Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater and Related Land Management Advisory Board 1992 ~ Working Together for TomorfQw's Greenspace 'the metropolitan toronlo and region conservation authority minutes 0-1 MARCH 6, 1992 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92 The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, March 6, 1992. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. PRESENT Chairman Lois Griffin Vice Chairman Kip Van Kempen Members Lorna Bissell lIa Bossons Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Joanna Kidd Paul Raina Bev Salmon Frank Scarpitti ABSENT Members Maja Prentice Joyce Trimmer MINUTES Res. #1 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THAT the Minutes of Meeting #9/91 be approved. CARRIED DELEGATIONS The following delegations spoke in support of the staff recommendation for item 1, Tommy Thompson Park User/Entltlnce Fees: Ralph Brown, Aquatic Park Sailing Club Alf Jenkins, Ontario Sailing Association Jean McDonald, Toronto Field Naturalists John Carley, Co-chair, Friends of the Spit The following delegations spoke to item 2, Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment: Jean McDonald, Toronto Field Naturalists John Carley, Co-chair, Friends of the Spit Ralph Brown, Aquatic Park Sailing Club Alf Jenkins, Ontario Sailing Association CORRESPONDENCE ITEM 1 AND 2 - TOMMY THOMPSON PARK - USER/ENTRANCE FEE John R. Carley, Co-chair, Friends of the Spit, dated February 20, 1992 C. Visser Cinder, dated January 16, 1992 Mr. H. Currie, Toronto Ornithological Club, dated February 11, 1992 Simon Gawn, dated January 27. 1992 Sandra Hawkins, dated January 31, 1992 Verna J. Higgins, Botany Conservation Group, dated March 5, 1992 Boris Mather, President, Citizens for a Lakeshore Greenway, dated January 22, 1992 Boris Mather, Citizen, dated January 22, 1992 Roy Smith, dated January 18, 1992 . . 0-2 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK - USER/ENTRANCE FEES KEY ISSUE Consideration of cost recovery for the transportation service and analysis of user/entrance fees at Tommy Thompson Park. Res. #2 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to implement a no charge van service consisting of a single van operating from April 25th to October 12th, 1992 at Tommy Thompson Park; THAT the Authority accept the $1,500 offered by the Aquatic Park Sailing Club to offset the operating cost of the transportation service; THAT the Authority subsidize the remaining operating costs associated with the provision of this service; THAT staff evaluate the ridership, park user levels and operating costs at the completion of 1992, In preparation of the 1993 Interim Users Program; THAT there be no entrance fee Implemented at Tommy Thompson Park; AND FURTHER THAT the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, and the Interim Users of Tommy Thompson Park be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND Tommy Thompson Park is a natural waterfront area that is uniquely different from any other park in the metro area. At the present time a large portion of the sit~ is in the continuing phases of construction, and although the site is open for limited access on weekends, there are few public amenities or visitor services on site. The park is being managed on an interim basis by the Authority until the Master Plan has been approved. The future long-term management of the site may be turned over to Metro Parks and Property as per the 1972 Waterfront Agreement between the Authority and Metro Toronto. Compared to other regional parks, Tommy Thompson Park lacks the services and facilities that are provided in all Conservation Areas that have an entrance fee, and the degree and ease of public access available at parks operated by local municipalities. In some respects, this site is similar to the Toronto Islands because of its remote location and access limitations. In order to facilitate use of the site by the public, the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, and subsequently the Authority have provided a transportation service on-site during the summer months. The average annual park attendance is approximately 40,000 visitors per year, of which, 60% are cyclists. The remaining 40% of the visitors consist of pedestrians, boaters and joggers. In 1991, a total of 5,707 visitors used the transportation service. This represents approximately 15% of the 1991 attendance which was 37,952 visitors. At their meeting #9/91, on January 10, 1992, the Authority, in consideration of the staff report on the need and costs associated with the provision of a transportation service at Tommy Thompson Park, adopted the following resolutions: \ \ WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-3 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK - USER/ENTRANCE FEES (CONTD.) Res. #280 "THAT the issue of transportation service at Tommy Thompson Park be referred back to staff for consideration of the proposed amendments made by Councillor Howard Moscoe and other issues raised by members of the Authority." Res. #281 "THAT staff give further consideration to user/entrance fees." The various issues raised at the meeting included the continuation of a transportation service, upgrades to the signage and entrance at Tommy Thompson Park, and consideration of the Aquatic Park Sailing Club's offer to contribute $ 1,500 toward the provision of a transportation service. Staff has recently met with the Toronto Transit Commission, Metro Parks and Property, and the Aquatic Park Sailing Club with respect to these issues, and have prepared the following report outlining the feasibility and cost implications of several user pay (cost'recovery) options at the park. Entrance Fees: A park entrance fee could be implemented to attempt to recover a portion of the annual operating costs associated with this site. A user pay system similar to other conservation areas would create revenue, however, additional financial considerations would be involved. At the present time, the Authority's Conservation Areas operate to a 30% cost recovery on average. The philosophy of this partial cost recovery has been that the public are contributing towards the services that are provided. Based on this formula, the Authority could implement an entrance fee to attempt to recover 30% of Tommy Thompson Parks operating costs which would equal approximately $28,500 in 1992. Due to the existing layout of the park and requirements under the Authority's Security of Funds Policy, a number of capital expenditures will be required before an entrance fee can be implemented. These would include the provision of a gatehouse and other equipment such as a cash register, floor safe and additional signage. The total cost for the initial set-up of this equipment is estimated at approximately $ 1 0,000.00. Annual operating costs for the site would increase by approximately $22,000.00 per year to cover the additional staffing and administration that would be required to collect the entrance fee. These costs would include additional staff time, mileage, training and maintenance. This option is the least desirable as far as the public is concerned and it is expected that usership of the site would decrease significantly if an entrance fee was implemented. At the present time, approximately 60% of the park users are cyclists, and since cycling is an activity that is .D21 unique to Tommy Thompson Park, these visitors are likely to discontinue their use of the site. It has been the experience of the Conservation Area staff that the public is more willing to pay for the use of a service than to pay admission to a park for walking or cycling. In this respect, staff anticipate that the implementation of an entrance fee may cause park visitors to demand the types of facilities that are available at other pay-per-visit areas; i.e., drinking water, washrooms, benches, picnic areas, etc. The financial implications of providing these types of services are largely prohibitive and implementation cannot be undertaken until the Master Plan receives Environmental Assessment approval. At the present time, there are no parks within Metro Toronto that require an entrance fee for public use, and it has been the policy of Metro Parks and Property to provide free public access to their parks including parking and transportation services. 0-4 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK - USER/ENTRANCE FEES (CONTD.) , ENTRANCE FEE PRESENT PARK OPERATING COST $70,000 (not including transportation) TRANSPORTATION SERVICE $25,000 (bus/van combination as in 1991) ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATION COSTS $20,000 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (1992) $10,000 REVENUE $28,500 NET COST TO MTRCA (1992) $96,500 User Pay Bus Service This option would involve the provision of a user pay bus service that would operate for 6 months from April 25th to Thanksgiving. The provision of a 6 month service would facilitate access to the site during the season of highest use and will provide access to the Aquatic Park Sailing Club members during the sailing season. This service would operate on an hourly basis from Queen and Jones Avenue to Tommy Thompson Park with passengers paying regular TIC fares. The cost of this service would be approximately $30,000 for the 1992 season. Cost recovery would be in the order of $11,500 based on the present TIC fare and 1991 ridership figures. However, the TIC has identified an expected decrease in ridership of at least 30%, which would substantially reduce any cost recovery. The primary advantage of this option is that all aspects of the user fee are administered by the Toronto Transit Commission, including fare collection, insurance, and security. User Pay Van Service: This option would involve the provision of a user pay van service that would operate from April 25 to Thanksgiving. This service could be provided with one or two vans operating on a half hour schedule within Tommy Thompson Park and connecting to the existing TIC Jones Line at Commissioners Street. The Toronto Transit Commission has indicated that this connection to their existing service would be permissable, however, under Section 110(2) of the Municipality of Metro Toronto Act, the Authority could not charge for a transportation service "outside" Tommy Thompson Park. Two Van User Pay Ootion: The cost of providing two passenger vehicles (one van and one suburban) for the 1992 season is approximately $21,000 including vehicle rental, staff wages, fuel and insurance. Cost recovery through charging would be in the order of approximately $4,000 at $1.00 per ride based on 1991 figures 2ill1 the anticipated 30% reduction in ridership. The fare of $1 .00 per ride was selected because it was a reasonable fee for this type of service, and the existing $1.00 coins would be easy to collect and administer. Additional operating expenses, in the order of approximately $1,500, would be incurred to collect and administer a user fee for the van service. This expense would primarily cover the additional staff time involved with handling the revenue. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-5 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK - USER/ENTRANCE FEES (CONTD.) One Van User Pav Ootion: Total costs to the Authority would be reduced considerably if a single van was operated in 1992. The estimated cost of providing a single van would be approximately $14,500 including vehicle rental, staff wages, fuel and insurance. Additional administration costs would remain at $1,500, and the projected revenue would be approximately $4,000 at $1.00 per ride as outlined above. The use of one van would be sufficient to maintain the previous years level of service due to the expected decrease in ridership. In addition, the frequency of the service could be increased to 15 minutes depending on demand. Costs could be reduced further if the vehicle is utilized for other Resource Management programs during weekdays and administered under the Authority's existing vehicle chargeback system. One Van No Charae Ootion: This option would involve the provision of a free van service consisting of a single van. The total operating cost to the Authority would be $83,000, if the Authority accepts the $1,500 offered by the Aquatic Park Sailing Club and subsidizes the balance of the operating costs for the single van option. Therefore there is only $1,000 dollars difference between subsidizing the program and operating a user pay service. ONE VAN TWO VAN ONE V AN (user fee) (user fee) (no charge) PRESENT PARK OPERATING COST $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 (not including transportation) V AN OPERATING COSTS $14,500 $21,000 $14,500 ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATION COSTS $1,500 $1,500 N/A PROJECTED REVENUE ($1.00/ride) $4,000 $4,000 $1,500. TOTAL COST TO MTRCA $82,000" $88,500" $83.000" . $1,500 from Aquatic Park Sailing Club to offset costs .. Cost may be further reduced by using vans for other programs RATIONALE Staff is recommending that a no charge van service be implemented at Tommy Thompson Park as part of the 1992 Interim User Program, consisting of a single van operating from April 25th through Thanksgiving. This service is the preferred option for the following reasons: (1) The use of a single van will allow the Authority to maintain a level of service at Tommy Thompson Park while reducing the total operating costs. Cost recovery of $1,500 would be available from the Aquatic Park Sailing Club. Therefore the total park operating costs including the transportation service would be: $70,000 + $14,500 - $1,500 = $83,000. 0-6 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK - USER/ENTRANCE FEES (CONTO.) (2) The operation of a van service could include connection with the existing TTC Jones Bus at Commissioners Street. (3) The operation of a van service maintains a greater degree of flexibility than the bus by allowing alteration of scheduling and frequency if required. Additional use of the van for other resource management programs during the week would further reduce the operating cost of this service and defray the vehicle costs for these other programs. (4) The use of an Authority operated transportation service augments the Authority's presence on-site and increases the level of public safety at the Park. In addition, the extra staff person will enhance the level of public interpretation of both the park's natural features and other Authority programs in the Metro Region. (5) The transportation service has facilitated use of the Park by individuals who could not otherwise enjoy the site because of the distances to and within the site. This includes senior citizens, families with young children and the disabled. (6) This service is in keeping with the agreement with Metro for the Authority to operate the site on an interim basis until the Master plan is prepared, approved and implemented, while not establishing any long-term operating procedures. . (7) This service has been considered as part of the budget analysis process and has been ranked high enough to receive funding in 1992. (8) There should be no entrance fee for the following reasons: - The Authority in managing the site on an interim basis. - A large portion of the site is still under various stages of construction and access to the public is limited. - At the present time there are limited public amenities or services that would justify an entrance fee. - This would be consistent with other regional and local parks within Metro Toronto and along the waterfront. 2. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT KEY ISSUE To present a revised concept plan for Tommy Thompson Park to facilitate public and agency review in preparation of a revised master plan for resubmission in 1992 to the Minister of the Environment for approval under the Environmental Assessment Act. Res. #3 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Frank Scarpitti THE BOARD RECOMMENtlS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the revised Tommy Thompson Park Concept (March 6, 1992) be endorsed as a basis to obtain public and agency comment in preparing a resubmission of the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment in 1992 to the Minister of the Environment; WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1192, MARCH 6, 1992 0-7 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT lCONTD.) THAT staff be directed to prepare the necessary documentation for public and government review with a special public meeting of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board to be scheduled to enable consideration of a revised Master Plan by the Authority no later than its meeting of July 24, 1992; AND FURTHER THAT the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Toronto, the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront and the Tommy Thompson Park Natural Areas Advisory Committee be so edvised. AMENDMENT Moved by: Lois Hancey Res. #4 Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THAT staff prepare documentation relating to the public transportation question as part of the revised Master Plan preparation. THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................... CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED BACKGROUND At its Meeting # 1/92, the Authority adopted the following resolution: "THAT the letter from Mr. Derek Doyle, Director - Environmental Assessment Branch - Ministry of the Environment dated November 13, 1991, be received; "AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to prepare a report for consideration at the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board meeting scheduled for March 6, 1992, on a planning process and recommendations to enable resubmission of the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment to the Ministry of the Environment." Staff, in preparing this report, held discussions with the Environmental Assessment Branch, the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, the Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department, the Metropolitan Toronto Works Department, the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, the City of Toronto Planning Department, .the City of Toronto Parks and Recreation Department, the City of Toronto Environmental Protection Office and the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront. The following represents a listing of the key issues with the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment submitted July 1989: . Private vehicle access to the endikement and public parking for 100 vehicles. . Lakefilling to create land base for Outer Harbour Sailing Federation Clubs. . Community sailing club location on Tommy Thompson Park versus other preferred locations in Outer Harbour. . Location of Interpretive Centre. . Land based facilities and vehicle access to Aquatic Park Sailing Club. . Capital costs - $4,850,000 l1 987 dollars). 0-8 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CON SID ERA TION 2. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (CONTD.) The Ministry of the Environment indicated that rather than preparing an entirely new submission, the Authority could refile the Ma"ster Plan, accompanied by an addendum outlining the public process, modified master plan, revised capital costs, and phasing. The Ministry indicated that there were very few problems with the original submission and that the review of a revised submission would be expedited. RATIONALE Staff have prepared a revised concept which in general terms addresses all the issues outlined above. The revised concept incorporates the following: . Elimination of private vehicle access and the public parking 1100 spaces) from the interpretive centre location lendikement). . Removal of any proposed lakefilling to accommodate the Outer Harbour Sailing Federation and additional parkland at the base of the park. . Recognition of the commitment by the City of Toronto in its assumption of the North Shore Park (Toronto Harbour Commissioners Park) of the Outer Harbour to accommodate all the community sailing clubs which presently are located on the North Shore. . Relocation of the proposed visitors centre to the park entrance at the base of the spit. . Addition of a small environmental education/shelter/washroom facility at the endikement which would be accessed by bus to facilitate the environmental programs of the school boards. . The Aquatic Park Sailing Club would remain in Embayment C with 100 swing moorings and limited on- shore facilities le.g. clubhouse and storage building). Parking and winter boat storage could be provided on the Outer Harbour Marina arm subject to the approval of the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, with club member's access to the Aquatic Park Sailing Club via their own water shuttle or possible van service. . The revised concept incorporates capital cost reductions in the magnitude of $2,500,000 in 1987 dollars. A further $500,000 reduction to provide municipal services to the environmental education/shelter/washrooms at the endikement could be realized if alternative site servicing options are acceptable to the City of Toronto and The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto. The revised plan also maximizes the use of the existing paved road for maintenance vehicles and cyclists while avoiding duplication of park facilities. This existing paved road could form the Tommy Thompson Park component of the "Lakeside Trail" being coordinated by The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto. The revised Concept Plan could receive favourable comment from the City of Toronto since it has a higher degree of conformity with the policy directions in the Central Waterfront Plan currently before the Ontario Municipal Board as follows: "SA.37 It is the policy of Council to support proposals for the Outer Harbour Headland which are in accordance with Section SA.36 and which: la) ensure that roads and intensive activities in the ooen soace area do not adversely affect the character of the Environmental Resource Area; lbl provide recreation opportunities for a wide variety of users; . . WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-9 SECTION I- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (CONTD.) (c) permit public access, notwithstanding construction and fill activities; (d) use parking in peak periOdS located in adjacent areas of the Port Industrial District: (e) provide bicycle and pedestrian paths from Unwin Avenue to the tip of the Outer Harbour Headland (f) prohibit private recreational automobile traffic within the Enviror:lmental Resource Area; and (g) promote the regulation of private automobile traffic from entering the Outer Harbour Headland, and encourage the use of non-motorized transportation and the use of acceptable public transit." On December 3 and 5, 1990, City of Toronto Council endorsed an agreement with the Toronto Harbour Commissioners to lease approximately 200 acres along the north shore of the Outer Harbour for parks and open space purposes. The City of Toronto Parks and Recreation Department is currently initiating the preparation of a concept/master plan for this area as required by the lease. The revised concept plan reflects the following commitment by the City of Toronto Council at its meeting March 25/26, 1991, to accommodate all the community clubs in the Outer Harbour: "Council adopted the Clause without amendment and, in so doing, took the following action: (1 ) Amended the body of the report (February 22, 1991) from the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation, as indicated in his further report of March 6, 1991. (2) Deemed that the specifications contained in Section 4.0 of the report (February 22, 1991) from the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation form the basis for legal arrangements for the Community boating Clubs to continue their right to use their existing facilities on the North Shore in the interim until such time as a Comprehensive Plan Agreement as set out in the CityfToronto Harbour Commission lease is developed (as approved by City Council on December 3rd and 5th, 1990). (3) Reaffirmed its intent to include provision for long term arrangements for windsurfing, rowing and community boating clubs, in the preparation of a Preliminary Concept Plan and a Comprehensive Plan Agreement as expressed in the draft lease between the City and the THC for the lands to be known as THC's Waterfront Park and in the future planning of additional Outer Harbour Parklands including those lands that may be acquired by the City pursuant to Recommendation No. 62 of the "Watershed" report by the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront (adopted by City Council on November 12th and 13th, 1990). (4) Agreed to consider arrangements for short term public moorings in planning. for these lands and adjacent lands in the Outer harbour area. (5) Invited the Community Boating Clubs to nominate representatives to participate with the City of Toronto, other agencies and interested parties towards the formation of the Preliminary Concept Plan for the THC's Waterfront Park, and to advise the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation of such representatives. 0-10 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CON SID ERA TION 2. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (CONTD.) (6) Requested the Toronto Harbour Commissioners to facilitate the necessary complementary agreements with the community clubs for effecting the water operations of the community boating clubs. (7) Granted authority to the appropriate City officials to take the necessary steps to give effect thereto. " From the Metropolitan Toronto perspective, the revised concept reflects the following Metropolitan initiatives as outlined in the December 1991 document - "Metropolitan Waterfront Plan - Planning Directions for the Metropolitan Waterfront: An Overview": "5.2 Metropolitan Initiatives Initiatives by the regional government will result in the implementation of a significant number of the Metropolitan Waterfront Plan's policies. For example, a strategy to enhance the access and the environmental integrity of Corporate Lands through new management practices will be initiated. Other strategies will increase public access, meet recreational needs and protect natural areas (including habitats) through land acquisition, improve waterfront areas through regeneration pilot projects, and provide continuous, connected access to the waterfront with the completion of the Lakeside Trail." The Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront in its "Interim Report - Summer 1989" set out the following recommendations for Tommy Thompson Park: "Therefore, the Royal Commission recommends that the Leslie Street Spit be recognized and protected as an urban wilderness park. In this context, "urban wilderness" is defined as an extensive area where natural processes dominate and where publiC access, without vehicles, provides low-key, low-cost, unorganized recreation and contacts with wildlife. The development of recreational facilities in the Outer Harbour Area should be frozen, pending a comprehensive analysis of the distribution and intensity of land - and water-based recreational uses. Sailors and windsurfers, for whom the Outer Harbour is an irreplaceable resource, should be given a permanent home on the north shore and/or the new marina. Interpretive facilities and parking should be accommodated at the neck of the Spit. there should be no private vehicular access to the Leslie Street Spit, with the exception of access to the Aquatic Park Sailing' Club, as under the existing arrangements. Opportunities to improve public transit access, such as use of a trackless train, should be explored, so that the Spit can be enjoyed by older people, the disabled, families with young children and other members of the public." The attached "revised concept" has been reviewed with the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront staff. The concept appears to be consistent with the recommendations in the Interim Report - Summer 1989 and the principles and directions of the Commission. It's final report is expected by late March 1992. It is therefore recommended that the Authority endorse the concept (March e, 1992) as a basis to obtain public and agency comment in preparing for the resubmission of the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment by September, 1992. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-11 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (CONTD.) DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will initiate the preparation of the appropriate documentation of a revised Master Plan based on the concept endorsed (March 6, 1992) for public and government review at a public meeting of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board to be scheduled to enable consideration of the revised Master Plan by the Authority no later than its meeting of July 24, 1992. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total estimated costs to prepare a revised master plan, circulate to all affected parties and print sufficient copies of the Addendum is estimated at $15.000. This project is included within the 1992 - 1994 lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project and funds are available subject to approval of the Ministry of Natural Resources and budget approval of the Authority. 3. DON VALLEY BRICKWORKS REGENERATION PROJECT KEY ISSUE Adoption of a Project under the Conservation Authorities Act for the implementation of the approved, -Don Valley Brickworks Concept Plan- at a total estimated cost of $5,000,000. Res. #5 Moved by: Joanna Kidd Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Don Valley Brickworks Regeneration Project Involving total estimated expenditures of $5,000,000 be adopted; THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to approve the project including the provision of grants in the amount of $2,500,000 towards the cost of the project over a four year period, such allocations to be in addition to the funding of other approved Authority projects; THAT upon receipt of approval of the project by the Province of Ontario that the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be requested to approve the project and a levy of $2,500,000 towards the cost of the project. AMENDMENT Moved by: Victoria Carley Res. #6 Seconded by: Lois Hancey THAT the MTRCA leek the support of other groups with an Interest in the Don River, THE AMENDMENT WAS .....,............................................. CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED BACKGROUND At Meeting No. 3/91 of the Authority held on May 3, 1991, the following resolution was adopted: Res.#101 -THAT the revised Don Valley Brickworks Concept Plan, as submitted by Metropolitan Toronto, be approved; , . 0-12 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. DON VALLEY BRICKWORKS REGENERATION PROJECT (CONTD,) "THAT staff be directed to prepare a project for the implementation of the plan, on the basis of a total cost estimate of approximately $3.500,000 to be shared equally by The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the Province of Ontario over a four-year period, such allocations to be in addition to the funding of other approved Authority projects; "AND FURTHER THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be advised that the Authority proposes to request provincial funding for the Don Valley Brickworks Concept Plan as additional funding and, therefore, does not expect that other programs or projects of the Authority will be delayed or deleted in order to accommodate this request." This report presents the Don Valley Brickworks Regeneration Project which has been prepared in response to this resolution. The project document is Appendix WR.1/92. The delay in preparation of the project resulted in part from other priorities but also in recognition of the need to strengthen the ties between this initiative and the other Don River Watershed initiatives. The funding difficulties at the Province, which have resulted in cuts to existing Authority programs, and lengthy delays in the processing of requests for funding of established programs, also had an effect on the timing of the presentation of this new initiative. The only significant change between this report and the Authority's earlier consideration of this matter is that the total estimated cost of the project has been increased from $3,500,000 to $5,000,000. The increase is proposed so that major components of the master plan, concerning the construction of water Quality improvement features, including a wetland system, can be included. As this component of the master plan is a strong link to the other broad public and private initiatives to restore the health of the Don River Watershed, it is felt to be a major feature which should form part of the Authority's project for the first phase of development of the site. The general background of the site was contained within the report to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board in April 1991 and sections of that report are repeated here for the convenience of the Board. The MTRCA acquired the property known as the Don Valley Brickworks in 1989. In accordance with the 1972 agreement between Metropolitan Toronto and the Authority, the lands were turned over to The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto for management. The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto established a planning committee under Chairman, Councillor Peter Oyler to develop a plan for the site. An ambitious but sensitive development plan was prepared for the site based on public and special interest group input. The plan proposed restoration of some of the existing buildings in recognition of the significant history of the site in the development of the Toronto region. The plan also proposed an extensive restoration of the former Quarry to develop unique gardens and wetlands while preserving the significant geological feature on the north face. The total estimated cost of the plan was $25,000,000. Metropolitan Toronto Council subsequently decided that the cost of the plan was too high for full implementation at this time. The plan was reviewed and a revised concept was prepared which concentrated on the rehabilitation of the Quarry while leaving the restoration of the buildings and proposed creation of a wetland ,habitat as future options. The joint report by Councillor Oyler and the Commissioner of Parks and Property described the proposed plan as follows: The revised plan IWR.l/92 attached) focuses on the Quarry area, retaining the Master Plan's dual emphasis on environmental rehabilitation and the protection of the site's geological resources. Environmental rehabilitation of the Quarry will be achieved mostly through the establishment of appropriate plant materials. A variety of gardens--butterfly garden, hummingbird garden, wildlife habitat garden, wildflower meadow, fossil garden, wet scree garden, and so on--will create an WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 D-' 3 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. DON VALLEY BRICKWORKS REGENERATION PROJECT (CONTD.I interesting diversity for visitors to the Quarry bottom, as well as demonstrate how native and naturalized plant species can be used to enhance and diversify habitat. Shrubs and trees will be planted on the Quarry to augment natural regeneration processes already underway; vegetation on Quarry walls, particularly the east ridge, will reduce soil erosion and contribute to slope stability. The internationally significant North Slope will not be altered. Access to the North Slope will be controlled to help protect this geological resource. Public viewing and interpretation of the North Slope will be possible from the Quarry bottom, behind a barrier thicket. More intense use of the North Slope, requiring direct access, will be limited, that is, to scientific professionals conducting geological research. Visitors will also have the chance to appreciate the site's geological heritage at interpretive stations along the west wall. Looped paths and open meadow areas will provide visitors ample opportunity to stroll through the Quarry. Access to the site will be from Bayview Avenue, where the existing entrance will be modified to allow for a limited amount of parking for both cars and buses. Bicycle parking will be provided further into the Quarry. The T.T.C. has indicated the attendance potential of the proposed plan would not warrant regular transit service to the site; however, they are willing to leview service needs when the Brickworks is open to the public. RATIONALE The rationale for the proposed restoration of the Brickworks site is included in the project document. The rationale for the Authority to be the proponent of the restoration is based on the resource management and environmental enhancement thrust of the plan. In addition, the Authority is already involved in several Don River Watershed management initiatives which are related to the objectives of the plan for this site. It is also hoped that the Authority will be able to secure provincial funding to assist with the implementation of the concept plan since there are many provincial objectives such as water Quality improvements, habitat enhancement, and protection of geologically significant site which can be achieved through the careful restoration of this site. The project could also be the focus of further private sector funding arranged by the Conservation Foundation which has been very successful in fund raising for the Charles Sauriol Reserve nearby. Therefore, there are many reasons for MTRCA involvement in the project. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The project document sets out the work to be done if the project receives all required approvals. The work is summarized as follows: (' ) Environmental audit and preparation of decommissioning plan; (2) Environmental Assessment Act approval or exemption; (31 Technical studies to refine the concept plan and provide background for site planning; e.g.; geotechnical, water Quality; (41 Site planning; (51 Detailed design and construction. FUTURE BENEFITS/PROBLEMS This site is the potential flagship of efforts to rehabilitate the Don River Watershed. It can become a unique and attractive reserve in the heart of Metro. If offers recreational and educational opportunities while also contributing real and measurable improvements to the water Quality and habitat potential of the Don Watershed. 0-14 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. DON VALLEY BRICKWORKS REGENERATION PROJECT (CONTD.) Funding at this time will no doubt be difficult. However, the plan has been scaled down considerably from the ambitious master plan to a first phase concentrating on basic rehabilitation and environmental enhancement. FINANCIAL DEl AILS There are no allocations in the 1992 Authority budget for this project. It is hoped that approvals could be obtained in time for initial allocations to be made in 1993. Allocations in support of a total expenditure of $3,500,000 are contained within the 10 year forecast of capital expenditures for Metropolitan Toronto commencing in 1993. 4. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 -Colonel Samuel Smith Waterfront Park, City of Etobicoke KEY ISSUE Continuation of the site development program at Colonel Samuel Smith Waterfront Park, City of Etobicoke. Res. #7 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the 1992 development program at Colonel Samuel Smith Waterfront Park, City of Etobicoke, under the "Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-'994" at a total cost of $672,500. CARRIED BACKGROUND The creation of the land base for the park was substantially completed in 1990 with the interior shoreline completed in 1991 except for the common haul-out and launch area. Monitoring of the storm sewer outfall weir structure and oil separator was initiated in 1991. This facility was required as a condition of the 1980 Environmental Assessment approval. Authority staff participates with The Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department and Parks and Property Department on the Waterfront plan initiatives and the recently established Lakeside Trail Committee. These planning initiatives supports Colonel Samuel Smith Park as providing regional open space/recreation opportunities on the Etobicoke waterfront and ensuring public access to and along the waterfront. Authority staff are working with Metro Parks and Property Department to ensure public access to the park in 1992. A major component of this effort will be the design, routing and implementation of the "Lakeside Trail" connecting 13th and 23rd Streets. Vehicular access will be provided via the existing park road intersecting Lakeshore Boulevard at Kipling Avenue. DEl AILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The major development components proposed for 1992 are set out on a priority .basis including a brief project description as follows: (1 ) Public Parkina Lot and Roadwav Imorovements To provide public access to part of the site in 1992, it will be necessary to construct the initial phase of the public parking lot and entrance road. It is proposed that a gravel base parking lot with a capacity of up to 70 car spaces be constructed at a total cost of $30,000. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-15 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTD.) -Colonel Samuel Smith Waterfront Park, City of Etobicoke (2) lakeside Trail To provide public access through Colonel Samuel Smith Park along the waterfront and the connection to 13th and 23rd Streets, the Authority and Metro Parks and Properly Department will be designing, establishing the alignment and implementing this portion of the "lakeside Trail". The lakeside Trail is being coordinated by the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department. The estimated cost for the initial phase of this work in 1992 is $31,500. (3) Site Servicina Desian and Installation Final design of site servicing for the Park including installation of the watermain and sanitary sewer .services will be completed. In addition, the high voltage cables, electrical switchgear and transformer will be installed. The total estimated cost for the site services work to be completed in 1992 is $520,000. (4) landscaoina Phase I It is proposed that some of the public areas of the park can be landscaped. Estimated cost for this initial phase is $25,000. (5) Interior Shoreline Treatment Final shoreline treatment around the common haulout and launch for the Sam Smith Boating Federation area will be completed on a cost sharing basis at a total estimated cost to the Authority of $50,000. (6) Site Gradina Final grading of some areas of the site will be completed in preparation for further development of . parking lots, roadway and final landscaping. Total budget for this work in 1992 is $16,000. FINANCIAL DEl AilS The total cost for the 1992 development .program is $672,500 and is budgeted under Account No. 204-. Up to $100,000 will be from the lakefill reserve account and the remaining funding availability will be subject to final approval from the Province of Ontario. This work will be carried out under the lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994, approved at Authority Meeting #3/91. 0-16 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. COLONEL SAMUEL SMITH WATERFRONT PARK -Temporary Agreement to Occupy Sam Smith Boating Federation Area KEY ISSUE To provide a temporary agreement with the member clubs of the Sam Smith Boating Federation (Lakeshore Yacht Club and Humber College Sailing Centre) to permit occupancy at Colonel Samuel Smith Park in April, 1992. Res. #8 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT an agreement be entered Into with each of the member clubs of the Sam Smith Boating Federation - Lakeshore Yacht Club and Humber College Sailing Centre, to permit occupancy of their respective sites on a temporary basis subject to the approval of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and in accordance with the conditions outlined in this report; THAT the appropriate Authority officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto; . AND FURTHER THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Etoblcoke. the Lakeshore Yacht Club and Humber COllege Sailing Centre be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At its meeting December 7, 1990, the Authority adopted the following resolution: "Res. #240 THAT the proposal by the Sam Smith Boaters Federation, Appendix WR.381, be approved in principle, subject to approval of The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto; THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be requested to approve of the proposal by the Sam Smith Boaters Federation; THAT the Sam Smith Boaters Federation be requested to finalize a master plan for the site in discussion with Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department and Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority staff, which plan will ultimately be approved as a schedule to the leases with each member group of the Federation; THAT the City of Etobicoke be requested to develop an appropriate zoning by-law for this waterfront park on the basis of the Federation master plan, and in conformity with the "Open Space" designation in the Etobicoke Official Plan; THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be requested to negotiate leases with the member groups of the Federation; THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be requested to submit the final leases to the Authority for approval, in accordance with the master agreement for Waterfront Development between MTRCA and Metropolitan Toronto; THAT the Minister of the Environment be advised that the Authority has suspended any further consideration of a public marina concept for this site and is proceeding to implement a boating federation, in accordance with the Colonel Samuel Smith Master Plan Environmental Assessment Approval - December, 1980." WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-17 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. COLONEL SAMUEL SMITH WATERFRONT PARK -Temporary Agreement to Occupy Sam Smith Boating Federation Area (CONTD.) Lease preparations, finalization of the Boating Federation Master Plan and rezoning of the Boating Federation site to permit boat clubs and a sailing centre are well underway. However, it does not appear likely that the lease negotiations and rezoning will be finalized in time for the boat clubs to commence partial operations this Spring, as had been anticipated earlier by all parties. The proposed lease cannot be finalized until the appropriate zoning is in place. The MTRCA submitted an application to the City of Etobicoke in July 1991 to provide for .special provisions. within the .W. - Waterfront Zone for the Federation lease areas to permit boat clubs and a sailing centre. The application was considered by the Etobicoke Development Committee on January 14, 1992, and at a public meeting on February 11, 1992. On Monday, February 17, 1992, Etobicoke Council adopted the January 7, 1992, report of the Commissioner of Planning and approved the rezoning application to permit the boating facilities at Colonel Samuel Smith Park subject to several conditions. In the meantime, to facilitate initial construction activities of the Lakeshore Yacht Club and Humber College Sailing Centre, the Authority filed for a variance to the Zoning By-Law with the Committee of Adjustment granting such approval. The approval is on a temporary basis until the completion of the rezoning with minor variances from By-Law Number 1981-188 and the Zoning Code to permit the project to proceed this Spring, in accordance with the Master Plan for the site. The variances will extend for a term of two years expiring on February 28, 1994, or upon completion of the rezoning application, whichever occurs first, and is subject to installation of fire hydrants and obtaining building permits prior to commencement of the project. The last date of appeal of this decision to the Ontario Municipal Board was February 24, 1992. The Authority is also making provision to permit public access through and to Colonel Samuel Smith Park. RATIONALE The granting of minor variances will permit two temporary construction trailers on the property, temporary parking areas and the installation of approximately 125 wet berths for the Lakeshore Yacht Club and 10 wet berths for the Humber College Sailing Centre. A safety fence is to be installed around the construction site. Therefore, in order that the project be allowed to commence this Spring, it is proposed, subject to compliance with the Committee of Adjustment's conditions, that Lakeshore Yacht Club and Humber College Sailing Centre be granted permission to occupy the site on the following conditions: (1 ) a temporary agreement be entered into with each club to permit occupation and use of the site effective April 1, 1992 or as soon thereafter as possible; (2) the temporary agreement shall expire upon the signing of formal leases, or at the end of nine months, whichever is sooner; (3) the form and the terms and conditions of the agreement shall be satisfactory to the Commissioner of Parks and Property, the Metropolitan Solicitor and the Chief Administrative Officer of The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; (4) notwithstanding the above, each agreement shall contain indemnification and insurance clauses to protect The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the MTRCA and, a clause to provide that in the event the rezoning is not completed, the clubs will remove, at their sole cost, all improvements and return the lands to their former state; and (5) the Lakeshore Yacht Club and Humber College Sailing Centre hereby agrees to pay 20% of the Metropolitan Toronto standard yacht club lease rates in effect for the periOd April 1992 to July 31, 1993 and 40% of the lease rate for the period August 1, 1993 to July 31, 1994. WORK TO BE DONE Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department are preparing the temporary agreements subject to the approval of Metropolitan Toronto Council and the Authority, after which time execution of such agreements can occur on April 1, 1992, or as soon as possible thereafter. 0-18 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 -Ajax Waterfront Area - 1992 Development Program KEY ISSUE Continuation of the development program along the Ajax Waterfront, Town of Ajax. Res. #9 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the 1992 development program at Ajax Waterfront Area, Town of Ajax, under the "Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994", at a total cost of $50,000. CARRIED BACKGROUND To date, substantial waterfront areas have been improved to basic park standards and transferred to the Town of Ajax for operation and maintenance. In 1991, the first phase of extensive tree and shrub plantings was completed. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff have completed a design for tree and shrub planting in an area adjacent to the waterfront trail between Rotary Park and Bartlett Drive. Design drawings will be submitted to the Town of Ajax Parks Department and Ajax Waterfront Advisory Committee for approval. Total estimated cost for the 1992 planting program to be undertaken by Authority staff is $38,000. For the Authority owned waterfront lands not yet accepted by the Town for management (lands east of Pickering Beach Road), basic maintenance will be carried out for the year at a total cost of $7,000. Shoreline erosion monitoring and minor erosion control works will be carried out up to a total cost of $5,000. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total budget for the 1992 development program is $50,000 under Account Nos. 230-10 and 19. Funding availability will be subject to final approval from the Province of Ontario. This work will be carried out under the Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994, approved at Authority Meeting #3/91. 7. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 -Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program KEY ISSUE Continuation of the implementation of the Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program in 1992. Res. #10 Moved by: Lorna Bissell , Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to continue the Implementation of the Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program at a total estimated cost of $400,000 in 1992 to be funded from revenues generated from the Program under the "Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992- 1994". CARRIED , . WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 D-19 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTD.) -Improved lakefill Quality Control Program BACKGROUND The'Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority developed the Improved lakefill Quality Control Program (IlQCP) in 1988 at the request of the Ministry of the Environment to respond to concerns about the quality of material being utilized in lakefill. The IlQCP became fully operational in January, 1989, for alllakefill sites along the lake Ontario shoreline within the Authority's jurisdiction. Details of the program results for 1989, 1990 and 1991 are summarized in monthly as well as annual reports and generally show substantial improvements to the quality of fill being accepted and disposed of at lakefill sites. DETAilS OF WORK TO BE DONE The IlQCP will operate at all existing lakefill sites including Tommy Thompson Park (operated by the Toronto Harbour Commission) and Authority operated sites which are Colonel Sam Smith in the City of Etobicoke and the three ongoing erosion control sites along the Scarborough waterfront. Again, as in 1991. only earth fill that meets the wopen waterW guidelines will be acceptable for disposal in the open lake. The IlQCP staff will continue to review all applications, approve and monitor the disposal of fill that adheres to the current guidelines. The total budget to implement the IlQCP in 1992 is $400,000 and is comprised of the following components: Staffing $247,000 Vehicle Equipment & Communications $ 38,000 Soil Testing $ 60.000 Water Quality/Fisheries Monitoring $ 40,000 Consultants $ 13,000 Miscellaneous $ 2.000 Total $400.000 FINANCIAL DETAilS The program is self-financing from fees charged for each truck load of fill received. Funds are available under the wlake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994 W in series Account No. 242-. 8. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGEN ERA TION PROJECT 1992-1994 - East Point Park, City of Scarborough KEY ISSUE To complete a current circulation and water q,uality study related to the evaluation of the East Point Park small craft harbour proposal. Res. #11 Moved by: Joanna Kidd Seconded by: Bev Salmon THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the 1992 waterfront program at East Point Park, City of Scarborough, under the wlake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994 R at a total cost of $34,000. CARRIED 0-20 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CON SID ERA TION 8. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTD.) - East Point Park, City of Scarborough BACKGROUND On November 14, 1990, a public meeting was held to receive public comments on the East Point Master Plan/Environmental Assessment. At this meeting, concerns were expressed about the water Quality within the proposed small craft harbour with respect to the location of the Highland Creek Pollution Control Plant. Concerns were also expressed on the affect of the proposed park configuration on the pollution control outfall and water circulation in the area. The recently released report "Watershed" - Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront provided several key recommendations affecting the East Point Master Plan/Environmental Assessment. The Royal Commission's recommendations on lakefilling are as follows: "25. The Province should bring forward comprehensive lakefill policies for public review as soon as possible. The policies should require thorough environmental appraisal of all individual lakefill projects, and of their cumulative effects across the Greater Toronto Waterfront. Until such pOlicies are in place, there should be a moratorium on new lakefilling. 26. Open-water disposal guidelines should be adopted for current lakefill projects." In the Authority's "Crisis in Confidence Report", the following recommendations were adopted: "THAT the Review of Lakefilling incorporate the Authority's small craft harbour proposal for East Point Park as a test case to evaluate the long term advantages and disadvantages of lakefilling on the Greater Toronto Waterfront; THAT the Authority make available to the Commission all of its data pertaining to lakefill." To support the Commission's work and meet the requirements of an environmental assessment for this project, the Authority retained the services of Gore and Storrie Limited to carry out a current circulation and water Quality study. Data was collected along a section of Scarborough waterfront from Livingston Road to the Rouge River and included water Quality analysis of storm sewer and riverine discharges for wet weather events as well as lake water sampling, testing and current circulation recording. Due to budget restraints, only the field monitoring and data collection was completed in 1991 at a total cost of $88,600. All of the data was compiled and summarized in a report entitled: "Data Report for the East Point Waterfront Park Circulation Study". DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE It is proposed that Gore and Storrie Limited be retained to complete the current circulation and water Quality study as detailed in their proposal and as approved by the Authority at their meeting #4/91 held on June 14, 1991. The final phase of the study involves the analysis and interpretation of all the field data collected in 1991 and includes circulation modelling and intake/outfall interaction with the proposed East Point Park landfill configuration. In addition, the purpose of this study will be to identify any problems associated with the proposed Master Plan, specifically related to water Quality, circulation and, if required, to provide recommendations to minimize any impacts. The total cost to complete the study in 1992 is $34,000. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-21 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 8. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTO.) - East Point Park, City of Scarborough FINANCIAL The total cost to complete the study in 1992 is $34,000 and is budgeted under Account No. 222-24. Funding availability will be subject to final approval from the Province of Ontario. This work will be carried out under the lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994, approved at Authority Meeting #3/91. 9. PARTNERS IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF FORESTS PROGRAM - Forestry Canada KEY ISSUE Undertake a five year Model Forest Project as part of the Forestry Canada Partners in Sustainable Development of Forests Program. Res. #12 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be authorized to enter Into a five year program with Forestry Canada to undertake forest management activities within The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority watershed; THAT the Authority's participation in the program be subject to annual review as part of the Authority's budget process and where funding is available, staff be directed to renew annually the Authority's participation in the program; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to take the necessary action to implement the agreement including the execution of any necessary documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND In October 1991, Forestry Canada announced the "Partners in Sustainable Development of Forests Program" which is designed to accelerate the implementation of sustainable development in forestry. Forestry Canada is supporting the establishment of a network of model forests, complemented by an associated program of enhanced research and information. The program' was developed to meet one of the goals of the Environmental Action Plan, Canada's Green Plan for a Healthv Environment. The goal of the plan is to promote sustainable use of Canada's renewable resources, including forestry, fisheries, and agriculture. Forestry Canada has allocated $ 100 million over six years for the program's implementation. The money will be divided among the following three components: data and knowledge, $13 million to expand and develop data systems; scientific research, $33 million to develop new environmentally sound forestry techniques and strategies including forestry practices, fire management, ecological reserves; and model forests, $54 million to establish a network of about eight working models of sustainable forest development, one in each of the forest regions of Canada. A Model Forest proposal was submitted to Forestry Canada by the Ontario Forestry Association on behalf of a partnership committee including M.T.R.C.A., the Ministry of Natural Resources, the City of North York, the , . . 0-22 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 9. PARTNERS IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF FORESTS PROGRAM (CONTD.) - Forestry Canada Town of Oakville, the University of Guelph, the University of Toronto, the St. Clair Region Conservation Authority, the Grand River Conservation Authority, the Long Point Region Conservation Authority, the Six Nations of the Grand River and the Niagara Escarpment Commission. The goal of the Project is to develop and demonstrate sustainable forest management; to maintain and/or rehabilitate existing forested areas; to expand and interconnect the forest ecosystem within the Deciduous Forest Region; to transfer the newest forest management technology to specific groups; and to communicate to all stakeholders the benefits of sustainable forest management. MTRCA had carried out an active forest management program for many years. The suggested Model Forest sites within the Authority's jurisdiction are of high priority. Activities are consistent with work presently undertaken and would not result in any inconvenience or deviation from existing Authority forestry plans. Activities and work locations in the Model Forest proposal specific to MTRCA include: . reforestation and vegetation enhancement within valley and stream corridors (Rouge River headwaters) . forest thinning, stand conversion, and forest protection (Glen Major RMT, former Walker property) . forest management demonstration (Kortright Centre for Conservation) . public education and communication (MTRCA watershed, particularly, the Oak Ridges Moraine) . research on forest and stream interactions (Rouge River headwaters) DETAILS OF THE WORK TO BE DONE Enter into an agreement with Forestry Canada to carry out the work should the Model Forest proposal be approved. Participate in the partnership steering committee including principal stakeholders to oversee the general administration of the project. Establish a local management committee to obtain public involvement, prioritize and direct specific projects. The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority will finalize specific projects within its watersheds and implement the work. FINANCIAL DETAILS Forestry Canada has been requested to provide an average annual budget of approximately $200,000 for five years, to carry out the work. Forestry Canada will be considering the degree of support and commitment being provided by the partners towards undertaking the proposed project. MTRCA currently funds and implements forest management activities on Authority land on an annual basis. Based on the existing MTRCA program, a contribution of up to $100,000 worth of work may be provided to complement the activities of the model forest project. Any MTRCA contribution would be subject to annual budget approvals and the availability of other resources. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-23 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 10. FLOOD CONTROL PROGRAM -Flood Protection Works Tyndall Nursing Home, City of Mississauga KEY ISSUE Completion of the flood protection works at the Tyndall Nursing Home on the Little Etobicoke Creek in the City of Mississauga. Res. #13 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to complete the construction of the flood protection works at the Tyndall Nursing Home, on the Uttle Etoblcoke Creek In the City of Mlsslssaug&, at an estimated cost of $25,000. CARRIED BACKGROUND . A project to provide flood protection at the Tyndall Nursing Home was approved by the Authority through Resolution #181 at Meeting #7/87 held on October 23, 1987. At Authority Meeting #6/91 held September 6, 1991, the Authority awarded Contract ED 91-11 for the Tyndall Nursing Home Flood Control Structure to Emico Contracting Inc. for the tendered amount of $126,432. Construction of the flood wall tendered in the contract began in October, 1991, and was substantially complete by December 31, 1991. Authority forces also carried out erosion control works identified in the project. DEl AILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The remaining work involves the restoration of the disturbed areas and finalization of the permanent easement and acquisition boundaries. The estimated costs to carry out these works are as follows: Site clean up $ 2,700 Extension of drains and installation of flapgates $ 1,800 Topsoil and Sodding $ 2,500 Restoration of Parking Lot $ 5,000 Riparian Planting $ 3,000 Legal and Survey $1 0.000 Total $25.000 This project has been designed and is being carried out in accordance with the Class Environmental Assessment for Water Management Structures for Conservation Authorities of Ontario. FINANCIAL DEl AILS Funds for this Project will be raised as follows: Grant supported (MNR) $13,750 Levy supported (Peel) $11.250 Total $25.000 . 0-24 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 11. URBAN STREAM REHABILITATION -Project by the Conservation Council of Ontario and Black Creek Project KEY ISSUES Update on the activities of the Urban Stream Rehabilitation Project in the Black Creek Watershed undertaken by the Black Creek Project (BCP) and Conservation Council of Ontario (CCO) in cooperation with The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Res. #14 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the Urban Stream Rehabilitation Project undertaken by the Conservation Council of Ontario and the Black Creek Project in cooperation with The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to continue to work with the Conservation Council of Ontario and the Black Creek Project on an annual basis between April 1992 to April 1995 to carry out projects to enhance riparian and aquatic habitats on Authority land in the Black Creek watershed. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Urban Stream Rehabilitation Project is a joint venture started in 1990 by two non-profit environmental groups, the Black Creek Project and the Conservation Council of Ontario. The project is aimed at improving the ecosystem in the Black Creek watershed by revegetating streambanks, reducing erosion and sedimentation and wetland creation. The benefits of such work include improved water quality, enhanced fish and wildlife habitat and additional recreational opportunities. Because of the Authority's long history in revegetation and sediment control projects, CCO requested MTRCA to participate as project manager. The CCO, however, remained the lead agency. At Meeting #4/90, held on June 15, 1990 the Authority approved resolution #123 stating: wTHAT an agreement be prepared between The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, the Conservation Council of Ontario and the Black Creek Project on an annual basis to carry out projects to enhance riparian and aquatic habitats on Authority land in the Black Creek watershedw. The Authority entered into an agreement with CCO and the BCP on April 1, 1991. As project manager, the Authority assumed the responsibilities for staff training, project design, approvals and accounting services. The Authority's technical/professional services, particularly input from full time staff, represented a $7,000 value to the project. Furthermore, M.T.R.C.A. provided 1000 trees and shrubs ($3,000 value) and $5,000 cash for sediment control. Over two years, the project budget was $600,000 which included approximately $220,000 from the Federal Government sponsored Environmental Partners Fund, $130,000 from other sources and the equivalent .of $250,000 from in-kind contributions. Over 100 volunteers from the general public and over 800 students from ten local schools planted 2,500 trees and shrubs and 340 wild flowers, along the Black Creek. The plants were watered and mulched to improve their chances of survival. All of the trees and shrubs are native and all will provide fruits, seeds and nesting sites for wildlife in the future. Those planted on the bank will provide stream shade. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-25 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 11. URBAN STREAM REHABILITATION (CONTD.) -Project by the Conservation Council of Ontario and Black Creek Project Three hundred meters of streambank were stabilized with 25 - 60 cm rock. Three other sites were stabilized with logs secured to the banks and one site was planted with live cuttings of willow, poplar and dogwood to form a root network in the soil to stabilize the banks. Physical and biological information was collected to assist in monitoring the results of the rehabilitation work in the future. Del AILS OF THE WORK TO BE DONE The construction of a small wetland in the City of York's Trethewey Park is scheduled to be completed between January and March. 1992. FINANCIAL Del AILS The Conservation Council of Ontario has applied to the Environmental Partners Fund for $200.000 to continue rehabilitation of the Black Creek for three years (April 92 to April 95). The Conservation Council and Black Creek Project must match the funding provided by the Environmental Partners Fund. The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has not committed any cash contribution to the project in the future. If requested by CCO and the BCP, a limited amount of Authority staff time would be provided for technical/professional services as an in-kind donation to the project. 12. KEATING CHANNEL DREDGING -Cost Sharing Proposal KEY ISSUE A proposal to share the costs of dredging Keating Channel among the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, City of Toronto., The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the federal government. Res. #15 Moved by: Victoria Carley . Seconded by: lIa Bossons THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto Harbour Commissioners be requested to continue to undertake the maintenance dredging of Keating Channel in 1992 and to fund 1/3 of the cost for the work; THAT the City of Toronto be requested to fund a share of the cost of the work; THAT the federal government, through the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Environment be requested to restore funding for a share of the cost of dredging the Keating Channel; AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate Authority officials be authorized to take the necessary action to put a funding agreement In place for 1992 Including the execution of any documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Toronto Harbour Commissioners (THC) dredged Keating Channel from the time of its construction in the 1920's to about 1974. As the dredging became more expensive and disposal of the dredged material more difficult, the THC sought partners in the work. Transport Canada eventually agreed to parti"cipate on the basis 0-26 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 12. KEATING CHANNEL DREDGING (CONTD.) -Cost Sharing Proposal that if the Channel was not dredged, eventually the delta would spread in to the north east corner of the Inner Harbour and affect shipping in navigation channels where the federal government was responsible to maintain safe depths. The MTRCA also agreed to participate on the basis that if the Channel was not dredged, the threat of flooding in the lower Don River valley was increased. The MTRCA's participation was the subject of an environmental assessment between 1980 and 1986 which was subsequently approved. Hence, a three party agreement was struck which saw the cost of dredging shared 3 ways during the period 1986 to 1991; i.e., THC, Transport Canada and MTRCA. The cost sharing agreement which began in 1986 was to fund the cost of dredging the material which had accumulated between 1974 and 1986. It did not specifically address the funding of the maintenance dredging which is required annually. The Channel has been completely dredged as originally planned but it will fill in quickly if dredging stops. The federal government, represented by Transport Canada, has advised the THC that no federal funds will be available for maintenance dredging unless Environment Canada assumes the federal-involvement. The staff of the THC has indicated it will be difficult for the THC to continue involvement because of the uncertainty surrounding the proposed assumption of THC lands by TEDCO. THC interests in the dredging may move to TEDCO if TEDCO assumes the ownership of lands to which navigable access depths must be maintained. Funding requests by the MTRCA to MNR and Metropolitan Toronto appear to have been supported at least in part for 1992. RATIONALE The rationale for the recommendations is based on the continuing need for the dredging, the unlikelihood of federal involvement in the short term, the interest of the City of Toronto in resolving the matter as part of the Ataratiri discussions and the need for the obligations under the Keating Channel Environmental Assessment approval to be met. The dredging is still required. Recent studies for the City of Toronto on Ataratiri confirmed the connection between the dredged channel and lower flood risks. In addition, some navigation interests still exist in the north east corner of the harbour. The federal contribution is unlikely to be renewed in the short term and therefore a new funding partner will be required if the other partners are to maintain the same share. The Toronto Harbour Commissioners, who coordinated the dredging project to date, have sought funding extensions from the federal government at the staff level over the past year without success. The proposed Ataratiri development has increased the importance of the Keating Channel dredging as part of the overall solution to flood risk management in the lower Don. The City of Toronto, as a proponent of the Ataratiri development and also having interest in the broader flood plain issues, is a logical partner to become involved in the funding of the maintenance dredging. The approval of the Keating Channel Dredging Project under the Environmental Assessment Act imposed conditions on the capping of the dredged material within the disposal cells at Tommy Thompson Park. There are costs associated with the construction of the proposed cap which were not part of the original funding for the dredging project. It was anticipated that the cap could be constructed by placing clean fill over the dredged material, which would have been done at no net cost. However, the desire to create wetland habitat, WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-27 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 12. KEATING CHANNEL DREDGING (CONTD.) -Cost Sharing Proposal while enhancing the existing fish habitat in the disposal cells, has resulted in a more expensive solution which will require funding of approximately $600,000, over a 2 to 3 year period, if the plan for the wetland cap is approved. For discussion purposes, staff have suggested to the various partners a cost sharing formula as follows: Cost estimates for the work are as follows: WORK 1992 1993 1994 1995 TOTAL Dredging 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 2,400,000 Capping 200,000 300.000 100,000 600,000 Cost Allocation Studies 100,000 100,000 Totals 900,000 900,000 700.000 600,000 3,100,000 Funding for the work is proposed as follows: 1992 1993 1994 1995 TOTAL MTRCA - Metro (135,0001 (135,000) (105,0001 ( 90,000) - Province (165,000) 1165,0001 (128,3331 (110,0001 300,000 300,000 233.333 200.000 1,033,333 City of Toronto 300,000 300,000 233,333 200.000 1,033,333 THCfTEDCO 300,000 300,000 233,333 200,000 1,033,333 TOTAL 900,000 900,000 700,000 600,000 3,100,000 FUTURE BENEFITS/PROBLEMS If the regular maintenance dredging of Keating Channel is delayed or deferred in 1992 due to a failure to reach a funding agreement, it is likely that the cycle of the past 15 years will simply be repeated. It is unlikely to get easier to find funds in future budgets. With each year the dredging is delayed, the volume to be dredged increases and the channel capacity decreases. While the existing Environmental Assessment approval includes annual or biennial maintenance dredging, it is possible that if the work was delayed beyond that period that a new environmental assessment would be required. FINANCIAL DETAILS The preliminary budget of the MTRCA for 1992 included an amount of $500,000 for the Authority's share of the dredging and capping of the dredged material. The allocation has recently been cut to $200,000 through review of the Authority's budget with Metropolitan Toronto officials. 0-28 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 13. THE DRAFT 1989-1990 KEATING CHANNEL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM REPORT KEY ISSUES Staff has prepared a draft report that outlines the findings of the 1989 -1990 Keating Channel Environmental Monitoring Program, as required under the Keating Channel Environmental Assessment approval. Res. #16 Moved by: Victoria Carley Seconded by: Bev Salmon THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 1989 - 1990 Draft Keating Channel Environmental Monitoring Annual Report be received; AND FURTHER THAT the Keating Channel Environmental Monitoring Program Draft Report be forwarded to the Toronto Harbour Commissioners for inclusion in their current Operating Plan, and circulated to the Ministry of the Environment for comments, as required under the Environmental Assessment Act. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Keating Channel was constructed in 1922 and is located at the mouth of the Don River in the north east corner of Toronto's Inner Harbour. Routine dredging of the Keating Channel to navigational depth was implemented after construction and ceased in 1974. During this time periOd dredgeate was disposed of in the deep waters of the open lake, or in advance of the eastern headland (Tommy Thompson Park). In 1972, Canada and the U.S.A. signed an agreement to ban the open water disposal of polluted sediments. Dredging was stopped within the Keating Channel due to the lack of suitable dredgeate disposal locations. Due to the lack of dredging, the Keating Channel filled with sediments from 1974 to 1987. This produced a flood hazard due to reduced channel capacity, and also impeded Inner Harbour navigation. The Keating Channel Environmental Assessment, in part, outlined the method of dredging and disposal of the Keating Channel sediments to reduce the flood hazard situation. The Environmental Assessment (E.A.) also outlined the disposal of Keating Channel Dredgeate in the confined disposal facility within Tommy Thompson Park. Upon approval of the E.A., dredging within the Keating Channel commenced in July, 1987. As a condition of the E.A. approval, The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) is required to implement an annual Environmental Monitoring Program to: . i) Monitor the quality of material dredged from the Keating Channel; ii) Monitor the quality and quantity of material lost through water transport from the dredgeate disposal cells within Tommy Thompson Park; iii) Report the findings of the Environmental Monitoring Program in an annual report. To achieve the 1987 Environmental Assessment requirements, the MTRCA designed the Keating Channel Monitoring Program with the following study components: (1 ) SEDIMENT QUALITY ASSESSMENT . Dredgeate Quality Sampling, Sediment Trap Sampling, Ponar Sediment Samples. (2) BIOMONITORING STUDY . Caged Clam Study, Spottail Shiner Study. (3) FISH COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT . Seasonal Fish Community Collections. , . WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-29 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 13. THE DRAFT 1989-1990 KEATING CHANNEL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM REPORT (CONTD.) (41 BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT . Benthic Invertebrate Sampling. (5) WATER TEMPERATURE MONITORING . Continuous Water Temperature Monitoring. This Environmental Monitoring Program addresses the impacts of the dredging and disposal operation within Tommy Thompson Park. Staff have documented the results of the 1989-1990 Monitoring Program in a Summary Report. The following is a summary of the main findings in the 1989-1990 report: . Analysis of the dredgeate samples collected from the Keating Channel indicates that a wide range of sediment quality parameters frequently exceed the Open Water Disposal Guidelines (OWDGI. However, the majority of the dredgeate samples were only marginally above the OWDG for most parameters. The violations of the OWDG precludes the use of alternative aquatic disposal methods other than the current use of the confined disposal facility at Tommy Thompson Park. Concentrations of total lead within the Keating Channel sediments have been detected in excess of the Severe Effect Level (SELl. The Severe Effect Level is the concentration of a specific parameter which would be detrimental to the majority of sediment dwelling organisms as determined by the draft Provincial Sediment Quality guidelines. However, the percentage of dredgeate samples with total lead SEL violations in 1989 (11 %) and 1990 (5%) have decreased since 1987 (27%1 and 1988 (26%), the initial years of the dredging operation. This reduction in the total lead SEL violations may reflect the presence of new bedload material within the channel. . The sediment traps deployed in the study area collected bottom sediment material that was typically composed of silts and clays within the disposal cells and coarser material outside of the disposal cells. A similar contrast is apparent with elevated chemistry levels detected in the sediments collected in the disposal cells compared to lower Chemistry levels in sediments from outside of the cells. The difference in sediment composition and chemistry levels, indicates that the sediments in the Outer Harbour and Embayment C are distinct from the sediments within disposal Cell 3. . The results of the Ponar sediment samples indicate that sediments within the disposal cells are dissimilar to other areas within Tommy Thompson Park. Although violations of the OWDG were frequent within the disposal cell sediments, no concentrations of parameters exceeded the Severe Effect Level. The results of the sediment Quality investigations into the dredgeate disposal operation and within the study area confirm the integrity of the disposal cells and the overall containment of the dredgeate disposal. . A total of 36 speCies were identified from the 1987 to 1990 benthic invertebrate collections. The benthic community within Cell 2 ranked the lowest for the measured parameters of abundance, richness, and diversity. The differenc'es were minor and not statistically significant, suggesting that environmental disturbances associated with active dredgeate disposal may be slightly more influential in Cell 2 than at other locations where there is no disposal occurring. . The intent of the biomonitoring study is to measure the spatial and temporal trends in the availability of compoundS and residual concentrations in aquatic biota. The bioaccumulation process is 0-30 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 13. THE DRAFT 1989-1990 KEATING CHANNEL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM REPORT (CONTD.) influenced by many factors including the availability of contaminants, specific conditions at the station, and the metabolism characteristic of the test organisms. The frequency of detections for PCBs, PAHs, and organochlorine pesticide compounds are apparently declining when compared to the number of detections during the initial years of the biomonitoring study. . The intent of the summer and autumn fish communities collections is to discern any spatial community changes within Tommy Thompson Park that may be attributed to the dredgeate disposal operation. The sampling sessions in 1989 and in 1990 were both conducted during the active dredgeate disposal operation and reflect the conditions during this operation. Overall, the fish community and species assemblages associated with Tommy Thompson Park reflect a diverse and well structured community. The fish community reflects no acute impacts from the dredgeate disposal operation, and continues to provide a stable environment producing a high quality community . . Continuous water temperature recorders were deployed within Tommy Thompson Park to determine the rate of water exchange between the Disposal Cells and Lake Ontario. Evident in the 1989 and 1990 water temperature data is the rapid decline in nearshore water temperatures associated with coldwater upwelling events. This rapid displacement of warm water is apparent in areas outside the disposal cells and implies that there is unrestricted exchange of water. The disposal cells although influenced by the effects of upwelling events, do not display the unrestricted exchange apparent at other locations. The water temperature information recorded in Tommy Thompson Park identifies the thermal isolation of the disposal cells and implies that there is a limited exchange of water between the disposal cells and the open lake. Results from the 1989 - 1990 Monitoring Program are similar to previous results, and support the conclusion that the disposal of the Keating Channel sediments is well contained within Tommy Thompson Park and has minimal impact on the aquatic environment outside of the disposal cells. 14. GULLS AND CANADA GEESE KEY ISSUE Review of diseases transmitted to humans by gulls and geese. Res. #17 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Paul Raina IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on diseases transmitted by gulls and geese be submitted to the local Municipalities for their Information; THAT staff be directed to submit a proposal to the Canadian Wildlife Service and the Ministry of Natural Resources urging them to develop a coordinated regional strategy in response to the problems associated with nuisance gulls and geese; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to continue efforts to control nuisance gulls and geese on Authority lands through population reduction activities, habitat modification and exclusion. CARRIED WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 0-31 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 14. GULLS AND CANADA GEESE (CONTD.) BACKGROUND At the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #7/91, staff was directed to investigate and report on the methods available to reduce the problems associated with large numbers of gulls and Canada geese in the Metro region. In addition to reviewing various population control techniques this report indicated that control of these nuisance species was the responsibility of the private landowners and that the role of other agencies such as the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) and the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) was to act as advisors and sponsor the further research and development of control techniques. In 1991, Authority staff were invited to participate in a Canada Goose Coordinating Committee consisting of municipal representatives from Hamilton to Ajax and staff from the MNR and CWS. The purpose of the committee was to exchange information related to the various problems associated with geese and identify possible control techniques. Through this committee, it has become evident that a coordinated regional approach is required to: - Ensure the most effective use of staff and resources in dealing with the problem; - Identify all specifiC problem sites within the region; - Select the most appropriate control options for each site and oversee their implementation; and, - Maximize public education related to the problems associated with large numbers of Canada Geese, and the control options that are available. Although the committee was established to review and respond to the regional Canada goose problems, the coordinated regional approach outlined above would also be useful in addressing the regional gull problems. At Meeting #8/91 the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting adopted the following resolution: Res. #124 -IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report, dated 1991.11.01., on nuisance gulls and geese be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back with its recommendation-. At Meeting #8/91 the full Authority adopted the following resolution: Res. #273 -THAT staff review current literature with respect to diseases transmitted by gulls and geese and report back to the Authority-. In this regard staff has reviewed some of the available literature and have prepared the following report summarizing the more common diseases that are known to be transmitted to humans from gulls and geese. In addition to reviewing literature, staff contacted other agencies to determine the extent of any ongoing work related to this issue. These included the City of Toronto Environmental Protection Agency, the Peel Region Board of Health and the Canadian Wildlife Service. , . 0-32 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/92, MARCH 6, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 14. GULLS AND CANADA GEESE (CONTD.) Staff is of the opinion, that although there are health issues associated with gulls and geese, at the present time, they are not a significant problem in the Metro region. In most cases normal sanitary precautions and good personal hygiene are sufficient to prevent disease transmission from wildlife. This report has been prepared as an overview only, since it is the responsibility of municipal health agencies to update information and continue to research wildlife related diseases and parasites. Histoolasmosis Histoplasmosis is a respiratory disease caused by the fungus Histoolasma caosulatum which flourishes in concentrated fecal deposits of birds and bats (Gordon and Ziment 1967, Smith 1971). People become infected by inhaling spores, and outbreaks of the disease among humans occur most frequently when soil that contains large quantities of excrement is disturbed (Sarosi et al. 1971). The majority of people who become infected develop only mild respiratory infections and once infected become somewhat resistant (Hodge et al. 1990). There have been only two serious outbreaks of histoplasmosis in the Great Lakes area, both of which occurred in Michigan and involved exposure to the fungus in an enclosed area (Cameron, pers. commun.). The potential of this disease was investigated in the gull colony at Tommy Thompson Park several years ago, however, it was determined that it should not become a problem unless excavation of the soil in the colony was undertaken. Botulism Botulism is caused by a toxin produced by the bacterium Clostridium botulinum. The disease is seasonal, occurring in late summer and early autumn, apparently coinciding with maximum build-up of decaying aquatic vegetation, low water levels and warm temperatures (Blokpoel 1986). The disease occurs regularly on the Toronto waterfront effecting both waterfowl and gulls, and in some cases has caused severe die-offs of these species. The disease can be transmitted through fecal material being ingested or being brought into contact with open wounds, however, normal sanitary practices should prevent Botulism (food poisoning) in humans (Blokpoel 1986). Psittacosis Psittacosis (also know as ornithosis or Chlamydiosis), is a common disease of caged birds, pigeons and poultry caused by the bacterium Chlamvdia osittaci. It occurs in free flying birds and has been reported in Gulls and Terns (Blokpoel, 1976). The infecting organism is present in the droppings and tissues of infected birds, however, the droppings are the most common route by which the disease is transmitted to humans. Clinical signs in people include fever, headache, upper respiratory infection and pneumonitis (Hodge et al. 1990). Normal sanitary precautions will prevent infection, however, the use of a mask or respirator will further protect individuals entering potentially infected areas (i.e. pigeon coop or poultry barn). Salmonellosis Salmonellosis is caused by the bacteria in the genus Salmonella, and is probably the most common disease transmitted to humans from animals and birds. Outbreaks of this disease among gulls has been attributed to the bird's habit of feeding at garbage dumps and sewage disposal sites (Muller, 1965). While the bacteria can grow in the fecal matter of most animals and birds, infection usually results from consuming foods and beverages contaminated with the bacteria (H09ge et al. 1990). The disease usually produces an intestinal infection accompanied by diarrhoea. Good personal hygiene is usually sufficient to prevent infection. Other Bacteria (Fecal coliform and Escherichia c'olil A great deal of concern has been expressed regarding the amount of fecal contamination of water bodies due to gulls and geese. It has been well documented that although bacterial contamination does occur in localized areas of high use by gulls and waterfowl (MTRCA, AQuatic Park Bacterial Study, 1984), there is little data to suggest that these birds are the major contributors. The beach closures in the Toronto area are still related to sewer and storm water point sources and can not be attributed to large numbers of these birds. In the case of WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1192, MARCH 6, 1992 0-33 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 14. GULLS AND CANADA GEESE (CONTD.) the Authority's Conservation Areas, the chlorine curtains maintained in the swimming areas are sufficient enough to alleviate any bacteria problems. The Authority is also participating in the CURB program in an attempt to further identify and reduce bacterial input into the watercourses. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will continue to monitor the gl,lIls and geese on Authority Lands with respect to associated diseases, and liaise with local health agencies on their continuing research. Staff will continue to participate in a Canada Goose Coordinating Committee with other agencies and Municipalities to further identify control options and techniques. MTRCA will continue its gull control program at Tommy Thompson Park to restrict the available nesting habitat for ring-billed gulls. In April of 1992 staff will again participate in an egg oiling research study with the Canadian Wildlife Service to assess the effectiveness of mineral oil as a means of reducing the Canada Goose population, and determine an effective methodology for its application and use. Eggs will be oiled at Heart Lake, Albion Hills, and Tommy Thompson Park as part of this study. Staff will submit a proposal to the Canadian Wildlife Service requesting funding under the Greenplan for the development of a Regional Goose/Gull Management Strategy. The proposal would identify the need for a regional approach, the goals and objectives of the Strategy and a methodology and time frame for its development. The purpose of the strategy would be to coordinate problem identification and management activities on a regional basis to more effectively deal with the problem of large numbers of Canada Geese and Gulls in southern Ontario. NEW BUSINESS Meeting #2/92 of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board will be held April 3, 1992 at 9:00 a.m. Item one of the Agenda, The Greater Toronto Trail System, will be discussed jointly with the Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Board at this time. TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 12:00 noon, March 6, 1992. Lois Griffin C. Mather Chairman Director, Water Resources Division /bb ---- - - ------ --- ~ 'MJrking Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace Vthe metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes 0-34 APRIL 3, 1992 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/92 The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, April 3, 1992. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 12:00 noon. PRESENT Chair Lois Griffin Vice Chair Kip Van Kempen Members Lorna Bissell lIa Bossons Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Joanna Kidd Maja Prentice Paul Raina Bev Salmon Frank Scarpitti Chair of the Authority William Granger ABSENT Member Joyce Trimmer MINUTES Res. #18 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Victoria Carley THAT the Minutes of Meeting #1/92 be approved. CARRIED CORRESPONDENCE Res. #19 Moved by: Frank Scarpittl Seconded by: Maja Prentice THAT 'the letter from Doug Martin, Presldant, Lakefront Owners Association, dated 18.03.92, re: Metropolitan Waterfront Plan, Share the Vision, "An Overview", to Pamela Leach, Waterfront Section, Metro Planning Department, be received. CARRIED 0-35 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 112/92, APRIL 3, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 -1992 Waterfront Monitoring Program KEY ISSUE ... Continuation of the implementation of the Waterfront Monitoring Program in 1992. Res. #20 Moved by: Kip Ven Kempen Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to continue the implementation of the Waterfront Monitoring Program at en estimated cost of .112,000 in 1992, to be funded under the -Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994-. CARRIED BACKGROUND Since 1975, The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) has conducted environmental monitoring programs to describe the physical and biological conditions associated with waterfront parks. SpeCial studies in the past have been conducted to examine the s~diment quality, water quality, sediment deposition rates, fish habitat assessment, fish community assessment, and benthic invertebrate collections. Details of the program results are summarized in technical reports and annual reports required as a condition of environmental assessment approval for various projects. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The 1992 Waterfront Monitoring Program will investigate environmental conditions at the following locations: . Sam Smith Waterfront Park; . Frenchman's Bay; . Scarborough shoreline; . East Point. Environmental conditions including sediment quality, water quality, fish community, benthic invertebrate community, water temperature condition, and local substrate conditions will be investigated. Environmental monitoring at the Sam Smith Waterfront Park and along the Scarborough shoreline is required to fulfil conditions of environmental assessment approval or to document existing environmental conditions for inclusion into the Class E.A. process. Environmental monitoring at the East Point Waterfront Area and Frenchman's Bay is designed to document existing conditions for use in the master planning process. The total budget to implement the 1992 Waterfront Monitoring Program is $112,000, and is comprised of the following components: Labour $ 55,000 Vehicle and Equipment 20,000 Lab Analytical Services 37 .000 TOTAL $112,000. FINANCIAL DETAILS The program is funded under the "Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994" under account no. 240-01 and subject to MNR project and budget approval. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 112/92, APRIL 3, 1992 0-36 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 -Ashbridges Bay Coatsworth Cut Dredging, City of Toronto KEY ISSUE To carry out emergency dredging within the Coatsworth Cut navigation channel at Ashbridges Bay, City of Toronto. Res. #21 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lorna Bissell THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with emergency dredging In Coatsworth Cut, City of Toronto, under the -Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994-, at a total cost of .100,000 subject to receipt of Provincial approval. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Coatsworth Cut has been an on-going navigation problem due to unsafe water depths and insufficient channel widths, all as a result of sediment deposition from various sources. Dredging of Coatsworth Cut was last carried out by the Authority in 1987. A water depth survey taken in April, 1991, showed that siltation had again reduced the navigable waters and dredging was required to maintain a safe channel entrance to the public launching ramps and the service facilities of the boating clubs. The Authority had budgeted to undertake the work in 1991 but had to cancel the project because all necessary approvals from various agencies had not been received in time to permit the project to proceed during the navigation season. The project was therefore deferred until 1992. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE To achieve minimum navigable standards, up to 4,000 cubic metres of material will need to be dredged from a 140 metre long section of channel. The location of the area is such that it cannot be dredged by land based equipment as it was in 1987. Therefore, all dredging must be carried out by marine equipment and since the quality of the dredgeate does not meet the .open water. criteria, it is proposed that this material be transported and disposed of in the endikement cell at Tommy Thompson Park. Quotations from marine contractors will be received to carry out the dredging, transportation and disposal of the dredged material. FINANCIAL DETAILS Due to budget limitations, the funds requested to carry out the emergency dredging in 1992 are $100,000 under Account No. 211-16. The costs to fully restore the area are several times higher. The estimated cost breakdown for the project is as follows: Site surveys (soundings) 4,000 Contract Supervision/Inspection 7,500 Contract/Equipment Rental 81,500 Contingencies 7.000 Total Budget $100.000 Funding availability will be subject to final approval from the Province of Ontario. This work will be carried out under the lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992-1994, approved at Authority Meeting #3/91. 0-37 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 112/92, APRIL 3,1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTD.) -Ashbridges Bay Coatsworth Cut Dredging, City of Toronto FUTURE BENEFITS/PROBLEMS A long term solution to the problem of sediment deposition and continuous dredging of the channel entrance is the modification of the shoreline alignment on the west side of Coatsworth Cut to retain future sediment accumulations. Currently, Metro Toronto Works Department is carrying out an environmental assessment for the proposed expansion to the main Ashbridges Bay sewage treatment plant. One of the alternatives over the long term includes land creation south of the existing plant which could incorporate a modified channel entrance. With the existing rate of siltation over a large area, it may be necessary to carry out annual dredging over the short term to maintain a safe navigable channel. 3. COLONEL SAMUEL SMITH PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT Larry Field, Manager, Waterfront, gave a presentation on this issue. KEY ISSUE To obtain approval from the Authority for modifications to the Colonel Samuel Smith Master Plan to facilitate public consultation, Metropolitan Toronto approval and submission of an exemption request under the Environmental Assessment Act, which Plan was originally approved by The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Etobicoke and finally the Environmental Assessment Board in December, 1980. Res. #22 Moved by: Joanna Kldd Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the revised Colonel Samuel Smith Master Plan, dated April 3, 1992, be approved In principle subject to the approval of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and public consultation; THAT staff be directed to Immediately prepare the necessary documentation and submit a request to the Ministry of the Environment for an exemption under the Envir.onmental Assessment Act for the revised Master Plan dated April 3, 1992; THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto's approval, Including comments from the City of Etobicoke and the public be forwerded, upon their receipt, to the Ministry of the Environment for consideration of the exemption request; THAT if the comments and Input of the City of Etobicoke, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the public warrant consideration of substantive change to the April 3, 1992 Master Plan, staff be directed to prepare a report on these changes for the Authority's consideration; AND FURTHER THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Etobicoke, the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Government Services, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront, the Lakeshore Yacht Club and Humber College be so edvised. CARRIED . . WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 112/92, APRIL 3,1992 0-38 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. COLONEL SAMUEL SMITH PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT (CONTD.) BACKGROUND The Authority, in December 1980, received approval under the Environmental Assessment Act for Colonel Samuel Smith park, -an undertaking proposed by The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) to create a regional waterfront park at the Colonel Samuel Smith Waterfront Area which would take advantage of a unique waterfront setting-. In approving the undertaking, the Environmental Assessment Board imposed the following condition: -b) 6. The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority shall confine the site to the area as set out in the Colonel Samuel Bois Smith Waterfront Area Master Plan (Exhibit #6) and shall be completed in accordance with Figure 24 of Exhibit #6.- See the Environmental Assessment Board's December, 1980, decision and the 1980 Master Plan as referred to in Condition b) 6. The Authority has proceeded to create the park in accordance with the conditions set out in the 1980 Environmental Assessment approval. However, in the intervening years, Authority staff have proposed modifications to the Master Plan to address implementation and detailed design issues. The Ministry of the Environment - Environmental Assessment Branch has advised Authority staff verbally that the proposed modifications are not consistent with the 1980 Environmental Assessment approval especially condition #6. Authority staff have been advised to submit an exemption request under the Environmental Assessment Act to accommodate the proposed Master Plan modifications. To satisfy condition b) 2), the Authority received Regional Director (Ministry of the Environment) approval to construct a storm water quality pond with an oil retention and recovery system. This facility commenced operation in 1991. At its meeting of December 7, 1990, the Authority approved in principle, subject to approval of The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the boating federation concept which resulted in minor site plan modifications to the 1980 Plan and included: . two yacht clubs (250 slips per club) . a dry sail component (30 - 40 dinghies - Lakeshore Yacht Ch.jb) . two clubhouses . vehicular parking for members . winter boat storage . Humber College Sailing Centre (20 docks and building) Approval of this boating federation concept resulted in a redistribution of the boating component set out in the 1980 Plan from 335 wet moorings/165 dry sail to 520 wet moorings and 30-40 dry sail. This boating federation concept was subsequently approved by Metropolitan Toronto Council on February 27,1991. The proposed Master Plan dated April 3, 1992, also incorporates the following modifications to the Colonel Samuel Smith Park lands: . marsh/wetland creation replaces the future swimming lake; . waterfront trail as endorsed by Cabinet connecting 13th and 23rd Streets; . relocation of public parking (50 spaces) and provision of 75 public parking spaces; . relocation of the publiC washrooms; 0-39 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 112/92, APRIL 3, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. COLONEL SAMUEL SMITH PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT (CONTD.) . relocation of the Metro park maintenance building; . provision for public access around the entire boating basin; . reconfiguration of the internal basin shoreline to accommodate the storm water quality pond and oil separator and public boardwalk; . removal of the public dry sailing area on the south side of the basin. In the proposed Master Plan dated April 3, 1992, the most significant modification is the replacement of a swimming lake with marsh/wetland creation. The swimming lake concept presented difficulties with funding, potential construction problems created by landfill material, and exposure to lake winds limiting the number of user days. The swimming lake in terms of location and level of activity is not consistent with the natural elements of the park plan. The creation of a marsh/wetland is in keeping with MTRCA's Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project for 1992-1994. This natural habitat initiative is part of additional regeneration eHorts for Colonel Samuel Smith Park including fisheries habitat (fish shoal) and terrestrial habitat. The Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront suggests in their Shoreline Regeneration Report that "efforts to create habitat such as wetlands should be actively supported in the Greater Toronto Bioregion Shoreline Plan". In the Metropolitan Waterfront Plan document - Planning Directions for the Metropolitan Waterfront: An Overview - prepared by the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, their goal is "to secure a healthy phYSical waterfront environment by conserving, protecting and enhancing ecological diversity and habitat productivity". The Master Plan dated April 3, 1992, maintains the intent of public parking within Samuel Smith Waterfront Park as set out in the 1980 Plan. Parking for the boat clubs and sailing school has been accommodated within the Samuel Smith Boating Federation leased area. Modifications have been made in the number of parking spaces available as the requirements for parking spaces has changed. The deletion of the swimming lake has resulted in a decrease of 215 spaces required'. The 100 spaces allocated for the amphitheatre has also been deleted. The amphitheatre and playing fields are not located within the Samuel Smith Waterfront Park plan and therefore are not part of the Authority's undertaking. If additional park parking is required, shared parking opportunities with Humber COllege are available as well as parking on adjacent parklands maintained by Metro Parks. The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto has initiated an open space review of the Lakeshore Psychiatric lands and other public lands south of Lakeshore Boulevard between 13th and 23rd Streets. The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto has also established a Lakeside Trail Committee to facilitate the "waterfront trail" along the Metropolitan waterfront and through Colonel Samuel Smith Park connecting 13th Street and 23rd Street. Authority staff have tabled the proposed Master Plan dated April 3, 1992, with the Metropolitan Toronto Waterfront Technical Committee at its meeting of March 20, 1992. Membership of this Committee includes representatives of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department, Planning Department, Works Department as well as the City of Etobicoke's Planning and Parks and Recreation Departments. This Committee supported the process to amend the plan subject to participation in review of the Master Plan _ April 3, 1992, through the public/agency consultation. RATIONALE The master plan modifications (April 3, 1992) reflect current approaches to shoreline regeneration (e.g., marsh/wetland) and improved public access as endorsed by the Province of Ontario of the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront's "Watershed" report and specifically the multi-use waterfront trail recommendation. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/92, APRIL 3,1992 0-40 SECTION I . ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. COLONEL SAMUEL SMITH PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT (CONTD.) The modifications also reflect a detailed review of the park components in coordination with Metropolitan Toronto. This modified master plan will be discussed further with The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Etobicoke, the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Natural Resources ,and the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront. This plan will also be subject to scrutiny by the abutting neighbourhoods and waterfront ratepayer groups through a public meeting and substantive consultation. The results of this consultation will be submitted to the Ministry of the Environment as part of their review of the Environmental Assessment exemption request. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Authority staff will pursue discussions with Metropolitan Toronto and other government agencies and obtain publiC comment as soon as possible. Early resolution of the master plan with the community, the City of Etobicoke, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the Ministry of the Environment - Environmental Assessment Branch is essential to achieve implementation of the public objectives for this waterfront park in the Etobicoke sector of the Metropolitan waterfront. If the results of the consultation suggest substantive changes to the April 3, 1992, Master Plan, staff will prepare a subsequent report for the Authority's consideration. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total estimated cost to prepare a revised master plan, circulate to all affected parties and hold a public meeting is estimated at $5,000. This project is included with the 1992-1994 Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project and funds are available subject to approval of the Ministry of Natural Resources and budget approval of the Authority. 4. MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992.. 1996 -South Marine Drive Erosion Control Project, Lake Ontario Waterfront, City of Scarborough KEY ISSUE Completion of the erosion control remedial works along the South Marine Drive sector of the Scarborough Bluffs, City of Scarborough. Res. #23 Moved by: William Granger Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the final phase of erosion control and slope stabilization for the South Marine Drive Erosion Control Project under the "Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992 - 1996" at a total cost of $50.000 subject to receipt of Provincial approval. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 1984, the Authority received all approvals and funding to commence the initial stage of construction of shoreline erosion control and slope stabilization for the South Marine Drive sector of the Scarborough Bluffs. To date, a total of 1010 metres of offshore armoured revetment and partial slope stabilization work has been completed. . . 0-41 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '2/92, APRIL 3,1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992 - 1996 (CONTD.) -South Marine Drive Erosion Control Project, Lake Ontario Waterfront, City of Scarborough DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE During 1992, staff propose to complete the final slope restoration work. A major component will be to complete the landscape rehabilitation of the site which will include tree and shrub planting, seeding and habitat rehabilitation. Wetland plant species and wild flower seed mixtures will be used to enhance habitat opportunities around the small wetland areas created as part of the final drainage and grading work. Environmental monitoring for the completed project will continue in 1992, comprising water and sediment quality analysis, offshore bathometric surveys, slope stabilization as well as monitoring the success of the planting program. All work will be carried out by Authority staff. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total budget to carry out the 1992 slope restoration and rehabilitation works is $50,000 under Account No. 134-14. The cost estimates for the various components of the work are: labour $ 7,500. Plantings 35,000. Environmental Monitoring 7,500. TOTAL BUDGET $50,000. Funding availability will be subject to final approval from the Province of Ontario. This work will be carried out under the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992 - 1996, approved at Authority Meeting #3/91. 5. MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1996 -5 Kingsbury Crescent Erosion Control Project, lake Ontario Waterfront, City of Scarborough KEY ISSUE Carry out final design and construction of Slope stabilization work at 5 Kingsbury Crescent, City of Scarborough. . Res #24 Moved by: William Granger Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the final engineering and implementation of remedial works in the vicinity of 5 Kingsbury Crescent, City of Scarborough, under the RMunicipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992-1996R, at a total cost of .175,000 subject to receipt of Provincial approval. CARRIED WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 112/92, APRIL 3,1992 0-42 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHOREUNE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992- 1996 (CONTD.) -5 Kingsbury Crescent Erosion Control Project, Lake Ontario Waterfront, City of Scarborough BACKGROUND In early 1 991, the Authority received a petition signed by homeowners along Kingsbury Crescent stating their concerns about the ongoing bluff erosion. Specifically, the homeowners requested that shoreline protection work be completed as soon as possible, and that the Authority request additional funding to carry out further slope stabilization work in the vicinity of 5 Kingsbury Crescent. In a report to the Executive Committee Meeting #5/91, staff reported that in early 1991, house No.5 Kingsbury was located 15.3 metres (50.2 feet) from the bluff crest and that the crest was receding at a rate of approximately 1.48 metres (4.85 feet) per year. Staff continues to monitor the erosion in this area. Shoreline protective work was completed below numbers 3 and 5 Kingsbury by late 1991. No additional funding was made available by the Province in 1991 and the Authority was unable to proceed with an engineering study as no surplus funding was available from existing erosion control projects. . DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE It is proposed that consultants be retained to assist in the review and analysis of all alternatives for remedial measures, including access, environmental, geotechnical, and cost considerations. Subject to addressing all environmental concerns and receiving all approvals, it is hoped that implementation of remedial work can start in 1992. The design process will be carried out in accordance with the Class Environm~ntal Assessment for Water Management Structures, as amended. A total of $175,000 is budgeted for 1992 of which $15,000 will be for engineering design. FINANCIAL DETAILS A project file was submitted to the Province for funding consideration in 1992 and was ranked number fifteen provincially. At this time we are unsure whether this would make the project eligible for regular funding or whether the Authority will be required to utilize local priority funding. Funding availability will be subject to final approval from the Province of Ontario. This work will be carried out under the "Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992-1996", approved at Authority Meeting #3/91. 6. DRAFT VALLEY AND STREAM CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PROGRAM KEY ISSUE The Draft Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program has been prepared to update and consolidate the Authority's goal, objectives, policies and implementation criteria for the watercourses and their related landforms; to integrate the Authority's public safety responSibilities with its commitment to ecosystem planning and management; and for the protection and regeneration of valley and stream corridors. The Draft Program also reflects the information gained and recommendations adopted by the Authority during the development of the Rouge River Watershed Comprehensive Basin Management Strategy. 0-43 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '2/92, APRIL 3, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. DRAFT VALLEY AND STREAM CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CONTD.) Res. #25 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: William Granger THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Draft Valley end Stream Corridor Management Program - April 3, 1992, be circulated to hs member end local municipalities, the Ministers of Natural Resources, Environmant, Municipal Affairs, Transportation, the Office of the Greater Toronto Area, non- governmant organizations and Interested professionals end resldants within the watershed for comment by July 31, 1992; THAT the municipalities be requested to commant specifically on Section B: Conserving Valley end Stream Corridors through Municipal Planning; THAT the Draft Program be provided to the Commission on Land Use Planning and Development Reform for consideration in their review of the planning process; THAT staff be directed to develop and implement a public consultation process to facilitate public review of the Draft Program; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board on the comments received regarding the proposed Program policies to enable the finalization and adoption of the Program prior to the end of 1992. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Meeting #7/88, the Authority resolved: wTHAT a Greenspace Plan for the Greater Toronto Region be received and be adopted as a guide to supplement the Watershed Plan (1986). . . W The importance of valley and stream corridors have received greater recognition since the adoption of the Greenspace Strategy (Plan). Their importance has been specifically identified in a number of recent provincial and municipal documents including: Soace for All: Ootions for a Greater Toronto Area. Greenlands Stratecv. R. Kanter, 1990. Watershed: Interim Reoort. Hon. D. Crombie, 1990 (Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront). A Greensoace Framework: The Protection and Manacement of Natural Heritace in the Greater Toronto Area. GTA Unit, MNR, final draft April, 1991. GTA 2021 - The Challence of our Future - A Workinc Document. The Office for the Greater Toronto Area - updated 1992. Draft Goals, the Commission on Land Use Planninc and Develooment Reform. November, 1991. Prooosed Policv Initiatives for the New Metrooolitan Toronto Official Plan: Discussion Paoer. Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, Policy Division, September, 1991. Brinc Back the Don. The Task Force to Bring Back the Don, August, 1991 (City of Toronto). WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 112/92, APRIL 3, 1992 0-44 SECTION I . ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. DRAFT VALLEY AND STREAM CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CONTD.) Community and interest groups have continued to advocate the protection of these corridors and are actively involved in their regeneration. RATIONALE The proposed Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program is a significant step in the Authority's continuing stewardship of the resources within its jurisdiction. It is the first component of a comprehensive document called for by the Authority at Meeting '1/90: ". . . THAT staff be directed to prepare a comprehensive document integrating the goals and Objectives of the Watershed Plan with the new initiatives in the Greenspace Strategy". The Draft Program has been prepared to: . integrate the Authority's commitment to ecosystem planning with its public safety responsibilities; . integrate adopted Authority policies with respect to flood vulnerable structures, parking lots, and Special Policy Areas consistent with the Provincial Flood Plain Planning Guidelines. It is recognized that the Program, when adopted, will have a number of functions including the clear communication of the Authority's goal, objectives, and policies with respect to valley and stream corridor management. It is also a Program which includes sufficient detail to provide direction with respect to implementation. The result of this approach should be the consistent, fair and equitable application of the Authority's policy and regulations throughout its jurisdiction. The provisions of the proposed Program include a number of specific initiatives which should be considered in its review. These include: That valley features and strear:n corridors which drain less than 125 hectares be included within the definition of valley and stream corridors (Section 3); That valley and stream corridor boundaries include a 10m setback (Section 3); That municipalities amend their official plans and comprehensive zoning by-laws to designate all valley and stream corridors as Open Space - Valley and Stream Corridor; That future alterations to stream corridors and/or watercourses to ac~ommodate adjacent new urban development or resource based development within these corridors may require an approved Subwatershed and/or Community Reach Plan; That cumulative impacts be addressed with respect to the alteration of valley and stream corridors; and That all proposals for valley and stream corridors address regeneration requirements as well as the protection of existing valley and stream corridor resources. The Draft Valley and Stream Management Program should assist the Authority's watershed municipalities in their commitments to implement an ecosystem approach. The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, for example, in its Proposed Policy Initiatives document recommends Urban Conservation measures which: "seek to sustain and enhance natural processes and to strengthen the capacity of the natural environment for self-renewal and growth for the benefit of future generations, within the physical constraints imposed by an urban community". 0-45 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '2/92, APRIL 3,1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. DRAFT VALLEY AND STREAM CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CONTD.) The Policy Initiatives Document also identifies the need for: "Environmental design pOlicies which work in harmony with natural processes within the needs and demands of an urban community". The policies and criteria contained within the proposed Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program give effect to these initiatives. Public Consultation The proposed policies represent a significant initiative by the Authority and should be discussed with provincial and municipal agencies and at the community level prior to finalization. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Copies of the Draft Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program should be circulated to provincial, municipal and community representatives. Public review of the document will be ensouraged through invitations to a public open house. Municipalities will be contacted to provide those community groups which may be interested in reviewing the proposed Program. A presentation will be developed where required. The comments received and recommendations with respect to any amendments to and adoption of a final Program will be brought back to the Board for consideration and recommendation to the Authority prior to the end of 1992. SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 7. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL SEMINAR/WORKSHOP KEY ISSUE The Ministry of the Environment, in June 1991, awarded The Metropolitan Toronto Region Conservation Authority funds from the Clean Sweep Lottery program, to carry out a project entitled "Demonstration Projects for Improved Subdivision Design and Planning and Construction Practices". Part of the objective of the study is to improve in the delivery of education to participants in the development process. To achieve this goal a formal workShOp has been arranged for April 14, 1992, directed to an audience of engineering consultants, developers, contractors and municipalities. Res. #26 Moved by: William Granger Seconded by: Paul Raina IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report, dated 1992.03.23., on the Erosion and Sediment Control Workshop be received for information. . CARRIED WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/92, APRIL 3; 1992 0-46 SECTION rv -ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 7. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL SEMINAR/WORKSHOP (CONTD.) BACKGROUND The study implemented by the MTRCA and the Ministry of the Environment is evaluating the effectiveness of erosion and sediment control guidelines and the implementation of various control methods. Particular consideration has been given to identify any problems and solutions which will improve construction practices during the development process. One initiative in the study is to improve the availability of education. This will be achieved during on-site compliance/ monitoring of active construction sites and through a formal workshop. The Provincial Urban Drainage Advisory Committee has been invited to provide input and direction. The committee is composed of technical staff that comment and direct on planning, design and construction issues related to urban drainage. The MOE/MTRCA workshop will be affiliated with the Provincial Urban Drainage Advisory Committee. The erosion and sediment control workshop will focus on concerns involving construction practices identified in urban development. The workshop will address the issue of erosion and sediment control and will promote a coordinated approach to solutions. The format for the workshop will combine formal lectures and exhibit/displays. The following lectures will be presented at the Erosion and Sediment Control Workshop: City of Mississauga - Top Soil Preservation By-Law . Existing problem in the municipality and highlights of the by-law. Ministry of Transportation - Research and Development Branch . Quantitative Evaluation Of The Effectiveness Of Erosion Control Materials. Developing a methodology to match erosion control materials to the erosion susceptibility of slopes. Soil Conservation Society in co-operation with The Ministry Of Natural Resources - University of Guelph . Developing an erosion and sediment control educational certification course. Background, future direction and contents. TransCanada Pipelines - Environmental Services Branch, Calgary . Techniques and policy regarding stream crossings; . Minimizing the environmental impacts. Techniques in Soil Bio-engineering - Robbin Sotir & Assoc., Georgia, Vnited States . Biotechnical slope protection and erosion control; planning, design and analysis. Best Management Practices and Improved Subdivision Design Tas Candaras, A. M. Candaras & Assoc. Engineering Consultant. A Developers Perspective - Mathews Group, London . Problems and solutions in the development process. Overview - Royal Commission On The Future Of The Toronto Waterfront - Honourable David Crombie, Commissioner. 0-47 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '2/92, APRIL 3,1992 . SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 7. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL SEMINAR/WORKSHOP (CONTD.) The workshop will address the issue of minimizing environmental impacts through new approaches and techniques in erosion and sediment control. An evaluation of the workshop by participants will be completed to provide feedback on additional workshops to be included in the study. FUTURE BENEFITS The workshop/seminar is a starting point for future educational initiatives with the municipalities on erosion and sediment control technology. The study undertaken by the Authority is organizing further workShops in the fall of 1992. These workshops will focus on various issues on erosion and sediment control and will explore opportunities to strengthen the partnership between the Authority and its member municipalities. NEW BUSINESS DOMT AR SMOKE STACK DEMOLITION Res. #27 Moved by: . William Granger Seconded by: Paul Raina THAT expense involved In the demolition of the Domtar Smoke Stack be presented for approval at Executive Committee Meeting #2/92, to be held April 10, 1992. CARRIED The next meeting of the Water and Related Land Management Meeting will be held on May 1, 1992, at 10:00 a.m., Visitors Centre, Black Creek Pioneer Village. TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 1 :50 p.m., April 3, 1992. Lois Griffin W.A. McLean Chair Secretary-Treasurer /bb . ~ 'M:Jrking Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace 'the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes 0-48 MAy' 1, 1992 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92 The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, May 1, 1992. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. PRESENT Chair Lois Griffin Vice Chair Kip Van Kempen Members Lorna Bissell lIa Bossons Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Joanna Kidd Maja Prentice Paul Raina Bev Salmon Joyce Trimmer ABSENT Member ~ Frank Scarpitti MINUTES Res. #28 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THAT the Minutes of Meeting #2/92 be approved. CARRIED Res. #29 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: Maja Prentice THAT the Minutes of Joint Water and Related Land Management and Conservation and Related Land Management Advisory Boards be approved. CARRIED DELEGATIONS Mr. Diwid Baile, Producer of "The Coming" by the Caravan Stage Company spoke to Agenda Item 6. CORRESPONDENCE Letters with reference to Agenda Item. 6, Caravan Stage Company: R.H. Thomson, Director, du Maurier Ltd. World Stage, dated 21.02.92, P. Tabuns, City Councillor, Ward 8, to Caravan Stage Co., dated 23.03.92 C.J. Malcolm, Executive Director, Toronto Traffic Calming Alliance, dated 13.03.92 M. Pastore, Greenspace, to Caravan Stage Co., dated 8.05.91 K. Rae, City Councillor, Ward 6, dated 03.92 H.C. Cooper, Mayor, City of Kingston, dated 23.05.91 J. Courval, Co-Chairperson, Friends of the Spit, dated 30.04.92 J. Macdonald, Representative, Toronto Field Naturalist, dated 30.04.92 0-49 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '3/92, MAY 1, 1992 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. THE DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE -Report of the Terms of Reference, Membership Selection and Reporting Procedures KEY ISSUE Terms of Reference, Membership Selection and Reporting Procedures for the formation and operation of the Don Watershed Task Force. Res. '30 Moved by: lois Hancey Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Terms of Reference, Membership Selection and Reporting Procedures for the Don Watershed Task Force, as set out In Appendix WR.1 0/92, be approved; THAT the Authority direct staff to request local and regional municipalities to appoint a council member, and an alternate to the Task Force by July 30, 1992; THAT the Authority direct staff to invite applications from Don River watershed residents to participate on the Task Force; THAT a three-person selection committee be established, Including two members of the Water and Related land Management Advisory Board and the Director of Water Resource Division, to review all applications from watershed residents; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the full Authority on the proposed membership of the Task Force for endorsement and formal appointment. AMENDMENT '1 Moved by: lois Hancey Res. '31 Seconded by: Paul Raina THAT the second paragraph of the recommendation be amended to reed: THAT the Authority direct staff to request local and regional municipalities within the Don River Watershed to appoint a council member, and an alternate to the Task Force by July 30, 1992. AMENDMENT '1 WAS .................................................... CARRIED AMENDMENT '2 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Joyce Trimmer THAT a member from the Region of Durham and the Region of Peel be included in the Task Force. ON A TIE VOTE, AMENDMENT '2 WAS ..................................... NOT CARRIED THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .cARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/91, the following was adopted as part of Resolution #154: "That the development of the Don River Watershed Management Strategy be directed by a planning task force as recommended in the Greenspace Strategy; That the task force report to the Authority and be known as the Don Watershed Task Force; WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 0-50 SECTION I . ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. THE DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE (CONTD.) -Report of the Terms of Reference, Membership Selection and Reporting Procedures That staff be directed to prepare a report for Authority approval identifying the Task Force chairperson, potential members, reporting arrangements, time frame, financial implications and draft terms of reference. W To better understand the options available for the Task Force formation and its mandate, staff compared past and present committees and special purpose groups. Items that were identified for comparison included method of formation, time frame, number of members, method of selection, accountability and reporting relationship, committee structure, terms of reference, and resources made ava,i1able. This review included the Authority's Oak Ridges Moraine Working Group, the Energy Steering Committee for the Kortright Centre for Conservation, and the Rouge Implementation Committee; the Solid Waste Environmental Assessment Process (Metro SWEAP); and the City of Toronto's Task Force to Bring Back the Don. In addition, staff reviewed methods used by local and regional municipalities for the selection of citizen appointments to committees. Based on the information collected, staff conducted preliminary discussions with consulting firms and the' Chairman of the Task Force to Bring Back the Don (City of Toronto), in order to further define the formation and mandate of the proposed Task Force. The report details the proposed terms of reference, membership selection, reporting procedures and financial implications of the Task Force. Key aspects of the report include: MANDATE OF THE DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE The mandate of the Don Watershed Task Force is to: (a) Develop a Don Watershed Management Strategy which defines a sustainable healthy watershed for the Don Watershed using an ecosystem based approach. This approach recognizes the interrelationships between the physical and biological processes, and the integration of conservation, restoration and economy that will ensure the continued health of the watershed. The Don Watershed Strategy should detail, but not be limited to the following: . the specific management actions required to protect, link, and regenerate greenspace resources within the watershed; . the specific management actions required throughout the watershed to address water and other watershed based resource and environmental management issues; . the development of conceptual management plans for each of the seven subwatersheds (as defined in the Don River Watershed State of the Ecosystem Report); . the agencies or others responsible for the implementation of the recommended actions, cost estimates, implementation priorities and scheduling; and . the mechanisms and integration required to regenerate and sustain a healthy watershed. (b) Assist and encourage communities, business and industry, and government and non-government agencies in resource planning, stewardship, and management activities within the watershed. These activities could include: . . 0-51 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. THE DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE (CONTD.) -Report of the Terms of Reference, Membership Selection and Reporting Procedures . pilot or demonstration management projects; . community' Adopt a Stream" initiatives; and . watershed education. (c) The Task Force shall: . involve individuals, communities, business, industry, and government agencies in the development of the watershed strategy; . report progress, on a quarterly basis, to the MTRCA and other agencies through the Authority's Water and Related land Management Advisory Board; . report to the public and watershed community on the development of the strategy, the resources of the watershed, opportunities for involvement and on individual and community stewardship initiatives; . follow the Authority's Policies and Procedures with respect to purchasing, hiring of consultants and all other matters; and . provide a draft Strategy Document to the Authority by December 31, 1993. T ASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP The task force shall consist of twenty-five (25) members including: . ten persons residing within the Don watershed (to be selected from applications); . the Chair of the Authority or other Authority member as designated; . one member from each of the ten local and regional municipalities within the Don watershed which include: - Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto - City of North York - Regional Municipality of York - City of York - City of Toronto - Town of Markham - Borough of East York - Town of Richmond Hill - City of Scarborough - City of Vaughan; . one representative appointed from each of: - the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan; - the Regeneration land Trust; - the Task Force to Bring Back the Don; and - the Friends of the Don. Members of the Task Force will be appointed by the Authority until December 31st. 1993. subject to annual review by the Authority. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 D-52 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. THE DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE (CONTD.) -Report of the Terms of Reference, Membership Selection and Reporting Procedures The appointment of members to the Task Force is consistent with the Authority'S ability to establish special committees under Sections 22, 23, 24, and 25 of its Rules of Conduct and the Evaluation and Review Committee's Recommendation at Authority meeting #7/91, which was adopted as part of Resolution #208: "That the Authority expand the practice of appointing committees of interested citizens to advise on specific issues; said committee to include at least one member of the Authority and to report to and take direction from the Authority." TASK FORCE CHAIR The Chair and Vice Chair will be members of the Task Force and will be elected by the members of the Task Force. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE . A Technical Advisory Committee will be drawn from provincial, regional, municipal agencies and others representing specific disciplines to advise/assist the Task Force in the development of the terms of reference for the strategy. REPORTING PROCEDURES The Task Force will communicate to the Authority through the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board. The Task Force Chair will be required to coordinate communications to this Board with the assistance of the MTRCA staff secretariat. Watershed strategies and related issues are co-ordinated for the Authority by the Water Resource Division and reported to the Authority through the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS MTRCA will budget for and administer the Don River Watershed Management Strategy project. Funding will be allocated from the project budget for: . Task Force strategy development and related initiatives; . staff secretariat support; and . Don watershed regeneration activities. In 1993, this allocation will be based on available funding and a work plan developed by the Task Force and approved by the Authority. Del AILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Two members of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board are required, along with the Director, Water Resources, to form a selection committee to review citizen applications. An advertisement will be submitted to local papers inviting citizens residing within the watershed interested in serving on the Task Force to attend an information session. A selection process will be developed in consultation with the selection committee. Requests will be sent to the Don watershed local and regional municipalities for the appointment of a Task Force member and alternate. A staff report will be prepared recommending the membership of the Task Force and subsequently the persons elected to the positions of Chair and Vice Chair. 0-53 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VAllEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1996 -Kingsbury Crescent erosion Control Project, lake Ontario Waterfront, City of Scarborough KEY ISSUE Continuation of the construction of shoreline erosion control works along the Kingsbury Crescent sector of the Scarborough Bluffs, City of Scarborough. Res. #32 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Bev Salmon THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the next phase of construction of the Kingsbury Crescent Erosion Control Project, City of Scarborough, under the "Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992-1996", at a total cost of $275,000, subject to receipt of Provincial approval. CARRIED BACKGROUND Construction of shoreline erosion control work along the Kingsbury Crescent sector of the Scarborough Bluffs has been ongoing since 1980; however, delays in finalizing property agreemel'!ts resulted in no construction activity for the period 1982 - 1986. To date, the offshore revetment has been completed to its entire design length; however, only 70 per cent of the structure has been armoured to the required design specifications. The remaining work is scheduled to be completed throughout 1992 and 1993. Total expenditures for the Kingsbury Erosion Control Project to date is $1.370,000. DETAilS OF WORK TO BE DONE During 1992, a 140 metre section of existing revetment core will be completed to the required design height and final armour protection. Construction and supervision will be carried out by Authority field staff utilizing the annual equipment supply contractor. The supply and delivery of quarry stone will be tendered in accordance to the Authority's purchasing policy. Environmental monitoring for the project will also continue in 1992. This work will include fisheries survey, benthos and substrate analysis to document any changes to the aquatic environment in the vicinity of this project. FINANCIAL DETAilS The total budget to carry out the 1992 work is $275,000 under Account No. 131-03 and 131-23. The cost estimates for the various components of the work are: Labour $ 45,000 Materials 55,000 Equipment 85,000 Site restoration and Slope stabilization agreements 80,000 Environmental Monitoring 10,000 TOTAL BUDGET $275,000 Funding availability will be subject to final approval from the Province of Ontario. This work will be carried out under the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992 - 1996, approved at Authority Meeting #3/91. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 0-54 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992 - 1996 - Fishleigh Drive Erosion Control Project, Lake Ontario Waterfront, City of Scarborough KEY ISSUE To continue with the construction of the erosion control works along the Lake Ontario shoreline adjacent to Nos. 33-83 Fishleigh Drive in the City of Scarborough. Res. #33 Moved by: Joanna Kidd Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the next phase of the construction of the erosion control works adjacent to Nos. 33-83 Fishlelgh Drive, City of Scarborough, under the "Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992-1996", at a total cost of $300,000, subject to receipt of Provincial approval. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Meeting #3/88 held on May 6, 1988, the Authority, under resolution #78, approved the Fishleigh Drive Erosion Control Project at a total estimated cost of $ 1,840,000. To date, a total of $ 1,050,000 has been spent on the construction of an access road, approximately 100 metres of offshore revetment and the acquisition of House No. 85 Fishleigh Drive, which is located at the easterly end of the project limit. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE During 1992, the Authority proposes to construct an additional 120 metres of offshore revetment. Construction and supervision will be carried out by Authority field staff utilizing the annual equipment supply contractor. The supply and delivery of quarry stone will be tendered in accordance to the Authority's purchasing policy. Environmental monitoring for the project will also continue in 1992. This work will include fisheries survey, benthos. and substrate analysis to document any changes to the aquatic environment in the vicinity of the project. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total budget to carry out the proposed work in 1992 is $300,000 under Account #138-03 and 138-23. The cost estimates for the various components of work are: Labour $ 78,000 Materials 120,000 Equipment 82,000 Environmental Monitoring 10,000 Contingencies 10,000 TOTAL BUDGET $300,000 Funding availability will be subject to final approval from the Province of Ontario. This work will be carried out under the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992- 1996, approved at Authority Meeting #3/91. 0-55 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CON SID ERA TION 4. ROUGE RIVER STRATEGY -IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE - 1991 Progress Report KEY ISSUE To provide the Rouge River Strategy - Implementation Committee 1991 Progress Report. Res. #34 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Joyce Trimmer THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Rouge River Strategy - Implementation Committee 1991 Progress Report (Appendix WR.17/92) be received; THAT the Progress Report be sent to all provincial ministries. municipalities and non-governmental organizations involved with the Rouge River Strategy for their information; AND FURTHER THAT each agency or organization involved with the Rouge River Strategy be circulated the Rouge River Strategy Implementation Committee'. Work Plan for future budgetary aQd program development information. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #1/90, the Rouge River Basin Management Strategy was adopted. The Objectives of the Rouge River Strategy included: . To develop a long term management plan for the watershed that: - recognizes the headwaters, rivers and Lake Ontario as distinct but inseparable planning units in ecosystem planning; - resolves existing economic and pOlitical constraints to existing watershed management through cooperative planning by all agencies; - balances ecological health and Quality with economic growth and development; and - manages our investments of yesterday and plan for our investments and needs of tomorrow. . To develop and implement a plan of action that will respond to today's water and related land management problems. . To monitor, assess and update, on an ongoing basis, the effectiveness of the watershed planning, management and implementation efforts initiated under the watershed strategy. In addition to these objectives, the Rouge River Strategy indicated a "Vision" for the watershed. The Vision consisted of a set of statements defining shared goals for watershed planning and management, goals which are appropriately ambitious but not unrealistic. Collectively, their purpose is to restore and protect the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the watershed as a natural resource which provides the setting and foundation for integrated social and economic development. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 0-56 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. ROUGE RIVER STRATEGY -IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE (CON~D.) -1991 Progress Report The Rouge River Strategy identified a number of policies and implementation actions that were required to meet the Vision of the watershed. The implementation actions were categorized according to the lead agency responsible for implementation. Lead agencies include The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA), the regional and local municipalities within the Rouge River watershed and the Ministries of the Environment (MOE), Natural Resources (MNR), and Agriculture and Food (OMAF). One of the recommendations of Resolution #16, for the adoption by the Authority of the Rouge River Strategy, was as follows: "THAT staff be directed to establish a Rouge River Implementation Committee to initiate and monitor the implementation of the Rouge River Basin Management Strategy." On December 5th, 1990, the first Implementation Committee meeting occurred to discuss the roles and responsibilities of each representative and to present the draft Terms of Reference for comment and finalization. The final Terms of Reference are as follows: . Assist the Authority in coordinating the implementation of the Rouge River Basin Management Strategy. . Monitor the effectiveness of the implementation actions, including the design of mechanisms for monitoring. . Prepare annual progress reports on the effectiveness of the Rouge River Basin Management Strategy. . Recommend changes to the Rouge River Basin Management Strategy to The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. To facilitate the efforts of the Implementation Committee, three working groups were developed to assist the agencies responsible for implementing key actions as outlined in the Rouge River Strategy. These working groups are: - Planning Working Group; - Technical Working Group (Engineering & Works); and - Environmental Working Group. The 1991 Progress Report highlights the efforts and work by all agencies and organizations that has occurred to date to implement the Rouge River Strategy, including the efforts of the Working Groups. Some major initiatives have been accomplished or in progress by the MOE, MNR, and OMAF, the regional and local municipalities (Metropolitan Toronto, City of Scarborough, and the Towns of Markham and Pickering), the Authority and non-governmental organizations (Save the Rouge Valley System, Toronto Field Naturalist and Conservation Council of Ontario) including: . Rouge River Fisheries Management Plan (Committee of all agencies and organizations) - Phase I (Management Strategy completed) - Phase II (Implementation Strategy to be completed in 1992~. . Subwatershed Planning Guidance Document (Draft - January, 1992) (Provincial Committee) 0-57 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. ROUGE RIVER STRATEGY -IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE (CONTD.) -1991 Progress Report . A number of pilot projects investigating the effectiveness of water quality control measures (MOE, Ministry of Transportation (MTO), Town of Markham, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and MTRCA). . The establishment of a Spill Response Sub-committee within Metropolitan Toronto (Metropolitan Toronto, City of Scarborough, the other local municipalities within Metro and MOE). While this work has been significant in implementing the Rouge River Strategy, considerable effort is still required to successfully implement the Strategy. This conclusion was reached by the Implementation Committee upon reviewing the 1991 Progress Report and is reflected in their recommendation of preparing a 1992 Implementation Work Plan. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The Implementation Committee members identified current fiscal restraints which make it difficult to implement all the recommendations at once and have recommended the next meeting of the Implementation Committee deal exclusively with the preparation of a Work Plan. This Work Plan would identify what still needs to be carried out and by which agency(ies) to fully implement the Rouge River Strategy and prioritize the efforts of the Implementation Committee for 1992 and beyond. 5. CARAVAN STAGE COMPANY -Tommy Thompson Park KEY ISSUE Staff has been requested to permit the use of Tommy Thompson Park for part of a Caravan Stage Company production during the 1992 du Maurier World Stage at Harbourfront. Res. #35 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen 'Seconded by: Joanna Kidd THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Caravan Stage Company be granted permission to use a portion of Tommy Thompson Park for part of the 1992 production of wThe ComingW, subject to agreement between the MTRCA, the Toronto Harbour Commissioners and the Caravan Stage Company; THAT staff be directed to develop and execute a formal agreement with the Toronto Harbour Commissioners and the Caravan Stage Company with respect to the use of the Leslie Street Spit for these activities; AND FURTHER THAT all Interest groups Including the Aquatic Park Sailing Club be edvised of this activity. CARRIED BACKGROUND Within the past several years, the Authority has received a number of requests related to the use of Tommy Thompson Park for a variety of charitable cycling and pedestrian activities, commercial filming, and other special events. Typically, permission has been granted subject to these organizations providing the Authority with a certificate of liability insurance and the execution of the joint waiver of claims maintained by the . , . WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 D-58 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. CARAVAN STAGE COMPANY (CONTD.) -Tommy Thompson Park MTRCA and the Toronto Harbour Commissioners (THC) for individuals requiring special access via THC lands. In addition, course marshals are required to control the activity and Authority staff is present to ensure that these special events do not impact on other scheduled park operations. Staff has received a request from. Caravan Stage Company for permission to utilize a portion of the Leslie Street Spit as a location for the presentation of a theatrical production during the 1992 du Maurier World Stage at Harbourfront. The production entitled "The Coming" is an ambitious undertaking spanning a number of locations in the outer harbour area, and focusing on an environmental theme. The production is proposed from June' 9th through July 24th and will involve a total of 35 performance days during this period. The proposed schedule for the performance is nightly from June 9th to 20th and then from Wednesday through Sunday from June 21 st to July 24th. Access to the site will be required in the evenings from approximately 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on each of the performance days. All lands to be utilized for this activity are within those leased by the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, however, since the activity is to occur outside normal THC work hours, the MTRCA is responsible for controlling access to these lands during this time. The following details the access request that has been made to the Harbour Commissioners by the Caravan Stage Company: (1 ) audience access to walk from Unwin Avenue along the path on the east side of the circulating channel and permission to erect banners along the existing wire fence on the east side of the path to enhance the artistic design; (2) permission to moor a certified scow (owned by McKeil Marine Ltd.) with tug provided by Soderholm Marine Services along the channel and have the audience board the scow at this point; (3) permiSSion to beach a 45' x 30' scow owned by Soderholm Marine Services in the south-east corner of the southern most containment bay on the Leslie Spit on which only the cast will have access; (4) under the guidelines of the Toronto Harbour Master, permission to transport the audience into the aforementioned containment bay to watch the presentation. McKeil Marine will tug the barge into the bay and a patrol escort boat will be provided; (5) permission to keep one trailer on the roadway between the pond and the containment bay; (6) permission to erect a tent on the southern point across from Embayment A and serve a meal in this enclosure; (7) access for the audience to walk to the southern point of the Spit where the final act of the play will take place; and (8) access through the main gates of the Spit for buses to pick-up the audience and two horse drawn wagons. As outlined above, all of these activities are restricted to lands leased by the Toronto Harbour Commissioners. Permission from the Authority is required for general access to the site during the performances and for the buses retrieving the audience at the end of the evening. 0-59 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. CARAVAN STAGE COMPANY (CONTD.) -Tommy Thompson Park Staff has reviewed the request and is confident that the activities will not impact any of the natural amenities at the site, nor will they affect other park programs since they will occur outside regular public hours for the site. All activities will be restricted to the main road or areas that are presently devoid of vegetation. All displays and materials are completely portable and will not impact the site during installation or removal. Staff is recommending that permission be granted subject to the following terms and conditions: (1 ) Caravan Stage Company will be required to provide a certificate of appropriate liability insurance to the MTRCA, with the Authority and the THC being named as insured for the duration of the activities on site. (2) Each participant in the activity, including staff and representatives of Caravan Stage Company, and the audience will be required to sign the joint MTRCAlToronto Harbour Commissioners waiver of claims that has been developed for third party access. (3) Caravan Stage Company will be required to provide an emergency vehicle in the form of an ambulance or a paid duty pOlice officer for the duration of the activities on site. (4) The Caravan Stage Company will be required to incur the total cost of providing one Authority Staff person to be on-site during the activities to supervise the use of the site, and control access at the gates. This cost is estimated at $2,000.00. (5) The Authority must receive written confirmation of all approvals received from the Toronto Harbour Commissioners with respect to the use of their leased lands. (6) A written agreement must be developed and executed outlining the details of the activity, the use of the site and any follow-up maintenance required. This agreement is to be signed by the MTRCA, the THC, and Caravan Stage Company. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will prepare a written agreement to be signed by the MTRCA, the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, and Caravan Stage Company. This agreement will outline the approvals subject to the conditions outlined above. 6. CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT -Research KEY ISSUE Completion of research by Mark E. Taylor and Associates. Findings are presented in two reports entitled, Constructed Wetlands for Stormwater Manaaement - An Annotated Biblioaraohv and A Review. Res. #36 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report, dated 1992.04.15, on the completion of research by Mark E. Taylor and Associates, into the use of constructed wetlands for stormwater management, be received for information; WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 0-60 , . SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT (CONTD.) -Research THAT .taff be directed to pursue opportunltle. to work cooperatively with other agencies and public groups In promoting the Implementation of a pilot constructed wetland; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to secure funding to support the aforementioned pilot project. CARRIED BACKGROUND Constructed wetlands have been used in the southern United States to reduce the adverse effects of stormwater on water quality. While this concept has been considered for use in the local area, staff of the Authority and other local agencies had specific concerns regarding the design, efficiency, and operation of constructed wetlands in the southern Ontario climate. For this reason, staff of the Authority and the Ministry of the Environment supported a proposal submitted by Mark E. Taylor & Associates to review literature documenting the use of constructed wetlands for stormwater management and to interpret that experience in the context of southern Ontario conditions. At the Executive Committee Meeting #3/91, Resolution #65 was passed which stated: "THAT Mark E. Taylor and Associates be retained to prepare an annotated bibliography and a written summary of the literature on the use of constructed wetlands for the treatment of stormwater; AND FURTHER THAT the cost for this contract be limited to the upset amount of $9,212.50 provided by the Ministry of the Environment." Mark E. Taylor and Associates submitted the two reports entitled, Constructed Wetlands for Stormwater Manaaement - An Annotated Biblioaraohv (received October 28, 1991) and Constructed Wetlands for Stormwater Manaaement - A Review (received December 12, 1991). The Ministry of the Environment has funded the printing of an additional 300 copies of the two documents. These copies are being circulated to Ontario's Conservation Authorities, Ontario Remedial Action Plan Coordinators, Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Member and Local Municipalities, Ontario Ministry of the Environment (Regional and District Offices) and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (Regional and District Offices). To assist in publicizing the findings of Dr. Taylor's research, staff of the Ministry of the Environment and the Authority are organizing two one-day seminars devoted to "constructed wetlands". The first of the seminars, scheduled for June 10, 1992, will be directed to an audience of agency personnel and the second day, June 17, 1992, to consultants and municipal staff. Public interest groups will also be invited to attend either of the two day sessions. Dr. Taylor's report describes the role of natural wetlands in regulating the hydrological regime of a watershed and in capturing and cycling nutrients. The report also documents experience from other jurisdictions, primarily the United States and Britain, where constructed wetlands have been used to treat municipal sewage, mine and industrial wastewater and urban stormwater. In the area of urban stormwater management, this experience suggests that constructed wetlands could serve to mitigate the impacts of urbanization on water quality and the pre-development hydrologic conditions of a watershed. Dr. Taylor has attempted to interpret this information for southern Ontario conditions when making recommendations for constructed wetland design and expected operating efficiency. . . 0-61 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT (CONTD.) -Research Whil!'! this information contributes greatly to our understanding of constructed wetlands for the treatment of stormwater quality, there are still some unresolved issues: . Lack of Demonstration Projects There are no known examples of constructed wetlands designed specifically for storm water treatment in the Greater Toronto Area. Subsequently, the effectiveness of constructed wetlands at removing contaminants from stormwater in this climate has not been demonstrated. The impact of these stormwater wetlands on wildlife is an uncertainty. The ability of design features to facilitate maintenance needs is also unknown. . Question of Dual Purpose Constructed wetlands may be designed for the purposes of water quality improvement or habitat creation. However, until more information is available regarding the impacts of stormwater wetlands on wildlife and the maintenance requirements of a stormwater wetland, the design purpose must be limited to either water quality improvement OR habitat creation. A second purpose may be incidental, but would not be promoted. . Location - In the Valley? Natural wetlands frequently occur along shorelines and on floodplains. The construction of a wetland may involve excavation or berming and can by its construction create other adverse impacts. Dr. Taylor's research indicates a potential role for constructed wetlands in the area of stormwater management, however the implementation of a pilot project in the Greater Toronto Area would provide agency and Authority staff with the opportunity to address some of the unanswered questions. Several local agencies and groups, including the lower Don River Task Force, Action to Restore a Clean Humber, the Ministry of the Environment, and the City of Vaughan have expressed interest in undertaking some form of a pilot constructed wetland project. Although all agencies and groups have a general interest in testing the concept of constructed wetlands, each has its own unique concerns (i.e., municipalities, public acceptance and maintenance requirements; Ministry of the Environment, effectiveness at treating water quality; Ministry of Natural Resources, impact on surrounding aquatic and terrestrial wildlife; Conservation Authority, impact on valley and stream corridor). To ensure that each of the agencies and groups can obtain the maximum benefit from a pilot project, such a project requires a coordinated approach. Given the Authority's past experience in working with provincial agencies, local municipalities and interest groups, staff feel that the Authority is in the best position to coordinate a pilot constructed wetland project. Authority staff, therefore, will be working with the various agencies to' identify potential opportunities for developing a pilot wetland project. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 D-62 SECTION IV. ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 7. THE ENVIRONMENTAL YOUTH CORPS PROGRAM (EYCI KEY ISSUE Undertake the Environmental Youth Corps (EYC) Program Stream Imorovement Proiect in partnership with the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. Res. #37 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Bev Salmon IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on the Eiwlronmental Youth Corps Program, Stream Improvement Project, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Environmental Youth Corps (EYC) Program gives youths, between the ages of 15 and 24, an opportunity to work on projects that contribute to improving the environment in their own communities. The Ministries of Agriculture and Food, Environment, Natural Resources, Northern Development and Mines, and Tourism and Recreation are EYC "Host Ministries". These Ministries approve funding for youth employment in projects sponsored by various non-profit organizations. The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has participated in the EYC Program by undertaking the Stream Improvement Project since 1989. Each summer, the Project crew removed man-made debris from rivers and stream banks in an effort to clean up Toronto area watercourses. This work resulted in a highly visible improvement to stream aesthetics and generates very favourable public response. This year, the Stream Improvement Project will be jointly undertaken by the Conservation Foundation of the Greater Toronto and the Authority. The Project is part of the Foundation's Environmental Rehabilitation of the Charles Sauriol Conservation Reserve in the East Don River Valley. The Proje~t will focus on the clean up and revegetation of the Don River valley, particularly within the Charles Sauriol Conservation Reserve. As the crew undertakes these activities, they will be ~valuating areas of stream bank erosion, assessing the adequacy of streamside vegetation, as well as noting any signs of obvious water quality impairment. The objectives of the Project are to carry out habitat and aesthetic improvement; to educate the participants on general stream ecology and water quality; and to heighten their awareness of environmental issues and concerns. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The Authority, on behalf on the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, will hire seven youths to carry out stream improvement activities from May 4 to August 21, 1992. Final site selection will be determined. Landowner approval will be obtained. FINANCIAL DETAILS The Ministry of the Environment is providing $30,000 for the hiring of seven youths for the Stream Improvement Project. The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto will provide up to $30,000 to the Project from funds raised for the Environmental Rehabilitation of the Charles Sauriol Conservation Reserve in the East Don River Valley. These funds will cover the cost of project coordination, materials, and equipment. 0-63 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 SECTION IV -ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 8. POTENTIAL FUTURE ISSUES FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION DURING 1992 Res. #38 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Bev Salmon IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the list of potential future issues for Board consi~eration during 1992 be received for information. CARRIED It has been our practice to provide the Board with a list of issues which may be coming before the Board during the year. This list is not be considered as totally inclusive as matters arise during the year which were not expected or were not anticipated in 1992. The list is, however, an indicator of the Board's work for the year. Plan Review (1 ) Lower Don Flood Control Strategy and Results of Royal Commission review of Lower Don Area (2) Oak Ridges/Lake Wilcox OPA 71 Review (3) Unionville Special Policy Area - Finalization (4) Oak Ridges Moraine Provincial Initiatives (5) Fill Regulation Extension Project Enoineerino and Develooment (1 ) Review of Storm Water Management Program (2) Dixie/Dundas Flood Control Project - Update and Revision (3) Review and Update of Erosion Control Priorities (4) Keating Channel Cost Sharing Agreement (5) Metropolitan Toronto Draft Waterfront Plan (6) Tommy Thompson Park Revised Master Plan (7) Motel Strip Waterfront Park - OMB Decision & Implementation (8) Frenchman's Bay Environmental Management Master Plan (9) Toronto Island Shoreline Management Plan (10) Canada Post Site Acquisition and Master Plan (11 ) East Point Park Environmental Assessment (12) Guild Inn Redevelopment Plan (13) Various Scarborough Bluffs Erosion Control Projects (14) Final Report of the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront (15) Fill Quality Control Program Inland Expansion Resource Manaoement Section (1 ) Federal Wildlife Strategy Proposal (2) Don River Watershed Task Force - Membership Approval (3) Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program - Approval (4) RAP Proposals (5) Tree Plan Canada Proposal (6) Sediment Control Program (7) Riparian Habitat Program (8) Tommy Thompson Park Interim Management Program WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/92, MAY 1, 1992 D-64 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 8. POTENTIAL FUTURE ISSUES FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION DURING 1992 (CONTD.) Resource Manaaement Section Icontd.l (9) Nursery Relocation Plan (10) Pond Monitoring Study (11 ) ESA Program Update (12) Rouge River Fisheries Management Plan (13) Rouge River Strategy Implementation Committee 1992 Work Plan (14) Subwatershed Planning Guidance Document (15) Gypsy Moth Project NEW BUSINESS DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE SELECTION COMMITTEE Res. #39 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: Lorna Bissell THAT the selection committee for the Don Watershed Task Force be established with the appointment of the Chair of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board, Lois Griffin, the Vice-Chair of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board, Kip Van Kempen and the Director of the Water Resource Division. Craig Mather. CARRIED PUBLIC MEETING There will be a Public Meeting of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board on May 27, 1992, at Hart House Theatre, 7:30 p.m. Advisory Board Members are invited to a tour of Tommy Thompson Park at 2:30 p.m. TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 11 :45 a.m., May 1, 1992. Lois Griffin J.C. Mather Chair Director, Water Resource Division /bb ~ Working Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace "'the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes 0-65 MAY 27,1992 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/92 , The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Hart House Theatre, University of Toronto, on Wednesday May 27, 1992. The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PRESENT Chair Lois Griffin Members Lorna Bissell Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Paul Raina Bev Salmon Frank Scarpitti Joyce Trimmer Chair of the Authority William Granger ABSENT Member Ila Bossons Joanna Kidd Maja Prentice Kip Van Kempen MINUTES Res. #40 Moved by: Frank Scarpitti Seconded by: Paul Raina THAT the Minutes of Meeting #3/92 be approved. CARRIED The Board had before it a staff report recommending a revised May. 1992. Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment. Larry Field, Manager, Waterfront, gave a staff presentation. DELEGA TIONS The following delegations spoke to the issue of Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment, dated May, 1 992. 1 . John Carley, Friends of the Spit 2. Roy Merrens 3. W. Ken Bryden (presentation read by M. Bryden) 4. Barry de Zwaan 5, Jean Macdonald, Toronto Field Naturalists D-66 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/92, MAY 27,1992 DELEGATIONS lcontd.l 6. Henry Graupner, Citizens for a Lakeshore Greeenway 7. Brenda Hogg, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 8. Wilma Harniman 9. Steven Price 10. Boris Mather, Citizens for a Lakeshore Greenway 11. Peg Lush 12. Darcy Chadwick, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 13. Ralph Brown, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 14. Karen Clark, Friends of the Spit 15. Ray Blower, Sierra Club, Eastern Canada Chapter 16. Marion Bryden, Friends of the Spit 17. Verna Higgins, Botany Conservation Group 18. George Fairfield, Toronto Ornithogical Club 19. Ann Hansen 20. Joe Oggy, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 21. Jake Smythe, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 22. Larry Whatmore, Outer Harbour Sailing Federation 23. Gord Lehman, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 24. Alf Jenkins, Ontario Sailing Federation 25. Donna Stewart, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 26. Lee Gold, Friends of the Spit 27. Jacqueline Courval, Friends of the Spit 28. Janice Blackburn, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 29. Roger Jublinville, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 30. Olga Jensen, Friends of the Spit 31. Alexander Wilson 32. David Cormack, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 33. Allison Barlow, Aquatic Park Sailing Club 34. Glenne Coady, Toronto Ornithogical Club 35. Mitchell Rothman, Aquatic Park Sailing Club CORRESPONDENCE Some of the delegations provided copies of their comments and, as well, correspondence was received by the Authority . 1. Caroline Underwood, dated May 26, 1992 2. Ruth Arntz, Friends of the Spit, dated May 25, 1992 3. Curtis Fahey, dated May 24, 1992 4. Thomas F.C. Cole, dated May 12, 1992 5. Donald E. Payne, M.D., dated May 20, 1992 6. Mary Baillie, dated May 16, 1992 7. Betty Madge, dated May 25, 1992 8. Margaret Chambers, dated May 23, 1992 9. Jane E. Graham, dated May 24, 1992 10 Dr. R.E. Munn, Institute for Environmental Studies, dated May 26, 1992 11 . Simon Shields, received May 25, 1992 12. David MacMillian, Fieldstone Private Capital Group Ltd., dated May 26, 1992 13. Anne Macdonald, dated May 21, 1992 14. William Wilson, dated May 22, 1992 15. Dorothy Winkler, May 25, 1992 16. J.G. de Zwaan, submission 17. Verna J. Higgins, Botany Conservation Group, submission , . WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/92, MAY 27,1992 0-67 CORRESPONDENCE (contd.1 18. Ralph Brown, Aquatic Park Sailing Club, submission 19. Alf Jenkins, Ontario Sailing Association, submission 20. Marion Bryden, former MPP for Beaches-Woodbine, submission 21. W.K. Bryden, submission 22. . Jean Macdonald, Toronto Field Naturalists, submission 23. Wilma Harniman, submission 24. Gord Lehman, submission 25. Larry Whatmore, Commodore, Outer Harbour Sailing Federation, submission 26. Anne Hansen, submission 27. Jake Smythe, submission 28. Ray Blower, Sierra Club of Eastern Canada, submission Res. #41 Moved by: Bev Salmon Seconded by: Lois Hancey THAT the correspondence and written submissions, as well as the letter received from Steve Ellis, City Councillor, dated May 21, 1992, re: Sweat Lodges on the Leslie Street Spit, b~ received and referred to staff for a report back to Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #5/92, June 19, 1992. CARRIED SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK REVISED MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - May, 1992 KEY ISSUE To recommend a revised Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan for approval to Authority Meeting #6/92, to be held July 24, 1992, and obtain direction to resubmit the Revised Master Plan to the Minister of the Environment for approval under the Environmental Assessment Act. Res. #42 Moved by: Frank Scarpitti Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Tommy Thompson p'ark Revised Master Plan dated May, 1992, be approved; THAT staff be directed to prepare an eddendum including documentation of the public comments on the Revised Master Plan (May, 19921 and submit it along with the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment document (July, 1989) to the Minister of the Environment for approval under the Environmental Assessment Act; THAT the Revised Master Plan (May, 1992) be forwarded to The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto for approval in accordance with the provisions of the 1972 Waterfront Agreement. THAT the Revised Master Plan (May, 1992) be forwarded to the Ministry of Natural Resources; 0-68 . WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/92, MAY 27,1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK REVISED MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (CONTD.) - May, 1992 THAT the Authority continue to utilize committees such as the Natural Areas Advisory Committee, a physical planning committee with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club and Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department, and a working committee with cycling experts to address the specific cyclists needs, in advisory capacities during the detailed design and implementation stages of the Revised Master Plan; AND FURTHER THAT the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Natural Resources, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Toronto, the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront, the Tommy Thompson Park Natural Areas Advisory Committee, the Aquatic Park Sailing Club and the Outer Harbour Sailing Federation be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Meeting #2/92, the Authority adopted the following resolution: "Res.#38 THAT the revised Tommy Thompson Park Concept (March 6, 1992) be endorsed as a basis to obtain public and agency comment in preparing a resubmission of the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment in 1992 to the Minister of the Environment; THAT staff be directed to prepare the necessary documentation for public and government review with a special public meeting of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board to be scheduled to enable consideration of a revised Master Plan by the Authority no later than its meeting of July 24, 1992; THAT the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Toronto, the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront and the Tommy Thompson Park Natural Areas Advisory Committee be so advised; AND FURTHER THAT staff prepare documentation relating to the public transportation question as part of the revised Master Plan preparation.. The revised Tommy Thompson Park Concept, as endorsed by the Authority, incorporated the following changes: . Elimination of private vehicle access and the public parking (100 spaces) from the interpretive centre location (endikement). . Removal of any proposed lakefilling to accommodate the Outer Harbour Sailing Federation and additional parkland at the base of the park. . Recognition of the commitment by the City of Toronto in its assumption of the North Shore Park (Toronto Harbour Commissioners Park) of the Outer Harbour to accommodate all the community sailing clubs which presently are located on the North Shore of the Outer Harbour. . Relocation of the proposed visitors centre to the park entrance at the base of the spit. . Addition of a small environmental education/shelter/washroom facility at the endikement which would be accessed by bus to facilitate the environmental programs of the school boards. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/92, MAY 27, 1992 0-69 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK REVISED MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (CONTD.) - May, 1992 . The Aquatic Park Sailing Club would remain in Embayment C with 100 swing moorings and limited on- shore facilities (e.g. clubhouse and storage building). Parking and winter boat storage could be provided on the Outer Harbour Marina arm subject to the approval of the Toronto Harbour Commissioners. with club member's access to the Aquatic Park Sailing Club via their own water shuttle or possible van service. . The revised concept incorporates capital cost reductions in the magnitude of $2,500,000 in 1987 dollars. A further $500,000 reduction to provide municipal services to the environmental education/shelter/washrooms at the endikement could be realized if alternative site servicing options are acceptable to the City of Toronto and Metropolitan Toronto. . The revised concept also maximizes the use of the existing paved road for maintenance vehicles and cyclists while avoiding duplication of park facilities. This existing paved road could form the Tommy Thompson Park component of the "Waterfront Trail" being coordinated by Metropolitan Toronto. RATIONALE The Authority staff presents for public comment and the Board's approval a Revised Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan - May, 1992 (see attached Tommy Thompson Park Plan - Revised May, 1992 summary document). The Revised Master Plan provides the following components, phasing and costing. Comoonents . The Revised Master Plan maintains the direction as originally approved, January, 1988, which utilizes a natural succession or ecological approach augmented by minimal intervention and management to achieve a unique urban wilderness park; - preservation of such significant species as the Caspian Tern, 'Common Tern and Black- crowned Night Heron; - protection of environmentally significant areas amenities; - creation of significant marsh/wetlands habitat; and - some surface/site preparation on the outer headland to allow natural succession (willow/aspen/cottonwood) to occur. . A park visitors centre at the base will be the focus of the public and environmental education program for the site's ecology, natural succession, history and coastal processes. This centre is supported by a small environmental education/shelter/washroom at the endikement. . In excess of 12 km of a separate major/minor pedestrian path system and a 7 km separate bicycle pathway as an extension to the Metropolitan Waterfront Trail with future linkage to the existing Martin Goodman Trail is proposed. The separate bicycle pathway will utilize the existing park service road. . The Revised Plan incorporates private vehicular access to the Park Visitors Centre at the base with the provision of 200 public parking spaces in this location. , . 0-70 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/92, MAY 27,1992 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK REVISED MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (CONTD.) - May, 1992 . As a general principle, no private vehicles will be permitted to access the site beyond the Park Visitors Centre at the base. The Plan does provide for school bus access to the environmental education/shelter/washrooms structure at the endikem~nt to facilitate the environmental programs of the school boards. . The Plan also provides for the Aquatic Park Sailing Club utilizing their own van service for primary access to their site during the sailing season - late April to mid October. The club would maintain their existing arrangements for restricted private vehicle access until implementation of the Master Plan and assumption by Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department. . The retention of the Aquatic Park Sailing Club in their existing location with 100 swing moorings, an approximate 1 ha land base area and restricted access provision which is outlined above. . The Plan includes extension of municipal services: sanitary, water, electricity, telephone to the Park Visitors Centre and environmental education/shelter/washrooms. . Public access to the site would be enhanced by the provision of a park transportation service similar to that provided by the Authority as part of the 1992 Interim Users Program and operating in future on the existing park service road between the public parking area and the lighthouse. Provision of such a service is subject to a detailed review (considering such matters as the user demand, operating criteria and financial feasibility) and approval of the operating agency - Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department. Phasina Phase 1- 1992-1996 . Environmental Assessment Approval of Master Plan . pedestrian trail and bicycle path (Part of Metropolitan Waterfront Trail) . public parking lot (Park Visitors Centre) . marsh creation - Cell 1 . site services - sewer, water, electrical, telephone to Park Visitor Centre area . minimum service washrooms (2) Phase II - 1997-2001 . Park Visitors Centre . major/minor pedestrian system in natural area . initiation of soil/site preparation for dry meadow, wet meadow and cottonwood/aspen, willow communities . site services: sewer, water, electrical, telephone to environmental education/shelter/washroom facility . environmental education/shelter washroom facility Phase III - 2002-2006 . marsh creation - Cell 2, Embayment A, B, C, and lacustrine marsh area . soil/site preparation for remainder of outer headland lakefill area . buffer area/site restoration - Unwin Avenue to endikement WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/92, MAY 27,1992 D-71 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK REVISED MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ICONTD.) - May, 1992 . service maintenance building . completion of pedestrian systems and lookouts . island development in Cells 3 . potential park transportation subject to approval of the operating agent Caoital Costs . Natural Area Restoration $1,000,000 . Site Services (sanitary, water, electricity, telephone) 800,000 . Site Facilities (Visitors Centre, environmental education/shelter/washrooms, parking, service building) 950,000 . Pedestrian System 325,000 . Landscaping and Site Restoration 260,000 . Park Transportation (operational costs subject to approval of Metropolitan Toronto) ...--..---- Total Revised Master Plan Costs (1992 Dollars) $3,335,000 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will prepare an Addendum to include the Authority approved Revised Master Plan, documentation of the public process and comments, the revised capital costs, phasing, minutes of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board and Authority. Subject to direction of the Authority, staff would refile the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plqn/Environmental Assessment document and the Addendum to the Minister of the Environment for approval under the Environmental Assessment Act. Upon refiling, Authority staff would activate the Natural Areas Advisory Committee, establish a working group to review the needs of cyclists and establish a working group with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club to address the detailed design and implementation considerations of the Master Plan. TERMINA TION The meeting terminated at 10:45 p.m., May 27, 1992. Lois Griffin J.C. Mather Chair Director, Water Resource Division /bb ~ 'M:>rking Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace 'the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes 0-72 JUNE 19, 1992 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92 The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, June 19, 1992. The Chair called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. PRESENT Chair Lois Griffin lIa Bossons Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Joanna Kidd Maja Prentice Paul Raina Bev Salmon Joyce Trimmer Kip Van Kempen Chair of the Authority William Granger ABSENT Member Lorna Bissell Frank Scarpitti MINUTES Res. #43 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THAT the Minutes of Meeting #4/92 be approved. CARRIED DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST Joanna Kidd declared a conflict, as a resident of Toronto Island, In item 4, herewith, Toronto Islands Shoreline Hazards Review. DELEGATIONS The following delegations addressed the Board at the appropriate time: Mr. Frank Kershaw, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department, re: Proposed West Humber, Highland Creek and North Humber Trail extensions by the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department, item 1, herewith. Councillor Augimeri re: Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992- 1996, 49 and 51 Troutbrooke Drive, City of North York, item 2, herewith. Vern Harper and Cliff Somers, Executive Director, Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto, re: Tommy Thompson Park Revised Master Plan/Environmental Assessment, May, 1992, item 3, herewith. Margaret Hilpert re: Project for the AcquiSition of the Sandbury Building Corporation Property, Frenchman's Bay ArealTown of Pickering, item 5, herewith. 0-73 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. PROPOSED WEST HUMBER, HIGHLAND CREEK AND NORTH HUMBER TRAIL EXTENSIONS BY THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO, PARKS AND PROPERTY DEPARTMENT Mr. Frank Kershaw of The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department gave a presentation on the proposed trail extensions. KEY ISSUE In accordance with the agreement between the Authority and The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, Authority approval must be obtained for development proposals prior to their implementation. The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department has proposed trail extensions to the North Humber, West Humber and Highland Creek trails over the next five year period. Res. #44 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: lIa Bossons THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Master Plans for the West Humber, Highland Creek and North Humber Trail Extensions as proposed by The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department be approved. CARRIED BACKGROUND In accordance with the master agreement for valley land parks between the Authority and The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, park master plans must be submitted to the Authority for approval. In this regard, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department has prepared a five year trail extension program which would extend the biCYCle and pedestrian trails of the West Humber river to the Authority's Claireville Conservation Area, extension of the trail along the main branch of the Humber river to Rowntree Mills Park at Islington and Finch Avenue west and the extension of the Highland Creek trail from Colonel Danforth Park south of Kingston Road southerly to Lake Ontario shoreline where it would ultimately connect with the proposed waterfront trail. The master plans submitted to the Authority for approval represent an alignment for discussion purposes only. Upon approval of the master plans, more detailed design would be carried out in conjunction with Authority staff. The proposed alignments for the trails have taken into consideration existing natural attributes and largely follow hydro corridors, pipeline corridors, sewer easem.ents and existing informal pathways. Authority staff have reviewed the proposed alignments with respect to other Authority concerns such as ESA's, riparian habitat requirements, bank and slope stability issues and specifically with respect to the West Humber trail, how the trail terminus will coincide with Authority plans for its lands at the Claireville Conservation Area. 2. MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1996 -49 and 51 Troutbrooke Drive, City of North York Councillor Augimeri gave a deputation and a written submission to the Board on erosion control on Troutbrooke Drive. KEY ISSUE Report on the slope instability at the rear of Nos. 49 and 51 Troutbrooke Drive, in the City of North York and status of the site within the Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992 - 1996. ~~ ------- WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-74 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERA nON 2. MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1996 (CONTD.) -49 and 51 Troutbrooke Drive, City of North York Res. #45 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT no major remedial works be carried out at this time at Nos. 49 and 51 Troutbrooke Drive in the City of North York, Black Creek Watershed; THAT the Authority direct staff to continue to monitor the site on a regular basis; AND FURTHER THAT the Authority direct staff to work with the owners to try and improve the condition of the slope through clean up and plantings if a suitable access agreement can be reached. AMENDMENT #1 Moved by: Lois Hancey Res. #46 Seconded by: Paul Raina THAT the matter be referred to The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Encroachment Review Committee and appropriate staff of the MTRCA consult with the Encroachment Review Committee and report back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board. AMENDMENT #2 Moved by: Lois Hancey Res. #47 Seconded by: William Granger THAT the referral to the Encroachment Review Committee include No. 47 Troutbrooke Drive. AMENDMENT #1 WAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED AMENDMENT #2 WAS .................................................... CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CARRIED BACKGROUND Troutbrooke Drive is located in the City of North York in the vicinity of Sheppard Avenue and Jane Street. Nos. 47-51 Troutbrooke Drive are located at the crest of the Black Creek valley. The valley slope is approximately 20 metres high. On April 29, 1991, staff received a report from the owners of Nos. 49 and 51 Troutbrooke Drive that a slope failure had occurred behind their homes. Staff visited the site and found that the rear yards had slum pea leaving a 1 metre high scarp, generally within 3 metres of the eXisting dwellings. It would appear that a combination of old fill and an increase in pore water pressure, resulting from the heavy April 1991 rains, caused the slope to fail. The nature of the slope problem was such that it was very difficult to define the scope of the problem. Therefore, staff recommended that a detailed geotechnical investigation be carried out and received approval to retain Terraprobe Limited to study the area. The investigation was carried out through the summer of 1991 and a final report was submitted in November, 1991. The report concluded that the slope failure in April, 1991, had taken place through earth fill which had been previously dumped over the natural slope face and supported with numerous make-shift retaining walls. Further, it concluded the slope failure was triggered by a combination of wet weather, unstable fill, and unstable retaining walls. The analysis indicated that the existing dwellings have not been affected by the slope failure and that the houses were safe from further instability, however, the filled portions of the rear yards, including the slope and retaining walls, were marginally stable and therefore further movement of the fill may occur. 0-75 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY' BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VAllEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1996 (CONTD.) -49 and 51 Troutbrooke Drive, City of North York Terraprobe Limited visited the site again this Spring in response to a concern of the owner at 51 Troutbrooke Drive regarding cracking in the interior of his home and reported the following: i) there was no movement recorded in the slope inclinometer located in the rear yard of #51. (This instrument, which is sensitive to the smallest movement within the slope, which placed in the bore hole last Spring); ii) there was no significant change in the rear yard elevations since last Spring (spot elevations were established during the study for future reference); iii) there was no sign of external cracking on the home; iv) the type of internal cracking noted is not usually associated with settling or foundation movement. These findings tend to support the conclusions of the Terraprobe Limited report that indicated the homes were safe from further slope instability and that any further settling should be restricted to the retaining walls and fill material imported into the rear yards. We also have reports on file that indicate that this area has been experiencing this type of movement, though not likely as dramatic as which occurred last Spring, since 1973. The homes have not suffered any stress over this period, which again appears to support our consultant's findings. Terraprobe Limited suggested the following options, for staff to consider in approaching the problem: (1 ) do nothing (2) acquisition (3) remedial/structural Acquisition could not be justified since the homes were not in danger. The remedial solutions proposed involved removal of the fill and retaining walls with appropriate grading, or the construction of an engineered retaining wall to support the fill. The estimated costs of the remedial solutions are $150,000 and $200,000 respectively. Staff have a concern regarding the benefit/cost of these solutions. It is difficult for staff to support expenditures of this size when the homes are not in danger and the problem was, for the most part, created by placing fill over the slope by the homeowners. Also, we feel that the site constraints (mainly lack of access) may prohibit major construction. In addition, the existing slope is well treed. For these reasons, staff are not prepared to recommend that major remedial works be carried out. In a case such as this, where the slope problems are localized and do not appear to present any long term hazard, the sites are generally placed on a monitoring list and reviewed during our annual update exercise. In contrast, the sites which appear within our pool of erosion pnority sites, involve ongoing river erosion which either threatens or may have potential to threaten private property and associated structures or involve slope problems where a degree of risk exists. In this case we would recommend that the Troutbrooke Drive site be included on our monitoring list and reviewed on a regular basis. In addition, we would be willing to work with the owners to try and improve the condition of the slope through clean up and plantings. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-76 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK REVISED MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - May, 1992 Vern Harper and Cliff Somers, Executive Director, Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto, appeared before the Board to address this issue. KEY ISSUE To report on the correspondence and written submissions received on the Tommy Thompson Park Revised Master Plan/Environmental Assessment, May, 1992. Res. #48 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the report on the correspondence and written submissions for the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan/Environmental Assessment May, 1992, be received; THAT a Working Committee be established composed of representatives of the Aboriginal community, Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Toronto, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront and The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to explore opportunities for providing "Sweat LodgesW within Metropolitan Toronto; AND FURTHER THAT this Report be considered in conjunction with the May 27. 1992. Board recommendations on the Tommy Thompson Park Revised Master Plan/Environmental Assessment - May, 1992 at Authority Meeting #6/92, on July 24, 1992. CARRIED BACKGROUND At its Meeting #4/92 held on May 27, 1992, the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board adopted the following resolution: Res. #41 "THAT the correspondence and written submissions, as well as the letter received from Steve Ellis, City Councillor dated May 21, 1992, re: Sweat Lodges on the Leslie Street Spit, be received and referred to staff for a report back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #5/92, June 19, 1992." The Authority has received 32 letters as of June 10, 1992, including 12 written submissions presented at the public meeting. The comments reflect, as the Board heard at the Public Meeting, general support for the Revised Master Plan. The letters also reflect the comments presented to the Board by some of the deputants namely the assurance of no private vehicle access into the park, that Aquatic Park Sailing Club should be relocated to the northshore or Outer Harbour Marina and the location of the Visitor Centre will be at the base of the park. In a letter from Councillor Steve Ellis, a new idea to consider allowing "the aboriginal peoples of Metropolitan Toronto to maintain several Sweat Lodges as part of Tommy Thompson Park" was presented. Authority staff have met with Councillor Steve Ellis; Cliff Somers, Executive Director, Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto; Jonathon Riordan, Coordinator of Community Council Project, Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto; Mike Smith, Native Coalition of Civic Employees; and Janice Dembo, Coordinator, Mayor's Committee on Community and Race Relations. "Sweat Lodges" are part of the aboriginal peoples religious and spiritual customs in which a purification 0-77 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK REVISED MASTER PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (CONTD.) - May, 1992 ceremony for the mind, body, soul, and emotions is held. The "Sweat Lodge" functions as the centre of the culture and of the aboriginal people. A delegation of the aboriginal people will be available to provide additional information on the importance of "Sweat Lodges" to the native community within Metropolitan Toronto. RA TIONALE The concept of "Sweat Lodges" merits consideration for Tommy Thompson Park and perhaps other parklands within Metropolitan Toronto. It is considered that this matter does not require specific provisions in the Master Plan. A specific proposal could be dealt with through the Interim Use Program, in consultation with the aboriginal community and other user groups. In the longer term, after the master plan is approved, a specific proposal could be dealt with as a park use permit application. As part of the consideration of the needs of the Native community in the Metropolitan Area, other locations under the jurisdiction of the Authority or Metropolitan Toronto should also be explored with the aboriginal community. Since the letters reiterated comments put before the Board at the public meeting and provided no additional information or suggestions, staff recommend that they be received and considered in conjunction with the May 27, 1992, Board recommendation to the Authority. No further modifications to the Revised Master Plan are recommended. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE This report should be considered in conjunction with the Board's recommendation on the Tommy Thompson Park Revised Master Plan/Environmental Assessment, May, 1992, at Authority Meeting #6/92, of July 24, 1992. It is also proposed that a working committee of representatives of the Aboriginal Community, the City of Toronto, Metropolitan Toronto, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront and The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority be established to explore opportunities for providing "Sweat Lodges" within Metropolitan Toronto. 4. ' TORONTO ISLANDS SHORELINE HAZARDS REVIEW KEY ISSUE Responding to a request from The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto for information concerning the susceptibility of the residential portions of Toronto Islands to flooding and erosion. Res. #49 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto Islands Shoreline Hazards Review Report be received; WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-78 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. TORONTO ISLANDS SHORELINE HAZARDS REVIEW (CONTD.) THAT staff be directed to forward copies of this report to The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto. the City of Toronto, Waterfront Regeneration Trust, Ministry of Natural Resources and Ministry of Municipal Affairs; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report to the Authority upon receipt of further details from Ministry of Natural Resources with respect to the proposed funding of shoreline management studies and protection works. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) was asked to comment on Clause No. 1 contained in Report No. 5 of The Parks, Recreation and Property Committee which was adopted by the Council of The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto at its meeting held on March 27, 1991. The Parks, Recreation and Property Committee recommends that: . "(3) The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority be requested to determine whether the land on Ward's and Algonquin Islands would be classified as "hazard lands" as it relates to the proposed residential use of such lands on the islands, and to submit a report therein to the Committee." The lengthy delay in a formal response to The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto was the result of a number of factors. Since the Authority does not have a regulation in place for Toronto Islands, there was some question as to the guidelines that would be used to establish the degree of hazard. Also, it was determined that a coastal engineering study to assess the implications of wave action was required. The study was undertaken in the Summer of 1991. A draft report was prepared by staff in the Fall of 1991 and circulated to staff at the Province, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the City of Toronto for comment. A series of discussions with various officials has taken place over the last several months to explain the implications of the draft report and determine appropriate action. In order to assist the Committee, the MTRCA has reviewed the "hazard land" question. The guidelines used to evaluate the area were the Draft Great Lakes - St. Lawrence River Flood and Erosion Policy Statement produced by MNR in 1990. The MTRCA does not regulate the Central Waterfront Area and does not have a Fill or Flood Regulation Line registered for this area. The Authority did not establish regulation lines in the Central Waterfront Area because this area was excluded from the area for which MTRCA was given responsibility in 1970 as the implementing agency for the Waterfront Plan of 1967. The Authority has applied this regulation with respect to the placement of fill along the Lake Ontario Waterfront except for the Central Sector between Dufferin Street and Coxwell Avenue, and the Toronto Islands. The Authority has not applied the floodplain component of the Regulation along the waterfront pending a decision on the Provincial Shoreline Policy and appropriate amendments to our Regulation. On February 1, 1988, the Province of Ontario announced that Conservation Authorities would be the leau implementing agency and "sole commenting agency on plan input and review matters related to the shoreline land use issues". The Minister's letter went on to say, "our primary objective in dealing with shoreline matters is, and should continue to be, the protection of life and property from flooding and erosion hazards. In this regard, each Conservation Authority must adhere to provincial policies and directives and safeguard the provinCial interests in shoreline management." 0-79 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. TORONTO ISLANDS SHORELINE HAZARDS REVIEW (CONTD.) CONCLUSIONS Within the Regulatory Shore Land Zone limit, there are 31 existing homes on Algonquin Island and on the harbour side of Ward's Island. On the south shore of Ward's Island, the study identified the need for repairs to the revetment protection. Without such repairs, four additional homes would fall within the Regulatory Shore Land Zone. Another critical issue which should be studied is the long term stability of the Centre Island landform which ultimately affects the stability of Algonquin Island. There are indications of gradual erosion of the beach and underwater slopes which suggest that long term erosion could be serious. A detailed coastal engineering study of the long term stability of the Toronto Islands as a whole is recommended. Changes have occurred over the past twenty years and "evidence indicates that recession of parts of the Islands is taking place" . In addition to concerns about the landform sta,bility, the condition of the existing seawall is also a concern. This needs to be evaluated further. The concrete seawall is in a deteriorated condition and the foundation for the wall, which is a timber crib, needs a detailed assessment. Toronto Islands is a unique situation. There are several low lying areas where localized ponding and flooding could occur during high lake levels as was evidenced in the periods of high lake levels during 1973. These areas should be reviewed in detail. A survey should be carried out in which an inventory of the existing buildings and the elevations would be confirmed. Any areas which would be subject to localized flooding could then be identified and preventative measures put in place. The location of proposed new development should be assessed after the results of the detailed coastal engineering study are available. FINANCIAL DETAILS The Ministry of Natural Resources advised the Authority on June 5, 1992, that it is anticipated that the Province will provide $5,000,000, at a 100% grant rate, over a 3-year period commencing in 1992, to the Authority to be used for the detailed study and subsequent construction of shoreline management works to protect the easterly portion of Toronto Islands. 5. PROJECT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE SANDBURY BUILDING CORPORATION PROPERTY -Frenchman's Bay Area / Town of Pickering Margaret Hilpert, as a concerned citizen, address the Board on this issue. KEY ISSUE Adoption of a project to acquire 21 acres, more or less of waterfront land in the Town of Pickering from Sandbury Building Corporation. Res. #50 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the "Project for the Acquisition of the Sandbury Building Corporation Property, Frenchman's Bay Area, Town of Pickering" be adopted; THAT the Town of Pickering and the Regional Municipality of Durham be requested to approve the project and contribute an amount of $500,000 towards the cost of the project; WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-80 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. PROJECT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE SANDBURY BUILDING CORPORATION PROPERTY -Frenchman's Bay Area / Town of Pickering (CONTD.) THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to approve the project and contribute $500.000.00 towards the cost of the project; THAT pursuant to Section 24 of the Conservation Authorities Act, the approval of The Ontario Municipal Board be requested if required; THAT Authority officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to complete the transaction, including obtaining any additional approvals which may be deemed necessary and the execution of any necessary documents. AND FURTHER THAT upon completion of the acquisition by the Authority, the lands be placed under Management Agreement with the Town of Pickering for Parks and Conservation purposes. AMENDMENT Moved by: Joanna Kidd Res. #51 Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THAT the Management Plan, when developed, be brought back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board for approval. THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................... CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CARRIED BACKGROUND The Members of the Authority at Meeting #7/91, held on October 18, 1991, adopted the following Resolution: "Res. #206 THAT the resolution from the Town of Pickering stating "that the Council of the Corporation , of the Town of Pickering hereby establishes a Committee composed of Councillors Van Kempen and Mitchell, a representative of Save Our, Bay and appropriate Town staff to meet with representatives of the applicant and the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to discuss the feasibility of initiating a trade or acquisition of lands that will provide for the preservation of the lands on Part Lot 24, Range 3 and which may allow the applicant to develop on less sensitive lands" be received; THAT staff be authorized to discuss with the Committee established by the Town of Pickering the feasibility of acquisition; AND FURTHER THAT Authority staff explore suitable options for the potential acquisition and funding for the costs involved. CARRIED" Since adoption of Resolution #206, a number of meetings have been held involving staff of the Authority, officials of the Town of Pickering and representatives of the owner. Discussions began with the preparation of an appraisal and negotiations to determine the market value of the property. Various options to secure the property for public open space were considered including a possible land exchange. The Authority has determined that some lands on the west side of the Bay are surplus but there are also other important lands which are still to be acquired. There is not enough potentially surplus land to fund the acquisition of all of the remaining high priority acquisitions. As a result, it was decided to proceed with a project through the Authority to acquire the lands, with funding from the Town of Pickering and the Province of Ontario. 0-81 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. PROJECT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE SANDBURY BUILDING CORPORATION PROPERTY -Frenchman's Bay Area / Town of Pickering (CONTD.) A conditional agreement of Purchase and Sale is at hand for a total amount of $1,050,000. Provision is included in the agreement for the vendor to retain a single family dwelling not'required for Authority purposes reducing the purchase price to a net amount of $900,000. In addition, it is anticipated that taxes, G.S.T. and other ancillary costs, will be approximately $100,000 for a total estimated project cost of a $1,000.000. The Corporation of the Town of Pickering under By-Law #4008/92, adopted June 1, 1992, a copy of which is attached, has authorized a contribution to the cost of the project of $500,000. Upon completion of the acquisition, it is proposed that the lands be placed under Management Agreement with the Town of Pickering and utilized for passive open space purposes. RA TIONALE A significant portion of the lands are within the Authority's acquisition project boundary under the Lake Ontario Waterfront Program. These lands include the open water, wetland, fisheries habitat, marshland and the hazard portions of the property. . The tableland component of the property originally proposed for development is situate immediately adjacent to an existing town owned park and overlooks Frenchman's Bay. It is felt that the entire holding should be acquired for environmental reasons including protection of the natural habitats and maintenance of a buffer zone around the Bay. The lands also represent an important link in the proposed waterfront trail. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total cost of the project is estimated at $1,000,000. A grant of $500,000 has already been approved by the Town of Pickering with the additional $500,000.00 to be requested from the Province of Ontario. Upon completion of the acquisition, the lands will be managed by the Town of Pickering at no cost to the Authority. 6. METRO TORONTO AND REGION REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN -Update on MTRCA Involvement KEY ISSUE The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) adoption of the Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (RAP) goals and list of MTRCA projects that received 1992 RAP Funding. Res. #52 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the report, dated 1992.06.01, regarding the Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan goals and The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority projects that received 1992 RAP funding be received for information; AND FURTHER THAT the goals established by the Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan be adopted in principle by The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority for incorporation as appropriate in its programs and projects. CARRIED WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-82 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. METRO TORONTO AND REGION REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN (CONTD.) -Update on MTRCA Involvement BACKGROUND Staff of the MTRCA has played an active role in the development of the Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (RAP), through membership on the overall RAP Team and the Technical Advisory and Public Advisory Committees. As part of the RAP Process, the RAP Team and the Public Advisory Committee formulated a set of goals to guide the development of the Metro Toronto and Region RAP. The Council of The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, at its meeting on January 29 and 30, 1992, adopted the RAP goals, in principle, for incorporation as appropriate in programs and projects undertaken. The attached set of RAP Goals generally reflect an ecosystem approach to planning, which is also subscribed to by the MTRCA. The Authority's Greenspace Strategy and the Rouge River Comprehensive Basin Management Strategy are consistent with these goals. The recent draft of the Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program further exemplifies the Authority's commitment to the implementation of an ecosystem approach throughout its operation. The Authority's adoption of the RAP goals at this time will provide an expreSSion of the Authority's support and commitment to the RAP as it enters the final phase of Stage II (Preparation of the Remedial Plan). In support of its technical contribution to the RAP, the Authority has been awarded 1992 RAP funding towards the following projects: . Habitat Rehabilitation on the Toronto Waterfront - Pilot Projects (Wetland Creation, Physical Fish Habitat Creation, Fish Access Improvements, Shoreline Naturalization) Total Project Cost: $120 K RAP Contribution: $20 K Other Partners: Great Lakes CleanUp Fund $50 K MNR $32 K MTRCA $20 K . Development of a Community Based Adopt-a-Stream Program - a Pilot Project on Robinson Creek, Rouge River Watershed Total Project Cost: $80 K RAP Contribution: $10 K No other funding partners have been identified to-date. Therefore, the project will be reduced in scope. . Update and Revision of the Toronto Angler's GUide Total Project Cost: $10 K RAP Contribution: $10 K Additional information regarding each project will be brought forward at this or future Advisory Board and Authority meetings with recommendations. DET AILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Authority staff will continue to seek other funding partners for the Adopt-A-Stream Pilot Project. 0-83 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. TREE PLAN CANADA KEY ISSUE Undertake community tree planting projects on properties of The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) as part of the Federal Government's Tree Plan Canada Program. Res. #53 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the Tree Plan Canada Program be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to take the necessary actions including the execution of any documents to participate in the Tree Plan Canada Program by undertaking community tree planting projects on properties of The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. CARRIED BACKGROUND Tree Plan Canada is an initiative of Canada's Green Plan for a Healthy Environment. The goal of the program is to assist community groups, environmental organizations and municipalities, organize and carry out public tree planting projects. The Authority has applied for funding to support three potential planting projects on MTRCA land. Locations include the Nashville Resource Management Tract, Boyd Conservation Area and Black Creek Valley. Approximately 29,000 trees would be planted. Several partners involved in the projects would include the Ministry of Natural Resources, Metro Toronto Separate School Board and the Black Creek Project. Participating in the Tree Plan Canada Program would benefit the Authority by: . developing partnership and community involvement in resource management activities; . increasing public awareness of the Authority; . expanding and inter connecting forested areas; . improving water quality, aquatic and terrestrial habitats. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE . Finalize agreements with Forestry Canada and other partners. . Prepare planting sites, obtain plant material and finalize arrangement to have volunteer's participate in the planting. FINANCIAL DETAILS Forestry Canada has been requested to contribute $30,800 for the purchase of the plant material. The project partners must contribute an amount at least equal to that provided by Forestry Canada. However, the partners contribution can consist of financial and in-kind donations. The Authority will provide an in-kind contribution of up to $5.000 for technical, administrative and accounting services. The balance of the partners contribution will consist of volunteer labour, transportation costs to bring students to the sites and cash donations for site preparation and on-site supervision. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-84 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERA nON 8. THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992 - 1996 -Guildwood Parkway Erosion Control Project, Lake Ontario Waterfront, City of Scarborough KEY ISSUE Continuation of the erosion control project along the Guildwood Parkway sector of the Scarborough Bluffs, City of Scarborough. Res. #54 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the next phase of construction of the Guildwood Parkway Erosion Control Project. City of Scarborough, under the wMunicipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992-1996w at a total cost of $350,000. CARRIED BACKGROUND The $2.1 million Guildwood Parkway Erosion Control Project was approved by the Authority in 1988 and construction got underway in September of the same year. The project involves the construction of 790 metres of shoreline protection from the east property line of the Guild Inn to Morningside Avenue. A total of twenty-three residential houses will benefit from this erosion control project. The project also protect!. Guildwood Parkway and the municipal servicing below it. It also achieves part of the waterfront trail between Guild Inn and East Point Park. Agreements were signed with all but three of the benefitting property owners along Guildwood Parkway in which a portion of their shoreline property and water lot were deeded to the Authority as their contribution towards the project. Agreements are still required for 469, 471 and 483 Guildwood Parkway to enable the work to be completed to Morningside Avenue by 1993. By the end of 1991, a total of $1.09 million had been spent on the design and construction of 517 metres of armoured revetment. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Authority staff will continue to negotiate with the remaining property owners in an effort to obtain agreements which will permit the shoreline protection to be completed easterly to Morningside Avenue. Negotiations include possible payment for private shoreline protection works which are already in place. The cost of completing acquisition agreements is the top priority and the balance of the funds will be used for construction. Subject to these agreements being obtained, it is proposed to construct an additional 130 metres of armoured revetment at a total estimated cost of $350,000. Construction and supervision of all work will be carried out by Authority staff utilizing the annual equipment supply contractor as approved at Authority Meeting #3/92. The supply and delivery of quarry stone was awarded to Steetley Industries and Wiles Transport Company at Authority Meeting #4/92. All imported earth fill used to construct the revetment core and backslope area will be accepted and monitored in accordance to the Lakefill Quality Control Program. Only clean earth fill material meeting the "Open Water" classification will be placed in the lake. 0-85 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERA nON 8. THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO V ALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992 - 1996 (CONTD.) -Guildwood Parkway Erosion Control Project, Lake Ontario Waterfront, City of Scarborough FINANCIAL DETAILS The total budget to carry out the 1992 work is $350,000. The cost estimates are as follows: Labour $ 65,000 Material 120,000 Equipment 115,000 Property Acquisition 50.000 TOTAL COST $350,000 Funds are available for the Guildwood Parkway erosion control Project under "The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992 - 1996". 9. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 -Bluffers Waterfront Park, City of Scarborough KEY ISSUE To carry out a flow monitoring program for the main sewage pumping station at Bluffers Park, City of Scarborough. Res. #55 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to invite proposals from consultants to carry out a flow monitoring program for the main sewage pumping station, Bluffers Park, City of Scarborough, at a total cost of $50,000. CARRIED BACKGROUND The main sewage pumping station was originally designed and constructed in 1974-1975. Due to recent high maintenance costs for the pumping units, the Authority completed a review of the operation and design capacity to determine if the system is adequate for meeting the needs of existing and projected park facilities. The consultant's review recommended that continuous flow monitoring equipment be installed to monitor inflow of sewage to the station. In 1991, the City of Scarborough's leachate collection system for Brimley Ravine was upgraded with all flows directed to the main sewage pumping station. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff propose to retain the services of consultants to design a flow monitoring system in the sewage pumping station. The consultant will prepare specifications for monitoring equipment, supervise the installation and monitoring program for a one year period. The monitoring results will be summarized in a final report incl:Jding an analysis of the existing system and recommendations to reduce the high maintenance cost, increase capacity and improve pumping efficiency. Proposals will be obtained from three consultants and will be the subject of a further report. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-86 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERA nON 9. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGEN ERA TION PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTD.) -Bluffers Waterfront Park, City of Scarborough RATIONALE Ongoing involvement by the Authority in this matter is based on three reasons. The original design of the pumping station was based on a Park Master Plan which was eventually changed to accommodate more facilities. Also, the park has been busier than anticipated. There are now flows directed to the station from the leachate collection system and more may be diverted from a proposed stormwater treatment facility. An accurate determination of existing flows is important in determining fair cost sharing arrangements for any required pumping station improvements. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total budget to complete a flow monitoring program in 1992 is $50,000. Funds are available under "The Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project 1992- 1994" in Account No. 220-07. 10. BUDGET PREPARATION - 1993 PROJECT FILES KEY ISSUE In preparation of the 1993 budget submission to the Province, it will be necessary to develop project files for all proposed capital projects, studies, major maintenance and for the Conservation Services Program for review and priority ranking by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNRI. Res. #56 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff be directed to prepare projects files for the projects listed herewith and submit them to the Ministry of Natural Resources. CARRIED BACKGROUND Any capital undertaking being considered by an Authority must have a project file submitted and ranked to be eligible for Provincial funding. Project files are divided into funding categories ,defined by the MNR and are priorized and ranked against other Conservation Authority projects which fall within the same category. This ensures that the Provincial dollars are allocated to the most important projects which have been identified by the Authorities. Following is a list of the funding categories applicable to the Water Resource Division: Flood Control - Major Maintenance Flood Control - Surveys and Studies Flood Control - Capital Flood Forecasting and Warning Fill Line Mapping Erosion Control - Major Maintenance Erosion Control - Surveys and Studies Erosion Control - Capital Comprehensive Water Basin Studies Recharge/Discharge Great Lakes Shoreline Management Plans Outdoor Recreation - Waterfront Development 0-87 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 10. BUDGET PREPARATION - 1993 PROJECT FILES (CONTD.) DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE For review and approval, Appendix WR.62/92 is a list of project files that staff are recommending be submitted to the MNR for funding consideration. These files represent, with the exception of administration, the Division's work programs and will form a basis for the preliminary budget discussions for 1993. The project files are listed in what staff feel is the relative order of priority; however, the list may be updated to reflect new projects or revised priorities. Under the "status" heading on the Project File List, "New" refers to a new initiative and "Update" refers to a project file which had been previously submitted, ranked but !!Q! funded and is now being brought forward again with new or revised information. The asterisk beside an update refers to multi-year project which has been funded in the previous year and must be brought forward to continue or complete the project. Please note that the list of project files under the Erosion Control - Capital are further divided into the benefiting muniCipality projects of Metro, Peel, York and Durham and the priority listings are relative to the benefiting municipality; however, the Province will rank all Erosion Control - Capital, together. 11. LOWER DON RIVER FLOOD PLAIN, CITY OF TORONTO -Flood Plain Management Strategy KEY ISSUE The cancellation of the Ataratiri Project and the referral of the site planning to the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront has resulted in the development of a revised flood plain management strategy for the Lower Don River Flood Plain, City of Toronto. Res. #57 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the status report on the revised flood plain management strategy for the Lower Don River, City of Toronto be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Executive Committee Meeting 113/92, May 8, 1992, a permit to construct pursuant to Ontario Regulation 293/86 was approved for a development project (referred to as the C2 Project) located within the Lower Don River flood plain, City of Toronto. Within the C2 Project report, staff outlined a revised flood plain management strategy for the Lower Don River. Included within the Executive Committee's approval of the C2 Project application was the following: "THAT STAFF be directed to work with the City of Toronto, the Province of Ontario, .Metropolitan Toronto and the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront, on the development of a new strategy for dealing with the flood plain of the Lower Don River. AND FURTHER THAT STAFF report back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board on the status of the strategy development prior to October 31, 1992." WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-88 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 11. LOWER DON RIVER FLOOD PLAIN, CITY OF TORONTO (CONTD.) -Flood Plain Management Strategy The revised flood plain management strategy and associated work program has been brought forward for the information of the Authority. Staff has also included any information or details that relate to progress on this issue since the Executive Committee consideration. ATARATIRI STRATEGY Prior to the demise of the Ataratiri Project, the framework for dealing with flood plain management in the Lower Don was comprised of four key components which, when implemented, provided a comprehensive plan for flood risk management. The components were: (1 ) Development of pOlicies which when approved, would provide Special Policy Area (SPA) status to the Ataratiri site first, followed by similar policy development for the remaining flood prone area. The SPA designation was phased based on the priority given to the Ataratiri project.. (2) The development of a flood remedial works plan which, when combined with the dredging of the Keating Channel, would provide a degree of flood protection to Ataratiri as well as the other flood prone lands to the west of the river. The results of this work indicated that Regional Storm protection was feasible and could be implemented within a two year period. This work would, if constructed, make redundant the SPA designation and the implementing policies. They would however, provide a mechanism for dealing with infill type developments in the interim. (3) The Authority, Metropolitan Toronto, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs approved Interim Procedures which provided a mechanism to deal with development applications in the less hazardous floodprone areas where the flooding was a metre or less until such time as the SPA and/or works were completed. City Council approval was still pending. (4) The continued dredging of the Keating Channel, and a renegotiation of a funding formula which would include Metropolitan Toronto, the Toronto Harbour Commission, the Province, the City of Toronto and the Federal Government. NEW APPROACH The cancellation of the Ataratiri Project and the referral of the entire Lower Don area to the Royal CommIssion, affected the timing and phasing of the comprehensive plan for the area; therefore, the need to develop a n~w approach was recognized by all the agencies involved and has been the focus of a great deal of attention over the past few weeks. The results of these discussions have culminated in a new approach to the flooding issue and one which has been agreed to by staff of the various agencies. The new approach maintains the original four components but in a different order and timing. The new approach recommended is as follows: (1 ) Adoption of the Interim Procedures. The Commissioner of Planning and Development of the City of Toronto prepared a report requesting City Council approval of the Interim Flood Plain Planning Policy Procedures for the Lower Don flood plain (approved by the Authority in 1991) and a strategy for flood plain management consistent with the new approach outlined here. Council approved the staff report at its meeting in May, 1992. 0-89 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I . ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 11. LOWER DON RIVER FLOOD PLAIN, CITY OF TORONTO (CONTD.) -Flood Plain Management Strategy Included in the City's report was the identification of one additional project site similar to the C2 Project that would not be facilitated by the adoption of the Interim Procedures and that is expected to reach the permit approval stage within the next six months. This site was identified after a thorough review by City and Authority staff of all pending development proposals on record. The City has requested that this project be considered for approval on the same basis as the C2 Project. (2) The Authority will continue to negotiate a new funding agreement for the Keating Channel. It is staff's understanding that a report recommending participation by the City of Toronto is being prepared by City Staff and will be forwarded to Council in the near future. (3) Authority staff and City of Toronto staff, with the support of the Ministries of Natural Resources and Municipal Affairs, will draft Special Policy Area policies for the entire Lower Don area by the end of June, 1992. These policies, once endorsed by the SPA Technical Committee, will be incorporated into the City's Official Plan (City Plan 92) and be integrated with its approval process. This can be achieved within six months. This approach is consistent with the Provincial Flood 'Plain Planning Policy which states: "In situations where remedial measures to permanently reduce flood levels may not be implemented in the immediate future, a Special Policy Area might be considered as a water management option, until the remedial measures have been completed." Staff have met with the City of Toronto with respect to the preparation of preliminary SPA boundaries and flood risk management policies. The objective for the development and designation of a Lower Don SPA is to maintain suitable flexibility to allow the Authority to work with the other agencies, including the Royal Commission, for ways of achieving permanent flood control remedial measures including the solution developed for the Ataratiri site. Preliminary SPA details discussed by staff to date are as follows: Prooosed SPA Boundarv: This SPA will not apply to the former Ataratiri site since it is a major redevelopment proposal and cannot be considered as an infill project within the existing flood prone community. This is consistent with the rationale for SPA designations and with other approved SPA's within the Authority's jurisdiction. In the May 8, 1992, Executive Committee Report, the Gooderham Worts site was also to be excluded from this process as it falls directly within the work of the Royal Commission and appeared to be reliant on many planning aspects of the Ataratiri site. A letter received from Goodman and Goodman on behalf of Gooderham Worts expressed concern with this approach. Subsequent discussions with the City and Gooderham Worts representatives have resulted in a modification to include the Gooderham Worts site within the proposed SPA process recognizing its historic association within the flood prone community. A portion of the site may still be excluded from the final SPA designation because of existing flood depths and the potential that proposed redevelopment could not achieve the minimum flood protection standards through on-site measures. Gooderham Worts will be assessing design options over the next few months. The lands identified for the various flood control remedial work options associated with the Ataratiri Project have been excluded from the proposed SPA as has a comparable hydraulic floodway immediately to the east of the Don River affecting the Lever Brothers property. This approach also protects in the interim the establishment of a greenway adjacent to the Don River. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-90 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 11. LOWER DON RIVER FLOOD PLAIN, CITY OF TORONTO (CONTD.) -Flood Plain Management Strategy At this p<?lnt, the northern limit of the proposed SPA IS Queen Street. Flood prone development north of Queen Street has been excluded on the basis of flood depths and velocities, valley slopes, and other land use planning considerations, including the regeneration of the Don River valley and municipal development control considerations. The remainder of the lands located within the Regulatory flood plain of the Lower Don River are included within the proposed SPA. The proposed SPA boundary will be reported to the Authority this fall. SPA Policies The SPA policies will be in compliance with other approved SPA's within the Authority's jurisdiction. These policies are generally outlined within the draft Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program which was endorsed by the Authority at Meeting #3/92. Staff have met with the City of Toronto and is satisfied that the Authority's policies can be readily integrated into the City's planning documents and that the existing flood depths within the proposed SPA are such that our technical standards can be achieved. The proposed policies will be reported to the Authority this fall. (4) As indicated, the remedial works component has been delayed due to the cancellation of Ataratiri but it will continue to be considered as part of the Royal Commissions' study of the area. The Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront has prepared a draft, Lower Don Lands Strateg'y (attached) outlining the project details for their work affecting the former Ataratiri site and other Lower Don River properties and issues. The draft Strategy includes project details concerning flood control remediation and related flood plain planning issues. The Authority and the Lower Don River Special Policy Area Technical Committee are identified as key players in the development of the Strategy. The Commission further notes that they expect to conclude their work by December 1 , 1992. CONCLUSION Staff is of the opinion that the new approach worked out for the Lower Don, provides an overall framework for dealing with the management of the flood risk while recognizing the referral of the former Ataratiri site and other issues to the Royal Commission. The existing flood vulnerable communities, with the exclusion of the sites discussed above, meet all of the requirements contained within the Provincial Flood Plain Planning Policy regarding the justification for a Special Policy Area designation. The review of all additional potential applications within the flood plain of the Lower Don over the next six months will be based on the Interim Procedures. Only one additional project, 54 Parliament Street, woultj not be covered by either the Interim Procedures or some other Authority policy. It is staff's opinion that this project would also meet the intent and requirements of the SPA and would be dealt with on the same basis as the C2 Project as requested by the City. The Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and of the Ministry of Natural Resources have supported this approach as outlined in their correspondence of May 7, 1992, received by the Executive Committee at Meeting #4/92. Based on the above, staff is working with the various agencies to develop a final flood plain management strategy for the Lower Don River, in accordance with the work program outlined as the "New Approach" and will report to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board no later than October 31, 1992. 0-91 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 11. LOWER DON RIVER FLOOD PLAIN, CITY OF TORONTO (CONTD.) -Flood Plain Management Strategy DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE In order to implement the various flood plain planning policies noted above, Authority staff has been working with the City of Toronto to integrate the Authority's Regulation Administration Program with the City's Development Review Program Procedures. This includes the transfer of MTRCA Regulation information to the City's property data base and related service procedure manuals. A joint objective is to maintain the City's and Authority's Service Delivery Guidelines and to ensure value- added service. In this regard, we are currently discussing the potential for exempting specific types of construction activities from the Regulation Approvals process. Staff will be reporting further to the Executive Committee on this issue. . 12. PROPOSED 1993 CANADIAN FORMULA ONE POWERBOAT GRAND PRIX, OUTER HARBOUR KEY ISSUE To report on the issues related to the Proposed 1993 Canadian Formula One Powerboat. Grand Prix in the Outer Harbour and impact on the public use of Tommy Thompson Park. Res. #58 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the report on the Proposed 1993 Canadian Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix in the Outer Harbour be received; THAT the Authority request the City of Toronto to address, prior to any approval, the impact details of such an event on the Tommy Thompson Park Interim Management Program in terms of public access. parking, Tommy Thompson Park van service, noise and crowd control along the environmentally significant edge of the park in the Outer Harbour; THAT the comments be forwarded to the City of Toronto, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront, and the Toronto Harbour Commissioners. AMENDMENT Moved by: Lois Hancey Res. #59 Seconded by: Maja Prentice THAT prior to final approval staff report back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board on how the City will address the environmental issues raised by the Authority. THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................... CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CARRIED BACKGROUND In April, 1992 the City of Toronto received a request from Power Events International Inc. to hold a Canadian Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix in Toronto's Outer Harbour on July 30 - August 1, 1993 and the subsequent four years. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-92 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 12. PROPOSED 1993 CANADIAN FORMULA ONE POWERBOAT GRAND PRIX, OUTER HARBOUR (CONTD.) The race course is a triangular area between the Toronto Harbour Commissioners Outer Harbour Marina and the northshore in the area of the Community Sailing Clubs. The Marina area would provide the grand stand setting, pit suites and hospitality services (refer to April 2, 1992, letter). On April 2, 1992, the City of Toronto Economic Development Committee in consideration of the request by Power Events International considered the following preliminary issues: (a) Noise, air and water quality impact, including potential impact on nearby environmentally sensitive areas; (b) Vehicular parking and shuttle bus arrangements; (c) Necessary construction on the Marina arm, such as proposed VIP parking areas; (d) Provision of adequate sanitation facilities; Ie) Temporary privatization of North Shore parkland, including Cherry Beach; (f) Temporary privatization of the Outer Harbour Marina arm and the Outer Harbour itself; (g) Precedent for other power boat racing events in the Outer Harbour; (h) Design implications for the Outer Harbour Marina arm of an annual event; (i) Possible Zoning By-law compliance issues on the North Shore and Marina arm; (j) Crowd control with respect to access to Tommy Thompson Park; (k) Determination of which City approvals, planning or otherwise are required. The Committee then took the following action: (1 ) amended the report (April 16, 1992) from the Commissioner of Planning and Development by adding the following to the list of Preliminary Issues to be addressed: (a) outline for an evaluation process if the event is approved and held; (2) requested the Commissioner of Planning and Development to consult with the proponent, CIVIC officials, and other agencies and interest groups, including the Outer Harbour Sailing Federation and Friends of the Spit, advise the community of the event, set up a community committee to allow input, and report on this matter to the June, 1992, meetings of the Economic Development Committee and other Standing Committees as appropriate; (3) adopted the report from the Commissioner of Planning and Development, as amended by Recommendations 1 and 2 above; (4) requested that Exhibition Place be considered as a venue for the proP9sed event; (5) requested the proponents to advise as to whether there will be union jobs involved. At its Meeting on May 22, 1992, the Authority requested that staff prepare a report on this issue and its impact on Tommy Thompson Park. Staff attended a meeting convened by the City on May 15. 1992. with all interested City departments and Agencies including the proponent, Power Events InternatIOnal. Authority staff in reviewing the proposal, utilized the experience with the 1986-1987 Hydroplane Races in the Outer Harbour and its impact on the Tommy Thompson Park Interim Management Program. RATIONALE The issues or concerns for the Authority are related to the publlc's use of Tommy Thompson Park through the Interim Users' Program which currently operates Saturdays. Sundays and Holidays and any impact. if any, on the sensitive areas along the northerly shoreline of the Spit and on the wildlife. 0-93 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 12. PROPOSED 1993 CANADIAN FORMULA ONE POWERBOAT GRAND PRIX, OUTER HARBOUR (CONTD.) . Public Access: It is important that regular public access to Tommy Thompson Park be maintained during this event, and that the issue of congestion at the entrance be resolved. This will probably require special signage along Unwin Ave. directing the audience to the Outer Harbour Marina, or a paid duty officer to deal with the access or congestion at the main gates to the Park. If it is necessary to have additional Authority staff on site, these expenses must be incurred by Power Events International. . Parkino: Similarly to the above, parking must be maintained for regular visitors to TIP. A paid duty officer to control unauthorized parking would be advisable. If Authority staff are required, this should be at the organizers expense, and a procedure should be in place to quickly receive assistance from police to deal with unauthorized vehicles, etc. . TIP Van Service: It is our understanding that most of the parking for this event will be off-site with patrons being shuttled to the Outer Harbour Marina. We are concerned that patrons of this even! may also access the Outer Harbour Marina via public transportation, and may try to use the van service in this way. We would like to ensure that these patrons are not using this service at the expense of regular visitors to Tommy Thompson Park. . Environmentally Sianificant Areas: Peninsula 0 could be a potential viewing location for visitors to the park. The Authority has designated this area as being "Environmentally Significant". Staff costs to minimize human disturbance or impact during the event for this area would be the responsibility of the event organizers. . Noise: The organizers must ensure that any impacts to the wildlife or visitors of Tommy Thompson Park as a result of the noise created by the race be addressed. This may not be a problem due to the proposed location of the race and the buffering effect of the Outer Harbour Marina landbase. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Authority comments on this event have been requested by the City of Toronto. This report and recommendations will also be forwarded to The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront and the Toronto Harbour Commissioners. Staff will also monitor the approval process at the City and if the event is approved, ensure that all Authority issues and costs are adequately dealt with. 13. METROPOLITAN WATERFRONT TRAIL WORKING COMMITTEE: INTERIM TRAIL ALIGNMENT KEY ISSUE To receive a status report on the Metropolitan Waterfront Trail Working Committee and interim trail alignment. Res. #60 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the report on the Metropolitan Waterfront Trail Working Committee and the interim trail alignment be received for information. CARRIED WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-94 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 13. METROPOLITAN WATERFRONT TRAIL WORKING COMMITTEE: INTERIM TRAIL ALIGNMENT (CONTD.) BACKGROUND In September, 1991, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto established the Metropolitan Waterfront Trail Working Committee to realize the opportunity for a continuous trail for cyclists and pedestrians adjacent to the lake along the Metro waterfront. Representation on the committee includes the Cities of Toronto, Scarborough and Etobicoke, the -Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront, Citizens for a Lakeshore Greenway and the M.T.R.C.A. On May 15, 1992, the Committee adopted the following recommendation: "THAT this report be forwarded to the Cities of Etobicoke, Toronto and Scarborough, The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, and the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront for information." RA TIONALE The establishment of the Working Committee by Metropolitan Toronto with the various partners on the waterfront has the objective of ensuring the creation of a "continuous waterfront trail" across the Metro Waterfront for recreational cyclists and pedestrians. This objective supports the Authority's initiatives for public access to and along the waterfront. The Metropolitan Waterfront Trail will form part of the "waterfront trail" between Burlington and the Trent River as recommended by the Royal Commission and endorsed by Provincial Cabinet. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Authority staff participation will continue with the Working Committee in establishing the proposed trail alignment and attending public meetings. Three public meetings have been scheduled for June 16, June 22, and June 25 across the waterfront to discuss the proposed Metropolitan Waterfront Trail and obtain public comment and input. 14. FLOODING -May 2, 1992 KEY ISSUE To report on flooding experienced due to storms occurring on Saturday, May 2, 1992. Res. #61 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THA T the staff report on the May 2, 1992, flooding be postponed to Water and Related Land. Management Advisory Board Meeting #6/92, to be held August 28, 1992. CARRIED 0-95 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERA nON 15. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION - PILOT PROJECTS KEY ISSUE Implementation on a pilot project basis of Habitat Rehabilitation projects along the Toronto Waterfront. Res. #62 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the Habitat Rehabilitation Pilot Projects be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND The opportunity for major habitat creation and rehabilitation projects was identified as a component of the "Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project, 1992 - , 994". The Waterfront Environmental Monitoring Program has provided insight into the location and type of habitat rehabilitation techniques required along the waterfront. Authority staff has been promoting the concept of habitat creation and rehabilitation with other agencies and interest groups. A proposal for pilot scale habitat rehabilitation projects was cooperatively prepared by the Authority and Metro Planning. This proposal lead to a funding agreement for implementation between the Ministry of Natural Resources, Ministry of the Environment. Environment Canada and the Authority. A steering committee to assist with project implementation has been formed with the funding partners and staff from Metro Parks and Property, Metro Planning, and the Royal Commission. Public information sessions were conducted on site at Bluffers Park and Ashbridge's Bay and various interests groups have been notified of the scope and nature of the projects. RATIONALE The north shore of Lake Ontario, including the Toronto Waterfront, has historically lost a substantial amount of its original fish and wildlife habitat. Currently, waterfront parks support some of the most important fish and wildlife communities and habitats along the waterfront. The habitat rehabilitation projects will enhance the existing environmental conditions and habitats present at the waterfront parks. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The habitat rehabilitation pilot projects consist of the following sites and techniques. Wetland Creation Wetland creation will be conducted in Bluffers Park within the western embayment and Humber Bay Park at the Mimico Creek estuary. The Wetland Creation project will Incorporate and test a variety of aquatic vegetation seeding and transplant techniques. The objective is to create and establish self sustaining wetland communities at the two locations. Fish Habitat Creation Fish habitat creation at Bluffers Park and Ashbridge's Bay conSists of constructed reefs of rubble, gravel, and cobble placed within waterfront park embayments. The project will incorporate and test a variety of reef construction techniques. The objective is to establish a productive habitat to enhance the local fish community. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 0-96 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 15. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION - PILOT PROJECTS (CONTD.) Fish Access Improvement Fish access improvement involves creating channels to connect the Toronto Island lagoons and the trout pond. Three openings will be cut into an existing berm. The objective is to restore the natural function of the trout pond, improve access to this area for the fish community, and reduce management costs. Shoreline Naturalization Shoreline naturalization consists of enhancing existing vegetation through the use of conservation design principles. The objective is to establish a natural botanical community and landform that is conducive to natural succession. Shoreline naturalization will be implemented at wetland and fish habitat creation sites. FINANCIAL DETAILS The approved funding to date is as follows: M.T.R.C.A. 20,000 MOE (Metro RAP) 20,000 MNR (RAP Funds) 32,000 Environment Canada Great Lakes Clean Up Fund 50,000 TOT AL: $122,000 The funds for the M.T.R.C.A. contribution will come from revenues from the lakefill program. FUTURE BENEFITS The direct benefit of the habitat rehabilitation project will be an increase in productive fish and wildlife habitat within the waterfront parks. It will also demonstrate the ecological potential and significant importance of waterfront parks. NEW BUSINESS PROPOSED 1993 FORMULA ONE POWERBOAT GRAND PRIX, OUTER HARBOUR Res. #63 Moved by: Victoria Carley Seconded by: William Granger IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board advise the Authority that it believes that Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix races at the Toronto waterfront have a negative impact on the conservation of our natural environment and, therefore, is philosophically opposed to all such races. CARRIED Res. #64 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Joanna Kidd THAT staff prepare a list of events that were supported and not supported over the past two years and provide comments on the impact of the event. CARRIED 0-97 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/92, JUNE 19, 1992 TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 11 :35, June 19, 1992. Lois Griffin W.A. McLean Chair Secretary Treasurer /bb ~ Working Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace V the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority 5 shoreham drive, downsview, ontario, m3n 1s4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 0-98 AUGUST 28, 1992 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92 The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, August 28, 1992. The Chair called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. PRESENT Chair Lois Griffin Members Lorna Bissell lIa Bossons Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Paul Raina Bev Salmon . Frank Scarpitti Joyce Trimmer Kip Van Kempen Chair of the Authority William Granger ABSENT Member Joanna Kidd Maja Prentice MINUTES Res. #65 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Lois Hancey THAT the Minutes of Meeting #5/92 be approved. CARRIED DELEGATIONS Res. #66 Moved by: William Granger Seconded by: Lois Hancey THAT delegations requesting to address the Board on the Don River Watershed, proposed Metro Police Canine Unit, be heard prior to the item being discussed. CARRIED 0-99 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 DELEGATIONS ICONTD.) The following delegations addressed the Board prior to the agenda item of concern. (a) Mr. D'Souza, resident of 42 Royal Rouge Trail, addressed the Board prior to Agenda Item 1, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992-1996, slope instability at the rear of nos. 42-44 Royal Rouge Trail. (b) Agenda Item 2, Don River Watershed, former Domtar/Polyresins Ltd. Properties, Metro Parks and Property proposed Master Plan, proposed Metro Police Canine Unit, was addressed by the following delegations: Mr. Frank Kershaw, Director, Planning, Research & Construction Division, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks; Councillor Bob Dale, Borough of East York, Ward 3, representing Mayor Johnson; Mark Wilson, Chair, Task Force to Bring Back the Don; Jean Macdonald, resident of the Borough of East York; Eileen Mayo, Chair, Toronto Field Naturalists; Paula Davies, resident of Ward 4, Borough of East York; Dave Money, Coordinator, Todmorden Mills Wildflower Preserve Committee; Tanny Wells, member, Task Force to Bring Back the Don; and Ron Dicks, Staff Superintendent of The Metropolitan Toronto Police Force. (c) Mr. Steve Klose, Coordinator, and Mr. Peter Hare, Past Co-Chair, Public Advisory Committee, of The Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan, gave a presentation and distributed "Strategies for Restoring Our Waters". CORRESPONDENCE (a) Letter from Moyra Haney and Dan Taylor, Co-Chairs, Public Advisory Committee, Metro Toronto & Region RAP, dated August 13, 1992, will be circulated to the Board. (b) The following items of correspondence concerning Agenda Item 2, Don River Watershed, proposed Metro Police Canine Unit, were presented to the Board: Mike Roussakis and Elizabeth Ormston, dated 27.08.92 H~I~ne St. Jacques, President, Corktown Residents & Business Association, dated 26.08.92 Ian C. Morton, dated 26.08.92 Keith Whelpdale, dated 26.08.92 Peter Hermant, dated 25.08.92 John Sherk, dated 25.08.92 Art Cuthbert, dated 25.08.92 John D. Roger, dated 25.08.92 Helen Barron, dated 25.08.92 Nigel H. Richardson, M.C.I.P., dated 24.08.92 A. Kennedy and P.G. Kennedy, dated 24.08.92 Anne Sinclair, President, Toronto and Area Council of Women, dated 24.08.92 David G.P. Allan, Yorkton Securities Inc., dated 24.08.92 Ruth Walmsley, 23.08.92 Romona F. Burke, 23.08.92 Norma Lounsburg, 22.08.92 Judeth Blackman, President, Rent-A-Wife, dated 21.08.92 Richard Aaron, dated 20.08.92 Mark Wilson, Chair, Task Force to Bring Back the Don, dated 20.08.92 FLOODING Brian Denney reported on the Flood Warning issued by the Authority, due to the heavy rain fall received and forcasted. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 0-1 00 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1996 -Slope Instability at the rear of Nos. 42-44 Royal Rouge Trail KEY ISSUE Report on the slope instability at the rear of Nos. 42-44 Royal Rouge Trail, in the City of Scarborough and status of the site within the Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992-1996. Res. #67 Moved by: William Granger Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff continue to Include Nos. 42.44 Royal Rouge Trail within the Metropolitan Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project 1992-1996 and consider it relative to established priorities and availability of funding; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Scarborough be requested to advise the owners of WExecutive Lots Numbered 1 - 38w about the sensitive nature of the valley slope and the zoning bylaws that apply to the area. AMENDMENT Moved by: Joyce Trimmer Res. #68 Seconded by: William Granger THAT staff arrenge a site visit to 42 Royal Rouge Trail and recommend a course of action to Mr. D'Souza until such time as funding Is available. CARRIED BACKGROUND It is anticipated that a delegation of owners will attend the Board Meeting on August 28, 1992, to express concerns about erosion and slope stability issues. Royal Rouge Trail is located along the top of the Rouge River valley at the north-east corner of Kingston Road and Sheppard Avenue West in the City of Scarborough. The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority was made aware of the slope problem behind Nos. 42-44 in the summer of 1989. Staff investigated the problem and ranked it accordingly. At present, it ranks as No. 7 on our erosion priority list for Metropolitan Toronto. The valley wall failure is approximately 20 meters long and affects the upper third of the slope. The homes are approximately 17m away from the physical top of slope and well beyond the stable slope (Soil Eng Geotechnical report dated September, 1984) and therefore are not in any danger. The localized failure is related to concentrated groundwater flow at the clay/sand interface. The failure has left an exposed scar approximately 3 - 4m high. It is anticipated that 2 - 3m of tableland may be lost as the oversteepened area recedes. Presently, the problem is located on Authority property. A pool in the rear yard of No. 44 Royal Rouge Trail may be affected if the slope recedes and is a significant factor in the ranking for the site. The plans for the pool were not circulated to the Authority prior to its construction. It was built prior to our initial visit in the summer of 1989. In July, 1991, the MTRCA received a submission for a pool installation at the rear of No. 42 Royal Rouge Trail. Staff were not in a position to recommend approval in light of the slope problems. In addition, access to the slope is very restricted and the construction of a pool and accessory structures may make future access from the top even more difficult, or may eliminate this alternative altogether. Staff notified the City's building department of our concerns and they refused No. 42 an enclosure permit. Royal Rouge Trail is part of a sub-division called Deauville Developments which received registration in 1985. The original draft plan was circulated in 1984 and was predated by a number of technical studies including a soils report prepared by Soil Eng dated September, 1984. 0-1 01 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1996 ICONTD.) -Slope Instability at the rear of Nos. 42-44 Royal Rouge Trail The soils report identified the potential for shallow translation failures in the upper slope because of a perched water table. This appears to be consistent with the problem at the rear of Nos. 42 - 44 Royal Rouge Trail. As a result, one of their recommendations was that "all structures should be set back at least 10 meters away from the top of bank" for all the lots along this reach of valley slope. This recommendation was carried through the development process and adopted specific to the zoning bylaws for this area. The bylaw also makes specific reference to pools not being allowed within the 10m setback. All the homes along the reach are located well in excess of the recommended 10 meters structural setback, although the rear property is located at the physical top of slope. Unfortunately, at least one pool has been constructed within the 1 0 meter zone. It should be noted this type of problem was recognized and addressed in both the "Comprehensive Basin Management Strategy for the Rouge River Watershed" and the draft "Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program" through the adoption of a 10 meter rear property line setback pOlicy to ensure that this situation does not occur on any new developments adjacent to the valleys. . 2. DON RIVER WATERSHED -Former Domtar/Polyresins Ltd. Properties -Metro Parks & Property Proposed Master Plan -Proposed Metro Police Canine Unit KEY ISSUE The Board had before it a staff report in respect of a master plan by Metro Parks and Property Department to accommodate the Metro Police Canine Unit within the Don Valley at the site of the former Domtar and Polyresins Ltd. plants. RECOMMENDATION THAT the proposal by Metropolitan Toronto to locate a Police Dog Services Facility at the former Domtar/Polyresins property In the Don Valley In the Borough of East York be approved subject to: (a) receipt and approval by staff of The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority of a detailed landscaping plan for the facility and adjacent valley lands; (b) the main vehicular access to the site being Beechwood Drive; THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be edvised that the southerly portion of the former Polyresins site will not be available for at least 2 years pending completion of the soil cleanup unless Metropolitan Toronto undertakes the cleanup; THAT consultation with The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and receipt of necessary approvals under Ontario Regulation 293/86 must occur prior to construction; AND FURTHER THAT the Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department be requested to proceed, as soon as possible, with the development and submission for approval of a master plan for the section of the Don Valley from the Forks to the Brickworks, In consultation with the Authority and the public, such plan to identify public uses and support facilities, environmental enhancements, heritage resources and management practices. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 0-102 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. DON RIVER WATERSHED ICONTD.) -Former Domtar/Polyresins Ltd. Properties -Metro Parks & Property Proposed Master Plan -Proposed Metro Police Canine Unit Joyce Trimmer challenged the Chair on the ruling that her motion was out of order. On a vote of the members, the ruling of the Chair was upheld. The Chair relinquished the chair to the Vice-Chair, Kip Van Kempen. MOTION Moved by: Lorna Bissell Res. #69 Seconded by: Lois Hancey THAT the question be put before the Board. CARRIED Lois Griffin assumed the Chair. MOTION TO DEFER Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Paul Raina THAT this matter be deferred; AND FURTHER THAT the Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department be requested to proceed, as soon as possible, with the development and submission for approval of a master plan for the section of the Don Valley from the Forks to the Brickworks, in consultation with the Authority, the Don Watershed Task Force and the public, such plan to identify public uses and support facilities, environmental enhancements, heritage resources and management practices. NOT CARRIED MOTION Moved by: Bev Salmon Res. #70 Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THAT the Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department request to locate a Police Dog Services Facility at the formar Domtar/PoIyreslns property In the Don Valley in the Borough of East York be refused. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) acquired the land at the former Domtar and Polyresins Ltd. sites in 1989 and 1990 respectively. The sites were acquired as part of the Metropolitan Toronto Hazard and Conservation Land Acquisition Project as major additions to the Don Valley open space system. The agreement between Metropolitan Toronto and MTRCA regarding valley lands requires that Metropolitan Toronto obtain MTRCA approval for proposed development. Metropolitan Toronto Council recently gave approval, subject to MTRCA approval, for the development of a Police Dog Services Facility on 0-103 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. DON RIVER WATERSHED (CONTD.) -Former Domtar/Polyresins Ltd. Properties -Metro Parks & Property Proposed Master Plan -Proposed Metro Police Canine Unit the site. Mr. Frank Kershaw, Director, Planning, Research & Construction Division, Parks and Property Department will attend the Board Meeting on AUGust 28, 1992, to seek the Authority's approval for the proposed Police Dog Services Facility. Metropolitan Toronto Council has not approved a master plan for this section of the Don Valley, but the Parks and Property Department has provided a preliminary plan for the area. The preliminary plan identifies that in addition to the Police Dog Services Facility which is proposed on portions of the former Domtar & Poly resins properties. consideration is also being given to a maintenance depot for the Parks and Property Department. The plan also proposes a new bicycle/pedestrian trail, adjacent to the Don River, to link existing trails on the north and south sides of the property. Vehicular access to the site has been restricted by Metropolitan Toronto and East York by installation of temporary barriers on Beechwood Drive. The MTRCA also requested the temporary closing to curtail illegal dumping during the demolition and decommissioning of the sites. Metropolitan Toronto is proposing that vehicular access will continue to be restricted in the future to pOlice and service vehicles, but that the possibility of public parking on the Domtar site for 75 cars be investigated in the future as part of the valley master plan. The Police Dog Services Facility will use the former laboratory building at the Polyresins site, but an addition to the building is also proposed. Outdoor exercise and training facilities will also be constructed within fenced enclosures. RATIONALE The staff recommendations are based on a number of considerations: (1 ) The building requirement for the police dog program can utilize an existing building, which is outside the flood plain, and the building addition will not have a major impact on the valley resource; (2) We are advised that pOlice dog operations have been very successful and the program will be expanded in the future; (3) The existing base of operations for the police dog program is also in an Authority building at Eastville Avenue in Scarborough. That location is totally unacceptable for continued use, as it is a residential area. The building is also used by MTRCA and Metro Parks and Property staff as an office, and therefore. it is an inappropriate location for the dog training facility. The dogs should be relocated as soon as possible; (4) Other locations, including other Authority lands have been discussed with Metro Parks and Property Department and the Metropolitan Toronto Police and no other suitable locations have been found; (5) Improvements to the bicycle/pedestrian trail through this section of the valley will be constructed as part of the proposal; (6) A police presence in the valley will help to reduce vandalism, dumping and other illegal activity; (7) Metropolitan Council has not dealt with a master plan for this area, but we are advised by the Parks and Property Department that a plan will be developed for consideration by Council. The plan will also deal with the proposed Parks and Property Department maintenance depot which is being considered for the existing office/warehouse building on the former Polyresins property. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 116/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 0-1 04 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. DON RIVER WATERSHED (CONTD.) -Former DomtarlPolyresins Ltd. Properties -Metro Parks & Property Proposed Master Plan -Proposed Metro Police Canine Unit DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Metropolitan Toronto will proceed with renovations and an addition to the laboratory building. Outdoor exercise areas, kennels and training areas will be constructed around the perimeter of the former Polyresins property in areas outside of the Regional storm floodplain. MTRCA will undertake any necessary soil and groundwater remediation. We are presently awaiting a response from the provincial and federal governments to a technical and funding proposal for soil clean up. FUTURE BENEFITS/PROBLEMS The benefits of the program are highlighted in the Rationale section of this report. Some problems are anticipated. The police are anxious to have the facility in place, and therefore, there will be some pressure on MTRCA to proceed with the soil Cleanup. The MTRCA is attempting to secure additional funding from other levels of government and this is a slow process. There is also some question about the extent of soil cleanup required to prevent any interference with the dog training. The Task Force to Bring Back the Don has expressed some concerns about the suitability of this use in a valley location, as has the East York Environmental Advisory Committee. FINANCIAL DETAILS All costs, other than soil cleanup, are the responsibilities of Metropolitan Toronto. The budget for the program is $1,660,000. 3. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 -Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program KEY ISSUE Fees for applications for Bills of Lading under the Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program. Res. #71 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT a processing fee for application for Bills of Leding under the Lakefll Quality Control Program be approved In the amount of .150 for projects generating twenty truck loedl or more of loll end .20 for projectl ganeratlng leiS than twenty truck loadl of loil; AND FURTHER THAT the fees be Implemented effective November 1, 1992. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program (lLQCP) is a program administered by MTRCA as agents for the Ministry of Environment. The purpose of the program is to ensure that the quality of material used at all lakefill sites within the Authority's juriSdiction meets existing guidelines. 0-1 05 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTD.1 -Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program Since the beginning of the program in 1988, the ILQCP has been funded solely by revenues generated through tipping fees imposed by the lakefill site operators. A portion of all such fees have been reallocated to the ILQCP. This procedure has been in place at all MTRCA operated lakefill sites and at the Toronto Harbour Commissioners' Leslie Street site. To date, no fees have been charged for the processing and review of applications or for the Bills of Lading. RATIONALE Revenues generated from tipping fees cover the costs of initial discussions, meetings with consultants regarding soil sampling protocol, reviewing soils management/environmental reports as well as site inspections, along with all administrative costs to support the program. If material is not approved for lakefill sites or developers choose to take material elsewhere, then no revenues are realized. In 1991, the MTRCA received a total of 120 "Large Site" applications requesting lakefill Bills of Lading, each of which contained a detailed environmental report containing chemical analysis results which were reviewed by lakefill staff. Of these 120 projects, 68 did not ultimately supply any material to a lakefill site. For the first six months of 1992, 100 "Large Site" applications have been received of which 65 have not supplied material to a lakefill site to date. In addition, a total of 554 "Small Site" applications were received in 1991, each of which required a pre- disposal inspection by LQCP staff. Of these "Small Site" excavations, 293 did not bring soil to a lakefill site. Only 5 "Small Site" applications have been received for the first six months of 1992 of which 2 did not supply material. These applications are down substantially because of the very limited availability of confined disposal locations for "Small Site" projects. Staff estimate that an approximate average of 20 person hours per week are spent on projects which do not provide revenues from tipping fees. It is clear that many people in the construction industry use the LQCP as a mechanism to obtain "free" assistance and general approval of fill quality regardless of the expected destination of the material. It is known that: owners of many private inland fill sites request applicants and/or consultants to provide either lakefill Bills of Lading or environmental soils reports which have been at least verbally approved by the MTRCA; Many municipalities and private developers go through the lakefill approval procedure to provide an option to the contractor for disposing of soil at a lakefill site. The Authority issues the required Bills of Lading to approved projects even though the final disposal location for the material is not known; and - the decision on where to take the excavated material IS ultimately the domain of the contractor and therefore lakefill approval is often sought for no reason. The introduction of an application fee will ensure that enough revenue is generated to at least cover staff costs associated with reviewing and approving applications. FINANCIAL DETAILS It is recommended that the fee structure be based on the classification of the excavation site as defined in the "Manual for an Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program". Large Sites, or sites requesting more than twenty Bills of Lading, are required to submit a detailed environmental report including chemical analysis results for the soils proposed for lakefill sites. The review of such reports, fOllow-up telephone conversations, review of WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 0-1 06 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 ICONTD.) -Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program revisions and site inspections can be quite time consuming. It is recommended that the application fee for "Large Sites" be set at $150. "Small Sites", as defined in the ILQCP Manual, are sites which will generate less than twenty truck loads of soil for disposal. Applications for "Small Sites" require only a site inspection by LQCP staff for purposes of approval. Therefore, it is recommended that the application fee for "Small Sites" be set at $20. The application fees would be exempt from Goods and Services Tax. It is also recommended that the fees be implemented effective November 1, 1992. 4. FLOODING, MAY 2, 1992 KEY ISSUE To report on flooding experienced due to storms occurring on Saturday, May 2, 1992 and the present watershed flooding potential. Res. #72 Moved by: William Granger Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the May 2, 1992, flooding be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND While the river systems within the juriSdiction of the Authority did not experience a severe Spring breakup period, watershed conditions remained very wet in early May. Both March and April experienced below normal temperatures along with well above normal amounts of rainfall (130-140% of normal) resulting in near saturated soil conditions. On Saturday morning, May 2nd, a very sharp cold front moved through the area setting off a series of intense thunderstorms. The first series of storms occurred just after noon, with the most severe storms centred over the west end of our watersheds and south of Highway 401. The first series of storms moved quickly through with rainfall totals of between 15-25mm. A second series of thunderstorms following the passage of the cold front at approximately 4:20 p.m. deposited a further 15-25mm of rainfall also in the west end of our watersheds. As a consequence of the intense rainfalls, a short time frame and already saturated soils, runoff rates were very high (70-80%). I While very high flows were experienced on most of the Authority's watercourses, with the exception of our most easterly river systems, flooding of any consequence was restricted to the Etobicoke Creek and Don River. The Don River experienced very high flows along the west branch, downstream of the G. Ross Lord Dam where the rainfall was most intense. As a consequence, the Main Don River overflowed its banks flooding Bayview Avenue and a portion of the Brick Yards area. No significant flood damages were reported, although the railway line was closed for several hours. 0-107 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. FLOODING, MAY 2, 1992 ICONTD.) The heaviest rainfalls and flooding occurred along the Etobicoke Creek system. Both the Little Etobicoke Creek and t.he main Etobicoke Creek experienced out of bank flows. No damage was reported along the Little Etobicoke Creek at the Tyndall Nursing Home due to the recently completed flood wall. Along the main branch of the Etobicoke Creek, the river flooded its overbank areas from upstream of Burnamthorpe Road to Dundas Street. The majority of flood damage along this reach was confined to the Markland Woods Golf Course where damage occurred to two of the golf course's footbridges and several erosion works were overtopped with some additional erosion damage. Silt and debris also lined several areas of the course. An analysis of high water marks near Burnamthorpe Road would estimate flows at between the 10-25 year return period flow. The records at our stream gauge on the Etobicoke Creek below the QEW reflect the fifth highest flow on record since recording began in 1967. The extreme flows on the Etobicoke Creek appear to be a consequence of two severe thunderstorms centred over the Lower Basin combined with the nearly saturated soil conditions on the watershed. These two factors led to extremely high runoff rates which resulted in the high flows. Following the May 2, 1992 flooding event, the remainder of the month was extremely dry with less than 25mm of rainfall occurring. The month of June followed suit with less than half the normal monthly rainfall of 75mm occurring. As a result of these dry conditions, no high flow events occurred throughout the remainder of Mayor June. This dry trend came to an abrupt halt as we entered July which has proved to be the wettest on record. Rainfall totals in excess of 150mm were recorded at most stations, which reflects twice the normal amounts. Heavy downpours occurred in North York on July 18th resulting in sewer surcharging and many basements flooded. Flooding at the Bayview Avenue extension also occurred on the Don River for a brief period. No other flooding was reported along any watercourses. Following the wettest July on record, August is also starting out on a similar track with average monthly totals of 75mm already having occurred by August 10th. The extremely wet ground conditions have resulted in high runoff rates occurring for even the minor rainfall events. As a consequence, the flood potential within the Authority's watershed is at a level not seen since the summer of 1986 when some of the highest flows and most severe flooding was recorded. Staff is, therefore, monitoring all approaching weather systems with extreme care should Flood Advisories or Warnings need to be issued. 5. FLOOD CONTROL PROGRAM - MAJOR MAINTENANCE -Black Creek Channel Fencing KEY ISSUE Responding to a request from The Corporation of the City of York to replace the chain link fence on both sides of the Black Creek Channel from Weston Road to Cliff Street. Res. #73 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to replace the chain link fencing on the Black Creek Channel betwean Weston Roed to Cliff Street In 1992, at an estimated cost of $40,000 subject to approval of the Ministry of Natural Resources and edditional funding being available. CARRIED WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 0-1 08 SECTION I . ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. FLOOD CONTROL PROGRAM - MAJOR MAINTENANCE (CONTD.) -Black Creek Channel Fencing BACKGROUND At Meeting #6/92, the Executive Committee under Resolution #136 resolved: "THAT the correspondence received from C. Rodrigo, City Clerk, The Corporation of the City of York, dated July 15, 1992, regarding request for replacement of the chain link fence on Humber Boulevard, City of York, be referred to staff for report to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board." This section of the Black Creek Flood Control Channel was built in 1959 and extends from Weston Road through to the confluence with the Humber River. The area of concern includes both sides of the channel from Weston Road south to the first bridge crossing by Humber Boulevard. This section is characterized by vertical concrete walls, approximately 4 metres in height, with a 6' high chain link fence mounted on top of the wall. In 1986, the Authority reviewed the public liability related to our channel and in an effort to improve public safety, arranged to have the guiderails installed along the critical sections of the chennel in this vicinity. At the same time we investigated the strength of the fence given the visible rusting. Our consultant concluded that the rusting had not weakened the fence significantly and as a result from a hazard point of view, the fence did not need to be replaced. However, the fence has continued to deteriorate and is unsightly. A major maintenance project was developed in 1990 in response to a request to have the fencing replaced. Unfortunately, this project has not been carried out because of funding constraints. Staff would now like to bring this forward again for consideration subject to funding being available. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The estimated cost to replace the 11 OOm of 2m high mesh is $40,000. We have also investigated the cost of painting the mesh. The electro statically applied painting process is almost as expensive as replacing the mesh, therefore, we have chosen the replacement alternative. This amount also includes a provision for several fence post replacements and minor concrete repairs around the base of existing fence posts. FINANCIAL DETAILS The Black Creek Fencing Project Major Maintenance Project will be carried out under the Flood Control Program and is subject to Ministry of Natural Resources project and additional grant and matching levy being available. 6. ENVIRONMENT ALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS -Draft report on the criteria review KEY ISSUE Draft report on updated Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) designation criteria. Res. #74 Moved by: William Granger Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to circulate the draft report on the ESA criteria review to agencies, municipalities, and the publiC for comment; AND FURTHER THAT staff finalize the draft report in light of the comments received and report back to the Board. CARRIED D-1 09 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. ENVIRONMENT ALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS (CONTD.) -Draft report on the criteria review BACKGROUND In 1982, The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) completed and adopted an Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) study. This study has been used as the basis for the Authority's comments for protection of significant natural features over the past ten years through its Plan Input and Review Process. The Authority's member, local and regional municipalities were asked to include all ESAs in an appropriate, protective, land use designation in their planning documents to protect these areas from loss, encroachment, and disturbance. In the intervening ten years, much has been learned about the sensitivity of natural habitats and fragmented ecosystems and many of the existing ESAs have changed due to development or natural processes. This, together with experience gained in the application of the designation criteria have created the impetus for an update on the 1982 study beginning with a review of the original ESA criteria. Initial input on designation criteria for significant areas and field application was sought from other agencies, municipalities, and interested groups and individuals. The attached report summarizes the information that was received and the resulting changes that are recommended to the ESA designation criteria. Of the seven original criteria from the 1982 study, it is proposed that five remain unaltered except for minor modifications to make them more sensitive to aquatic species and habitats. Three criteria have been substantially altered or elevated from the status of sub-criteria. These alterations have been made to better recognize and protect headwater and recharge/discharge areas, large habitat blocks, and linkages between significant areas. The review of the ESA criteria is the first phase of a proposed three-year ESA project that will include the refinement of field interpretation guidelines to ensure consistency in the application of ESA criteria, field investigations of the existing 126 ESAs to confirm their status and boundaries. and the identification and investigation of new candidate areas. In addition, it is proposed that guidelines for compatibility studies for development proposals on or adjacent to ESAs will be developed along with selected ESA management plans and methods for protection. This three-year ESA project would be the foundation for the development of an ongoing ESA programme for the protection and management of ESAs. RATIONALE The Authority has consistently recognized the difficulty in administering a program where the data is outdated. In the ten years since the original field investigations were undertaken, many ESAs have changed due to impacts associated with development on or adjacent to them or through natural successional processes. In addition, since 1982, the Province has developed its designations and policies for wetlands. It is important to rationalize the Authority's criteria and initiatives in light of these developments. Several municipalities are currently updating their Official Plans and have requested up-to-date information on ESAs for inclusion in these documents. In some cases, municipalities such as The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, The Corporation of the Town of Markham and City of Vaughan are conducting inventories of the natural features and have noted areas that they feel would satisfy ESA criteria and have asked that the MTRCA verify their findings. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The draft report will be sent to agencies and local and regional municipalities with a request for comment. Staff would meet with anyone requesting further information or clarification. The public and interest groups would be invited to an information session that would outline the revised criteria and future work plan. Field investigations will be undertaken on selected ESAs and candidate areas in response to requests from Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Vaughan, and the Town of Markham and to assist the development of the Don River Watershed Strategy. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 16/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 D-11 0 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. THE DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE -Selection and Appointment of Task Force Members KEY ISSUE Progress report on the selection of Don watershed residents and the appointment of municipal and other representatives to the Task Force. Res. #75 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: William Granger THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Don Watershed Task Force Selection Committee report directly to the full Authority at Meeting #8/92, regarding the appointment of Don watershed residents to the Task Force; THAT the report include the Don watershed municipal appointments and the appointments of representatives from the Task Force to Bring Back the Don (City of Torontol, the Friends of the Don, the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan, and the Waterfront Regeneration Trust Agency; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to organize a tour of the Don watershed for Task Force members and interested Authority members following the formal appointment of Task Force members. CARRIED BACKGROUND Resolution #57 was adopted at Authority Meeting #4/92: "THAT the Terms of Reference, Membership Selection, and Reporting Procedures for the Don Watershed Task Force, as set out in Appendix WR.10/92, be approved; "THAT the Authority direct staff to request local and regional municipalities within the Don River Watershed to appoint a council member, and an alternate to the Task Force by July 30, 1992; "THAT the Authority direct staff to invite applications from Don River watershed residents to participate on the Task Force; "THAT a three-person selection 'committee be established, including two members of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board and the Director of the Water Resource Division, to review all applicants from watershed residents; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the full Authority on the proposed membership of the Task Force for endorsement and formal appointment." Municioal and Other Aooointments Received bv Auaust 18. 1992 Seven of the ten local and regional municipalities have appointed members to the Task Force and six appointed alternates. Appointments have been made to the Authority's Task Force by the Task Force to Bring Back The Don, Friends of the Don, the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan and the Waterfront Regeneration Trust Agency. D-111 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. THE DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE (CONTD.) -Selection and Appointment of Task Force Members Selection of Watershed Residents Advert'isements were placed in local newspapers; information packages were mailed to ratepayer groups, local interest groups and interested individuals residing within the Don Watershed; and an evening information meeting was held in North York, on June 23, 1992, to inform residents of the formation of the Task Force and its mandate. Residents were invited to submit applications to the Authority by July 24, 1992. Thirty-three applications were received from residents throughout the watershed. The applicants reflect a range of professions, past community experience, education, and watershed interests. The Selection Committee have begun the task of interviewing the applicants. A number of persons were unable to attend the two original interview evenings scheduled and a third evening is being scheduled in early September. RATIONALE The staff and Selection Committee request leave of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board (W&RLMAB) to report the recommendation of the Selection Committee directly to the full Authority. Normally this type of report would be first dealt with at the W&RLMAB. There is no W&RLMAB meeting scheduled for September of 1992. Holding the report to the next regularly scheduled meeting in October will delay the work of the Task Force by one month. The Terms of Reference for the Task Force require that a draft strategy document be prepared by December of 1993. This request is made to provide the Task Force with a full fifteen months to prepare the draft strategy. 8. REGIONAL HEADWATER HYDROLOGY STUDY KEY ISSUE To report on the completion of the Canada/Ontario Flood Damage Reduction Program, Regional Headwater Hydrology Study. Res. #76 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the Regional Headwater Hydrology Study be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND One of the initial steps in updating the Authority's watershed Plan in the late 1970's, was the completion of pilot hydrologic studies and full scale hydrologic investigation of nine watersheds within the MTRCA. These works began with Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks, and ultimately included the Humber, Don and Rouge Rivers as well as Highland, Duffin, Petticoat and Carruther's Creeks (MacLaren, 1978, 1979). In these and related studies, flows were provided for present and future land use conditions for 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100 year return period floods as well as the Regional Storm (Hurricane Hazel). In the late 1970's and 1980's, the flood flow hydrology provided by these studies was employed in the Authority's Floodplain Mapping Program. The focus of this program was the provision of hydraulic floodline analyses, floodplain mapping, and engineering studies for flood damage reduction. The scope of the hydraulic analyses in this period was large and, in general, it was not possible to provide floodplain information for all watershed areas. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92. AUGUST 28,1992 0-11 2 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 8. REGIONAL HEADWATER HYDROLOGY STUDY ICONTD.) The small, headwater tributaries draining roughly less than 13 km2 (5 mi21, as well as a number of larger, rural tributaries, were not included in these studies. Consequently, the flood risk was not evaluated or mapped along these tributaries except in site specific studies. There are about 200 of these watercourses in The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Conservation Authority (MTRCA) jurisdiction. These headwater tributary areas are the source-area streams for both rural and urban areas. In recent years, there has been rapid urban expansion and transformation of many of the headwaters within the Authority's mandate. The changes have been dramatic in some cases, or are projected to be so, and involve portions of the headwaters not previously benefitting from flood risk mapping. As a result, the MTRCA and the Canada-Ontario Flood Damage Reduction Program (FDRP) developed a comprehensive Mapping Extension Program that was to provide floodplain mapping of these headwater areas. This program involved: . topographic mapping for use in defining flood prone regions; . hydrology and hydraulic engineering studies for flood damage reduction; . floodline mapping to identify the extent of headwater flood risk. Prior to the cancellation of the FDRP program by the Federal government in 1991, the Authority produced fifty-six new topographic map sheets and updated four existing map sheets. Hydrology and hydraulic studies were completed on the Rouge River and the Rainbow Creeks with thirty-six new floodline maps created. The Regional Headwater Hydrology Study has developed a methodOlogy for generating flows and hydrographs for any headwater area in the MTRCA jurisdiction based upon hydrologic soil grouping, land use and drainage area. The study also developed specific flood flow values (2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100 and Regional flows) at approximately 600 points throughout the headwater area. This hydrology provides flood flow values which can be meshed with subsequent hydraulic and mapping investigations for flood damage reduction, through floodline mapping on existing or new contour mapping should funds become available. In addition, this project has other related water management applications of value within the MTRCA. Principal among these is that it provides a blend of flow data from a wide range of previous and recent MTRCA studies to develop a consistent data base. This approach allows for quickly accessing data for flood studies required as part of the Authority's plan review process and in master drainage planning studies to ensure consistency in the development of flow data for storm water strategies. 9. RAINBOW CREEK FLOODPLAIN MAPPING STUDY KEY ISSUE To report on the completion of the Canada/Ontario Flood Damage Reduction Program, Rainbow Creek Floodplain Mapping Project. Res. #77 Moved by: Ua Bossons Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the Rainbow Creek Mapping Project be received. CARRIED 0-11 3 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #6/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CON SID ERA TION 9. RAINBOW CREEK FLOODPLAIN MAPPING STUDY (CONTD.) BACKGROUND The Floodplain Map'ping Project on the Rainbow Creek was initiated through the Canada/Ontario Flood Damage Reduction Program (FDRP) in November of 1988. As the City of Vaughan had also initiated a Master Drainage Planning Study of, the Rainbow Creek basin at that time, the two studies were coordinated by the same consultant to ensure overall consistency in developing a basin management strategy. The Floodplain Mapping Study utilized the revised hydrologic information for the Rainbow Creek developed as part of the City's Master Drainage Plan. Due to problems related to the FDRP program, modelling approaches undertaken by the consultant as part of the Master Drainage Plan and changes in staffing, several lengthy delays occurred which resulted in the hydrology for the basin not being finalized until the spring of 1992. The Hydrology Study produced new estimates of flows along the Rainbow Creek tributaries of the Humber River. As part of the Floodline Mapping Study, new hydraulic models were developed along the Rainbow Creek watercourse on ten contour map sheets produced by the Authority as part of its 1986 mapping extension program. The flow information developed within the Town's Master Drainage Plan was then used in the new hydraulic models to develop flood lines along the watercourses on our extension mapping. The study produced an additional twenty kilometres of floodline mapping along the Rainbow Creek watercourses up to the 1 30 tjectare watershed limits. In addition to the new flood line mapping produced, the hydraulic models developed through this study were used to investigate the impacts of development scenarios on the Rainbow Creek Watershed for the Town's' Master Drainage Planning Study. The hydraulic models were run to determine impacts of changing land uses to develop storm water management strategies for use on the Rainbow Creek watershed. The Master Drainage Planning Study also identified nine flood susceptible sites and forty erosion sites. Recommendations on remedial works and monitoring at these sites were also identified. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '6/92, AUGUST 28,1992 0-1 1 4 SECTION II - ITEMS FOR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION 10. EVERGREEN FOUNDATION - Langstaff Business EcoPark KEY ISSUE The development of a plan by the Evergreen Foundation for the development and maintenance of the "Langstaff Business EcoPark" on Authority lands. Res. #78 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE THAT the Evergreen Foundation develop a plan for the wLangstaff Business EcoParkw In consultation with Authority staff and that the plan be submitted to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board for approval; THAT the Evergreen Foundation and Authority staff Initiate the organization of a committee made up of interested partners from the community and Including representation from the Authority, City of Vaughan and the Evergreen Foundation to provide advice and comment regarding the Park Plan and to eventually coordinate management of the property; THAT organization be undertaken for a community event Involving cleanup and planting of the site during the Autumn of 1992; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to work with the Evergreen Foundation for the long-term development and management of the WLangstaff Business EcoParkw on Authority lands. CARRIED BACKGROUND In May of 1992, Authority staff received a proposal from the Evergreen Foundation for the creation of the "Langstaff Business EcoPark". The proposed site is a 31 hectare parcel owned by the Authority and bounded on the north by Langstaff Road and on the south by Highway 117. The West Don River flows through the property and there is light industrial and commercial development on either side of the valley. The Authority does not currently carry out any maintenance on the property other than occasional garbage pickup in response to specific concerns. The City of Vaughan has, in the past, carried out cutting of some sections of the lands under the provisions of Noxious Weeds Act. The lands are not currently fenced and a number of problems have been encountered with dumping and encroachments by neighbouring businesses. The proposal received from the Evergreen Foundation involved the creation of a "natural" park through planting and site rehabilitation. Initial work would involve a resource inventory and survey of the property, organization of a community development and management committee, and organization of a community cleanup and planting event. Coincident with this, Evergreen Foundation staff would prepare a detailed Park Plan. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The initial phase of the project would be funded by the Evergreen Foundation and the Environmental Partners Fund. This work has been budgeted at $12,255. No direct costs would be incurred by the Authority, however, some staff time would be involved,' for liaison and coordination activities. FUTURE BENEFITS Implementation for the EcoPark proposal provides the opportunity for enhanced management of an Authority property, the maintenance of which would otherwise likely remain unfunded. In addition, this project provides an opportunity for community involvement in the development and care of a local resource. It is anticipated that partnerships such as that proposed will become an increasingly common option for the management of 0-11 5 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 16/92, AUGUST 28, 1992 SECTION II - ITEMS FOR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION 10. EVERGREEN FOUNDATION ICONTD.) - Langstaff Business EcoPark public greenspace. This proposal therefore offers an opportunity for the development of a model for similar arrangements elsewhere, while addressing immediate problems related to adequate management and rehabilitation of Authority lands. This project is consistent with the work undertaken by the Don River Watershed Task Force and it is anticipated that implementation of the proposal would be coordinated with and assisted by the Task Force. TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 2:05 p.m., August 28, 1992. Lois Griffin J. Craie Mather Chair Acting Secretary Treasurer /bb ~ 'Working Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace Vthe metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes 0-11 6 OCTOBER 16, 1992 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 117/92 The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, October 16, 1992. The Chair called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. PRESENT Vice Chair Kip Van Kempen Members Lorna Bissell Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Joanna Kidd Maja Prentice Paul Raina Member of the Authority Richard Whitehead Chair of the Authority William Granger ABSENT Chair Lois Griffin Members lIa Bossoms Bev Salmon Frank Scarpitti Joyce Trimmer MINUTES Res. #79 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Maja Prantlce THAT the Minutes of Meeting #6/92 be approved. CARRIED , 0-117 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. DRAFT MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT MATERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY AND LAKEFILL GUIDELINES KEY ISSUE The Ministry of Environment has issued the draft Materials Management Policy and Fill Quality Guidelines for Lakefilling for public consultation. Res. #80 Moved by: Bill Granger Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the draft Ministry of Environment Fill Quality Guidelines and Materials Management Policy be received; THAT approval be given for staff to prepare a presentation to the Advisory Committee on environmental Standards; THAT staff prepare final comments and recommendations for the next meeting of the Board; AND FURTHER THAT the staff report contain additional information on the various fill quality classifications and In particular, detail on material to be regulated under Regulation '309 of the environmental Protection Act. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Ministry of Environment (MOE) has released several new documents to control the type and quality of excess sediments and fill used for on land disposal and in lakefilling projects. The draft Policv For Manacinc Excess Soil. Rock and Like Materials is intended to provide a consistent approach to the management of excess soil, rock, old concrete, bricks, masonry and dredged material. The purpose of the Policy is to clearly establish the order in which decisions are to be made to manage excess materials, outline the process for categorizing these materials and expand the options for managing them. Several other documents have been prepared giving greater detail on all aspects of the proposed policy. In June of this year, the Ministry of Environment announced that the new Sediment Quality Guidelines will be put into effect immediately. The purpose of the sediment quality guidelines is to protect the aquatic environment by setting safe levels for metals, nutrients and organic compounds. These guidelines replace the Ministry's 1976 Open Water Disposal Guidelines. A third document, released at the same time as the Materials Management Policy is the Fill Quality Guidelines For Lakefillinc. The aim of these guidelines is to make sure that the fill will not harm fish, sediment-dwelling organisms or the quality of the water. It was announced that the new lakefill guidelines will take effect immediately for all new lakefill projects on an interim basis. Final guidelines will be announced in 1993 following the public consultation process. These three new documents are part of an overall strategy by the Ministry of Environment for managing fill and sediments in Ontario as well as for protecting the quality of the water and preventing pollution. The decision tree illustrating the relationship between the documents is refered to as Figure 1. Key Features of the Materials Manacement Policy . To meet the requirements of the proposed policy, the generator or receiver of an excess material would be required to: WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 0-11 8 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. DRAFT MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT MATERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY AND LAKEFILL GUIDELINES (CONTD.) (1 ) Determine if the material should be managed under the proposed policy. If excess material cannot be managed under the 3Rs, reduction, reuse and recycling - then the proposed pOlicy will apply. (2) Categorize the material. The policy contains four new material categories, including a redefined inert fill (clean fill) category. Chemical sampling and analysis may be required to classify materials. (3) Determine appropriate management option. The appropriate option depends on the material classification, which in turn depends on the degree of contamination. (4) Follow approvals process requirements. Each class of materials requires a different set of approvals. A new "permit-by-rule" approach is proposed for managing materials classified as urban residential and urban industrial fills. In other words, it will be the explicit responsibility of the- generator and receiver of excess fill to appropriately manage fill, including selection of the disposal site for certain materials without the .need for site - specific approvals from the Ministry of the Environment. Key Features of the New Lakefill Quality Guidelines The guidelines regulate the fill which may be used in lakefilling projects. The fill which is suitable to be used for lakefilling projects is divided into two categories: (1) confined fill and (2) unconfined fill. Only inert fill may be used in lakefilling projects. Confined fill may be used for lakefilling projects provided it is placed within the confines of a structure, such as a dyke, which is capable of withstanding the waves of a-once-in 50 years storm. Unconfined fill may be placed directly into the water, but must first pass a series of tests including: bulk chemical tests for 11 metals and organic compounds and the receiving water simulation test to determine if organic compounds will leak out from the fill. The new lakefill guidelines establish three levels of effect: no effect level, lowest effect level and severe effect level. Generally, for fill to be acceptable for open water filling, it must be cleaner than the sediments at the lakefill site and at least meet the lowest effect level. Public Review Process The Advisory Committee on Environmental Standards (ACES) has been given the responsibility of coordinati!1g the review and public consultation program for the Fill Quality Guidelines for Lakefillina and the Policy for Manaaina Excess Soil. Rock and Like Materials. The consultation program will extend for 120 days, ending on Friday, January 8, 1993. Written comments will be accepted by ACES at anytime during this period. ACES is organizing a series of deputation meetings in several locations throughout Ontario. In Toronto, presentations can be made to ACES on Wednesday, November 4, 1992. Following the public consultation period, ACES will report directly back to the Minister of Environment in February 1993, who will make a final decision. . 0-11 9 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. DRAFT MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT MATERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY AND LAKEFILL GUIDELINES (CONTD.) Imolications of the New Guidelines on Authoritv Proarams The new lakefill guidelines will have an immediate affect on proposed Authority projects under the Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project. The new guidelines for fill quality are more stringent than the present Open Water Guidelines used by the Authority and with less flexibility in interpreting the chemical tests, will result in less material being suitable for lakefilling. New methods of lakefilling will need to be engineered to prevent loss of fines and maintain structural integrity as availability of suitable fill becomes unreliable. a) East Point Park Chemical testing shows that the existing fill stockpile at East Point Park will not meet the new "Unconfined" category for open water filling. The approximate 120,000 cubic metres of material in stockpile was generated from excavation of the intake tunnel for the Easterly Filtration Plant and therefore is considered to be "native" material. For this material to be acceptable for lakefilling, an engineered endykement will need to be constructed wherein the stockpiled fill can be placed. b) Etobicoke Motel Strip Approximately 150,000 cubic metres of clean fill is required to construct the Public Amenity Strip for the Etobicoke Motel Strip. With the proposed new lakefill guidelines in place, it may be very difficult locating surplus clean fill without having to purchase suitable material. c) Tommy Thompson Park The new lakefill guidelines will not apply to the Leslie St. Spit. This lakefill site, which is operated by the Toronto Harbour Commission will continue to accept "open water quality" fill as administered by the Authority's Lakefill Quality Control Program until the project is complete. The project has been "grandparented" since it is so close to completion. d) Scarborough Shoreline Protection The new lakefill guidelines will also have an affect on proposed erosion control projects along rivers as well as along the Lake Ontario shoreline. All uncertain availability of clean fill may delay the ultimate completion of the proposed Sylvan Avenue erosion control project along the Scarborough bluffs. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Authority staff are presently reviewing the Materials Management Policy and Lakefill Guidelines in detail and will be preparing comments to be submitted to the next Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting for approval prior to submission to ACES. Authority staff propose to make a presentation to ACES on November 4, 1992, to outline our interests in the new guidelines and that the Authority will be submitting written comments. FUTURE BENEFITSIPROBLEMS At Meeting #3/91, held on May 3, 1991, the Authority directed staff to prepare a program for an Inland Fill Quality Control Program for Watershed Protection within the regulated areas of the Authority's juriSdiction as well as those areas where the Authority's assistance is requested by a member or area municipality or the Province of Ontario. The new MOE Materials Management Policy will require that the generator or receiver be responsible for management of excess fill. With new guidelines and definition for various classes of fill, there is an opportunity to implement the Island Fill Quality Control Program for those sites that are environmentally sensitive or of a particular concern. . WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 D-120 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. THE VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECTS IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO, AND THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITIES OF PEEL, YORK AND DURHAM 1992-1997 -Progress Report and Pool of Erosion Sites KEY ISSUE Staff have prepared a progress report and a pool of priorities list related to proposed future works for the Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects in Metropolitan Toronto and the Regional Municipalities of Peel, York and Durham. Res. #81 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the pool of priorities for ~e Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects In the Municipality of Metropollten Toronto and the Regional Municipalities of Peel, York and Durham: 1992-1997 be approved as shown in Appendix WR. 68/92. CARRIED BACKGROUND In view of the large number of sites requiring erosion control works, major remedial work is carried out on a technical priority basis defined by the degree of hazard associated with the problem. The technical priorities are reassessed, at least once, during our annual exercise whereby all the sites on our inventory are visited and monitored. This review reflects the dynamics of the erosion processes and the addition of any new sites and, therefore, ensures that the works we are proposing for a given year are addressing technically the most hazardous sites within our area of jurisdiction. The degree of hazard is evaluated and priorities established for an erosion site by considering the effects on the distance to structures, rate of erosion and the physical properties of the slope. The lists provided in the accompanying Appendices reflect the review and ranking carried out in the summer of 1992. These priority lists are used to determine what sites should be included with the Project File submissions to the Ministry of Natural Resources and in helping to formulate the 1993 preliminary budget for the erosion control program. 3. VISUAL ARTS ONTARIO -Points of View Project KEY ISSUE The consideration of the competition brief, the artist selection process and four pOSSible site locations for Visual Arts Ontario's Points of View pilot project along the Scarborough Bluffs. Res. #82 Moved by: Joanna Kldd Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the competition brief and artist selection process be endorsed. THAT the Authority support consideration of four possible sites: Fishleigh, South Marine Drive, Guild Inn and Guildwood Parkway for a potential integrated artwork. 0-1 21 WATER AND RELATeD LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. VISUAL ARTS ONTARIO (CONTD.) -Points of View Project THAT a selection committee be established with represantatlvu from the public; the art community; the City of Scarborough Planning Department; Scarborough Council; the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property, and Planning Departments; Metro Toronto Public Art Policy Advisory Committee; Visual Arts Ontario and The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to review the six artists' proposals end select an artist; THAT the selected artist and pilot project be subject to the approval of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Scarborough and the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; AND FURTHER THAT the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Scarborough, Visual Arts Ontario, Metro Toronto's Public Art Policy Advisory Committee and the selection committee be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #1/92 held on February 21,1992, Resolution #19 was adopted: "THAT the Visual Arts Ontario's concept for artists to collaborate and integrate art works into the Authority's projects along the Scarborough Bluffs be endorsed subject to the concurrence of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and City of Scarborough; THAT staff continue to work with Visual Arts Ontario to establish a more comprehensive proposal including details of specific projects plus costs; THAT final approval of each project be subject to the approval of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Scarborough and The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; THAT staff be directed to obtain input on Visual Arts Ontario's concept from the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, the Metropolitan Parks and Property Department, the City of Scarborough Planning Department, and the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Councillors whose wards are inVOlved; AND FURTHER THAT the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, and the City of Scarborough be so advised. " This report presents an update on the Points of View project. The project competition brief for artists and a waterfront map identifying the four possible site locations was available at the meeting. Authority staff received support for project collaboration with V AO from the Metropolitan Toronto Waterfront Committee, the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property and Planning Departments, as well as, Scarborough Council. All parties endorsed the Authority's approval in principle for VAO to collaborate and incorporate art works into the Authority's projects along the Scarborough Bluffs, and agreed that final approval for specific projects be subject to the approval of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Scarborough and The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Scarborough Council's recommendation 3 of clause 12, from report no. 11 adopted on May 11, 1992, requested: "that a review committee be established, composed of representatives of the MTRCA, Scarborough Council, Visual Arts Ontario and a member of the community, to review each piece of art to be recommended for inclusion in this project." WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 117/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 D-122 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. VISUAL ARTS ONTARIO ICONTD.) -Points of View Project Authority and V AO staff determined that it would be appropriate to initiate one pilot project with a single artist and then evaluate the project success prior to completing a series of additional works. A preliminary selection committee was established to review and choose a short list of both potential artists and possible site locations. The committee consisted of: Karin Eaton, Scarborough Arts Council Carolyn Woodland, Metro Toronto's Public Art Policy Advisory Committee Ron Shuebrook, Artist, VAO Board Member, Dean of Fine Arts University of Guelph Eugenia Sagardia, MTRCA Nigel Cowey, MTRCA Mike Bender, MTRCA Craig Mather, MTRCA, ex-officio Hennie Wolff, VAO, ex-officio. The selection committee reviewed approximately thirty artists' work and selected a short list of six artists and two alternates, all of which have previously completed and installed various environmental art works. The first six artists will receive a competition brief requesting proposals. If one artist decides not to submit a proposal, then the first alternate will be contacted. In addition, the committee chose four pOSSible sites that could accommodate a potential integrated art work. The sites include: Fishleigh Drive, South Marine Drive, Guild Inn and Guildwood Parkway. Artists will visit the various sites and taylor their proposal accordingly. Finally, V AO staff prepared the competition brief for the six artists to request proposals and provide project direction. The brief, which was approved by the selection committee, outlines the responsibilities of the artist and sponsor (VAO), the selection process, site profiles, and guidelines for proposal development. RATIONALE The rationale for the competition brief and artist selection process is based on the adopted Metropolitan Toronto's public art pOlicy advisory committee's report; "A Public Art Policy Framework For Metropolitan Toronto". The competition brief provides the artist with a fair and reasonable process for the Points of View project. The report also outlines the importance of establishing qualified selection juries to select artist/artwork for public art projects. The artist selection committee for the Points of View project will ensure that professional artistic standards are applied and that selected works do not jeopardize the integrity of the site. The rationale for Fishleigh Drive, South Marine Drive, Guild Inn and Guildwood Parkway being selected as possible project sites, is based on location, accessibility, physiographic diversity and site suitability. The shoreline management initiatives that the Authority has undertaken at these locations would provide ideal staging areas for interactive artworks. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE V AO and Authority staff will arrange site visits for the artists and provide an opportunity for the artists to meet with MTRCA project staff. It is proposed that the selection committee be expanded to include one Scarborough councillor; one staff member from the City of Scarborough, Planning Department; and one staff member from each of the Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property, and Planning Departments. The expanded committee will review the artists' proposals and select a preferable concept. The recommended artist will then be required to submit a more detailed proposal plus development costs. The final proposal will then be presented to the public. Following the public meeting, the final proposal will then be presented to the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the Municipality of Scarborough for approval. 0-123 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. VISUAL ARTS ONTARIO (CONTD.) -Points of View Project FINANCIAL DETAILS MTRCA costs for this stage of proposal development will be limited to staff time and an Authority vehicle to conduct the site visits for the six artists. VAO has budgeted $30,500 for site visits, proposal fees, maquette fees and administration. VAO has a balance of revenue and expenses for this phase of the project. 4. PROPOSED 1993 CANADIAN FORMULA ONE POWERBOAT GRAND PRIX, OUTER HARBOUR KEY ISSUE To report on how the City of Toronto will address the environmental issues raised by the Authority on the Proposed 1993 Canadian Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix race in the Outer Harbour. Res. #83 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the report on the Proposed 1993 Canadian Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix race in the Outer Harbour and the environmental Issues raised by the Authority be received. THAT the Authority confirm Its participation In the negotiations of a master agreement with the City of Toronto. THAT the Authority confirm Its participation In the proposed working committee 81 outlined In the City Council's, adopted recommendation on this issue at its meeting September 14 & 15, 1992. THAT staff be requested to report on the provisions of the future master agreement between the proponent and the City of Toronto on this Proposed 1993 Canedian Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix in the Outer Harbour. AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At its meeting #5/92 held on June 19, 1992, the Authority adopted the following resolution: Res. #95 "THAT the report on the Proposed 1993 Canadian Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix in the Outer Harbour be received; THAT the Authority request the City of Toronto to address, prior to any approval, the impact details of such an event on the Tommy Thompson Park Interim Management Program in terms of public access, parking, Tommy Thompson Park van service, noise and crowd control along the environmentally significant edge of the park in the Outer Harbour; WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 0-1 24 SECTION I. ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. PROPOSED 1993 CANADIAN FORMULA ONE POWERBOAT GRAND PRIX, OUTER HARBOUR (CONTD.) THAT the comments be forwarded to the City of Toronto, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront, and the Harbour Commissioners; AND FURTHER THAT prior to final approval staff report back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory ~oard on how the City will address the environmental issues raised by the Authority." The Authority also had before it a related resolution of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board, and in this connection, passed the following resolution: "THAT the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board advise the Authority that it believes that Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix races at the Toronto Waterfront have a negative impact on the conservation of our natural environment and, therefore, is philosophically opposed to all such races. " On April 2, 1992, the City of Toronto Economic Development Committee, in consideration of the request by Power Events International, considered the following preliminary issues: a) Noise, air and water quality impact, including potential impact on nearby environmentally sensitive areas; b) Vehicular parking and shuttle bus arrangements; c) Necessary construction on the Marina arm, such as proposed VIP parking areas; d) Provision of adequate sanitation facilities; e) Temporary privatization of North Shore parkland, including Cherry Beach; f) Temporary privatization of the Outer Harbour Marina arm and the Outer Harbour itself; g) Precedent for other power boat racing events in the Outer Harbour; h) Design implications for the Outer Harbour Marina arm of an annual event; i) Possible Zoning By-law compliance issues on the North Shore and Marina arm; j) Crowd control with respect to access to Tommy Thompson Park; k) Determination of which City approvals, planning or otherwise are required. At the Toronto City Council meeting held on September 14 & 15, 1992 the Council adopted the following Clause: "IT is recommended that: (1 ) City Council endorse the holding of a Canadian Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix in the Outer Harbour on a one-year trial basis, such endorsation to be contingent upon the necessary planning approvals being in place and the proponent entering into a master agreement with the City to address all of the City requirements, including those to be reaffirmed on an annual basis; (2) the Commissioner of Planning and Development be requested to report on the necessary planning approvals and the appropriate provisions of a master agreement between the proponent and the City, in cQnsultation with other interested City Commissioners, the proponents, the Outer Harbour Sailing Federation, the Friends of the Spit, and other agencies including, but not limited to, Metro Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Metropolitan Toronto, Toronto Harbour Commissioners, and the Royal Commission/Waterfront Regeneration Trust; (3) the Toronto Harbour Commissioners and/or the proponent be requested to submit the necessary planning applications to accommodate the powerboat race facilities proposed for the arm of the Outer Harbour Marina; and 0-125 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 17/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. PROPOSED 1993 CANADIAN FORMULA ONE POWERBOAT GRAND PRIX, OUTER HARBOUR (CONTD.) (4) a Working Committee be organized by the proponent, to the satisfaction of the City, to coordinate event planning and to monitor post-event input, representing, but not limited to, interested City Departments, residents, interest groups, the Outer Harbour Sailing Federation, the Metro Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Metro Planning, the Waterfront Regeneration Trust, transit operators, police, emergency services, and Ward Councillors". DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE In summary, the Council has endorsed the Proposed Canadian Formula One Powerboat Grand Prix in the Outer Harbour for a one-year trial basis. The proponent is required to enter into a master agreement with the City, in consultation with other interested parties. City Council also suggested that a working committee will be organized to include all interested parties to coordinate event planning and to monitor event input. It is suggested that the Authority take part in this working committee. The Authority has a number of issues of concern that require action, such as; impact details on the Interim Management Program for Tommy Thompson Park in terms of public access, parking, Tommy Thompson Park van service, noise and crowd control along the environmentally significant edge of the park in the Outer Harbour. These issues will be dealt with in the master agreement which will be prepared in consultation with the Authority. Through this process, the Authority's concerns regarding environmental impacts will be dealt with directly. Staff will report on the provisions of the master agreement. 5. ACTION TO RESTORE A CLEAN HUMBER (ARCH) -Staff report on a request by ARCH to prepare a watershed strategy for the Humber River KEY ISSUE Staff report on a request by ARCH to prepare a watershed strategy for the Humber River. Res. #84 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to continue its efforts to fund the preparation of a Humber River watershed strategy through its regular budget process; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report back to the Board on the results of the Humber Watershed Partnership project on the opportunities to accelerate the development of watershed strategies. AMENDMENT Moved by: Lois Hancey Res. #85 Seconded by: Paul Raina THAT the Authority emphasize the need for a comprehensive watershed management strategy for the Humber River; THAT staff be directed to meet with the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the Region of Peel, the Region of York, the Province, the Federal Government (Remedial Action Plan), and the area municipalities to discuss funding options for a watershed management strategy for the Humber River. THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................... CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CARRIED WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 0-126 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. ACTION TO RESTORE A CLEAN HUMBER (ARCH) (CONTD.) -Staff report on a request by ARCH to prepare a watershed strategy for the Humber River BACKGROUND Authority staff is in receipt of a letter from the organization 'Action to Restore a Clean Humber' (ARCH) requesting The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to prepare a watershed strategy for the Humber River. The following is in response to this request. The Authority's Greenspace Strategy recommended the preparation of watershed strategies for each major river watershed similar to the Rouge River Strategy. In this regard, Authority staff has been actively pursuing the means to enable the preparation of a number of watershed strategies including the watersheds of the Humber and Don Rivers and the Duffin Creek; however, the current available funding through the regular budget process generally only permits one watershed strategy to be developed within a 2-3 year period. As part of the Authority's yearly budget process, project files have been submitted for the last three years to the Ministry of Natural Resources for the preparation of a Humber River watershed strategy. The project files for the Humber River watershed strategy have not been funded as part of the Ministry budget process, instead the Ministry of Natural Resources has funded the project file for the preparation of the Don River watershed strategy. The Authority has chosen to concentrate its current efforts in this program on the Don River watershed, especially in light of available funding, and the community and political support for the work of the Task Force To Bring Back The Don. Nevertheless, the Authority is actively involved in a number of programs and projects which are of benefit to the Humber River watershed, including: . Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program (Draft) - This program is a consolidation of Authority policies and objectives including environmental pOlicies from the Rouge River Strategy which can be applicable to any of the Authority's watersheds. . Subwatershed Planning - Authority staff participated on an inter-agency committee to develop a guidance document outlining subwatershed planning. This is a preventative planning process that Authority staff is discussing with provincial and municipal staff, which should be of benefit across MTRCA jurisdiction. . Clean Up Rural Beaches Program (CURB) - As part of the Authority's work with the Ministries of the Environment and Agriculture and Food, staff is implementing remedial works in the agriculture communities within the Humber and Rouge Rivers, designed to improve water quality and enhance soil conservation. . Black Creek Project - Authority staff is assisting the Black Creek Project in rehabilitating reaches of the Black Creek, a tributary of the Humber River. . Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Geographical Information System (GIS) Project - Authority staff is assisting the RAP in compiling existing environmental monitoring data and transferring into a GIS format. This information will assist in protecting and enhancing the Humber River. In addition to these projects, Authority staff was approached by ARCH with an unsolicited proposal. The purpose of this project is to assist the Metro Toronto Remedial Action Plan Team by developing the "Humber Watershed Partnership: A Prototype Mechanism for RAP Implementation", within a nine to twelve month period. This work is being carried out with ARCH, Environment Canada and the Ministry of the Environment, with Authority staff administrating the financial resources for this project. The following outlines the four phases of this project and identifies the objective of each phase: Phase I - Develop conceptual model(s) for a Watershed Partnership. Phase II - Evaluate conceptual model(s) at the agency staff level and select preferred prototype(s). D-127 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 17/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CON SID ERA TION 5. ACTION TO RESTORE A CLEAN HUMBER (ARCH) (CONTD.) -Staff report on a request by ARCH to prepare a watershed strategy for the Humber River Phase III - Circulate preferred prototype(s) partnership and receive comments on the roles defined within the report. Phase IV - Prepare final project report. Authority staff is supportive of the need to undertake a watershed strategy for the Humber River watershed and believe the products from the Humber Watershed Partnership could potentially address not only the funding needs to achieve the development of watershed strategy for the Humber River, but also for the other major river watersheds. 6. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES STUDY KEY ISSUE The Authority's actions in response to recommendations from the Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Study. Res. #86 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Maja Prentice THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the draft report, entitled wErosion and Sediment Control Practice~ Study - Phase IW, be received for information; THAT staff be directed to work with the Ministry of the Environment In edvanclng the recommendations of the Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Study, as outlined in the executive Summary; THAT staff be directed to prepare a strategy for promoting the edoption of 8 Topsoil by-law by each of the Authority's member municipalities who do not yet have such a by-law; THAT staff be directed to develop a comprehensive sediment control program, based on findings from the Study, as a further step In preparing a comprehensive document integrating the goals and objectives of the Watershed Plan with the Initiatives In the Greenspace Strategy; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board, In early Spring 1993, with the final study report, the Strategy for promoting municipal edoption of a Topsoil by-law, and the Comprehanslve Sediment Control Program. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Authority's involvement in sediment control arises from a number of resource interests including conservation of land, water quality, and fisheries habitat. Under the Authority's revised Watershed Plan (1986), sediment control falls within the activities of the Conservation Land Management (CLM) Program. The goal of that program is to: "contribute to the quality of land and water resources through a comprehensive program for conservation of land management including vegetation management, wildlife management, fisheries improvement, source area protection, sediment control, water quality improvement, and conservation land planning". WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 D-128 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES STUDY (CONTD.) The sediment control component of the CLM Program applies to both rural and urban portions of the watershed. However, both the Authority and the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) share concern over the lack of effective sediment controls being employed by all agencies and practitioners in the developing portion of the watershed. In response to this concern, the two agencies secured funding from the Clean Sweep Lottery to undertake an Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Study. which would set out recommendations for remedial action. A draft report documenting the activities involved in Phase I of the study has been completed (see Executive Summary). The primary objectives of Phase I of the Study, which extended from October 1991 to October 1992, were: . To evaluate the effectiveness of the existing erosion and sediment control guidelines and the implementation of various control methods. . To identify solutions to improve construction practices by examining current legislation, design/planning and education. . The Study involved five components: 1) Field Monitoring; 2) Erosion and Sediment Control Educational Seminar; 3) Erosion and Sediment Control Survey; 4) Demonstration Projects; 5) Legislative Review and Evaluation. Generally, the Study found that the existing erosion and sediment control guidelines are adequate, but that the real problems lie in the planning and selection of sediment controls for specific sites and in the monitoring and maintenance of sediment controls, once installed. The Study also indicated that improved control of sediment could best be achieved through stronger enforcement, education, and training by a number of agencies. Overall, the Study set out recommendations for improved sediment control under four general areas: 1) Municipal Adoption of Top Soil By-laws under the Top Soil Preservation Act; 2) Revision to Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines; 3) Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring; 4) Training/Education Course and Workshops. An appropriate lead agency was identified for each recommendation, although it is interesting to note that all agencies have a responsibility to take a more active role in erosion and sediment control. Finalization of this draft Phase I report will not significantly alter any of the study recommendations. For this reason, staff saw no need to delay the implementation of the study recommendations. Phase II of the study will focus on the implementation of recommendations from Phase I. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE In response to the study findings and recommendations, the following actions could be taken by the Authority, directly: D-129 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES STUDY (CONTD.) Study Recommendation #1 - Topsoil By-laws Preparation of a Strategy for Promoting Municipal Adoption of a Topsoil By-law. The Study identified the Topsoil Preservation Act as the most effective piece of legislation to control sediment from construction activities early in the development process. A number of municipalities, including Mississauga and Markham, have either enacted or are in the process of enacting Topsoil By- laws under the Topsoil Preservation Act. Staff support the need for an Authority strategy to promote the adoption of a Topsoil By-law by the remaining municipalities in the MTRCA jurisdiction. The strategy would provide recommendations for: a) Promotional activities (e.g. presentations, meetings, etc.); and b) Operational guidelines (e.g. a model Topsoil By-law, guidelines for the development of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Authority and the municipality regarding responsibility for sediment control monitoring; technical guidelines for use of erosion and sediment control). Study Recommendation #2 - Revised Guidelines Although the existing 1987 Guidelines on Erosion and Sediment Control For Urban Construction Site. were found to be technically adequate, the Study found that improvements could be made in the areas of planning, selection, monitoring, and maintenance of sediment controls. Authority staff could develop a framework for the revision of the 1987 Guidelines, based on information collected during the Study. The framework would be used to obtain further provincial endorsement on the direction to proceed with revisions. In addition, this initiative will contribute to the Authority's efforts in developing an MTRCA-specific set of guidelines for use by member municipalities taking more responsibility in the area of sediment control, under the new Topsoil By-laws. In response to the Mississauga Topsoil By-law, at Meeting #1/92, the Authority resolved: "...THAT an auditing process be established, including the preparation of guidelines for erosion and sediment control for urban construction sites, to ensure that the Authority's watershed management objectives are maintained;" Study Recommendations '3 and 4 - Compliance Monitoring/Education To achieve an improvement in erosion and sediment control practices, province-wide, other government agencies must respond to the Study recommendations. To take an active role in soliciting action by other agencies, Authority and MOE staff are preparing a brief report to summarize the main findings and recommendations of the Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Study. The report will be written to a non-technical audience and will be distributed to Senior government officials, decision-makers, and other interested individuals. The report will also be sent to the Minister of the Environment to fulfil a condition of the Clean Sweep Funding, which required a report of the study findings. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 117/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 D-130 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 6. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES STUDY (CONTD.) General Development of a Comprehensive Sediment Control Program. At Meeting 111/90, the Authority resolved" ...THAT staff be directed to prepare a comprehensive document integrating the goals and Objectives of the Watershed Plan with the new initiatives in the Greenspace Strategy". Development of a sediment control program, as a further step in preparing that comprehensive document, would be timely with the completion of the Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Study. The Study findings could be used to update and strengthen the Authority's existing sediment control activities in urbanizing areas and the Authority's commitment to sediment control could be demonstrated by documenting these new directions into a program. FINANCIAL DETAILS Complete funding for this project, in the amount of $150,000, was provided by the Clean Sweep Lottery Program and the Toronto and Area Watershed Management Studies funding. Of the original $150,000, $58,900 remains to support the Phase II implementation activities. 7. DON WATERSHED STATE OF THE ECOSYSTEM REPORT KEY ISSUE The Don Watershed State of the Ecosystem Report completed by consultants in August of 1992. Res. #87 Moved by: Victoria Carley Seconded by: William Granger THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Don Watershed State of the Ecosystem Report, dated August 1992, be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to provide copies of the report to all Don Watershed Task Force members; Don watershed municipalities; the Ministries of Natural Resources, environment, Transportation; the Greater Toronto Area office; regional reference libraries; the 'Waterfront Regeneration Trust Agency; and community groups undertaking regeneratl"n and stewardship activities within the watershed. AMENDMENT Res. #88 Moved by: Joanna Kldd Seconded by: Maja Prentice THAT the report be referred back to the consultants and that they be asked to re-write the Executive Summary to Include reference to the Task Force to Bring Back the Don; the Metro Toronto Remedial Action Plan; and that the recommended management options (Table A) be eliminated; THAT the revised Executive Summary be forwarded to the full Authority at Its meeting on October 23, 1992, to be considered In conjunction with the recommendations related to the Don Watershed State of the Ecosystem Report. THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................... CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CARRIED 0-1 31 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 17/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. DON WATERSHED STATE OF THE ECOSYSTEM REPORT (CONTD.) BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/91 the following resolution was adopted: Res. #154 "THAT The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority initiate the development of a Don River Watershed Management Strategy; "THAT a detailed investigation of the greenspace resources of the Don Watershed be initiated and include both valley and tablelands using existing data and field investigations. as required; "THAT terms of reference for a 'Don Watershed Ecosystem Report' be developed in conjunction with the Task Force to Bring Back the Don and the Authority's member and local municipalities within the Don watershed and the appropriate provincial agencies." . At Executive Meeting #13/91, by Resolution #255, the firm of Ecologistics Limited, in association with Paragon Engineering Limited, was retained to prepare the Don River Watershed State of the Ecosystem Report at an upset limit of $49,600., plus applicable taxes. The objectives set for the State of the Ecosystem Report were: (1 ) To develop a 'Greenspace' inventory of the Don River watershed in a digital format compatible with the SPAN Geographic Information System; (2) To produce a comprehensive analysis of the biophysical state of the Don Watershed ecosystem based on the review of existing technical studies and reports; (3) To produce a comprehensive analysis of the legislative and policy framework relevant to the planning, management and rehabilitation of the Don Watershed; and (4) To produce a comprehensive analysis of current programs and initiatives of the various agencies, municipalities and others which may contribute to the rehabilitation of the Don River watershed. Reoorts Received From The Consultants The terms of reference required that the consultant provide the Authority with two separate products. The first received was the digital computer files which now form the basis of the Authority's computerized regional geographic information base for the Don watershed. Staff has been using the greenspace data base and has been enhancing it since initial files were received early in 1991. Samples of maps which can be generated using in house Authority facilities will be available for review. Information currently contained in the Don watershed data base includes: . location of all Authority ESAs within the watershed; . Ministry of Natural Resources - ANSls; . Ministry of Natural Resources designated wetlands; . public open space; . forest and agricultural areas; . land use; . watercourse locations; . MTRCA 1991 fisheries study locations; . valley and stream corridor ownership for major watercourses; and . flood vulnerable areas. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 17/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 D-1 32 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. DON WATERSHED STATE OF THE ECOSYSTEM REPORT (CONTD.) The second product received was the written report on the Don Watershed State of the Ecosystem Report prepared from existing technical sources, through policy review and consultation with municipal and provincial agencies, and from questionnaires returned by interest groups. A copy of the Executive Summary of the document is appended. This report will serve as a valuable reference for the Authority's newly formed Don Watershed Task Force, for Authority and other agency staff and for community groups in their efforts to regenerate the watershed. The consultants note in the report that no specific ecosystem targets have been established specifically for the Don Watershed. Evaluating the state of the ecosystem was difficult in the absence of these targets. The establishment of clear targets and the identification of the actions required to achieve these targets must be addressed by the new Task Force. The detailed review of the policies and programs of the federal, provincial, regional and municipal jurisdictions involved provides useful information on the extent to which policies and programs are in place and are being used to address ecosystem issues. Lack of co-ordination of these efforts is identified once again as a missing component in these efforts. Related Studies The Authority has initiated a number of other activities which will contribute to the development of the Don watershed management and regeneration strategy. The final report updating the hydrology and hydraulics for the watershed has been submitted recently by the Authority's consultants - Marshall, Macklin, Monaghan. A forthcoming communication to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board will address stormwater management concerns and recommend policies for the Board and the Authority's consideration. The review of the Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) designation criteria was received by the Authority at Meeting #8/92. It is currently being circulated for review and will form the basis for updating information on ESAs within the Authority's juriSdiction including field investigations of potential new ESA sites. Initial information on existing (formal) trails and public access points will be brought into the digitized information base by early 1993. This will assist the task force in addressing greenspace linkage issues within the watershed. Details of work yet to be done: 1 . Continue to investigate and pursue the cost effective addition of data layers to the GIS system useful to the Authority and its partners in watershed and resource regeneration including the addition of fill regulation and regulatory flood lines. 2. Production and distribution of copies of the report as per the recommendation. 0-133 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD '7/92, OCTOBER 16, 1992 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 8. BLUFFERS TOPLANDS PROPOSED PARKING AND ACCESS -Brimley Road (Bluffers Park - City of Scarborough) KEY ISSUE To report on the status of the proposed parking for Bluffers Toplands (City of Scarborough). Res. #89 Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lois Hancey IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the status report on the proposed Bluffers Toplands parking be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At meeting #6/92 held on July 24, 1992, the Authority adopted the, following resolution: Res. #110 "THAT the construction of a temporary traffic circle by the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department, with participation of the City of Scarborough, on Authority lands off Brimley Road immediately south of Barkdene Hills be approved; THAT the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department and the City of Scarborough Works and the Environment Department be so advised. AND FURTHER THAT staff report back on the status of the parking proposed for the toplands. " In 1987 the Authority proposed the construction of a parking lot for Bluffers Toplands, realignment of the access to Cardinal Newman School and turning circle for private and transit vehicles. This proposal was to provide phased parking on Authority and Cardinal Newman High School lands. In an earlier action by the Authority on the Bluffers access issue, the Authority adopted the following resolution at its meeting #2/92 held on March 22, 1991: Res. #55 "THAT the status report dated February 18, 1991, on the Life and Fire Safety Report and Brimley Road South Traffic Study recommendations, be received; THAT staff be directed to work with Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department and Scarborough Works Department on traffic management approaches and long term access improvements to Bluffers Park; THAT the provision of emergency telephones be referred to Metropolitan Toronto Council, and discussed also with marina operators and boat clubs; AND FURTHER THAT the recommendations be forwarded to Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department and Scarborough Works Department." In response to discussions on the traffic management approaches and long term access improvement, construction of a temporary turning circle in the area proposed for parking on the Bluffers Toplands was undertaken and became operational in July 1992. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 117/92. OCTOBER 16, 1992 0-1 34 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD 8. BLUFFERS TOPLANDS PROPOSED PARKING AND ACCESS ICONTD.) -Brimley Road (Bluffers Park - City of Scarborough) DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Authority staff will continue to work with the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the City of Scarborough to evaluate the effectiveness of the temporary traffic circle in alleviating the weekend traffic congestion on Brimley Road and in Bluffers Park. As a result of these actions the parking lot concept has been put on hold. NEW BUSINESS MOTION Moved by: Victoria Carley Res. #90 Seconded by: Paul Raina THAT staff be directed not to permit any applications for permanent structures or facilities within the are~ of review by the Don Watershed Task Force until the Task Force has set planning guidelinas, or equivalent, within one year, for the Don watershed except where the applicant can prove a critical need to Improve, protect or restore a structure or facility which is part of an existing use within the study area; AND FURTHER THAT all municipalities within the Don River watershed be requested to approve appropriate legislation to achieve the above or to restrict development until such time as the Don River Watershed Task Force has an approved set of guidelines or equivalent. MOTION TO REFER Moved by: Maja Prentice Seconded by: Lorna Bissell THAT this matter be referred to staff to provide a report on the Implications of the motion to the next Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board. THE MOTION TO REFER WAS ............................................... CARRIED TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 11 :25 a.m., October 16, 1992. Kio Van Kemoen J. Craia Mather Vice Chair Secretary Treasurer ~ IMJrking Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace Vthe metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes D-135 NOVEMBER 20, 1992 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92 The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, November 20, 1992. The Chair called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. PRESENT Chair Lois Griffin Vice-Chair Kip Van Kempen Members Lorna Bissell lIa Bossons Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Paul Raina Bev Salmon Joyce Trimmer ABSENT Members Joanna Kidd Maja Prentice Frank Scarpitti MINUTES Res. #91 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: Paul Raina THAT the Minutes of Meeting #7/92 be approved. CARRIED DIRECTOR, WATER RESOURCE DIVISION The Chair announced the appointment of Brian Denney to the position of Director, Water Resource Division, effective December 1, 1992. 0-136 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION I. ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 -Synopsis of the Waterfront Monitoring Program A slide and verbal presentation was given by Gord MacPherson, Coordinator. KEY ISSUE At the Water and Related land Management Board Meeting #2/92, staff was directed to provide the Board with an overview of the Waterfront Monitoring Program. Res. #92 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on the Waterfront Monitoring Program be received. AMENDMENT Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Res. #93 Seconded by: Lois Hancey THA T staff report back to the next meeting of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board on opportunities that may be available for raising public awareness of storm water quality. THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................... CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED BACKGROUND Since 1975, The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has conducted environmental monitoring programs to describe the physical and biological conditions associated with Shoreline Regeneration Projects. The Authority's Environmental Monitoring Program focuses on compliance monitoring for Authority projects, environmental planning, and assisting and coordinating ongoing research. The results of the various monitoring programs are included in technical reports, data summary documents, and master plans. The overall objectives of the program are to: . augment the present state of knowledge of lake processes by further research, data collection and analysis; . ensure that Authority projects comply with the environmental standards of regulatory agencies; . generate waterfront development plans that integrate environmental enhancement opportunities into the design, and ensure that the environmental integrity of the site is maintained or improved; . seek to integrate the monitoring efforts of various agencies to avoid duplication and provide maximum benefit from collective efforts; A brief summary of the three principal monitoring techniques and preliminary results are as follows: WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 0-137 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION 00" 1. PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTD.) -Synopsis of the Waterfront Monitoring Program Water Quality Assessment: o. Water' quality collections are conducted routinely at a number of waterfront areas from April to November. Samples are analyzed for bacteria, trace heavy metals, nutrients, water chemistry, PCB's, and numerous pesticides. The water quality associated with IllI Ie TTP .. . - waterfront parks is greatly influenced by the proximity of major point sources. L..acat Ion .1_ m'8al.11ll11 As an example of water quality conditions, Figure 1. Figure 1. Mean total phosphorus levels in water outlines the mean concentration of total phosphorus at collected from selected waterfront locations. selected waterfront areas since 1989. Total phosphorus levels are useful for discussion because they reflect the distribution and concentration of other parameters. Consistent and stablQ water quality conditions are present at Tommy Thompson Park, Bluffers Park, and the area around the Colonel Sam Smith Waterfront Area. Water quality at these locations reflect nearshore conditions and hopefully will remain stable. Violations along the waterfront of the provincial water quality standards are sporadic in nature and are primarily influenced by rainfall, wind conditions, and water temperature. Water quality monitoring provides a valuable baseline assessment of conditions on a seasonal and annual basis. The elevated levels at Humber Bay Park and Ashbridge's Bay Park fluctuate from year to year and are a result of discharges from the nearby sewage treatment plant, storm sewers, and rivers. The above two locations will continue to have poor water quality until the point sources are controlled. Elevated levels at Frenchman's Bay are unique and indicate accelerated eutrophic conditions and the loss of aquatic macrophytes within the bay. The lack of previous data within Frenchman's Bay limits our understanding of water quality conditions. Sediment Quality Assessment: Most contaminants in the aquatic environment are eventually deposited on the lake bottom. Sediment quality assessment can determine the extent of or. contamination and indicate cumulative impacts. As an example of sediment quality conditions, Figure 2 displays the mean total phosphorus levels at ~ selected waterfront areas since 1989. Trends in 2OCO sediment quality results are typically similar to water quality results. 1~ 1000 The sediment quality conditions at the waterfront 500 parks are influenced by local sources of contamination and not Authority projects. Elevated 0 levels of total phosphorus at Ashbridge's Bay Park lll5 .. "" .08 .. - and Humber Bay Park are the result of LocUlon contamination from storm sewers, river discharges, .1_ E!!J1180.1881 and sewage treatment plant outfalls. The above Figure 2. Mean total phosphorus levels in sediments two locations will continue to have poor sediments until the point sources are controlled. Sediment collected at selected waterfront areas since 1989. quality at other locations reflect nearshore conditions and hopefully will remain stable. 0-138 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION I. ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 (CONTD.) -Synopsis of the Waterfront Monitoring Program fish Community Assessment: The fish collections along the Toronto waterfront M me Cartll tara: have been the most enlightening aspect of the CoL IcnII Smltll tara: Environmental Monitoring Program. This survey BlIaaMr IaJ tara: delineates spawning activity and the location of .lIIIIller Rln, critical spawning habitat within the waterfront 'Ib1'Dll1a II14mda parks. It also documents the presence/absence of 011_ llarllau unique species, and the composition and health of 1trmm, TbamJllOa tart Adlbrl~ IaJ tart the fish community. The fish tagging aspect of this IcorDOfOlIgll 1IlO,. program identifies fish movement along the 111111u1 tart waterfront and linkages between habitats, and the loll". Rlnr subsequent capture of tagged fish has indicated the p,.1IC:lllllllM IcrF ____ extensive use of waterfront parks by anglers. D . III II :aD 21 aD _II~ As an example of the waterfront fish community, figure 3. Number of fish species at various waterfront Figure 3 displays the results of the 1991 survey of locations. the Toronto waterfront and outlines the number .of species collected from specific areas. This survey has revealed that the waterfront parks provide significant habitat which has fostered the development of unique fish communities. Specifically the waterfront parks provide structural habitat in the form of rocky shorelines and submerged weedbeds that are beneficial to many fish. The waterfront parks also provide isolation from the cold waters of Lake Ontario which produces a stable thermal habitat for resident fish. Our survey of the waterfront has shown that the fish communities across the waterfront are improving due in part to the significant habitat created by waterfront parks. The survey has identified significant spawning activity in areas like Bluffers Park and Colonel Sam Smith Park, and the lack of spawning in Frenchman's Bay. In addition to the above techniques, the monitoring program also includes; botanical inventories, wildlife inventones, habitat assessment, invertebrate community assessment, and biomonitoring. Conclusions The Waterfront Environmental Monitoring Program has provided insight into the complex ecosystem of Lake Ontario, and delineated the effects of Authority shoreline regeneration projects. Monitoring has identified that the Keating Channel dredging and disposal operation has had minimal impact on Tommy Thompson Park, and that the construction of the Colonel Sam Smith Waterfront Park has had minimal environmental impact. Through our monitoring program, it is apparent that the impact of storm sewers, sewage treatment plants, and river discharges are still the major problems on the waterfront. The monitoring program is critical for establishing baseline environmental conditions for the planning and Implementation of future projects like the proposed Motel Strip, and Cell 1 Capping at Tommy Thompson Park. The environmental information provides a foundation of knowledge that allows the integration of habitat and environmental enhancement opportunities into waterfront development projects. The habitat enhancement opportunities outlined in the Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project, 1992-1994, are a direct result of knowledge gained through the monitoring program. South Marine Drive is an example of habitat creation where the Authority has created two small wetlands and biodiversified the shoreline in association with the erosion control works. Recently, the Authority has also been successful in securing funding for pilot scale implementation of the habitat aspects of the shoreline regeneration projects. Our funding partners were very supportive of this project due in part to the long term commitment and the scope and nature of the monitoring programs. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 0-139 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1994 ICONTD.) -Synopsis of the Waterfront Monitoring Program The Authority has become a resource of environmental information on the waterfront which is extensively utilized by outside government agencies, public interest groups, and academic institutions. The Authority has also coordinated joint environmental monitoring projects and collaborated with outside agencies on projects with mutual interests. The fish community survey is a good example where the Authority works with the Ministries of the Environment and Natural Resources to obtain fish samples for the Ontario Sports Fish Contamination Program, and the Waterfront Fish Indicator Program. The Waterfront Monitoring Program is critical to understand the effects of Waterfront Regeneration Projects and the opportunities that regeneration can provide for habitat restoration. The environmental conditions along the Toronto waterfront are the result of many local and regional influences that impact all aspects of the aquatic ecosystem. The Toronto waterfront is a very complex ecological system and environmental conditions fluctuate, and are very site specific. Poor environmental conditions persist at areas that are influenced by point sources and will continue to degrade. Areas that are isolated from point sources have stable environmental conditions and hopefully improve with the implementation of various remedial measures along the waterfront. FINANCIAL DETAILS The 1991 Waterfront Monitoring Program is funded ($112,000) from the Waterfront Capital Budget and ($60,000) from the Fill Quality Control Program. 2. SEASONAL FLOODING. VICINITY OF OLD BROCK ROAD AT THE CLAREMONT BY-PASS -Request by Region of Durham Works Committee for Authority Review KEY ISSUE The Authority has received a request of the Region of Durha(11 Works Committee from its meeting held September 22, 1992, to prepare a project file to deal with a seasonal flooding concern in the vicinity of Old Brock Road at the Claremont by-pass. Res. #94 Moved by: Lorna Bissell Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report dated November 20, 1992, on the request from the Region of Durham Works Committee to develop a project file on flood remedial works In the vicinity of Old Brock Road in Claremont be received; THAT the Region of Durham Works Committee be informed that as no structures are considered flood vulnerable, the Authority sees no need for flood control remedial works through this site, and as such no project file will be developed. AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to meet with Mr. Senkiw to determine if the Authority could assist in restoring the natural character of the stream corridor. CARRIED 0-140 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD 18/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. SEASONAL FLOODING - VICINITY OF OLD BROCK ROAD AT THE CLAREMONT BY-PASS (CONTD.) -Request by Region of Durham Works Committee for Authority Review BACKGROUND The Region of Durham has received a request from Mr. Senkiw, a resident on Old Brock Road in Claremont, to assist in eliminating a seasonal flooding problem on his property. Mr. Senkiw's property and those of his neighbours are traversed by a very small headwater tributary of the Mitchell Creek (52.53 ha) which is tributary to the Duffin Creek. Mr. Senkiw contends that the seasonal flooding on this property has been increased due to a diversion of a small additional drainage area into the watercourse in question due to the construction of the Claremont by-pass. Along with the additional drainage area, Mr. Senkiw has indicated that sediment from upstream development has clogged the low flow channel and changed the watercourse characteristics through their properties. The residents, through Mr. Senkiw, first brought their complaints to Town of Pickering staff who investigated the issue and responded by correspondence dated December 10, 1990, and May 17, 1991. The Town's letters state that there was no evidence of any recent sedimentation problems and that the watercourse through this area is naturally poorly defined. With respect to upstream development, the area upstream is presently zoned to be developed as large lot (0.3 ha) residential properties. Storm ""ater management practices will be required. The Town of Pickering felt that there was not an issue regarding the watercourse which would warrant the use of public funds. Authority staff has identified the need for storm water controls on flows from the only subdivision currently in planning for this area. Staff comments on the subdivision have also requested adequate sediment controls to be implemented during construction. The area in question is located within the Oak Ridges Moraine and is subject to additional levels of planning controls. With respect to the subdivision currently in planning (i.e., Toko Investments), there is no defined watercourse draining the upstream lands. The residents of Old Brock Road, through Mr. Senkiw, have now approached the Region of Durham for assistance. In May of 1992, a report was taken to the Region of Durham Works Committee on the watercourse through Mr. Senkiw's property and his neighbours. The conclusion of this report was that the maintenance of the seasonal watercourse should be the responsibility of the private home owner as it is not in public ownership. As for the diversion of an additional 15.24 hectares of drainage area due to the Claremont by-pass, the Region contended that since the by-pass was constructed in 1966 and Mr. Senkiw constructed his home in 1986, that the homeowner assumed responsibility of the level of seasonal flooding inherent along the watercourse. A second report was taken to the Works Committee on September 22, 1992, outlining Mr. Senkiw's request under the "Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act" to obtain documentation relating to the legitimacy of the diversion of waters by the Claremont by-pass construction. While staff of the Region indicated they were prepared to meet and discuss the problem with Mr. Senkiw, it was still their position that the conclusions of the report taken to the Works Committee on May 5, 1992, were valid. Following the report being received by the Works Committee, a resolution was also adopted that the' Authority be requested to prepare a "project file" to deal with the watercourse concerns presented by Mr. Senkiw. Staff of the Authority have reviewed the information supplied by the Region of Durham and have visited the site in question. The watercourse drains only 52.5 hectares and, being less than 130 hectares, the Authority has traditionally not administered its construction regulation. Major system drainage is left to area municipalities to resolve as part of their review of servicing. In the case of the residents of Old Brock Road, no issue relating to flooding of their homes has been expressed; the flooding issue seems related to the property only. The watercourse has a defined cross-section as it outlets from Old Brock Road but quickly becomes ill- WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 0-141 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. SEASONAL FLOODING - VICINITY OF OLD BROCK ROAD AT THE CLAREMONT BY.PASS (CONTD.) -Request by Region of Durham Works Committee for Authority Review defined through Mr. Senkiw's property and downstream where it exhibits a swale like appearance. No significant erosion or sediment problems were observed through this reach. Flooding along this watercourse occurs on a seasonal basis during the spring thaw(s) or following very heavy rainfalls, however, this is typical of watercourses of this nature. No structures appear to be at risk from flooding as they are located well above the watercourse. As such, the flooding issue seems to be associated with inconvenience and maintenance of private property. For thiS reason, there is no justification for the Authority to undertake any form of flood control remedial works through this site. 3. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK . 1 993 Interim Management Program KEY ISSUE As part of the ongoing Interim Management Program at Tommy Thompson Park (TTP), staff has prepared the proposed 1993 Interim Management Program for the park. Res. #95 Moved by: Paul Raina Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the 1993 Interim Management Program for Tommy Thompson Park be received; THAT staff be directed to implement a no charge transportation service consisting of a single van operating from April 24 to October 11, 1993, on a similar basis as the 1992 service; THA T staff be directed to negotiate a 1993 licence agreement with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club; THAT staff be directed to negotiate a formal agreement with the Toronto Harbour Commissioners regarding access and other such items deemed necessary for the 1993 program; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized to take whatever action is required in connection with the Interim Management Program including the execution of any documents and agreements. CARRIED BACKGROUND At the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #8/91, the 1992 Interim Management Program for Tommy Thompson Park was received. The follOWing briefly outlines the regular activities and special events that have occurred during the 1992 season. The park was open to the public Saturdays, Sundays and holidays from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. commencing January 4, 1992. To date, a total of 33,774 visits have been recorded at the park. This attendance is lower than last year at this time and is being primarily attributed to the poor weekend weather that we have experienced throughout the Spring and Summer of 1992. Public transportation was provided by means of a single shuttle van operating during public hours from April 25th until October 12th. This service has replaced the single TTC bus and van combination used in previous 0-142 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK (CONTD.) - 1993 Interim Management Program years. The operation of a single van allowed the Authority to maintain a sufficient level of service to park users requiring transportation, while reducing the operating costs of the service by approximately 50%. The total usage for the service in 1992 was 5,899 rides, which represents a 3.5% increase over 1991 ridership. During the period of operation it was determined that approximately 18% of the overall park visitors used the transportation service and of this use approximately 60% were members of the Aquatic Park Sailing Club. In total, 120 visitors used the TIC Jones Bus connection to access Tommy Thompson Park. A further 149 riders used the van service to connect with the Jones Bus upon leaving the park; however, the majority of the visitors using the van (2,468) arrived by car and accessed the van at the main entrance/parking area. In order to further assess the types of users and their level of satisf~ction with the transportation service, staff distributed a Van Service Questionnaire during its operation from September 5 through October 12. These surveys indicated that the majority of the respondents were very satisfied with the size of van, frequency of service, van route, friendliness of staff and overall quality of the service. A nature interpretation program was continued in 1992 and operated from May 30th to September 7th. This year's program offered a theme walk on Sundays and holidays focusing on different aspects of the park's natural history, and a general interest walk on Saturdays. In addition to the regularly scheduled program, staff offered several bird banding demonstrations in the spring and fall, and two additional theme programs in September including a Monarch butterfly walk and an interpretive bike ride at Tommy Thompson Park. The park bulletin board was upgraded this year to accommodate a greater diversity of display materials. This display was changed regularly throughout the summer and was used to compliment the nature interpretation program at the park, and announce the scheduling of all park operations and activities. The bulletin board will be used continually throughout the fall ,and winter to highlight information on the park and Authority activities. The Tommy Thompson Park Newsletter continued its circulation in 1992. This newsletter has given the Authority the opportunity to highlight special events, regular programs and announcements. In addition, the newsletter was utilized to inform all visitors of the progress being made with the master planning process for Tommy Thompson Park. . In the interest of safety, security and access, a staff member has been on duty at all times during public hours. It is expected that this practice will continue for 1993. Soecial Activities In addition to the regular park programs, other special events and activities have taken place at Tommy Thompson Park during the 1992 season. The following is an outline of these various events: MS Society Walk-A-Thon (May 24); - Tour for Federal Minister of the Environment Pauline Browse (June 2); Friends of the Spit Viewing Day (June 7); Field Trip for Elderhostel Program (June 11); - Caravan Stage Co. Production "The Coming" (June 13-28); Aquatic Park Sailing Club Spit Clean-up Day (July 18); Society for Ecological Restoration Field Trip (August 14); Annual Terry Fox Run (September 20). Staff is of the opinion that the 1992 program was successful in providing year-round access to the park while maintaining a sufficient level of service for park visitors. In this respect, staff has prepared the 1 993 Interim Management Program on a similar basis as follows: WAIER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 0-143 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK (CONTD.) - 1993 Interim Management Program 1993 Interim Manaaement Proaram The '1993 Interim Management Program will endeavour to maintain the basic components of the previous year's program. These basic components include: . year-round access of the park to the public; . a transportation service for use by the public during the spring, summer and fall seasons; . a resource management program (gull control, tern management and biophysical inventories); . a nature interpretation program offered during the summer season; and, . a licence agreement with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club for sailing activities. Public Access: The park will be open year round on weekends and holidays (excluding Christmas Day and Boxing Day) from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. commencing January 2, 1993. In the interest of public safety and security, staff will be on site at all times during public hours. During the winter months, the park may close periodically due to unsafe conditions created by inclement weather. Public Transoortation: Transportation will be provided by means of a single van in operation from April 24 through October 1 1, 1993. As in 1992, the service will operate on a half hour schedule between the corner of Leslie St. and Commissioners St. and the pedestrian bridge within the park. The service will stop over at the main entrance/parking area, and will be scheduled to connect with the TIC Jones Bus at Commissioners Street. The use of a single van shuttle service in 1992, demonstrated that a sufficient level of service could be maintained while reducing operating costs by approximately 50%. In 1993 staff will endeavour to further reduce the costs of this service by making use of vehicles within the MTRCA's motorpool, if available. In addition, the Aquatic Park Sailing Club has agreed to provide a financial contribution of $1,500 in order to help defray the cost of the service. Nature Interoretation: This program will be provided to the public from June 5 though September 6, 1993, and will include general interest and theme walks presented by a park naturalist on weekends at 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. During other hours the naturalist will circulate throughout the park setting up nature viewing stations or providing general information to the public using the transportation service. Staff will prepare a brochure outlining the summer schedule of nature walks for distribution to the public, and will make use of news releases to announce the weekly program. Lessees: Staff will prepare a 1993 lease agreement with the Aquatic Park Sailing Club for sailing activities at the Park. The conditions of the lease will be the same as used in previous years. Vehicle parking on site and access during publiC hours will be limited to three weekends in the spring and three weekends in the fall for necessary preparatory work. During public hours outside the above, the Aquatic Park Sailing Club members must park their vehicles at the Leslie Street parking area. During non-public hours, access to leased land will be granted upon proof of membership and key privileges. Wildlife and Resource Manaaement Activities: These activities will include a ring-billed gull control program, common tern habitat management, Canada goose management, and an update of the 1978-82 Aquatic Park Environmental Study. The gull control program will be undertaken from March 29 through July 9, 1993, and will encompass the same areas controlled in previous years. Control techniques will include staff patrol, pyrotechnical devices and scarecrows, with control activities being undertaken on weekdays throughout the duration of the program. Control activities will be extended to include weekends during the month of May. Falconry will not be used in 1993 in order to evaluate the effectiveness of other control techniques on site and reduce operating costs of this program. 0-1 44 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION I . ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. TOMMY THOMPSON PARK (CONTD.) - 1993 Interim Management Program An update of the Aquatic Park Environmental Study will be undertaken using methodologies similar to those used during the 1978-82 study. Studies will focus on updating the information on mammals, reptiles, amphibians, birds and fish. Staff will also endeavour to update the Authority's Environmentally Significant Area Study for the E.S.A.'s at Tommy Thompson Park. The common tern management program for 1993 will be similar to 1992 and will include the delineation and monitoring of nesting areas, signage and patrol, installation of artificial nesting rafts in cooperation with the Canadian Wildlife Service, and monitoring tern nesting success. RA TIONALE The purpose of the Interim Management Program at Tommy Thompson Park is to maintain the existing level of public use of the site until such a time as the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan is fully approved and implemented. The proposed 1993 Interim Management Program is in keeping with the agreement with Metropolitan Toronto for the Authority to operate the site until this time, without establishing any long-term operating procedures. The provision of a van shuttle service will facilitate access for members of the Aquatic Park Sailing Club during the periods when vehicular access is restricted. In addition, this service has enhanced the use of the site for other individuals and groups who could not otherwise enjoy the site because of the distances to and within the site. The use of an Authority operated transportation service augments the Authority's presence on-site and increases the level of public safety at the park. The operation of a single van maintains a greater degree of flexibility by allowing alteration of scheduling and frequency, if required, and connection with the existing TIC Jones Bus at Commissioners Street. The discontinuation of the falconry component in the 1993 gull control program will allow staff to evaluate the effectiveness of less cost intensive control techniques. Staff is proposing to redirect the funding from this component to facilitate the update of the Environmental Study and Environmentally Significant Areas Study for the park. The information obtained, as a result of these updates, will be required for site specific planning and monitoring related to the Master Plan, habitat creation projects, and the ongoing management of the site. FINANCIAL DETAILS Costs associated with the 1992 Interim Management Program have been estimated at $144,000, representing a zero percent increase over the 1992 budget. The following is a breakdown of the costs associated with the program: GULL CONTROL PROGRAM $30,000.00 TRANSPORT A TION SERVICE $15,000.00 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY UPDATE $25.000.00 WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT $10,000.00 NATURE INTERPRETATION PROGRAM $ 15,000.00 EQUIPMENT RENTAL $10,000.00 WEEKEND OPERATIONS $30,000.00 SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS $ 9.000.00 TOTAL $144,000.00 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 D-145 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MINUTES -Meeting # 1/92 KEY ISSUE The minutes of the first meeting of the Don Watershed Task Force, held on October 29, 1992, are provided for the information of the Board. Res. #96 Moved by: Victoria Carley Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the minutes of the Don Watershed Task Force, Meeting #1/92, Appendix WR. 93/92, be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE The Don Watershed Task Force held its first meeting on October 29, 1992. The Task Force will report formally to the Authority through the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board on a quarterly basis. Copies of the minutes of all scheduled meetings of the Task Force will also be provided to the Authority through the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board. This will constitute the formal record of the ongoing work of the Task Force and serve to keep Authority members informed of the steps being undertaken in the development of the Don Watershed Strategy. 5. MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT'S "MATERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY FOR SOIL, ROCK AND LIKE MATERIALSw AND THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT'S "FILL QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR LAKEFILLlNGw FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS -Com/"(lents KEY ISSUE Final comments to the Advisory Committee on Environmental Standards (ACES) on the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) draft Lakefill Guidelines and Materials Management Policy. Res. #97 Moved by: Bev Salmon Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Advisory Committee on Environmental Standards be asked to consider the Authority's comments on the Ontario Ministry of the Environment documents entitled "Materials Management Policy for Soil, Rock and Like Materialsw and WFiII Quality Guidelines for LakefillingW, with particular emphasis on the Implications of these initiatives on the feasibility of the waterfront access Objectives of the Authority's projects at the Motel Strip and East Point Park. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #7/92, the Board received a staff report on the MOE draft Lakefill Guidelines and Materials Management Policy and recommended that staff prepare final comments and recommendations for the next meeting of the Board. 0-146 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION I. ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT'S wMA TERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY FOR SOIL, ROCK AND LIKE MATERIALSw AND THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT'S wFILL QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR LAKEFILLlNGw FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS (CONTD.) -Comments Analvsis of the Prooosed Documents In September, 1992, the Minister of the Environment asked the Advisory Committee on Environmental Standards to consult the public and make recommendations on the "Proposed Policy for Management of Excess Soil, Rock and Like Materials" and the "Fill Quality Guidelines for Lakefilling in Ontario". These documents were released for public comment along with a number of supporting documents: (1 ) Policy for Management of Excess Soil, Rock and Like Materials: Economic Assessment; (2) Rationale for the Development of "Ontario Typical Range" of Chemical Parameters in Soil, Vegetation, Moss Bags and Snow; (3) Rationale for the Development and Application of Bulk Soil Placement Guidelines for Disposal of Excess Soil, Rock and Like Materials; (4) Sampling, Processing and Analytical Protocols for Bulk Characterization of Soil, Rock and Like Materials; (5) Guidelines for the Decommissioning and Cleanup of Sites in Ontario (prepared in 1989); (6) Development of the Ontario Provincial Sediment Quality Guidelines for PCB's and Organo Chlorine Pesticides; (7) Development of the Ontario Provincial Sediment Quality Guidelines for Arsenic, Cadmium, Copper, Lead, Manganese, Mercury, Nickel and Zinc; (8) Aquatic Sediment Quality Guidelines. The deadline for written comments to ACES is January 8, 1993. The short periOd of time available to the Authority to provide technical comments on the documents in time to respond to ACES, necessitated a brief review. Soecific Comments Lakefill Guidelines Issue 1 - The Proposed Screening and Classification Systems The Authority generally supports the screening and classification system for lakefilling outlined in this guideline. The system recognizes correctly that strict guidelines must be in place at lakefill sites and that those guidelines should be strictest for direct "open water" disposal of materials. The Authority also supports the use of ambient sediment quality data and the utilization of pre-colonial background levels within the decision making framework. Issue 2 - Application of the Guidelines The Lakefill Guidelines indicate that the failure of any parameter by any amount will cause the soil tested to be classified as failing the guideline. This strict policy is to be utilized in the Materials Management Policy as well as in the Lakefill Guidelines. However, the Lakefill Guideline document does not contain information regarding the interpretation of test results received from multiple sample points at excavation sites. Since no such information is' contained, it must be assumed that one exceedance of a particular parameter will, in effect, disqualify an entire excavation site, or at least a large segment of the excavation site, from disposal warranted at that particular guideline level. The Authority feels that it is not practical to reject entire excavation sites because of one, or a few, marginal exceedances of either the unconfined criteria or the confined criteria especially since the concentration levels of parameters on these guidelines are so near the levels at which they naturally occur. ------- -~-- WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92. NOVEMBER 20,1992 0-1 47 SECTION I-ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT'S wMATERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY FOR SOIL, ROCK AND LIKE MATERIALSw AND THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT'S "FILL QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR LAKEFILLlNGw FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS (CONTD.) -Comments The Authority's experience in operating the Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program has been that some marginal exceedance of these guidelines (both the unconfined and the confined criteria) can be expected even in native soils. For this reason, a more practical interpretation system should be applied for lakefilling. The Authority recommends to ACES that MOE be instructed to review the strict interpretation protocol implied in the document and consider a more practical interpretation protocol (for lakefilling only) that would utilize averaging of results and/or other statistical analysis across like soli strata. Staff has retained the services of Dames and Moore Ltd., to assist in recommending a statistical approach. Issue 3 - Protection of Water Quality, Aquatic Habitat and Recreation Potential a) Old Asphalt The Lakefill Guidelines state that asphalt is "not considered acceptable for use in cOQtact with open water, though such material may be considered for use where the proponent is able to demonstrate through studies funded by the proponent, that the material will not adversely affect the environment". The proposed Policy will require that broken asphalt be recyCled or disposed of at a controlled fill site or municipal landfill site. The Authority agrees with the elimination of broken asphalt for open water filling operations. Asphalt, however, should be acceptable for reuse as base material for roeds and parking lots at lakefill sites as being acceptable engineered construction applications. It should also be appropriate to use hot mix asphalt as the final treatment for the roads/parking lots and waterfront trails. b) Confined Engineering Criteria It is conceivable that any new lakefill sites created under these new guidelines would have to be constructed utilizing confined filling techniques in order to offset a lack of available soils for unconfined disposal due to the strict nature of the unconfined criteria. Neither this document, nor the background documents, outline any engineering principles or techniques which should be required for the creation of confined fill structures. The Authority is concerned that since unconfined lakefilling along the Metro Toronto shoreline will be very limited under the new guidelines, reasonable criteria for constructing confined fill conditions need to be provided before these guidelines go into effect. Failure to allow for such reasonable criteria for the construction of confined fill structures may seriously jeopardize the Authority's very important future initiatives on the waterfront. The Authority recommends that the MOE Include engineering criteria for constructing confined lakefill sites with the Lakefill Guidelines. Such criteria should include the type of materials allowable for construction of confined endikements and materials to be used for protecting these structures if necessary. Issue 4 - Sampling, Testing and Analytical Protocols a) Sampling Requirements for Excavation Sites Generating Fill The background document entitled "Sampling, Processing and Analytical Protocols for Bulk Characterization of Soil, Rock and Like Materials" contains, in the Authority's opinion, excessive and unnecessary requirements for sampling both in-situ soils and stOCkpiles of homogeneous soils. 0-148 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 , . SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT'S wMATERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY FOR SOIL, ROCK AND LIKE MATERIALSw AND THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT'S wFILL QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR LAKEFILLlNGw FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITT~E ON ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS (CONTD.) -Comments Soil sampling protocols which are based on complete geotechnical information, existing land uses and a detailed site history are accurate yet practical. The sampling protocol for in-situ soils, as outlined in the background document is, in the opinion of the MTRCA, likely to be excessive in many cases depending on the site specific information. The Authority believes that the requirements for sampling surficial soils and previously filled soils are reasonable but the number of samples required for native soils to depth are, in most cases, excessive. The Authority is concerned that excessive and costly sampling requirements will lead to a decrease in the amount of testing done and an increase in the amount of illegal dumping. The Authority recommends to ACES that the MOE be instructed to review the sampling requirements for in- situ soils with the intent to develop a more practical sampling protocol for in-situ native soils. b) Sampling requirements for Stockpiles The Authority is concerned that sampling protocols for stockpiled soils, as outlined in the background documents, do not distinguish between stockpiles of heterogenous soils from unknown origin and stockpiles of homogeneous soil of known origin. Clearly, these two situations should not be subjected to the same sampling requirements. New sampling requirements for stockpiles of homogeneous soil should be developed. These requirements should be substantially less than the requirements for heterogeneous stockpiles. c) Criteria for Testing Ambient Sediment Quality at Proposed Lakefill locations The Authority, as a lakefill proponent, requires guidelines for sampling ambient sediment quality at proposed lakefill sites in order to determine what the actual guidelines governing lakefilling at that specific site will be. No such information is provided in either the Lakefill Guidelines or in the supporting documents. The Lakefill Guidelines and/or the background documents should provide sampling protocol for testing the ambient sediment quality at proposed lakefilllocations. Issue 5 - Quality of Lakefilled "Rubble" Material In addition to soil materials, the process of lakefilling requires the utilization of rubble material such as brick and concrete. Currently, there is a great deal of confusion regarding testing requirements for this type of material. The Authority has requested chemical testing of rubble material in certain situations where contamination has been expected. However, there is a great deal of confusion among soil consultants as to when the testing of rubble is necessary, what type of testing should be performed and how the results should be interpreted. This ambiguous pOlicy has often led to the penalization of applicants who test their rubble materials while applicants who do not perform testing are allowed to lakefill. The MOE should Include a less ambiguous policy on the issue of rubble quality at lakefills. The policy should address when testing Is necessary, what testing should be performed and how the results should be interpreted. Materials Manaaement Policv for Soil. Rock and Like Materials Issue 1 - The Proposed Classification System The Authority believes that this pOlicy is a positive step toward controlling landfill quality, diverting materials away from sanitary landfill sites and standardizing testing requirements and procedures of all soils management pOlicies from the Lakefill Guidelines through to Regulation 309. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 0-149 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT'S "MATERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY FOR SOIL, ROCK AND LIKE MATERIALSw AND THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT'S wFILL QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR LAKEFILLlNGw FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS ICONTD.) -Comments Issue 2 - Responsibilities of Generators and Receivers The Authority feels that the permit by rule system would be more reliable if excavation site owners were designated as the generator. This change would remove the confusion surrounding who must initiate the testing process and ensure that the owner of the soil be responsible for its disposal. This may also apply to the receiver. Definition for WgeneratorW is to include the owner of the property generating the fill. Issue 3 - Enforcement and Protection of ground and Surface Waters The Authority is concerned that while new stringent lakefill guidelines are being enforced, the potential for ground water contamination may actually increase since rural landfill sites do not fall under the changes to Regulation 309. Under the pOlicy, rural "inert fill" sites are not subjected to audit by MOE inspectors unless a public complaint is logged. The Authority is concerned that rural landfill sites may then become the dumping ground for excavators trying to circumvent the system and avoid the cost of testing. Excavators may deposit their"inert fill" in these sites without fear of MOE audit. Many of these rural landfills (e.g., sites in the Oak Ridges Moraine) exhibit very high potentials for impacting ground water quality. Clearly, a more pro-active method of ensuring fill quality at rural landfill sites is required. At Meeting #3/91, the Authority directed staff to prepare a program for an Inland Fill Quality Control Program for Watershed Protection within the regulated areas of the Authority's juriSdiction as well as those areas where the Authority's assistance is requested by a member or area municipality or the Province of Ontario. The Authority recommends that the MOE work to help the Authority protect rural landfill sites and ground water quality. The MOE should consider empowering Conservation Authorities to control the quality of fill being used at these sites. The Authority feels that it's Inland Fill Quality Control Program for Watershed Protection would be an ideal pro-active program to protect these rural sites and the ground water quality. Issue 4 -, The Approval and Regulation of Controlled Fill Sites The Authority believes that Controlled Fill Sites should be available before this policy is implemented. Without the availability of such sites, there may be an increase in illegal dumping and no reduction in soils going to sanitary landfill sites. The Authority supports the recommendation of staff of the Toronto Harbour Commissioners that Controlled Fill Sites be treated as temporary disposal locations or wholding sitesW and that the Materials Management Policy's ultimate goal should be to eventually remedlate the soils contained in these sites. Thus the soil in these sites would be treated as a resource and not as a waste, In keeping with the 3 R's philosophy, and no land space would be permanently lost. Operators of Controlled Fill Sites should be made to invest a percentage of their revenues in a clean up fund which would be used to remediate the soils when the technology was available. Issue 5 - Sampling, Testing and Analytical Protocols As described above, the Authority is concerned that the sampling requirements for in-situ soils and stockpiles are needlessly excessive and may act to dissuade generators from testing their soils (see the recommendations made above under the Lakefill Guideline comments). Issue 6 - Figure 1 (attached Decision Tree) The chart is useful in understanding the proposed Policy. The classification labelled "Handle as Waste" should be clarified by showing that the current Regulation 309 will apply. 0-1 50 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT'S wMA TERIALS MANAGEMENT POLICY FOR SOIL, ROCK AND LIKE MATERIALSw AND THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT'S wFILL QUALITY GUIDELINES FOR LAKEFILLlNGw FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS ICONTD.) -Comments Implications of the New Guidelines on Authority Programs The new lakefill guidelines will have an immediate affect on proposed Authority projects under the Lake Ontario Waterfront Regeneration Project. The new guidelines for fill quality are more stringent than the present Open Water Guidelines used by the Authority and with less flexibility in interpreting the chemical tests, will result in less material being suitable for lakefilling. New methods of lakefilling will need to be engineered to prevent loss of fines and maintain structural integrity as availability of suitable fill becomes unreliable. a) East Point Park Chemical testing shows that the existing fill stockpile at East Point Park will not meet the new "Unconfined" category for open water filling. The approximate 120,000 cubic metres of material in stockpile was generated from excavation of the intake tunnel for the Easterly Filtration Plant and therefore is considered to be "native" material. For this material to be acceptable for lakefilling, an engineered endikement will need to be constructed wherein the stockpile can be placed. There is no approved Master Plan in place for this site so it is difficult to determine the cost implications of the proposed guidelines. Based on the preliminary Master Plan for the waterfront park, construction of a rock containment structure could add seven to eight million dollars to the cost of the project. The Authority continues to hope that the Waterfront Regeneration Trust will treat East Point Park as a pilot project and carefully assess all as~ects of economic and environmental feasibility. b) Etobicoke Motel Strip Approximately 150,000 cubic metres of clean fill is required to construct the Public Amenity Strip for the Etobicoke Motel Strip. With the proposed new lakefill guidelines in place, it may be very difficult locating surplus clean fill without having to purchase suitable material. Because the're will be a time constraint in completing the filling, it is estimated that there would be a minimum additional cost of approximately $300,000 to $600,000 to purchase clean fill plus the cost of monitoring this soil quality, estimated at $150,00.0. c) Tommy Thompson Park The new lakefill guidelines will not apply to the Leslie Street Spit. This fakefill site, which is operated by the Toronto Harbour Commissioners, will continue to accept "open water quality" fill as administered by the Authority'S Improved Lakefill Quality Control Program until the project is complete. The project has been "grandparented" since it is so close to completion. d) Scarborough Shoreline Protection The new lakefill guidelines will also have an affect on proposed erosion control projects along rivers as well as the Lake Ontario Shoreline. An uncertain availability of clean fill may delay the ultimate completion of the proposed Sylvan Avenue erosion control project along the Scarborough bluffs. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 0-151 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERA nON 6. METRO PARKS AND PROPERTY DEPARTMENT - PROPOSED MAINTENANCE FACILITY -Ash bridges Bay Park KEY ISSUE To amend the Ashbridges Bay Waterfront Area plan to incorporate a maintenance facility and further to approve the construction of a tractor shed. Res. #98 Moved by: Bev Salmon Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Ashbrldges Bay Waterfront Area Master Plan be amended to Incorporate a maintenance facility as shown in Appendix WR.98/92; THAT approval be granted for construction of a tractor shed within the maintenance facility area In accordance with the site plan dated September, 1992 (Appendix WR.98/92); THAT Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department obtain the necessary approvals from the City of Toronto; AND FURTHER THAT the Metropolitan Parks and Property Department be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Authority is in receipt of plans from the Metropolitan Parks and Property Department for the construction of a tractor shed in an area north of the public launching ramps. This area of Ashbridges Bay Park was initially utilized by the Authority during the park construction phase for the storage of equipment and materials with future plans to erect a small building for the waterfront operations. The Authority's waterfront operations, however, are currently accommodated in shared facilities with Metropolitan Toronto at One Eastville Avenue. Since completion of the AShbridges Bay Park, Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property Department have assumed all maintenance responsibilities in accordance with the 1972 Waterfront Agreement. Authority staff have no objection to amending the AShbridges Bay Waterfront Area Master Plan to incorporate a maintenance area and facilities for the Metropolitan Parks and Property Department. However, to continue our waterfront activities and environmental monitoring, we would continue to use the area as a mooring location. If another maintenance building is constructed in future, the Authority would request a small room of approximately 100 sq. ft. with direct access from the exterior be to incorporated for storage of life jackets, auxiliary motor, waterfront monitoring equipment, etc. Authority staff have reviewed the plans for the tractor shed and would recommend approval to construct this building. 0-152 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92. NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. DON WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT CURTAILMENT KEY ISSUE Staff report on the. implications of not permitting any applications for permanent structures or facilities within the Don River watershed for one year. Res. #99 Moved by: Bev Salmon Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on the Implications of not permitting any application for permanent structures or facilities within the Don River watershed for one year, be received; AND FURTHER THAT to implement the intent of the motion would result in high legal costs, detracting staff resources from the Strategy development and would be impractical at the municip.al level. CARRIED BACKGROUND At the Water and Related land Management Advisory Board Meeting #7/92, the following motion was referred to staff: "MOTION Res. #90 THAT staff be directed not to permit any applications for permanent structures or facilities within the area of review by the Don Watershed Task Force until the Task Force has set planning guidelines, or equivalent, within one year, for the Don watershed except where the applicant can prove a critical need to improve, protect or restore a structure or facility which is part of an existing use within the study area; AND FURTHER THAT all municipalities within the Don River watershed be requested to approve appropriate legislation to achieve the above or to restrict development until such time as the Don River Watershed Task Force has an approved set of guidelines or equivalent. MOTION TO REFER THAT this matter be referred to staff to provide a report on the implications of the motion to the next Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board. THE MOTION TO REFER WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED". This motion was brought forward with the intent to allow the Don Watershed Task Force an opportunity to complete its work in order that guidance could be given to land use changes occurring within the watershed. This is an implementation issue that is often faced during the preparation and completion of a strategic planning exercise. As anticipated, within the motion there are a number of implications associated with the Authority not permitting any applications for permanent structures or facilities within the study area of the Don Watershed Task Force and requesting municipal controls. The Conservation Authorities Act does not contemplate nor provide for "holding controls" as related to Section 28, Fill, Construction and Alterations to Waterways Regulations. WAT'ER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 0-153 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. DON WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT CURTAILMENT (CONTD.) Applicants have the right to apply for permission under this regulation; permission can be refused if, in the opinion of the Authority, the control of flooding pollution or conservation of land is affected. To this end, to defer the processing of an application would be problematic. To refuse permission for reasons other than the above, may also result in an appeal to the Minister of Natural Resources as is the applicant's right. Authority staff could request that planning documents and/or development applications within the Don watershed be deferred pending completion of the Task Force work. To be effective, municipal support would have to be received. As a broad-brush approach, this would require a great deal of time and effort to achieve. The affected proponent/applicant would also have the right to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board. Time and resources could be directed to this approach but the value of the end result would be questionable. Municipalities may find this to be an inappropriate course of action at this time given the administrative process that would be required and the slow rate of development weighted against the short term value of curtailing development in the Don. Authority staff has discussed with municipal planning staff the development control options that could be considered at a municipal level. Any control option would involve a complex review and preparation process and would likely not be fully effective nor expeditious in its implementation. For example: . All municipalities must agree to implement the by-law; similar time frames would be required; not all municipalities may agree. . Appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board regarding the implementation of such controls may not be defended by municipalities given the strategy development is an Authority initiative. . This approach would likely result in a "patch work" control vis-a-vis the existing holding control by-laws and regulations governing this type of control mechanism. . Significant staff time and resources would be required at an Authority and municipal level which may detract from the completion of the strategy. Staff is of the opinion that the Authority resources are most effectively utilized on the initiatives that are presently underway that are complementary to the work of the Don Watershed Task Force in protecting and regenerating the health and ecological integrity of the valley and stream. Such activities include: . Draft Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program Approved in principle by the Authority and currently under review by municipalities, provincial ministries, non-governmental organizations, and the development industry. While this program is not expected to be approved by the Authority until early 1993, the initial indication from municipalities is of support, and in some cases, municipalities are attempting to achieve these specific policies through current planning applications. . Subwatershed Planning Guidance Document Authority staff participated in preparing this document which recommends integrating environment Objectives with traditional development Objectives early in the planning process. Within the Don watershed, staff is working with the Town of Vaughan and other agencies to undertake this process within Vaughan's O.P.A. 400. 0-1 54 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #8/92, NOVEMBER 20, 1992 SECTION I . ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 7. DON WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT CURTAILMENT (CONTD.) . Review of Policies For The Public Use of Conservation Lands Approved in principle by the Authority and currently under review by municipalities, provincial ministries, non-governmental organizations and recreational users. This document outlines the watershed stewardship role the MTRCA would adopt and details the Authority's desire to protect the natural resources on Authority lands. In conclusion, staff believe that the Authority's current initiatives and its plan input and review process provides protection for the watershed and valley and stream corridors, and contributes to the overall work of the Task Force in its development of a watershed strategy for the Don River. The most effective way to influence land use planning and development is through clearly articulated goals, objectives, polices, etc., that are shared by all parties to the process. To redirect limited Authority and municipal resources to interim control measures would result in the delay of the completion of the strategy. It is also unlikely that any interim development control mechanisms could be broad enough or implemented soon enough to be of significant value. NEW BUSINESS DUMP SITES Res. #100 Moved by: Joyce Trimmer Seconded by: Lois Hancey THA T staff be requested to report to the Authority as soon as possible on all dump sites selected within or near the Authority's Watershed. CARRIED TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 11 :25 a.m., November 20, 1992. Lois Griffin Brian Denney Chair Acting Se ----- ~ Working Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace 'the metropolitan toronto and region conservati~n authority minutes D-155 JANUARY 15, 1993 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92 The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, January 15, 1993. The Chair called the meeting to order at 10: 15 a.m. PRESENT Chair Lois Griffin Members Lorna Bissell lIa Bossons Victoria Carley Lois Hancey Paul Raina Bev Salmon Frank Scarpitti Joyce Trimmer ABSENT Members Joanna Kidd Maja Prentice MINUTES Res. #101 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: Bev Salmon THAT the Minutes of Meeting #8/92 be approved. CARRIED DELEGA nONS (al Mark Wilson, Acting Chair, Don Watershed Task Force, spoke to Agenda Item 1. He informed the members that the next meeting of the Don Watershed Task Force will be on January 21, at 6:30 p.m., at Metro Hall. (b) Sarah Rang, President, Black Creek Project, gave a presentation on the clean up of Black Creek, Humber River Watershed. - ----- D-156 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92, JANUARY 15, 1993 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE -Minutes of Meeting #2/92 and Meeting #3/92, and First Quarterly Report KEY ISSUE The minutes of the Don Watershed Task Force from Meeting #2/92 and Meeting #3/92 and First Quarterly Report are provided for the information of the Board and Authority members. Res. #102 Moved by: Lois Hancey Seconded by: Victoria Carley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Minutes of the Don Watershed Task Force. Meeting #2/92 and Meeting #3/92. (Appendix WR.100/92 and WR.103/92) be received; THAT the Don Watershed Task Force Quarterly Report (Appendix WR.111/92), dated January 6, 1993. be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to assist the Task Force in meeting its Work Plan (December 14, 1992) targets, based on the draft Don Watershed Strategy Table of Contents (December 14. 1992). as provided for in the 1993 budget estimates and any other funding sources which may be made available to the Authority. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Meeting #4/92 of the full Authority, the Terms of Reference, Membership Selection and Reporting Procedures, dated May 1, 1992, for the Don Watershed Task Force were approved. The Terms of Reference required that the Task Force: "report progress, on a Quarterly basis, to the MTRCA and other agencies through the Authority's Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board." To ensure that the Authority is kept informed on an ongoing basis, all minutes of the formal monthly Task Force meetings are being reported through the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board. In addition, the Chair of the Task Force, will make four, separate, Quarterly reports which will address/highlight the key elements of the strategy development process. FINANCIAL DETAILS The Authority has budgeted $100,000, and 2.2 years of direct contract staff time to develop the draft strategy. The direct staff time will provide support services for the Task Force, and the working committees, public consultation, fisheries 'management plan development, subwatershed plan background work, community outreach in developing and implementing regeneration projects and mapping and report preparation. The additional funding will be used for consulting services to address speCific aspects of the draft Table of Contents and for assistance in professional facilitation services. Salaried staff, who are budgeted elsewhere, will assist by reviewing existing Authority policies, programs and operations and updating these for inclusion in the strategy and in such initiatives as the monthly publication of "On the Don". WATER AN'D RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92, JANUARY 15, 1993 D-1 57 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. DON RIVER HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULICS UPDATE AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY KEY ISSUE Don River Hydrology and Hydraulics Update Study, completed in August, 1992. Res. #103 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Don River Hydrology and Hydraulics Update Study. dated August. 1992. be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to utilize the findings and recommendations of this study in the development of the Don River Watershed Management Strategy. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/91, Res. #154, In part, was adopted: . "THA T The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority initiate the development of a Don River Watershed Management Strategy; THA T staff be directed to test the transferability of the stormwater management conclusions of the Comprehensive Basin Management Strategy for the Rouge River Strategy Watershed to the Don Watershed;" As one of the background component studies for the development of a Strategy for the Don River Watershed, the Authority undertook to update the hydrologic data in use on the Don River. The key component of this study was to: 1 . Update the flow information on the Don River; 2. Update the flood level information on the Don River; and 3. Utilizing the updated hydrology model, assess various land use scenarios on the Don River and develop a Stormwater Management Strategy, for preventative flood control. The first component of the study was carried out utilizing the existing hydrology model for the Don Watershed, This model was updated to reflect existing watershed conditions and calibrated using the 1986 flooding events on the Don River. Once the hydrology model had been calibrated and verified, return period flows for the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100 and regional storms were developed for both existing and future watershed conditions. The second component of the study involved the updating of the Authority's existing hydraulic backwater model and the completion of new flood level information based on the flows developed during the initial component of the study. Subsequent to the development of new flood level information, the Authority has initiated an in-house program of updating the floodline mapping along the Don River to reflect the new regulatory flood levels. Following completion of the mapping, the inventory of flood susceptible sites will be updated for use in the Authority's Flood Warning System. The final component of the study involved the analysis of different levels of stormwater controls on various land use scenarios to develop a stormwater management strategy for preventative flood control for the lands remaining to develop on the Don River. The options assessed with respect to stormwater controls were to do nothing (i.e., not controls). utilize total controls (i.e., both major system and minor system control) and to use only stormwater Quality controls (i.e., 25 mm storm runoff control). These levels of controls were compared for both the future development of the Don River Watershed based upon existing Official Plans and also on a future ultimate development scenario. D-158 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92, JANUARY 15, 1993 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 2. DON RIVER HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULICS UPDATE AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ICONTD.) Based upon an overall watershed analysis, the implementation of total stormwater controls were found to be effective in mitigating impacts on flooding along the Don River. The study therefore recommended that stormwater control up to and including the 100 year storm be implemented on the Don River. unless a subwatershed study recommends a higher level of control based on local constraints. These findings differ from the Rouge River Study in that controls were found to be effective in controlling flow on the main branches of the watercourse. Detailed stormwater management for proposed developments will still be a requirement to locate stormwater management facilities, address local drainage concerns and to meet erosion/water Quality objectives. The adoption of a blanket policy for managing storm water on the Don River differs from that presently in use. Current requirements only request controls up to and including the 100 year flows when a specified flooding concern is located downstream of the proposed development. This study identifies a benefit for controls on an overall basin management basis. 3. PUBLIC AWARENESS OF STORMWATER QUALITY KEY ISSUE Opportunities for raising public awareness of storm water Quality, Res. #104 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report on Public Awareness of Stormwater Quality. dated 1993.01.06.. be received for information; THAT the Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan be requested to include. within its Communication Plan. specific activities to increase public awareness of storm water quality and household best management practices; THA T staff be directed to strengthen a stormwater quality component to its existing educational programs and environmental services; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to pursue funding sources, such as Environmental Partners Fund and Environmental Youth Corps. and to undertake a pilot project to focus public attention on the subject of storm water quality as part of the proposed Environmental Management Plan for Frenchman's Bay or other suitable site. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Meeting #8/92 of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board, Res. #93 was adoptedd: "THAT staff report back to the next meeting of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board on opportunities that may be available for raising public awareness of stormwater Quality." In response to this direction, the following report provides a list of methods available for use in a public awareness campaign and identifies eXisting programs, both external and internal to the Authority, that may be used to implement some of these methods. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92. JANUARY 15. 1993 D-159 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. PUBLIC AWARENESS OF STORMWATER QUALITY ICONTD.) Methods Available .to Increase Public Awareness of Storm water Qualitv Stormwater often carries with it pollutants such as oils and greases from road surfaces, pesticides and fertilizers from lawns, bacteria from animal drOPPings, and small soil particles referred to as sediment from a variety of sources. Once these pollutants enter the aquatic ecosystem, they can seriously affect the health of the system and limit its uses for swimming, fishing, and general recreation. Few people understand the linkages between activities carried out in their own backyard and the potential impacts downstream. The following list presents some examples of the methods available to increase public awareness of these linkages: . Catch Basin Painting Programs Cities such as Calgary and Etobicoke have initiated catch basin painting programs to increase public awareness of the direct linkages between their local lot and road drainage and the downstream watercourse health. Under these programs, fish silhouettes are painted on catch basin covers. Corresponding articles in the local newspapers and direct mailings inform the public of the message symbolized by the fish. In Baltimore County, Maryland, a similar program involved painting messages, such as "This drains to Chesapeake Bay", on catch basin covers; . Information signs at Stormwater Management Ponds; . Information enclosures/newsletters in municipal water bills; . Information displays and posters in public centres; . Pamphlets/Brochures; . Public media campaign (e.g., television, radio, community newspaper advertisements to focus public attention on an environmental problem); . Information "Hot Line"; . Messages in the school curriculum; . Public Information Meetings/Presentations to community groups; . Promotion of Alternative Cleaning Kits (e.g., prepared by the Association of Municipal Recycling Coordinators for distribution to households); . Promotion of household hazardous waste disposal depots and waste oil disposal depots. Examples of these materials were on display. Existino Public Awareness ProQrams (External to MTRCA) Public awareness and education on stormwater Quality and/or the related topic of household best management practices are an integral part of several on-going programs, being carried out by local groups and agencies. The following provides some examples of these programs: Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan IRAP) (a) The RAP Public Advisory Committee's Communication Plan sets out strategies for disseminating information to a broad public regarding sources of pOllution affecting Toronto waterfront water Quality. For example, one activity, aimed at all Metro Region politicians lprovincial and municipal levels), was carried out in Fall, 1992. As part of this initiative, the RAP Strategies Document and an invitation to become more involved in the RAP were sent to 282 Metro Region politicians. (b) The Metro Toronto RAP office plans to coordinate two storm drain marking programs during 1993, one in Markham and one in East York. These projects would be coordinated with the municipal works department and carried out with local school groups. D-160 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92, JANUARY 15, 1993 SECTION 1- ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. PUBLIC AWARENESS OF STORMWATER QUALITY ICONTD.) (c) One of the RAP Remedial Actions specifically addresses the need for public education regarding household best management practices and their linkages to water Quality. Teacher Action Plan ITAP) Workshop Series A storm drain marking program is a central part of a two year TAP Program on Great Lakes water Quality. The TAP Program will instruct teachers on water quality related topics. The Metro Toronto area will act as a site for a pilot project. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and others have funded Education Through Video (ETV) to coordinate this work. Representatives from the Metro Toronto RAP and the MTRCA participated on the Steering Committee for this project. The TAP Program will provide an opportunity to disseminate information to approximately 500 teachers at all grade levels. Household Hazardous Waste Campaign The Conservation Council of Ontano has recently initiated this Campaign. Public awareness is a primary objective. . Fishways Program Trout Unlimited and the Ministry of Natural Resources operate the Fishways Program, which offers an educational resource manual and training seminar providing lessons relating to fish and aquatic habitats. Municipal Programs Several of our member municipalities have set up programs to increase public awareness of environmental concerns. For example, the regional municipalities have established household hazardous waste depots and encourage residents to use these depots rather than disposing of dangerous substances through the storm or sanitary sewage systems. As noted above, the City of Etobicoke has already undertaken a catchbasin painting program with local school groups. These are only a few of a wide range of municipal programs that will raise publiC awareness of stormwater Quality and/or related environmental concerns, Of the several existing programs listed above, the Metro Toronto and Region RAP addresses the concern of storm water Quality most comprehensively. Development and implementation of the Stage II Remedial Action Plan will involve and affect the widest audience. Authority staff will continue to support the RAP in its public awareness activities. Existino Public Awareness ProQrams (Within MTRCA) Stormwater Management ISWM) Program Authority staff are currently revising the Stormwater Management Program in consultation with staff from member municipalities. Staff shall consider including an educational component in this program to contribu~e to greater public understanding of stormwater management. Kortright Centre for Conservation and Authority Field Centres - Educational Programs All visitors to Kortright and the majority of adult and school groups visiting the Authority's field centres are exposed to some aspect of water Quality education. Many of these educational programs cover topics on stream management, fish habitat, and water quality. These programs could be augmented with additional components relating to stormwater Quality. For example, the Albion Hills Field Centre is considering adopting a program similar to the American program called "Green Plan", in which students from schools along a watercourse carry out water testing and instream studies. As part of their energy theme display, staff at the Kortright Centre will be highlighting the benefits of allowing stormwater runoff (from roof leaders) to infiltrate rather than be directed to watercourses via storm sewers. WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92, JANUARY 15, 1993 D-1 61 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 3. PUBLIC AWARENESS OF STORMWATER QUALITY ICONTD.) Environmental Services The Authority runs a Clean Up Rural Beaches Program (CURB). which includes a large public education component regarding agricultural runoff and its impacts on water Quality. The Authority has been providing environmental services to its member municipalities for a number of years. Although these services have traditionally involved tree planting and stream rehabilitation projects, the Authority could add to those traditional services by providing assistance to those municipalities who express an interest in organizing a public awareness program relating to (storm)water Quality. Environmental Youth Corps The Environmental Youth Corps (EYC) program gives youth an opportunity to work on projects that contribute to improving the environment in their own communities and to develop job skills in the environmental field. The Authority will submit a proposal to carry out a pilot public awareness program in a subject watershed. This program could employ some of the methods listed above, such as a storm drain marking program and distribution of information pamphlets, and could be carried out by EYC participants. FINANCIAL DETAILS The Authority's proposed public awareness program will only be undertaken if adequate funding can be secured from such sources as the Environmental Youth Corps program and the Environmental Partners Fund. 4. ETOBICOKE CREEK EROSION AND LEACHATE CONTROL STUDY KEY ISSUE Report on the Etobicoke Creek Erosion and Leachate Control Study being carried out by the City of Etobicoke and request for Authority staff to participate. Res. #105 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff provide technical assistance and arrange for permission for the City of Etobicoke staff and/or its agents to enter Authority property for the purposes of carrying out the Etobicoke Creek Erosion and Leachate Control Study. CARRIED BACKGROUND The City of Etobicoke operated a landfill site in the Etoblcoke Creek Valley north of the Queensway and South of Dundas Street in the 1950's and 1960's. The City completed Its landfill operation at the site in 1968. Subsequently, land ownership of the lands adjacent to the creek was transferred to the MTRCA and to various private companies. In 1980, the City received a preliminary report from the Ministry of Environment expressing their concerns for long term erosion activity in the area and its impacts on the landfill and the potential for leachate problems. Erosion IS now encroaching Into some of the landfilled areas and as a result the city is proposing to carry out an Erosion and Leachate Control Study. The purpose of the study is to determine if there IS any existing and/or potential for leachate contamination of the Etobicoke Creek and prepare recommendations and estimates for remedial work. It IS anticipated that the design of any proposed erosion control works will incorporate leachate intercepter systems, Staff are very supportive of this Important initiative and are prepared to assist and prOVide technical support to the City wherever possible. D-162 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92, JANUARY 15, 1993 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 4. ETOBICOKE CREEK EROSION AND LEACHATE CONTROL STUDY (CONTD.) FINANCIAL DETAILS The City of Etobicoke have awarded the Erosion and Leachate Control Study to Golder Associates Ltd. for an estimated cost of $65,000.00. The City will be funding 100% of the costs of the study; therefore, no funding at this time is required from the Authority. Subject to the findings and recommendations of the study, the Authority may be requested to cost share in the construction of any erosion and leachate control remedial works recommended for our lands. 5. VISUAL ARTS ONTARIO -Points of View Project KEY ISSUE To present the Visual Arts Ontario announcement on the exhibition of the six artists proposals for information. Res. #106 Moved by: lIa Bossons Seconded by: Paul Raina THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the staff report, dated January 14. 1993, on the Visual Arts Ontario announcement on the artist's exhibition for the Points of View Project be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #9/92, held October 23, 1992, Res. #170 was adopted: "THA T the competition brief and artist selection process be endorsed; THAT the Authority support consideration of four p,ossible sites: Fishleigh, South Marine Drive, Guild Inn and Guildwood Parkway for a potential integrated artwork; THAT a selection committee be established with representatives from the public; the art community; the City of Scarborough Planning Department; Scarborough Council; the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Parks and Property, and Planning Departments; Metro Toronto Public Art Policy Advisory Committee; Visual Arts Ontario and The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to review the six artists' proposals and select an artist; THA T the selected artist and pilot project be subject to the approval of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Scarborough and The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; AND FURTHER THAT The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, the City of Scarborough, Visual Arts Ontario, Metro Toronto's Public Art Policy Advisory Committee and the selection committee be so advised. " The Artist's Selection Committee will be reviewing proposals from the six artists. In conjunction with the selection process, Visual Arts Ontario has arranged to hold an exhibition of these proposals at the Gallery, Scarborough Campus, University of Toronto, from February 22 to 28, 1993. The exhibition is being held to receive public comment prior to the final selection. -- - ~-- WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #9/92, JANUARY 15, 1993 D-163 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 5. VISUAL ARTS ONTARIO ICONTD.1 -Points of View Project Members of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board will receive an invitation to a special reception in the afternoon on February 24, 1993. WORK TO BE DONE The Artist's Selection Committee will be completing the review by the end of February and preparing a recommendation for consideration by the Authority. NEW BUSINESS 6. BLACK CREEK PROJECT Res. #107 Moved by: Joyce Trimmer Seconded by: Lois Hancey THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to continue assisting the Black Creek Project with rehabilitation and regeneration projects; THAT municipalities and agencies be requested to participate as required; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board on the Black Creek Project including the development of criteria for activities and opportunities to establish a formal policy for channel repairs and renaturalization, and environmental guidelines for municipalities in reviewing development proposals. CARRIED TERMINA TION The meeting terminated at 11 :30 a.m., January 15, 1993. Lois Griffin Brian Denney Chair Acting Secretary- Treasurer ~ Working Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace 'the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes JOINT MEETING OF THE D-164 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD The Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board and the Conservation and Related Land Manageme~t Advisory Board met at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre on Friday, April 3, 1992. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. ',' , _')1 I PRESENT Chair Lorna Jackson Members Lorna Bissell lIa Bossons Victoria Carley Lois Griffin LOIs Hancey Joanna Kldd Howard Moscoe Marie MUir Paul Palleschi Donna Patterson Maja Prentice Paul Raina Bev Salmon Frank Scarpitti Deborah Sword Kip Van Kempen ABSENT Members Margaret Britnell Mike Colle Gerri Lynn O'Connor Joyce Trimmer DELEGATIONS Mr. Bob Woodburn, President and Mr. Robert Lockhart, Vice President, of The Rethink Group Inc. presented the report "Review of Authority Policies for the Public Use of Conservation Lands" and answered Questions for Board Members. JOINT MEETING OF CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT AND WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARDS D-165 SECTION I - ITEM FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. REVIEW OF THE STRATEGY FOR THE PUBLIC USE OF AUTHORITY LANDS -Presentation of the Consultants' Report KEY ISSUE There is some degree of concern that The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation (MTRCA) lands are being developed for outdoor recreation activities that do not "fit" the image of that which some may perceive the Authority should be doing. The Review was designed as a consultation process with representatives of its funding partners, user and Interest groups, agencies, staff and the general public leading to a vision and recommendations to update the Strategy. Res. #1 Moved by: Kip Van Kempen Seconded by: Frank Scarpitti IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Review of the Authority Policies for the Public Use of Conservation Lands by The Rethink Group dated March, 1992 be received; THAT "Vision 2001 - Public Use of MTRCA Lands" be approved for discussion with the Province of Ontario, member municipalities and other appropriate groups as the Authority's preferred vision and guiding principles for the public uses of its lands; THA T the staff be directed to use the recommendations as points of discussion; AND FURTHER THAT the staff be directed to report to the Authority prior to the end of 1992 any changes that may be required to its Strategy for the Public Use of its Lands. AMENDMENT Moved by: Lois Griffin Res. #2 Seconded by: Kip Van Kempen THAT the second paragraph of the recommendation be amended to read: THAT "Vision 2001 - Public Use of MTRCA Lands" be approved for discussion with the Province of Ontario, member municipalities and other appropriate groups. THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................... CARRIED AMENDMENT Moved by: Howard Moscoe Res. #3 Seconded by: lIa Bossons THAT the second paragraph of the recommendation be amended to read: THAT "Vision 2001 - Public Use of MTRCA Lands" be approved in principal; THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................ NOT CARRIED AMENDMENT Moved by: Maja Prentice Res. #4 Seconded by: Paul Palleschi THA T "Vision 2001 - Public Use of MTRCA Lands" be circulated and written comments and resolution be requested of member and local municipalities. THE AMENDMENT WAS ..................,......................, . . . . . . . . . CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION. AS AMENDED, WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CARRIED JOINT MEETING OF CONSERVATION AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT AND D-166 WATER AND RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARDS SECTION I - ITEM FOR AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION 1. REVIEW OF THE STRATEGY FOR THE PUBLIC USE OF AUTHORITY LANDS ICONTD.1 -Presentation of the Consultants' Report BACKGROUND In January of 1991, the Authority adopted a report entitled "A Crisis in Confidence". The report, containing recommendations, was a review of the issues raised by the Greater Toronto Area Co-ordinating Committee; a review of the Conservation Authorities; a report of the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront and a report to the Premier of Ontario concerning the Greenlands Strategy for the Greater Toronto Area. Briefly, the areas where partiCipating interest groups Indicated a lack of trust in the Authority are: . disposing of surplus lands; . weak stands against development In natural resource areas; . designs for flood and erOSion control; . focus limited to river valleys, waterfront, headwaters and the escarpment; . managing waterfront lands for landfilling and public use; . Interpretation of Its mandate for "wise use" for outdoor recreation. These latter two concerns prompted the Authority to undertake a public review of its pOlicies with respect to the outdoor recreation use of Conservation lands. The study was intended to concentrate on outdoor recreation uses as there has been very little concern expressed about the Authority's role in conservation education and heritage programs. In July 1991, The Rethink Group was engaged to conduct the study, To understand the changes proposed in the Review, the following documents should be refered to: the Strategy for the Public Use of Authority Lands; the Greenspace Strategy and brief summaries of the outdoor recreation projects approved by the Authority; the Conservation Area Development Project 1991-1995; and A Program for the Establishment of the Greater Toronto Region Trail System - Phase I, are attached. It should be noted that the present strategy for the Public Use of Conservation Authority Lands was developed as a guideline or vision to assist in the development of ItS concept plans and projects for outdoor recreation, heritage and conservation education facilities on lands managed by the Authority. It did not necessarily apply to Authority'lands planned and managed by others. It IS proposed that an updated strategy would be a guideline not only for developing public use faCilities on lands managed directly by the Authonty but would be a gUideline to others planning, developing and managing Authority lands, The new Strategy would be the basis and guideline for the Authority to approve the plans on ItS leased lands. Staff believe the "Vision 2001 - Public Use of MTRCA Lands" and "gUiding prinCiples" are generally a preferred approach to managing ItS lands for outdoor recreation, conservation education and heritage programs, Before a final staff analysIs and comment on the consultants' reView, It is Important that staff discuss with the member municipalities, the Province of Ontario and other appropriate agencies and groups the proposed "Vision 2001 - Public Use of MTRCA Lands", "Our Guiding PrinCiples" and the acceptable and unacceptable facilities/activities for MTRCA lands. Additionally, the consultants' recommendations should also be used as a baSIS of these discussions. FollOWing the collaboration process and "a period of Reflection and Reality Testing" staff propose to make recommendations to the Board to update the Strategy for the Public Use of Conservation Authority Lands prior to the end of 1992. TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11 :45 a,m" April 3, 1992, Lorna Jackson W.A, McLean Chair Secretary- Treasurer