Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater and Related Land Management Advisory Board Appendices 1992 \JR. \ I'll DON VAllEY BRICKWORKS REGEN ERA TION PROJECT FEBRUARY 1992 THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Water and Related Land Management Meeting #1/92 March 6, 1992 WK 1.J~<f INTRODUCTION This is a Project of the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, under the Conservation Authorities Act, to commence implementation of the Don Valley Brickworks Master Plan. The Project describes the site, the proposed master plan and the process that led to the development of the plan, the rationale for the plan and the Authority's involvement in implementation as well as the cost estimates and proposed funding arrangements. LOCA TION AND DESCRIPTION The site is located in the Don River Valley, along Bayview Avenue in the Borough of East York. It comprises 16.5 ha. (40. 7 acres) acquired by the Authority in 1989. The site still contains a collection of buildings which were the offices, storage and production facilities for the brickmaking industry, which operated on the property between approximately 1890 and 1990. The buildings have been temporarily closed and secured pending implementation of the site master plan which is described below. The site is bounded on the north side by the internationally significant north slope. The slope was exposed over the years by the excavation of clay from the quarry for use in brick making. The stratigraphy of the face of the slope is a valued and frequently studied record of glacial activity and climate change. Tho quarry, which has been partially filled, is a poorly drained meadow in the early stages of natural plant succession. Drainage is collected and pumped to Mud Creek, a small watercourse on the west side of the property. The ridges surrounding the property on 3 sides offer views of the valley and ! linkages to the top of the valley on the west side. DON V ALLEY BRICKWORKS MASTER PLAN Metropolitan Toronto accepted the site for management under agreement with the Authority in 1989. A consulting team, headed by Hough, Stansbury Woodland Ltd. was retained by Metro Toronto to prepare a Master Plan. A planning committee with political representatives, citizens, staff and technical advisors was also established to guide the process. Technical studies were done, public input was obtained and an impressive, ambitious and locally supported plan was prepared by March 1990. \'uK 3. 19Z-. The summary section of the Master Plan Report describes the Plan as follows: "The unique attributes of the Brickworks site lie in its physical connections to the entire Don Valley system, the remarkable fossiliferous deposits contained in the North Slope, and the extraordinarily significant role the rehabilitated site can play in community efforts to restore the valley to a state of health. This requires a holistic view that integrates issues of reforestation and water quality, natural and industrial heritage, and community values. It is this overall perspective that has inspired the plan for the Brickworks site itself, the key principles of which are found below." . The establishment of links between the site's bio-physical systems and industrial brickmaking history, and the role of the park as a focus for restoring the degraded watershed ecosystem. . Intensive experiences in the Brickworks complex that focus on geology and palaeobotany, brickmaking, pottery, demonstration gardens, nature learning activities for children, rental markets and rentable exhibit space. The industrial architecture of the Brickworks present an image of "garden ruins" that maintain the basic historical forms of the buildings, but which are partially demolished. Some are conceived as open courts incorporating gardens; other have their roofs removed, with the structure remaining as pergola-like structures which incorporate a variety of activity areas that are woven into the overall fabric of buildings. The essential brickmaking equipment and machinery remains for interpreting industrial history and brickmaking processes. . Passive learning activities in the quiet natural setting of the quarry that combine education and recreation. This includes the Don Centre (incorporating lecture halls, offices and interpretive exhibits), stormwater purification demonstration of the Mud Creek, bio- ! technology, a meadow and natural gardens, a marshland and wildlife habitat, and interpretation of the North Slope." The Master Plan proposed a comprehensive and exciting rehabilitation plan for the site but it is expensive. The estimated total cost of the basic plan in 1990 was $18,600,000. In addition, 3 desirable optional features of the plan raised the total estimated cost to approximately $28,000,000. The 3 features were: a greenhouse complex, a pedestrian bridge and the proposed Don Centre - a major interpretive facility. Metropolitan Toronto Council determined that the Plan was too expensive to be implemented at this time but that a revised initial phase of the Plan concentrating on safe public access, basic restoration of the quarry and construction of various special vegetation areas could be a reasonable first phase. Council decided to request the Authority to adopt a ProJect to implement the revised first phase. WR. Y IflJ DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT This Project proposes an initial rehabilitation of the quarry while deferring the more expensive components of the Master Plan. The revised Plan was described in the Metropolitan Toronto staff report as follows: "The revised plan (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 garden, wildflower meadow, fossil garden, wet scree garden, and so on--will create an 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 ~Iso 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 review service needs when the Brickworks is open to the public. n The revised plan has been further altered during the course of Authority review to include the pond and wetland components of the original Master Plan. It had been deleted on the basis of cost (approximately $',500,000) but was identified as a desirable feature if other funding partners were found. Overall, the proposed revisions to the Master Plan are reasonable. The revised plan can be the basis of an interesting and unique park for the Metropolitan Toronto Region. The proposed changes do not detract from the querry's potential as a park area, nor do they significantly diminish the opportunities to demonstrate environmental rehabilitation or the presentation of the site's geological heritage. Finally, the revised plan does not preclude returning to various components of the Master Plan should funding become available. ~R~sf42- RA TIONALE FOR THE PROJECT The restoration of the Don Valley Brickworks can be the focal point of efforts to restore the Don River Watershed. It's large land base and high profile location provide an excellent opportunity to demonstrate good environmental management in an urban setting. The program for the park will provide good examples of urban resource management including erosion control, water quality improvements, habitat enhancement, trail linkages and protection of a significant geological feature. The site cannot be safely used at present by the public. Some modest improvements can facilitate public use while providing the basic framework for a gradual return of the area to the natural valley ecosystem. The plan for the site has been well supported by interest groups and the local community. It is consistent with the recommendations of the Task Force to Bring Back the Don and would provide an excellent proving ground for many of those recommendations. For example, the water quality pond and wetland features are similar in concept to the "Rosedale Marshes" proposed by the Task Force. The Brickworks site provides an opportunity to refine the concept and detailed design, while providing significant improvements in water quality to the flow in Mud Creek, which drains an urbanized area of 449 hectares, before it joins the Don River. The rehabilitation of the Don Valley Brickworks presents an opportunity to achieve real progress on issues that have been the s:Jbject of many reports. The M.T.R.C.A.'s Greenspace Strategy, various reports of the Crombie Commission, Metropolitan Toronto's "Towards a Liveable Metropolis", the Authority's Don Watershed Strategy and many other public and private sector initiatives all spe2k to the need to expand and rehabilitate vital open space areas and linkages within the urban framework. This project, to restore the Brickworks site, is an important realization of these often discussed objectives. ! ESTIMA TED COSTS The total cost of the Project is estimated to be $5,000,000. The costs will include legal and survey fees, environmental studies and assessments, consulting fees, design investigations and labour, material and equipment costs to implement the plan. There are 2 major components to the cost: $ 3,500,000. Public access and rehabilitation of the quarry area including grading, planting, trails, signage, etc. $ 1,500,000. Water quality pond and marsh and associated works. $ 5,000,000. W R"R IMPLEMENT A TION PLAN Following receipt of the necessary approvals for this Project, the implementation of the plan would include the following activities: (1 ) Environmental audit and decommissioning plan. - long use as an industrial site and large volumes of fill already placed in the quarry suggest that some chemical testing of soils and groundwater should be done to identify any clean up requirements. (2) Environmental Assessment Act approval or exemption. - a project of this scale, undertaken by a Conservation Authority is subject to the Environmental Assessment Act. Given the emphasis of the plan on environmental rehabilitation combined with strong support for the plan it may be appropriate to seek an exemption. (3) Technical studies. - further investigations of geotechnical conditions, water quality and flow in Mud Creek, surveys, recommended plant species and servicing will be required prior to further development of the site plan. (4) Site Planning. - further refinement of the site plan to establish grading and drainage patterns, path alignments, development phasing, linkages, security and access control and final delineation of various landscape zones will be done. (5) Detailed design. - detailed design and construction drawings for the hard features such as the storm water drainage and treatment facility, servicing and pathways will be prepared as well as the detailed grading and ! planting plans for the various landscape types. (6) Construction. - implementation of the plan will involve a combination of efforts by Metro Parks and Property staff, M.T.R.C.A. staff and contractors over a 3 year period. wRl. (q~ FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS This Project proposes that the funding will be raised as follows: 1993 1994 1995 1996 Total Prov. of Ontario 625.000 625.000 625.000 625.000 2.500,000. Metropolitan Toronto 625,000 625,000 625,000 625,000 2,500,000. Total: 1,250.000 1.250.000 1,250.000 1.250.000 5.000,000. APPROV ALS REQUIRED 1 . Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. 2. Province of Ontario. 3. Metropolitan Toronto ! WR.<6ft -- ,:-:,..... ,;'1 .. .~ 1 ~. ::t;. . ..,,"j h:. J ~t ... {' .. . . ..::.~~ . .','/ I ~ ,"':"1 ~:..'I '. . . .~'" .... ;,.'; . I ..1 -~ ,; ~ ,., :, j :..~ ~- q ." ! , " d~ .~ ~~itJ~: l'j , r", " .J - ,I J ~ . \~ : J:. . ~ . .._. .r. ~.' ,I" . .... ~. '1J ~.,~.(:. {-'l ,. '\ ..(1.\ ",", , .... . ..... \ E ~ ....0 ~ EXISTING lANE. CRUSHED BRICK BIRD HABITAT DEMONSTRATION GARDEN A MANAGEO REGENERATION H LOWLAND CAROUNEAH ~ WlLDUFE HABITAT DEMONSTRATION GARDEN LOW MEADOW ( TOP OF EAST RIDGE) Thi. CotoIIMan _lion uliIlzIng Smal pocII.l. of pIone.r IpIdn In managtel _.1Ion (I... InlIlo1y ulltlng mo_ (upon. popIa/I. poplar, -loam. upon. _ MANAGED REGENERATION BRICKWORKS I VAlLEY OVERLOOK -. dogwood .ugmonltcl willi rnoplo. -. .IC. 101 """"PI' h.cld>trry. hopu.., b1_ 10 ocar1tl cIotur.) _ _1pIdn 01 NORTH SLOPE VIEWING NODE oak, red cedat ) to u.a1$I natural tho _ In _lion 10 Iho NATURAL SUCCESSION regen.r.don. lOU",",n _ opocln, oug... B NATURAL SUCCESSION m.oplt. betch. M end will.. ook, , Bl/TTERFl Y AND HUMMINGBIRD GARDEN LOW MEADOW 1OhIt. pine, end "'_. ... Th... ar... wUI be aJowoed 10 IoIowIng c..toln..n Cpecfl. at. condnu. r-a.net.ting natufely. Indudtel: tulp tr... _ luptlo. CHAIN UNK FENCE I HA - HA Maintenance Ie not necessary. c:ucumbtr ..... _ ......... _ t------ t - - ~ C MA"AG'. .'G'""'AOO" uh. hldcary. Kontucly _.. _. IIonoy-locuol. end ~. '~ (LOWER SLOPES OF EAST o.pondlng on budgtt, Can:lInoon . . . RIDGE AND QUARRY BOTTOM) specI.. may be Introcluctcl ._ .. 8-'1~ . Manogtel_ by plandng II'IId pocII.1I or .. lIIgo ........, EI1f. ~ om" _Ilnc. 01 pion.., 1pId.. Undonlorey .....Includ. _. I . "2 ( on tJopea whit. .roslon oc:cun, ....."... -berry. _-haz.. 'f ~ ~ bIo..ngl..rtng planllng 1IchnIq.... rtdllud. end II1tmalo __ Iii '9 wi! be uMd ). dogwood, In'.,prothoe c:>orwMclIono ~v~ 0 BUTTERFLY GARDEN m.oy be ...- wi" gIoclIl .,. Corollnoan ,ocord. on ... Nonh ~ '_M_.U Slope. cycI. 01_. bultorllloo end I QUARRY GREEN moth.. end In parlIcuIar tho Wonln:tl bun.rfIy. with Ito IIrong valley low growing orl.... and while llsodallon. SurroundIng woodland cIoYe, IOf nUrogan t1xatkJn et.t end m..~w Incfudo opocln lor _If, r--. ....r. _ per . 'Itva. habitat and food. NaUw and yo.... _ _ nonl1lM 1pKt.. whh MCtat J LOWLAND SOUTHERN - po-odudng -. ara uMd III allracl HARDWOOD bunat1Ue.,or obMrvatlon. ButteI1U.. pta'. ~aow and mawe. Rod mapla ,_ m.oplt a_lion with yo_ _. paper _. 01 often ~nted Gower. Indudtng oycarnoro. bIaclr walnut. end _ btumbl.., mock orange, lilao. plna,appo-oprlal. III this -.. !j I bunorfly bush. hontyoucIdo, IItOro. low It.. 01 Iho lit.. llndotoaoy and dayt.rle.. planll w111lncludo an....... 10_ E HUMMINGBIRD GARDEN dOVWOOd. IOMe.berry, dogwood.. ~ The galden, blended with the and vibufnum.. t!jfb bun.my Calden, Indud.. both A rich ground layer ., hob_.. nlM and ncHWlI"'" .peci.. with plan' malorial wIIIlndudo a _If 01 nectlt producing _ra. shlde toIlefant wUdllowera. IUdI u cf> . Hummingbird. ptef.f fed, Ofange. yo- lawn Illy. spring beauty, and ~now now.f, such .. marsh marIgoId.IICk-ln-lIla pulpil. Ilono)'lucIrio, be.ulf bush. SIberian dutchman'. bt.echet, and 'fins. P" thNb, 10.. of Sharon. cardinal K FOSSIL GARDEN _0... bergarnol. end d.yllla., A primary _'lItO.n foroll tIong F WILDUFE HABITAT GARDEN tha woll ridga (well. M pine. rod .,.,.- A yltl.IyOI planll will oupport end 1OhIto _) _ 01 '.pUIes, amphibians, and mamm&ls. cold.. Inlotglaclal porlodo __ Squt..,.ls. 'ICCOnt, U ... It lOads bylhoNonhSlope._ E)NORTH and aalamand.,.. Food plants "'~--pIanta Inctuda oalll. hlc:kOl)'. woInu~ conoIll 01 lama end -.- __ MIXED FOSSIL GARDEN wild applo. v1bu1numo. dogwood.. --.. .ldolborry. and horbacoou. L WET SCREE GARDEN ~ SCREE GARDEN orou_. planll, FelTUl. moue.. 1c:fI_. IInd ....1Ib G BIRD HABITAT QlowIng In betwoan ... clomp. LOW SHALE WALL DEMONSTRATION GARDEN ohadtel _ debri. at ... bile of ,r ThI. gald.n wi. Indude nnlng ..u.. ... wool rldgo. Ooca_ do.mpo INTERPRETIVE NOOE. (GEORGIAN BAY I ORDOVICIAN ) SERVICE ACCESS lor bUd. end Iood plan... Holling 01 _ "., Jad<-ln-'" pulpit, GRANUlAR I CRUSHED BRICK all.. will be .nhanced d'w'oogI'Ilhe end _...-.. plan... ,') ..lectIon of tuitable ..e and IIvub M ENTRY MEADOW opoclo. In addillon 10 bIId _., EXISTING SHALE WALL 50 CAR PARKING ~ ~ Food planll wlIloc:uo on IruIt end A more coIourtuI mixture 01 01....... - ~ ..tel pIOduc>ng plan.. ( hough low -. bIId'a looI.hlol. end MANAGED REGENERATION ENTRY MEADOW SEPARATE ENTRANCE '\ ..ason. ). Including -.y. --ro. .- onco or ..... per , TO BRICK YARD old.rbeny. dogwood. viburnum. yo.... Opllonal_........... honoyoud<lo, end thI-. oouId Includa __. KIOSK - SHELTER BULLETIN BOARD,DRINKlNG FOUNTAIN BICYCLE PARKING OVERFLOW PARKING I BUSES end ""')'101 spring -...g _. THIS lUSTER PL&H IS BASED 2110 2't .. ~ Iha mOlropolilOn loronlo Ind region DON VALLEY BRICKWORKS MARCH 1992 ON A lUSTER PI.AH COMPLETED FOR VLJi conservltion luthorl'Y METROPOLITAN TORONTO 5Y HOUGH STANSBURY WOOlllAHD UMITED METRES . 10 WR 10 IGJ;l, THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY TERMS OF REFERENCE MEMBERSHIP SELECTION &: REPORTING PROCEDURES THE DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MAY 1, 1992 WR., , /Q 1.0 AUTHORITY DIRECTION At Authority meeting #5/91 the following recommendations, pertaining to the Don Watershed Task Force, as part of Resolution #154 were adopted: "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; 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." 2.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE The goal of the Authority through the Don Watershed Task Force is to develop a management strategy for the Don River watershed which will be adopted/supported by municipal and agency politicians and staff; watershed residents; and special interest groups and which will empower agencies, communities and individuals to become actively involved in watershed management and stewardship activities. 2.1 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; . . ./2 uJR. 11..,/9 ~ - 2 - · 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, industry, and government and non-government agencies in resource planning, stewardship, and management activities within the watershed. These activities could include: . 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 and non-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 in regeneration activities 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. . . ./3 WR 13 h.: - 3 - 3.0 MEMBERSHIP SELECTION Members of the Task Force will be appointed by the Authority until December 31st, 1993, subject to an annual review by the Authority. 3.1 Size of the Task Force The task force shall consist of twenty-five (25) members including: . 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 - Regional Municipality of York - City of Toronto - Borough of East York - City of Scarborough - City of North York - City of York - Town of Markham - Town of Richmond Hill - City of Vaughan; . ten persons residing within the watershed; . 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. 3.2 Local and Region Municipality Representatives The local and regional municipalities will be requested, by the Authority, to appoint a council member, and an alternate to the Task Force. Where a council member is not available, a local resident may be appointed. A municipality may appoint a current Authority member. . . ./4 uJ~.\~ICJ ~ - 4 - 3.3 Community Membership An advertisement will be placed in local papers requesting interested individuals residing within the Don watershed to apply for appointment to the Task Force. The selection of ten citizens within the watershed will be carried out by a 3 person committee comprised of 2 members of the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board, and the Director, Water Resource Division. 3.4 Criteria for Citizen Membership Selection: In recommending citizens for appointment, the selection committee will take into consideration the following: . demonstrated interest in watershedICommunity issues; . the ability of the applicant to meet the potential time commitments; * . representation of rural, urban, environmental and business interests. *Members will be required to attend on a regular basis. It is anticipated evening meetings will be held once per month. Members unable to fulfil this commitment will be replaced to ensure broad and effective representation of watershed issues. 3.5 Selection of Chair and Vice Chair of the Task Force The Chair and Vice Chair will be elected by the Task Force from amongst its members. 3.6 Reportini Relationship The Task Force will communicate through the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board, and the Task Force Chair will be required to coordinate communications to this Board, with the assistance of the MTRCA staff secretariat. . . ./5 . UJRI5 /'1: - 5 - 4.0 RESOURCES TO THE TASK FORCE 4.1 M.T.R.C.A Secretariat The secretariat will include: . Coordinator; . Environmental Technician; and . Secretary (part-time position). The secretariat's role will be to attend all meetings and to assist the Task Force in day to day activities. 4.2 Technical Advisory Committee A Technical Advisory Committee will be drawn from provincial, regional, municipal and other technical experts representing specific disciplines to advise/assist the Task Force in the development of the terms of reference for the development of the strategy and to provide technical review of key reports. The committee members will also provide a linkage to planning and resource managers, within affected agencies. The membership for the advisory committee may include persons with expertise m: . Water Quality . HydrologylHydraulics . Terrestrial Ecology . Land Use Planning . Cultural History . Restoration Ecology . Municipal Operations & Maintenance . LocallRegional & Provincial Government Programs . Fisheries Management . Community Involvement/public Consultation. The Technical Advisory Committee will be formed following the appointment of the Task Force members. . . ./6 wR.'{;,It:t~ - 6 - 4.3 Budget 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. . 5.0 COMPENSATION OF TASK FORCE MEMBERS At regular Task Force meetings, members will be eligible for travel expenses, according to Authority policy. 6.0 RULES FOR THE CONDUCT OF THE TASK FORCE The Task Force will follow the Rules of Conduct of the Authority (The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority), as adopted by Resolution #3 of Authority Meeting #2/86, or as may be amended. A quorum will consist of a majority of the members of the Task Force. Wfcn h~ Comprehensive Basin Management Strategy For The Rouge River Watershed Implementation Committee 1991 Progress Report W R ,,, /'1 ').. 1 INmODUCllON In January 1990, The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority formally adopted the Comprehensive Basin Manaaement Strateav for the Rouae River Watershed (cBMS). This document contains a number of goals, policies and implementation actions that are designed to restore and manage the natural resources of the Rouge River Watershed. The CBMS identifies a number of agencies as either Lead Agencies - with the ability to implement the recommended actions, or as Supporting Agencies - able to assist the lead agency(s) to implement the recommended action(s). The Authority directed staff to establish an Implementation Committee to assist the identified lead agencies to implement the recommended actions. At their first meeting (December, 1990), the Implementation Committee endorsed the establishment of the following working groups: Planning, Technical and Environmental. Each group was directed to select those recommended actions that related directly to the members area of expertise. By concentrating in specific areas, the working groups could further assist lead agencies to implement the recommended actions. The Implementation Committee also adopted the "Terms of Reference", which required that an annual progress report be prepared. The Phase One Progress Report (1991) will assist to: . document the efforts of the lead agencies, the supporting agencies and the Environmental, Technical and Planning Working Groups to implement the recommended actions; . indicate the status of each recommended action; . demonstrate the effectiveness of those actions that have been implemented; and . assist to determine the direction to be taken during Phase Two (1992), to ensure that the outstanding recommendations are implemented. The following report was prepared from the responses to a questionnaire sent to each agencies or organizations. A draft report was circulated to the Implementation Committee for review and comments were incorporated into the final report. The report is divided into three main sections: a summary of each recommendation divided into the seven component areas of the Rouge River Strategy (Public Health, Public Safety - Flood Control, Public Safety - Erosion Control, Fisheries, Riparian Habitat, Terrestrial Habitat and Aesthetics), the three working groups' progress report and concluding recommendations. WR. ,q (q,-, 2 PUBLIC HEAL lH 1. Expand M.T.R.CA and mlri:lpal erIorcemert programs to ensure that erosion and sediment control plans are property designed, Implemerted, rnaIrtU1ed and removed. Lead Aaencies: M.T.R.C.A. Local Municipalities Supportina Aaencies: Regional Municipalities MOE MNR 1.1 Lead Aaencies Efforts: - M.T.R.CA . Continued program development in sediment control, inland fill quality; regulatory control through regulation administration and by-law review; and remedial works in sediment control and implementation of "Clean Up Rural Beaches" (CURB) program; . Undertaking with MOE a "Construction Practices Study" - Investigating the availability and effectiveness of various planning and technological controls on erosion and sedimentation on urban construction sites across M.T.R.C.A. jurisdiction; . Organize with MOE and the Provincial Urban Drainage Advisory Committee (PUDAC) a workshop on sediment control for regulatory agencies and consultants. - Town of Plckerilg . Has inspectors responsible to monitor all construction projects and are aware of the importance of implementing erosion and sediment control; . Standard clause for erosion and sediment control included in all subdivision agreements. - Town d Markham . Same as Town of Pickering efforts; and . Additional enforcement power provided by the recently passed Topsoil Preservation By- law; WI( ;'of'tJ 3 - CIly of ScarboroLgh . Implementation in principle since 1983 but enforcement efforts relatively low; . Anticipated that Subwatershed planning will increase effort as site plan development occurs. 1.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: . Significant efforts have occurred to implement this action and it is expected that the Construction Practices Study will identify problems with current practices, solutions to these problems and future efforts that are required for more effective erosion and sediment control. 1.3 Future Direction: . To be determined by the Construction Practices Study which is expected to be complete by the end of 1992. 2. Establish a pilot project to investigate design alerts. guldelnes and eff8ctIveness of water quality ponds and other cortroI m888lnS such as i'IiItratJon trenches and galerles and soak- 8WfIt pits. TIlls project woUd be a Jc*t Y8I'tln of a runber of agencies and relevart non- govemmertal organizations. Lead Aaencv: M.T.RCA Supportina Aaencies: MOE MNR Local Municipalities Urban Development Institute Non-government Organizations 2.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.CA . Staff are on the following committees: - MOE BMP Study (Phase I & II); - Metro Works' Emery Creek Water Quality Project; - Markham BMP Pilot Project; . With MOE, monitoring water quality of stormwater ponds originally designed for water quantity controls to determine their effectiveness as water quality control ponds; . M.T.R.CA with MOE funded an "Annotated Bibliography and Written Summary on the Use of Constructed Wetlands for the Treatment of Stormwater" by Mark Taylor; WR 'lIlt; '- 4 . M.T.R.C.A. has constructed and are monitoring the effectiveness of a water quality control structure for a storm water sewer outfall at Colonel Samuel Smith Park. 2.2 Supportina Aaencies Efforts: - MOE . Funded the "Stormwater Quality Best Management Practices Study" with the intent to develop a BMP design manual; . Working with M.T.R.CA, Town of Markham and Environment Canada on pilot projects designed to determine water quality benefits of different water quantity and quality control measures. - MTO . With the Town of Pickering and the City of Scarborough are undertaking a number of pilot projects for stormwater quality and quantity management for transportation corridors crossing the Rouge watercourses. - Town of Markham . Undertaking with MOE and Environment Canada a demonstration project for stormwater quality control. The objectives are: . To protect the environment from contaminated stormwater discharge from urban developments into the Rouge River basin and to sustain an overall ecological balance; . Design a stormwater quality control facility (BMP) that is based upon environmental, social and economic considerations; . Evaluate the effectiveness/capability of the facility in removing various pollutants and protecting the downstream aquatic ecosystems. - Metro Tororto (Works) . Undertaking the Emery Creek Water Quality Project. - Save the Rouge VaIBt System . Although no opportunity for direct involvement have been made to this organization to assist with implementing this action, S.R.V.S. have expressed their interest to be included on the committees reviewing the numerous pilot projects currently underway. Involvement of NGO could facilitate development of new approaches. 2.3 Workina Groups Efforts: . The Technical Working Group has been kept informed of the details and progress of the pilot ~ projects. WR'L'-.hJ_ 5 2.4 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: The efforts to date, have begun to examine how effective water quality control measures are and have produced the Phase I (BMP Study) which recommends a selection process for BMP's. 2.5 Future Direction: It is anticipated the numerous pilot projects currently underway will determine the effectiveness of water quality control measures and will indicate any future studies and works that are required. 3. Ensln aI new ildustr1aVcommerclal developmerD are designed wth retertion ponds (equipped with skimmer/separator) to function as the fInaJ cortroI measures for spills. Lead Aqencv: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities 3.1 Lead Aqencies Effort: - Town of Pickering . This is a requirement for major developments. - Town of Markham . Recommended further discussions occur before this action be implemented. The following questions need to be answered before implementing: - municipal or private ownership; - are current systems proven to be cost-effective; - if ownership is private, how do we ensure the owner maintains the facility; - if ownership is municipal, what are the legal, operational, maintenance and financial repercussions. . In discussion with MNR about the practical use of oiVgrit separator and the long-term cost effectiveness. - CRy of Scarborough . Currently do not implement. Need discussion on overall size of development and projected operational costs if assumed by municipality. . Undertaking a subwatershed plan for the Morningside Tributary which will address this issue. - Metropolitan Tororto . Have not implemented as this is the responsibility of local municipalities. WR. 1-3/' 1J 6 3.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: As not all the local municipalities implement this requirement, its implementation has not been effective. 3.3 Future Direction: . The local municipalities represented on the Technical Working Group and M.T.R.CA need to meet to discuss this action, its original objectives and whether it can be implemented; . The regional municipalities should be deleted as a lead agency as this action is not a responsibility of the regional government. 4. Undertake additional studies to assist the developmert of poOcIes and operational criteria to be ImpJemerted In the plan ~ and review process and to address deficiencies In the present modelDng and a monitoring data base. Lead Aaency: - Ministry of the Environment Supportina Aaencies: MNR M.T.R.eA 4.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - MOE . Continuing to monitor fish contaminant levels in the Rouge River watershed (1991 - Brown bullheads at Rouge River marsh); . Monitoring off-site impacts on ground and surface waters at the York Sanitation Site (Whitchurch-Stouffville) and off-site ambient air quality for total reduced sulphur at the Beare Road Landfill. (Metro Works conducts a monitoring program of ground and surface waters and gases at this site); . Operates and maintains eight water quality monitoring stations in the Rouge River watershed. Water samples are analyzed generally for nutrients, heavy metals, physical and chemical characteristics and bacteria; . Conducted "young of the year" sampling of common shiners at the Rouge River mouth. Analysis consisted of mercury, PCB, metal and mirex and data should be published in 1992. WI( Z'i /If J..; 7 4.2 Suooortina Aaencies Efforts: - M.T.R.eA . With MNR and as part of the Rouge River Fisheries Management Plan, the following has been identified: . cold and cool water sources; . groundwater input to the watercourse. 4.3 Effectiveness of Imolementation: . Although some good work is progressing in the monitoring of fish contaminant levels and leachate quality, the groundwater resource has not been studied. 4.4 Future Directions: . The Technical Working Group should review existing information on groundwater in the Rouge River watershed and recommend what additional studies are required to assist in developing appropriate policies and operational criteria; . MOE's Waste Management Branch is considering an inventory and mapping of abandoned garbage dump and landfill sites in the Rouge river watershed. 5. Extend 8XIstIng prcM1cIaI programs ~ a cooperative "Rouge River Farm Remedial Program" to eliminate aOO/or cortroI bacteria SOU'C8S from marue storage, livestock access to watercolft8S or other agricultural practices. Lead Aaencies: MOE OMAF Suooortina Aaencies: M.T.R.C.A. Local Municipalities 5.1 Lead Aaencies Efforts: - OMAF . Current policy does not allow OMAF's extension programs to be targeted to specific watersheds but must be applicable to any watersheds in the province. Presently has or promotes 2 programs for agricultural extension. Land Stew&r'dstm II Provides incentives for planned on farm conservation systems and environmental protection measures including fencing of watercourses, ditchbank stabilization WR ~5/, 1I 8 structures, manure storage and handling systems and field windbreaks. National Sol Conservation Proaram CNSCP) A federal government program focusing on retiring and protecting fragile land especially adjacent to watercourses. - MOE . Provided grant to M.T.R.CA for a "Clean Up Rural Beaches" (CURB) program which part of the funding is directed to abatement field work (eg. fencing to restrict cattle access) in the Bruce's Creek Subwatershed. 5.2 Supportina Aaencies Efforts: - M.T.R.C.A . With the assistance of MOE, implementing a CURB plan under a 5 year program. 5.3 Workina Groups Efforts: . The Environmental Working Group were given presentations on the agricultural extension programs available for use in the Rouge River watershed. With the assistance of the M.T.R.C.A.'s CURB staff coordinator, this working group will be developing an agricultural improvement program for the Rouge River watershed. 5.4 Effectiveness of Implemented Action: . The actions to date have not created any physical improvements within the Rouge River watershed. The programs offered through the Ministry of Agricultural & Food have made significant improvements in other watersheds throughout the province. 5.5 Future Direction: . The development of a Rouge River Farm Remedial Program by the M.T.R.CA and the Environmental Working Group should be a priority. 6. MaIrtUl fnJ/or me BIB BXIBtng mlD:lpal malrtenancelerlorcemert programs to eRmlnate fnJ/or cortroI bacteria SOU'C8S. Lead Aaencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities 6.1 Lead Aaencies Efforts: - Town of Markham . Has a complement of by-law enforcement officers responsible for Town by-laws including pet and litter by-laws and Topsoil Preservation By-law; WR. ,-,/,1, 9 . Works with the Region of York to implement the MISA (MunicipaVlndustrial Strategy for Abatement) Program; . Undertakes annually street cleaning (minimum 4 cleaning/yr) and all catchbasins (once/year) . - Town or Plckemg . By-law enforcement done for pet/litter, existing sewer use; . Undertakes catchbasin cleaning. - cay or Scarborough . The City has an established and expanding maintenance/enforcement program which includes: - outfall monitoring; - priority outfall up-pipe investigation and correction; - sewer use by-law enforcement; - BMP's applied up-pipe at point source (potentially on private property). - soils & groundwater monitoring & remediation at contaminated sites. - site plan & permit approvals for discharges to sewers & watercourses. - Metro Tororto (Works) . Implement the Water Quality Monitoring Program (since 1988) to abate bacterial and chemical contaminations in storm outfalls discharging to the Don and Humber Rivers. Had planned to include the Rouge River under this program but 1992 budgetary restraint will not permit. 6.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: . The current programs in place appear to implement these actions. 7. M"'" ard/or 8lCt8nd m~ spl action cortroI programs. Lead Aaencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities Supportina Aaencv: MOE WR. ~7/1L 10 7.1 Lead Aaencies Efforts: - cay 01 Scarborough . Implements a Scarborough Spills Action Plan which is revised and updated regularly to compliment both Regional and Provincial plans; . Overall level of service is expected to improve in 1992 when Metro Toronto Region adopts a complimentary plan. - Ta.vn of Markham . The Town's Fire Department and Roads Department worked closely with MOE in implementing the Province of Ontario Contingency Plan for Spills of Oil and Other Hazardous Materials. - Metro Tororto (Works) . Have arranged an agreement with the six local municipalities and MOE to deal with spill occurrences in an effective manner across Metro. Agreement curtails duplication of effort by outlining spill response responsibilities between local municipalities, Metro and MOE; . Metro with the local municipalities (Works Depts.) and MOE have established a Spill Response Sub-committee to develop a contingency plan; . Employ inspectors to ensure industries are in compliance of Metro's Sewer Use By-law. 7.2 Effectiveness of Imolemented Actions: . The formation of a Spill Response Committee between the regional and local municipalities and MOE (as per Metro example) would appear to be an effective mechanism in dealing with spills and a good example for York and Durham Regions to follow. 7.3 Future Direction: The Technical Working Group should review the Metro's Spill Response Committee in relation to the current programs in York and Durham Regions to make any suitable recommendations that would standardize spill response in the Rouge River watershed. 8. Madly ~ IY road mattenance and Parks and Recreation practices to mlnknlze Impact on water qudy by the reduction or e1m1natlon 01 the use 01 pesticides, herbicides, fertilizer, road sail etc. Lead Aaencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities WR 2r/,~ 11 8.1 Lead Aaencies Efforts: - Metro Tororto (parks & Property) . Have adopted an Integrated Pesticides Management Program which attempts controlled spraying rather than preventative spraying. This program also examined the use of alternatives and natural fertilizers. - Town of Markham . Applications of spraying are conducted in response to complaints. The Parks Department is analyzing the problem and implementation of cost-effective alternative methods of pest and weed control. The Road Department monitors new innovations in road de-icing and will implement those that are deemed cost effective. - City of Scarborough . Follows Scarborough guidelines and operating practices to control herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers and road salt. Through recalibration and site adjustment, salt usage has been reduced by 25% over 3 years and herbicides, pesticides and fertilizer reduced by 20%. - MTO . Has considerably reduced salt application in transportation corridors and does not apply pesticides adjacent to highway corridors through the Rouge River watershed. 8.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: The municipalities are fully aware of the need to reduce the use of chemicals and have made significant efforts to do such. 9. Establish a public education and awareness program to Oldne the benefits of "good housekeeping" practices. Lead Aaencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities Supporting Aaencies: MOE Non-government Organizations 9.1 Lead Aaencies Efforts: - Town of Pickering . Has established an awareness program to deal with these types of issues. Wi{ ~~ ICfL 12 - Town of Markham . Has an educational program which enlightens the local citizens on how to dispose of household hazardous waste, compost and reduce the use of pesticides and herbicides. - Metro Tororto . Have conducted public awareness programs, demonstrations and displays; . Operates the Household Hazardous Waste Program which includes a "Toxic Taxi" service to pick up household hazardous wastes free of charge. 9.2 Suooortina Aaencies Efforts: - Toronto Field NatLnIsts . Promotes public awareness through newsletter features, clean-ups and through information disseminated at its natural education centre and public displays. - Conservation Council of Ortarlo . Incorporates public education & awareness programs into a number of documents this organization has produced. 9.3 Effectiveness of Imolemented Actions: There is some concerted effort by the municipalities to achieve this recommendation. 9.4 Future Direction: Through S.R.V.S. it was suggested the Rouge River Strategy provides a frame work for defining problems and solutions and establishing priorities. This could be undertaken by a group representing the M.T.R.CA, local municipalities and N.G.O. w~ .30;':1.; 13 PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CON'mOL 1. Extend fIoodlne mappilg to the 130 ha dranage Iml for aI Level 1 SOO/or Level 2 streams and Idertly any addllonal flood suscepti)le des; also extend fllne mapping for regulation purposes. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA 1.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.CA . Completed the Regional Headwater Hydrology Study; . Developed mapping specifications for inclusions in flood study requirements; . Flood susceptible site inventory updated to reflect sites within Rouge Extension mapping; . Flood susceptible sites map updated to indicate new sites on Rouge; \ . M.T.R.C.A. is undertaking the Fill Regulation Extension Project which will extend M.T.R.C.A.'s regulation to all watercourse drainage areas up to 125 ha limit; . Phase I (Map schedules/descriptions) is near completion and expected to be finished by 1992; . Phase II (Public Review & Approval Process) will begin in 1992/93. 1.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions When the above-noted efforts are completed, two of the components of this recommendation will be done. The flood line mapping component of the recommendation will not be done as M.T.R.C.A.'s normal funding grants, for this type of work, has not provided any budget and is not expected to in the foreseeable future. 1.3 Future Direction: All agencies need to be supportive of M.T.R.C.A.'s request to include floodline mapping specification through all relevant planning activities such as subwatershed planning. W R 31/' t." 14 2. Enstn appropriate .Open Space - Hazard Land" designations and policy statement are contailed n local and regional mlO:lpal 0ftIcIaI Plans and secondary plans and that area bylaws are ~8d to ncorporate these designations and policy statements. Lead Aqencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities 2.1 Lead Aqencies Efforts: - Cly c:A Scarborough . Amendments to their Official Plan have been suggested and this is expected by end of 1992 or early 1993. Appropriate by-law charges will not occur until after Official Plan has been revised. - Town of Markham . Recognizes "Open Space - Hazard Land" designations and policy statements and these are contained in O.P. and secondary plans. Valleys designated "Hazard Land" are zoned Open Space. The Natural Features Study being undertaken by the Town may recommend further policy direction in this regard. - Town 01 Pickering . Recognizes "Open Space - Hazard Land" designations and policy statements and these are contained in O.P. and secondary plans. Valleys designated "Hazard Land" are zoned Open Space. - Metro Toronto . Recognizes "Open Space - Hazard Land" designations and policy statements in O.P. Undertaking a comprehensive review of their O.P. 2.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: . Between municipalities, there is inconsistencies on the timing of undertaking this recommendation and in how these areas are zoned. 2.3 Future Direction: . The M.T.R.CA's Valley and Stream Corridor's Policy Document is advocating a similar policy as per this recommendation. The Planning Working Group should examine this issue and make recommendations that would standardize the designation and zoning of hazard land in the Rouge River watershed. Wi ~.z./, '- 15 3. Expand M.T.R.CA and mLrllcIpal erIorcernert programs to ensure complance wth developmert cortroI and fII regulations, both dLrtlg and after construction. Lead Aqencv: M.T.R.CA Suooortinq Aqencv: Local Municipalities - SEE PUBUC HEAL ni - AcnON #1 4. Delineate Master DrUlage Plan areas on a 1: 1 0000 map base and Incorporate them Into ml61lclpal planning documents. Establish a time framellmplementatlon plan for Master Drainage Plan preparation for Level 2 waterco~. Establish funding mechanisms for flood cortroI works and an acquisition program for flood susceptible sites on Level 3 streams to be inplemented In leu of upstream runoff control Lead Aqencv: M.T.R.CA Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities 4.1 Lead Aqencv Efforts: - M.T.R.C.A. . With the Rouge Implementation Committee, M.T.R.CA staff initiated the development of generic terms of reference for M.D.P.'s. When completed, an implementation schedule and delineated map will be prepared. However, the province (MOE/MNR) began the preparation of a subwatershed planning document that would satisfy the objectives of the generic terms of reference, therefore, no further work occurred; . M.T.R.CA represented on the provincial committee charged with the task to develop this guidance document; . Have established an interim process for MOP studies until subwatershed planning implemented; . Pursued the Development Charges Act - Bill 20 by meeting and soliciting comments from the Regional municipalities regarding incorporating a drainage levy into their by- law; /1JR33hz. 16 - Town of Markham . Engineering Department is investigating the delineation of MOP areas and will review mechanisms to incorporate these areas into municipal planning documents; . The Town is in discussions with M.T.RCA regarding funding mechanisms for flood control and downstream works. - City of Scarborough . Current and future needs will be better serviced by subwatershed planning. Pilot program is currently underway on Centennial Creek watershed. 4.2 Workina Grouo Efforts The Planning Working Group has discussions with staff from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs to enquire as to whether MMA should be developing a long term program to assist with the financing of watershed MOP's. It was indicated that the Planning Working Group could request funding by submitting a MOP pilot project proposal which evaluates the effectiveness of the new guideline document (now the Subwatershed Planning Guidance Document). 4.3 Effectiveness of Imolemented Actions: The development of a guidance document is crucial for this recommendation to be implemented. Until this is complete, a number of issues (funding, study coordination) cannot be resolved. 4.4 Future Direction: . M.T.RCA staff has reviewed the Subwatershed Planning Guidance Document and support its objectives and proposed planning process. M.T.RCA staff will be reporting to their boards recommending a strong advocacy role for M.T.RCA and promoting this document to all their member municipalities; . The Rouge Working Groups members should review this document and provide comments. . Pursue with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs the funding of a pilot project to evaluate the effectiveness of this document. 5. Prepare generic terms of reference for Master Drai1age Plan studies to ensure consistency within the Rouge Study methodology and restB Lead Aaency: M.T.RCA W~ 31.1/,2.., 17 Supportina Aaencies: MNR MOE - SEE PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CONTROL AC"nON #4 6. Establish a hydrologic model mUtenance program that Includes: staff training, model adJustmert and updating. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA . no action has occurred. 7. Accelerate acquisition programs for public ownership of hazard lands. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.C.A. Supportina Agencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities 7.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.eA . Have completed the Greenspace Protection and Acquisition Project (1991) which includes hazard lands. This project is still awaiting final approval. 7.2 Supportina Aaencv Efforts: - Towns of Markham & Pickering . Acquisition of hazard lands are normally dedicated to the municipality through development agreements. 7.3 Future Direction: To review the acquisitions that occurred under M.T.R.CA's project to determine if hazard land acquisition is increasing. w~ss/, z.. 18 8. Develop an enhanced data gathering Network Plan for the Rouge watershed Incorporating both preclplatlon and stream gauging for use In aI aspects 01 water management. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.eA Supportina Aaencies: MNR MOE Water Survey of Canada - no action has occurred. 9. Develop a program of remedial works and acquisition for the flood susceptible section of UnlonviJle. The remedial works component 01 the program shaH be administered by the M.T.R.CA ttvough Its Flood Control Program. The acqulstion component of the program shaD be administered jortIy by the M.T.RCA and the ml6liclpality. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA Supportina Aaencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities 9.1 Lead Aaencv Effort: - M.T.RCA . Flood protection and hydrology study of Unionville tributary completed; . Initiated discussion of remaining flood site with Town of Markham. 9.2 Supporting Aaencies Efforts: - Town 01 Markham . A plan of action will be developed after analyzing the study results. Preliminary results suggest that berming and storage pond construction have a higher benefit/cost ratio than acquisition. 9.3 Effectiveness of Implemented Action: The Flood Protection and Hydrology Study will provide direction for the remedial work plan and/or acquisition plan. - -- WI( 3'hL 19 10. Establsh a pU:)Ic education program to Increase pubic awareness of floodplain management and flood and erosion cortroI objectives. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA Suooortina Aaencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities MNR 10.1 Lead Aaency Efforts: - M.T.R.C.A . Initiated the development of a M.T.R.eA promotion program which will include the public awareness recommendations within the Rouge River Strategy. 10.2 Effectiveness of Imolemented Action Until the program is completed .and implemented. the effectiveness can not be determined. WR31 1,1, 20 PUBUC SAFETY - EROSION CON11=lOL 1. Expand M.T.R.CA and m~ erIorcemert programs to enstn compllance with developmert cortroI and II regLJatlons, both dLRlg and after construction Extend fIoodllne mapping and ftlllnes (developmert 11mb) to the 130 ha Omit. Prepare a Developmert lint Policy for Implemertatlon through the plan Input and review process. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.C.A. Supportina Aaencv: Local Municipality 1.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.CA - SEE PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CON11=lOL AcnON #1 AND #3 . A Development Limit Policy has been drafted and will be incorporated in the Valley and Stream Corridor Policy Document. 1.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Action: The completion and adoption of M.T.R.C.A.'s Valley/Stream Corridor Policy document is an important step in implementing this recommendation. 2. Delineate Master Drahage Plan areas on a 1: 1 0000 map base and Incorporate them Into muriclpal planning dcxunens. EstabIsh a fuldlng mechanism for erosion protection works and acquisition on Level 2 and 3 watercotnes n leu of ru'1Ofr cortroL Lead Aaencies: M.T.R.CA Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities - SEE PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CON11=lOL AcnON #4 W~ 3r},< 21 3. Prepare generic terms c:A raf8r8nce for Master Drahage Plan Studies to ensU'8 consistency with the Rouge RIver DrU1age Study methodology. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.C.A. Supportina Aaencies: MNR MOE - SEE PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CONTROL ACTION #4 4. Carry o~ addtional erosion works and acquisition on Level 2 and 3 watercourses in lieu of runoff controL Lead Aaencies: M.T.R.CA Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities - SEE PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CONmOL ACTION #4 5. Amend the operational crlarIa cortained wthIn the Erosion and Sediment Control Program of the Watershed Plan to read aI Level 1, 2 and 3 streams that drain In excess of 130 hectares. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.C.A. Supportina Aaencies: Local Municipalities 5.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.RCA . M.T.R.CA has reviewed the Erosion and Sediment Control Program and believes the program operation criteria is worded such that no revision is necessary. )JK3'/,Z. 22 FISHERIES 1. ReqiA aI Master DrU'lage Plans for urbanIzi1g areas to address implementation of control measl68S which wi: . provide cortroI c1 over1and sol erosion and transport during n.noff; . mlr*ntze the period c1 time that objectives for ammonia, metals and organic compcx.l1ds are BlCC88ded In rmoff; . Incorporate methods of prevertlng spls from reaching watercourses; . regulate the water temperature In the watercourses. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA Supponina Aaencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities MNR MOE - SEE PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CONTROL ACTlON #4(SUBWATERSHED PLANNING GUIDANCE DOCUMENT SECTlON) 2. Define HabIat SuItabIly Ind8X (HSQ crlerta for target species In each community zone to more clear1y express physical habbt needs In englneertng design and planning temlS. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.C.A. Supponina Agency: MNR 2.1 Lead Agencv Effons: - M.T.R.CA . Developed two models to assist in project planning and implementation. Model 1 - Identifies fish communities on an sub-watershed basis; - Distinguishes between cold and warm water fish communities; WR.. '10"~ 23 - Identifies broad limiting factors and habitat potential. Model 2 - Select indicator species on a reach specific basis; - Identifies limiting factors. 2.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Action: . . When completed, these models should be able to identify physical habitat needs. 2.3 Future Direction: . The models require calibration and validation and may require further modifications. 3. Prepare 8 fisheries managemert plan for the Rouge RIver watershed. Lead Aqencv: MNR Supportinq Aqencies: M.T.R.CA LocaVRegional Municipalities Non-governmental Organizations 3.1 Lead Aqencv Efforts: - MNR . With the assistance of M.T.R.C.A., the local and regional municipalities and S.R.V.S., the fisheries management plan is underway with Phase I (Management Strategy) completed and Phase II (Implementation Strategy) to be completed in 1992. Accomplishments to date include: . assessment and potential of fish habitat within management zones; and . habitat management requirements. 3.2 Working Group Efforts The Rouge River Strategy Environmental Working Group provided comments on the Rouge River Fisheries Management Plan (Phase I). 3.3 Effectiveness of Implemented Action: . Upon completion of the Fisheries Management Plan, fisheries management and enhancement will occur. w~ ~I /" z..,. 24 3.4 Future Direction: . The entire plan needs to be reviewed by all agencies in the Rouge River watershed and endorsed for it to be successfully implemented. 4. Review policies regarding permitted uses In the floodplain to minimize Impacts on the Riparian Habitat Zone. Lead Aaency: M.T.R.CA Supportina Aaencies: MNR MOE OMAF Municipalities 4.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.eA . This review is currently underway through the work occurring for the Valley and Stream Corridor Policy document. 4.2 Supportina Aaencies Efforts: - Town of Markham . Has introduced a requirement for a vegetated riparian habitat zone adjacent to streams in new Secondary Plans. - Town of Pickering . Presently working with MNR in a number of areas. 4.3 Effectiveness of Implemented Action: . The Valley and Stream Corridor Policy document should provide direction to all agencies on appropriate uses in the floodplain. 4.4 Future Direction: All the working groups should review M.T.R.CA's Valley and Stream Corridor Policy document and provide comments. WI< ~ '-I,t.. 25 5. MonIor cortamnut levels In fish tissue from yCUlQ-Of-u.year Rouge River fish and In aquatic sedlmerU as early Indlcal:ors of the presence of potertlally bloaccumulatlve chemicals and location of potertlal80l6C8S. Lead Aaencv: MOE Supportina Agencies: MNR M.T.R.CA 5.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - MOE . As part of its regular programming conducted "young of the year" sampling of common shiners at the Rouge River mouth in 1991. Fish were analyzed for mercury, PCB's, metals and mirex. This work was part of a larger Metro Toronto stream outfall sampling program. It is expected that the data will be published in 1992. 5.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Action: . Until the report is published and compared to a similar 1989 Study, it is difficult to assess whether these parameters are decreasing and whether further monitoring is required. 6. EstabBsh the RIpartan Habht Managemert Program. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA Supportina Aaencies: MNR Local Municipalities Non-governmental Organizations 6.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.eA . A draft Riparian Habitat Program was completed and circulated internally. Policy statements within the program have been incorporated into the Valley and Stream Corridor Policy document. WR '-I~ I,,., 26 6.2 Suooortina Aaencies Efforts: - Town of Markham . The Markham Conservation Committee organizes interested groups who would like to do voluntary work such as riparian plantings. - Save the Rouge Valet System . Stress the need to update guidelines for stream bank stabilization and riparian plantings. There is a need to coordinate the different riparian-type programs to achieve efficiency and to encourage maximum public participation. SRVS can participate in formulating revised guidelines in establishing and facilitating public involvement. - Conservation CCUlCI of Ontario . Has developed two documents entitled "Urban Streams" and "Urban Forest" that could assist with this issue. 6.3 Effectiveness of Imolemented Actions: . The need for comprehensive, widely supported Riparian Habitat Management Program is self-evident from the responses and needs to be discussed further. 6.4 Future Direction: . The Rouge River Strategy Environmental Working Group should examine this issue and provide direction to M.T.R.C.A. 7. Use opportunities provided by remedial works for flood and erosion control to rehabUitate physical habitats for target fish commLdles where feasible. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA 7.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.CA . Internal committee struck to review erosion control construction practices and revise accordingly to contribute fisheries habitat rehabilitation; . Hired aquatic and terrestrial staff to assess site conditions and provide recommendations regarding preferred methods, access and habitat protection and rehabilitation. In addition, reviewed past erosion control sites to assess potential for improved techniques and to perform post-construction audit to monitor projects for a number of years; . Habitat rehabilitation and enhancement work is now required as part of flood and erosion control planning under the new draft Class EA. W~~4 1'1'- 27 7.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: . These actions have greatly increased M.T.R.CA staff knowledge on better habitat protection and enhancement. 7.3 Future Direction: . It is anticipated the internal work will lead to a habitat enhancement guideline document for erosion and flood control projects. 8. Monitor the incidence of disease, parasites and viruses In resident fish. Lead Agencv: MNR Supportina Aaencies: M.T.R.CA MOE - no actions known at this time. 9. Establish a pubUc education awareness program to outline to landowners the benefits of Implemertlng proper measures for controUlng overland soU erosion and transport. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA Supportina Aaencies: Local Municipalities OMAF - SEE PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CONmOL ACllON #10. W R l.f 5 J'I"z' 28 RIPARIAN HABITAT 1. Establish the Riparian Hablat Managemert Program. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.CA Supportina Agencies: MNR Local Municipalities Non-governmental Organizations - SEE RIPARIAN HABITAT AC110N #6 2. Review M.T.R.CA'sland acquisition program for hazard lands and identify the extent to which the riparian habitat zone Is Included. Develop an acquisition program for any riparian habitats not previously identified. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.eA Supportina Aaency: Municipalities 2.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.CA . Developed the Greenspace Protection and Acquisition Project (1991) which included the riparian habitat zone as a component of the Greenspace System. 2.2 Supportina Aaencies Efforts: - Town 01 Pickering . Will endeavour to carry this out (Planning Department). - Town of Markham . The Town's Natural Features Study will identify significant and sensitive portions of valley systems. A review of existing ownership and possible acquisition of privately owned sections with the M.T.R.CA would be appropriate when the information is available. ----- w~ '1"h~ 29 2.3 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: . Both of the M.T.R.C.A.'s Greenspace Protection and Acquisition Project and the Valley and Stream Corridor Policy document should implement the objective of this recommendation. 3. EstabIsh a plbIc education and awareness program to a&ale the inportance of healthy r1partan habtats In providing passive recreation, mUtaInJng inportart (MctIonaI) wildlife communlles and mlnmlzJng overland sol erosion and transport to watercourses. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.C.A. Supportina Aaencies: MNR Local Municipalities - SEE PUBUC SAFETY - FLOOD CONTROL ACTlON #10 3.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts - M.T.R.C.A . Assisting the Markham Conservation Committee and the school board to establish an education program including classroom and field work on the Rouge River. Habitat rehabilitation projects will be included for practical experience. 3.2 Working Group Efforts . All Working Groups provided comments on the Trees for Today and Tomorrow's (TTT) project (Rouge River and Watershed Restoration Project) which includes a major component of public awareness and communication. w ~ Lf1/Q-z... 30 TERRESTRIAL HABITAT 1. Accelerate ....19 programs c1 deslgndlg mportart floral and faunaJ features as enWonmertaJ protection areas ttYough the m..nclpal pIarri1g process. Lead Aaencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities Supportina Aaencies: M.T.R.CA MNR Carolinian Canada 1.1 Lead Aaencies Efforts: - Town of Pickering . Are accelerating existing programs to designate important floral and faunal features. - City at Scarborough . Will support and assist M.T.R.CA in this effort. - Town of Markham . The Town commissioned "Natural Features Study" which will identify important floral and faunal features to be protected. The study comprises three stages: . inventory and evaluation; . natural feature policy plan; and . detailed strategy to implement plan. 1.2 Supportina Agencies Efforts: - M.T.RCA . An evaluation and review of M.T.R.C.A.'s Environmentally Significant Areas Study (1982) has been initiated which may assist in identifying these areas. 1.3 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: . At this time. it is too early to make any judgement of the effectiveness of these actions. IAJR 48},z 31 1.4 Future Direction There seems to be a need to standardize the identification and designation process amongst municipalities in the Rouge River watershed in cooperation with the Rouge Valley Park Planning Committee. The Rouge River Strategy Planning and Environmental Working Group could assist with this endeavour. 2. Establish a J'8SOU'C8 monItortng program on selected significant terrestr1al habitats to determine Impacts from hydrologic changes. Lead Aaencv: MNR Supportina Aaencies: M.T.R.CA Carolinian Canada Non-governmental Organizations 2.1 Supportina Aaencies Efforts: - M.T.R.CA . As part of any flood and erosion control projects are monitoring impacts of the environment. 2.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Action: . The actions to date, have not been effective as a monitoring program has not been established. 3. Establish a public education and awareness program to outline the importance of healthy terrestrial habIats In providing passive recreation, mai1taining important (functional) wildlife comml.llitles and enhancing groundwater quartity and qualily. Lead Aaency: M.T.R.CA Supportina Aaencies: MNR Carolinian Canada Non-governmental Organizations - SEE PUBUC SAFElY - FLOOD CONmOL ACllON #10 w~. 4' I,L 32 4. EstabIsh a private lands stewardship program to rehablltate terrestrial habitats on rural and urbanlUlg lands. Lead Aaencv: M.T.R.C.A. Supportina Agencies: MNR Non-governmental Organizations 4.1 Lead Aaencv Efforts: - M.T.R.C.A. . Completed Oak Ridges Moraine mapping which digitized ESA, wetlands, ANSI, watercourses, M.T.R.C.A. properties, etc.; . As part of the CURB program, technical advice is given to landowners generally concerning agricultural situations but would also include any of M.T.R.CA extension programs such as stewardship programs; . As part of the 1992 budget, preparations have included project files submitted to MNR for land stewardship programs for M.T.R.CA entire jurisdiction and specifically for the Rouge River watershed. Neither received funding approval. 4.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: - have not been effective. 4.3 Future Direction: . With the assistance of the Rouge River Strategy Environmental Working Group, MNR and NGO, a program should be developed. Wit SOl,;, 33 AESlHETlCS 1. EDmlnate fRJ/or cortroI dry weather phosphorus sources such as illegal waste discharges to stonn sewers, fauIly septic systems. Lead Aqencv: Local Municipalities 1.1 Lead Aqencv Efforts: - Town of Plckertng . Undertakes a program which operates on complaint basis. - City or Scarborough . Attempts to maintain a storm sewer discharge of phosphorous to 1.0 mg. < or less. Typical discharge values and receiving water quality are within this limit; . Enforces Scarborough Sewer Use By-law #17777. . Undertakes a septic tank elimination program. - Town of Markham . Works cooperatively with the Region of York to implement their "MISA" program. This program is designed to monitor and abate effluent that exceeds limits specified in the sewer use by-law for sanitary and storm sewers; . Town staff are not aware of any problem related to faulty septic systems in rural areas, 1.2 Effectiveness of Implemented Actions: . Without a comprehensive monitoring program, it is difficult to assess whether phosphorous loading is a problem and whether the municipal programs are effective. 1.3 Future Direction: . A comprehensive monitoring program involving the regional and local municipalities, MOE would assist in achieving the objectives of this recommendation. 2. MaJrtail fRJ/or extend m~ spl action control programs. Lead Aqencies: Local Municipalities Regional Municipalities - SEE PUBUC HEALTH - AC1l0N #7 WRsll~L 34 WORKING GROUPS PROGRESS REPORT In 1990, The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA) formally adopted the Comprehensive Basin Manaaement Strateav for the Rouae River Watershed (CBMSRRW). This document contains a number of goals, policies and implementation actions that are designed to restore and protect the natural resources of the Rouge River watershed. The MTRCA directed staff to establish an Implementation Committee to assist those stakeholders identified as lead agencies to implement the recommendations stated in the Rouge Strategy. The Rouge River Implementation Committee was divided into three working groups. Each group is responsible for examining specific actions stated in the Rouge Strategy, based on the experiences of the individuals in the group, to assist the assigned lead agency(s) with the implementation of the recommendations. The three groups are: - the Planning Working Group; - the Technical Working Group; and - the Environmental Working Group. As a means of informing the Implementation Committee of the accomplishments that have been made by the working groups, each group has been requested to produce a progress report, documenting the groups achievements, on a yearly basis. The following represents a summary of the each working group: ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP - PHASE ONE PROGRESS REPORT (SEPTEMBER, 1991) PHASE ONE ACllONS: 1. In 1990, Trees For Today and Tomorrow (TTl) submitted the Rouae River and Watershed Restoration Proiect to the MTRCA for potential sponsorship. TIT is a registered charitable organization working in co-operation with the MTRCA in developing reforestation projects along three of the main watersheds in MTRCA jurisdiction. The first phase of the project involves four components: 1) Stream and Fisheries Habitat Improvement; 2) Wildlife Habitat Improvement and Protection; 3) Revegetation; and 4) Public Awareness and Communication. The EWG was presented with the Rouge River and Watershed Restoration Proiect proposal, as a possible project to be undertaken in the Rouge River watershed. To date, the Town of Markham has informed TIT that there is an interest by some large corporations to participate in this project. This option will be pursued by TIT. 2. A joint effort between the Ministry of Natural Resources, the MTRCA, the municipalities within the Rouge River watershed and several non-government organizations is underway to prepare a Rouae River Fisheries Manaaement Plan. This plan is the direct result of an action recommended in the strategy document. WRSZ/'z. 35 The objective of this plan is to rehabilitate the Rouge River to support a healthy, sett-sustaining cold water fishery. However, the plan recognizes that some reaches within the Rouge Watershed will also be managed for cool or warm water species. There are five major components to this plan, as follows: 1. Habitat Assessment. 2. Monitoring Program. 3. Assessment of Existing Management Strategy. 4. Public Access. 5. Communication. The Rouge Working Groups will be provided with updates of the Rouge River Fisheries Management Plan, as the major components of the plan are developed. 3. The Rouge River Basin Management Strategy emphasized the need for an integrated and comprehensive approach to resource planning. As a vehicle to analyze the local conditions and stormwater management requirements within a subwatershed, the Master Drainage Plan (MOP) was identified as the most appropriate mechanism to integrate these other resource issues. MTRCA staff, in consultation with the Ministry of the Environment (MaE), the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and the local municipalities within the Rouge River water- shed have suggested that the MOP process should proceed in two phases. Phase One, the Subwatershed Inventory established the existing baseline conditions of the watershed being developed, prior to any land use decisions being made. Phase Two, the Master Servicing Plan involves integrating the development with the resources. The EWG was presented with the draft Generic Terms of Reference for Phase One of the proposed MOP guidelines. A working committee involving the MaE, MNR, MMA, conservation authorities (including MTRCA) and municipalities has recently been established to produce Generic Sub-Watershed Master Plan guidelines. These guidelines will include examining the necessary linkages and relationships to municipal planning and planning documents of other ministries and agencies. Therefore, the MTRCA has postponed work on the MOP guidelines to avoid duplicating the efforts with this new working committee. WR. 53 Jt:t Z- 36 4. The Executive Summary of the MOE - Best Manaaement Practice (BMP) Studv was provided to the EWG for review. This study was undertaken due to the recognition that the development forms must meet our current needs while preserving and maintaining our natural resources for the future. There is also a need to plan our actions in ways which recognize such things as water quality and quantity linkages between surface and groundwater, and dependencies between physical and biological resources. This item will be brought forward again for the EWG consideration when the entire report is approved for circulation, by the MOE. 5. The EWG examined many of the provinciaVfederal agricultural programs that are available to individual farmers and farming organizations in Ontario, to practice conservation farming practices. As these programs are province wide and the EWG's mandate is restricted to the Rouge Watershed this presentation was designed to assist the EWG to potentially devise a plan to incorporate these programs into a Rouge River Farm Remedial Program; to assist with the implementation of the Rouge Strategy. These programs include: A. Food Svstems 2002 A comprehensive program, initiated in 1988, designed to assist growers to cut their use of pesticides by 50%, by the year 2002. The program employs research, education and field delivery components to reduce pesticide use without disturbing the viability of farmers. Concurrently, the program will help keep Ontario in the forefront of safe food production and assure a healthy environment. Research The 15-year plan involves three, five-year programs which emphasize research to develop and implement non-chemical alternatives using high technology and biotechnology. Major areas of emphasis include laboratories/testing pesticide residue monitoring; testing, modifying and delivering improved sprayer technology; and project studies (for example, non-chemical alternatives such as biological control; cultural practices and crop rotations; and the development of pest-resistant crop varieties). Education The Ontario Pesticide Education Program (OPEP), a program of study on safe handling and application of pesticides for vendors and growers, has been expanded under Food System 2002. OPEP began in 1982 as a joint venture between the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, the Ministry of the Environment and the Crop Protection Institute of Canada. Field Deliverv The Ministry of Agriculture and Food has hired a number of pest management specialists to assist farmers in substantially reducina pesticide use. These specialists deliver expanded Integrated Pest Management programs to growers, identify areas for further research, develop and modify monitoring techniques, evaluate shifts in both pest resistance and in the dominance of pest species; and prepare training sessions/materials for growers and others. WRS'//9_ 37 B. Land Stewardshio II A $38 million program, effective from September 1990 to March 1994, which provides incentives for planned on-farm conservation systems and environmental protection measures. The program assists farmers in establishing new structures and changing practices to meet the challenge of environ-mentally responsible agricultural resource management. The intent of Land Stewardship II is to help farmers develop a "systems approach" in the planning of their on-farm soil conservation and environmental protection systems. This is to ensure that an identified on-farm erosion or environmental concern is addressed in a complete sense rather than only considering one component of the problem. The program has four major aspects: 1. An emphasis on conservation farm planning; 2. Extension, education and technology transfer field staff; 3. Grants to: - farmers who adopt practices or build structures as part of their conservation farm plan; - organizations for on-farm demonstrations and evaluation; and - organizations for conservation promotion and education. 4. Farmer-led administration. At the field level, the program is administered by the Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association. Grants are available to eligible farmers for practices and structures which protect agricultural soil and water in Ontario, from erosion and degradation. Funds are available for soil conservation systems (including such system components as residue management, cover crops, strip cropping, conservation equipment and soil conservation structures) and environmental protection measures (manure storage and handling systems, milk house washwater disposal systems and pesticide handling facilities). Funding is also available to farm organizations and conservation authorities for on-farm demonstrations and evaluation and conservation promotion and education. C. National Soils Conservation Proqram (Buffer Strio Proqram) The federal government is offering up to $10,000 per farmer under this unique 3-year program worth nearly $9 million. Producers can receive funds for retiring and protecting fragile land, especially farmland strips adjacent to streams and open ditches. This protected land will then act as a shield from land that is under agricultural production and will help reduce erosion and chemical runoff. The Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association is administering the program on Agriculture Canada's behalf. wR 55 (qz. 38 Eligible projects can include such program components as: buffer strips with permanent grass and/or trees; enhanced buffers; block plantings of trees on highly erodible fragile land; and retiring flood plains from agricultural production. Priority is given to row crop acres taken out of production. Funding is also available for the establishment of demonstration sites which focus on the retirement of fragile lands through permanent cover. Eligible groups for funding under the demonstration site component of the program include municipalities, universities and colleges, conservation authorities, government ministries, farm organizations and non-government agencies. D. Rural Beaches Proaram In 1986, the MmCA Rural Beaches Project was established in cooperation with the Ministry of the Environment (MOE). The goals of the project were to identify and remedy bacterial pollution sources to improve water quality and reduce beach closures. The primary task had been the completion of the Clean Up Rural Beaches Report (CURB). The main components of the CURB report include: 1. A model that identifies the bacterial pollution sources and their impact on the swimming beaches. 2. An estimated total cost for remedial measures required to improve surface water quality. 3. A strategy to implement remedial measures (on the Humber and Rouge watersheds). The Authority developed a CURB implementation program to demonstrate on a pilot project basis, the recommendation made in the CURB report by: 1. Providing financial assistance to landowners for the construction of remedial measures to improve rural water quality. 2. Encouraging landowners to implement remedial measures and adopt best management practices that reduce pollution loads into local watercourse. 3. Cooperating with local health offices to determine the water quality impact of suspected faulty septic systems. 4. Monitoring surface water quality to evaluate the effectiveness of remedial measures. 5. Conducting an information and education program to increase public awareness of methods and management practices for achieving and maintaining improved water quality. The three year research project (September 1986 -August 1989) has been funded by the Provincial Rural Beaches Program of the MOE. The beginning of the W~ S" If! Z, 39 implementation phase (September 1989 - January 1991), has been cost shared equally between the MTRCA and the MOE. The MOE has offered to partially fund the CURB program in the MTRCA watershed, over a five year period (1991-1995). Based on a sliding scale, MOE will provide 100% funding for one year, 75% for year two, and 50% for years three, four and five. This funding is to be used for one staff person and support costs to promote the program and assist landowners with implementing remedial measures. Tim Rance (MNR) introduced two MNR community oriented programs: A. Community Fisheries Involvement Proaram (CFIP) This program is designed to encourage the public to actively undertake hands-on fisheries management projects which will directly benefit the fisheries resource.MNR has published a CFIP: Field Manual (Part 1 - Trout Stream Rehabilitation) which is available to the public. (Part 2 - Warm Water Fisheries has not yet been released.) B. Community Wildlife Involvement Proaram (CWIP) This program is designed to: - Increase the variety, abundance and distribution of wildlife and wildlife habitat; - Increase knowledge about wildlife resources; - Strengthen relations between landowners, outdoor recreational/interest groups. These programs may assist with the development of a Rouge River Farm Remedial Program by providing funding for riparian plantings to produce wildlife corridors. PLANNING WORKING GROUP - PHASE ONE PROGRESS REPORT (SEPlEMBER. 1991) PHASE ONE ACllONS: 1) The Rouge River Basin Management Strategy emphasized the need for an integrated and comprehensive approach to resource planning. As a vehicle to analyze the local conditions and stormwater management requirements within a subwatershed, the Master Drainage Plan (MOP) was identified as the most appropriate mechanism to integrate these other resource issues. . MTRCA staff in consultation with the Ministry of the Environment (MOE), the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and the local municipalities within the Rouge River watershed have suggested that the MOP process should proceed in two phases. Phase One, the Subwatershed Inventory, established the existing baseline conditions of the watershed being developed prior to any land use decisions being made, and Phase Two, the Master Servicing Plan which involves integrating the development with the resources. WR 57 I'll. 40 The Planning Working Group was presented with the draft Generic Terms of Reference for Phase One of the proposed MOP guidelines. A working committee involving MOE, MNR, MMA conservation authorities (including MTRCA) and municipalities, has recently been established to prepare a guideline document that will assist with the preparation of Sub-Watershed Master Plans. These guidelines include the necessary linkages and relationships to municipal planning and planning documents of other ministries and agencies. Therefore, the MTRCA has postponed work on the MOP guidelines to avoid duplicating the efforts with the new working committee. 2) MTRCA staff presented the PWG with a preliminary map illustrating the subwatersheds on the Rouge River watershed to provide an idea of their possible average size and to show the subwatershed boundaries in relation to municipal boundaries. The PWG agreed that a planning unit should be based on a subwatershed, and that these areas should be determined by technical and municipal experts; 3) One of the policies for Riparian Habitat recommended that a publicly owned riparian habitat zone be established adjacent to: iO Level 1 and 2 watercourses less than 130 ha in drainage if they have natural terrestrial (woody) vegetation. The definition of "natural terrestrial (woody) vegetation" was clarified, as follows: "Vegetation communities/habitats that are occurring or produced in a state of nature, indigenous to the site, and consisting of 50% (minimum) woody species and tree cover". The term "woody" was also clarified to include shrubs and trees. Further work is necessary in order to provide the minimum areal extent for these vegetation communities to meet the definition. The PWG has recommended that "the ownership of the riparian habitat zone be determined through consultation between the private land owner and the municipality, in a similar way that the ownership of the 10 metre development limit (environmental buffer zone) as stated in the Rouge Strategy. 4) MTRCA staff have been pursuing the possibility for municipalities to include financial provisions for MOP studies by the MTRCA, within any proposed by-law under the Development Charges Act. The Authority authorized staff to approach regional municipalities and request that they include provisions for flood and erosion control structures, within their development charges by-laws. The letter that was circulated to the clerks of the regional municipalities was presented to the PWG. The PWG was informed that Peel; York, and Durham had indicated that they are reluctant to include financial provisions within their by-laws for MOP studies by the MTRCA. However, the Town of Markham is working with the MTRCA to develop a by-law which includes a levy for storm water management, master drainage plans and erosion and flood control structures. Wft..S8/'L 41 Municipal representatives of the PWG investigated other internal funding options that may be available to finance MOP's, as an alternative to the Development Charges Act. Some of these potential funding options included: - developers funding MOP; - municipality funding MOP; - conservation authority funding MOP; - municipalities generating funds (eg: through levies) and transferring them to the conservation authority for MOP. 5) Members of the PWG met with representatives from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MMA) to inquire as to whether MMA should be developing a long term program to assist with the financing of watershed MOP's. Representatives from MMA indicated that the PWG could request funding by submitting a MOP pilot project proposal which evaluates the effectiveness of the new guideline document that is being prepared to assist with the preparation of Subwatershed Master Plans. 6) The PWG was presented with the joint Trees for Today and Tomorrow I MTRCA project proposal entitled The Rouae River & Watershed Restoration Proiect. This project will involve four major components on the Rouge River & watershed, including: 1) steam and fisheries habitat improvement; 2) wildlife habitat improvement and protection; 3) revegetation; and 4) public awareness and communication. To date, the Town of Markham has informed Trees for Today and Tomorrow that there is an interest by some large corporations to participate in this project. This option will be pursued by Trees for Today and Tomorrow. 7) The PWG has received a number of new initiatives concerning water quality criteria and guidelines that require a change in or affect the municipal planning process, including the Executive Summary to the Ministry of the Environment report entitled The Study of Stormwater Qualitv Best Manaaement Practices. There is general agreement that it is important for the PWG to review any new initiatives to ensure that the Rouge Strategy - Actions being recommended by the PWG are consistent with new provincial guidelines and policies. PLANNING WORKING GROUP - PHASE ONE PROGRESS REPORT (SEPTEMBER. 1991) PHASE ONE ACTlONS: 1. In 1990, Trees For Today and Tomorrow (TTl) submitted the Rouge River and Watershed Restoration Proiect to the MTRCA for potential sponsorship. TIT is a registered charitable organization working in co-operation with the MTRCA in developing reforestation projects along three of the main watersheds in MTRCA jurisdiction. w~ 5"'L 42 The first phase of the project involves four components: 1) Stream and Fisheries Habitat Improvement; 2) Wildlife Habitat Improvement and Protection; 3) Revegetation; and 4) Public Awareness and Communication. The TWG was presented with the Rouae River and Watershed Restoration Proiect proposal, as a possible project to be undertaken in the Rouge River watershed. To date, the Town of Markham has informed TIT that there is an interest by some large corporations to participate in this project. This option will be pursued by TIT. 2. The Rouge River Basin Management Strategy emphasized the need for an integrated and comprehensive approach to resource planning. As a vehicle to analyze the local conditions and stormwater management requirements within a subwatershed, the Master Drainage Plan (MDP) was identified as the most appropriate mechanism to integrate these other resource issues. MTRCA staff in consultation with the Ministry of the Environment (MaE), the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and the local municipalities within the Rouge River watershed have suggested that the MOP process should proceed in two phases. Phase One, the Subwatershed Inventory, establishes the existing baseline conditions of the watershed being developed, while Phase Two, the Master Servicing Plan integrates development with the resources. The Technical Working Group (lWG) was presented with the draft Generic Terms of Reference for Phase One of the proposed MDP guidelines. A working committee involving MaE, MNR, MMA conservation authorities (including MTRCA) and municipalities, has recently been established to produce Generic Sub-Watershed Master Plan guidelines. These guidelines will include examining the necessary linkages and relationships to municipal planning and planning documents of other ministries and agencies. Notwithstanding the efforts of this provincial committee, the Rouge Implementation Committee (lWG) will continue efforts to provide the MTRCA with technical comments regarding the MOP guideline document. 3. The following pilot projects are currently underway to monitor the effectiveness of stormwater management ponds: Town of Markham The Best Management Practice proposal for the Markham Pilot Project is divided into four phases: 1. Site selection; 2. Detail design; 3. Construction; 4. Monitoring. WR. 'oj,! 43 Town of Scarborouah The Dunker Flow Monitoring Project (DFMP) is a project designed to control the quality of stormwater runoff before it reaches Lake Ontario. This project is viewed as an alternative to the installation of underground storage tanks and above ground detention ponds. This project will begin soon and follow an E.A. process. MTRCA The MTRCA Pond Study Advisory Committee has conducted a tour of possible stormwater pond facilities that could be monitored under this study. The following ponds have been chosen for the study: - Heritage Estates Pond (Don River); - Markville Pond (Rouge River). This study will be coordinated from the MOE office located at 1 St. Clair Ave. West, beginning in August and extending for approximately eighteen months. 4. In March, 1990, M.M. Dillon submitted to the Authority a review of the MTRCA - Erosion Control Criteria. The purpose of the review was to simplify the design, construction and approval process for new developments by combining the criteria for water quality and stream erosion control. This report forms part of an extensive erosion control review program. The two phased program, scheduled over a 3-5 year period, would provide a series of computer analyses of different erosion control criteria. This would be followed by extended field measurements to verify the computer models. This report forms the first phase of the program. 5. Ministry of Transportation The Ministry of Transportation is currently establishing several pilot projects designed to monitor highway runoff and the impacts to stream hydrology; including a stormwater quality pond at Highway #401 and the Rouge River crossing. 6. At the request for clarification by the Planning Working Group, the lWG has established a sub- committee to provide "a technical rationale for the establishment of a 10 metre buffer strip (development limit) in an ill-defined valley." A response will be provided to the PWG, at a later date. 7. Future direction for the Technical Workina Grouo. 0 review MOE - Best Management Practice Study (Phase 1) and the MOE - Water Quality Control Guidelines to ensure there is a good understanding of the requirements; - review the "terms of reference" for the Water Quality Pond Pilot Project and other projects that are currently underway, to ensure that the recommendations of the Rouge Strategy will be addressed; WR f.1/,l, 44 - site visit to MTRCA oil skimmer and storm sewer outfall settling pond and weir structure. recently constructed at Col. Sam Smith Waterfront Park, Etobicoke; - consideration of retention pond maintenance. CONCLUDING RECOMMENDAll0NS From discussions the Implementation Committee had reviewing the 1991 Progress Report, the following recommendations were made: . A Work Plan be prepared identifying what work still needs to be carried out and by which agency(ies) to fully implement the Rouge River Strategy; and . The remaining recommendations to be implemented must be prioritized for work in 1992 and beyond. w~. bl/92, BUDGET PREPARATION 1993 PRELIMINARY PROJECT FILES LIST Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #5/92 June 19. 1992 ~R. b3h!- PRELIMINARY PROJECT FILE LIST - 1993 Status Cost Benefitting Municipality Erosion Control-Caoital Works V ALLEYLANDS 11 ) 3030 - 3068 Weston Road update 175.000 Metro (2) Burgundy Court update 150.000 Metro (3) Parkview Hill Cres. update 110.000 Metro (4) 40-42 Royal Rouge Trail update 56.000 Metro (5) Loney Avenue update 63,000 Metro (1) Bakerdale & Southdale update 52,000 York (1 ) King Street - Bolton update 26,000 Peel ( 1) Greenwood 5th Concession update 47,000 Durham Erosion Control-Caoital Works LAKESHORE (1) Kingsbury Crescent update · 100,000 Metro (2) South Marine Drive update · 50,000 Metro (3) Fishleigh Drive update · 300,000 Metro (4) Guildwood Parkway update · 350,000 Metro (5) Sylvan - Phase II update 200,000 Metro (6) # 3-5 Kingsbury update 100,000 Metro (7) Sunny point Berm update 75,000 Metro (8) 39-41 Springbank update 110,000 Metro Erosion Control-Malor Maintenance (1) Highland Creek Channels update 44,000 (2) 3056 Grovetree Road update 22,000 (3) Royal York Road new 35,000 Erosion Control-Survey & Studies 11 ) Erosion Control Update and new 40,000 Environmental Inventories (2) Meadowcliffe Drive update 40,000 (3) Tildon Avenue new 15,000 (4) Review of Erosion Control new 20,000 for Storm Water Management . Multi Year Projects which have been funded in the previous year and must be brought forward to continue or complete. w R toLl ('t"l.- . Status Cost Shoreline Manaaement Plans . Studies 1 . Shoreline Master Plan-GIS update 45,000 Flood Control - CaDital 1. Keating Channel update · 400,000 2. Dixie/Dundas Damage Centre update · 300,000 3. Black Creek-JanelWeston Rd. update 1,000,000 Flood Control . Maior Maintenance 1 . Stouffville Dam update 95,000 2. York Mills Channel update 45,000 3. Black Creek Channel Repairs new 100,000 Flood Control . Surveys & Studies 1. Rouge River Model Update & new 25,000 Plotting of Flood Line 2. Duffin Creek & Don River new 30,000 P10ting of Flood Lines 3. Mapping Update update 40,000 4. Humber Rv. Hydrology/Hydraulics new 100,000 Review & Plotting Flood Lines 5. Review of Flood Vunerable Sites Priorities new 20,000 6. Etobicoke Cr. HydrologylHydraulics Review new 80,000 & Plotting of Flood Lines Flood Forecastlna & Warnina 1. Computerized Flood new 30,000 Forcasting & Data Retrieval Fill line MaoDina 1 . Fill Regulation Extension Program update 40,000 ComDrehensive Water Basin Studies 1 . Don River Watershed Study update · 300.000 2. Environmentally Significant Areas Study update 60,000 3. Subwatershed Plans new 60,000 4. Duffin Creek Watershed update 30,000 5. Humber River update 40,000 . Multi Year Projects which have been funded in the previous year and must be brought forward to continue or complete. , ..- w ~ ".5 /''1 1993 CONSERVATION SERVICES PROJECT FILES Files Net Expenditure Revenue Expenditure CONSERVATION PLANNING/ TREE PLANTING/REFOREST A TION Conservation Planning 389000 389000 Forest Management 125000 30000 95000 Plant Propagation 200000 190000 10000 Tree & Shrub 18000 18000 0 Reforestation 15000 5000 10000 Res. Management Tract-Cons.Services 10000 10000 Pest Control - Gypsy Moth 10000 10000 Res. Management Tract-Cons. Areas 1 0000 10000 Hazard Tree Removals 10000 10000 Authority Land Maintenance 210000 210000 Walker Property Management 75000 75000 Private Land Stewardship 50000 50000 Total 1122000 243000 879000 SOIL CONSERVATION/ SEDIMENT CONTROL Clean Up Rural Beaches 22000 22000 Sediment Control 82000 30000 52000 Riparian Habitat nooo nooo Hydroseeding 15000 1 5000 0 Total 196000 45000 151000 FISH & WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT Rouge River Fisheries Management Plan Implementation 50000 50000 Total 50000 0 50000 , ~R ~lo{Cfl- OUTDOOR RECREATION - WATERFRONT Benefitting SITE! ACTIVITY Local Estimated Municipality Municipality Cost Metro MARIE CURTIS PARK City of Etobicoke master plan revision,Canada Post 25,000 Metro COL. SAM SMITH PARK City of Etobicoke weir structure monitoring 5,000 electrical transf. & H.V. cables 30,000 weir struct. bridge design & const. 100,000 public boardwalk phase I 100,000 wetland creation 75,000 shoreline treatment, haulout area 44,000 final grading/topsoil/seeding 75,000 pathways 100,000 general site grading 50,000 roads & parking lots 75,000 landscaping 50,000 site lighting Phase II 25,000 final armour hardpoints 0 final armour breakwater 0 Metro HUMBER BAY WEST City of Etobicoke pathway 75,000 final armour hardpoint Phase I 150,000 final grading/landscaping 75,000 pedestrian bridge design 20,000 Metro MIMICO APARTMENT STRIP City of Etobicoke property acquisition, legal/survey 25,000 Metro TOMMY THOMPSON PARK City of Toronto Interim management 145,000 Master Plan implementation 300,000 Metro ASHBRIDGES BAY City of Toronto Entrance Improve. & Class E.A. 150,000 , .. - wI< ''11,~ OUTDOOR RECREATION - WATERFRONT Benefitting SITE! ACTIVITY Local Estimated Municipality Municipality Cost Metro BLUFFERS WEST City of Scarborough property acquisition 300.000 Metro BLUFFERS PARK City of Scarborough toplands parking lot design 35.000 Brim ley Road sidewalk 250,000 pumping station upgrade study 25.000 Brimley Road access & safety 20.000 Metro EAST POINT PARK City of Scarborough Master Plan E.A..sediment trans. 50.000 interim site security 5,000 Metro PORT UNION ROAD AREA City of Scarborough master plan W.F. recreation 20,000 Metro CHESTERTON SHORES City of Scarborough property acquistion 300.000 Durham FRENCHMANS BAY Town of Pickering Environmental Management Plan 25.000 property acqusition 250,000 Durham AJAX WATERFRONT Town of Ajax tree/shrub plantings 45,000 Pickering Beach Rd. property acq. 250,000 Metro/Durham W.F. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING Lake Ontario environmental studies 115.000 TOTAL $3.384,000 Notes: Project limit is $3.1 million. Projects are listed by site only with project priority to be finalized for submission to the Province. WR eb cg/q~ THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1997 THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY OCTOBER, 1992 w~b'/1~ PROGRESS REPORT The following is a list at which major or minor remedial work was carried out between the inception of Project W.C.-60 - 'Erosion Control and Bank Stabilization in Metropolitan Toronto' in September, 1974, through to the end of the 1987-1991 Project for Erosion Control and Slope Stabilization, and for the first year of the Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project in the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, 1992 - 1997. LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR MAJOR REMEDIAL WORKS 90 Forestgrove Drive East Don River 1974 20-30 Islay Court Humber River 1974 39-41 Storer Drive Humber River 1974-1975 99-103 Burbank Drive Newtonbrook Ck. 1974-1975 Hi Mount Drive Newtonbrook Ck. 1974-1975 8-10 King Maple Place Newtonbrook Ck. 1974-1975 113 Burbank Drive Newtonbrook Ck. 1975 14-22 Archway Crescent Humber River 1975 6 Wooden Heights Humber River 1975 45 Riverbank Drive and Vicinity Mimico Creek 1975 32-38 Bonnyview Drive Mimico Creek 1975-1976 37-43 Lakeland Drive West Humber 1976 Yvonne Public School Black Creek 1976 30-56 Grovetree Road West Humber 1976 95-97 Portico Drive East Branch 1976 Highland Creek 197-205 Sweeney Drive East Don River 1976 24 Stonegate Road Humber River 1976-1977 24-36 Westleigh Crescent Etobicoke Creek 1976-1977 158-168 & 190-212 Three Valleys Dr. East Don River 1976-1977 6-14 Sulkara Court East Don River 1978 Don Valley Drive Don River 1978 50-58 Stanwood Crescent Humber River 1978-1979 Enfield/Sunset/Jellicoe Vicinity Etobicoke Creek 1979 w(l1.t> 'q '2- LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR MAJOR REMEDIAL WORKS (Continued) 17-53 Riverview Heights Humber River 1979 10 Codeco Court - Phase I Don River 1980 35 Canyon Avenue Don River 1979 31-39 Rivercove Drive Mimico Creek 1980 25-31 Alamosa Drive Don River 1980 Don Valley Parkway & Lawrence Don River 1980 10-14 Bruce Farm Drive Don River 1980-1981 39-47 Presley Avenue Don River 1980-1981 Grenview Boulevard Mimico Creek 1981 Rainbow Creekway I Development Newtonbrook Creek 1981 9 & 11 Sulkara Court Don River 1981 Denison Road Vicinity Humber River 1981 146-168 Humbervale Blvd. & Mimico Creek 1982 835 Royal York Road 45-55 Wynford Heights Crescent Don River 1982-1983 12-30 Beaucourt Road Mimico Creek 1983 Delroy Drive & Berl Ave. Vicinity Mimico Creek 1983 Raymore Drive Humber River 1984 Moorevale Park Don River 1984 100-104 Gwendolen Crescent Don River 1984 Fairglen & Weston Road Humber River 1985 Duncan Mills Road Don River 1985-1986 Riverside Crescent Humber River 1985-1986 Rainbow Creekway II Newtonbrook Creek 1986 (East Don River) 14 Neilson Drive Etobicoke Creek 1986 Chipping Road Bridge East Don River 1986 6 Burnhamthorpe Crescent Mimico Creek 1986 Maple Creek Farms Highland Creek 1986 Warden Woods Park Massey Creek 1986 14 Forest Path Humber River 1987 P.U.C. Lands Highland Creek 1987 Scarborough College Highland Creek 1987 Lawrence Avenue Bridge Highland Creek 1987 ~R 1( /91= LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR MAJOR REMEDIAL WORKS (continued) The Queensway + The West Mall Etobicoke Creek 1988 Highland Creek - Confluence Highland Creek 1988 10 Glenorchy Place West Don River 1988 Leslie Street & Steeles Avenue East Don River 1988 (German Mills Ck.') 5201 Dufferin Street West Don River 1989 6-10 Saddletree East Don River 1991 (German Mills Ck.) Carmel Court East Don River 1991-1992 (German Mills Ck.) ~~ 1~/qt- LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR MINOR REMEDIAL WORKS 520 Markham Road Vicinity (Cedarbrook Retirement Home) Highland Creek 1975 84-89 Greenbrook Drive Black Creek 1975 Kirkbradden Road Mimico Creek 1975 West Hill Collegiate Highland Creek 1975 Shoreham Court Black Creek 1975 27-31 Ladysbridge Drive West Branch 1975-1976 Highland Creek N.W. of 56 Grovetree Road West Humber River 1975-1976 37-43 Mayall Avenue Black Creek 1976 79 Clearview Heights Black Creek 1976 S. W. of Shoreham Drive Bridge Black Creek 1976 Driftwood Court Black Creek 1976 75 Decarie Circle Mimico Creek 1976 4 Woodhaven Heights Humber River 1977 73 Van Dusen Boulevard Mimico Creek 1977 Donalda Club (8th Fwy.) Don River 1978 Westleigh Crescent Vicinity Etobicoke Creek 1978 Scarlett Woods Golf Club Humber River 1978 22-26 Dunning Crescent Etobicoke Creek 1978 Kennedy Road Shopping Mall Don River 1978 Sheppard and Leslie Nursery Don River 1978 Leslie Street at Sheppard Don River 1978 Meadowvale Road Rouge River 1978 Zoo (Z-15) Rouge River 1978 Orchard Crescent Mimico Creek 1978 Forest Valley Dam Camp Don River 1978 Beechgrove Drive Highland Creek 1979 Restwell Crescent Don River 1979 Deanewood Crescent Vicinity Mimico Creek 1979 Dawes Road - 2 Sites Don River 1979 Twyn River Bridge Rouge River 1979 ~R1~ tCfL LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR MINOR REMEDIAL WORKS (Continued) Glen Rouge Trailer Camp Rouge River 1979 Beechgrove Drive - II Highland Creek 1980 Jason and Riverdale Humber River 1980 Warden & st. Clair - 2 sites Don River 1980 Zoo -II Rouge River 1980 Glendon College Don River 1980 Scarlett Road & Eglinton Humber River 1980 Wilket Creek Don River 1980 Glen Rouge Trailer Camp Rouge River 1980 sunnybrook Park Don River 1981 Donalda Golf Club Don River 1981 Glendon College Don River 1981 Bonnyview Drive II Mimico Creek 1981 West Side of Markham Rd. (W. Branch) Highland Creek 1981 Alderbrook Drive Don River 1981 West Dean Park (2 sites) Mimico Creek 1982 Royal York Road Mimico Creek 1982 Waulron Street Etobicoke Creek 1982 Colonel Danforth Park Highland Creek 1982 Upwood Greenbelt Vicinity Black Creek 1982 55 & 73 Vandusen Blvd. Mimico Creek 1986 Royal York Road II Mimico Creek 1986 14 Brian Cliff Drive Wilket Creek 1987 Summary: Major Works 63 Minor Works 53 Total Expenditure $7,450,000 WR.1l(lq~ The following table lists the top fifteen (15) valley land erosion sites in order of their technical priority. The current pool of priorities will be reviewed regularly during 1993 to accommodate any significant changes and the possible inclusion of new sites. METROPOLITAN TORONTO REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1993 PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS 1 Burgundy Court Humber River North York Problem: Slope failure Structures Affected: 5 Homes Height of Bank: 17m Length of Bank: 80m 2 3030-3068 Weston Humber River North York Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Road Structures Affected: 2 Homes Height of Bank: 14m Length of Bank: 210m 3 180-188 Parkview Don River East York Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Hill Crescent Structures Affected: 4 residential house lots Height of Bank: 35m Length of Bank: 100m 4 1220 Access Road at East Don River North York Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Sheppard A venue East Structures Affected: Office building Height of Bank: 17m Length of Bank: 50m 5 31-33 Cherryhill Ave. Centennial Crk. Scarborough Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Structures Affected: 2 Homes Height of Bank: 9m Length of Bank: 20m E. (Q -1 ~ ~ l-l E (V -1 METROPOLITAN TORONTO REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1993 ()' .:is"' PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS ~ 6 8 Alder Road Massey Creek East York Problem: Slope failure Structures Affected: One roadway & services Height of Bank: 20m Length of Bank: 16m 7 42-44 Royal Rouge Rouge River Scarborough Problem: Valley wall failure Trail Structures Affected: One home & One pool (interim preventative Height of Bank: 30m measures proposed) Length of Bank: 20m 8 Burhamthorpe Road at Mimico Creek Etobicoke Problem: Riverbank erosion Mattice Road (south of Structures Affected: Roadway Islington Golf Club) Height of Bank: 11 m Length of Bank: 50m 9 91 Forest Grove Drive Don River North York Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Structures Affected: One home Height of Bank: 8m Length of Bank: 23m 10 Humber Valley Yacht Humber River Etobicoke Problem: Riverbank erosion Club Structures Affected: Yacht Club, Gas Pumps, Hydro & Water Services, Docks Height of Bank: 1.5m Length of Bank: 300m METROPOLITAN TORONTO REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1992 PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS *11 93-113 Weir Crescent Highland Creek Scarborough Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Structures Affected: One residence, One pool and 9 private properties Height of Bank: 35m Length of Bank: 105m 12 221 Martin Grove Mimico Creek Etobicoke Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Road Structures Affected: One residence Height of Bank: 12m Length of Bank: 24m *13 14-21 Stanwood Humber River North York Problem: Slope failure Crescent Structures Affected: 4 Residences Height of Bank: 21 m Length of Bank: 60m 14 Sewell's Road at Finch Rouge River Scarborough Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Structures Affected: One roadway Height of Bank: 14m Length of Bank: 88m 15 Loney Avenue Black Creek North York Problem: Coincident valley wall erosion Structures Affected: 5 Homes Height of Bank: 7m Length of Bank: 45m * Sites considered for remedial work in previous years, but for various reasons have been deferred indefinitely (these sites have been included for your information and will be reconsidered for remedial work upon the resolution of outstanding issues). E. 7J ...1 ....J ~ .... . WK 1~ ICf 1- THE REGION OF PEEL VALLEY REGENERATION PROJECT 1992 - 1997 THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY OCTOBER, 1992 uJR.1Cf h1 PROGRESS REPORT The following is a list of sites at which remedial work was carried out from the inception of the Interim Water and Related Land Management Project 1979-1981, through the 1982-1984 Erosion Control and Slope Stabilization Project, the 1985-1986 Erosion Project and the 1987-1991 Project for Erosion Control and Slope Stabilization. LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR 138 King Street Vicinity - Bolton Humber River 1979 (Caledon) Sherway Drive, (Mississauga) Etobicoke Creek 1979 Wildwood Park, (Mississauga) Mimico Creek 1979 Mill Street, (Brampton) Etobicoke Creek 1980 Pony trail Drive & Steepbank Cres. Etobicoke Creek 1980-1981 (Mississauga) 10 Beamish, Wildfield (Brampton) West Humber River 1980 (Lindsay Creek) Centennial Road - Bolton Humber River 1981 (Caledon) Legion street near Derry Road Mimico Creek 1982 (Mississauga) Charolais Blvd., (Brampton) Etobicoke Creek 1982 Glasgow Road (Caledon) Humber River 1983 93 Scott Street (Brampton) Etobicoke Creek 1984 2130 Dundas Street East Etobicoke Creek 1987 (Mississauga) Summary: Major sites Completed 12 Total Expenditure $363,500.00 wR ~~t. The following table lists the top seven (7) erosion sites in order of their technical priority. The current pool of priorities will be reviewed regularly during 1993 to accommodate any significant changes and the possible inclusion of new sites. PEEL REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1993 PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS I 302 King Street East Humber River Caledon Problem: Riverbank erosion Bolton Structures Affected: Two homes Height of Bank: 7m Length of Bank: 80m 2 1726 Lincolnshire Etobicoke Mississauga Problem: Valley wall erosion Blvd. Creek Structures Affected: One home Height of Bank: 20m Length of Bank: 30m 3 4424-4434 Palisades Etobicoke Mississauga Problem: Valley wall erosion Lane & BeechknoU Creek Structures Affected: Three homes Court Height of Bank: 16m Length of Bank: 70m 4 6469 Netherhart Road Etobicoke Mississauga Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Creek Structures Affected: Storage area behind industrial building Height of Bank: 12m Length of Bank: 40m 5 12 Beamish Court West Humber Brampton Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion (W.H. - 142) River Structures Affected: Private property Height of Bank: 6m Length of Bank: 20m E :N cO - ~ E. 70 oCl PEEL REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1993 ,.., - -4 PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS ~ 6 Riverspray Crescent Little Etobicoke Mississauga Problem: Minor riverbank erosion (Site #1) Creek Structures Affected: Public parkland and private property Height of Bank: 5m Length of Bank: 30m 7 Riverspray Crescent Little Etobicoke Mississauga Problem: Minor riverbank erosion (Site #2) Creek Structures Affected: Public parkland Height of Bank: 4m Length of Bank: 35m - W~~/tf: THE REGION OF YORK VALLEY REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1997 THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY OCTOBER, 1992 - wR <i'-lICf ~ PROGRESS REPORT The following is a list of sites at which remedial work was carried out from the inception of the Interim Water and Related Land Management project, 1979-1981, through the 1982-1984 Erosion Control and Slope Stabilization Project, 1985-1986 Erosion Project and the 1987-1991 Project for Erosion Control and Slope Stabilization. 7374 Kipling Avenue, Woodbridge Humber River 1979 7440 Kipling Avenue, Woodbridge Humber River 1979 (Rainbow Creek) 8254 Pine Valley Drive, Woodbridge Humber River 1979-1980 14th Avenue, Markham Rouge River 1979-1980 19th Avenue, Markham Rouge River 1979 King Township and Humber River 1979 Town of Caledon (Cold Creek) Cedar Grove Community Centre Rouge River 1980 146 Riverside Drive, Woodbridge Humber River 1980 Postwood Lane, Markham Don River 1980 Pine Grove Vicinity Humber River 1980 North Don Sewage Treatment Plant Don River 1981 Kennedy Road West, Markham Don River 1981 Nobleton, Lot 5, Conc.8 (Cole Farm) Humber River 1982 5760 Kirby Sideroad Humber River 1982-1983 Buttonville Rouge River 1984 Klein's Crescent Humber River 1985-1986 36 Prince Edward Boulevard Little Don River 1987 Markham Channel Rouge River 1987 14-16 Cividale Court Don River 1988 Swinton Crescent Don River 1988 8-10 Cachet Parkway Rouge River 1989 73 Birch Avenue Little Don River 1991 Summary: Major sites Completed 22 Total Expenditure $330,500 W~S5~2 The following table lists the top ten (10) erosion sites in order of their technical priority. The current pool of priorities will be reviewed regularly during 1993 to accommodate any significant changes and the possible inclusion of new sites. YORK REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1992 PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS 1 Bakerdale & Southdale Tributary of Markham Problem: Slope failure & river bank erosion Rouge River Structures Affected: 2 residence and one pool (Markham Height of Bank: 3m Channel) Length of Bank: 50m 2 10151 Highway. #27 Humber River Vaughan Problem: Riverbank erosion Structures Affected: One tennis court & private property Height of Bank: 3m Length of Bank: 80m 3 21-25 Carol wood Rouge River Markham Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Crescent Structures Affected: Private property, pool and shed Height of Bank: 18m Length of Bank: 250m 4 IBM Golf Course Rouge River Markham Problem: Slope failure & riverbank erosion Structures Affected: Tee & private property Height of Bank: 16m Length of Bank: 70m 5 16 Ravencliffe Road Don River Markham 0 Problem: Slope failure Structures Affected: 1 residence & 1 pool Height of Bank: 18m Length of Bank: 1O.5m E ;0 8f ;r E 7V 00 -1 YORK REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1992 - -0 r-s PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS 6 20 Deanbank East Don River Markham Problem: Toe erosion and slumping of slope Structures Affected: one residence Height of Bank: 13m Length of Bank: 40m 7 9854 Highway #27 Humber River Vaughan Problem: Riverbank erosion Kleinburg Structures Affected: One residence Height of Bank: 2m Length of Bank: 37m 8 9961 Warden Avenue Rouge River Markham Problem: Slope failure (Berczy Creek) Structures Affected: One residence Height of Bank: 3m Length of Bank: 75m 9 22 Framingham Drive Don River Markham Problem: Undercutting of slope due to seepage and surface runoff Structures Affected: One residence Height of Bank: 20m Length of Bank: 40m 10 Fiddlehead Farm Humber River King Problem: Toe erosion and slumping Structures Affected: Private property Height of Bank: 10m Length of Bank: 30m WR gf{/9Z THE REGION OF DURHAM VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROJECT 1992-1997 THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY OCTOBER 1992 . tUft 8'~/~L PROGRESS REPORT The following is a list of sites at which remedial work was carried out from the inception of the Interim Water and Related Land Management Project, 1979-1981, through the 1982-1984 Erosion Control and Slope Stabilization Project, the 1985-1986 Erosion Project and the 1987-1991 Erosion Control Project. LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR 16 Elizabeth Street, Ajax Duffin Creek 1979 558 Pine Ridge Rd, Pickering Rouge River 1979 Hockey Ranch, Pickering Duffin Creek 1980 Woodgrange Avenue, Pickering Rouge River 1981 Altona Road, Pickering Petticoat Creek 1981 Sideroad 30 (Whitevale) Duffin Creek 1982 8-10 Elizabeth Street Duffin Creek 1987 3555 Greenwood Road Duffin Creek 1988 Summary: Major Works Completed 8 Total Expenditures $82,200 WR~~~ The following table lists the top nine (9) valley land erosion sites in order of their technical priority. The current pool of priorities will be reviewed regularly during 1993 to accommodate any significant changes and the possible inclusion of new sites. DURHAM REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1993 PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS 1 5 th Concession - Duffin Creek Pickeringl Ajax Problem: Riverbank erosion Greenwood C.A. Structures Affected: Bridge abutment Height of Bank: 3m Length of Bank: 50m 2 1404 Ravenscroft Road Duffin Creek Ajax Problem: Riverbank & valleywall erosion Structures Affected: Fence & private property Height of Bank: 13m Length of Bank: 40m 3 Altona Road, R-5 Petticoat Creek Pickering Problem: Riverbank erosion (West Side, across Structures Affected: Roadway & hydro pole from Height of Bank: 1.5m #1800 Altona Road) Length of Bank: 30m 4 Greenwood C.A. Duffin Creek Ajax Problem: Slope failure & valleywall erosion (Lookout Tower Site) Structures Affected: Parking area & roadway Height of Bank: 23m Length of Bank: 50m 5 1840 Altona Road Petticoat Creek Pickering Problem: Riverbank erosion Structures Affected: House and private property Height of Bank: 3m Length of Bank: 40m E 70 .,S) - :0-- I'l C. ?O . ~ DURHAM REGION EROSION PRIORITY - 1992 P - ..0 PRIORITY LOCATION WATERSHED MUNICIPALITY COMMENTS ~ 6 1789 Altona Road Petticoat Creek Pickering Problem: Riverbank erosion Structures Affected: Private property Height of Bank: 7m Length of Bank: 15m 7 Valley Farm Road Duffin Creek Pickering Problem: Riverbank erosion Structures Affected: Farm building Height of Bank: 2m Length of Bank: 89m 8 1436 Highbush Trail Petticoat Creek Pickering Problem: Riverbank erosion Structures Affected: Garage Height of Bank: 6m Length of Bank: 16m 9 Ravenscroft Road Duffin Creek Ajax Problem: Riverbank erosion Structures Affected: MTRCA land Height of Bank: 2m Length of Bank: 133m w~. 't~ l'lt THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE SUB-COMMITTEE REPORT ON MEETING #1/92 Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #8/92 November 20, 1992 ~ INorking Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace oJR ~'-t I q 2- V the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes REPORT ON MEETING #1/92 OF DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE SUB-COMMITTEE November 3, 1992 The Don Watershed Task Force Sub-Committee met in Committee Room #4 at the North York Civic Centre on Thursday, October 29, 1992, at 6:30 p.rn. The Acting Chair, Mark Wilson, called the meeting to order at 6:45 p.m. PRESENT Acting Chair Mark Wilson Members Veronica Bergs Tom Kurtz Margaret Casey Deborah Martin-Downs David Cohen Denis McKee Donald Cross Joan King Natasha Feder Carl Knipfel William Granger David Shiner Barbara Hall Dan Taylor Eldred King Thomas Ward William King Michael White Lorna Krawchuk Authority Staff Brian Denney Craig Mather David Dyce Bernard McIntyre Adele Freeman Joanne Paterson Carol-Ann Macaulay Peter Wigham Visitor.; Suzanne Barrett, Waterfront Regeneration Trust Bill Gray Steve Klose, MOE, Central Region Rollo Myers, Task Force To Bring Back The Don Paul Nodwell, Town of Markham MINUTES 1. OPENING REMARKS William Granger, Chair of the Authority, welcomed everyone to the Task Force; discussed the fonnat of the Agenda; and advi~d members of their responsibility and the procedure for declaring a 'conflict of interest". PRESENTATIONS SU7.anne Barrett, Waterfront Regeneration Trust, made a presentation. Steve Klose, Metro Toronto Remedial Plan, made a presentation. 2. MANDATE OF THE TASK FORCE, ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES Craig Mather reVlcwed thc "Briefing Notcs for Don Watershed Task Force Members" distributed at the meclIng. Thc NOtcs contain The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority'S "Rules for the ('.anduct of the Authuruy", daled May 12, 1992. WR't5/<f'L DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING '1/92, OCTOBER 29.1992 2 3. WA TERSHED PLANNII')IG David Dyce, Manager, Resource Management Section. Water Resource Division, made a presentation. 4. DON RIVER WATERSHED STATE OF THE ECOSYSTEM REPORT Dianne Damman, Ecologistics Ltd, made a presentation. KEY ISSUE Presentation of the information contained in the Don Watershed State of the Ecosystem Report completed by consultants in August. 1992. Res. #1 Moved by: Margaret Casey Seconded by: David Shiner THA T the Don River Watershed State of the Ecosystem Report be received. CARRIED 5. DON WATERSHED STRATEGY 1993 WORK PLAN DEVELOPMENT KEY ISSUE Development of a framework to guide the preparation of the draft Don Watershed Strategy to form the basis for a more detailed work plan for 1993. Res. #2 Moved by: Bill King Seconded by: Eldred King THAT a steering committee of five members (Veronica Bergs. Deborah Martin-Downs. Donald Cross. David Cohen and Denis McKee be selected to plan a one day or evening session to develop a framework for the preparation of the draft Don Watershed Strategy; AND FURTHER THAT a facilitator be hired to assist the Task Force in the preparation of the framework. CARRIED 6. TECHNICAL ADVISORS KEY ISSUE Deferral of the formation of the Technical Advisory Committee until a framework/work plan is established for the preparation of the draft Don Watershed Management Strategy. MOTION TO DEFER Moved by: Barbara Hall Res. #3 Seconded by: David Shiner . THA T the formation of a Technical Advisory Committee and/or choice of technical advisors be deferred until a framework/work plan has been developed to guide the preparation of the Don Watershed Management Strategy. , CARRIED 7. DON WATERSHED 1991 FISH INVENTORY REPORT KEY ISSUE The results of the Don Watershed 1991 Fish Inventory Study are provided for the information of the Task Force and for its conSideration in the development of the draft Don Watershed Management Strategy. w~ 'I" I1z- DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING #1/92, OCTDBER 29, 1992 3 7. DON WATERSHED 1991 FISH INVENTORY REPORT (CDNT'D.) RECDMMENDA TION THA T the report on the Don Watershed 1991 Fish Inventory be received; AND FURTHER THAT the Task Force consider incorporating a fisheries management component in the development of the draft Don Watershed Management Strategy. MOTION TO DEFER Moved by: David Shiner Res. #4 Seconded by: Michael White THAT the report on the Don Watershed 1991 Fish Inventory Report be brought forward to a subsequent meeting of the Task Force for discussion. CARRIED 8. DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING SCHEDULE KEY ISSUE A schedule of meeting dates was proposed for the Don Watershed Task Force. Res. #5 Moved by: Barbara Hall Seconded by: Margaret Casey THAT meetings be scheduled: Thursday, November 26, 1992; Thursday, January 7, 1993; Thursday. February 4, 1993; Thursday, March 4, 1993; Thursday, April 1, 1993; Thursday, April 29, 1993; Thursday, May 27,1993; Thursday, June 24, 1993; Thursday, July 22, 1993; Thursday. August 19, 1993; Thursday, September 23. 1993; Thursday, October 21, 1993; Thursday, November 18, 1993; Thursday, December 16, 1993; AND FURTHER THAT the meetings be held at the North York Civic Centre unless otherwise noted. AMENDMENT Moved by: Barbara Hall Res. #6 Seconded by: Natasha Feder THA T the November 26, 1992, meeting commence at 5:30 p.m.; THAT the March 18, 1993, meeting be omitted and the schedule be revised as follows: WR 'l7/li"L. DON WATF:RSHED TASK FORCE MEETING #1/92. OCTOBER 29.1992 4 8. DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING SCHEDULE (CONT'D.) Thursday. November 26, '992 at 5:30 p.m.; Thursday, December' O. 1992; Thursday. January 2', , 993; Thursday. February' 8, , 993; Thursday, March 25, , 993; Thursday, April 22. 1993; Thursday, May 20, 1993; Thursday. June 17,1993; Thursday, July 15, 1993; August 12, 1993; September 9. 1993; October 7. 1993; November 4, 1993; December 2, 1993. THAT the meetings be held at the North York Civic Centre at 6:30 p.m. unless otherwise noted; AND FURTHER THAT the meeting schedule be reviewed at the December 10, 1992, meeting. THE AMENDMENT WAS ................................................... CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION. AS AMENDED. WAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CARRIED NEW BUSINESS Michael White invited those present to participate in the Evergreen Foundation planting on Saturday, October 31,1992, at 10:00 a.m., Hwy. 7 and Centre Street. Councillor Barbara Hall invited those present to the Lower Don Task Force tree planting on November 1, 1992. TERMINA TION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:00 p.m. Wit. <f g /If 2- THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY METRO PARKS AND PROPERTY PROPOSED MAINTENANCE FACILITY ASHBRIDGES BAY PARK Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #8/92 November 20, 1992 ~Cf'J , Ashbridge's Bay c:;o NORTH ASHBRIDGE1S BAY BOATING COMMUNITY --\ \ \ Legend (1 ) Proposed Tractor Shed (2) Existing Storage Sheds // BOAT LAUNCHING RAMPS , , ., -0 ~.- ~ - \ ~: - - .. / ~~ ;10 Q ........ ........ K"' <( -, ......... ...... ..... ,. - ,. - ~ I ~. Io&tlllf5 ~-----'6'------ ~ ,~ 'U' ' \t;lI -/~- - - - - - -'6 I '-\ ~ .: 12.' ,f 1.1.' L \;-.' I I ~I 1" "I . .1'~ I ~ I \ -I '00' . soo<>- ".' "...... I I I , ~ ,,/ I I I ~~ ~~ ~ J r : '!!JI @ H .0 i . I o ..._ _. - .- 2'd: Tip,c."L I:: I I _ ALL AT ". C.an1l6:1 I ":!\ ,~ I - posr:5 ,...,. .. -- ~ i I ,. T'~,. I:!J' LOCAIION PLAN ~- ., . :~o -@ @ ~ SCALI': ,"e +0' 0'. ~. . ~ -t I , \ ______-- J H'I'OIlOf'l-At./lii Cl-....CS t, " ssc-lloN A-A J FLO 0 R ~LAN - - - - - - -- I.. I ~C""LE !V"~I'O' <( SC.ALI:. "1/1" -1'0' ".,' , \'10 _"1- _X-"io.-X 1. ALL FRAMING - pRess ......... W~~ . ROOF _ "-t' F~Ep:;'..:';;;,;O ,UHe" _ FC.OOFIN G- - - _ ,If(\ _r::;JJ-'lJt; 20 <~~R ,,',"ACT ,,,,,G'ES (y Iio'}- '\ '\ ~ ftJ~ { G ,..1("1{ I ,...fl.~ , - , I , ~ -Ie. 0 'G ;:: I ~ pI- I II I '-"0' I I -- NCiw aLP 6-. I ' . -H ~ . ........ :i"J 10" I~ l/ (P "- _'1--"/0.-. 't "1--'1- J(J 0 ::l~"'" 1l""F R........-e1U ......o..A WAL.L.. , METROPOLITAN TOROfITO - "'HD P~""'~ ~"He'"'''' RAMP PARKS .. PROPERTY OEPARTMENT -,- 1- " PARK t-\,A.INTE....ANC.c 8LDI>: ICAlI AS PAR~ING ASHSR1DGI:5 'SAY P....lllC. RO'(' ~IOyJ'" ."3" " -.1 DAti ,. SeW-T". ~2. S'IE PL.AN-. ASI-IBRIDGES BAY PARK DIUlI;e. f----. on___ - P-- - - ~6'o" -.- - -- -- .. DWOHe. ELEVAT' ON --- - ---- - - ::.c..AL.e: :tilt ""'0" WR'OI I, z... THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE SUB-COMMITTEE REPORT ON MEETING #2/92 Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #9/92 January 15, 1993 ~ Working Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace uJR\O~qc:l ~ Vthe metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes REPORT ON MEETING 112/92 OF DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE SUB-COMMITTEE November 26, 1992 The Don Watershed Task Force Sub-Committee met in Committee Room 1/3 at the North York Civic Centre on Thursday, November 26, 1992, at 5:30 p.m. The Acting Chair, Mark Wilson, called the meeting to order at 5:50 p.m. PRESENT Acting Chair Mark Wilson Members Veronica Bergs Denis McKee Margaret Casey Peter Meffe David Cohen Roz Mendelson Donald Cross David Shiner Natasha Feder Dan Taylor Bill Granger Thomas Ward Gord Hutchinson Walter Watt Lorna Krawchuk Michael White Tom Kurtz Deborah Martin-Downs Authority Staff Brian Denney Craig Mather David Dyce Bernard Mcintyre Adele Freeman Joanne Paterson Carol-Ann Macaulay Peter Wig ham Facilitator Robb Ogilvie, Ogilvie & Co. Visitors Lynn Armstrong, Town of Markham Jim Barker, M.N.R. Michael Hough, Hough Stansbury Woodland Ltd. Steve Klose, MOE, Central Region Mike Thorne, Metro Works MINUTES Res. #7 Moved by: Donald Cross Seconded by: Bill Granger THAT the Minutes of Meeting # 1/92 be approved. CARRIED WR {o31 ~ DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING #2/92, NOVEMBER 26, 1992 2 1. DON WATERSHED STRATEGY 1993 WORK PLAN DEVELOPMENT KEY ISSUE Information regarding the selection of the facilitator, background materials and meeting process. Res. #8 Moved by: David Shiner Seconded by: Lorna Krawchuk THAT the staff report regarding the selection of the facilitator be received. CARRIED 2. MUNICIPAL OFFICIAL PLANS Margaret Casey made a short presentation identifying that a number of Official Plans are currently being revised throughout the watershed. MAIN BUSINESS OF MEETING Robb Ogilvie. Facilitator, working from a draft Table of Contents produced by Mr. Donald Cross, Authority staff and himself, facilitated the Task Force's discussion on the components to be included in the draft strategy due in December of 1993. Having reached consensus on the broad elements and a list of issues to be addressed he proceeded with an initial discussion on the work plan including a public consultation process. Mr. Ogilvie will produce a separate report which will be provided to all Task Force members prior to the December 10, 1992 meeting. TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:30 p.m. David G. Dyce, Manager J. Craig Mather, Secretary-Treasurer Resource Management Section /cam. I wR lOlf ICf 1.1 THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE SUB-COMMITTEE REPORT ON MEETING #3/92 TASK FORCE WORK PLAN DON WATERSHED STRATEGY DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS Water and Related land Management Advisory Board Meeting #9/92 January 15, 1993 - wR ~5/Cf); ~ 'MJrking Together for Tomorrow's Greenspace Vthe metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority minutes REPORT ON MEETING #3/92 OF DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE SUB-COMMITTEE December 10, 1992 The Don Watershed Task Force Sub-Committee met in the Cafeteria at the Borough of East York Office on Thursday, December 10, 1992, at 6:30 p.m. The Acting Chair, Mark Wilson, called the meeting to order at 6:50 p.m. PRESENT Acting Chair Mark Wilson Members Veronica Bergs Deborah Martin-Downs Margaret Casey Denis McKee Don Cross Peter Oyler Gord Hutchinson Dan Taylor William King Thomas Ward Lorna Krawchuk Walter Watt Tom Kurtz Michael White Authority Staff Ron Dewell Sonya Meek Adele Freeman Joanne Paterson Rose Hasner Peter Wigham Carol-Ann Macaulay Craig Mather Bernard Mcintyre Facilitator Robb Ogilvie, Ogilvie & Co. Visitors Michael Hough, Hough Stansbury Woodland Ltd. Steve Klose, MOE, Central Region Paul Nodwell, Town of Markham MINUTES Res, #9 Moved by: Don Cross Seconded by: Deborah Martin-Downs THAT the Minutes of Meeting #2/92 be approved. CARRIED lOR 10"1'17.1 DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING #3/92, DECEMBER 10,1992 2 1. DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING SCHEDULE KEY ISSUE Confirmation of Don Watershed Task Force Meeting Dates for 1993. Res. #10 Moved by: Peter Oyler Seconded by: Margaret Casey THAT regular meeting dates for the Don Watershed Task Force be scheduled for 6:30 p.m. on the following dates be confirmed: Thursday, January 21,1993; . Thursday, February 18, 1993; Thursday, March 25, 1993; Thursday, April 22,1993; Thursday, May 20, 1993; Thursday, June 17, 1993; Thursday, July 15, 1993; Thursday, August 12, 1993; Thursday, September 9, 1993; Thursday, October 7, 1993; Thursday, November 4, 1993; Thursday, December 2, 1993. CARRIED 2. DON WATERSHED STRATEGY, TABLE OF CONTENTS AND WORK PLAN KEY ISSUE Review and adoption of the Draft Table of Contents for the Don Watershed Strategy and 1993 Don Watershed Task Force Work Plan. Res. #11 Moved by: Deborah Martin-Downs Seconded by: Don Cross THA T the Draft Table of Contents and 1993 Don Watershed Task Force Work Plan, as appended, be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board and the Authority be provided with the draft Table of Contents and the 1993 Work Plan. CARRIED 3. TO DETERMINE THE SIZI;/PAGE BUDGET FOR THE STRATEGY DOCUMENT The Task Force Members discussed a page budget of 100 pages for the final strategy document. The Task Force agreed that a document of this length could be adequate to present the strategy and not intimidate a broad spectrum of the public and officials from reading it. The following page breakdown does not include supporting/technical documents that may be required: wR 101 /'1;. DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING #3/92. DECEMBER 10, 1992 3 3. TO DETERMINE THE SIZE/PAGE BUDGET FOR THE STRATEGY DOCUMENT CONT'D. PAGES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 PURPOSE 1 BACKGROUND 10-15 VISION 2 - 3 PRINCIPLES 1 - 2 STRA TEGIES 20 - 30 SUBW A TERSHEDS 49 (7 each) 100 The 100 page budget for the final strategy document should also include graphic illustrations. 4. FORMATION OF PROPOSED WORKING COMMITTEES Four work groups were formed to address specific components of the Table of Contents as identified in the work plem. TilSk Force members met initially to discuss the topic areas, potential technical advisors and set a date for the first meeting. Mark Wilson will work with staff to invite Task Force Members not present to join these working groups. Group 1 Vision: Mark Wilson Craig Mather Deborah Martin-Downs Peter Wig ham Don Cross Michael Hough Natasha Feder Paul Nodwell (Town of Markham) Joan King Group 2 Water. Flora & Fauna: Deborah Martin-Downs Bernard Mcintyre Thomas Ward Sonya Meek Steve Klose Tom Kurtz Walter Watt , Group 3 Public Safety: William King Joanne Paterson Lorna Krawchuk Ron Dewell Gord Hutchinson tJj(( IO~ I, t, DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE MEETING #3/92, DECEMBER 10, 1992 4 4. FORMA TION OF PROPOSED WORKING COMMITTEES CONT'D. Group 4 Land Use/Greensoace: Veronica Bergs Adele Freeman Margaret Casey Michael White Dan Taylor Denis McKee (no formal resolution) TERMINA TION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 8:50 p.m. DilVid G. Dvce. Manaqer J. Craiq Mather Resource Management Section Secretary- Treasurer le;lIn, . lOR 'o~/qt, I DON WATERSHED STRATEGY I DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. executive Summary .Other features and natural resources . Other environmental quality elements 2. Purpose eThe need for a strategy -Public safety .floodlng 3. Background and Context . erosion hazards, river and valley walls eHow we got here . water supply contamination .contamination of surface waters 4. A Vision for the Watershed .soil contamination eCreatlng a sense of place . (air quality) eA regenerated Watershed .personal safety (crime) 5. Guiding Principles -Social/Community Use eEcosystem Principles eAccess .trails 6. Strategies Common to the Entire Watershed . recreation -Water .parks eHeadwaters .Iearning/interpretation locations eSurface Water Quality eCultural heritage .mitigating urban runoff eBroader social access .protection against new and existing ePublic activities pollutant sources . agricultural -Land Use . point sources ePublic use/Land use .sediment .ownership & stewardship of resources eGroundwater quality . residential .protection against new and existing . business/industrial pollutant sources . rural/agriculture . remediation . utilities eSurface water quantity .corridors (Infrastructure) .recharge .economic development . baseflow .Iandfill sites .soils (mechanical & biological) . public perceptions of place -Flora and Fauna eMoraine features -Institutional Framework eWaterfront eWatershed education and outreach eTableland features/ESA's eContinuing public involvement eValley and stream corridors eStewardship opportunities eBuried and channelized tributaries eEncouragement of self-regulation (I.e. Blue eOther significant areas Box) eWetlands eManaging a watershed/re-newed institutions eAquatlc . headwaters 7. Subwatershed Strategies .flsheries eSpecific protection and regeneration .linkages and effects on ecosystem strategies for each of the 7 subwatersheds: dynamics 1) Upper Don West eTerrestrial 2) Upper Don East . meadows 3) German Mills Creek .forests (upland, lowland) 4) Middle Don East .riparian habitats 5) Middle Don West .Iinkages 6) Lower Don River (Bring Back . rare species the Don/Waterfront . biological contaminants Regeneration Trust) 7) Massey CreekfTaylor Creek December 14, 1992 - - . -- ~""""".""""-"""'-~---~-'--"'-"''''''- .- WR 1'0 I'L DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE WORK PLAN . -.... J.uo 2111 u..un, 'M 1_ ....- lA, :at. .....1JIl9 J_l'" .... 12t/'1 ,... "'1 ........ OCl7lft ....Mot H....,., ....u.. ... ,.. .......9 Of "'. D.. IGUII ~T"'f__ ....... .. T.at ..... a........ ....un.g.. T.IIII ,'T,,,,.,e. ..........f Tu, JutyUlft U.....elT.... ..rullfef'C' .. T..II ,_. S..lIm,ll. t....,_. ....lIl.....,r..... elT...,_ F~. '......11 1ft "'.rc. ....bftt.,r..1I f"e. elTullFwc. ....1Nlo9.,htll _. f"e. . Wllu R,I.... 0"." hel... ...... f.,e. .ri.,............... .... =:"'s':':.~=.:..: '-- ."- l- f".. l- I-- ...Yi_.... 11_1_..... l- i-- 110"0 .... w.,.... n.. --- _o..n FI.._ SIr.lev_''''' _ "....1.. ... "'"~' ...,....... Apcw-.. II.... .'..11....11>0111' e_I.......... .....111.. w..... 'lIOII',_ ..-- ..-- '1Ir.1..... _: .P,,-.I. S.I.ly .!tI.............. ..."... ApON.' S.........."... ,......1.,."... .cr...-" hu.....I. 1Io.'._..,IW." "... 1Il.liUlIl-* -. -- . Wet... . toe.... I f,..._,1I Iln"g1" 'foI.....I.,....... 'u...... 'U11-e.' .lM........1 'trlll"" III,,. 1'._--..... . Fa.. . ,__ c.~U.. ..L~U.. '1""'91.' ~ "-~- ./ 1 '-'''''' .1 -..... ~,.._..... W.I".N W.I_ ... ...., _Ill W.,... ... 1II.I.telll __ "'1'IlII 1IIe181el1l _. ..... A...I", _ 1I...1Il lII.tal.1Il . IDN. ellcul.l. tat ,.,,,..1 CD"...Il.II.".nlIl 51." 1..1n_1I .",,'D.., .:-., c........... , It"".... ........,. .. -... ,1.cllljl'DUIlllll VI~.II . A9-cta., Cand...t J - Vldoft .-.. NOO. ",...,.. I . Gullllllllljl "11Itcl",1.. . 0....... ",..... "",_,,,''' PnlllCl,.I.. "., AliI.ftCl..1 SI"..I'.," P....,"1lI Or,..". "",,'D..1l ..,,1 W...Uov Gr-. 1II.._cbb_. unl'llI, '0. f---- .1IlIl..'1 . W..., .f1o,..1lllIl .If..... .c.... "'''9'''' e...ul...~.. F..... Itr.IIMlII.. .,,1Il ."h - C_.ull.....: h '''9_1.., ~ . ",-eta. I NaO. NGO. .0......1 "'''Ie . 0..--.1 "'.... 09'9Il1011 VI...".... ar... R....'ch ..._. .......~'.f.I' .1IlIl..n . s.c..ll ..........actllNl. CD_I,U.. Or9."'" War""" G..... III.-ml.._. . l.ftlIl U.. ........" . 1rl.C.lt,tI,-,al .u........ _110ft. ".......,. 0f9_...1lllIl I....,... ....., ....., ceftlllucl' I.C.__."U_' I.c._._.uon, f.C._.M.C.... .""'......:- - .....1CJII_U'l.-1 S........I..""..... Su....la.ftalll. J ''''_..''''11'.' S..._....,...IIl. . , .. S,_ 1 DECEMBER 14, 1992 W(t "I/,z., THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE QUARTERLY REPORT JANUARY 6, 1993 , . Water and Related Land Management Advisory Board Meeting #9/92 January 15, 1993 WR \11../'12, DON WATERSHED TASK FORCE QUARTERLY REPORT JANUARY 6, 1993 . Prepared by: Mark Wilson, Acting Chair, Don Watershed Task Force The Don Watershed Task Force has had three meetings. The focus of these meetings and an initial watershed tour has been to: . familiarize all Task Force members with the watershed; . to initiate the development of the strategy by focusing on the issues to be addressed; and . on the development of a work plan. The Table of Contents and Work Plan, appended to the minutes of Meeting #3/92, required the Task force members to break into four smaller planning units each addressing specific elements. It Is anticipated that each of these groups will prioritize the issues and allocate their time and resources to the .significant few rather than the trivial many.. An important element of the Work Plan Is the development of an efficient and effective consultation process, and an Informed constituency. This, we trust, will ensure that the draft strategy, when released, will be supported by a broad range of agencies, groups, and Individuals leading to Its Implementation over both the long and short terms. While everyone cannot be involved at all points we believe that the Work Plan will provide opportunities at many levels for all who wish to become Involved and informed. We particularly hope to enlist the assistance of technical staff of the many agencies to provide specific suggestions to Implement the strategies both at the watershed and subwatershed levels. This will be done at the working group level and by Integrating these persons Into specific task force meetings.