Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWaterfront Advisory Board 1971The MetropoRitan Toro nth and Region Conservation Authority M II N U T E S H -1 Waterfront Advisory Board Monday- March -15 -1971 #1/71 The Waterfront Advisory Board met at the Authority Administrative Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on Monday, March 15, 1971, commencing at 3:00 p.m. PRESENT WERE Chairman Vice - Chairman Members Authority Vice - Chairman Secretary- Treasurer Director of Operations Project Director - Waterfront Plan Engineer ABSENT WERE Members MINUTES F.A. Wade A.H. Cowling Miss T. Davidson Mrs. J.A. Gardner E.A. Horton H.E. Kennedy Wm. E. LeGros D. Melnik W.G. Messer A. O'Donohue P.B. Pickett Mrs. J. Tyrrell R.G. Henderson F.L. Lunn K.G. Higgs W.A. McLean M.R. Garrett J. Carroll B.G. Harrison J.R. Williams The Minutes of Meeting #2/70 were presented. Res. #1 Moved by: A.H. Cowling Seconded by: H.E. Kennedy RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #2/70, as presented, be adopted as if read. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; CHAIRMAN'S REMARKS In his opening remarks, Mr. Wade stated that the Board is now in the action stage and the Agenda is geared to getting things in motion. He did, however, make two observations - first, as a citizen of the Metropolitan area, he wished to express his appreciation to all those persons and agencies who have worked to bring the Waterfront concept before us in its present brilliant form. He observed that we are the beneficiaries of all this work and further stressed the importance of the continued co- operation of all to make the total Waterfront concept a reality; that the accruing benefits, both from the esthetic and from every practical consideration, will be incalculable. H -2 -2- PROJECT WF -2 - A PROJECT FOR THE ACQUISITION & DEVELOPMENT OF THE ASHBRIDGE'S BAY WATERFRONT AREA A Task Force communication was presented having regard to Project WF -2 - A Project for the Acquisition and Development of the Ashbridge's Bay Waterfront Area (Phase I). Res. #2 Moved by: W.G. Messer Seconded by: Mrs. J.A. Gardner RESOLVED THAT: The Task Force communication on Project WF -2 - A Project for the Acquisition and Development of the Ashbridge's Bay Waterfront Area (Phase I), be received; and THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: Project WF -2 - A Project for the Acquisition and Development of the Ashbridge's Bay Waterfront Area (Phase I), at an estimated cost in 1971 of $275,000.00, be adopted; and further, that the following action be taken: (a) All member municipalities be designated as benefiting, on the basis set forth in the 1971 Waterfront levy; (b) The municipalities of Metropolitan Toronto and The City of Toronto be requested to approve of this Project; (c) The Minister of Energy and Resources Management be requested to approve of this Project and of a grant of 50% of the cost thereof; (d) The Toronto Harbour Commissioners be requested to make available to the Authority, for a nominal sum, the lands under their control, which are required for this Project; (e) The Province of Ontario be requested to transfer to the title of the Authority those portions of the required waterlot which are Crown Lands; (f) When approved, the appropriate Authority officials be authorized to take whatever action is required in connection with the Project, including the execution of any necessary documents; (g) The approval of The Ontario Municipal Board for the financing of this Project be requested, if required. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; PROJECT WF -3A - A PROJECT FOR THE ACQUISITION & DEVELOPMENT OF LANDS IN THE PICKERING /AJAX SECTOR - WATERFRONT PLAN, EXTENSION NO. 1 A Task Force communication was presented having regard to Project WF -3A - A Project for the Acquisition & Development of Lands in the Pickering /Ajax Sector, WAterfront Plan, Extension No. 1. Res. #3 Moved by: Wm. E. LeGros Seconded by: P.B. Pickett RESOLVED THAT: The Task Force communication on Project WF3A - A Project for the Acquisition and Development of Lands in the Pickering/ Ajax Sector, Extension No. 1, be received; end -3- H -3 THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: Project WF -3A - A Project for the Acquisition & Development of Lands in the Pickering /Ajax Sector, Waterfront Plan, Extension No. 1, at an estimated cost in 1971 of $905,000.00, be adopted; and further, that the following action be taken: (a) All member municipalities be designated as benefiting on the basis set forth in the 1971 Waterfront levy; (b) The municipalities of Metropolitan Toronto, the Township of Pickering and the Town of Ajax be requested to approve of this Project; (c) The Minister of Energy and Resources Management be requested to approve of this Project and of a grant of 50"% of the cost thereof; (d) The land acquisition procedures applicable to the Authority's Plan for Flood Control and Water Conservation be applicable to this Project; (e) Discussions be entered into with Ontario Hydro for the joint use of portions of lands owned by Ontario Hydro in connection with the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station; (f) When approved, the appropriate Authority officials be authorized to take whatever action is required in connection with this Project, including the execution of any necessary documents; (g) The approval of The Ontario Municipal Board for the financing of this Project be requested, if required. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; PROJECT WF -4 - A PROJECT FOR THE ACQUISITION & DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCARBOROUGH BLUFFS WATERFRONT AREA (BRIMLEY ROAD RAVINE, PHASE 1) A Task Force communication was presented having regard to Project WF -4 - A Project for the Acquisition & Development of the Scarborough Bluffs Waterfront Area (Brimley Road Ravine, Phase 1). Res. #4 RESOLVED THAT: Project for the Waterfront ARea Moved by: A.H. Cowling Seconded by: Miss T. Davidson The Task Force communication on Project WF -4 - A Acquisition & Development of the Scarborough Bluffs (Brimley Road Ravine, Phase 1), be received; and THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: Project WF -4 - A Project for the Acquisition & Development of the Scarborough Bluffs Waterfront Area (Brimley Road Ravine, Phase 1), at an estimated cost in 1971 of $700,000.00, be adopted; and further, that the following action be taken: (a) All member municipalities be designated as benefiting, on the basis set forth in the 1971 Waterfront levy; (b) The municipalities of Metropolitan Toronto and the Borough of Scarborough be requested to approve of this Project; (c) The Minister of Energy and Resources Management be requested to approve of this Project and of a grant of 50% of the cost thereof; H -4 -4- (d) The Province of Ontario be requested to transfer to the title of the Authority those portions of the waterlot required . which are Crown Land; (e) When approved, the appropriate Authority officials be authorized to take whatever action is required in connection with the Project, including the execution of any necessary documents; (f) The approval of The Ontario Municipal Board for the financing of this Project be requested, if required. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT - SPECIAL STUDIES A Task Force communication was presented advising that it was felt necessary to carry out certain studies in connection with the Waterfront Development. Res. #5 Moved by: A. O'Donohue Seconded by: H.E. Kennedy RESOLVED THAT: The Task Force communication on Special Studies for Waterfront Development be received; and THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The firm of James F. MacLaren Limited be engaged to prepare a preliminary inventory report as set out in their proposal dated March 5, 1971 and to include the collection of data concerning present information on lake bottom materials, for a fee to be based on Scale 1 of the 1970 Schedule of Fees of the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario; the said fee not to exceed $7,500.00; and The Minister of Energy and Resources Management be requested to app4.ove of the Studies and of a grant of 50% of the cost thereof. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; NEXT MEETING IT WAS AGREED THAT the next meeting of the Board be held on May 13, 1971, at a time and place to be arranged by the Chairman. ADJOURNMENT On Motion, the Meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m., March 15. F.A. Wade Chairman F.L. Lunn Secretary- Treasurer The Metropolitan Toronto and Region o Consservatn®n Authority M ll AV U ll E S H- 5 Waterfront Advisory Board Thursday- May -13 -1971 #2/71 The Waterfront Advisory Board met at 17 Mill Street, Willowdale, on Thursday, May 13, 1971, commencing at 10 :15 a.m. PRESENT WERE Chairman Vice - Chairman Members By invitation Secretary- Treasurer Project Director, Waterfront Plan Engineer Engineer Globe & Mail Authority Chairman ABSENT WERE Members TOUR OF PROJECTS F.A. Wade A.H. Cowling Miss T. Davidson Mrs. J.A. Gardner H.E. Kennedy D. Melnik Mrs, J. Tyrrell Mrs. Sheila Martin F. Le Lunn W, A. McLean M.R. Garrett C. Mather Jim McKenzie Dr. G. Ross Lord J. Carroll B, G, Harrison E.A. Horton Wm. E. LeGros W, G. Messer A. O'Donohue P, B. Pickett J. R, Williams The majority of the Meeting was devoted to a tour of the following projects: (a) Ashbridge's Bay (b) Scarborough Bluffs (c) Petticoat Creek (d) Frenchman's Bay (e) Ajax with a lunch stop at the Guild of All Arts. On completion of the tour the Meeting resumed in the Committee Room of the Ajax Municipal building. MINUTES The Minutes of Meeting #1/71 were presented. Res. #6 Moved by: Seconded by: Miss T. Davidson Mrs. J.A. Gardner RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #1/71, as presented, be adopted as if read. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; H -6 -2- STAFF PROGRESS REPORT & CHART A Staff Progress Report with Chart was presented. Res. #7 Moved by: Mrs. J. A. Gardner Seconded by: Mrs. J. Tyrrell RESOLVED THAT: The Staff Progress Report with Chart, as presented, be received and filed. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; ADJOURNMENT On Motion, the Meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m., May 13. F. A, Wade Chairman F, L. Lunn Secretary- Treasurer The Metrop®intan Toronto and Region Conservation o Authority MIINUTIES H -7 Waterfront Advisory Board Thursday - July -8 -1971 #3/71 The Waterfront Advisory Board met in Committee Room 3, City Hall, Toronto, on Thursday, July 8, 1971, commencing at 10:00 a.m. PRESENT WERE Chairman Members Authority Vice - Chairman Secretary- Treasurer Project Director, WF Plan Engineer ABSENT WERE Vice - Chairman Member F.A. Wade J. Carroll Miss T. Davidson Mrs. J.A. Gardner B.G. Harrison E.A. Horton H.E. Kennedy Wm. E. LeGros D. Melnik W.G. Messer A. O'Donohue P.B. Pickett J.R. Williams R.G. Henderson F.L. Lunn W.A. McLean M.R. Garrett A.H. Cowling Mrs. J. Tyrrell MINUTES The Minutes of Meeting #2/71 were presented. Res. #8 Moved by: Seconded by: E.A. Horton R.G. Henderson RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #2/71, as presented, be adopted as if read. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; STAFF PROGRESS REPORT A Staff Progress Chart was presented and received. REPORT #7/71 OF THE TASK FORCE A Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, Sector Plan Evaluation, was presented. Res. #9 Moved by: Seconded by: A. O'Donohue Mrs. J.A. Gardner RESOLVED THAT: The Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Development, Meeting #7/71, Sector Plan Evaluation, be received and appended as Schedule "A" of these Minutes; and further H -g -2- THAT the following comments be noted: (a) Humber River bridges - piers - effects on siltation; (b) Ashbridge's Bay - Task Force to check Ashbridge's Bay sewage disposal plant for its future efficiency; (c) Brimley Road Area - Task Force to check re policing of Brimley Road Project; (d) Task Force to check possibilities of a Go Train stop in the East Point Park area, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; MILLGATE INVESTMENTS LIMITED - ETOBICOKE SECTOR - WATERFRONT A Staff Report having regard to the proposed expropriation of a parcel of land known as the waterlot fronting on Part Lot 9, broken front concession in the former Village of Long Branch, owned or controlled by Millgate Investments Limited, Etobicoke Sector of the Waterfront Development, was presented, Res. #10 Moved by: W.G. Messer Seconded by: J.R. Williams RESOLVED THAT: Prior to the Authority entering into discussions with the Borough of Etobicoke concerning the acquisition of the Millgate Waterlot, the Waterfront Task Force be requested to prepare a detailed report on this area, taking into consideration the following: (a) The proposed District 7 Plan, Borough of Etobicoke, which indicates this area as public open space; (b) Examine in terms of cost, availability of fill, length of time to construct, access and compatibility of regional use with adjacent neighborhoods, a development including the Len Ford Park extension and the Millgate property forming a land area similar to that described in the Waterfront Plan; (c) As an alternative, examine the feasibility of linking the land described in (b) to Marie Curtis Park; (d) Making recommendations concerning the Authority's role in the Millgate Waterlot expropriation. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; SUNNYSIDE BEACH AREA STUDY - WESTERN BEACHES SECTOR A Staff Report having regard to a proposal received from Mr. A. O'Donohue concerning water pollution in the Sunnyside Beach area, and reclaiming the Western Beaches, was presented. Res. #11 Moved by: R.G. Henderson Seconded by: A. O'Donohue RESOLVED THAT: The principle of improving bathing facilities in the Sunnyside area through the creation of controlled bodies of water and an offshore island be adopted, and that further study of the proposal be based on considerations to include the following: (a) Continuity of protected water for boating (rowing, paddling, canoeing, power craft, sailing); -3- H -9 (b) The most suitable location for improved bathing facilities in the Sunnyside area; (c) The feasibility of small enclosed bathing lakes in terms of health regulations, maintenance procedures and costs, and the quality of water that can be maintained; (d) The source of fill materials; (e) Parking and traffic requirements; (f) Development costs. AMENDMENT TO RES. #11 Mr. B.G. Harrison, Seconded by Mr. J. Carroll MOVED AN AMENDMENT THAT: The principle of improving bathing facilities in the Sunnyside area through the creation of controlled bodies of water and an offshore island, be received and referred to officials of The City of Toronto, for their consideration and comment. The Amendment was NOT CARRIED; The Resolution ( #11) CARRIED; with Mr. Harrison and Mr. Carroll voting in the negative. PROJECT WF -3A - PICKERING /AJAX SECTOR - TOWNSHIP OF PICKERING - APPROVAL A Staff communication was presented having regard to the Township of Pickering approval conditions of Project WF -3A, Pickering /Ajax Sector, Waterfront Plan. Res. #12 Moved by: Mrs. J.A. Gardner Seconded by: H.E. Kennedy RESOLVED THAT: The communication having regard to Project WF -3A, Pickering /Ajax Sector, Waterfront Plan, Township of Pickering, approval conditions be received and appended as Schedule "B" of these Minutes; and further THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The recommendations contained in the Staff Report having regard to Project WF -3A, Pickering /Ajax Sector, Waterfront Plan, Township of Pickering, approval conditions, be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; PROJECT WF -2 - ASHBRIDGE'S BAY AREA - CITY OF TORONTO - APPROVAL A Staff communication was presented having regard to The City of Toronto approval conditions of Project WF -2, Ashbridge's Bay Area, Waterfront Plan. Res. #13 Moved by: R.G. Henderson Seconded by: W.G. Messer RESOLVED THAT: The communication having regard to Project WF -2, Ashbridge's Bay Area, City of Toronto, Waterfront Plan, approval conditions be received and appended as Schedule "C" of these Minutes; and further H -10 -4- THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The recommendations contained in the Staff Report, as amended, having regard to Project WF -2, Ashbridge's Bay Area, City of Toronto, Waterfront Plan, approval conditions, be adopted; and further THAT a copy of the Report be forwarded to the Council, City of Toronto. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; PROJECT WF -3A - PICKERING /AJAX SECTOR - HYDRO LANDS - NEGOTIATIONS A Staff communication was presented having regard to negotiations in connection with Hydro lands required for Project WF -3A, Pickering/ Ajax Sector of the Waterfront Plan. Res. #14 Moved by: Mrs. J.A. Gardner Seconded by: W.G. Messer RESOLVED THAT: The communication having regard to negotiations in connection with Hydro lands required for Project WF -3A, Pickering/ Ajax Sector, Waterfront Plan, be received and appended as Schedule "D" of these Minutes; and further THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The recommendations contained in the Staff Report having regard to negotiations in connection with Hydro lands required for Project WF -3A, Pickering /Ajax Sector, Waterfront Plan, be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; 1972 PRELIMINARY BUDGET ESTIMATES The 1972 Preliminary Budget Estimates were presented and discussed in some detail. Res. #15 Moved by: A. O'Donohue Seconded by: H.E. Kennedy RESOLVED THAT: The 1972 Preliminary Budget Estimates, as presented, be received; and further THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The Preliminary Budget Estimates for 1972, as appended as Schedule "E" of these Minutes, be included in the Budget Estimates of the Authority for 1972. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE CREDIT VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY }MOOD CONTROL & POLLUTION ADVISORY BOARD A communication from the Credit Valley Authority, suggesting that a representative of this Authority be appointed to the Credit Valley Flood Control and Pollution Advisory Board as a liaison on waterfront matters, was presented. Res. #16 Moved by: A. O'Donohue Seconded by: H.E. Kennedy RESOLVED THAT: Mr. F.A. Wade, or his designate, representative to the Credit Valley Conservation Control and Pollution Advisory Board. be appointed as a Authority Flood CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; -5- H -11 SCARBOROUGH LAKEFRONT DEVELOPMENT STUDY A communication from the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board, advising that they had received the comments of the Borough of Scarborough Planning Board on the Lakefront Development Study and referring the Study and Scarborough's comments to the Authority, was presented. Res. #17 Moved by: B.G. Harrison Seconded by: H.E. Kennedy RESOLVED THAT: The communication from the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board having regard to the Scarborough Lakefront Develop- ment Study carried out by H.G. Acres, Consulting Engineers, be received; and further THAT the Report, together with the comments of Scarborough Planning Board, be referred to the Task Force, Waterfront Development, for study and report. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; ADJOURNMENT On Motion, the Meeting adjourned at 12:50 p.m., July 8. F.A. Wade Chairman F.L. Lunn Secretary- Treasurer H -12 SCHEDULE "A" REPORT #7/71 OF THE TASK FORCE RE SECTOR PLAN EVALUATION As a part of the preparation of a five -year project and ten -year plan for the waterfront development, the Task Force carried out an evaluation of proposals in the Waterfront Plan in order to establish their appropriateness and priority. The evaluation consisted of analysis by sector by the Task Force as a group and by the individual members of the Task Force. Meetings were held with officials of Parks and Recreation, Planning and Works Departments of all waterfront municipalities in order to ensure that the evaluation had the benefit of municipal input. In order to provide some guidelines for evaluation, the Task Force established basic criteria for judging suitability and priority of projects. i) Projects should be distributed by Sector on a realistic allocation of the financial resources available. Financial resources can be based on $4,000,000 per year over a five -year period, commencing in 1972. Projects undertaken in 1971 would be considered additional to the five -year project. The total funds available for allocation, then, would be $22,500,000. As a basis for discussion and evaluation, the distribution of this total would be as follows: Etobicoke Sector Western and Eastern Beaches Sectors Scarborough Sector Pickering /Ajax Sector $ 6,500,000 5,500,000 6,500,000 4,000,000 It was noted that as the evaluation proceeds, this basic allocation will be altered as required. ii) The acquisition of key waterfront lands and water lots. iii) The implementation of projects aimed at providing erosion control for critical areas. iv) Projects which will increase the protected water available. (It is noted that protected water would have emphasis on small boat harbourages, but would not exclude offshore islands.) v) The development of one major park development in each Sector within the five -year plan. vi) Mr. John Bower, Metro Planning, suggested the addition of a sixth criteria - the improvement of small waterfront areas, where such improvement will enable significant public use, or improve the appearance of the area. At Meeting #7/71 of the Task Force, all of the evaluations were brought together in a master report and the Task Force discussed the comments of other Task Force members and municipal officials, and recommended elements of the Waterfront Plan which should be given further consideration and detailed study for inclusion in the five -year project and the ten -year plan, which should be recommended to the Advisory Board in the fall of 1971, -2- H -13 In order that the Advisory Board can be appraised of the progress which has been made, the following is a summary of the elements of the Waterfront Plan to which the Task Force intends to give detailed study: Etobicoke Sector 1) Marie Curtis Park 2) R. L. Clark Water Filtration Plant, Ontario Hospital Lands 3) Mimico Creek - Proposal for tourist camping on west side not feasible because land consists of sanitary landfill. Desirable to investigate acquisition of portion of Federal lands and Ontario Water Resources lands west of Marie Curtis Park for this facility. - Proposal for extension of marine facilities deleted pending a boating and marina need study. - This area offers excellent opportunity for major extension to existing public land inventory in the Etobicoke Sector - Propose to study access through 20th Street extension - Landfill to create major waterfront park including possibility of boating facilities. - This project is underway - proposed to be completed within five -year project.- 4) Mimico Creek to - Propose to give detailed study to Humber Johnson, Sustronk, Weinstein and Associates, Consultants, proposal and include acquisition of access points from Lakeshore Blvd. 5) Beach Management 6) Mill Gate Park - There are several areas where minor improvements can be made to existing local parks, i.e., Prince of Wales, Rotary, to make them more suitable waterfront areas. - Thoroughly investigate requirements. - This item will be dealt with under item 4(a) of the Agenda. General Comments: A major alteration in the Etobicoke Sector plan is concerned with the limited amount of fill that will be available. The original Waterfront Plan envisaged sanitary landfill being used and for this reason the use of fill was maximized. It is now considered inappropriate to use sanitary landfill on the waterfront and the amount of fill will be limited to clean fill available. This has resulted in more emphasis on existing land acquisition and less emphasis on landfill. H -14 Western Beaches Sector 1) Hydraulic improvements at mouth of Humber given a high priority. 2) Boat launching ramp considered inappropriate in this location. -3- 3) Beach improvements Sunnyside to Humber covered under item 4(b) of Agenda. 4) Sunnyside Pool and Bath -house - Retention of Sunnyside Pool is a part of beach improvement proposal for the Sunnyside area. - Bath -house will require replace- ment to serve as a major facility. 5) Relocation of Lakeshore Blvd. and increased parking to be given detailed study. General Comments: The Western Beaches Sector at the present time is limited by access and a shortage of land. The major improvements will revolve around the the feasibility of access and parking and the feasibility of creating more land. Eastern Beaches Sector 1) Ashbridge's Bay 2) Woodbine and Kew Beaches - Project will be started this year and completed within the five -year project. - Proposals in plan to be given detailed study - Boardwalk extension, landscape improvement, shoreline improve- ment, replacement of facilities and extension of land area in front of Kew Beach to provide more space for extension of local park facilities. 3) Nursewood Road - Detailed study to be given proposal in Waterfront Plan. General Comments: Principle of retaining the present characteristics of the Eastern Beaches to be followed with major changes in Ashbridge's Bay and Nursewood Road areas. Scarborough Sector 1) Development of beach management policy - Detailed study to be given to entire Scarborough Sector for a beach management policy which can be pursued to systematically control erosion problems. 2) Bluffers Park Brimley Road area 3) Bellamy Road Ravine 4) Guildwood area 5) East Point Park -4- H -15 - Brimley Road project will be in process in 1971 - Committee of Task Force established to prepare basic plan of this area which will resolve the problems raised in Acres plan and the original Waterfront Plan. - Study foot access from Kingston Road as recommended in Acres plan. - Consideration to be given to public land requirements and suitable development in the area. - Detailed consideration to be given to development of East Point Park within the five -year project. - Access to site major problem. General Comments: Beach management programme for the entire Sector. The development of Brimley and Bluffers Park and East Point Park are the major elements to be pursued. Pickering /Aiax Sector 1) Chesterton Shores 2) Lower Rouge Conservation Area 3) Rosebank, Petticoat Creek, Frenchman's Bay area 4) Frenchman's Bay to Carruthers Creek - Not included in Waterfront Plan. - Use of foot access to Lower Rouge to be studied, - Further development will await Lawrence Avenue extension. - Major development as per Waterfront Plan to be studied for Petticoat Creek. - Remainder of area not scheduled for development until land acquisition has further proceeded - Target dates for land acquisition and plan of development will be prepared. - Land acquisition in Project W.F.3A. - Plan for land acquisition to be established. - Development to be basically as per Waterfront Plan. - Detailed study of development in Duffins Creek area. General Comments: Emphasis will be on land acquisition as per Project W.F.3A, with development proposals in Petticoat Creek and Duffin Creek to be given major attention. W A McLean, Project Director Waterfront Development Plan H -16 SCHEDULE "B" REPORT RE PROJECT WF -3A - PICKERING /AJAX SECTOR, WATERFRONT PLAN - TOWNSHIP OF PICKERING - APPROVAL The Council of the Township of Pickering gave conditional approval to Project W F -3A, a project for land acquisition in the Pickering /Ajax Sector, Waterfront Plan by resolutions #227 and #229, dated June 7, 1971. The approval was con- ditional as set out hereunder: 1. that the Council of the Township of Pickering adopt the recommendations set out as A, B and C in the pre- amble of the Federation of Ratepayers Associations' submission. "The combined ratepayers associations submit that Council's approval of Project W F -3A must at this time cover only the following: a Glen Avis Park b all of the unoccupied land c) and for all of those who wish to sell their property.' 2. that the recommendations of the Federation of Ratepayers Associations made in their submission to Council, dated May 25, 1971, with respect to MTRCA Project W F -3A, be adopted. The recommendations being those contained on pages 50 and 51, numbered 1 to 7, as amended and attached. "(1) The Authority provide a target ownership development plan. (2) That the above plan be directed to the Planning Board of the Township and all other normal municipal channels, including proper notification of public hearings. (3) That it shall be a declared intention that where practical, development priorities will first be established on the vacant lands. (4) That the Authority in conjunction with the Township Advisory Committee, will resolve the problems of property maintenance and deterioration. (5) That following the formation of the Township Advisory Committee, consideration will be given to the retention of all of the lands the Township presently owns on the west side of Frenchman's Bay. (6) The Authority implement a contingency fund to purchase promptly properties from residents who must cell. i. formula of evaluation should be established acceptable to the Authority, the pro- vince, and the individual. (7) In summation, we recommend that a citizens' advisory committee be formed to resolve the foregoing basic problems. The ratepayers will look to Council for direction as to the structure of this committee.•' Most of the points covered in the recommendations of the Federation of Ratepayers Association, as amended by Council, have been recognized as Authority policy, but have not been formerly stated. With respect to the preamble to the Ratepayers Association's brief, it has been the intention of the Authority to acquire only those properties which are offered for sale and which the owner is willing to sell to -2- H -17 the Authority. The preamble provides for the Authority persuing the acquisition of unoccupied lands and Glen Avis Park, whether or not they are on the market for sale. COi;UIEUT ON RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Target - Ownership Development Plan The Authority has directed the Task Force for Waterfront Development to prepare a five -year development project and a ten -year development plan for all sectors of the waterfront under the Authority's jurisdiction. The information derived from the project and the plan in the Pickering /Ajax Sector will satisfy this requirement. 2. That the plan be directed to Planning Board and include notification of public hearings Under the procedures adopted by the Authority in dealing with waterfront projects, all projects proposed by the Authority must be approved by the municipality in which the project is located. Plans and projects are forwarded to the Council of the municipality for this approval. It is up to the Council to deal with the plan or project in the manner which it sees fit. The exercising of this requirement will be a matter for the Township to deal with. 3. Development priorities first on vacant lands The development priorities will be outlined in the five - year project and the ten -year plan, and this requirement can be incorporated in the Pickering /Ajax Sector. 4. Township Advisory Committee and property maintenance and deterioration The Township intends to establish an advisory committee to deal with waterfront projects. It has been the practice of the Authority to send representatives to committee meetings of this kind to discuss Authority projects and policy. 5. Retention of lands owned by the Township on the west side of Frenchman's Bay Project CA -4$, a project for the acquisition and develop- ment of the Frenchman's Bay Conservation Area was adopted by the Authority at meeting ;1/69, resolution #24, RESOLVED THAT :report i #22/68 of the Executive Committee be received and adopted without amendment and appended as schedule (d) of these minutes. Report #22 of the Executive Committee read in part, "Project CA -4$, a project for the acquisition and development of the Frenchman's Bay Conservation Area be adopted, and further in this connection that the following action be taken: a) the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the Municipality of the Township of Pickering be de- signated as benefiting H -18 -3- b) the Township of Pickering be requested to transfer to the Authority, for a nominal sum, all lands owned by the Township included within the project. The Township of Pickering at the Council meeting February 17, 1969, by resolution #22/69, took the following action: "MOVED by Councillor V. Rudik, SECONDED by Councillor A. King that WHEREAS The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has adopted the recommendation of the Conservation Areas Advisory Board and the Executive Committee having regard to Project CA -4$, 'a project for the acquisition and development of the Frenchman's Bay area'. AND WHEREAS the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and the Township of Pickering will be designated as benefiting municipalities; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT the Township of Pickering does endorse the action of the Conservation Authority, and further, agrees to transfer to the Authority, for a nominal sum, all lands owned by the Township included within the project (approximately 4$ acres); The Township would request that the Authority consider continuing the lease presently in effect on the lands occupied by the Frenchman's Bay Yacht Club, and further, that the Authority agrees to lease back to the Township of Pickering the area known as West Shore Glen Park for a nominal sum, as recommended by the Committee of the Whole Council, February 13, 1969. Carried." The lands included in Project CA -4$, with the exception of the Township lands, are now in the ownership of the Authority. An agreement has been drawn between the Authority and the Frenchman's Bay Yacht Club as requested in the Pickering Township resolution. As yet, the lands owned by the Township have not been transferred to the title of the Authority, although negotiations have been going on, and the Authority has agreed to lease back to the Township the lands required for local purposes. Item 5 of the Council of Pickering's resolution refers to these negotiations. It is the intention to discuss the retention of these lands by the Township with the citizens' advisory committee to be formed. It has been the practice of the Authority where municipal lands are involved in a project to request the munici- pality to deed to the Authority, at a nominal sum, those lands owned by the municipality lying within the project boundary. The purpose of including these township lands in the Authority's project was to bring under the control of the Authority the bulk of the lands fronting on the west side of the Bay, a large part of which is marsh land, in order to ensure that the use and management of the lands was a part of, and in keeping with, the use and management of the whole Frenchman's Bay project. -4- H -19 The West Shore Glen Park referred to in the Council resolution is a small area of parkland developed by the Township and the local residents, and it was felt that this serves an important use and should be leased back to the Township, for a nominal sum, in order that its present use can continue unimpeded. 6. A Contingency fund for property purchase This point is raised by the residents because of the awkward procedures which the Authority has to follow in connection with land purchases under a project. Up until the submission of Project W F -3A to the province, it has been the procedure to negotiate pro- perties and then prepare a project for their acquisition. The period from the preparation of the project to final approval is approximately six months. In most cases, it is impossible to get a six months, option on a pro- perty in this section of Pickering. The matter is complicated by the fact that the only properties being acquired are those which the owner wishes to sell. Normally, he wants the transaction completed in as short a time as possible, in order that he can move on to his new property. In Project W F -3A, the Authority has recommended to the province that the acquisition pro- cedures be simplified. Approval in principle of land acquisition within the project boundary has been re- quested, with approval for each property as it is negotiated, being subject to the required evaluations and a certificate of approval from the Director of the Conservation Authorities Branch. Proceeding in this manner with the funds available in the current year of $905,000, there should be no delay in acquiring those properties which owners are willing to sell to the Authority. 7. Citizens, Advisory Committee The Council of the Township of Pickering intends to create a citizens, advisory committee to assist Council in dealing with Authority waterfront projects in the Pickering Sector. As has been indicated earlier, it is the practice of the Authority to co- operate in working with such groups, and it is expected that this practice would continue. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that: The Council of the Township of Pickering be advised that the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has given detailed study to the conditions set by the Council in its approval of Project W F -3A, and that the Authority in carrying out the project will proceed as follows: A) Land acquisition will be confined to Glen Avis Park, all of the unoccupied land and water areas, and those properties whose owners wish to sell to the Authority. H -20 -5- B) The development of the Pickering /Ajax Sector will be based on the development proposals made in the 1967 Waterfront Plan. The Authority, at the present time, is preparing a detailed development plan for a five - year project and a ten -year plan, which will include priorities of development and timing for completion. C) Under the procedures established for consideration of waterfront projects, the Authority will forward the five -year project and ten -year plan to the Council of the Township of Pickering for their consideration. If invited, the Authority will participate in any public discussion that the Council may wish to have on the project. D) Where practical, development priorities in the five - year project and ten -year plan will first be established on vacant lands. E) The Authority will co- operate with the Township and any committees it may establish in resolving the problems of property maintenance. F) The matter of the transfer of lands on the west side of Frenchman's Bay from Township to Authority ownership was dealt with in Project CA -4$, a project for the acquisition and development of the Frenchman's Bay Conservation Area. Authority negotiations with the Township have been proceeding in accordance with that project, and resolution #22/69 of the Council of the Township of Pickering. The Authority will proceed with negotiations on the transfer of these lands with the Council and any advisory committee the Council may wish to form on the basis that it is the terms of the transfer agreement which are being negotiated. The Authority recognizes that the Township has agreed by resolution to transfer the lands and that the Authority has met its commitments made under Project CA -4$. G) The Authority has set aside $905,000 for land acquisition in the Pickering /Ajax Sector during the year 1971. The Authority has applied to the Province of Ontario for approval of Project WF -3A on the basis that the approval would be in principle for the project area, and that each property would be negotiated and approved separately by certificate from the Director of the Conservation Authorities Branch. In this way, properties can be acquired in a much shorter period of time after com- pletion of negotiations, and these procedures will have the same effect as a contingency fund. H) The Authority agrees to co- operate with the Council of the Township of Pickering through discussion with its citizens' advisory committee on matters pertaining to waterfront development. W. A. McLean Director Waterfront Project SCHEDULE "C" H -21 REPORT RE PROJECT WF -2 - ASHBRIDGE'S BAY, WATERFRONT AREA - CITY OF TORONTO - APPROVAL The Council of the City of Toronto approved Project W F -2 by resolution May 26, 1971. The approval was subject to the following assurances: a) that a close liaison will be established and maintained between the Authority and the four private recreation clubs presently sub - leasing sites in the Ashbridge's Bay area, and that every effort be made to accommodate their present and projected needs b) that the present ingress to the public car park, which services Woodbine Beach Park, be retained until such time as an alternative access route can be provided c) that the sanitary drainage be connected to the lakefront interceptor d) that the water supply be obtained from the existing main on Lake Shore Blvd. East and provide for fire protection e) that the Metropolitan Corporation be requested to approve the modification of the intersection of Lake Shore Blvd. East and Coxwell Avenue, including its ultimate signalization f) that the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority be requested to confirm that the cost of all public works facilities for this undertaking will be charged to the project and that the future dredging of Ashbridge's Bay will be the Authority9s responsibility. With respect to item (a), meetings have been held with all four private recreation clubs concerning their land re- quirements, and provision is being made in the master plan of development for their accommodation. With respect to item (b), the present ingress to Woodbine Beach Park will be retained until such time as an alternate access route can be provided. With respect to items (c) and (d), the service connections will be made as recommended. With respect to item (e), an application has been made to the Metropolitan Corporation for approval of the modification of the intersection of Lake Shore Blvd. East and Coxwell Avenue, including the installation of traffic signals. With respect to item (f), it is expected that the proposed development will significantly reduce the silt accumulation in the Bay, thereby reducing the need for dredging. The matter of costs of maintenance of the land and water areas included in the project will be included in agreements to be drawn with the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto covering these matters. The costs of public works required for the carrying out of the Ashbridgets Bay project have been included in the project estimates. H -22 -2- RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the report on Project WF -2, Ashbridge's Bay, City of Toronto approval, be adopted; and further THAT a copy of the report be forwarded to the Council, City of Toronto. W.A. McLean Director Waterfront Project SCHEDULE "D" H -23 REPORT RE PROJECT WF -3A - PICKERING /AJAX SECTOR - HYDRO LANDS - NEGOTIATIONS Resolution ,;=4O, Authority meeting ;;`3/71, in dealing with report ,4/71 of the Executive Committee read in part as follows: 'Project W F -3A, a project for the acquisition and develop- ment of lands in the Pickering /Ajax Sector, Waterfront Plan, Extension No. 1, at an estimated cost in 1971 of $905,000, be adopted, and further that the following action be taken: (e) Discussions be entered into with Ontario Hydro for the joint use of portions of land owned by Ontario Hydro in connection with the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station. Initial contact with officials of the Ontario Hydro Commission was made by the Chairman of the Waterfront Advisory Board, and at a meeting with Hydro officials, the proposals of the Authority in the vicinity of the Pickering Nuclear Station were described. Ontario Hydro has subsequently commissioned a study by Project Planning Associates Ltd. of their lands at Pickering, in order to develop guidelines for the development of a portion of these lands for park and recreation purposes. A preliminary plan has been prepared. At the present time, discussions between the Authority and Ontario Hydro are centered on an $1 -acre parcel of land lying west of Sandy Beach Road, and including a 40 -acre marsh area. The de- velopment proposal in this area is for a passive type of recreational use centering on the preservation of the marsh. Ontario Hydro has proposed that the Authority enter into an agreement with Hydro for the Authority's management of these lands. The Task Force considered this matter at its meeting 1$/71. It is the opinion of the Task Force that the purpose of the Authority would be well served by accepting under Authority management the $1 acres presently being discussed. It would enable to bring into public use a significant block of land on the east side of Frenchman's Bay, and would protect the marsh area. The Township of Pickering has expressed a requirement for local park development in this area. It is anticipated that this requirement would involve approximately ten acres of land. RECOMMENDATION The Task Force agreed and recommends that the staff be authorized and directed to negotiate a draft management agreement with the Ontario Hydro Commission for the management of approximately $1 acres of land on the east side of Frenchman's Bay. The Task Force further recommends that the terms of the agreement make provision for the following: Continued H -24 -2- a) The initial development of the lands by Ontario Hydro. b) If requested by the Township of Pickering, the inclusion of a ten -acre local park site, and a sub three -party agreement with Pickering, the Authority and Hydro to provide for the local park requirement, and the Township of Pickering assuming the maintenance of the local park. c) Ontario Hydro continuing to pay the taxes on the land. d) The Authority undertaking the remaining maintenance costs. e) Provision for any further development of the lands by the Authority with the agreement of Ontario Hydro. W. A. McLean Director Waterfront Project SCHEDULE "E" H -25 RE 1972 PRELIMINARY BUDGET ESTIMATES - WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT Administration A 1 Salaries - Waterfront Task Force $ 72,000. A 21 Office Equipment - 1 Electric Typewriter 700. - 2 Desks & Chairs (1 pedestal; 1 Steno) 300. - Dictating Equipment 600. A 34 Technical Plans & Maps - Waterfront A 106 Administration of Fill Regulations A 113 Publications & General Printing - 5 -year Project - Brochure A 114 Tours & Special Days - Waterfront Tours Total Administration Capital Projects PROJECT WF -1 - MIMICO CREEK PROJECT WF -2 - ASHBRIDGE'S BAY PROJECT WF -3A - PICKERING /AJAX PROJECT WF -4 - BRIMLEY ROAD RAVINE STUDIES & TECHNICAL DATA 5 -YEAR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Total Capital WAM/e June -30 -1971 5,000. 1,000. 2,500. 6,000. 1,000. $ 89,100. 200,000. 250,000. 1,000.000. 310,000. 250, 000. 1,990,000. - $ 4,000,000. W.A. McLean, Project Director Waterfront Development Plan The MetropoRiltan Mt Toronto and legion. Conservatio n Authority il N U T 1 S H -26 Waterfront Advisory Board Thursday - September -23 -1971 #4/71 The Waterfront Advisory Board met at the Authority Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on Thursday, September 23, 1971, commencing at 2:00 p.m. PRESENT WERE Chairman Vice - Chairman Members Chairman of the Authority Vice - Chairman Secretary- Treasurer Director of Operations Project Director, WF Plan Engineer Deputy- Treasurer ABSENT WERE Members MINUTES F.A. Wade A.H. Cowling Mrs. J.A. Gardner E.A. Horton H.E. Kennedy Wm. E. LeGros A. O'Donohue P.B. Pickett Mrs. J. Tyrrell J.R. Williams Dr. G. Ross Lord R.G. Henderson F.L. Lunn K.G. Higgs W.A. McLean M.R. Garrett D.L. Hall J. Carroll Miss T. Davidson B.G. Harrison D. Melnik W.G. Messer The Minutes of Meeting #3/71 were presented. Res. #18 Moved by: Seconded by: A.H. Cowling J.R. Williams RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #3/71, as presented, be adopted as if read. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; THE GUILD INN AREA STUDY A Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, "The Guild Inn Area Study" was presented. Res. #19 Moved by: J.R. Williams Seconded by: Mrs. J.A. Gardner RESOLVED THAT: The Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, "The Guild Inn Area Study ", as amended,be received and appended as Schedule "A" of these Minutes; and H -27 -2- THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The recommendations contained in the Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, "The Guild Inn Area Study ", as set forth herein, be adopted: THAT a Project which shall be subject to the Guild Inn being acquired by the Ontario Heritage Foundation be prepared for the acquisition and development of certain lands in the Guild Inn Area; and further in this connection: (a) THAT the development of the lands acquired in connection with this project be in keeping with the principle of a metropolitan resource park on the waterfront having access separate from the Guild Inn itself and being a major point of access to foot trails along the bluffs which could eventually extend to Sylvan and Cudia Parks; and (b) THAT the acquisition of the lands in this area be subject to satisfactory negotiations after evaluations by accredited appraisers. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; MILLGATE PARK STUDY A Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, "Millgate Park STudy" was presented. Res. #20 Moved by: Mrs. J.A. Gardner Seconded by: E.A. Horton RESOLVED THAT: The Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, "Millgate Park Study" be received and appended as Schedule "B" of these Minutes; and THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The recommendations contained in the Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, "Millgate Park Study ", as set forth herein, be adopted: THAT the Millgate Park /Len Ford Park area being unsuitable in terms of present access, potential access and compatibility with surround- ing area for regional park purposes be considered a local park area; and further in this connection: (a) THAT the Authority not participate in the cost of acquisition of the Millgate Park; (b) THAT should the Borough of Etobicoke acquire the Millgate property, the Authority participate in a shorline management programme in this area which would create a mature shoreline minimizing the erosion and /or accretion of shoreline materials, and that the cost of carrying out the shoreline management programme be borne as part of the cost of the waterfront development; and (c) THAT the linking of the Millgate /Len Ford area with Marie Curtis Park by means of an existing shoreline link not be given further consideration at this time, and that an extension of Marie Curtis Park through landfill be considered to provide space for additional facilities. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; -3- H -28 CUDIA AND SYLVAN PARKS REPORT A Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, "Cudia and Sylvan Parks" was presented. Res. #21 Moved,by: A.H. Cowling Seconded by: H.E. Kennedy RESOLVED THAT: The Report of the Task Force, Waterfront Plan, "Cudia and Sylvan Parks, be received; and further THAT the Report, together with the recommendations of the Task Force, as set forth herein, be referred to the Borough of Scarborough for their consideration: THAT the most appropriate use for the Cudia /Sylvan Park areas would be as a low -use passive resource park; and further in this connection THAT the following action be taken: (a) The land acquisition in the report as it pertains to the bluff face be re- examined to determine the minimum requirements considering erosion control problems; (b) The principle of primarily foot access to the park areas be established using whatever possible existing unopened public rights -of -way; (c) The possibility of foot access from Markham Road be examined; and (d) THAT further study be given to the shoreline management programme propolaed in the area. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; ADJOURNMENT On Motion, the Meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m., September 23. F.A. Wade Chairman F.L. Lunn Secretary- Treasurer H -29 SCHEDULE "A" THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY GUILD INN AREA STUDY REPORT 13H OF THE TASK FORCE AUGUST -3 -1971 AMENDED -- SEPTEMBER -23- 1971 INTRODUCTION The Waterfront Plan (1967) indicates largely private development in the Guildwood area, including high- density residential develop- ment, the retention of the Guild Inn,a 9 -hole golf course in con- nection with the Inn, and public access along the waterfront linking Guildwood to proposed park areas at Cudia and Sylvan Parks. Dis- cussions have been held concerning the acquisition of a portion of the Guild Inn property by the Ontario Heritage Foundation through the Authority. The study examines the area and estimates the suita- bility and potential for a public project. 1. PRESENT CHARACTER OF THE AREA a) Size Based on property information obtained from the owner, it has been determined that ownership by Guild Inn companies is in three parcels: i) West: 26.62 acres + ii) Guild Inn :41.83 acres + iii) East: 8.85 acres + TOTAL: 77.30 acres + The West acreage does not include 3.38 acres of public road- way which has been closed by Township Bylaw. To the west of the Guildwood property, the Waterfront Plan proposes a 132 -acre primitive park (Sylvan - Cudia) which would be linked by foot access along top of bluffs to proposals in the Guild area. This would require acquisition of "rights" over approximately 2500 feet of shoreline. b) Development i) West: The lands in the west parcel are undeveloped, except for old public rights of way (portions of Sher- brooke, Woodvale and Cedarcliffe), which are now closed, but foot trails remain in evidence. Adjacent to, and west of, the West parcel, there is residential develop- ment (multiple mixed) which has taken cognizance of the bluffs and shoreline resulting in a very attractive housing settlement fronting on gardens, playfields, pools and walkways along the bluffs. Erosion in en- dangering some of these facilities. It is through these lands that a portion of the connection with Sylvan and Cudia described in 1 (a) would have to pass. ii) Guild Inn: The Guild Inn has become an important Scar- borough landmark. On the 41.83 -acre site, a hotel/ dining room facility has been developed surrounded by landscaped gardens, an outdoor pool, historic buildings, and works of art along woodland trails. On the west side of the Guild site, there are four residences and an administration /storage building. The area which is - 2 - H -30 specifically used for Inn purposes is approximately 19 acres. The uses of this area are as follows: Inn Buildings: Roads & Parking: Other Buildings: Grounds & Gardens: 1 acre (130 rooms) 3 acres (approx. 400 cars) 2 acres 13 acres TOTAL: 19 acres The remaining lands on the Guild site are used in connection with the Inn, but it could be satisfactorily operated if they, in addition, were used by the public for passive recreation. There are two sections to the Inn: an old section containing guest rooms, small conference facilities, dining room and bar, private dining rooms, and service facilities, and a new wing containing approximately 60 guest rooms and conference facilities. Other buildings on the site include a settler's cabin, a craft studio, now used for receptions and conferences. No inspection of the buildings has been carried out to determine structural and mechanical soundness. Road and parking areas are paved, except for a gravel road which has been constructed to give access to the foot of the bluffs through a deep ravine. The grounds and gardens are maintained to a high stan- dard. Their ornamental nature indicates substantial maintenance costs. At the foot of the bluffs on lands presumed to be public lands, there is, at the present time, a fill project under way. Access to the fill site is gained by a steep gravel road which has been constructed through a ravine east of the Guild buildings. The fill is mostly clean excavated material, extending 30 - 401 into the lake along the toe of the bluffs a distance of some 800'. Rubble materials is placed on the lakeside to protect the fill which has been placed at an average elevation of 10'+ above lake level. It would appear that the purpose of the fill is to protect the toe of the bluffs from erosion and to eventually provide access to the lake level. The fill does not appear to be placed according to a properly engineered design, although it has the appearance of achieving stability. This erosion control measure for the toe of the bluff, together with an in- tercepter storm drain at the top, which directs all sur- face drainage into a storm sewer, which has its outlet at the base of the bluffs, has reduced considerably the rate of bluff erosion in this area. iii) East: The East parcel presently consists of 6.09 acres +, a public school site having been established on the east side of the parcel. A foot trail has been worn along the edge of the bluffs in this parcel, and there is no other development. H -31 3 c) Topography The major topographic feature of all three parcels is the 200' -high Scarborough Bluffs. The face of the bluff is almost vertical and has been dissected in one location by a stream through a deep ravine, and in several locations by very local surface run -off. The property map accompanying this report shows the bluff face as it was in 1962. Rough measurement indicates that the top of the bluff has retreated since that time. The remainder of the property is flat of the deep ravine which has been cut buildings. The East and West parcels there are still substantial stands on with the exception east of the Guild are well- wooded, and the Guild parcel. d) Official Plan and Zoning i) West: Presently zoned "A" Apartments, at a density of one dwelling unit for each 1075 square feet of lot area (40 units to the acre).Pending development of Bluff Conservation policy, no lot line is permitted within 250' of top of bluffs, no building within 300'. Registered Plans 2455 and 2422 exist on portion of parcel and as yet have not been superseded. ii) Guild Property: Presently zoned Highway Commercial (39.08 acres +); Apartments (2.75 acres +) to a density of one dwelling unit for each 2150 square feet of lot area (20 suites to the acre). Highway Commercial zoning in Guild area permits hotels, motels, auto sales, res- taurant, tourist resort, banquet hall, etc. All uses presently existing at the Guild Inn. The value of the "OS" zone is unknown. For this reason, it has not been separated from area of adjacent zoning. For information purposes, the following calculation is made: Section Size Portion which is OS West Parcel Guild Parcel East Parcel 25.12 acres 43.33 acres 10.89 acres 5 acres 10 acres 3 acres iii) East: Presently zoned for single - family dwellings (8.85 acres +). The bluff face in front of all three parcels is zoned "0" Major Open Space. The "0" zoning has not been subtracted from the parcel acreage given. A detailed analysis of zoning in this area is presented in Appendix A. e) Property Ownership The ownership of the three parcels of land is divided among three companies (one for each parcel) in an interlocking family arrangement. No detailed analysis of ownership has been made. No property valuations have been made. 1 E - --- - -- - --- -- - �� GO, 0w000 RKWG♦ • ,u 0001 ,.\\0 \ \O\ \0 P� 0 N'c 11ij// /I //Illlllll� OPEN SPACE SINGLE FAMILY APT. (40 SUITES /ACRE ) APT. (20 SUITES /ACRE) HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL 1 L100.10 W ..0.1 WILD DIN STUDY PLAN L7 CAT•LIO• ...WO. UN. 0 z 1E 1 GUI D Yi 00 D I I I I I I I SIR *WILFRID LAURIER it COLIEGIAtE INSTITUTE .I, •• • 1; 11,42.111•00• • O. ACRES INIST . • • 1 PNV21, • .I■■• • •■•II2 •■1 1 ‘. \.-... i4 r II. 'y I , I .. ......: s., ..;... I ; ( PI \ ) 7-1.--,>---, I i -,-,-..-1•‘ 1 -, ---, ,i ., , .. i )C. C - .- ' 1 1 60 %.\ \ 1••T ••••Cll. • It •4O1• II. •Call \••, I .• , ,•• 'AX -.4 • •Ii% I S• • •.".An■• 2 4! A AE• .•• • . v or/. • • • r; • -- L• ./e . •-• AAtx ■•••• Atays. .......... • tv tat Ta.22,,1:;:c...202Z100Xv0 Rte. GUILD INN STUDY PLAN C1::3 ••••• - 4 - H -34 f) Access Present access to the Guildwood site is from Guildwood Parkway, a collector road, linking Guildwood Village to Kingston Road. All other public roads in the area are residential streets. The area is served by public transportation, including a 'GO' transit stop at Guildwood Parkway and Kingston Road. 2. PREVIOUS STUDIES AND PROPOSALS The Waterfront Plan recognized the Guild Inn as a hotel of unique character. At the time of the preparation of the Plan, the owners of the Guild proposed the development of a par 3 golf course to the east of the Inn (East Parcel). The Plan further recognized that the Guild may wish to create boating facilities in connection with the Inn. The Plan states, "such facilities would enhance the attractiveness of this section of the waterfront for boaters and would add to the interest and activity ". The Waterfront Plan further recognizes the long -term potential for apartments built down the face of the bluffs, between Livingstone Road and the Guild Inn (West Parcel) where apart- ments on the adjacent table -land have been constructed. (Reference: 1 (b) (i).) Proposing offshore sea walls for protection, the Plan envisaged recreation facilities including boat slips along the shore in front of apartment buildings built to the contour of the bluffs. While the Plan looked at the Guild Inn and adjacent lands as private development, it envisaged public use in the form of foot access from Cudia and Sylvan Parks to the west through the apartment development at Livingstone Road to the Guild property. 3. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL There are many features of this area which offer considerable development potential: a) The bluffs are a superb natural feature which hold great interest for many. Whether it is their geologic origin, their spectacular form, or the view they offer, there is much to attract the visitor. b) It is a well- wooded site. Woodland trails have been de- veloped along the edge of the bluffs and are currently used by local residents and visitors to the Guild alike. c) Access has been developed by way of a gravel road to the foot of the bluffs. d) The Guild Inn has developed landmark status. It is widely known and a firm part of Scarborough character. There is value in its continuance as an interest site, e) The owners recognize value in the West parcel for residen- tial development. Present zoning for 40 suites to the acre substantiates the value. Plans for the East parcel are not known. H -35 - 5 f) The site is accessible by motor vehicle from Kingston Road via Guildwood Parkway, a collector road. Bus service, Scarborough East line, goes past the entrance. There is no direct service connecting with the Warden Subway Station, as a transfer from the Scarborough bus at Morningside is necessary. There is 'GO'transit service nearby. g) The site is fully serviced. h) The size of the site, and the possibilities for linkage with other waterfront areas, enable the site to be part of a system. 4. DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS There are constraints to development in the Guildwood area as follows: a) Residential Uses i) The Waterfront Plan proposal for apartment development on the face of the bluffs is in contradiction to existing zoning and set -back regulations. Strong citizen objec- tion to zoning changes for increased apartments in the area can be expected. ii) Physical conditions to permit development in (1) may be limiting factor. iii)Buildable land in the East parcel and present zoning single - family residential may limit practicality of de- velopment. b) Shoreline Uses i) Present fill is not being placed to maximize shoreline use. Water's edge will still be relatively inaccessible. ii) Width of fill permits little more than road access. iii)Surface drainage still erodes bluff from top causing a hazardous condition, both top and bottom, except adjacent to Guildwood site itself where surface run -off is con- trolled. iv) Present fill will not provide protected water. c) Guild Uses i) Winter occupancy is limited due to location and lack of indoor pool. Owners feel with all- weather pool Inn will attract more winter guests. ii) Present operation is slightly less than on a break -even basis. iii)Approximately 19.0 acres of land required for predomina- tely Guild visitor use. d) Public Park Uses i) Hazardous condition of top and bottom of bluffs. ii) Guildwood Parkway heavily travelled. Borough has not been able to secure widenings for present use. iii)Land area available limited, not sufficient for major metropolitan park. iv) Land values not obtained, but estimates indicate sub- stantial value. Use for cost must be compared with what can be obtained in other areas. - 6 - H -36 5. DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES The development alternatives discussed here are those which offer some potential for achievement. a) A Major Metropolitan Park The total land area which could be made available in the Guild - wood area is approximately 77 acres. This would include 3.38 acres of public roadway which could be transferred to the owner- ship of the Authority by the Borough of Scarborough. Deleting 19 acres for the actual Guild operation, this would leave 58 acres for public park purposes. In terms of a major metropolitan waterfront park with a full range of facilities, including boating and bathing, which would be difficult to develop, this would be a small acreage compared to other nearby opportunities on lands already owned by the Metropolitan Corporation. (East Point Park 1.5 miles to east, 211 acres.) In addition, land would have to be created at the foot of the bluffs for marine purposes, but inasmuch as a similar develop- ment would be required at East Point Park, the figure is not necessary for comparison. Two major metropolitan parks within a mile and a half of each other are not required in this area, and the East Point Park site is considered preferable on the basis of size and its pre- sent availability. What it lacks is a major point of interest, such as the Guild Inn. The bluffs at East Point are not as spectacular as at the Guild. b) A Metropolitan Resource Park Rather than offer a full range of activities and facilities, such a park would emphasize and make available for public use the major resources which are present, in this case: i) the Guild Inn (a cultural resource) ii) the bluffs and shoreline (natural resource) iii) the wooded trails. Visitor pressure would be less in this instance than in a major metropolitan park, and land requirements would be less. In a sense, this is the use now being made of the property. Land requirements would be as follows: iv) the Guild property v) the lake frontage and set -back strips of the East and West parcels. Base shore protection would be required, but a large land mass at the foot of the bluffs and protected water would not be re- quired. In such a plan, the Guild and its associated facilities would be an integral part of the park and a major attraction. De- velopment would include: vi) Guild facility improvements vii) Making the log cabin and studio public attractions viii) Continuing the trails and extending the trail system H -37 - 7 - ix) Introduction of public facilities, washrooms, picnic, interpretive x) Widening entrance road, re- arrangement of parking xi) Development of picnic areas xii) Foot trails to base of bluffs and a beach trail (This would require modifications to existing fill) In a development of this type, the lands of the East and West parcels could be developed as zoned on their buildable portions. c) A Metropolitan Resource Park (Modified) A modification of (b) would be to separate the Guild Inn itself from the park operation. It was indicated in 1 (b) (ii) that approximately 19 acres are required for the Inn operation. In this proposal, a separate entrance for the park would be de- veloped, and a division of uses between the Inn and the park would be made. The separation would preferably be a visual one accomplished by access and landscaping, rather than fencing, thus permitting some common uses. In addition to the acquisition of the East parcel and the fron- tages of all three parcels, this proposal would require the acquisition of approximately 3.83 acres of the Guild parcel, in order to provide a separate park entrance east of the Guild entrance. This modification has several advantages: i) By separating the entrances and by landscaping, the degree of privacy for Guild lands could be obtained. ii) The difficulty of mixing Inn parking with park parking would be avoided. iii) The horticultural theme of the present Guild Inn could be extended into the park, and the resulting heavier visitation could be accommodated. iv) The park values would continue to be available to Inn visitors. v) Management responsibilities could be distinctly allocated. In both metropolitan resource park proposals, the linking of the lands by foot trails with other waterfront lands remains a valid concept. d) Private Development as Proposed in the Waterfront Plan The proposals in the Waterfront Plan for the Guildwood area have already been described in 2. The principle of attractive multiple residential development has already been established on Livingstone Road to the west aE the site. Existing Borough zoning and regulations would not permit buildings in major open space (bluffs) or within 250' of the top of the bluffs. The policy statement of the Borough in this connection infers that should the bluffs be satisfactorily stabilized, the 250' set- back would be relaxed. There is no indication of a willingness to permit development in the "0" zone, however. It is evident that beach management policies at the base of the bluffs will stabilize the base, but top erosion will, unless controlled, continue until at least a 2 :1 slope has been esta- blished. This erosion would, in time, "use up" most of the 250' set -back from today's top of slope. The availability of this set -back for public purposes is considered valuable, and the Authority should not recommend a change in present Borough policies. - 8 - H -38 Residential development to the west of the Guild site,according to present zoning and policy, will be appropriate. The other major issue raised in the Waterfront Plan for this area is private versus public development and use of the Guild site. The Plan opts for private. The discussion in this report recognizes the bluffs and wood- lands along the top of bluffs as an important resource. There are very few areas in the Scarborough sector where the water- front is still in a relatively natural state and where public access is possible. Cudia and Sylvan Parks are fine natural areas, but access can be obtained only through residential streets. Tree cover in East Point and Bluffers Parks has been removed. Accessibility and physical character in the Guildwood area lend this site an importance that will be difficult to produce else- where. Very few revenue - producing opportunities are present, and if the bluffs and shoreline portions of the site are to remain in their present state, they should be under public management. The Guild Inn is part of the Scarborough character, is widely known as a unique resort, and its continuance was provided for in the Waterfront Plan. This report concurs with this provision. The development of marine facilities in connection with the Guild Inn was recognized as a possibility in the Plan. This report has not studied all aspects of marine facilities in this area, but concludes that the development of a shoreline manage- ment policy aimed at stabilization and the preservation of the natural qualities of the bluffs and the wooded areas at the top of bluffs should be given major consideration. Marine facili- ties are proposed one and one -half miles to the east at East Point Park. 6. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL The most appropriate form of waterfront development in the Guildwood area will be in the form of a metropolitan resource park as described in the modified version in section 5 (c), page 7 of this report. The development proposal for this area is as follows: a) Introduction A metropolitan resource park in the Guildwood area will bring into public ownership a significant stretch of the Scarborough Bluffs and make this major natural feature available for public enjoyment; provide for the continuance of the Guild Inn opera- tion; enable the implementation of a shoreline management policy; and provide a point of access to a hiking trail system along the waterfront in Scarborough. b) Land Acquisition The land acquisition recommended for a metropolitan waterfront resource park in the Guildwood area is as follows: H -39 - 9 i) The Guild Inn Parcel: 3.83 acres (East Access) 16.54 acres (Frontage on Bluffs) ii) The East Parcel: 8.85 acres iii) The West Parcel: 9.64 acres (Frontage on Bluffs) TOTAL: 38.86 acres iv) The remaining 19.10 acres + Guild Inn site is not recom- mended for acquisition by the Authority; rather it is suggested that it may be acquired through the Ontario Heritage Foundation. c) Land Development The development of the lands in the proposed park would be in two sections: i) The Guild Parcel: About 19 acres would likely be required for the Guild operation. Development on these lands would be a part of the waterfront park. Any improvements and the financing of the improvements would have to be assessed against the operation of the Guild Inn, with details to be worked out by the Ontario Heritage Foundation. In the continiung operation of the Guild Inn, the Authority trust that emphasis will be given to the preservation of the unique character of the Inn and its importance as a Scarborough and even Canadian institu- tion. ii) The Public Park Lands: The development of the lands to be included in the public park section of the project should be based on a recognition of the importance of the natural features which exist. Considerable restraint should be shown in altering the existing features, and only those things which are required for the comfort, health and safety of the visitors should be provided. Two major exceptions to this policy would be appropriate. Because of the character of the Inn site development, particularly the floral displays and the works of art, it would be appropriate to tastefully develop horticul- tural sections of the public park where the Guild site and the public park come together. In this way, a visual division between the Guild and the Park could be esta- blished without creating a formal barrier. The horti- cultural development would enhance the site and, if done tastefully, would not detract from the natural features. This type of development would be a continuance of the reputation for floral beauty that the Guild property now has. - 10 - H -40 Secondly, a beach management policy would be pursued at the foot of the bluffs. The toe of the bluffs would be stabilized through the establishment of a soft beach along the shoreline having a width of 75 - 150', thus enabling pedestrian access to the shoreline. A small protected water area could be included to encourage a small marsh area in shallow water, and an attempt at a fishing programme could be made. Further examination of the potential of this type of development would have to be made. As the stabilization of the toe of the bluffs proceeds, planting programmes to advance the stabilization of the bluff face itself could be undertaken. In addition to the recommended horticultural development, modest landscaping would be required, in addition to the natural features. d) Park and Recreation Facilities Facilities which are proposed for the public park are in keeping with the passive use of the resource features. They would con- sist of a 9 -acre woodland picnic area, foot trails, an observa- tion point, fishing piers, and a lavatory shelter. At appro- priate locations, interpretive material would be installed. e) Services Municipal services are presently available at the site, and these would be extended to serve the public park area. The re- quired services include water and sewer to the lavatory shelter; water to drinking fountain locations throughout the site; and hydro service to the lavatory shelter and for street and parking area lighting. f) Access The access and parking arrangement for the Guild site would re- main as it is at present. Access to the public park would be gained by the construction of a new road intersecting the Guild - wood Parkway at Galloway Road. The new park road would be de- signed to give access to the picnic and floral areas; a trail connection to the bluffs pathway; and would extend down the existing roadway to the foot of the bluffs. Three parking lots of approximately 60 cars each are proposed. g) Adjacent Development To the west of the Guild site, apartment development, in keeping with the proposals of the Waterfront Plan, is recommended. These proposals should be modified to observe the zoning and policies that presently exist in Scarborough, and to permit extension of the walking trails along the bluffs to the west. h) Cost Estimates l The estimated cost for the acquisition and development of a metropolitan resource park in the Guild area is as follows: H -41 I Land Acqusition Subject to evaluation. II Land Development i) Grading, turf landscaping, including gardens: ii) Water service: iii) Sanitary sewers: iv) Storm drainage: v) Roads, parking trails: vi) Electrical supply and lighting: vii) Lavatory shelter: viii) Shore management: ix) Engineering and contingency: TOTAL: horticultural $ 70,000. 16,000. 20,000. 10,000. 63,000. 18,000. 20,000. 160,000. 76,000. $453,000. APPENDIX A GUILDWOOD ZONING General Considerations: Public parks, public streets, private and separate schools, and public utilities are permitted in any zone. Generalized Zoning Regulations: Single - Family Dwelling (on map). This includes Scarborough's "S" or Single - Family Residential zoning. The permitted uses are: single - family detached dwellings. Apartments (on map). This includes Scarborough's "A" or Apart- ment Residential zoning. The permitted uses are: apartment buildings multiple - family residential dwellings nursing homes nursery schools senior citizens' homes senior citizens' apartments. Neighbourhood Commercial (on map). This includes Scarborough's "NC" or Neighbourhool Commercial zoning. The permitted uses are: service station bank medical centre personal service shops restaurants retail stores and offices Highway Commercial (on map). This includes Scarborough's "HC" or Highway Commercial zoning. The permitted uses are: hotels motels funeral homes auto sales, etc. - 12 - H -42 NOTE: "Highway Commercial Uses" category depicting the Guild Inn shall be modified to permit the following uses: motel hotel restaurant tourist resort banquet hall and convention centre country club recreation and cultural facilities arts and crafts centre retail commercial activities directly related to and associated with the aforementioned. Major Open Space (on map). This includes Scarborough's "0" or Major Open Space zoning. The permitted uses are :public recreation ( "the erection, structural alteration, and /or maintenance of buildings is prohibited on these lands, except buildings accessory to public re- creational uses ") NOTE: In Guildwood, "Pending the completion of engineering studies and plans for the conservation of the Scarborough Bluffs, the following restrictions shall apply as an interim development policy: a) No lot line be permitted within 250' from the top edge of the bluffs. b) No building be permitted within 300' from the top edge of the bluffs." (From Secondary Plan for Guildwood) "Extent of Major Open Space Uses '0' to be all the lands between the water's edge of Lake Ontario and the top edge of Scarborough Bluffs or a horizontal distance of 250' from the water's edge, whichever is the lesser." (From Community Bylaw for Guildwood) GUILDWOOD OWNERSHIP Registered Plans 2455, 2422 These plans have been in existence for some time. However, the age of a registered plan does not matter. It can only be changed by court order or by being superseded by a sub - division plan. Roads in Sherbrooke Avenue Area These roads were originally dedicated to Scarborough. Now, the right of way on Sherbrooke Avenue has been closed by Scarborough Bylaw 10642, and the roads are no longer public. Indeed, their status as roads has been lost, and they are now considered land held as property by Scarborough. H -43 SCHEDULE "B" THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTh,R1TY LEN FORD / MILLGATE PARK STUDY REPORT 9I OF THE TASK FORCE AUGUST -5 -1971 INTRODUCTION The Metro Waterfront Plan (1967) suggested that there were a number of alternatives offering themselves for the re- development of the existing Long Branch shoreline (which includes the Len Ford /Millgate Park area). The Plan itself contemplated the continuance of the present uses and the maintenance of the stability of the neighbourhood during the time period covered by the Plan, except for the expected completion of the then proposed Long Branch Hotel on the Millgate Park landfill site by private interests and the Plan's suggested extension of Len Ford Park "in the form of a finger - like ornamental park with lagoons and small islands linked by foot bridges ". The owners of the Millgate Park site, Millgate Park Investments Ltd., have recently applied for zoning of the area to permit a high- density residential development in the form of apartments. (The site is presently unzoned.) The Borough of Etobicoke Council has more recently passed a resolution calling for (a) the expropriation of the Millgate Park land- fill site to ensure that the land is used for public recreation purposes (as is suggested in the proposed Etobicoke District 7 Plan), and (b) negotiations with the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority "to investigate the possibility of their participation in the financing of this expropriation" in light of the Authority's having been designated as the implementing agency for that sector (Etobicoke) of the Metro Waterfront Plan. As of this writing, (a) the Millgate Park area rezoning has not come up for discussion in Etobicoke, and (b) no negotiations have commenced between the Authority and the Borough concerning the expropriation. It is anticipated that Millgate Park Investments Ltd. will go before the Ontario Municipal Board in the fall of 1971 to try and get a ruling on the zoning. This report examines the area and estimates the suitability and potential for a public use of the Len Ford /Millgate Park area. 1. PRESENT CHARACTER OF THE AREA a) Size The present Millgate landfill site is approximately 4.5 acres. Len Ford Park is 3.0 acres. b) Development i) On Landfill Site: The present site consists of undeveloped landfill with no services, roads, etc. i".i) Surrounding Landfill Site: To the north of the site is a large high- density apartment development of about 9 acres at 60 units per acre. To the west and east are well - established, single - family homes, including some with lake frontage. The narrow strip of grassed open space known as Len Ford Park lies immediately west of the landfill site and fronts on the water. - 2 - H -44 c) Access Immediate road access is limited to two -lane residential streets. There is no legal pedestrian access along the shore from the east or west as the waterfront properties on either side of the Len Ford /Millgate Park area are privately owned. Indeed, illegal access is very difficult, because of the various forms of shore protection the pro- perty owners have put in. Access by boat is possible with the nearest launching ramp being at Marie Curtis Park, about a mile to the west. d) Topography /Type of Shoreline The landfill is composed of clean fill and rubble which have been dumped into the lake to an elevation of about 8 feet above present lake level. The top is uncovered, except for a few weeds, although it is reasonably flat. There has been substantial wave erosion from the face of the fill which has resulted in a dangerous overhanging bluff on the south side. Much of the eroded soil has been deposited in the area to the west of the original fill, because of the westward lit- toral drift. A small area of land just above water level has gradually built up just west of the original fill and is now actually outside the patented waterlot of Millgate Park on Crown waterlot. Some material has also been deposited in front of the private residences to the west beyond Len Ford Park. Prior to the fill being placed, the shoreline was primarily a series of widely varying structures designed to protect the private residences along the lakefront from flooding, erosion, etc, caused by high waves, etc., especially during winter storms. Such protection still exists in the areas to the east and west of the Len Ford /Millgate Park site. e) Zoning /Official Plan i) Landfill Site: The Millgate Park site itself is presently unzoned, although an application for zoning as high - density apartment land has been submitted to the Borough of Etobicoke by Millgate Park Investments Ltd. In the latest proposed District 7 Plan, it is seen by the Borough of Etobicoke planning staff as being suitable for local park usage, along with Len Ford Park, to help make for a present deficiency of local parks in the area. ii) Surrounding Landfill Site: Most of Len Ford Park and the area to the north of it is presently zoned "RMl" Residential Multiple, which permits single - family dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, etc.* (floor space index = 0.6), but not apartments. A small section on the western end of Len Ford is zoned "RS" Residential Single, which permits single - family dwellings only, as is much of the area to west along Lake Promenade to Marie Curtis Park. The area to the north of the landfill site is zoned "RMA" Residen- tial Multiple Apartments (all uses in Residential Multiple, plus apartments -- maximum floor space index = 1.74). The area to the east is mostly Residential Single all the way to the Western Water Filtration Plant. *NOTE: A public park is permitted in any zone in Long Branch H -45 - 3 - Generally speaking, the area surrounding the landfill site will maintain its existing use according to the proposed District 7 Plan. f) Property Ownership The landfill site is mostly on a patented waterlot owned by Millgate Park Investments Ltd. However, as a result of erosion, land is being accreted on Crown waterlot to the west. Len Ford Park is owned and managed by the Borough of Etobicoke. The 33 properties lying between Len Ford Park and Marie Curtis Park are privately owned. Four unopened public rights of way extend from Lake Promenade to the lake in this area. Schedule of Property Ownership Millgate Waterlot: Len Ford Park: Unopened Rights of Way: Private Residential Properties: TOTAL :• 4.5 acres+ 3.0 acres± 1.0 acres+ 7.3 acres+ 15.8 acres± 2. PREVIOUS STUDIES AND PROPOSALS The Metro Waterfront Plan suggested that there were a number of alternatives offering themselves for the re- development of the existing Long Branch shoreline. The Plan itself contem- plated the continuance of present uses and the maintenance of the stability of the neighbourhood during the time period cov- ered by the Plan, except for the expected completion of the privately, long - proposed Long Branch Hotel on the Millgate Park landfill site (this was seen by the Plan as a suitable area for new commercial uses on the Western Waterfront) and the Plan's suggested extension of Len Ford Park "in the form of a finger -like ornamental park with lagoons and small islands linked by foot bridges" (in order to help meet what the Plan called "the growing needs of western Metropolitan Toronto in terms of providing a wide range of essentially water - oriented recreation facilities "). The Plan, however, does not state specifically whether these two developments were meant to satisfy a local or regional requirement. It could, of course, be inferred that a hotel is built to meet the requirements of a. large market area. However, the Plan does not advocate improving access to the area in terms of (a) roads from the nearest arterial road (Lake Shore Blvd.), and /or (b) acquisition of public rights of way along the shore to allow pedestrian and perhaps bicycle and trackless train access from Marie Curtis Park and /or the Western Water Filtration Plant. The Plan infers that the expanded Len Ford Park would be primarily a local facility, and the Borough of Etobicoke recognizes a local park deficiency in this area. 3. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL a) The site has a superb uninterrupted view not only of a large expanse of Lake Ontario, but also of a large expanse of shoreline, some of which requires improvement to be aesthetically pleasing. b) Access by road to within a mile of the site is extremely good along the Lake Shore Blvd., which connects in several places with a major highway routes and rapid transit around and through Metropolitan Toronto. - 4 - H -46 c) The site is within walking and /or cycling distance of a large number of local residents. d) There is a deficiency of local and regional park in the Etobicoke area. The site is well- located to serve a local function. Neighbourhood adjustments would be required for it to serve a significant regional function. 4. DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS a) Availability of Landfill Strong competition for available landfill materials is developing along the western waterfront. Evaluation of waterfront projects in the Etobicoke Sector by the Task Force led to the conclusion that the original proposals for major landfill projects should be undertaken at one time. Priority projects have not yet been firmly established, but initial evaluation indicated that the Mimico - Humber area, and the R.L. Clarke Plant area offered considerable potential. It is not presently considered that large amounts of clean fill materials together with rubble for protection would be available in this area for some time, if major landfill projects were undertaken at R.L. Clarke and Mimico - Humber. b) Access Present access to Marie Curtis Park is directly from Lake Shore Blvd. to the western area, and from 42nd Street to the eastern area. This type of access has resulted in primarily regional use for the western area, local use on weekdays, and regional use on weekends for the eastern area. In considering a road link with Len Ford Park from Marie Curtis, 42nd Street would be the likely route. Forty- second Street is a residential street and already bears considerable traffic as the. eastern entrance to Marie Curtis Park. Existing access to Len Ford Park and the Millgate site is limited to residential streets. c) Compatibility of Regional Use with Adjoining Neighbourhoods Without a major alteration to street patterns access to the Len Ford /Millgate area from either Lake Shore Blvd. or Marie Curtis Park, for large volumes of traffic, would have inherent a considerable degree of incompatibility with adjoining neighbourhoods. It is doubtful if the expense involved in creating access patterns which would not interfere with the neighbourhood would be justified by the size and type of park area which can reasonably be created in the Len Ford /Millgate area. 5. DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES Three basic alternatives are evident for development in this area. Alternative I - Waterfront Plan - Apartments plus Park Extension The original proposal for a hotel on the landfill site has now been changed to a proposal for high- density apartments by the owners. This occurred because the owners were unable to arrange financing for the hotel because "the demand for hotels in the western part of Metropolitan Toronto has been completely satis- REQUIRED LAKESHORE ROAD / Il luuuVu�,� MARINA AV. ASH a ST. S PARK ONTARIO HOSPITAL PROPOSED REG. PARK 10 ACRES APARTMENT DEVEL. ( PRIVATE) THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHOR ITY MILLGATE PARK STUDY ALTERNATIVE I PRIVATE LANDS PUBLIC PARK DATE SEPT. 1971 1 SCALE APPROX. 1"= 1000' - 5 - H -48 fied "1. Therefore, the closest development possible to the original Waterfront Plan would be for a high- density apartment development and park extension of primarily local significance. As the site for an apartment development, the Millgate property offers a great deal. It has a fine view of Lake Ontario and much of the shoreline. Once one is on Lake Shore Blvd., which is less than a mile away fromthe landfill site, major centres for shopping, work, etc. can be easily reached because of Lake Shore Blvd.'s linkages into the major highway and rapid transit systems around Toronto. However, access to Lake Shore Blvd. would be a problem since an apartment development would create a traffic volume which the local streets are not capable of handling, according to the Etobicoke planning staff. The same type of adjustments to local streets would be required for apartments on the site as for a park of regional significance. The extension of Len Ford Park proposed by the Waterfront Plan would create " a fingerlike ornamental park with lagoons and small islands linked by foot bridges ". This park was to adjoin the original proposed hotel, and access would be gained through local residential streets to it. No linkage along the shore- line, or by Cmeans of landfill- created islands, to other parks or major arterial roads was proposed. The park would be about 10 acres in size. This ornamental park would be quite different from other parks in the area such as Marie Curtis and the Western Water Filtra- tion Plant, since they are proposed to be relatively actively 'used, whereas it would be relatively passive under this proposal. Marie Curtis and the Filtration Plant would have large spaces for ball games, launching ramps, beaches, etc. The Len Ford Park extension would be something to appeal to older people and people without children, etc. who just wished to spend a quiet time looking at flowers, walking around, sitting and watching a fountain, etc. Cost The estimated cost of this proposal is approximately $600,000. based on the creation of 10 acres of new land in front of Len Ford Park and providing limited landscaping. If the full floral park were to be developed, the cost would be greater. No land acquisition would be required, and Millgate Park would remain in private hands for development as a hotel site or for apart- ments. Alternative II - Acquisition and Development of Millgate Park and Len Ford Park as a Regional Waterfront Area Consideration of this alternative should be thought of as an alternative to extending the present land base at Marie Curtis Park as proposed in the Waterfront Plan. There are three sub - alternatives which have been looked at: 1 Quote from letter from Millgate solicitors to Long Branch Council, October 1968. JAMES REQUIRED LAKESHORE ROAD I sr. w X MARINA R AV. 4 PARK Y BLVD. 1 IL L- 11 IUuuvui__L REGIONAL PARK 17 ACRES NO PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ONTARIO HOSPITAL THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MILLGATE PARK STUDY ALTERNATIVE II a. PRIVATE LANDS PUBLIC PARK DATE SEPT. 1971 1 SCALE APPRAX 1 "= Imo' PRIMARY ACCESS FROM LAKE\ SHORE BLVD \ h .MMES 3T. OF LOOP SYSTEM LAKESHORE ROAD I/ MARINA AV. AOUIRE RESIDENTAL PROPERTIES SOUTH OF LAKE PROMENADE FOR LINK LAND FILL ASH Il iuuu�u�L pip A WESTERN WATER FILTRATION PLANT ONTARIO HOSPITAL F F Z THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MILLGATE PARK- STUDY ALTERNATIVE IIb PRIVATE LANDS PUBLIC PARK A "I"C CCE T art 71 1 nn •1 r • runt, e. 11_ 1/�AAI ENLARGED PARK AREA ENABLING MORE FACILITIE WOULD BENEFIT FROM COMPLETE LOOP SYSTEM LAKESHORE ROAD � 1 � ... . .W YES sr. MARINA AV. ASH S. �CR E4. / / WESTERN / 0 • E ~ m ONTARIO :. HOSPITAL ›; _ - a / a A i- O F F : t W v PA7 X RLVD. M OA : a # ..'� ` O r� `� �OM� �� , l .7.- .... qpE �� JJ�JJJJ) /lI / / /O/ .. O FILTRATION W USING WEST AREA ENTRANCE AND BRIDGE ACROSS ETOBICOKE CR. HEAVY TRAFFIC ON 42 ND ST. COULD BE AVOIDED CREATE LINK BY LAND FILL APPROX. 30 AC. ENCLOSING A 60 AC. LAKE 2 THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHOR ITY MILLGATE PARK STUDY ALTERNATIVE II c PRIVATE LANDS PUBLIC PARK DATE SEPT. 1971 1 SCALE APPROX. In: 1000' - 6 - H -52 a) Develop a park of approximately 17 - 20 acres in front of the Millgate and Len Ford Park, the land mass having a configuration similar to that in the Waterfront Plan. It would be extremely difficult to make a park of this size serve a regional' function, because the desirable facilities: boating, bathing, picnicking - -would require access and parking facilities beyond the capability of the site. To create a larger area would not solve the access problem, and it would be more practical to locate a major landfill in front of the existing Marie Curtis Park where access is adequate as recommended in the Waterfront Plan. b) Link the 17 - 20 acre park site with Marie Curtis by acquiring the properties on the south side of Lake Promenade between the two sites. There are at present 33 private properties in this area. This acquisition would enable vehicle and /or pedestrian access from Marie Curtis, but a complete loop would not be possible without altering a residential street leading from Len Ford/ Millgate to Lake Shore Blvd. This alternative would be more satisfactory than those previously discussed in that it would have less of an impact on the remaining residential community. It would not, however, add to the protected water available in the area, and would not result in a more satisfactory traffic pattern for park use than now exists at Marie Curtis Park. The present shoreline in this area as has been previously described would require considerable improvement before it could be considered suitable for public use. The cost of assembling the basic land area for this alternative is as follows: i) land acquisition including the Millgate property: $2,900,000. ii) shore improvements and landfill: TOTAL: 800,000. $3,700,000. c) Achieve the link between Marie Curtis Park and the Len Ford/ Millgate area by a landfill project in the form of a curving spit, or a series of islands linked by a roadway. A curving spit is probably the more desirable from a cost point of view, whereas a series of islands would permit more circu- lation of water. This alternatives has several advantages over (b) in that: i) the acquisition of the 33 privately -owned properties would not be required ii) the fill would create a sizable body of protected water iii) the impact on the neighbouring community would be negligible except at the Millgate end where road widenings would be required if a traffic loop were to be completed. Without the completion of a traffic loop, there would seem to be little point in the link. H -53 The amount of land required for a connecting link would vary according to the type of use and facilities that were proposed for it. A connecting spit 3200' long by an average width of 200' would cover approximately 15 acres. Making provision for some parking, lookouts, and picnic areas would require another 15 acres. It is considered that a minimum desirable size would be 30 acres for the spit and 10 acres of additional fill for the existing Len Ford /Millgate area. The estimated cost of creating the required land carrying out the shore improvements and acquiring the Millgate Waterlot is $3,900,000. Construction of the connecting roadway, bridges, and site development has not been calculated. Alternative III In this alternative, the two park areas - -Marie Curtis Park and Len Ford /Millgate Park - -would not be linked. Marie Curtis Park would be expanded as required, as recommended in the Waterfront Plan, and the direct access from Lake Shore Blvd. would be improved by upgrading the intersection. Len Ford /Millgate would be recognized as a local park facility as proposed in Etobicoke's District 7 Plan. In this alternative, the decision on the Millgate acquisition would remain with Etobicoke, and the area would be developed as a local park by Etobicoke. The expansion of Marie Curtis would provide the additional facilities proposed in the Water- front Plan, and could be shaped to provide a body of protected water. The public cost of land assembly and land creation would be less than in II (c) because less landfill would be required. The cost is estimated at $3,300,000. including the acquisition of the Millgate Waterlot. The recommended cost sharing between Etobicoke and the Authority would be based on the division of local and regional facilities. 6. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT POLICY Whichever alternative is selected, a shoreline management policy should be initiated for this area as a part of water- front development. The fill which has been placed both in the Len Ford area and on the Millgate Waterlot has created an unsatisfactory shoreline. Because it is an immature system, the water's edge is inaccessible by pedestrians; it is unsightly and there is considerable erosion and accretion of material in the area. The shoreline should be re- shaped to form a mature beach and protected by the beaching method. The estimated cost of shoreline improvements in this area is $150,000. A plan of shoreline management has been prepared. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT LAKE SHORE B LV D in M LAKESHORE ROAD MARINA 4 AV. 15 it IUUU _IULJL_ vz) .MMES n. L i q PARK BLVD. 0 J LANE 2 A ONTARIO HOSPI TAL •., WATERFRONT PLAN PROPOSAL FILL APPROX. 20 ACRES EXPAND MARIE CURTIS PARK FACILITIES / 1 -7- �� `, ■ ' / THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHOR ITY MILLGATE PARK STUDY ALTERNATIVE III PRIVATE LANDS PUBLIC PARK ■ H -55 7. 8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The following is a summary of the alternatives which have been examined. Alternative Cost I Regional park with apts. or hotel II(a) Regional park without apts. or hotel Fill Compatibility Require- Time to 1 with Regional ment Construct Neighbourhood Significance 600,000. 10 acres 1 year medium* low 600,000.+ land ac- quisition 10 acres 1 year medium low II(b) Regional park linked by land 3,700,000. 10 acres 1 year low medium II(c) Regional park 3,900,000. linked by + roads 4 - 5 landfill & bridges 40 acres years high ** high III Millgate/ Len Ford local; 3,300,000. Marie road re- Curtis quirement expanded less 30 acres 4 years high high 1 Assuming no other major fill is in progress * Citizens and Borough have expressed opposition to apartments. Park area is preferred. ** Except if link were to be continued through to Lake Shore Blvd. there would be conflict on street selected for connection. Alternative III is the preferred alternative because it con- forms with present proposals of the Etobicoke Planning Board; it satisfied the needs for additional regional park space with the least neighbourhood disturbance, and leaves the option open for a connecting link at some future date. The Metropolliitan Mt Toronto aid Region, Cons enratil n A uth®mnty M I[ N IU TE S H -56 Waterfront Advisory Board Thursday - December -16 -1971 #5/71 The Waterfront Advisory Board met at the Authority Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on Thursday, December 16, 1971, commencing at 10:00 a.m. PRESENT WERE Chairman Vice - Chairman Members F.A. Wade A.H. Cowling J. Carroll Miss T. Davidson Mrs. J.A. Gardner B.G. Harrison H.E. Kennedy D. Melnik A. O'Donohue P.B. Pickett Mrs. J. Tyrrell J.R. Williams The Meeting was also attended by the following Members of the Executive Committee who are not Members of the Board: Metropolitan Toronto Parks Secretary- Treasurer Director of Operations Project Director, WF Plan Adm. - I & E Division Engineer Deputy- Treasurer M.J. Breen J.A. Bryson E.H. Card Mrs. F. Gell C.F. Kline C.R. Purcell K.G. Waters T.W. Thompson, Commissioner F.L. Lunn K.G. Higgs W.A. McLean T.E. Barber M.R. Garrett D.L. Hall In attendance also were a number of interested persons representing various Citizens' Groups. ABSENT WERE Members E.A. Horton Wm. E. LeGros W.G. Messer Vice - Chairman A.H. Cowling acted as Chairman for the Meeting. MINUTES The Minutes of Meeting #4/71 were presented. Res. #22 Moved by: Seconded by: F.A. Wade J. Carroll H -57 -2- RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #4/71, as presented, be adopted as if read. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; LAKEFRONT OWNERS' ASSOCIATION - Brief Mrs. S.H. Voisey, Secretary of the Lakefront Owners' Association, presented a Brief on behalf of the Lakefront Owners' Association, together with a supporting submission. Res. #23 Moved by: J. Carroll Seconded by: Mrs. J. Tyrrell RESOLVED THAT: The Brief presented by Mrs. Voisey on behalf of the Lakefront Owners' Association be received and referred to the Task Force for Waterfront Development for consideration and report in detail to the Board prior to any final decision being made in con- nection with the Len Ford /Millgate Park area. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; LAKESHORE RATEPAYERS' ASSOCIATION - Brief Mrs. A. Peterson, on behalf of the Lakeshore Ratepayers' Association of Ward 5, Borough of Etobicoke, presented a communication from the Lakeshore Ratepayers' Association and spoke briefly in support thereof. Res. #24 Moved by: Mrs. J.A. Gardner Seconded by: P.B. Pickett RESOLVED THAT: The communication from the Lakeshore Ratepayers' Association, as presented by Mrs. A. Peterson, be received and referred to the Task Force for Waterfront Development for consideration and report to the Board. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; COMMUNICATION FROM MR. HAROLD T. GRIFFIN 9 Crescentwood Road, Scarborough A communication was presented from Mr. Harold T. Griffin, 9 Crescent - wood Road, Scarborough. Res. #25 Moved by: B.G. Harrison Seconded by: P.B. Pickett RESOLVED THAT: The communication from Mr. Harold T. Griffin, 9 Crescentwood Road, Scarborough be received and referred to the Task Force for Waterfront Development for consideration in devising a detailed proposal for the erosion control measures on the Scarborough Bluffs in connection with the Waterfront Plan. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; SCARBOROUGH LAKEFRONT DEVELOPMENT STUDY A communication from the Task Force regarding the Scarborough Lakefront Development Study referring to the action taken by the Council of the Borough of Scarborough and the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board, was presented. Res. #26 Moved by: B.G. Harrison Seconded by: F.A. Wade -3- H -58 RESOLVED THAT: The Council of the Borough of Scarborough, the Borough of Scarborough Planning Board and the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board be advised that: (a) The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has reviewed the proposals of the Scarborough Lakefront Development Study in the light of the recommendations of the Borough of Scarborough and the 1967 Waterfront Plan, and that it concurs with the recommendations of the Borough of Scarborough as set out in the recommendation embodied in Report No. 34 of the Board of Control, adopted by Council at its meeting held on Monday, June 7, 1971, with the exception of Item 13 (1) (c), that "the major land acquisition be the acquirement of the entire Seminary property "; (b) The Authority agrees that subject to the entire Seminary property being available for purchase, it will co- operate in the acquisition of the entire property, provided that those portions of the property not required by the Authority are required for other public purposes compatible with the Waterfront Development, and that the costs of the additional property are met by the public agencies requiring the property; (c) The recommendations of the Authority for the development of the area covered by the Scarborough Lakefront Development Study are contained in the Authority's "Metropolitan Toronto and Region Waterfront Plan - 1972 - 1976 ", which will be forwarded to the Borough for its consideration and approval; (d) A meeting be arranged between the Executive Committee of this Authority and the Council of the Borough of Scarborough to discuss the possible purchase of the entire seminary property. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; MASTER PLAN - METROPOLITAN TORONTO WATERFRONT, PHASE I, ETOBICOKE SECTOR A communication from the Task Force regarding the Master Plan - Metro- politan Toronto Waterfront, Phase I, Etobicoke Sector, was presented. Res. #27 Moved by: Mrs. J.A. Gardner Seconded by: J. Carroll RESOLVED THAT: The Council of the Borough of Etobicoke, the Borough of Etobicoke Planning Board and the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board be advised that The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority: (a) Concurs in the action taken by the Borough of Etobicoke Planning Board as set out in Resolution No. 64, September 14, 1971; (b) Has drafted recommendations for the waterfront development in the area between the Humber River and the Mimico Creek to comply with the proposals of the Borough of Etobicoke in its current draft land use plan for District 7d, and are contained in the Authority's "Metropolitan Toronto and Region Waterfront Plan - 1972 - 1976" which will be forwarded to the Borough for its consideration and approval. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; H -59 -4- METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION WATERFRONT PLAN - 1972 - 1976 - A PROJECT FOR THE ACQUISITION & DEVELOPMENT OF WATERFRONT LANDS The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Waterfront Plan - 1972 to 1976 - A Project for the Acquisition and Development of Waterfront Lands, was presented and pages 1 to 36 thereof were considered in detail. A number of amendments to Section III, POLICY OF THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY RESPECTING THE PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE LAKE ONTARIO WATERFRONT IN THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO REGION, were made by Resolution. Res. #28 Moved by: A. O'Donohue Seconded by: J.R. Williams RESOLVED THAT: Clause (vi) of Section III, page 26, be amended to read: "The Authority will seek the cooperation of the municipal- ities in reviewing their plans of development for lands adjacent to the waterfront, to ensure that any development is compatible with the overall Waterfront Plan, and cooperate with the local municipalities for the protection of adjacent residential neighborhoods." Res. #29 Moved by: Seconded by: RESOLVED THAT: Clause (vii) read: Res. CARRIED; Mrs. J. Tyrrell P.B. Pickett of Section III, page 26, be amended to "The major areas of concern for the Authority in this Water- front Project will be the conservation, restoration, develop- ment and management of the waterfront resources, the protection and management of important natural habitats, the design, development and provision for the management of recreational areas, and the carrying out of a shoreline management policy, and to interpret to the municipalities and to the public through the municipalities the policies of this Project." CARRIED; Moved by: J.R. Williams Seconded by: A. O'Donohue RESOLVED THAT: Clause (viii) of Section III, page 26, be amended by inserting after the word "Authority" in line 19 - "will at the request of the local municipality ". The Resolution was NOT CARRIED; Res. #30 Moved by: A. O'Donohue Seconded by: J.R. Williams RESOLVED THAT: Section III, page 27, be amended by adding: "(xii) The Authority, through the Waterfront Advisory Board, in cooperation with the local municipalities, should hold one or more public meetings in the area where each development is proposed to receive the input of the people affected." CARRIED; Res. #31 -5- H -60 Moved by: A. O'Donohue Seconded by: Miss T. Davidson RESOLVED THAT: Section III, page 27, be amended by adding: "(xiii)The Authority, as a matter of policy, will cooperate with all agencies concerned with improving the water quality of Lake Ontario in the area under the jurisdiction of the Authority." CARRIED; Res. Moved by: J.R. Williams Seconded by: P.B. Pickett RESOLVED THAT: Section III, page 27, be amended by adding: "(xiv) The policy of the Authority with respect to the Waterfront Project is that it will not expropriate single family residential homes." The Resolution was NOT CARRIED; The following amendment was made to Section IV, DETAILS OF THE PROJECT: Res. #32 Moved by: B.G. Harrison Seconded by: J.R. Williams RESOLVED THAT: Clause (a), Purpose, page 28, be amended by adding thereto "subject to the policies set out in this Project ". CARRIED; ON MOTION, the Meeting recessed at 4:10 p.m., December 16, to meet again at the call of the Chair to complete consideration of the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Waterfront Plan - 1972 -1976 - A Project for the Acquisition and Development of Waterfront Lands. A.H. Cowling, Vice - Chairman F.L. Lunn Acting Chairman Secretary- Treasurer The Metropoilitan Mt Toronto and Regio n Conservation Authority M li N U TE S H -61 Waterfront Advisory Board Thursday- January -6 -1972 #6/71 The Waterfront Advisory Board resumed the meeting recessed December 16, 1971, at the Authority Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on Thursday, January 6, 1972, commencing at 2:00 p.m. PRESENT WERE Chairman Vice - Chairman Members Authority Vice - Chairman Gardiner, Roberts Secretary- Treasurer Director of Operations Project Director, WF Plan Engineer ABSENT WERE Members MINUTES F.A. Wade A.H. Cowling J. Carroll Miss T. Davidson Mrs. J.A. Gardner B.G. Harrison H.E. Kennedy D. Melnik W.G. Messer A. O'Donohue P.B. Pickett Mrs. J. Tyrrell J.R. Williams R.G. Henderson R. MacDougall F.L. Lunn K.G. Higgs W.A. McLean M.R. Garrett E.A. Horton Wm. E. LeGros The Minutes of Meeting #5/71 were presented. Res. #33 Moved by: A.H. Cowling Seconded by: J. Carroll RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #5/71, as presented, be adopted as if read. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION WATERFRONT PLAN - 1972 - 1976 - A PROJECT FOR THE ACQUISITION & DEVELOPMENT OF WATERFRONT LANDS The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Waterfront Plan - 1972 -1976, A Project for the Acquisition and Development of Waterfront Lands, which had been partially considered on December 16, 1971, was presented and consideration thereof continued. Res. #34 Moved by: Mrs. J.A. Gardner Seconded by: R.G. Henderson H -62 RESOLVED THAT: Section III page 27 of "Metropolitan Toronto and Region Waterfront Plan - 1972 -1976, A Project for the Acquisition and Development of Waterfront Lands, be amended as follows: (xii) "The Waterfront Advisory Board will cooperate with municipal- ities when they call public meetings to inform those within the areas of their jurisdiction to be affected by the proposed "Waterfront Plan ", and that the municipalities be so advised ". Res. #35 Moved by: P.B. Pickett Seconded by: H.E. Kennedy CARRIED; WHEREAS The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority authorized a Waterfront Task Force to prepare plans and a description of a Project to be undertaken in respect of the conservation, restoration and development and management of the natural resources of the waterfront; and WHEREAS the said Task Force has prepared a draft of the said Project for the consideration and recommendations of the Waterfront Advisory Board and the said Project has been studied, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Waterfront Plan, 1972 -1976, dated December 16, 1971, which was prepared by the Task Force and submitted this day to the Waterfront Advisory Board, be received; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Waterfront Advisory Board recom- mends the said plan, as amended, to the Executive Committee for its consideration and recommendation to the Authority, to be adopted as a Project. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY; ADJOURNMENT On Motion, the Meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m., January 6. F.A. Wade Chairman F.L. Lunn Secretary- Treasurer