500 ~O,OOO Utilities Gas 24,500 Hydro 145,000 Wate: 10,500 Security 80,000 260,000 Tow Baseline Asset Cost 875,000 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23, 1996 E74 .. .. APPENDIX 4 E75 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23, 1996 Black Creek Pioneer Village Financial and Operating Plan 1'997-1999 An aggressive plan has been establi~ed for Black Creek Pioneer Village to meet the substantial revenue targets required as levy is reduced to cover only annual baseline asset management. Baseline costs have been revised to $875,000 which represensts only those costs which would be associated with the protection of the Village's assets including the artifact collection and the historic buildings. It is projected that the levy reduction goal will be achieved by 1998, contingent on a number of assumptions being successfully integrated into the operation of the business. Assumctions in 3-vear Plan . A sponsor for the Terrace will be found in 1996, and the Terrace capital improvements will be completed by April, 1997. New Catering revenue is projected on a '96 Fall-Winter sales effort to book weddings, banquets, and corporate events for a full 1997 patio season. . The real dollars dedicated to BCPV advertising budget would be $200,000 annually. Currently, $104,00 of the $204,000 BCPV marketing budget is allocated to Corporate Communications staffing who provide little or no direct service to BCPV, This shift is required to increase promotion of the 1997 Balloon exhibition, and drive a minimum of 8% increase in paid attendance to BCPV. . Sponsorships amounting to $350,000 a year for 3 years, commencing in 1997, are successfully negotiated by Arts and Communications Counsellors by Fall 1996. Included in this package is increased media time valued at $90,000 which, when coupled with the $200,000 advertising budget identified above, will triple the 1995 advertising allocation and establish BCPV more substantially against the competition. . BCPV launches a new business initiative - dinner theatre. This will require marketing and capital investment in 1996 and 1997 for introduction of this new business by May 1997. An operating profit is projected in year 2 of operation. . Rate increases factored into plan. Admission rate increase to $8.50 from $8.00 would occur in 1998. Parking rate increase to $5 per car would occur in 1999. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 E76 . Establishment of membership/development department in 1997. Membership development will be the backbone of development/fundraising, with BCPV Board and DeveloJ?ment staff (new position) growing donations and endowment. Establishment of a Crown Foundation will be pursued but is not factored into the business plan at this point. ~ Revenue Generating Initiatives 1. Membership and Development Growth in membership will be substantial over four years, starting in 1996. With modest resourcing, the repackaging and strategic development of membership should have an immediate short term revenue growth impact (over 18 months) and a substantial growth impact in 1998 and 1999. The strategy will raise existing membership renewal rate, increase a proportion of donors' current giving levels, and convert a more significant percentage of Village visitors into members. The program is projected to grow from the $22,000 (1995 actuals) to $220,000 by 1999. A Development Department, with a staff of 1 + support, will be created in 1997 and will be dedicated to individual and corporate gifts, as well as directing the membership program. The resources to cover these costs will come from a combination of cost reduction and membership revenues. 2. Sponsorship Development Seven Sponsorship packages have been identified by the consultant which, if successfully negotiated by Fall 1996, will contribute $350,000 per year for 3 years. These sponsorship packages include Education sponsorship, Dickson's Hill School Partner, Environmental Partner, Promotional Partners, Performance Partner, Mill Partner, Christmas Partner, and Seniors Day Partner, 3. Catering Revenue With the redeveloped patio and some growth in general attendance, BCPV catering will increase banquet and corporate business generating a net revenue of $56,000 in 1997. This will grow to $80,000 by 1999. Profitability of Food Services from special functions and Village outlets will improve, beginning with an ambitious net return of $76,000 in 1997 and building to over $120,000 net profit by 1999. 4. Dinner Theatre (BCPV Visitors Centre Theatres) A business plan for Dinner Theatre is currently being developed with an independent firm that has created dinner theatre for Ste Marie Among the Hurons. This initiative would be a three-way partnership between BCPV, the show's creator, and a sponsor (1 element of the Performance Partner package noted above). It will require start-up marketing costs in 1996 to sell En CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23, 1996 the 1997 season plus capital costs in 1997 for set design and construction in the BC?V Theatres. The objective is to develop both the local Toronto market (corporate + individuals) and the bus trade. Opportunity to cross .. promote with Ste Marie Among the Hurons is being explored. It is anticipated this initiative would generate a net revenue in year 2 (1998) and beyond. .. 5. Attendance and admission revenues This plan projects extremely conservative attendance increase of about 8,000 visitors in 1997 (8% of 100,000 full paid admissions in 1995) because of 1) special balloon theme exhibit May - August and 2) increased advertising budget including contra negotiated by sponsorship consultant. This attendance goal may increase substantially, but BC?V has no substantive analysis available at this time and has projected conservatively. The goal for 1998 is the retention of 1997 attendance levels despite the impact of a rate increase in 1998. The goal for 1999 is a 4% increase in attendance, when admission rates remain the same as 1998 but parking rate increases $1 per car. A special, yet to be defined summer exhibition is also projected in 1999 to drive the attendance increase and some budget has been allocated for its execution. Parking increases are projected in 1997 because of the sale of passes to York University students, and anticipated business resulting from the operation of the Ice Gardens. 6. Education Fees BCPV is negotiating with the Ice Gardens to supply special programs for their Summer Hockey Camp which is geared to children age 6 - 1 3. BC?V projects an increase of 5,000 students and a net revenue of about $28,000 from the Ice Gardens by year three of this plan. 3 Year Plan Financial Summarv 1997 Revenue Changes . Increase catering activity to generate $76,000 net from patio, from weddings, functions . Increase admission and parking revenue by $65,000 from promotion & special exhibition . Increase membership revenue by $55,000 or more . $350,000 from year 1 Sponsorships . Dinner Theatre operation on cost recovery basis in year 1 Expenditure Changes CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 E78 . Development staff on boar<<:, $60,000 . Sponsorship fees of $70,000 . Dinner Theatre operation on cost recovery . Catering cost increase proportionate to level of business .. 1998 Revenue Changes . Admissions increase of $48,000 from fee increase . Parking increase of $12,000 from York and volume of attendance . New Licensing and retail agreements to net $20,000 . Substantial membership growth increase . Development department should generate $90,000 from giving programs/donor cultivation . Lease agreement with private firm for restaurant or other venture in Agnew House will net $20,000. Expenditure Changes . Maintenance budget to increase by $90,000 to cover major routine work on a regular basis . Development Department to increase staffing to supervise membership program. 1999 Revenue Changes . Admissions growth of $12,000 at 4% and parking increase . Retail increase to reflect increased attendance plus licensing opportunities . Membership growth continuing to full capacity and development department achieving target of $125,000 (net) . Dinner theatre projected to net $40,000 and be well established with travel trade sector. Expenditure Changes . Events Development program established to continue annual "new" theme for promotion, including promotion start-up. E79 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 Black Creek Pioneer Village EXPENSES RESOURCES ~ REVISED 1997 1998 1999 Program Management 356,400 370,000 370,000 370,000 _. Curatorial ~ 162.000 164,000 165,000 165,000 AdmissionS/Parking 148,400 148,000 149,000 149,000 Gift Shop 285,400 285,000 285,000 285,000 Operations 1,134,500 1,120,000 1,125,000 1,132,000 Maintenance 412,400 397,000 491,000 500,000 Sponsorships 50,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 Education 223,100 226,000 229,000 232,000 Membership/Development 60,000 100,000 100,000 Dinner Theatre 25,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Events Development 184,000 Marketing 204,000 204,000 204,000 204,000 Other 41 2. 1 00 423.000 423,000 423.000 SUB TOTAL 3,413,300 3,542,000 3,686,000 3,889,000 Food Service 750,000 830,000 852.000 872.000 TOTALS 4,163,300 4,372,000 4,538,000 4,761,000 REVENUES RESOURCES 96 REVISED 1997 1998 1999 Admissions $568,000 $640,000 $688,000 $700,000 Parking 69,500 80,000 92,000 100,000 Sponsorships 20,900 380,000 390,000 400,000 Retail Ventures 552,000 562,000 582,000 607,000 Membership 25,000 100,000 190,000 220,000 Development 35,000 60,000 90,000 125,000 Education 242,100 250,000 266,000 294,000 Dinner Theatre 75,000 100,000 115,000 Agnew Lease 20,000 25,000 Other 98.000 100.000 100.000 100.000 SUB TOTAL 1,610,500 2,247,000 2,518,000 2,686,000 Food Service 770,000 906,000 945,000 1,000,000 SEl.F GENERATED REVENUE ~380,500 3,153,000 3,463,000 3,686,000 Grant 220,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Foundation 209,000 Asset Management Grant 875,000 875,000 875,000 Levy 1.353.800 144.000 Q Q TO.,.lL REVENUES 4,163,300 4,372,000 4,538,000 4,761,000 . CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23.1996 ESO .. .. APPENDIX 5 ES1 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE THE NEXT FORTY YEARS .. GOVERNAl~CE MODELS .. INTRODUCTION In the face of the unprecedented reductions in tax dollar support anticipated for the Village as it enters its second forty years, significant change will be required at all levels of the organization if it is to meet the challenges ahead. It is certain that a higher degree of self sufficiency will be a cornerstone of the Village's furore success. This will be achieved through a combination of generating more revenues from new and traditional sources and wringing every possible efficiency out of each dollar made in expenditures. Staff commitment to change in this direction is high and can be demonstrated in a number or initiatives which have commenced and are ongoing. In order for this committnent to be sustained and enhanced. JIld indeed. for the objective of greater self sufficiency to be achieved. the framework within which initiatives are undertaken must recognize the need for efficiency :md creativity. Any policies, processes or procedures of the organization must., in the furore. only be adopted after it has been determined that they :u:id value to the achievement of the mission or the Village. Similarly, existing policies, processes and procedures must be exposed to scrutiny and meet the same test or adding value. The most fundamental policy which determines all others and, in addition. impacts all processes and procedures. is the governance policy of the facility. Any review of this narore must start here and it is with this in mind that the following discussion on the future of governance for the Village is put forward. GOVERNA.~CE OF THE VlLLAGE - THE STATUS Qeo Before considering the options available, it would be beneficial to understand the governance model under which the Village currently operates. Today. the Village is governed by a multi-layered system which involves, in ascending order of authority above the Nlanager of the facility: the Director of Facilities and Operations. the Chief Administrative Officer, the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board and finally, the Full Authority, The Finance and Administration Advisory Board constitutes an additional layer to the extent that it deals with the Village's annual budget in the context of the overall Authority budget approval process and the Executive Committee can be considered another layer still with regard to the purchasing procedures established for Authority operations. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY ~OARD #4196. A~GUST 23.1996 E82 Recommendations that relate to the operntio~ maintenance and development of the Village are vetted at the staff level. navigating a treacherous course from Village staff to Director, possibly to Management Committee and/or the CAQ. Having survived this review, e,cam;nation may then pass to the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board which. in most instances. has no decision making power but, instead. makes its recommendations to the Full Authority. Issues examined at the Advisory Board level are then open for re-examination by the Full Authority where a decision is finally' ratified. Development (ie. fundraising) initiatives at the Village occur in one of two ways. Some projects, usually small ones, are undertaken using the available staff resources at the Village, led by the Manager. Most often such projects could be classified as sponsorships in support of a specific program or event. Because there is no Development Officer as pan of the staff complement, rarely would staffhave the time or capacity to take on a fundraising program to support a major capital. maintenance or operations need. Advisory Board or Full Authority members render assistance from time to time if requested but this is not frequent and is not viewed as a normal 'duty' of Board members. Major capital campaigns in support of the Village :lI'e undenaken from time to time by the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, a separate body with its own organizational structure. Board members. policies and procedures. The Foundation raises funds specifically for Authority capital projects of all kinds and only at the request of the Authority, GOVER.1\(ANCE OF THE VILLAGE - OPTIONS FOR THE FUTURE The Status Quo In answering the question of whether this model adds value to the achievement of the self sufficiency objective, one would have to respond in the negative for the following reasons: In surveying the practices of other similar facilities in Canada and the united States, we could find no other institution with a governance model similar to ours, In fact, it is almost universal that the facilities we looked to had a model consisting of a separate Board of Directors (or Trustees) who had been given the sineuJar responsibility for guiding the activities of their operation. There is some variation in whether the fundraising needed to support the facility is carried out by the Board or by a separate Foundation, but where there was a separate F oundatiOIl, its ~ purpose was to raise funds only for that facility. It is important to note that. this pattern holds regardless of the nature of the 'parent' organization whether it is Federal (ie. Fort York, Ste. Marie Among the Hurons), Provincial (ie. McMichael Gallery, Upper Canada Village, Ontario Agricultural Museum. Glenbow Museum) or municipal (ie. Metro Zoo, O'Keefe Centre). This model also holds true for major facilities like Colonial Williamsburg in Virginia., Old Sturbridge Village in Massachusetts and Shelburne Farms in Vermont which are run by not- for-profit foundations established for the express purpose of overseeing the operation and development of these musewn/attractions. E83 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23, 1996 There are several weaknesses inherent in the Village's status quo model. Foremost is the rigorous decision making process. For a facility which will have to rely on its ability to identify and act on opporrunities and do so with a !~:m and efficient staff. the present process is too time consuming, uncertain and inflexible. It epitomizes the traditional 'top-down' approach of the past and. to use a currently popular phrase in management circles, represents 'rowing' instead of 'steering'. While it is true that with public funding suppon comes a cenain expectation of accountability, alternatives exist for ensuring adequate levels of accountability in a governance model as will be demonstrated later. The second weakness could be described as organizational distraction. When sitting as the Board of Directors, Authority members oversee a remarkably complex range of issues and programs which constitute the business of the various Divisions and Sections of the Authority, The Village is only one. In addition to this, these same members have to deal with local and regional council issues in their home municipalities. committee work. constituency work and some must even balance personal business interestS amongst all their duties as elected and appointed officials. To expect the level of attention. interest. hard work and commitment from these people which is required to support and add value to the governance of the Village as it meets the challenges of the future is to coUrt disaster, Similarly, the Foundation has a number of projects currently under way. Some of these (ie. Brickworks) are large but limited duration while others (ie. Foster Woods. Greenspace Acquisition) will require an ongoing commitment for J. protracted length of time. The Foundation views itself as an aide to all of the Authority's programs and tries to meet as many of the identified needs as possible, This limits its ability to concentrate on the Village' s needs except when it is the Village' s rum (which it was in 1985 and then again in 1996) and prohibits its panicipation in the ongoing support of operations which is critical. In addition. the volwlteer members of the Foundation mayor may not have the commitment and passion to the Village's goals that are required. They may have been recruited and gave their time because of an interest in land acquisition while cultural heritage matters do not capture their imagination in the least. Clearly their contributions to the former can be expected to be much more significant than to the latter. Organizational distraction also manifests itself as members, staff and the public wrestle with the implications of the Authority's well publicized corporate direction of focusing on its core business of healthy rivers. Decisions at all levels are consistently confronted with the apparent lack of connection between the Village and the core business of the parent organization. This is funher complicated by the feeling of almost everyone involved that. regardless of whether or not the Village contributes to healthy rivers, it is too important a facility to allow it to be destroyed. While the public seems to be coming to terms with this issue of the Village's place in the ecosystem as evidenced by the discussions taking place at the Humber Watershed T:lSk Force. it will undoubtedly remain an issue for debate for as long as financial priorities have to be established within the Authority to reconcile the difference between the supply and demand of public funds. The status quo model feeds the organizational distraction which is impacting on the Village's CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23, 1996 E84 ability to formulate and pursue aggressive plans to ensure its future. The model served the Village well during a period of time when public funds were plentiful for such projects but will not add value to the operation in the future ~hen public funds will be scarce and new. creative funding mechanisms will have to be developed. The Status Quo governance model is no.! recommended. Privatization Twning the operation of public facilities and programs over to private sector interests is often suggested as a means of making the Village self sufficient thereby reducing the drain on the public purse. It has, in fact been suggested in the past for the Village both in the context of the entire operation as well as for its component parts. especially Food Services and the Gift Shop, Partnering with the private sector for J.lI or part of the Village's operation is a model which warrants close examination. however a meaningful assessment of the pros and cons of this approach can only be carried out if there is tirst a consensus reached on the standards of operation which are appropriate and acceptable, The Village. for its first forty years of life. has been first and foremost a museum. Its collections of buildings and artifacts were acquired largely through donation on the understanding that they would be conserved in perpetuity as a permanent record of the life :md times of the people who carved this country out of the wilderness. The Province and the Authority's member municipalities share with us the custodial duty of care for these priceless pieces and in a very real way, we have a responsibility to the rest of Canada to ensure this national treasure is not lost. It is clear to most observers that the traditional museum approach of the past will not be successful in the furore as a means of achieving the goal of ensuring the survival of this tre:lSure, Indeed. this is the underlying force which has resulted in the Village generating an industry- leading 53 per cent of its operating funds through various user fees and products. It is also clear to most observers that, as good as 53 per cent might have been in the past. it will not be sufficient in the furore. In any discussion of how privatization might contribute to the long term conservation of the assets now managed by the Village. steps must be taken to ensure that the public's 'bottom line' of protection of the integrity and significance of the assets is not overshadowed by a private operator's profit oriented bottom line. This is normally achieved by the construction of a tightly worded Terms of Reference which are distributed to interested operators and which culminate in the receipt of a Proposal. The Terms of Reference document the sundards of operation referenced above and serve as the yardstick against which the performance of the contractor is assessed. If the heritage aspects of the Village do not restrict the way in which the facility is operated. then the standards would essentially reflect a parcel of land with certain improvements, some of which are old buildings. These buildings mayor may not support the business of the operator E85 CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23. 1996 and mayor may not survive the redevelopment of the site carried out to cre:lte a revenue producing business. ., This point of view could be expected to be opposed from the perspective of the public and is at odds with the Heritage Act which applies to owners of such assets whether public or private. If it is agreed that the heritage aspects of the Village would have to be protected through the establishment of the operating standards contained. in the Terms of Reference for a Proposal Call, then the probability of a for-profit model being successful for the entire Village is remote at best. The operation currently recovers 53 per cent of its operating cost while functioning somewhere between the 'museum' and 'attraction' models. This recovery rate experience takes into account only the day to day operating costs of the facility and excludes capital and major maintenance costs which have been deferred for a. number of years. Moving along this continuum closer to the attraction end will involve compromises to the museum standards and will improve the recovery rate on operations. It is unrealistic, however. to expect that a private operator could generate sufficient revenues from the facility to create an adequate return on investment if the operator must also make capital improvements to support operations and maintain the heritage aspects of the property. In the absence of capital investment., the likely outcome of a parmership with the private sector would be an operation focused on the short term where the Village would essentially be 'mined' for its revenues until such time as the assets deteriorate to the point that visitation is impossible or unattractive. The Foundation is currently planning a major capital campaign to address the needs of the Village for structural improvements and repairs. The continued operation of the Village in the future will rely on this investment. It is unlikely that the Foundation could mount a successful campaign to raise these funds if it is perceived that the investment would be made to support a profit motivated operator. The use of the privatization model for cenain components of the Village.s operation is certainly worth funher investigation, panicularly for those components which have been developed over time to support the core business by generating additional operating revenue. The restrictions would be fewer and the potential for profit greater for these components. The administration of private contracts would, however, have to fit into the operating policies and standards of the facility. This would be a function of the governing body, whichever model is ultimately chosen. The Privatization governance model is not recommended. An Independent Operating Body In stark cont:rast to the diversification oriented strategies of the 1980's, industry in the 1990's is increasingly shedding business units which do not relate to their core business, There are many examples of this trend contained in the Business Sections of the newspapers but a current one is Molsons efforts to sell off its interest in Diversey. In hindsight, one would have to wonder why a beer maker thought they could do a goodjob of producing cleaning products but it probably CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23.1996 ES6 seemed like a good idea at the time. Similarly, there were very good re:lSons for the Authority to get into the cultural heritage business forty years ago but the validity of those re:lSons have been obscured by time and changing circumstances. This is not to say, however, that the validity of someone being in the business is any less than it was then. In fact. there are probably bener reasons to be in the business today with the pace at which these resources are being lost. But just as Molsons has recognized that both their core beer business as well as the cleaning products business of Diversey need the focused attention of managers devoted to those enterprises. the Authority must recognize that neither its core business of healthy rivers nor the important business of the Village are well served by the distractions created by trying to balance the interests of both. It is from this perspective that the concept of 'spinning off' the Village as a separate operating entity is put forward. There are a variety of ways in which this model could be implemented which will be examined in further detail below but, regardless of the final design of the model. the primary objective is to provide a focus to the organization and to build comminnent to its objectives. All important secondary objective of such an exercise would be to provide capable and devoted leadership which encompasses the variety of skiils and contacts required including political. marketing, fundraising, business management and heritage conservation, An Authority Appointed Board of Directors In its simplest form. implementing this model would involve the appointment of a Board of Directors by the Authority which would be charged with the sole responsibility of overseeing the Village operation. A set of bylaws would be wrinen to establish the framework for this Board to operate within and the details of the reporting relationship between the Board :md the Authority would be set out, These bylaws may set out some policies and procedures which are different than those which govern the rest of the Authority's operation. In this scenario, there remains a high degree of association between the facility and the Authority and a relatively high degree of financial responsibility remains with the Authority. A Not-For-Profit Corporation \Vithout Share Capital Provincial legislation provides generally for the establishment of an independent, not-for-profit corporation without share capital. The objects of the company are established through its articles of incorporation. The composition of the Board of Directors is laid out to deal with whatever distribution of representation issues have been identified and a constitution or bylaw is wrinen for the organization setting out the duties and responsibilities of the Officers and senior staff. The Board establishes its own policies and procedures to govern the operation in accordance with its objects and there is no requirement for reporting to some higher authority other than as it regards the maintenance of articles of incorporation. This mechanism has been identified recently as a means by which Land Trusts concerned with the conservation of specific land forms or landscapes could be formed and involve local communities in the process. The yluskolca Land Trust is one such organization established in this way. E87 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96, AUGUST 23. 1996 Specific legislation may also be passed to create such corporations. This is in fact how the Metro Zoo is governed and is the new model recently adopted by the O'Keefe Centre. In these Acts. the new corporation mayor may not be required to follow certain guiding principles. For example, the Act setting out the relationslUp between the Zoo and Metropolitan Toronto Council provides for Council to "...establish general policies to be followed by the Board of Management in the operation, management and maintenance of the Metropolitan Toronto Zoo...". On the other hand, the draft legislation proposed' for the O'Keefe Centre has no such provision and empowers the Board to '.,..manage and supervise the affairs of the Corporation." The only approval power conferred upon Metro in this draft Act is with respect to the changing of the name of the Centre. While there is generally a great deal of autonomy granted to the Board in such corporations to manage their own affairs, where there are physical assets involved, the parent organization often retains ownership of the assets and enters into a le:lSe agreement with the new corporation. This is the C:lSe with the Zoo and will be the C:lSe at the O'Keefe. Protection of the underlying value of the assets can be ensured by incorporating terms and conditions into the lease which limit the powers of the Board to act unilaterally in this regard and could establish certain limits or standards that are judged to be appropriate. Another example of this model is the scenario at the Y{cNlichael Gallery. In this insmnce. the corporation is established through the _'vfc~'vfichael Canadian Art Collection Act and there is a continuing relationship between the Gallery and the Provincial government through the requirement for the filing of an Annual Report. Similar JrnUlgements would also be in place for other Scheduled agencies of the Crown such as Upper C.mad.a Village or the Ontario Agricultural Museum. The Foundation As Operator The operation of a public or quasi-public facility by an independent charitable foundation is a model which has been applied many times in the past and, in some instances, applied quite successfully, As noted earlier, the most successful and well known example is Colonial Williamsburg but there are many other applications of the model throughout the world. An unsuccessful application of the model was the Zoological Society of Metro Toronto which. at one time. operated the Metro Zoo on behalf of the municipality. TIlls has been subsequently replaced by a model consisting of a separate Board of Directors to oversee operations with the Zoological Society fulfilling the role of fundraisers for the facility. It should be noted that in the Foundation model typified by Colonial Williamsburg, there is no parent organization to which that Foundation is responsible or accountable. They are a totally independent.. nonprofit educational organization which manages and enjoys outright ownership of the restored area. In an effort to help support the heritage education programs. this organization also owns other. non-heritage assets such as hotels, restaur:mts and retail operations which it manages as profit centres. In many respects, the foundation model is not really a model at all but, rather, a means by which .. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 EBB a Board of Directors is established for a separate, nonprofit corporation. Normally, however, these fOWldations are not placed in the position of taking over existing facilities which had been run by public agencies which necessitates the trnnsfer of public assets to a private body. Usually, these fOWldations are established (and end;cwed) by a philanthropist as a means of managing the facility in perpetuity, Regardless of how such a foundation comes into being, its one and only interest is in the management of the faciljty it was established to manage and any ancillary businesses it engages in are only aimed at supporting that facility. Analysis of Independent Operating Body Options When searching for a governance model which achieves the objective of establishing a focused and committed organization, an independent body assembled according to their individual interest and skills and given the responsibility and authority to manage the facility is best suited to the challenge. The foregoing discussion indicates the range of alternatives available under the Independent Operating Body model and the following analysis will examine the strengths and weaknesses of each. The advantage of the Authority appointing a separate Board of Directors to oversee the Village is that it affords the highest level of direct control over the operation and would be viewed. therefore. as the model with the greatest degree of accoWltabiiity to the public. In addition. depending on the degree to which this new Board would be allowed to establish its own policies and operate outside of the established Authority procedures, it could potentially have a positive impact on streamlining the decision making process for the Village. The recruinnem of board members could be c:uned out in such a way as to provide resources to the facility which have not been available in the past. Finally, human resource issues would not result since the staff would still be working for the Authority. The main disadvantage of this model is that the Village would still be viewed as :11, Authority facility and would continue to contribute to and suffer from the organizational distraction described earlier. Fundraising and sponsorship development would continue to have to be coordinated in some way with similar initiatives for other aspects of the Authority operation and would not, therefore have as free a rein as if it was an independent organization. Should the new Board be established without significant decision making powers. it would be nothing more than another advisory body and would result in more process, not less. Should decision making powers be limited and board members expected to serve in an advisory capacity only, the caliber of talent attracted to the facility would likely not be as high. The creation of a not-far-profit corporation without share capital through special legislation is not a viable option due to the difficulties and time required to have an Act introduced and passed into law. The creation of such a corporation through available mechanisms is achievable, however and has the following advantages as a governance model for-the Village. Primarily, it establishes a clear separation between the Village and the Authority's core business units and provides a . E89 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23, 1996 streamlined.. responsive decision making framework. Aggressive steps to deal with funding and progr:unming issues would be more easily implemented and a greater number of creative ideas from a wider range of perspectives woul4' be likely, Attracting high profile, well connected and business-wise members to the Board would be easier resulting in greater contacts with the community, particularly the business community. ., The disadvantages of this model rest largely with the perception of a lack of accountability of a separate Board of Directors. In addition. sensitive human resource issues may result as the current staff would find itself working for a new corporation. not the Authority and this new corporation would be empowered to establish its own human resource policies regarding such matters as salaries and benefits. Finally, the Village not only is about history, but it has history. Many individuals have been involved in the creation of the Village over the ye:lIS including Authority members past and present. Authority staff past and present, donors and customers. A change as .significant as this can be expected to attract its share of critics, particularly if not well communicated in advance, The advantages of this model are greater than the advantages of any of the other models discussed. The disadvantages do not outweigh the advantages. particularly when one considers the steps which could be taken to overcome the difficulties, Specifically, with respect to the accountability issue. it must be accepted that accountability does not have to come from . rowing' but can be as effective, if not more so, as a result of' steering' . Mechanisms for the Authority to discharge its responsibilities towards the Village operation which are based on the establishment and monitoring of performance indicators rather than budgets can be introduced in the articles of incorporation, if desired and would be more effective, Annual operating plans followed up by year end reports are common tools used to accomplish this. Indeed. as the Village moves closer to self sufficiency in the coming years, the issue of accountability to a level of government providing funding support can be expected to diminish, to be replaced with concern for accountability to its customers. With respect to human resource matters, depending on one's outlook, the model could present exciting opportunities rather than simply risks, An enlightened Board could very well establish compensation policies which include performance based incentives to help stimulate creativity, risk taking and customer service. Similar matters have been successfully resolved in other instances of this nature, even in unionized environments, by recognizing staff concerns in the articles of incorporation. Above alL the existing staff will have to weigh the risks associated with change against the risk resulting from a resistance to change, This same message should form the basis for the communication plan to the broader public should this model be adopted. It is clear the Village cannot survive without significant change and the price of resisting innovative attempts to ensure its survival will surely result in its demise. The creation of a Not-Far-Profit Corporation Without Share Capital is recommended. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 E90 .. THE ROLE OF THE FOUNDATION Fundraising for both capital and operating needs will be essential sources of support for the Village in the future. Similarly, other Authority programs and operations will increasingly rely on the Foundation to support their activities. Combined, these facts mean that the Foundation will have less time to devote to the Vill~e. not more. This reluctance to spread itself too thinly across the watershed is what prompted the Foundation to deny the Authority's recent request to raise $500,000 in operating funds for the Village for 1996. As noted earlier, successful foundations associated with facilities are established for the sole purpose of supporting that institution. The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto as it is cUITently constituted does not view itself as a single cause fundraiser and has made it clear they do not want to become such an organization. In addition, the Foundation is made I~p of a variety of individuals with a range of interests and skills. however these interests and skills were not specifically chosen to meet the needs of the Village, These people were also not chosen to be. nor are they interested in becoming, a working Board of Directors for the Village. It is. therefore. impractical to suggest that the Foundation take over responsibility for the operation of the Village and become its Board of Directors. It is not what the Village needs at this juncture and to do so would put at risk the support the Foundation provides to such prognuns as land acquisition and tree planting. Should a not-for-profit corporation be established as recommended. the Board will have to make its own determination of how best to achieve the fundraising targets it will undoubtedly set for itself. In the short term. the Foundation should be encouraged to vigorously carry forward with its current capital C31llpaign since any new Board would not be in a position to take over this responsibility immediately anyway. In the longer term. the Foundation should be encouraged to enter into discussions with the Board to determine how they might contribute to the Village's needs once the capital C31llpaign has reached its successful conclusion. The participation of the Foundation in the governance a/the Village is not recommended. . E91 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 .. .. APPENDIX 6 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY.BOARD #4f96. AUGUST 23. 1996 E92 SEARS& RUSSELL .. CONSUtJ'ANTS UMlTED 111 Avenue Road Suite 700 Toronto, Ontario MEMORANDUM MSR 318, Canada Tel: (416) 926-8242 .. Fax: (416) 926-1426 To: Ken Owen From: Henry Sears Date: May 24, 1996, revised Re: BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE This memorandum follows the meeting with the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business P~an Sub-Committee, and subsequent discussions. During the most recent meeting a question was :aised whether there was an alternative to the creation of an independent entity to govern BCPV. There are alternative governance models, such as the creation of an Advisory Board which could provide some focus on the Village, while remaining connected technicallv with the Authority. However, in our view a . . governance model based upon an advisory group is unlikely to be effective for the following reasons: 1) Although an Advisory Board can focus on the needs of BCPV, it still must function within the context of the overall wITRCA decision-making processes. This means all major decisions - such as a capital improvement program - must be considered as part of the overall priorities.of the .MTRCA, even if minor decision-making powers can be delegated to an Advisory Board. This alternative is no different than the current situation where the priorities of the ~CA and the Village are frequently not identical. 2) The creation of an Advisory Board will not improve the overall decision-making process for the Village. An Advisory Board is adequate for a "maintenance" operation, but is unlikely to be adequate to deal with implementing the scale of change required to change it's public attractiveness and to significantly increase its income-earning capabili ties. .. E93 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD .#4/96. AUGUST 23. 1996 .. .. - 2 - 3) An Advisory Board will not likely be able to successfully mount a major fundraising campaign for either capital improvements or an endowment fund as long as it is seen to be simply a part of the Authority. In summary, it is our view that the establishment of an Advisory Board or a similarly structured body is unlikely to prove to be an effective step. It will most likely be unable to m3rShall the requisite resources or to provide the leadership to champion change of the scale required at the Village. As discussed, the creation of a separate entity is not without risks. However, the failure to do so is not risk free. The need is probably inevitable unless the Authority is content to continue to subsidize BCPV at roughly current levels in perpetuity. If major changes are required they cannot be achieved invisibly. The most effective route is to accept the visibility that will necessarily accompany the restrucr..u'ing and make the changes prcracti.vely. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/96. AUGUST 23.1996 E94 TERMINA TION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11 :35 a.m., August 23, 1996. Richard Whitehead Craig Mather Chair Secretary-Treasurer pI. ~ , the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD SPECIAL MEETING #5/96 September 27, 1996 Page E95 The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board met in the Boardroom, in the Visitor's Centre at Black Creek Pioneer Village on September 27, 1996. The Chair, Richard Whitehead, called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. PRESENT Victoria Carley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Randy Barber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , Member Donna Patterson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Deborah Sword .................................................... Member Richard Whitehead ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chair REGRETS Maria Augimeri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair Michael Di Biase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Lois Hancey . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair, Authority Richard O'Brien ........,...,................................. Chair, Authority Gerri Lynn O'Connor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Paul Palleschi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . Member MINUTES RES. #C18/96 - MINUTES OF MEETING #4/96 Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Victoria Carley THAT the minutes of Meeting #4/96, held August 23, 1996 be approved. . . . .. CARRIED E96 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/96, SEPTEMBER 27,1996 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION RES. #C19/96 - FUND RAISING FOR BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE The Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Plan Sub-Committee recommended a separate fund raising mechanism for Pioneer Village. Staff were directed to discuss this matter with The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto and report back. Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Randy Barber THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT approval in principle be given to the establishment of a special standing committee of The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto with the sole responsibility for fundraising for Black Creek Pioneer Village; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to work with The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto to develop this model in greater detail for review and approval by the Authority before the end of the year. ......................... . . . . .. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #7/96 held on August 30, 1996 the following resolution was passed: "RES. #A 157/96 THA T the recommendation of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Plan Sub-Committee, regarding the need to establish a separate fund raising mechanism for Black Creek Pioneer Village rBCPV) be approved; THA T staff be directed to immediately enter into discussions with The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto rCFGTJ regarding the most effective means of establishing a separate fund raising mechanism that will meet the objectives of both BCPV and the CFGT; AND FURTHER THA T staff report to the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board on the results of these discussions....................... ........................ ...... CARRIED" Based on this direction, a meeting was arranged with the President and Vice-President of The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto (CFGT) to discuss options for setting up a separate fund raising mechanism for the Village. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/96, SEPTEMBER 27,1996 E97 Based on this discussion, it was agreed that the most effective option for establishing a dedicated fundraising mechanism for the Village, would be to create a separate committee of the Foundation dedicated to the Village. This would meet the needs of the Village, while utilizing the experience, reputation and infrastructure already available through the Foundation. This would allow for the recruitment of volunteers especially attuned to, and interested in, the needs of the Village while at the same time relying on the existing staff and services and eliminate the need to duplicate efforts in these areas. It was recognized that if the Foundation is to meet the fundraising needs for both the Authority and the Village as envisioned in the current business planning exercise, and to ensure the coordination of the Foundation's work with the Village's sub-committee, a qualified and a experienced professional fundraiser is required. This position would not only build on the existing fund raising capabilities of the Foundation for the Authority, it would provide the guidance needed to get the Village sub-committee up and running. The position would also coordinate the two activities to ensure fundraising efforts are integrated and do not work at cross purposes. Based on the agreement that a separate and dedicated sub-committee of The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto for Black Creek Pioneer Village would be the most practical and effective way of meeting the fundraising needs of the Village, and the recognition that additional fundraising expertise was required if this model is to be effective, the President of the CFGT agreed to present this model to his Board of Directors at their upcoming meeting on September 24, 1996. The Board of Directors will be asked to support this model in principle in order that a more detailed analysis of costs, reporting mechanisms and structure can be done. When this analysis is complete a final report will be presented to the Board of Directors in December for their approval. It is my opinion that with the help of a professional fund raiser and the careful selection of the sub-committee members, such a model will work. The Authority, in conjunction with Village staff would be directly involved in the selection process for both. At this point, it is not anticipated that any interim financial support will be required from the Authority. These details however will be developed subsequent to receiving the support for this model by the Foundation and the Authority. Just as the Foundation will be asked to support this proposal in principle in order to proceed with more detailed planning, so to is the Authority's support required. It is anticipated that the details can be worked out over the next two months and a final recommendation will be bought to the Authority before the end of the year. This will allow the new structure to be set up and the selection of the sub-committee members to begin, early in the new year. Report prepared by: Craig Mather, Extension 240 E98 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/96, SEPTEMBER 27, 1996 RES. #C20/96 - BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE Recommendations #1 and #2 of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Plan Sub-Committee Report, dated August 16, 1996. Moved by: Randy Barber Seconded by: Donna Patterson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report, dated September 16, 1996, on recommendations #1 and #2 of the Black Creek Pioneer Village Business Sub- Committee Report, be received; THA T the mandate for Black Creek Pioneer Village continue to be the provision of quality public programming and the effective management of the public's investment in its heritage; THA T there be no change to the organizational or reporting relationship between the Authority and Black Creek Pioneer Village; THA T the Authority continue to support the basic land, facilities, and collections costs of Black Creek Pioneer Village, as determined annually through the budget process; AND FURTHER THAT Black Creek Pioneer Village develop multi-year business plans, in conjunction with other Authority businesses plans, to ensure that the balance of Village operating costs are raised from non-tax sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. CARRIED BACKGROUND At C&RLM Meeting #4/96, Resolution #C16/96 was passed, referring Recommendations #1 and #2 of the BCPV Business Plan Sub-Committee Report back to staff for a further report to a Special Meeting of the C&RLM Advisory Board, prior to Authority Meeting #8/96. The Authority adopted a corporate strategy to deal with funding reductions, which commits the public use facilities to a significantly decreased reliance on tax-based revenues. In response to this challenge, the BCPV Business Plan Sub-Committee was struck and charged with establishing a plan for the Village. The Sub-Committee addressed three basic issues: 1. What is the mandate of BCPV? 2. What is the plan for achieving this mandate? 3. What organizational structure is best suited to supporting the Village in the achievement of the plan? CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/96, SEPTEMBER 27,1996 E99 Recommendations #1 in the report addressed the mandate and plan for achieving the mandate: Recommendation # 1 The Sub-Committee recommends that the mandate for the Village be to continue to provide quality public programming and effectively maintain the public's investment in its heritage while operating within a financial framework which provides for stability through an annual allocation from the Authority equal to the estimated basic maintenance costs. And furthermore, that the balance of operating expenses be raised from non-tax sources. The current governance and reporting relationship between MTRCA and BCPV is considered by the committee to be the most effective and viable governance model to achieve BCPV plan objectives. The continuance of the existing governance model, although integral to the Sub-Committee's recommendation #1 is not explicitly stated. We feel a separate recommendation clarifying the governance model is required. The Sub-Committee endorsed the roles of BCPV in public education and stewardship of the cultural asset, but also recognized that a rationale for funding must be established based on the financial realities facing MTRCA. Recognizing the core of BCPV is stewardship of the buildings, collection, and land, the Sub-Committee directed that a financial plan be devised, to consist of: 1 ) a basic level of costs for the core asset, which would form the level of Authority financial support; and 2) program costs which, in time, must be supported through revenue generation (non-tax sources). Staff recommends the adoption of this rationale for funding but feel that the basic asset support costs and the multi-year business plans must be subject to the annual corporate budget process. This funding model confirms the commitment of the Authority and its partners to the core asset, while requiring BCPV to self-fund all levels of service above this. The term "baseline maintenance cost" was used in the report to define the core costs or critical mass of the museum in terms of basic land and facility upkeep, and stewardship of the collection to a reasonable degree. The baseline cost excludes all public access and activity, and includes what are considered the foundation of the current operation. These include maintenance, collections management, and services/rents such as security, insurance, taxes, utilities, elevator service, heating/cooling system maintenance, fire extinguishers, pest control, etc. It does not represent a complete "shut down" mode, but rather one that can be open to the public with the addition of program costs. A shut down mode bears no resemblance to a functioning facility nor does it offer a reasonable basis for funding rationale. Shut down mode would be comprised of total layoff of all staff, E100 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/96, SEPTEMBER 27, 1996 dispersion of most collection with the remainder mothballed, buildings and facilities boarded up, 24 hour security monitoring system, periodic building and collection "health checks", and repairs only for severe damage or vandalism. Program costs include aspects of operation geared to the education and entertainment role, such as school tours, interpretation, livestock and gardens, costume, events, research, food services, retail sales, marketing and sales, membership, etc. In summary, the Sub-Committee's Recommendation #1 is a blending of several basic premises: the confirmation that BCPV's mandate is as a public museum with an education role, confirmation of the existing relationship between MTRCA and BCPV, and that a new funding rationale along the lines of baseline costs and program costs be established. Recommendation #2 The Sub-Committee recommends that the financial and operating plan appended to this report form the basis for developing the Village budget over the next three years. This recommendation is the outcome of the issue What is the clan for achievina the Mandate? An aggressive multi year business plan has been developed with the goal to reduce levy by 50% (a total of $725,000 from $1,600,000 in 1995 to $875,000 before 1999). This plan will be brought forward to the Authority as part of the corporate budget process. The Village must maintain the appearance of stability and remain open if revenue generation is to overtake public sector funding support to become the major revenue source in the funding mix in the short-term. Increased attendance can be achieved by positioning something new to see at the Village. Like the Zoo's White Lions, BCPV needs a summer attraction and strong advertising thrust to build visitation. In 1997 BCPV will feature hot air balloons (exhibition, demonstrations, theme for summer theatre, buskers, tethered rides) to increase visitation May - August. This four month attraction will increase not only admissions, but parking, retail, food, and membership revenue. BCPV's sponsorship development project (1997-99 $350,000 per year) is now in the selling phase, with very encouraging signs of interest from a number of corporations that have been approached. Seven partnership packages have been developed: Education, Dicksons Hill Program, Performance, Environmental Conservation and Education, Roblins Mill, Senior Services, and Christmas. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGiMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/96, SEPTEMBER 27,1996 E101 A new membership development strategy has been created, to drive membership from under 1,000 to upwards of 5,000 over the next 3 years, and to increase revenues from $25,000 to $200,000 annually. At Authority Meeting #7/96 Resolution #C16/96 was approved, regarding the establishment of a separate fund raising entity for BCPV. Staff have met with members of The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, who are receptive in principle. With the establishment of this committee by January 1997, revenue targets for 1997 and beyond will form a part of the BCPV multi-year plan. Some increase in costs will occur in order to meet membership and development goals but they will be offset by revenue. Expanded banquet business will result in 1997 because of patio improvements to be made before the spring opening. Increased daytime group sales as well as evening functions and concerts form an important part of this plan. Dinner Theatre is one new venture that is included. This venture is not slated to generate an operating profit until year 2, but has the potential to build an entirely new market and revenue source for BCPV. Fee increases are not scheduled for 1997. In 1996 admission fees were raised and parking fees were introduced. Admission fee increases are planned for 1998, and parking fee increases to following in 1999. Report prepared by: Marty Brent, ext. 403 TERMINA TION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:30 a.m., Friday, September 27, 1996. Richard Whitehead Craig Mather Chair Secretary-Treasurer pI. ~ ,. the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING #6/96 October 4, 1996 Page E102 The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board met in the South Theatre, in the Visitor's Centre at Black Creek Pioneer Village on October 4, 1996. The Chair, Richard Whitehead, called the meeting to order at 10: 15 a.m. PRESENT Victoria Carley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Michael Di Biase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Richard O'Brien .............................................. Chair, Authority Deborah Sword .................................................... Member Richard Whitehead .................................................... Chair REGRETS Maria Augimeri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Vice Chair Randy Barber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Lois Hancey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair, Authority Gerri Lynn O'Connor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Paul Palleschi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Donna Patterson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member MINUTES RES. #C21/96 - MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING #5/96 Moved by: Richard O'Brien Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THAT the minutes of Special Meeting #5/96, held September 27, 1996 be approved. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED E103 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4, 1996 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION RES. #C22/96- USE OF METAL DETECTORS IN CONSERVATION AREAS - PERMITS Elimination of the requirement for a special permit to use a metal detector in a Conservation Area. Moved by: Victoria Carley Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board Resolution #7, approved on June 27, 1984, be rescinded; AND FURTHER THAT the use of metal detectors in Conservation Areas be permitted subject to such operational guidelines as deemed appropriate by Authority staff. CARRIED BACKGROUND In the early 1980's the Authority, along with other public agencies, began to experience significant use of metal detectors by hobbyists, on its lands. In an effort to ensure that there was no conflict between metal detecting and other visitor or Authority activities, a permit system for metal detecting was instituted. This system restricted the number of individuals permitted to use metal detectors at each location and the dates and time when metal detecting was allowed. Use of metal detectors on Authority lands was approved in 1984 by Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board Resolution #7 which stated: '7HA T the use of metal detectors in Conservation Areas be permitted as outlined in the "Guidelines for Use of Metal Detectors in Conservation Areas. "" A copy of these guidelines is attached. RA TIONALE Over the last fifteen years, demand for metal detector use on Authority property has been significantly reduced, to the point where control is no longer an issue. In addition, field staff have experienced no problems over the years with metal detector users contravening guidelines or carrying out activities beyond the terms of their permit. Consequently, it is felt that the permit system for metal detecting is no longer required. In 1996, eight permits were requested and issued. The paperwork and time required for this process, while not considerable, are unnecessary and represent an inconvenience for the public and an unneeded demand on staff. CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4, 1996 E104 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS No fees were charged for the metal detecting permit, so their elimination will not create a loss of revenue. WORK TO BE DONE Letters will be sent to current permit holders outlining the change in procedures. Report prepared by: Andy Wickens, extension 252 E105 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4, 1996 Guidelines for the Use of Metal Detectors in Conservation Areas 1. The use of metal detectors may be authorized by permit in designated Conservation Areas for the period beginning after the Labour Day weekend and ending prior to the Victoria Day weekend as specified herein; Tuesday September 3, 1996 to Friday May 16, 1997. 2. No such permits will be issued for the Claireville, Cold Creek, or Glen Haffy Conservation Areas 3. To obtain a permit the operator must apply in writing and provide their name, address and telephone number. The MTRCA is not obligated to issue a permit solely on the basis of having received an application and may refuse an application if it chooses to do so. 4. No permit will be valid for more than two Conservation Areas, and each operator is limited to one permit. The number of permits issued for each Conservation Area will be limited. Permits must be renewed annually. 5. Permits are not transferrable and must be on the permit holders person when engaged in the use of a metal detector, or any related activity, in a Conservation Area. 6. Permit holders are required to check in with the Area supervisor before using a metal detector in a Conservation Area. Such use is limited to regular operating hours and will not disrupt or interfere with the use or enjoyment of the Area by others, or with the activities or operations of MTRCA staff. 7. In general, metal detectors may be used in developed picnic areas and beach areas, including the water, the use of scuba gear or equipment of a similar nature not being permitted. The Area supervisor may designate areas which are out-of-bounds to the use of metal detectors. 8. Users of metal detectors must replace any disturbed soil or turf to its original condition. Items of waste or other debris found while using a metal detector must be properly disposed of. 9. Special permission may be granted at any time to an individual to use a metal detector to search for a specific item in a specified location of any Conservation Area at the discretion of the Area Superintendent. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4,1996 E106 RES. #C23/96- CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION AREA Call for proposals to develop public uses in the Claireville Conservation Area south of Steeles Avenue. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the public use proposals for the Claireville Conservation Area south of Steeles Avenue be received; THA T staff be directed to continue to work with Wild Water Kingdom and the proponents of the Pitch and Putt, Golf Dome and Monson Design Build proposals and apply the Phase I concept review process of the Strategy for Public Use of Conservation Authority Lands (1995) when evaluating the concepts; THA T staff be directed to consult with other agencies, interest groups and the public to get input regarding the suitability of the proposed public use concepts; AND FURTHER THAT the results of the Phase I - Concept Review of the development proposals within the Claireville Conservation Area, south of Steeles Avenue, be reported to the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board. ........... CARRIED BACKGROUND At Meeting #3/96, held on April 26, 1996, the Authority endorsed Resolution #A66/96 which states: "THA T staff be directed to invite proposals to develop public uses in the Claireville Conservation Area south of Steeles A venue; THA T staff be directed to continue consultation with other agencies, community groups and the public regarding recreational development opportunities and proposal calls within the Claireville Conservation Area; AND FURTHER THA T public use development proposals within the Claireville Conservation Area south of Steeles A venue be brought back to the Authority for further consideration. " E107 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4,1996 A meeting was held with members of the community on May 16, 1996, to discuss the terms of reference to request proposals for public uses south of Steeles Avenue in the Claireville Conservation Area. Their comments were incorporated and the Request for Proposals was advertised. A large sign was posted on the site. A notice was put in the Globe and Mail and Daily Commercial News. The Request for Proposals was mailed to thirty-five addresses including private businesses and municipalities. An information session was hosted by staff on July 16, 1996. Twelve individuals attended. An overview of the property was provided, the process was discussed and staff answered questions from the attendees. The deadline for proposals was August 22, 1996. Three concepts were received. The three proposals are briefly described below: World Pitch and Putt Pitch and Putt is a variation on the game of golf with its own set of rules and regulations. The rules of the game stipulate that individual holes cannot exceed 75 yards and that the total course length be less than 1090 yards. Players are allowed only two clubs - a putter and an iron. A complete game takes about an hour to play and greens fees average $10.00/person. The proposal includes: . 18 hole pitch and putt golf course occupying approximately 6 acres . Driving range with flood lights . 3000 sq. ft. building containing a clubhouse with a small licensed restaurant . Barbecue area . Car parking (approximately 100 cars). The Golf Dome The operation would be almost identical to the facility owned by the same company in the Town of Markham. The busy season is from December to March at the Dome. The driving range and mini putt components help to offset the slowdown in Dome activity during the warm weather months. Retail pricing for the use of the Dome is $25/hour. The summer range prices are $1 0.50/bucket. The proposal includes: . A climate controlled air-supported 65,000 sq. ft. dome enclosing an indoor driving range with 72 stalls on two levels. . Outdoor driving range . 18 hole mini-putt . 5,000 sq. ft. pro shop . 3,000 sq. ft. clubhouse with small licensed restaurant facilities . Car parking (approximately 75 cars). CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4,1996 E108 Monson Desion Build Monson Design Build is a project management company proposing to build a multi-purpose facility including: . Enclosing Wild Water Kingdom with walls and a roof to permit four season activity . Four storey motel . Farmers market . Service Plaza . Recreational vehicle home park . Recreational pavilion with a day care facility, playdium centre arcade and multi- purpose area . Equestrian complex . Sports playing fields, numerous trails . Linking Indian Line Campground to Wild Water Kingdom . Development of the reservoir as the local fishing canoeing, kayaking and skating centre. The subject area is currently licenced to Wild Water Kingdom on a yearly basis as part of their lease agreement with the Authority; however, they did not submit a proposal to develop additional public use facilities at this location. Staff did stress to the other proponents that any public use development on the site must be complementary to the existing Wild Water Kingdom facilities. DET AILS OF WORK TO BE DONE . Continue to work with the proponent(s) to investigate the public use concepts further. . Initiate the Phase I - Concept Review process as outlined in the Strategy for Public Use of Conservation Authority Lands (1995). The screening of the concepts will include: - identification of benefits and potential negative implications; - compliance with Authority policy (Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program) ; - compatibility with current or planned uses; - preliminary projections of development and operations costs; - preliminary public consultation on the concepts; - identification of impacts on adjacent land uses; - general compliance with requirements under the Planning Act and other relevant legislation and by-laws. . Report the details of the concept review to the Authority. E109 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4,1996 FINANCIAL DETAILS All proponents have been advised that the Authority will not be responsible for any costs related to the preparation or implementation of the proposed developments. Potential financial returns to the Authority are still being explored by staff. For information contact: Gary Wilkins, Ext. 211 RES. #C24/96 - 1997 PROPOSED PUBLIC FACILITY FEE SCHEDULE Establishment of the 1997 fee schedule for public use of Authority facilities and programs. Moved by: Richard O'Brien Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 1997 Fee Schedule, dated September 9, 1996, (CR.1/96) for admission to, and use of, the Authority's facilities and programs, to be effective January, 1997, be approved. .................. CARRIED BACKGROUND The revenues derived from public use facilities have always formed a significant part of the Authority's operating budget. Recent reductions in funding levels and anticipated municipal levy decreases for 1997 and beyond, mean that user fees will be of increasing importance in allowing the Authority to cover the costs of providing outdoor recreation and education opportunities. The attached 1997 Fee Schedule for Authority public facilities and programming is linked to, and based on, the Business Plans currently being finalized for Black Creek Pioneer Village, the Conservation Areas and the Kortright Centre. These plans will allow the Authority to deal with a projected $1.2 million reduction in levy over the next three years. It should be noted that the fee increases proposed are only one part of a much larger plan to increase revenue and reduce operating costs. Business plans will be brought before a joint meeting of the finance and Administration Advisory Board and the Authority Executive on October 11. Staff are aware that increases to fees will likely have an effect, at least in the short term, on attendance figures. This has been taken into account in the overall revenues projected which are, we feel, quite conservative CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4,1996 Ell0 RA TIONALE Kortright Centre for Conservation The Kortright Business Plan calls for the facility to increase cost recovery from revenues over the next three years. This will be achieved partly through increased fees. Under item 32, all admission fees are increased by $0.50 and fees for school tours have gone up a similar amount. The revenue impact of this fee increase is estimated to be $60,000, which is consistent with the Business Plan, and which assumes that public and school attendance will be reduced slightly as a result of the fee increase. The Kortright membership under item 33 has been changed to a pass with price increases reflecting changes in individual admission fees. Kortright plans to introduce a membership program with a variety of benefits, similar to the program outlined for Black Creek Pioneer Village below. Item 34 has been deleted. Requests for this activity are rare and the price is usually negotiated as part of an overall package. Black Creek Pioneer Village Under item 25, no increase in admission fees is proposed. The business plan calls for increases in the subsequent two years. Fees for weddings and commercial photography have been increased to reflect market demand. The revenue impact of these fee increases would be modest but would allow the Village to better cover the costs of providing service. A major initiative taken by Black Creek Pioneer Village to increase revenues over the next three years involves a comprehensive membership program. The current Village Citizenship under item 26 has been converted to an Annual Pass at a price of $50.00 for a family, and $25.00 for an individual. This pass would not include parking or reciprocal privileges with Kortright or the Conservation Areas. The membership program has been overhauled and offers benefits over and above the basic pass. In addition to free admission and parking, benefits include free general admission or discounts for other Authority facilities, special member programs, a newsletter, and other added value offers. Conservation Areas The Conservation Areas Business Plan calls for an increase in revenue of $479,000 for 1997. This is one component of a $990,000 reduction in levy funding of conservation Area operations over the next three years. $250,000 of the planned 1997 revenue target is derived from an increase to admission fees of between 25 % and 33 %. Passes have also been increased proportionately. E111 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/96, OCTOBER 4, 1996 The angling fee at Glen Haffy has been extended to children and a fee has been proposed at Heart Lake. This should net an additional $25,000. Camping fees have been increased at both Albion Hills and Indian Line to reflect market prices, and premium fees have been introduced for peak periods such as long weekends. Camping revenues are estimated to increase by $100,000 in 1997 as a result of these fee changes. Several other minor fee increases are included such as commercial photography and maple syrup tours for schools at Bruce's Mill. Report prepared by: Andy Wickens, Ext. 252 TERMINA TION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11 :15 a.m., Friday, October 4, 1996. Richard Whitehead Craig Mather Chair Secretary-Treasurer pI. ~ ,. the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING #7/96 November 1, 1 996 Page E 112 The Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board met in the South Theatre, in the Visitor's Centre at Black Creek Pioneer Village on November 1, 1996. The Chair, Richard Whitehead, called the meeting to order at 10:10 a.m. PRESENT Maria Augimeri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Vice Chair Randy Barber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Victoria Carley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Michael Di Biase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Donna Patterson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member Deborah Sword .................................................... Member Richard Whitehead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chair REGRETS Lois Hancey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice Chair, Authority Richard O'Brien .............................................. Chair, Authority Paul Palleschi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member MINUTES RES. #C25/96 - MINUTES OF MEETING #6/96 Moved by: Randy Barber Seconded by: Donna Patterson THAT the minutes of Meeting #6/96, held September 27, 1996 be approved. .. CARRIED BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES Further to Resolution #C23/96 - Claireville Conservation Area; a public meeting regarding proposals received for the Claireville Conservation Area lands at the corner of Finch and Steeles, will be held November 18, 1996 at Humber College - Nature Centre, 205 Humber College Boulevard, Etobicoke, from 6:30 - 9:00 p.m. E113 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 CORRESPONDENCE (a) A letter, dated October 21, 1996, received from the Clerk's Department, King Township, regarding King Township's interest in a lease, management agreement or partnership arrangement for Cold Creek Conservation Area. The Town has assigned Councillor Linda Jessop to work with the Authority on plans for the future of the lands. RES. #C26/96 - CORRESPONDENCE Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Donna Patterson THA T the above item of correspondence (a) be received. .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED PRESENT A TIONS (a) Ms. Leslie Scott of McCormick Rankin presented the Board with an overview of the proposed Bayview Avenue Extension. (b) Mr. Dave Pearson, Superintendent of Central Zone - Conservation Areas, presented the Board with an overview of facilities, operations and innovations of the Central Zone; including Boyd Conservation Area and the Kortright Centre for Conservation. RES. #C27/96 - PRESENT A TIONS Moved by: Randy Barber Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor THA T the above presentations be received.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 El14 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION RES. #C28/96 - PREFERRED GAME SUPPLIER Selection of a preferred games supplier for Authority properties. Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Victoria Carley THAT Kloda Productions be the Authority's preferred games supplier for the 1997 calender year; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to enter into an agreement with Kloda Productions to formalize this arrangement. ........................... CARRIED BACKGROUND As part of the ongoing revenue generating initiatives, staff has been actively pursuing partnerships with companies in the private sector. One area of interest is the provision of entertainment devices in our Conservation Areas, the Kortright Centre and Black Creek ,Pioneer Village. A number of companies currently provide inflatable games, dunk tanks and other amusement devices to groups, in our facilities, without the Authority receiving any compensation for it. In 1994, the Authority approved a policy allowing promotional flyers, including games suppliers, to be mailed with our picnic permit mailings. This service is available to any firm, subject to approval by staff, for a small fee. This has allowed us to recover most of the mailing cost for the group picnic permits and to provide an additional level of service to our customers. A Request for Proposal (RFP) was sent out in April to eight companies that provide amusement device rentals and services in Southern Ontario. The RFP asked for expressions of interest in becoming the preferred games supplier to our facilities. The preferred games supplier would have the sole industry rights to the following: . including gameslamusement related promotional material with all picnic permits mailed by the MTRCA . ability to place posters and signage at high traffic areas in the Conservation Areas . close cooperation from MTRCA staff including, whenever possible, hydro hookups and overnight storage of gameslequipment at the areas . Right to stage a promotional day, during the month of May, in one or more of our conservation areas. This will allow them to market directly to event organizers by show casing their games and attractions in an outdoor setting. . promotion by the MTRCA as the preferred games suppliers to our facilities including customer referrals by our booking office E115 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 . right to use the preferred games supplier designation in other advertising (subject to MTRCA approval of copy and context) A total of 6 responses were received. As per the RFP, all companies responded with offers of financial compensation, business backgrounds, references, games inventories and other relevant information. Under this agreement, other companies would be free to provide game services or rentals to our customers. The MTRCA would not prohibit or encourage any other company from providing games or amusements to groups in our facilities but only the "preferred games supplier" would have access to MTRCA mailing lists, service staff recommendations or other promotional opportunities. RATIONALE Currently various games companies provide services to our customers, primarily in the conservation areas. The number of rentals is unknown as is the total dollar volume. There currently is no fee or permit required, by either the customer or the games company, to use or provide this service. The industry itself is fragmented. Some companies provide large, high margin, games requiring one or more staff while other specialize in small, do-it-yourself games. The range of "games", however defined, makes this market a difficult one to regulate. Standard permitting fees would likely only be successful with the larger companies that are readily identifiable when entering a facility. This approach would be less successful with those customers who have rented a small dunk tank or moonwalk from a local supplier. Trying to collect permit fees, once a game is operating, is a difficult enforcement problem particularly if it was individually rented. Kloda and Bob Terry Games offered the highest rate of financial return to the Authority. Both companies maintain adequate levels of inventory and have provided suitable references. Kloda Productions offers mid to high end games at prices which are competitive with the local market. Their prices include staff who supervise and run the equipment unlike Bob Terry Games. They have a long history in Montreal but the Ontario part of their operation is only a year old. The percentage of gross offered (15%) is lower than Bob Terry Games (18%) but includes staffing costs. Total Authority revenue is therefore much higher with Kloda. FINANCIAL DETAILS In 1996 revenues of $1,155 where received in fees in return for inserting promotional material in our picnic permit envelopes. In 1996 approximately 1200 permits where mailed. This revenue would be eliminated under the proposed partnership. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 El16 The responses received from the six firms are below. Company Group Company Public Mailing Rentals staff costs Event * * Costs % of gross included in % of gross Covered rental % rental revenue charge charge collected payable to MTRCA Bob Terry Games 18% no 25% 100% Kloda 15% yes 15% 100% Great Canadian 10% yes % after cost 100% Amusement Company - to be negotiated Hart Entertainment 5%-10% yes not stated 100% Depending on volume Leisure Activities 12.5% no reduced 100% Unlimited rental rate New Heights 10% no not clear not Entertainment stated * * Public event - where a game is run as a pay per use attraction by the company Currently there is a surplus in the picnic mailings of $435 - based on mailing costs of approx. $720 and revenue of $1,155. The actual costs of mailing would now be paid by the preferred games supplier. Estimates for the amount of revenue generated through the percentage of gross are highly speculative but are between $2,000-$4,000 in the first year of the partnership. Staff anticipate that this will grow into a significant revenue source in the next few years. For information contact: Bob Burchett, Ext. 367 E117 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 RES. #C29/96 - EXPRESSION OF INTEREST Campground Development and Operation Approval to pursue expressions of interest for the development and operation of a campground at Greenwood Conservation Area and for the operation of Indian Line Campground. Moved by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THA T staff be authorized to solicit expressions of interest from private operators for the development and operation of a campground at Greenwood Conservation Area and for the operation of Indian Line Campground; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board once responses have been received with a recommendation for further action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. CARRIED BACKGROUND The 1996 Capital Development List approved by the Authority in November of 1995, includes $100,000 for campground development at Greenwood. Staff has been examining capital and operating costs for the campground development along with the logistics of putting such a development in place. Preliminary analysis would suggest that the Greenwood Campground project, if developed and operated directly by the Authority, will not meet our needs for net revenue in the short and medium term, as required by the Recreation Business Plan. Over the past few years there has been informal discussion at the Board level regarding the possibility of the Authority turning over the operation of Indian Line Campground to private interests. This possibility has yet to be formally investigated. RA TIONALE The Authority's Recreation Business Plan calls for public recreation operations to be self funding in three years. One component of the strategy to achieve this involves campground development in the east end of the Authority's jurisdiction, and measures to maximize return from the Authority's existing campground operations. As noted above, it would appear that development and operation of an east end campground by the Authority will not meet the revenue objective of the Business Plan in the required time frame. Staff would like to explore the possibility of having this facility developed and operated by private interests to determine whether the financial return might be more attractive. CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 EllS The Authority's existing Indian Line Campground generally provides a net revenue surplus. There has been some suggestion that the return to the Authority could be increased if the campground were turned over to a private operator under a lease or partnership arrangement. Given the Authority's need to maximize net revenues over the next few years, staff feel that it would be prudent to "test the waters" and determine if there is any interest from the private sector. This expression of interest would be pursued separately from that for Greenwood although there may be some overlap in the potential proponents approached. FINANCIAL DETAILS These initiatives will be pursued in house by Authority staff. Any incidental costs will be absorbed by existing operating budgets. DET AILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will develop a package and approach a variety of companies for expressions of interest. For information contact: Andy Wickens, extension 252 RES. #C30/96 - CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN Endorsement of the working Terms of Reference for the preparation of the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the working Terms of Reference for the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan, dated October 11, 1996, as appended be approved; AND FURTHER THAT any additional comments received before November 22, 1996 from the Technical Advisory Committee, or others, be incorporated into the working Terms of Reference, where appropriate, and that staff bring any substantive changes to the attention of the Authority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority meeting #7/96 held on August 30, 1996, resolution #A 155/96 was adopted as follows: . E119 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1. 1996 "THA T staff be directed to proceed to undertake Phase I of the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan. Phase I to include: 1. Review existing plans and studies within the West Humber River Subwatershed, of which Claireville Conservation Area is a part (i.e. Humber Watershed Strategy); 2. Document existing and proposed land use, municipal services, road classifications and property ownership; 3. Document and quantify the current public use and types of recreation activities occurring in the Claireville Conservation Area and surrounding communities; 4. Define the natural heritage system, cultural and physical resources. Define the community's needs in terms of outdoor recreationl education. Identify any information deficiencies that may exist. THAT staff be directed to establish a Technical Advisory Committee, which will include members of the public and interested community groups, to participate in the development of the Terms of Reference for the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan, assist in the development of the plan, and to facilitate opportunity for public input. AND FURTHER THAT the Final Terms of Reference for the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan be brought back to the Authority for approval. . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED" Staff invited over forty individuals to be members of the Technical Advisory Committee. Members include elected representatives, agency staff, interest groups, businesses and citizens. A broad cross section of interests are represented on the Committee. The Technical Advisory Committee has met on two occasions. At the first meeting on September 18, 1996, staff described the reasons for preparing a management plan for Claireville Conservation Area. The Authority's financial position was discussed briefly. An overview of the tasks and deliverables was also provided. A workshop was conducted where the participants were asked to share their values of the Claireville Conservation Area and describe their vision of the property in the future. There was an underlying appreciation for the Claireville Conservation Area because: . the area represents diversity from both a biological and a human use perspective . the area can be characterized as a "doorstep" - its proximity to the neighbouring urban area, its asset to the community as a nature preserve and its vast size . it is naturally beautiful . it provides a wide variety of human uses including educational value . it provides a buffer to development . it is a "green oasis" CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E120 . it provides a connection to the past - our history and heritage . it has potential for recreational and other uses. The following characteristics of Claireville were identified as desirable for the future: . diversity: biodiversity and diversity of uses . accessibility to nature - linked and connected . a "green oasis" of parkland, accessible for both people and wildlife . a protected, expansive area . a "bird viewing" wetland . Olympic equestrian park . improved financial performance . a multi-functional area . viable and sustainable The above characteristics reflect the mix of participants' opinions. It is recognized that the area will be under significant demand from a rapidly developing urban neighbourhood and a mix of community interests. The Technical Advisory Committee met again on October 8, 1996. The draft Terms of Reference and work plan were discussed. The Terms of Reference has been revised to reflect the comments provided by the Technical Advisory Committee at their second meeting. DET AILS OF WORK TO BE DONE . Finalize the work plan; . Prepare the background chapters of the Claireville Conservation Management Plan This will include summaries of previous planning studies, land use policies, recreation use and biophysical information; . Prepare maps and background information to facilitate future analysis and evaluation by the Technical Advisory Committee; . Continue to work with the general community to generate interest and invite comments regarding the future management of the Claireville Conservation Area. FINANCIAL DETAILS The Authority has allocated $10,000 to cover the cost of supplies and materials, rentals and professional services. Report prepared by: Gary Wilkins, Ext. 211 E121 CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 WORKING TERMS OF REFERENCE CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN October 11, 1996 The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority : 4" , CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E122 WORKING TERMS OF REFERENCE CLAIREVlLLE CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has initiated the preparation of a comprehensive management plan for the Claireville Conservation Area This plan will include a description and evaluation of the property based on land use planning policies; landscape features, constraints and opportunities. The Plan will result in the identification of specific management zones. These management zones will be are~ in which a certain type of activity will be undertaken. For example, within a Natural Environment Zone, stream rehabilitation may occur; within a Public Use Zone, passive recreation may be recommended. The Plan will provide a framework for the Authority to determine priorities for future initiatives including the protection of natural features, habitat regeneration and identification of potential public use locations. The Management Plan will provide a framework for determining the ecological appropriateness of any proposed public use location and ensure that the integrity and diversity of the Area are maintained. The Mission Statement for the Authority states that with one-third of Ontario's population within its area of jurisdiction, the Authority acts in the community's interest through advocating and implementing watershed management programs that: 1) maintain and improve the quality of the region's lands and waters; 2) contribute to public safety from flooding and erosion; 3) provide for the acquisition of conservation and hazard lands; and 4) enhance the quality and variety of life in the community by using its lands for interregional outdoor education, heritage preservation, and conservation education. Planning efforts have shown that special interest and community groups have grown more concerned with the impact of land use change on the remaining natural landscapes. At the same time, user groups, businesses and municipalities have expressed a growing interest in using public lands for a variety of outdoor recreation, ecological restoration and other uses. The provision of public uses on MTRCA land must consider economic factors, the needs of the community and the needs of the natural landscape to ensure it is protected and managed properly. For the purpose of this project, the Claireville Conservation Area, will include the Ebenezer Resource Management Tract, Indian Une Campground and the Wild Water Kingdom, to ensure that any planning for the Area is completed in a comprehensive manner. At Meeting #1/96, held on March 8, 1996, the Executive Committee approved the following Resolutions: Res.#E7/96 eTHA T the proposed public use development zones, as identified on the attached map of the Claireville Conservation Area, be approved in principle: AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to consult with other agencies, interest groups and the public to get input regarding the suitability of the proposed public use development zones. e . f .' .- E123 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96. NOVEMBER 1,1996 2 , Res. #E8/96 AND FURTHER THAT staff prepare a consolidated report and report back to the Executive Committee at a later date. · At its meeting #7!96 held on August 30, 1996, the Authority adopted the following resolution approving the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan study approach: Res. #155/98 THAT staff be directed to proceed to undertake Phase I of the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan. Phase I to include: 1. Review existing plans and studies within the West Humber River Sub _ watershed, of which Claireville ConseNation Area is a part (ie. Humber Watershed Strategy). 2. Document existing and proposed, land use, municipal services, road classifications and property ownership. 3. Document and quantify the current public use and types of recreation activities occurring in the Claireville ConseNation Area and surrounding communities. 4. Define the natural herftage system, cultural and physical resources. Define the community's needs in terms of outdoor recreation! education. Identify any information deficiencies that may exist. THAT staff be directed to establish a technical advisory committee, which will include members of the public and interested community groups, to participate in the development of the Terms of Reference for the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan, assist in the development of the plan and to facilitate opportunity for public input; AND FURTHER THAT the Final Terms of Reference for the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan be brought back to the Authorfty for approval. 2.0 STUDY AREA The Claireville Conservation Area is located in the cities of Brampton and Etobicoke, in the Humber River Watershed. Figure 1 illustrates the entire Claireville Conservation Area complex which will be induded in the planning project. Figure 2 puts the Claireville Conservation Area into a local context. The site is approximately 2,100 acres (848 hectares) in size. The area extends approximately 7 kilometres in a northwest direction from Finch Avenue and Highway 427, and varies from 0.8 to 2 kilometres in width. Many transportation corridors exist making the area very accessible. Some of the major corridors indude: Highway 427, Highway 27, Highway 50, Highway 407, Steeles Avenue and Highway 7. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1,1996 E124 E3ENe::::R .....u ~ FUI. T. . "'" - - ,_ FIGURE 1 ! ! CLAJREVILLE I EBENEZER g ) the mftl'tloolitan toranto and region CDMerwtlOn aumonty S ~ PO'TENTtAL INT'ERAEGlCNAL. mAa. i J I ..., 1 ~ ... ~ " BRAMFrCN VAl:GHAN ~~~. .~ ~'.~" . ~ ~.~.~. / .~~ ~ ~. "~" .~ ..., It1t Sl&LS AI/l! c.N.IIAL . . I ~ INDIAN UNE I S CAMPGROUND i. ~ ~ 11 i \: ~ AlISSISSAf.1GA e:cSIC:;KE . - " m ..... N c.n .. n 0 Z en I m ::u < :t>- ..... 0 Z - :t>- Z 0 ::u .---o- m > ..... m 0 > Z 0 s:: N :t>- Z :t>- el m s:: m Z ..... :t>- O < en 0 ::u -< OJ 0 :t>- ::u 0 401 "" ..... (0 m FIGURE 2 . z CLAIREVILLE I EBENEZER 0 < LOCAL CONTEXT m s:: OJ m ::u - . - (l) (l) m . , - CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E126 5 The Claireville Conservation Area currently provides multifaceted regional scale recreation activities for the Greater Toronto Area Although much of the Conservation Area is currently closed to the public, Wild Water Kingdom, Indian Une Campground, the Etobicoke Field Centre and Claireville Equestrian Ranch are operated through partnerships between the Authority, other agencies and individuals. Some land is rented for agricultural use and several houses on the property are rented for residential use. 3.0 GOALS Based on the Mission Statement of the MTRCA, the following goals have been identified for uses on Conservation Authority lands: . To conseNe, protect and manage Authority lands in consultation with the public in a manner that values, respects and enhances the natural, cultural and heritage resources. . To encourage uses that are compatible with healthy watersheds, respectful of the unique character of the lands and sustainable in environmental, physical and economic terms. 4.0 OBJECTIVES The following objectIves will be pursued by the Authority in the use of its lands: . new uses must be consistent with all approved strategies, policy directions and guidelines of the Authority (ie. Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program), . existing uses which have been the subject of a previous master plan, a management agreement or site specific proposal approvals, will be permitted to continue, but subject to review as per terms and conditions of current agreements, . new uses will be assessed on a sub-watershed basis using a screening process, as set out in The Strateav for Public Use on Conservation Authoritv Lands (1995) . activities provided will be compatible with the natural environment . wherever possible, uses will link natural systems and create ecological and trail connections between public land holdings, . natural and cultural heritage resources will be protected and enhanced, . recreation uses will strive to incorporate conservation education, . sustainable management practices will be followed on Authority lands and any activities and practices that would negatively affect the landscape, or result in ecological damage will be prohibited, . a portion of the revenue generated at Claireville Conservation Area may be used to implement components of the Management Plan (ie. Wetland creation), and . for each new public use of Authority lands, the community will be defined and will be involved as part of the planning, assessment and evaluation process. , - E127 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 6 5.0 ELEMENTS OF A MANAGEMENT PLAN To ensure that aiticaJ elements are considered in all Mure watershed planning and implementation within the Humber River Watershed, a number 01 guiding principles and strategies have been established by the Humber River Watershed Task Force, based on an integrated ecosystem approach to protect, enhance and enjoy the watershed. The table below provides examples of some objectives and actions that the Claireville Conservation Area management plan may include to fulfil the guiding principles recommended in the draft Humber Watershed Strategy. GUIDING PRINCIPLES OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN . All activities and future development should work Celebrate, regenerate and with natural processes to contribute to preserve our natural, historical environmental health and cultural heritage. . Ensure appropriate land uses for the natural processes and features 01 the Conservation Area . Includes goals and strategies for wildlife . Includes goals and strategies for protection, restoration and enhancement of natural features! functions . Locate development away from areas that are subject to risks from natural hazards (ie. risks associated with flooding and erosion) . Land uses will be managed through broad Establish linkages and promote partnerships which consider local, regional and partnerships among interregional needs communities. . Develop and foster partnerships between heritage organizations, environmental groups and the development industry . Support a mix of public and private uses that permit public access, use and enjoyment of the Area . Encourage action initiatives by individual community groups . Promote greater year-round access and use . Restore and maintain connections with natural and cultural heritage features (ie. wildlife habitats and communities) . Reconnect woodland habitats to facilitate movement and recolonization by flora and fauna . Interregional trail development : - CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E12S 7 GUIDING PRINCIPLES OBJECTIVES AND ACTlONS OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN . Enhance the aquatic habitat in the reservoir and Protect the Humber Watershed river, by revegetating riparian areas and improving as a continuing source of clean water quality water. . Minimize the amount of impervious surfaces . Restore natural stream processes, where possible . Control and treat runoff by employing stormwater best management practices . Maintain and where possible, enhance groundwater recharges . Protect and enhance wetlands . The use of Authority lands will be financially Build a strong watershed sustainable economy based on ecological . Provide opportunities for efficient use of limited health. government and private sector resources . Ensure planning decisions are based on an evaluation of the amenity and ecological value of the resource, as well as the associated dollar costs and benefits . Integration where possible, of social, environmental, and economic objectives (ie. coordination of activities and sharing resources; multiple benefits) . Use full - cost accounting methods to ensure that long-term environmental and economic costs are included in cost/benefit evaluations (ie. environmental protection at the beginning may reduce the need for environmental rehabilitation later, thus, improving long term affordability and sustainability) . Provide opportunities for all income groups : ." .- .'. ". E129 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 8 GUIDING PRINCIPLES OBJECTIVES AND ACl10NS OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN . People should be able to get to, and enjoy the Promote the watershed as a Conservation Area, by vehicle, on foot or by destination of choice for bicycle, with improvements made where feasible recreation and tourism. to overcome the barriers presented . The Authority will endeavour to make land available for a variety of compatible uses, recognizing and being sensitive to, the diversity of the community . Design and landscaping should protect, enhance and create a distinctive and memorable place within Claireville . Design should include a range of landscape types . Maintain existing vistas and views; density and design of structures should not be permitted to create visual barriers to the natural beauty of the Area . The focus for public use will be on recreation and outdoor education . The Conservation Area should provide diverse landscapes, places, wildlife habitats, uses, programs, and experiences . Provide a mix of public and private uses, developed and natural areas, large and small scale, active and passive, busy and quiet, and free and user pay activities . Develop literature, such as guide books, trail maps Increase awareness of the and news releases of events and activities at watershed's resources. Claireville. . Develop and distribute fact sheets on watershed management issues, such as the management of natural processes. . Promote the use of the outdoor education centre at Claireville. . Promote partnerships among environmental, Increase community cultural, heritage, recreation and education stewardship . and-take .. -organizations, private industry and public responsibility for the health of agencies. the Humber. . Encourage action-oriented initiatives to protect, conserve and regenerate Claireville and the Humber watershed. : - CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E130 9 6.0 STUDY PROCESS The Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan will be undertaken in two phases. Phase I will be conducted by MTRCA staff and will involve the preparation of a background report that includes all relevant material Oe. existing resources, site constraints, and historical information etc.) to assist in putting the planning exercise into context for the general public and the Technical Advisory Committee. This background report will be provided to the Technical Advisory Committee so that once familiar with the site and its issues, they can make informed decisions and valuable recommendations to guide the Mure management activities in the Claireville Conservation Area The background report will also be made available to the public, upon request. Phase I includes the establishment of a Technical Advisory Committee. In Phase II, the Technical Advisory Committee will provide comments on the Working Terms of Reference and provide input to guide the development of the Management Plan. This Committee will also provide a forum to facilitate public input and consultation. The Management Plan will be prepared by MTRCA staff with assistance from the Technical Advisory Committee and circulated to all interested parties. Phase II will include an evaluation of the Area, public consultation, and the preparation of a Management Plan that provides recommendations and management zones. The Authority has an extensive mailing list for the Claireville Conservation Area already in place. All appropriate individuals/groups will be advised of all public meetings regarding the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan. Information sessions and public meetings will be used to facilitate public comment and input into the Management Plan. STEPS Phase I (MTRCA Staff) 1. Establish a Technical Advisory Committee. 2. Review existing plans and studies within the West Humber River Sub - watershed, of which Claireville Conservation Area is a part (see Humber Watershed Strategy). 3. Document existing and proposed land use, municipal services, road classifications and property ownership. 4. Document and quantify the current public use and types of recreation activities occurring in the Claireville Conservation Area and surroundifJg communities. 5. Define the natural, cultural, heritage, recreation and education resources. Identify any information deficiencies that may exist. 6. Prepare a background report that provides the above information. t .... E131 CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 10 Phase II . (MTRCA staff with assistance from the Technical Advisory Committee) 1. Identify generally, the purposes of the Claireville Conservation Area 2. Evaluate the property based on the available background information. 3. Identify: 1) the natural resources and potential enhancements, existing outdoor recreation/education uses, potential outdoor recreation and education areas and potential surplus lands; 2) linkages between Claireville Conservation Area and surrounding communities; 3) potential access points; and 4) the landscape's ability to sustain proposed uses. 4. Facilitate a wide range of opportunities for public input as outlined in Section 6.2 Public Participation. 5. Document the community's opinion and recommendations for the Mure management of the Claireville Conservation Area 6. Make recommendations to facilitate Mure management activities and identify potential management zones. 7. Prepare a Management Plan for the Claireville Conservation Area that will provide a framework for determining the ecological appropriateness of any proposed public use location and ensure that the integrity and diversity of the Area are maintained. 6.1 MANAGEMENT PLAN TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Representatives from the following agencies/groups will be invited to participate in the Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan Technical Advisory Committee: Humber River Watershed Task Force, regional and municipal staff, elected representatives, community groups, Ministry of Natural Resources, Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation, Wild Water Kingdom, The Claireville Equestrian Ranch, the Etobicoke Board of Education, unaffiliated citizens and Authority staff. A Technical Advisory Committee will be established to assist the Authority in finalizing the Working Terms of Reference, and determining the management zones and management recommendations. This Committee will provide technical input and assist the Authority with the public consultation program regarding the Management Plan. In summary, the Technical Advisory Committee will be responsible for the following major functions: 1. Provide1echnicat expertise-and advice to the MTRCA throughout the development of the Management Plan; 2. Ensure that appropriate staff, other than themselves, at their respective municipalities/agencies are adequately informed throughout the process; 3. Review the membership of the Technical Advisory Committee and make suggestions for expansion or contraction as the Advisory Committee sees fit or as situations present themselves; : - CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E132 11 4. Provide comment and input to the suggestions brought to the Technical Advisory Committee; 5. Assist in the identification of current outstanding issues involving Claireville Conservation Area and make suggestions as to appropriate ways of resolving them; 6. Receive written comments and hear delegations as input into the planning process, when appropriate, and to make suggestions thereon to MTRCA staff; and 7. Assist the MTRCA in presentationS/public forums, where appropriate. The Technical Advisory Committee will follow the Rules of Conduct of the Authority as adopted by Resolution #3 of Authority meeting #2/86 or as may be amended. At meeting #2/96 the Technical Advisory Committee agreed that all issues will be resolved through agreement by consensus. However, if an issue cannot be resolved, there will be a majority vote taken. 6.2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The eventual development and use of the Claireville Conservation Area will be important to the area residents and consequently, they must have a meaningful way to provide input to the planning process. To facilitate a wide range of opportunities for input, the Authority will use many techniques to generate a high level of awareness. The public participation component will include the following: * Presentations or discussions with key interest groups (ie. Stewards of Claireville, West Humber Naturalists, Federation of Ontario Naturalists, Humber River Watershed Task Force, Community Associations), upon request. This list will be expanded through local municipal Planning Department and Technical Advisory Committee input. * Information sessions/ mailings to the public, including ratepayer/user groups to identify a broad range of potential needs and opportunities for the Area * Public meetings to present the background information, proposed management zones and Technical Advisory Committee recommendations. * Delegations will have the opportunity to present their position at the meetings of the Technical Advisory Committee. Delegations must notify the Committee eight working days, in advance of their intent to make a presentation. * Public participation will be encouraged at all Authority meetings. 7.0 TIMING It is anticipated that Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan will be presented to the Authority for approval by February 1997. f - , " E133 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 12 8.0 MAINTENANCE OF THE PLAN The Claireville Conservation Area Management Plan will undergo a review approximately every five years. If major revisions are necessary to reflect changing environmental, sociaJ, or economic conditions, it will only be done after consultation with all affected groups and individuals. Revisions of the Plan will be in keeping with the original stated goals and objectives of the Plan to protect the natural heritage values of the property. Should the Management Plan identify potential public use zones, specific uses within these areas will be screened and assessed according to The Strategy for Public Use of Conservation Authority Lands (1995). A community consultation process will also be employed at this stage of planning to ensure that all local and regional interests are represented in the concept and detailed design review. The consultative process will include the establishment of a working group with representatives from citizens, user groups, agencies and elected representatives. The screening process for specific public uses will ensure that all proposed uses, facilities and landscape changes will be thoroughly examined and designed to minimize disruption, to protect, enhance or restore the Area C:\IIIrm8.o11 CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E134 SECTION IV - FOR INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #C31 196 - FOREST MANAGEMENT ON MTRCA LANDS Staff propose to generate revenues to support the Authority Forest Management program through contracting for selected cutting of trees as set out in the 1996-2005 Operating Plan. Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Randy Barber THA T staff be authorized to invite quotations for forest management cutting and tending operations and to negotiate and enter into contractual agreements for the purpose of implementing such operations on Authority lands in accordance with the 10 year operations schedule; AND FURTHER THAT all revenues generated from the sale of forest products through the contracted cutting and tending operations be held in a forestry reserve account, such that these funds are available to provide for future non-revenue generating forest management activities including forest stand improvement, reforestation planting, and stand access maintenance and development. ................................... CARRIED BACKGROUND The funding constraints that have taken place in the Authority over the past year will affect our ability to fund Environmental Services Section (ESS) forest management programs as we have in the past. We are still, however, committed to delivering these programs to the same level without the traditional sources of funding. We are proposing alternative methods of generating funding and are seeking confirmation and approval of the proposed methods and implementation activities. This will allow us to continue implementing the operational component of the ESS forest management program and in doing so meet the greater Authority mandate and objectives of: - water management - soil erosion and sediment control - fish and wildlife habitats - public education and recreation - aesthetics - products E135 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 The ESS forestry program will continue to promote the sustainable production of both tangible and intangible benefits provided from the land. The forestry program objectives continue to remain: . assessment of the natural forest resource, through the analysis of inventory data and preparation of management plans. . implementation of forest management activities, which recover marginal lands, enhance and protect forest functions, promote stewardship and community outreach. . management based on sound forestry and resource management principles. It is proposed for the 1996-2005 operating period, that: . tenders are to be let to private contractors for the sale of standing timber on Authority owned and managed lands with the revenue generated going to support the forest management program. . The revenues generated to be deposited in a Uforest management reserve" that will provide a source of funding for resource development. These activities being essential non-revenue generating management functions. The following three resource development components of the forestry program will be funded through the "forest management reserve": * forest stand improvement * reforestation planting and site preparation * stand access maintenance and development CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E136 The following table provides a summary of proposed forestry operations for year-1 of the new operating schedule. Proposed Operating Schedule for Year -1 Location Stand Area (Hal Stand treatment forest Estimated Estimated No. types volume revenue in m3 Walker Woods W122 0.9 3rd thinning Red pine 68.5 $1,439 plantation W107 1.0 3rd thinning 38.0 $798 W119 2.1 3rd thinning 97.7 $2,052 W93 3.6 3rd thinning 144.5 $3,035 W4 0.6 3rd thinning 39.3 $825 W7 6.5 3rd thinning 160.3 $3,366 W53 4.0 3rd thinning 161.1 $3,383 subtotals 18.7 709.4 $14.897 Walker Woods M1 23.0 Improvement cut Hardwood volumes not estimated M11 2.8 Salvage cut 152.4 $3,000 subtotals 25.8 152.4 $3,000 Totals 44.5 861.8 $17 ,897 RA TIONALE Traditionally, staff has planned and implemented thinning and improvement cutting operations on MTRCA lands. Operating budget grant/levy funding was designated annually to implement priority projects. Commencing in 1996, the funding available to support forest management activities fell victim to the current budget restraint program. As such, staff is looking to implement some of these operations in a cost-effective manner through contract arrangements with external forestry contractors, the revenues from these operations going to support other forest management program activities. E137 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1,1996 Revenues generated from the sale of standing timber will fund the three resource development components of the Forestry program. Revenues are proposed to be apportioned among the three development components depending on yearly management priorities and partner support available to projects. We are proposing to maintain the same level of reforestation planting, however the impact of recent increased seedling costs and the loss of "free seedling" status for some of our tree planting partners, will reduce the number of seedlings planted or require greater funding or cost sharing. Stand access maintenance and development will rely solely on revenue-generated funds to maintain roads and entry points in a condition appropriate to commercial forestry operations. Future management prescriptions will also require the development of new or substantially improved stand access roads and processing locations that meet industry standards. Funds will also be directed to the implementation of non-revenue generating forest tending activities such as thinning, pruning, cleaning, salvage and sanitation cuts. The purpose of these operations is to improve forest health and influence the composition of the future forest stand. It is anticipated that all essential development and maintenance activities can be funded entirely through revenues. However, the assumption that a constant flow of revenue will be available in any given budget year to fund non-revenue producing activities is not valid. Given the current budgeting and accounting procedures in use at the Authority, there are many factors that preclude this notion. For example, changing market conditions can demand the sale of products at times that will maximize revenues, but market conditions will not necessarily coincide with the fiscal year cycle. Revenues could be lost to the program at fiscal year ends, without any planting, developmental or maintenance projects benefitting the forest resource ever having been realized. As a result, it is recommended that a "forest management reserve" be established. The establishment of a reserve account is proposed as a way of imparting flexibility and continuity into the funding aspect of the forest management program. Through the reserve, revenues received through the sale of products and contracts in one year would be available in successive years to support ongoing priority management and non-revenue generating activities. This reserve account would not be in a position to run a deficit. Expenditures would be based on and limited to the availability of reserve funds. ESS staff will continue to circulate internally the yearly proposed forest management operations schedule in an effort to keep staff apprised of our proposed activities. The schedule will detail the proposed management operations giving a description of the forest stand, its size and location, the silvicultural treatment to take place, estimated volume of products if anticipated, and the proposed timing of operations. Efforts will then be made to assess and deal with the impact to other programs, recreational activities, rental agreements, proposed management strategies and land use by the general public. Staff will also be advised as to any changes to the longer term work schedules and management focus. CONSERV A nON AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E138 The public notification process will proceed as in the past. Communications will be sent out to the appropriate governmental bodies, watershed task forces and public groups who may be impacted by proposed forest management operations. Municipal and Regional offices will be contacted where applicable in compliance with their tree bylaw regulations as well as notification to the Niagara Escarpment Commission when appropriate. The Area forester for the MNR will be notified concerning our management activities and a proposal sent for their own records. Organized public user groups, like the Bruce Trail Association and smaller local clubs that have recognized access to Authority lands will be notified of our intentions and how it will effect land use. Private landowners adjacent to the proposed works will also be contacted and meetings between Authority staff and landowners can be scheduled to address areas of concern. Report prepared by: Dave Rogalsky, (905-851-2809) For information contact: Zoltan Kovacs (905-851-2809) E139 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 RES. #C32/96 - BA YVIEW A VENUE EXTENSION AND UPGRADING Presentation by the Region of York updating and advising the Board of the progress of the Environmental Assessment for the proposed Bayview Avenue extension and upgrading. Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THA T the report of the Region of York with respect to the progress of the Environmental Assessment for the proposed Bayview A venue extension and upgrading be received. AMENDMENT RES. #C33/96 Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THA T the concerns expressed by the Members of the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board, regarding the proposal to extend Bayview Avenue, in the T own of Richmond Hill, be considered by the Region of York, in the completion of the Environmental Assessment of this project. THE AMENDMENT WAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED BACKGROUND Since the early 1980's, Authority staff has been involved in discussions with staff of the Region of York and their consultants, McCormick Rankin, with respect to the above project. Our objective, throughout this process, has been to minimize the potential negative impacts of this project on the Authority's Lake St. George property, the operation of the Lake St. George Conservation Field Centre, and on the watershed management resources within and adjacent to Bayview Avenue. Originally, the project was to complete Bayview Avenue and to upgrade the existing sections to accommodate anticipated traffic flow. To provide a buffer to Wilcox Lake and to minimize the impact on the Lake St. George property, staff identified, in 1982, that a "mid-range" alignment would be acceptable. In 1989, the Authority was notified of the commencement of the Class Environmental Study Report for this project. At that time, staff reiterated the concerns previously identified and updated them to reflect changes in policy and program interests ie. 1982 E.S.A. Study, identification of archaeological resources on Authority Lands, registration of revised regulations. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E140 In June 1990, the project was revised to include a service road for the section north of North Lake Road. The purpose of this amendment was to ensure homes on the west side of Bayview could access the improved Bayview Avenue but not be directly affected by the increased traffic. While this resolved the residents' COAcerns, it shifted the project east, affecting a significantly larger area of Authority land. In correspondence to the consultant it was noted that Authority staff was: "very concerned that greens pace lands, acquired for conservation purposes, are more and more frequently being regarded as suitable to meet the servicing requirements of the growing population in the Greater Toronto Area. While the Authority continues to cooperate with its member and local municipalities....every effort should be made to minimize the loss of these valuable resource lands, particularly in the headwaters Moraine....The recent addition of the service road proposal and its considerable impact on Authority property and the E.S.A. should be reviewed to identify other alternatives." The full Authority at its Meeting #5/93, held June 25, 1993, considered a report and recommendations from the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board with respect to this proposed project. In this regard, the Authority adopted the following resolutions. RES. # 1 08/93 "THA T the staff report regarding the proposal by The Region of York to upgrade Bayview A venue from Stouffville Road to Bloomington Road be received; THA T the Region of York be advised of the requirement for restricting access to and providing adequate natural buffering of the Lake St. George property and that relocation, replacement and, where necessary, additions to existing plant materials should commence prior to and be protected from construction; THA T the Region be advised of the Authority's concerns for the loss of/or impact on significant archaeological resources, the natural features and functions associated with the Forester Marsh Environmentally Significant Area, the Snively Street Wetland, Lake Wilcox and Lake St. George, as well as the valley and stream corridors which require permits from the Authority under its regulation; THA T this report and recommendations be forwarded to the Region of York as an identification of the Authority's major concerns with respect to the Bayview A venue project; AND FURTHER THA T due to its concerns, The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority will object to this project unless it is subject to a full Environmental Assessment. " E141 CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 AMENDMENT RES. # 109/93 "THA T the Authority respectfully request the Region of York to consider abandoning the project to upgrade Bayview A venue from Stouffville Road to Bloomington Road. " The Authority's request to "bump up" this project to a full Environmental Assessment was granted by the Minister of Environmental and Energy. The issues noted by the Authority in its consideration of this proposal are as follows: 1. LOSS OF AUTHORITY LANDS AT LAKE ST. GEORGE. The proposed alignment cuts through the southwest portion of the property and then removes a strip along the western boundary to accommodate the service road and the widening of Bayview. Part of the property in the southwest will be permanently separated from the remainder. 2. IMPACT ON OPERATION. The Lake St. George Conservation Field Centre provides residential programs in conservation and outdoor education, under agreement, with the Board of Education for the Region of York, the Metropolitan Toronto School Board and the Metropolitan Separate School Board. The location of the Centre and its natural setting, including the kettle lakes, contribute significantly to the day and night outdoor and conservation education programs offered and to the experience and the education of the participants. The impact of increasing traffic capacity, lighting, the addition of a service road and the linking of Bayview will be significant, including noise and air pollution, loss of natural buffering vegetation, and limiting access from Lake St. George to Lake Wilcox. 3. DESTRUCTION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES. Archaeological resources have been identified on property that will be affected by the project. Full salvage excavation will be required before construction. While this is a requirement, our preference would be to leave the resource in situ for future excavation and study in conjunction with the Field Centre operation. 4. AFFECT ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. Lake St. George and Lake Wilcox are connected by a stream corridor. This provides a link between these areas which is, currently, affected by existing Bayview Avenue. The new road alignment north of North Lake Road will significantly increase these impacts and includes a proposal to reroute the watercourse under the new roadway. The Forester Marsh and the Snidely Street Wetland are impacted by the proposal to retain existing Bayview as a service road and to develop a new road as Bayview Avenue north of North Lake Road. More recent studies have identified these features as part of a larger wetland complex. The loss, or impairment, of these resources, in the Oak Ridges Moraine is of concern to the Authority. While impacts may be minimized or mitigated, they will still be damaged. CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 E142 The Jefferson Forest, in the south portion of the proposed extension, will be affected by the construction of the new roadway, specifically with respect to the impact of light and noise on its habitat characteristics. The protection of the features and functions of the Forest are of concern to the Authority. 5. IMPACT ON THE OAK RIDGES MORAINE: The new section of Bayview, between Stouffville Road and Bethesda Road will cross tributaries to the Rouge River system and cut through a section of the Oak Ridges Moraine. The Authority was a member of the Oak Ridges Moraine Technical Working Committee. The new section of Bayview will affect lands designated within the Natural Heritage System of the Oak Ridges Moraine. The proposal traverses a section of the Moraine with typical undulating topography and will involve cut and fill. The conservation of the Oak Ridges Moraine landform, features and functions is of concern to the Authority. 6. AL TERNA TIVES TO THE UNDERTAKING: The ESR did not fully consider alternatives to the undertaking on the grounds that they would not complete the network nor achieve network flexibility. Since the "network" was established some time ago, before today's concerns for the natural environment, the Authority felt that "alternatives to" the proposal should be more fully investigated. The Region has proceeded to prepare a full Environmental Assessment and has requested Authority staff input and comment throughout the process. It has been pointed out, by staff, that the Authority's concerns relate to the impact of any proposed route on environmental resources and operational activities rather than on one route versus another. The Region and its consultants have been requested to address those issues of concern to the Authority in connection with any proposed route. The Region of York has requested an opportunity to give the Board a progress report. A brief presentation will be made by Leslie Scott, McCormick Rankin, the Region's consultant. Report prepared by: Alyson Deans, Ext. 269 E143 CONSERV A TION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 NEW BUSINESS RES. #C34/96 - BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE The renovation of the outdoor patio adjacent to the Visitors' Centre to increase food revenues at Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV). Moved by: Deborah Sword Seconded by: Michael Di Biase THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff proceed with patio renovations at Black Creek Pioneer Village a cost not to exceed $74,500; and THAT reserves be used for these expenditures; AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to seek a sponsor for the patio, as part of the Black Creek Pioneer Village capital campaign, to offset this capital cost. . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED BACKGROUND The BCPV 1997-99 Business Plan includes increased revenue targets in Food Services based on additional sales to be realized from the patio. In order to achieve the Business Plan objectives, staff wishes to proceed with renovations and aggressively sell the space for the full 1997 season and beyond. ANAL YSIS The patio cannot currently accommodate large corporate functions and wedding receptions because of the deteriorated state of the flooring, lack of covered space and lack of suitable tables and chairs. Because of the patio's current state, BCPV has been unable to attract bookings or achieve the revenue potential this location is capable of generating. BCPV has lost bookings to other GT A facilities because prospective clients with groups of more than 200 could not be accommodated with a weather proof guarantee. The entire patio flooring would have to be replaced in 1 997, because it is 12 years old and at the end of its life. A covered space must be provided to assure customers that they can be accommodated regardless of the weather. Electrical upgrading is required to handle basic entertainment needs. Tables and chairs are required to replace the unattractive round picnic tables with fixed seats, which are unsuitable for banquets and event dining. There is a potential revenue of about $50,000, after expenses, that can be generated in 1997 from corporate parties and wedding receptions held on the patio. This figure will increase in years 2 and 3, as the facility becomes better known. Taking into account that the fixed costs factored into the 3-year business plan will not change, the patio is forecasted to provide incremental revenue of $100,000 gross, for a net return of $49,500. Variable costs will be mainly for food and labour. CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1.1996 E144 WORK TO BE DONE Boardwalk flooring will be completely replaced, with recycled plastic materials used for the stringers and pressure treated wood for the deck to extend the life of the patio and reduce maintenance costs. Tenting covering an area of 2,700 sq. ft., including vinyl sidewalls will be purchased and installed. Electrical upgrade of the existing panel and additional new outlets will be installed, and some lighting fixtures replaced. Patio furniture, consisting of 50 tables and 200 chairs will replace the fixed picnic tables. Because the flooring would have to be replaced due to its deteriorated state, the incremental cost of this project is really the cost of the covering and furniture. Project Costs: Boardwalk $32,000 Tent with sidewalls 29,500 Electrical upgrade 5,000 Furniture 5,000 Contingency 3.000 $74,500 In 1996, a sponsor opportunity for the patio, at the $150,000 level was developed as part of the $1.4 million BCPV capital campaign. Sponsor proposals were sent to 18 corporations. None of these firms were sufficiently interested in this partnership opportunity to explore it in detail. Most companies indicated lack of funds, previous commitments or priority for national marketing and advertising projects rather than regionally based ones as their reason for declining. The search for a sponsor will continue. In the meantime, BCPV needs the basic patio renovated and ready for customers for 1997, and must begin to sell it now. Report prepared by: Marty Brent, ext. 403 E145 CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/96, NOVEMBER 1, 1996 TERMINA TION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11 :35 a.m., Friday, November 1, 1996. Richard Whitehead Craig Mather Chair Secretary-Treasurer pI.