Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Watershed Management Advisory Board 2007
THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #1/07 April 20, 2007 The Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #1/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village , on Friday, April 20, 2007. The Chair Richard Whitehead , called the meeting to order at 10:10 a.m.. PRESENT Gay Cowbourne Member Grant Gibson Member Pafmela Gough Member Bonnie Littley Member Andrew Schulz Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority Richard Whitehead Chair ABSENT Maria Augimeri Member Anthony Perruzza Vice Chair John Parker Member RES. #D1 /07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Pamela Gough THAT the Minutes of Meeting #6/06, held on February 9, 2007, be approved. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #D2 /07 - RESTORATION OF DAMAGE CAUSED BY HIGH STORM FLOW EVENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF TORONTO PUBLIC PARKS AND VALLEY LANDS Recommending approval to implement projects, other than Edwards Gardens, for the restoration to City of Toronto public parks and valley lands, which were affected by high storm flow events. 1 Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Andrew Schulz THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be authorized to take such action as is necessary to assist the City of Toronto with the management of projects to restore damage caused by the 2005 storm flow events, including the implementation of priority projects identified. CARRIED BACKGROUND As a result of high storm flow events of July and August 2005, extensive damage occurred to trails, pathways, parking lots, pedestrian bridges and stream banks and embankments, within the parks and valley lands managed by the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department. Over 500 sites have been identified for remedial works. The damage was attributed to streambank erosion, fallen trees, debris jams and extensive flooding. Subsequent to the storm events, City of Toronto staff retained the services of Engineered Management Systems Inc. (EMSI) to conduct emergency inspections of the trails, pathways, pedestrian bridges and parking Tots to assess the damage. Visual inspections were conducted during October, November and December of 2005. The consultants prepared a report, which included a summary of the deficiencies and estimated costs for repairs. This report was submitted to the City of Toronto staff in February 2006. Due to the urgency of conditions, corrective action was taken immediately where there was a high risk to the public safe usage of the trails and pathway network. The City of Toronto, Parks Forestry and Recreation Department has requested Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to assist them with the management and implementation of projects for the remediation of the remainder of the storm related damage identified by EMSI. RATIONALE TRCA and the City of Toronto have a long history of working together on a number of projects. Many of these projects are on TRCA -owned lands of which the city is responsible for management. TRCA is recognized by the City of Toronto as being able to provide cost - effective management of watershed related projects due to highly specialized expertise, the ability to expedite required approvals and permits, facilitate community involvement and meet tight timelines. FINANCIAL DETAILS Toronto City Council has authorized the General Manager of Parks Forestry and Recreation to enter into a sole source purchase order with TRCA in order to expedite these projects within the 2007 capital budget year for an estimated cost of approximately $2,605,000. For Information contact: Jim Berry, 416- 392 -9721 Date: April 02, 2007 2 RES. #D3/07 - STREAM RESTORATION OF WILKET CREEK, AT EDWARDS GARDENS PARK, CITY OF TORONTO Recommending approval of a project for the restoration of the storm damage of Wilket Creek at Edwards Garden Park, City of Toronto. Moved by: Seconded by: Andrew Schulz Pamela Gough THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to proceed with the repairs and restoration relating to storm damage of Wilket Creek, at Edwards Gardens Park, City of Toronto. CARRIED BACKGROUND Wilket Creek flows from the approximate area of Bathurst Street and Finch Avenue, south to Leslie Street and Eglinton Avenue, where it joins up with the west Don River. From its headwaters down to York Mills Road, the creek is buried, surfacing at a large outfall located just south of York Mills Road. The creek is subjected to tremendous wet weather flows causing degraded water quality, extensive erosion problems and frequent flooding events. As a result of high storm flow events of July and August 2005, two wooden pedestrian bridges were washed out, stream banks were eroded and pathways were damaged. The City of Toronto retained the services of Chisholm, Fleming and Associates to conduct a feasibility study for the rehabilitation and replacement of pedestrian bridges, pathways and related channel erosion control works in Edwards Gardens Park. The study area included a 400 metre section of Wilket Creek immediately south of Lawrence Avenue. A final report was prepared with a number of recommendations for stream channel and bridge rehabilitation, as well as other related works. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The project involves the following: • project planning design and approvals; • removal of sediment deposits; • replace and or repair pathways; • replace rail fencing; • stabilization of stream bank using natural channel design treatments; • install flow deflector at Lawrence Avenue box culvert; • install stream bed grade controls; • protect and stabilize pedestrian bridge abutments and footings; • removal of damaged gabion baskets; • possible mitigation of stream barriers (concrete weir and dam); and • repair to scour pool at culvert pipe outlet. Subject to the receipt of all required approvals, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) intends to begin construction in June of 2007, for a period lasting approximately 4 months. 3 RATIONALE TRCA and the City of Toronto have a long history of working together on a number of projects. Many of these projects are on TRCA lands of which the city is responsible for management. TRCA is recognized by the City of Toronto as being able to provide cost - effective management of watershed related projects due to highly specialized expertise, the ability to expedite required approvals, facilitate community involvement and meet tight time lines. FINANCIAL DETAILS Toronto City Council has authorized the General Manager of Parks, Forestry and Recreation to enter into a sole source purchase order with TRCA in order to expedite and complete this project within the 2007 capital budget year for an estimated cost of approximately $1,400,000. Report prepared by: Jim Berry, 416- 392 -9721 For Information contact: Jim Berry, 416- 392 -9721 Date: March 30, 2007 Attachments: 1 4 Attachment 1 a i7 On ' � -17 asd , 1t -- .. ark C.icats i +.�Ttalwta�rci " ` Ci � Park 0• 6 t J .j,y 'J 4,4.5rif r 7':' lyr0o L L7tlraiaira7 �y, 4t,,, F i r ris,:c,. I' � dp 7� Q- Royal Oak D'(",. d'd D !; Salon'' 5 RES. #D4/07 - CN RAIL EMBANKMENT IN CHARLES SAURIOL CONSERVATION RESERVE EROSION CONTROL PROJECT Initiation of the Class Environmental Assessment process for the CN Rail Embankment at Charles Sauriol Conservation Reserve Erosion Control Project, City of Toronto, under the "City of Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project ". Moved by: Seconded by: Andrew Schulz Pamela Gough THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to commence a Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) for the CN Rail Embankment in Charles Sauriol Conservation Reserve, City of Toronto, under the "City of Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project "; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to proceed with the implementation of remedial works, pending approval of the Class EA and the receipt of all necessary approvals, if required. CARRIED BACKGROUND The East Don River runs relatively parallel to the Don Valley Parkway throught the reach of Lawrence Avenue in the north to the CP Rail overpass in the south. Within this area, the upper channel is mainly hardened in order to protect the parkway, causing increased flow velocity through the lower segment of the reach. There are a number of water control structures located within this reach, including a 150 metre section of concrete slab channelization, an armourstone revetment, and a concrete weir. There is also a sanitary sewer crossing in the area. Each of these structures are in varying degrees of disrepair and will be addressed individually. The primary area of concern, referred to as Mile 9.1 by CN Rail, is located on the west bank of the East Don River directly downstream of the hardened section of the channel and within this area there are two large erosion sites that have been documented and monitored extensively since 2005. Monthly monitoring of the two erosion sites was carried out by TRCA staff from December of 2005 to December of 2006. Further to this, in order to determine the level of urgency for erosion control works required at these sites, TRCA retained the services of Jacques Whitford Environment Limited in July of 2006, to assess the current level of risk to the stability of the existing CN tracks and embankment from riverbank erosion and to provide rationale for the timing of remedial works based on the level of risk identified. Based on the results of the investigation, Jacques Whitford recommended that consideration be given to conducting remedial works at Erosion Site 1 within the next two to three years, while works should be considered at Erosion Site 2 within the next year or two. 6 As the result of these findings staff is preparing to initiate a Class EA in order to develop and implement erosion control works at this location, and proposes to carry out the planning and design phases of the project under the Class Environmental Assessment forRemedialFlood and Erosion Control Projects (2002). RATI ONALE The Class EA approach is required for these projects by the Province of Ontario to ensure a suitable means for the planning of remedial flood and erosion control projects. The planning and design process of a Class EA project is illustrated below: INITIATE CLASS EA PUBLISH NOTICE OF INTENT 4 ESTABLISH COMMUNITY LIAISON COMMITTEE 1 PREPARE BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE REMEDIAL MEASURES & SELECT PREFERRED MEASURE CONDUCT DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MPACT 1 CAN ALL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BE Yes AVOIDED, MITIGATED OR COMPENSATED? UNCERTAIN No PREPARE PROJECT PLAN PROVIDE NOTICE OF FILING TO INTERESTED PARTIES (Appendix E) PREPARE AND FILE NOTICE OF ADDENDUM AS NECESSARY TO ADDRESS COMMENTS (Appendix E) PREPARE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT ES-F1) 1 ARE IMPACTS DEEMED ACCEPTABLE? 1 Yes PUBLISH NOTICE OF FILING FOR REVIEW (Append EI 1 ARE ALL CONCERNS ADDRESSED, (Nn Part II Order Requests) No REPARE INDIVIDUAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OR REASSESS PROGRAM OPTION ISee Figure 1A) 1 Yes PROJECT APPROVED UNDER EA ACT PROVIDE NOTICE OF PROJECT APPROVAL & PROCEED TO CONSTRUCTION (see Figure 1C) Part 11 Order MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT I REVIEWS PART II ORDER REQUEST 1 Request Denied FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding has been identified within the 2007 City of Toronto Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Project budget. 7 TRCA will be requesting funding assistance or in kind contributions from CN Rail prior to implimenting works. Report prepared by: Patricia Newland, 416- 392 -9690 For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416- 392 -9690 Date: March 30, 2007 Attachments: 1 8 Attachment 1 ,5poSfj_ O- rauacnrr,• ''port! .Ctr a r :z6 °o� anoke ,. is Rff _, ..�pn,: r W� % ny QI �Jtgv�Y lar / I �� r��i{'il Cir. r '*'° e__.,., -..� 6∎)), it w] - gyp xy^ r1 �Y, 9rrctorre Terracn.� 4 Cs'; c�4� wyw C'Y .} _e s6. t lo tip. Dr. Purls Kim./ i '- { J �•. Swgeney C. Dr icti9 a - load P- V +z Rd v tK ,rye . t ik'Li• Ci lopmeS6 Q. :0rladkvr: 00. St A Charts $iur1r,P Ce cwun'ClC,rf .4+f. a Wcomore•� Wyrifor+d t:Cr L t�..r P tcarrn vo.pAry,ofe Draycott Dr . ak r .. : ^;n..,_' .Tur'tnra lwf rastor� avant. o� stq „k , r{ yafkrn cr Or Trophy Dr f 9 RES. #D5/07 - HIGHWAY 10 AND STEELES AVENUE EROSION CONTROL MAINTENANCE PROJECT To perform major maintenance on an erosion control structure referred to as the Highway 10 and Steeles Avenue Erosion Control Structure, City of Brampton, under the Regional Municipality of Peel Climate Change Enhancement Projects - 2007. Moved by: Seconded by: Pamela Gough Grant Gibson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT subject to the receipt of all required approvals staff be directed to commence major maintenance on the Highway 10 and Steeles Avenue Erosion Control Structure, City of Brampton. CARRIED BACKGROUND Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff has been annually monitoring the erosion control structures located within the Regional Municipality of Peel since 2005. The structure, called the Highway 10 and Steeles Avenue Erosion Control Structure, has been documented as "at risk of failure" since the initial inspections occurred in 2005. The structure was built on TRCA land by TRCA in 1972. The structure is an 85 m long, 4 m high, gabion basket retaining wall located within Kiwanis Memorial Park in the City of Brampton. The structure is protecting residential property at the top of the slope from lower bank scour and slumping. There is a large drainage outfall located at the upstream end of the structure, which appears to be contributing to the failure of the retaining wall. The structure features degradation of the wire and discharge of contents into the water course, indicating that further slumping and possible complete collapse of the retaining wall is inevitable. When the structures fails, it will take out a significant portion of the property at the top of the slope, create risk to the parkland and people visiting the park, as well as causing a very large obstruction in the watercourse through this section of Etobicoke Creek, which could potentially cause problems with the normal conveyance of flow through the area. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Due to the tendency of gabion baskets to degrade at the water /land interface, staff is recommending that the entire structure be removed and replaced with a new structure of armourstone or other more suitable materials. The following steps will be followed to expedite the implementation of this major maintenance project. 1. survey (Topographic and Archaeological); 2. design planning; 3. submission for, and receipt of, necessary approvals (Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Navigable Waters Protection Act, Ministry of Natural Resources); 4. construction of replacement structure: • construct crossing and other site preparation; • remove existing structure as per design instructions; 10 • replace with armourstone wall or other suitable materials as per design; • site cleanup and restoration; 5. perform post construction monitoring to ensure effectiveness of design /installation. This undertaking will enhance the stability of the slope and ensure ongoing protection to life and property. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding of $100,000 has been identified for this project in the 2007 Regional Municipality of Peel Climate Change Enhancement Projects budget. Report prepared by: Patricia Newland, 416- 392 -9690 For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416- 392 -9690 Date: April 02, 2007 Attachments: 1 11 Attachment 1 E,r I ark •_y_; Brampton. { + Cerrrar ial Ymc i�j . Vivaldi Fracas G �r % St ra bins—Ca � �ry,aa0n �acli i3T� ,�i 11(fY I- _ i U� �L' _ ❑�! tttrk- r .- —_ a s Charolat G to,r .0 circuit I E'�' Eigrl Dr WO-JGdsi i wS Rang b Rp3a Sat n yghtdri CI r Perk rn19 Priarat #S`— Hr]5 ;teeles Air Kantor py.rk agetisriaolc r t C Ointatfr t ljet [Shoppers Wand Mari is rra Xa p e of Villa 1 -� faPaigra; g eu o • p. ji P, y ;Cr Lacr 4rp ziturawe ' 110 Wail wew eat --- tees - �- rierl & Steeias • Pd;r 799G 12 RES. #D6/07 - CONSTRUCTION OF EMERGENCY EROSION CONTROL WORKS Highland Creek at Morningside Avenue. Approval of the implementation of the final design for proposed channel alterations, including associated pedestrian trail reconstruction. Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Grant Gibson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff proceed with the implementation of proposed emergency erosion control works on Highland Creek at Morningside Avenue for the total estimated cost of $550,000. CARRIED BACKGROUND In January 2005, the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department identified an eroding pathway in Morningside Park immediately east of the Morningside Avenue Bridge to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff. Following a site inspection a detailed survey was carried out by TRCA staff on February 7, 2005, at which time an exposed watermain was discovered in the creek bed below the eroded section of the pathway. TRCA staff notified the City of Toronto Works Department (now Toronto Water) of the problem and informed them that the bank stabilization works to protect the pathway would not be carried out until the exposed watermain was addressed. In addition, staff notified Hydro One of an existing hydro pole at risk, located near the top of bank on the north side of Highland Creek east of Morningside Avenue. Hydro One subsequently relocated the pole. In the interim, TRCA continued ongoing site monitoring, completed the final detailed design and obtained approvals to proceed with the implementation of the bank stabilization work, including reinstatement of the pedestrian trail. Implementation was delayed pending completion of required protection of the exposed watermain by the City of Toronto. The severe flood event of August 19, 2005, and subsequent events resulted in a significant amount of additional damage at the site. In addition to advancing the erosion of the pathway and further exposing the watermain, extensive erosion occurred around a Morningside Avenue bridge pier and a concrete - encased Bell Canada conduit upstream of the bridge became exposed in the creek. In the months following the flood event, multiple inspections of the site were carried out by various departments within the City of Toronto (Transportation, Toronto Water and Parks), who collectively determined that restoration works should be carried out as a single undertaking. In April 2006, Toronto Water requested that TRCA serve as project manager for the restoration works at the site. Due to the extensive damage to the infrastructure at this site, City of Toronto staff also declared the restoration works under the City of Toronto's Emergency Protocol. Although the City of Toronto remains the proponent for the works, TRCA is responsible for managing the services of the consultant, Parish Geomorphic, for the development of the final design, securing all approvals, permits and implementing the restorative works. 13 Protection of the exposed Bell Canada conduit and temporary channel realignment was recently completed by R &M Construction on behalf of Bell Canada. In addition, the City of Toronto is presently tendering for the protection of the exposed south bridge pier, which is tentatively scheduled to be completed by the end of April, 2007. Following completion of the bridge works, TRCA will commence implementation of the final design for the remainder of the channel protection, pending receipt of all approvals. RATIONALE The purpose of this work is to restore approximately a 200 metre section of the Highland Creek from the existing weir located 90 metres upstream of the Morningside Avenue bridge to a location of approximately 100 metres downstream of the bridge crossing. In addition, work will include reconstruction of a section of damaged asphalt pedestrian trail located on the north bank of the Highland Creek east of the Morningside Avenue bridge. The final detailed design, completed by Parish Geomorphic in consultation with the City of Toronto and TRCA staff will be implemented and managed by the TRCA Restoration Services staff on behalf of the City of Toronto. Work is expected to be completed by the end of August, 2007 assuming commencement of construction activities at the end of April. FINANCIAL DETAILS TRCA previously committed $100,000 from our capital erosion budget towards the bank stabilization component within account code 155 -01. This amount will be applied to the total cost of the restoration works. The remaining portion of the cost will be 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto. Report prepared by: Mark Preston, 416 - 392 -9722 For Information contact: Mark Preston, 416- 392 -9722 Date: April 02, 2007 Attachments: 1 14 Attachment 1 QUniveth ivrAittari to at Scarborough • = 11 O. WWII • •M 'I 5.,... ...., . 14. • tfl, in >, V wading Gt CI Cerek 'E 'de Park r_a (774 Beath )1.10n Avevv_17i•Aza 00-111 y 47.1 Kings-- it • " - Colonel 01, '=77, I _I And ith muirm flee rI ci YL:•ifrx5.):.• ..1,. v etvd "...4 7 m 0Aw•;10.° T n To.....,• •c•9 15 RES. #D7/07 - JEFFERSON'S FOREST MANAGEMENT TRACT Advisory Committee. Initiation of the Jefferson's Forest Management Tract Advisory Committee Moved by: Seconded by: Pamela Gough Grant Gibson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff be directed to establish an advisory committee, which would include members of the Humber Watershed Alliance, Rouge Park Alliance, interested community groups, business representatives, community residents, agency staff, municipal staff and area councillors, to assist with the development of the Jefferson's Forest Management Plan and to facilitate the opportunity for public input; AND FURTHER THAT the management plan be brought to the Authority for approval once completed. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Jefferson's Forest Management Tract (JFMT) is approximately 180 hectares of land that straddles the boundary between the Humber River and Rouge River watersheds. It is located between Bethesda Sideroad and Stouffville Road to the north and south, and between Bayview Avenue and Leslie Street to the east and west. The Lake St. George Field Centre is immediately north of the JFMT, and the Oak Ridges Moraine Corridor Park is to the west. The JFMT is located in the Town of Richmond Hill, in the Region of York. JFMT consists of forest and successional forest areas, wetlands and meadows. It provides quality habitat in both the Humber River and Rouge River watersheds, as evidenced by the variety of flora and fauna species of regional concern. The property is subject to several provincial plans and policies, including the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan. Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) and Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSIs) also exist on the site. The JFMT provides the opportunity for passive, year -round public use. The property is heavily used by the public currently, with both authorized and unauthorized uses. There is evidence that hikers, mountain bikers, dirt bikers, all terrain vehicles (ATV's), snowmobiles and 4 -wheel drive vehicles are using the property. In connection with the funding for the purchase of the Bayview Oakridges Estates Inc property, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) received funding from the Town of Richmond Hill, the Region of York, the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation, the City of Toronto and The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto in the amount of $40,000 to develop a management plan for the Jefferson's Forest complex. To develop the management plan, staff will use the TRCA model process that has been successfully used at other TRCA properties. The four phases of work will include: 16 Phase 1 - estimated completion fall 2007: • establishment of a technical committee; • site protection and securement plan. Phase 2 - estimated completion winter 2007/2008: • natural and cultural heritage inventories of the property; • establishment of an advisory committee; • develop plan vision, goals and objectives; • complete management plan background report for the property; • public consultation. Phase 3 - estimated completion summer 2008: • develop draft management zones for the property; • draft management recommendations; • public consultation. Phase 4 - estimated completion December 2008: • finalize management zones; • finalize management recommendations; • public information session. RATIONALE It is an appropriate time to complete a management plan for the property, as TRCA has received funding to develop a plan and there is no current plan in place. The forest is encountering many stresses with recent and proposed urban development. In addition, with the projected population growth in the Town of Richmond Hill and the Region of York, the Jefferson's Forest Management Tract will likely become an even more popular environmental and outdoor recreation area, requiring a plan that can address future public use demands and enhanced environmental protection. The plan will integrate the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan that was recently completed and will integrate with implementation initiatives. Furthermore, it is necessary to prepare a comprehensive and integrated management plan for the property that can respond to the changes in the availability of public funds and evolving concepts in conservation and sustainability, and move TRCA towards its goal for The Living City - a vision for healthy communities based on a healthy ecosystem. The management plan will complement a number of TRCA initiatives, including: • The Living City vision; • Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy; • Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber; • Rouge Park North Management Plan. The goal of the Jefferson's Forest Management Tract Management Plan process will be to protect, conserve and manage the property within an ecosystem framework, and in consultation with the community ensuring watershed health, public enjoyment and environmental sustainability. 17 Staff has recommended the establishment of an advisory committee to provide an integrated approach to the development of the management plan. The committee will assist with determining the management zones and management recommendations, and provide direction and comment on the public use development and restoration plans. TRCA will select and invite agency and community representatives to be members of the advisory committee for the duration of the project. Suggested advisory committee representatives could include: • TRCA - Authority Member and staff; • Town of Richmond Hill - Councillor and staff; • Region of York - Councillor and staff; • Rouge Park Alliance - Member and staff; • Ministry of Natural Resources; • Richmond Hill Naturalists; • Citizens Environment Watch; • Humber Watershed Alliance; • Ontario Realty Corporation; • Humber Valley Heritage Trail Association; • Oak Ridges Moraine Trail Association; • Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation; • Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust; • Save the Oak Ridges Moraine; • Oak Ridges Friends of the Environment; • Diamond Back Golf Course; • User groups, including mountain bikers; • Local ratepayers groups; • Representatives from local schools and school boards; • Major area landowners, including developers; • Community residents; and, • Local business representatives. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE IN 2007 • Phase 1; • establishment of a technical committee; • site protection and securement plan; • Phase 2; • develop a project Terms of Reference, which will include the scope of work responsibilities and projected timelines; • complete background report, including natural and cultural heritage inventories; • establishment of an advisory committee; • public consultation. It is anticipated that the management plan will be completed by December 2008 and brought back to the Authority for approval. 18 FINANCIAL DETAILS Provision for the development of a management plan for the Jefferson's Forest Management Tract has been included in TRCA's 2007 Capital Budget under account 408 -38. Report prepared by: April Mathes, extension 5320 For Information contact: Mike Bender, extension 5287 or April Mathes, extension 5320 Date: March 26, 2007 RES. #D8/07 - Moved by: Seconded by: GLEN MAJOR FOREST AND WALKER WOODS STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE Terms of Reference. Approval of Terms of Reference for the Glen Major forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. Bonnie Littley Pamela Gough THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Terms of Reference for the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee be approved; AND FURTHER THAT all members of the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee and the Duffins and Carruthers Watershed Resource Group be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #6/03, held on July 25, 2003, Resolution #A158/03 was approved, in part, as follows: THAT the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties, dated June 2003, as attached, be approved;... One of the key recommendations of the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan was the development of a stewardship committee to assist with the implementation of the management plan. The role of the committee should include: • reviewing all proposed public uses and related activities for the property; • working with TRCA in raising funds to implement site development, maintenance, environmental protection and restoration activities. Upon completion of the plan, TRCA staff worked with interested community members and established a stewardship committee for the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods properties, including the Brock tract, Dagmar lands and Wilder Forest and Wildlife Area. Altogether these lands total more than 1,500 hectares of TRCA -owned land on the Oak Ridges Moraine. 19 The stewardship committee consists of approximately 20 -30 members, and includes trail captains, area landowners, representatives from user groups (including hiking, biking and equestrian), and representatives from a variety of groups and agencies, including municipalities, the Oak Ridges Trail Association and the Durham Conservation Association among others. These members have been working actively for the last two years, but the committee has not yet been formalized. The adoption of the Terms of Reference will assist in formalizing the committee's mandate and organization. RATIONALE Implementation of the Duffns Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties (2003), A Watershed Plan for Duffins and Carruthers Creek2003 and the Fisheries Management Plan for Duffns Creek and Carruthers Creek (2004) will continue to be assisted by the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods (GMWW) Stewardship Committee. They will also continue to provide a forum for public input and help TRCA determine priority implementation actions as set forth in the aforementioned plans. Area landowners, user group representatives, community groups and organizations compose the GMWW Stewardship Committee. User group representatives are essential in communicating with their respective communities to educate and engage them in positive land use practices for their activities, as well as presenting the concerns and needs of those communities back to the stewardship committee. This approach is instrumental in creating an inclusive atmosphere at the stewardship committee, has resulted in improved user relations on the property and has successfully raised plan implementation funds. Successful collaboration can benefit a significant natural area and the GMWW Stewardship Committee is an excellent example of such success. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The GMWW Stewardship Committee will: • Make recommendations regarding the prioritization and implementation of the Duffns Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties, A Watershed Plan for Duffns Creek and Carruthers Creek and the Fisheries Management Plan for Duffns Creek and Carruthers Creek(2004). The recommendations must be consistent with the objectives of TRCA and must assist TRCA in reaching prescribed targets as set forth in the watershed plan. • Make recommendations to TRCA on modifications or updates to the Duffns Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties. • Identify and enhance relationships with the Glen Major and surrounding area communities through the development of public awareness and stewardship programs. • Develop and establish communications links with the community and the municipality. • Participate in activities such as: • natural area enhancements including tree plantings and wetland buffers; • trail construction and maintenance; • identification and management of non - native, invasive species; • public use and natural heritage monitoring; and • property cleanup events. • Undertake other activities which support the management plan and TRCA 20 Specific projects that the GMWW Stewardship Committee will be involved with in 2008 include: • trail development and restoration; • habitat creation through site rehabilitation; • invasive species management. FINANCIAL DETAILS TRCA will provide a staff contact to act as a liaison between TRCA and the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. The TRCA liaison will also facilitate any technical reviews or formal approvals that are required before commencement of a project. Project support has been budgeted as part of management plan implementation under account 408 -96. Report prepared by: April Mathes, extension 5320 For information contact: Mike Bender, extension 5287 or April Mathes, extension 5320 Date: March 30, 2007 Attachments: 1 21 Attachment 1 Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee TERMS OF REFERENCE 1 INTRODUCTION In 1999, Toronto and Region Conservation (TRCA) initiated the preparation of a management plan for a complex of properties in the Duffins Creek watershed, including Glen Major Resource Management Tract, Walker Woods Tract, Goodwood Resource Management Tract, Secord Forest and Wildlife Area, Clubine Agreement Forest, the Former Timber Brother Gravel Pit and the Claremont Field Centre. TRCA worked in partnership with Durham Region, the Township of Uxbridge, the City of Pickering, the Ontario Heritage Trust, the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan Advisory Committee and the community to prepare the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties. At Authority Meeting #6/03, held on July 25, 2003, Resolution #A158/03 was approved, in part, as follows: THAT the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties, dated June 2003, as attached, be approved; One of the key recommendations of the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan was the development of two stewardship committees, one for the East Duffins Creek and one for the West Duffins Creek, to assist with the implementation of the management plan. The committees should "assist with the review of all proposed public uses and related activities for the property.... Assist with all specific aspects such as trail, education and communications... assist TRCA in raising funds to implement site development, maintenance, environmental protection and restoration activities." 2 GLEN MAJOR FOREST AND WALKER WOODS The Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods property complex is more than 1,500 hectares composed of the Glen Major Resource Management Tract at 1,081 hectares, the Walker Woods Tract at 429 hectares and the former Timber Brothers gravel pit at 38 hectares. These lands are located in the headwaters of the Duffins Creek watershed within the Township of Uxbridge. TRCA owns all of the lands with the exception of 72 hectares in the Glen Major Resource Management Tract, which is owned by Ontario Heritage Trust and managed by TRCA. The properties are situated within the southern portion of the Great Lakes -St Lawrence floristic region, which is composed of mixed coniferous - deciduous forest. In addition, the properties stretch across the Oak Ridges Moraine physiographic region, which is made up of sand and gravel soils and is characterized by rolling hills, kames and kettles. The lands also contain groundwater discharge areas in the form of springs, seeps and marshy areas that support high quality cold water fish habitat. 22 The Duffins headwater properties are some of the most naturally diverse in the TRCA jurisdiction, supporting over 120 different vegetation communities, 573 vascular plant species and 107 different fauna species. With respect to conservation status, over 50 vegetation communities, 150 flora species and 51 fauna species are considered to be of concern within the TRCA jurisdiction. The natural habitats range from mature, organic coniferous swamps, to near -old growth upland deciduous and mixed forests, conifer plantations, and dry, open, prairie -like communities with complexes of sand barrens. The properties are also significant for their representative contiguous natural cover and extensive interior forest conditions within the TRCA jurisdiction. The Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods properties contain an Environmentally Sensitive Area ( #111, the Uxbridge Forest Kames), Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (Earth Sciences - Uxbridge Forest Kames, Candidate Life Sciences - Uxbridge - Glen Major Forests) and Provincially Significant Wetlands (Glen Major Wetland Complex). 3 MANAGEMENT PLAN In 1999, TRCA initiated the preparation of a management plan for the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods properties (GMWW). As a part of the process for developing the plan, TRCA prepared the Phase 1 Reference Document In Preparation ofa Management Plan for Goodwood, Secord, Clubine, Walker Woods, Glen Major, Timber Brothers, and Claremont, dated February 2000, that details the current knowledge about the properties. This report was reviewed by TRCA staff and the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan Advisory Committee. The Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties contains the following: • a brief description of the property and the management planning process; • vision, goals, objectives and principles; • management zone delineation; • management recommendations; • concept plans; • trail plans; and • implementation guidelines. The following vision statement was developed for TRCA properties in the Duffins Creek Headwaters, and should guide all current and future actions. 23 The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority properties in the Duffins Creek Headwaters, which contain diverse ecosystems, abundant wildlife and spectacular vistas, will become a model for private and public land stewardship. The various TRCA properties will be integrated and expanded through donations, land purchases, conservation easements and planning incentives to protect, conserve and improve ecological integrity. The properties will be carefully managed and monitored to ensure susta inability and adherence to conservation principles. Appropriate public use and environmental awareness will be promoted and managed with a balanced approach. The Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties will guide GMWW for the next 25 years, with regular reviews and updates conducted every five to seven years. Through diligent implementation of this plan, GMWW will be further enhanced as a valuable environmental, recreational and educational resource for residents of the Greater Toronto Area. 4 COMMUNITY STEWARDSHIP COMMITTEE The Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee will work with TRCA to implement the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties and the relevant objectives that are set out in the watershed plan for the Duffins and Carruthers Creek watersheds. The following details the composition of the committee, basic operating procedures and responsibilities. 4.1 lUMAND4 TE The Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee will assist TRCA: in implementing the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties, A Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek and the Fisheries Management Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek, provide a forum for public input; and help TRCA determine priority implementation actions as set forth in the plan. In addition, the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee will participate in partnership projects led by Durham Region, the Township of Uxbridge and the City of Pickering. The GMWW Stewardship Committee will: • Make recommendations regarding the prioritization and implementation of the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties, A Watershed Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek and the Fisheries Management Plan for Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek. The recommendations must be consistent with the objectives of TRCA and must assist TRCA in reaching prescribed targets as set forth in the watershed plan • Make recommendations to TRCA on modifications or updates to the Duffins Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties. • Identify and enhance relationships with the Glen Major and surrounding area communities through the development of public awareness and stewardship programs. 24 • Develop and establish communications links with the community and the municipality. • Participate in activities such as: • natural area enhancements such as tree plantings and wetland buffers; • trail construction and maintenance; • identification and management of non - native, invasive species; • public use and natural heritage monitoring; and • property cleanup events. • Undertake other activities which support the management plan and TRCA. 4.2 MEMBERSHIP Membership will be open to any interested party or individual committed to the protection of the natural environment. Membership will be based on individual or agency interest and with a commitment to the mandate of the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. Interviews of potential members at large may be undertaken if there is interest beyond the maximum membership numbers. Participation will be voluntary and without compensation. All stewardship committee meetings are open to the public. 4.2.1 GROUP AND AGENCY REPRESENTATIVES The membership of the GMWW Stewardship Committee will be as follows: • Trail captains for all of the zones in GMWW (8). • Members at large, including representatives for each of the major user groups (8): • bicycling; • equestrian; • hiking. • Group or agency representation (see list below). Each of the above will be a voting member. It is anticipated that decisions will be made by consensus of the members present. Representatives of agencies and user groups are expected to represent the interests of their organizations or communities to the best of their abilities. Invitations to members of the public to join will be made to fill the members -at -large positions. TRCA shall have the authority to designate or remove members of the stewardship committee. The GMWW Stewardship Committee members may designate an alternate to ensure attendance and representation at meetings. Members who do not wish to attend meetings cannot vote by proxy. 25 The following groups and agencies have been, or will be, invited by TRCA to join, or are currently members of the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee and may constitute voting members (see structure): • TRCA Chair (Ex- officio); • Durham Region staff; • Township of Uxbridge staff; • City of Pickering staff • Elected officials representing Durham Region, the Township of Uxbridge and the City of Pickering; • Local members of provincial and federal parliament; • Ontario Heritage Trust; • Durham Conservation Association; • Oak Ridges Trail Association; • Mountain bicycling community, currently represented by the Durham Mountain Bicycling Association and Chico Racing; • Equestrian community, currently represented by the Uxbridge Horsemen's Association; • Uxbridge Watershed Committee; • Uxbridge Naturally • Duffins Creek Watershed Specialist 4.2.3 TRCA STAFF The TRCA staff liaison will attend all Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee meetings. In addition, TRCA technical staff will be invited to attend the meetings, as the agenda requires. 4.3 GROUP ORGAN /Z4 T /ON The purpose of full stewardship committee meetings shall be to inform committee members on recent developments, hear and comment on actions taken by the Executive Committee and sub - committees, seek input on issues, take suggestions on new initiatives, and host presentations and speakers on relevant issues. The Chair will be elected by the voting members of the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. The Chair should have at least one year experience as a member of the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. It is preferred that the Chair be a member of the public and not a representative from an agency. The stewardship committee will also elect a Vice Chair and a Secretary. All other representatives on the Executive Committee (see below) will be designated by their respective user groups or the stewardship committee as a whole. TRCA staff will not stand for the positions of Chair or Vice Chair. 26 Elections for the Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary positions will take place on alternate years. The Vice Chair will not be considered an automatic successor for the Chair. Responsibilities of the Chair include chairing the stewardship committee meetings and setting the agenda. The Vice Chair will be responsible for the Chair's tasks in absence of the Chair. The Secretary is responsible for recording minutes of the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee meetings. Due to the large size of the stewardship committee, an Executive Committee shall be formed. The Executive Committee will be composed of up to eight members and shall include, at a minimum, the Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary and one representative from each of the major user groups. The executive committee will meet regularly and will be authorized to carry out the mandate of the stewardship committee. Their duties will include researching, developing solutions and taking actions on issues that are before the stewardship committee. The Executive Committee may invite experts in as needed. The Executive Committee may also be assembled as needed to address issues that are time - sensitive or that do not require input from the entire stewardship committee. All decisions that are made by the Executive Committee will be communicated to the stewardship committee. 4.4 TERM LENGTH Membership includes a two year commitment to the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. An individual's term can be renewed for up to five consecutive terms, resulting in a maximum service of ten consecutive years. This will be consistent with review and update of the Duffns Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties as prescribed in the management plan. The appointment of the Chair shall be for two years. The Chair shall be eligible for re- appointment. 4.5 RULES OF CONDUCT The Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee will follow TRCA's Rules of Conduct as adopted by Resolution #34 at Authority Meeting #2/86, held on March 21, 1986, and as amended periodically. The Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee is not a formal commenting body of TRCA. The group will develop and make recommendations to TRCA that assist with the development and implementation of the Duffns Creek Headwaters Management Plan for TRCA Properties and A Watershed Plan for Duffns Creek and Carruthers Creek TRCA staff will advise the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee of TRCA projects planned or undertaken within the area of GMWW, and of major planning initiatives or projects of other agencies where TRCA may be a commenting or permitting body. 27 4.5.1 ISSUE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES All issues will be resolved through agreement by consensus of the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. However, if an issue cannot be resolved, there will be a majority vote taken. TRCA is responsible for ultimate decision - making and, where disagreement occurs, stewardship committee members are welcome to make delegations to TRCA's boards. 4.5.2 MEETING FREQUENCY The Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee will meet a minimum of four times per year. Meetings shall only be scheduled when there is sufficient business to justify the meeting. A meeting may be cancelled on the authority of the Chair for cause (e.g. a major snowstorm). The date of the next meeting should be set at each meeting, or at the call of the Chair. The Executive Committee will meet a minimum of four times per year, with more regular meetings being held as needed. The Executive Committee may meet or make decisions via phone or electronic mail as needed, with all decisions being communicated back to the stewardship committee. 4.6 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT TRCA will provide administrative support in the operation of the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee to the Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary. TRCA will provide a staff contact to act as a liaison between TRCA and the Glen Major Forest and Walker Woods Stewardship Committee. The TRCA liaison will also facilitate any technical reviews or formal approvals that are required before commencement of a project. Project support will be dependent on the limits of TRCA resources. 4.7 COMPENSA T /ON Committee members shall receive no financial compensation. If appropriate, members reasonable 'out of pocket' expenses may be reimbursed solely at the discretion of TRCA. 28 RES. #D9/07 - FULFILMENT OF OAK RIDGES MORAINE CONSERVATION PLAN WATERSHED PLANNING REQUIREMENTS Approval of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan conformity assessments and approval to use the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessments (Attachments 1, 2 and 3) in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine. Moved by: Seconded by: Pamela Gough Grant Gibson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the conformity assessment for the Duffins Creek Watershed Plan in Attachment 1 and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be deemed to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP; 2002) and be approved for use in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine in the Duffins Creek watershed; THAT the conformity assessment for the Rouge River Watershed Plan in Attachment 2 and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be deemed to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP; 2002) and be approved for use on an interim basis in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine in the Rouge River watershed until such time as a final watershed plan is brought back to the Authority for approval; THAT the conformity assessment for the Don River Watershed Plan in Attachment 3 and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be deemed to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP; 2002) and be approved for use on an interim basis in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine in the Don River watershed until such time as a final watershed plan is brought back to the Authority for approval; THAT staff report back to the Authority in June 2007 on the conformity assessment for the Humber River Watershed Plan; THAT staff be directed to continue to work toward the timely completion of watershed planning documents for the Rouge, Don and Humber River watersheds including adequate opportunities for public and stakeholder consultation; THAT staff work with watershed municipalities to coordinate ongoing planning initiatives, including growth planning and source water protection planning, with the finalization of watershed plans; THAT staff report back at the earliest possible opportunity on the completion of each of the remaining watershed plans and with a progress report in September 2007; 29 AND FURTHER THAT the regional and local watershed municipalities and the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND ORMCP Watershed Planning Requirements The watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Act and sections 24 and 25 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) require municipalities to: • Initiate the preparation of watershed plans by April 22, 2003 for each watershed, whose streams originate on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM); • Incorporate the watershed plan's requirements into the municipal official plan; and • Ensure all major development commenced on, or after, April 23, 2007 conforms with the completed watershed plan, otherwise the major development (i.e. 4 lots or greater; 500 m 2 (5000 ft2 ) or greater; or major recreational use) cannot be approved. Late in 2006, regional municipal staff sought clarification from the province regarding the approval process for 'completed' watershed plans, with respect to the April 23, 2007 deadline. Correspondence from staff at the Ministry of the Environment indicated that the province has no intent of reviewing final watershed plans and that the municipalities are responsible for determining when a watershed plan is completed. Through discussions among regional and conservation authority staff, regional staff has asked that conservation authority boards review and endorse the completed watershed plans and confirm fulfilment of the ORMCP, as one step in the process of confirming that overall requirements of the ORMCP have been satisfied. Regional staff will have the option of taking full reports on the final watershed plans to their committees and councils in fall 2007, once they can report on the plans' implications in relation to growth planning and other major initiatives. The regional municipalities of Peel and York have requested the province grant a one year extension of the ORMCP's implied deadline for the completion of watersheds plans, on the basis that the province's technical guidelines supporting the ORMCP have not yet been finalized and the municipalities need additional time to understand the watershed plan's implications in relation to provincial growth planning and other major initiatives that have emerged since the ORMCP was introduced. Similarly, the Regional Municipality of Durham has requested a two year extension. At the time of writing, the province had not yet responded to the regions, and therefore staff is taking a conservative approach by preparing this report on the assumption that the province will not grant an extension. A common 'conformity assessment' form was developed by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff, in cooperation with regional staff and staff from neighbouring conservation authorities for use in summarizing how each watershed plan addresses the ORMCP requirements. This form is used as the basis for this report. Watershed P lanning Work program Shortly after the release of the ORMCP, the regional municipalities of Peel, York and Durham expressed interest in working with TRCA on the fulfilment of the ORMCP's watershed planning requirements, in recognition of long- established partnership in watershed management. 30 There are four watersheds draining the Oak Ridges Moraine in TRCA's jurisdiction: Humber River, Don River, Rouge River and Duffins Creek. A state of the art watershed plan for the Duffins Creek watershed was just completed as the ORMCP was released and, following review by TRCA and Regional Municipality of Durham staff, was considered to provide adequate direction to meet the intent of the ORMCP. Watershed management strategies had previously been prepared for the Rouge River (MTRCA, 1990), Don River (TRCA, 1994), and Humber River (TRCA, 1997), and therefore watershed planning activities were deemed to have been initiated and ongoing for these watersheds, as per the ORMCP requirement. However, updates were needed to reflect new information and fill gaps. The Regional Municipality of York, Regional Municipality of Peel and City of Toronto entered into five year capital work programs with TRCA in 2003 to develop updated plans for the Humber, Don and Rouge River watersheds, particularly with an aim to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the ORMCP. At Authority Meeting #7/03, held on September 26, 2003, Resolution #A196/03, regarding an overall workplan and schedule for this work, was approved as follows: THAT the Integrated Watershed Planning Process described in Part 1 of the Workplan to Fulfil the Watershed Planning Requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan ( ORMCP) Regulation (O. Reg. 140/02) be used to guide the preparation of work plans and budgets for individual watershed plans throughout the TRCA jurisdiction, and particularly for those watersheds draining the Oak Ridges Moraine; THAT staffbe directed to undertake the preparation of watershed plans, as per the planning schedule set out in this report, in cooperation with our watershed partners. This 'generic' workplan was developed jointly with the regions and neighbouring conservation authorities, such that all ORM watershed plans would follow a consistent process. The workplan outlined a common three - phased approach to watershed planning, including: 1) initial workplan scoping and characterization of current conditions; 2) analysis of current and potential future stresses on the watershed and evaluation of various management strategies; and 3) preparation of the watershed management plan and implementation framework. Opportunities for public and stakeholder consultation throughout the process were recognized as an essential component of the work program. The scope of technical study components addressed the core ORMCP requirements (e.g. water, natural heritage) and acknowledged that 'other' study components such as cultural heritage and nature -based recreation may be included to address local watershed interests and issues. Based on the generic workplan outline, TRCA staff prepared tailored work plans and schedules for each watershed with input from watershed municipalities and stakeholders. TRCA has been committed to be a leader in advancing the science of integrated watershed planning in order to produce state -of- the -art watershed planning products that will provide a sound basis for effective management decisions. Some of the innovative aspects of this work include: 31 • modelling and analysis of the watershed's response to future land use and management scenarios, including various extents and forms of urban growth, stormwater retrofits, expanded natural cover and climate change; • an integrated, interdisciplinary analysis that has improved understanding of the watershed system and its sensitivities (e.g. interaction of surface and groundwater; effects of terrestrial natural heritage on hydrology, etc.); • development and application of linked modelling tools to support the above -noted analysis; • development of a science -based methodology for prioritization of regeneration actions; • social marketing studies in support of more strategic implementation recommendations for lot level practices in business and residential sectors; • development of an implementation guide to accompany the watershed plan, including a policy component that will assist municipal planners in applying the plan's science and strategic recommendations; and • ongoing commitment to community engagement in the planning process. In 2005, the province released a series of draft technical guidelines addressing various aspects of the ORMCP, including one on watershed planning. TRCA and regional staff reviewed and submitted comments on the guidelines. The watershed planning guidelines, while quite general, do seem to advocate for the same planning process that TRCA and its partners had previously outlined and were following. The provincial guidelines have yet to be finalized. Fu /f//ment of ORMCP The ORMCP's watershed planning requirements mainly involve the characterization of the watershed's water budget, surface and ground water flow systems and natural heritage and determination of appropriate land and water use management strategies and criteria to protect these resources. A watershed study for the Duffins Creek watershed had been initiated prior to the release of the ORMCP and, when that plan was completed in 2003, it was considered to provide state -of- the -art management direction in keeping with the principles and needs of the ORMCP. Work on the Rouge, Don and Humber watershed plans has been generally progressing according to the work plans, such that the technical information and direction necessary to fulfil the ORMCP requirements has been completed. However, there have been delays (explained below), which have meant that there has not been adequate time to complete meaningful public consultation and the final documentation for these all watershed plans. Staff has prepared 'conformity assessments' for the Duffins, Rouge and Don watersheds summarizing how each watershed planning study has addressed the ORMCP requirements and identifying the appropriate draftor f/na /document references of where the information can be found (see Tables 1 -3). A conformity assessment for the Humber watershed will be reported back at the Authority's June meeting, to allow municipal staff the opportunity to review the first full draft watershed plan. Unlike the Rouge watershed, where an initial round of consultation has taken place, the Humber planning study schedule has followed the Rouge and subsequently has only very recently completed the first draft plan. Peel and York municipal staff has expressed preference for this timing. 32 Staff feel confident that the information and management direction contained in the draft watershed planning documents has an adequate scientific basis to allow municipal and TRCA staff to begin to use this information in the review of major development applications, if any such applications are submitted after April 23, 2007 and before final watershed planning documents can be brought back for approval by the Authority. The watershed plans provide updated technical information about existing conditions and systems in the watershed that is unlikely to change substantively as the plans are finalized. Many of the management recommendations are not new, but rather endorse the continuation of accepted practice using the updated technical information. New approaches are being recommended in the following areas: • the need to protect and expand natural cover in the watersheds, as an integral component of the water management strategy and also to achieve objectives for biodiversity; • the need to manage water balance, particularly as part of community planning and stormwater management designs. Community designs that minimize impervious surfaces and incorporate innovative stormwater management techniques will be needed to mitigate impacts on pre - development rates of infiltration, evapotranspiration and surface runoff; and • the need to design and build more sustainably in greenfield developments, redevelopments and retrofits, by addressing a range of objectives including those noted above. It should also be recognized that the watershed plans are providing guidance at watershed and subwatershed scales of detail. This information represents a valuable contribution and context, which will assist development proponents. However there will still be further study requirements and planning refinements to be carried out by proponents at the site scale. Interim approval to use the draft watershed planning documents will allow TRCA and municipal staff to work cooperatively with development proponents on the early stages of implementation. Lessons learned from these experiences can be considered and incorporated into the final watershed planning and implementation documents. There are various reasons for the delays in the studies, specific to each watershed plan, but generally include: modelling study complexities; time required to carefully ensure sound science; study modifications and adjustments in response to major provincial planning initiatives (i.e. Greenbelt Plan, Places to Grow Plan, Clean Water Act); capital budget deferrals, and loss of certain staff resources due to job changes. Much of the work involved in these watershed plans is leading edge science and in some cases being tested for the first time. The additional time taken will help ensure a defensible product. Delay in the completion of watershed plans is beneficial in some respects, in that it will allow municipal and TRCA staff an opportunity to incorporate growth planning considerations into the watershed plans. This will make the watershed plans all the more valuable and relevant for the municipalities, who are actively embarking on growth plan initiatives in response to the provincial Places to Grow plan. 33 Watershed P /arming Status The following sections report on the progress and status of each of the specific watershed plans. Duffins Creek Watershed (Attachment 1) • Watershed plan and supporting technical documents completed in 2003. Rouge River Watershed (Attachment 2) • Final draft watershed plan delivered by Rouge Watershed Task Force November 30, 2006. • Authority approval on January 5, 2007 to proceed to finalize all background technical reports, undertake public consultation and report back in April 2007 with final watershed plan. • Background technical report finalization has taken longer than expected, due in part to staff loss and a concurrent staff focus on completion of the draft Humber watershed plan. • All background reports and final draft watershed plan expected to be released for consultation in May 2007. • Draft implementation guide also to be the subject of consultation and further development expected to start in May 2007. • Aim to report back to Authority with final Rouge River Watershed Plan in fall 2007, pending comments received and the extent of work to relate the plans to growth planning initiatives. Don River Watershed (Attachment 3) • TRCA deferred the City of Toronto portion of the 2006 budget to 2007, which was accommodated in the work schedule by extending the completion of the full watershed plan until end of 2007. • An interim ORM report for the Don watershed, Conformity with sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, was drafted in early 2006, which characterized the ORM subwatersheds in the Don and concluded there were no further opportunities for major development due to the advanced stage of development and /or development planning processes in this watershed. • The interim ORM report and selected other reference documents contain adequate information to fulfil the ORMCP requirements, should there emerge a new opportunity for major development or redevelopment in this watershed. • Active work is underway on the development of an updated Don watershed plan by end of 2007, with an emphasis on setting regeneration project priorities and re- engaging watershed stakeholders. Humber River Watershed (conformity assessment to be reported at June 2007 meeting) • First full draft watershed plan to be released for consultation period in May 2007. • Preliminary consultation with watershed municipalities was held on March 30, 2007 on draft plan recommendations. • Background technical reports and draft implementation guide expected to be available for review concurrent with and following the release of the watershed plan. • Aim to report back to Authority with final Humber River watershed plan in fall 2007, pending comments received and the extent of work to relate the plans to growth planning initiatives. 34 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE As noted above, consultation with Humber municipalities on the first draft watershed plan and conformity assessment is to be carried out and a report brought back for interim approval in June 2007. Further broad consultation must be conducted on the Rouge and Humber watershed plans and in the development of the full Don watershed plan. All watershed planning technical documentation must be finalized. As watershed plans are finalized, separate, full reports will be brought to the Authority outlining new findings and management directions for each watershed. The reports will verify the ORMCP conformity assessment. An important aspect of consultation on the final draft watershed plans will involve working closely with the municipalities to ensure a full understanding of the implications and relationships between the watershed plans and growth plans, as well as other planning initiatives. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for the watershed planning studies was provided by the Regional Municipality of Peel, Regional Municipality of York and City of Toronto as part of the municipal capital budgets. There are adequate funds remaining to support completion of the planned schedule of consultation and finalization of the documents. Additional funds would be necessary if the work involved in addressing public comments and integrating growth planning implications into the plans proves to be extensive and prolonged. Staff will report back to seek direction, should such circumstances arise. Report prepared by: Sonya Meek, extension 5253 For Information contact: Sonya Meek, extension 5253 Date: March 30, 2007 Attachments: 3 35 Attachment 1 DUFFINS CREEK Watershed Plan Requirements Conformity Assessment Report - G1 U CD o • N N i ti) us 0 O= M a) ILI Q I- CES a) O U _c C a3 O '5 -o O7 ro 'a) 17) C U ., a3 U C w a) .� • ro a) - P a • a) a) L U N .' O O O N 0_ = a) Q • -0 C a) (T3 -0 O O C i O Q .= C O W • a) C .i O U C a)o c-o E a) o co a- f a) a) 0< oC a) - .c W 1.15 O O a)� U) a) o a) N -o Y C (Ti a3 O -U) N C C 0 O a) a) ro U U O O U C D W ) • E a� UU) �Y 3a) O a U C C E -5 • 0 O N O - O Q co 92 O •. Q CrT O O N C a) E C O C w a) 0 c U C a) E 0 0 Document Reference Duffins Creek Watershed Plan was adopted for use in the plan input and review process at the June 27, 2003 meeting of the TRCA (Authority Res. #A126/03). See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). (Management Strategies) in the Duffins Creek Watershed Plan. 7.0 (Subwatersheds) and 8.0 (Implementation) of the Duffins Creek Watershed Plan. Conformity Assessment A watershed study was initiated by the TRCA, in partnership with the Region of Durham, Region of York and area municipalities for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek watersheds in 2000, prior to the release of the ORMCP. The final Watershed Plan for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek (herein called "Duffins Creek Watershed Plan ") was completed in August 2003. See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). recommended management strategies regarding existing and future land and water use that will help to protect the ecological and hydrological features and functions of the watershed, including the portions in the Oak Ridges Moraine Area. A key strategy is the need to protect and expand natural cover as a means of achieving multiple watershed benefits. priority actions and areas accompany the management strategies in the Duffins Creek Watershed Plan and are illustrated on subwatershed- specific maps. There is also an implementation section that summarizes key directions according to various implementation tools. Requirement Every upper -tier municipality and single -tier municipality shall, on or before April 22, 2003, begin preparing a watershed plan, in accordance with subsection 24.(3), for every watershed whose streams originate within the municipality's area of jurisdiction. A watershed plan shall include, as a minimum, (a) a water budget and conservation plan as set out in section 25; strategies; include more detailed implementation plans for smaller geographic areas, such as subwatershed plans, or for specific subject matter, such as environmental management plans; Subsection 4 N 24. (3) 4 N O 0 4 N O 0 Document Reference Se ection 8.7 (Monitoring and Reporting) of the Duffins Creek Watershed Plan. See Sections 6.0 (Strategies), 7.0 (Subwatersheds) and 8.0 (Implementation) of the Duffins Creek Watershed Plan. See Table E -1 (Summary of Management Goals, Objectives and Ratings) and Section 6.0 (Strategies) for watershed goals, objectives, indicators and targets used to track or evaluate watershed health. See Section 8.3 of the Duffins Creek Watershed Plan for key policy issues and criteria. Conformity Assessment The Duffins Creek Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding changes or enhancements to existing environmental monitoring programs and other area, site -or issue - specific monitoring requirements. The Duffins Creek Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding the use of environmental practices and programs. The Duffins Creek Watershed Plan includes a framework of watershed goals, objectives, indicators and targets to be used to track or evaluate long term watershed health. The Plan also includes a policy framework and criteria for the review of land use proposals to evaluate the protection of groundwater and surface water quality and quantity, hydrological features and functions, as well as terrestrial features and functions, and aquatic communities and habitat. Requirement (d) an environmental monitoring plan; (e) provisions requiring the use of environmental management practices and programs, such as programs to prevent pollution, reduce the use of pesticides and manage the use of road salt; and, (f) criteria for evaluating the protection of water quality and quantity, hydrological features and hydrological functions. Subsection 24. (3) cont'd 24. (3) cont'd c 4 o N 0 Document Reference Duffins Creek Watershed Plan was adopted for use in the plan input and review process at the June 27, 2003 meeting of the TRCA (Authority Res. #A126/03) Report of the Peer Review Workshop, April 29, 2003. See document references for section 24.(3) See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2) See document references for section 24.(4) Conformity Assessment The Duffins Creek Watershed Plan was completed in 2003. During the peer review phase of that plan, stakeholders agreed that the plan represented state -of- the -art in the areas of water and natural heritage management, core aspects of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. See conformity assessment for section 24. (3) See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). See conformity assessment for section 24. (4) For any applications received prior to completion of watershed plans, in accordance with the ORMCP, conformity will have been reviewed and confirmed through applicant submitted studies. Requirement Major development is prohibited unless, (a) the watershed plan for the relevant watershed, prepared in accordance with subsection 24.(3), has been completed; (b) the major development conforms with the watershed plan; and (c) a water budget and conservation plan, prepared in accordance with section 25 and demonstrating that the water supply required for the major development is sustainable, has been completed. An application for major development to which this subsection applies shall not be approved unless, (a) the relevant municipality has complied with clause (c) of subsection 24.(4); or (b) the applicant, (i) identifies any hydrologically sensitive features and related hydrological functions on the site and how they will be protected, (ii) demonstrates that an adequate water supply is available for the development without compromising the ecological integrity of the Plan Area, and (iii) provides, with respect to the site and such other land as the approval authority considers necessary, a water budget and water conservation plan that, (A) characterizes groundwater and surface water flow systems by means of modelling, (B) identifies the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and (C) identifies water conservation measures. Subsection 4 N 24. (4) cont'd 24. (4) cont'd 24. (8) 4 o N 0 Document Reference a a � m N Q ns a� N m o O L AN N :NV ° �S C ' c°n'j0�? m , (.0 U W R N � a o . m 00Q u) N — C C O O W`4-0 CC E c °) c11 .m E U N oW a Conformity Assessment O U o> ° O E Q i a) TI .o 0 E ro ° o ?0co co co a ro -o C a) .E u) a E L E °C 3 5 E Q a3 a) ° i ro cm o Y° O c T 5 O - a r> O _C W.- co o a°r > - .— -(1) � u) O .� .� C a) u) N a) N ° a) u) Y w 0 ro E a) a) E r ci o ro w 3 a) D c� a) O a) �3P2 09E8 °°� �n m 3 �o uoi > °� 0 °) -o °o 0 Lo 0) ° ° 0 cn al >al D C a) C .° L 0 C'3 0. _ w N O o W .o o o Q a) 70 a) ° o C N a) in N as N (,, O E5 c\J ac) o o a) 9 •a r w o � c O cL E :° O o 0 0 c T 5 N > D C c � O Ti O O a) H 3 r (� m c� a _C.E r U 0 U Q .N � O Q c. C a ro M a) C O NO Y U >. a) — 0 O N O N .0 u) C O O Q H a) c N o o° E a) i° cod �(Q T.� o ° ro = > a) a ° r cn w W) 3 cOi O °) N 0 fA U >ro t° o a°) >. C > C U ,, Q 0_ Q E -c °. E °� -x ° i> as 0 i a .- 0 O a) (Ts p O Q — o U o U o U 5 aE O 92 C o E O GI 0 O 0) > 0 3 o5 o o c� o ,-°�, Q ro 3 c- p ¢ c� ro E S C ai N N E a�i 0 X o D El D a) ) O C o a Requirement C .6)-s a) - acs a) o ao cL`' +) N .0 > .0 N N a) L O)N N O 3 .c ._ CO - a) Q O C E c5 N -0 N .CD .0 ° C c O U a) cT5 o U -o .� o a) N 0 .� u) C C o Q+ O E O _0 C U , E _ co a) a) N : u) a) _c 0 c5 a) _ w a) 3 >. U c5 P U -C a o•C wEao3E Subsection Lci N Document Reference \\ 5« .G f % 01 %k co 00 % @ ® Zee o a 2 §// _ \ \ \ / §Q� a @ 2 its 1 t ®E = m m0�\£ \§ \ \ •@ / w m 9 m\ g 2 \ ®f % _ % \ _ _ % /7\\ \2253§% 2 \[� \ / \ /kk \3 CO § / / 5 = m E w = _ _ m e ®7 ® c.9 = E- /( / \E\ /\ /� 0%o \ 2), / -4, 2 E § 0 0 /\ \Q\ \d. /Q\E£ Conformity Assessment The Region of York began preparing a water conservation plan for the entire Region in 1997. The program included a 6 year capital program along with a 2 year maintenance program. This 8 year program came to completion in summer 2006, with a sustained savings of 20.33 million litres per average day. In February 2006 the Region of York began its Water Efficiency Master Plan Update, it will be completed in spring of 2007. Once completed an implementation plan will be developed to update the Water for Tomorrow program to include some or all of the measures recommended in the report. During this time the Water for Tomorrow program is maintaining its public and youth education programs along with a shower head and toilet flapper retrofit maintenance program. Nuuy� VVCIJ uC„C �NCu NuJCu VII I u u uOC characteristics, interception abstractions, vegetation, surficial soil characteristics and spatial variations in long term average precipitation, temperature and evaporation (average daily inputs) across the watershed, using Water Balance Analysis System (WABAS) software. WABAS generated recharge estimates for input to the MODFLOW groundwater model, which was used to estimate the groundwater component of the water budget. Requirement GI/CAI/VIA C.1.1 1.71J11CALIVI y Ju SA VVu« C.1.1 ISA outflow, surface water outflow, change in storage, water withdrawals and water returns; Subsection 3{ id S § \ R Document Reference L. a) 22( / a 5 \ ) \ /\ /3 m e ®m » G \ \ t f ( \E\� \ \ \ \ E @% e A? L. o e m o = /�kfCO\ 8 5 U o * &\ §E f/ §# f / . (4 % 1-13. $ ) \ $ ® 5 £ 7:3 $ R \/ [(k \22E& m o 7 e o o= co o 0 = m = G \ \ / \ / k = t § ¥ (7 "%w E /°=EF « ,e E o= \ % o o f $ @ = f « 4 ®\ t\ , 0 4 = 5 = m k ®m {= m /� /\ / / /22 / \\ ƒ / ¢ o = n J j \ a) (5m2( /� \ § / -c, e 2 0 Q \ 5 \ o b= m� \\§ /E ¥= o o = E _ CT ® » ®^ « f (0_ 0 $#\ \ { / / \e 3& e— L_ _ t = $ E m o = o /§ a m% E m o m m e A ?/» \� /j §C\ \) Conformity Assessment VVu« J Cu Ncc �u�u «� «u Ny uc„c _# and calibration of a hydrologic model based on Visual OTTHYMO software. qualitative) for the protection of groundwater and surface water quality and quantity, hydrological features and functions, as well as terrestrial features and functions and aquatic communities and habitat. Durham Region's Water Efficient Durham has a multi - pronged approach to public education which includes TV Ads, publications, partnerships with a variety of stakeholders including retailers, garden centres, horticultural groups, lower tier municipalities, home builders, manufacturers etc.The goals for the public education component are to identify the barriers to the desired behaviour and develop strategies to overcome those barriers.These strategies are designed to promote specific actions (eg. buy a subsidized 6L. toilet). Requirement affected ecosystems, (ii) the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and (iii) goals for public education and for water conservation; Subsection �E \ o at{ \ 0 Document Reference 00 \> Ek �® \i /� _ ? /\ \$ \k z4 ®L§ "- q) a \2 §\@ m%3 \\�� _� ' % /i\7 Duffins Creek Hydrogeology and Assessment of Land Use Change on the Groundwater System (Gerber Geosciences, 2003) Conformity Assessment York Region's Water for Tomorrow program outlined specific goals for both education and water conservation measures as outlined in the initial scope of work.The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends new and /or updated programs for public education and water conservation measures.New goals for education and water conservation measures will be set once the program implementation plan is completed and approved by council. Durham Region has developed water and sewer use projections through the year 2021. Vnrle Dnn inn hoc rlovnInnnrl rnrofor_i !cc. nrnfilc.c 0 nrl A watershed -scale evaluation of the predicted effects of forecasted water and land use on groundwater levels was completed in support of the Duffins Creek Watershed Plan. Based on this evaluation, appropriate land and water use management strategies have been provided in the final draft plan. Requirement (e) evaluate plans for water facilities such as pumping stations and reservoirs; Subsection �{ \ S \ �{ S 25.(2) cont'd Document Reference _ co 2 . E0 \ GI co- CO \�)0c\I O / e§ o.E a 'E = e ).g 3 2 m %.q §$/ f° t} — L_ = g = = e o&£= t o —= m o a= m== m= / \¥ 2 =.9 % £ m / % m m = 2 2 m = ¥ � = — � ] i o 0@ W m \ co $) m = - m� ¥— _ m» e/ m -.° 9 E y» m $ 7 ° S§ 0 S/ E W U) 4 j 3 E g a J m= g E L- e o » / 2/R§ \f o o&o» m @ © \N /�$ F 7% m \.2 § j n%%° m d . c \ 5 £ _ _ e= a k g= E a 3 co a »_ = E @ c ) E § g = ° .2 2 E� = y/ y G f » o n o = m = ° ®E o ?� ®» m j 2= E I S $ $% 2% 2 0 2 m 4 m »£ m o= See Section 8.3 of Durham's Water Efficiency Plan which defines the benefit /cost ratios for all chosen water efficiency measures See Section 5.2.3 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007) for the cost analysis of water conservation measures Conformity Assessment All upper -tier and single -tier municipalities in the Duffins Creek watershed have developed water efficiency plans and programs that identify and evaluate water conservation measures, incentives and ways of promoting water conservation measures and incentives. The Duffins Creek Watershed Plan supports the recommendations of the municipal water efficiency plans and programs and describes management strategies that would further contribute to achieving the objectives and targets of these plans /programs. Durham Region's water rates are derived through full All upper -tier and single -tier municipalities in the Rouge River watershed have developed water efficiency plans and programs that analyse the costs and benefits of their recommended water conservation measures, incentives and promotion strategies. Requirement // a� £ _\ d /�7\ d ®y LT _E = m = m = k \ . j $ .\ ` t = e m @ _ ) ° § Ti % S ¢ o.g 3 \ $ / m E ( ? I E 5 7 CO 6 E 7% E m = me g.E 3 _ ®§\�% /�/ :/ \%¢ /2f G% 22 k$ E 5. D 7 c§ as ° @ E m = § @ m _& _ \ g / - % % 8 g o % co 2220 \�.: w 2 ] / t) ®t ® d 9 ? _ % % E m ^ ) : _ ==ro oaE F (g) analyse the costs and benefits of the matters described in clause (f); Subsection �{ \ o �{ \ o Document Reference 2/ o = \\ oa) \ ] 2 \\ CO / \/\ / E \\E E \ ? ƒ\-0 \\�% a 2 [ 2�§® \ \ \/% CO g 2 = _ wcr See Section 9.0 of Durham's Water Efficiency Plan] See Section 6.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007) for the recommended program strategy Conformity Assessment IUCI ILIIICJ LI IC Lype UI VVCLLCI UJC LL/ L/C ICUUL.:CU ICIJ.. average annual day, peak day etc.) identifies subsidy amounts where applicable, and compares the cost of the measure compared to the cost creating that water capacity through conventional means (eg. expanding the water plant). York Region's Water for Tomorrow program used specific water conservation measures and incentives as part of the original capital plan. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update also recommends the use of specific water conservation measures and incentives. Durham Region's Water Efficiency Plan is a ten year plan. It features a detailed implementation schedule which specifies both the pilot project duration and full -scale project length of each water efficiency measure. York Region developed an implementation plan for the program as part of the scope of work in 1998. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update has recommended an updated program strategy, the development of an implementation plan for the updated program will begin once the Master Plan Update has been finalized. Requirement (i) contain an implementation plan for those specified measures and incentives that reconciles the demand for water with the water supply; Subsection at \ S \ E\i{ S Document Reference » E = g 0 m /� 6y .2 .2 ti $» _$ /4 & )0 b.@ » .� m \\c 6\� 2 + § y »f $. /\ =o§ /i @ _ 0 / \ = \\ a{ .2 \ t> /§ __ /0 See Duffins Creek Watershed Impervious Cover Assessment Technical Briefing Note (TRCA, 2007) < Z Conformity Assessment York Region's Water Use Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends a monitoring and Evaluation program. Thc. fli iffinc rsrca,le \A /n+orchorl DInn innli irloc Current and projected future per cent impervious cover has been assessed for each subwatershed, revealing that current and project future impervious coverage is well below the 10% threshold. No lower percentage is specified. Requirement Except with respect to land in Settlement Areas, all development and site alteration with respect to land in a subwatershed are prohibited if they would cause the total percentage of the area of the subwatershed that has impervious surfaces to exceed, (a) 10 per cent; or (b) any lower percentage specified in the applicable watershed plan. Subsection at \ 0 27.(1) 27.(1) cont'd - % 6 2 $ % % .0 § ( w o_ -(5I®§ .g - 0 0 ƒ 2 H \ o E ,, 1- % / 2 2 y_\ % / -o -0 c m \co w w \ \ \w c c c c as as as as 0000 c c c c 0 .0 .0 .0 2 2 2 2 a a a a a) a) a) a) m m m m c c c c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) a) a) a) . . .c 0 0 0 0 2222 o m o o a) a) a) a) CD c c c 2222 ____ w w w w 0000 n n n n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • • • • CD CD CD a) E E E E c c c c 0 0 0 0 .5 .5 .5 .5 c c c c LLLL a) a) a) a) 5555 0000 Si mbbbb% a) to' 77a) 0 :c 'c 'c 'c c \2222/ L Attachment 2 ROUGE RIVER Watershed Plan Requirements Conformity Assessment Report - §\ .. \ ° 2 m w \ @ _ E 2 H / 0 /� /i/ Document Reference % #9 = g =e_ c R c/\ E o Cr) ^ S E a m E¥ IGZt�® o8 i9 \§ \ \i r § \ \ $ i r / _ / / t .2 - / C E wEou) acr < 2� ebb/ ƒ222\/ /CQ U). -o (0OJ /\\Ea± gg /\ /) §° oi6 ) 0 \ % < / _ \ 3 E 3./.% L. E 2 -0.- a m o o=« o a= E c_ . a 2 7 3 E§ I o / f \ » § } * « f .@ $ b e / 5 m m E § \ o 0 a== «)H_ °=5 =£ m® = =_ ¢ƒ\ / //k <) -u <\ \ \ \ /\7 Conformity Assessment Watershed planning and ongoing watershed management have been activities the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has carried out in partnership with its municipalities for a number of years. Therefore a watershed plan was deemed to have been initiated prior to April 22, 2003, although study components required updating to varying degrees. A watershed study was initiated by the TRCA, in partnership with the Region of York, Region of Durham and City of Toronto and area municipalities for the Rouge River watershed on June 27, 2003. A final draft of the Rouge River Watershed Plan was completed on November 30, 2006, subject to specified revisions approved by the Rouge Watershed Task Force. Finalization of this plan is pending further public consultation. Requirement c Z = 0 0 CO / \ 0 / \ _ 3 %f =% E — .b / .a m y o m e _ < g » E § @ p # _ >,.. 2. 3E %Zff/ a�a >= .aa ==2 E _ 0 = e = - 2 E=®- a=m )=m�m \� ca \\� E / a coo o _. ®t m\ »'/ a % 2 \ > _ _ § E L ± E a to «.& Subsection j Document Reference See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). See Section 5.0 (Strategies) in the Rouge River Watershed Plan. \ ,.c_) a) `6 o) \\ a) m L. \\ 5 \% 2m \ e §t $ \\ \ \ % / \/ Conformity Assessment See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). The final draft Rouge River Watershed Plan describes recommended management strategies regarding existing and future land and water use that will help to protect the ecological and hydrological features and functions of the watershed, including the portions in the Oak Ridges Moraine Area. Key strategies include the need to expand natural cover and build sustainable communities, particularly with an aim to maintain or restore water balance. ateaz aUL.:LJI Iva! ly LI IC I 1 la! !aye!! ICI IL strategies in the final draft Rouge River Watershed Plan. The draft Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide provides more detailed implementation direction for policy, regeneration projects etc., including supportive maps, criteria etc. Specific policies within the framework for implementation may be subject to revision based on detailed consultation with municipal partners and stakeholders and Conservation Authority Board review. Any such revisions will not affect satisfaction of this Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan requirement. Requirement A watershed plan shall include, as a minimum, (a) a water budget and conservation plan as set out in section 25; (b) land and water use and management strategies; JI 1 IaIICI y. Cuytap1 Ill! aICaz, JULlI 1 aJ JULJVVaLCIJ1 ICU plans, or for specific subject matter, such as environmental management plans; Subsection 24. (3) �{ N S j �{ S Document Reference See Section 5.6 of the Rouge River Watershed Plan fo r recommended enhancements to existing monitoring prog rams. See Section 5.0 of the Rouge River Watershed Plan. See Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide. See Appendix D of the Rouge River Watershed Plan for a summary of watershed goals, objectives, indicators and targets used to track or evaluate watershed health. See the draft Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide for a compilation of all criteria and maps showing where criteria apply. Conformity Assessment The final draft Rouge River Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding changes or enhancements to existing environmental monitoring programs and other area, site -or issue - specific monitoring requirements. The final draft Rouge River Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding the use of environmental practices and programs. The Implementation Guide further identifies practices required in the land use planning and development process. The final draft Rouge River Watershed Plan includes a framework of watershed goals, objectives, indicators and targets to be used to track or evaluate long term watershed health. The accompanying Implementation Guide sets out criteria for the review of land use proposals to evaluate the protection of groundwater and surface water quality and quantity, hydrological features and functions, as well as terrestrial features and functions, and aquatic communities and habitat. Requirement (d) an environmental monitoring plan; (e) provisions requiring the use of environmental management practices and programs, such as programs to prevent pollution, reduce the use of pesticides and manage the use of road salt; and, (f) criteria for evaluating the protection of water quality and quantity, hydrological features and hydrological functions. Subsection 24. (3) cont'd 24. (3) cont'd c 4 o N 0 Document Reference Approval to undertake public consultation on the final draft Rouge River Watershed Plan and its supporting technical documents was granted at the January 5, 2007 meeting of the TRCA (Authority Res. #A295/06) See document references for section 24.(3) See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2) See document references for section 24.(4) Conformity Assessment A final draft of the Rouge River Watershed Plan was completed on November 30, 2006, subject to specified revisions approved by the Rouge Watershed Task Force. While the final draft plan may be subject to revisions based on detailed consultation with municipal partners and stakeholders and Conservation Authority Board review, any such revisions will not affect satisfaction of Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan requirements. See conformity assessment for section 24.(3) See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). See conformity assessment for section 24. (4) For any applications received prior to completion of watershed plans, in accordance with the ORMCP, conformity will have been reviewed and confirmed through applicant submitted studies. Requirement Major development is prohibited unless, (a) the watershed plan for the relevant watershed, prepared in accordance with subsection 24.(3), has been completed; (b) the major development conforms with the watershed plan; and (c) a water budget and conservation plan, prepared in accordance with section 25 and demonstrating that the water supply required for the major development is sustainable, has been completed. An application for major development to which this subsection applies shall not be approved unless, (a) the relevant municipality has complied with clause (c) of subsection 24.(4); or (b) the applicant, (i) identifies any hydrologically sensitive features and related hydrological functions on the site and how they will be protected, (ii) demonstrates that an adequate water supply is available for the development without compromising the ecological integrity of the Plan Area, and (iii) provides, with respect to the site and such other land as the approval authority considers necessary, a water budget and water conservation plan that, (A) characterizes groundwater and surface water flow systems by means of modelling, (B) identifies the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and (C) identifies water conservation measures. Subsection 4 N 24. (4) cont'd 24. (4) cont'd 24. (8) 4 o N 0 Document Reference GI N° a) -0 L ( a C O N a) U C (s 2 O Q O 7 0 O a o < >°O c E U> as a) a) _E c cwm¢ o m co 0 C E M O - c 01 ui C .�.0 0)O N O a- a E 0 cc a) E C c (� r a) C% L a) a) -c ( (5 . 3 N Q N , a3 I� a) 0 7 CC< N 01 01 o L 0 U 0 S N Q .� i E a) 2 r cal E 0 i o i ° - o o- ,,_4-' > ° - °- •� E c� U co a3 a3 U O 7 U7 != a3 R U a) 7 cc O C- a. a , 0_ Zr) ) Q) �_, _ ¢riv) 3 3 �EQ <oR mp° o* Conformity Assessment _a E co W _ N D+ c) ?' ' O O j O O 0 E C D .� := -c Eo°cQO, '-• °— U a) U U a) O'5 E :C °c�OC w0.0 ro.EO 3 E aa) -o - -o Bo°'c!°a)a) Nc o c >� c >� (s 3� >> a) o aQQ)o a) a) Q a 13 o ° c o ° c U) .3 E c W r O O D 0) c� a co c� d) c� � 3 .E c� 0 0 c�0000 ,- E • 0 a.- 00 > L H N Q.E02EQ 0 a) 0 o �. 0) r >, a co c s- OE Q 73 N Q o c U C E O a3 E ° 1 .3) 2 ai ° 0) H° a o 8 m C c� '- E E r a) o O . a) r+ c� 0) c� Q N o. 0) C c N a) O E E'- o � • c�— C . o a ro ro o c .( -0E >o -EGI E c lT5 . c r E °a c� 01 o ..-0 O O N p aa) c 3.2o_ -aE 0 O.o ° o GI U — a) D O ° E tea) o �aO-EEoc� o r c) p O >' 0 N (s O p a o w p GI w > 0 L 15 a7) �3 O D r- a) ro O 0 '-' LE w m a H E .4=E A m a Requirement E .0) c a) - as a) aoo 3�- +1) N .0 > E N N C a) L 0)N N O 3 .�.- U _ a) -o < < C c c"5 N -0 N.�.0 ° c c O U - a) 05 o U N D 0 _a E U , E = O a) a) a) La) r U C , 0 cr5 Qas 0)c�ro U c5 P U LE a0 a) .c wEao3E Subsection id N Document Reference 2 § 7'\ �\f % 7 - m m a /) m =.o &ƒ \ m ° \:2 / \e ƒ /\ \ t%a ea= % /g § == = )� / f / / @=®fa2tƒ= m== = =E \a_ = � m m / \ / 6 # % \ }\ ) j \�y7=/ ° `e _L. %= 2k\ mn§t3 a ?m CQ) r e5 /%® D°° \ E\/2) / / }: ®�) aa7\E$ E m / m= � - c m \ \ / k > p\ E k f \ \ 7 \ ƒ \ E / 4£ 4£ EQ\£ wO OO £ m7. See Section 3.2 (Current Conditions) of the Rouge River Watershed Plan and the Rouge River State of the Watershed Report Chapter 4 (Groundwater Quantity and Quality) and Chapter 5 (Surface Water Quantity) for descriptions of the current groundwater and surface water flow systems and issues. Conformity Assessment The Rouge River Watershed Plan includes a quantitative description of the major components of the water balance equation on an average annual over the watershed surface area. The water budget was developed based on land use characteristics, interception abstractions, vegetation, surficial soil characteristics and spatial variations in long term average precipitation, temperature and evaporation across the watershed, using Water Balance Analysis System (WABAS) software. WABAS generated recharge estimates for input to the MODFLOW groundwater model, which was used to estimate the groundwater component of the water budget. The groundwater flow system of the Rouge River watershed has been characterized by development and calibration of a groundwater flow model that utilizes MODFLOW software. The surface water flow system of the Rouge River watershed has been characterized by development and calibration of a hydrologic model based on HSP -F software. Requirement A water budget and conservation plan shall, as a minimum, (a) quantify the components of the water balance equation, including precipitation, evapotranspiration, groundwater inflow and outflow, surface water outflow, change in storage, water withdrawals and water returns; (b) characterize groundwater and surface water flow systems by means of modelling; Subsection \ �E \ S Document Reference Sections 4.1 and 4.5 of the m0 (a3 0 0 UijF° U d 0 w( ui a) (� o N a3 >, U a 3 as ( as as p . asp = O U c . 0 Q o cn 2 0 c z ro Conformity Assessment a) U T a E°)0 m ro c(2 3 C o co C . au) a) ro o �� 5 3� oo `�C( as o .o— o °.. asaas co E a) a? U ro as m g H ro ° a as �us�3�E �����a)��E ZEroasas� SCO m 23OO( o GI C a) as r o w ro C CD al o � � o 0) a�i ro ai C -0 a) a CC o72 roa5Cro >- -s= Cga)�C — o ro r a�i a) ro aa) a) o a o r D U° 3 ro 3 ro .0 ro H aa) -a ro m aI) �`��oinE o°'C�a�iYE.�0)coaE °� o 0 3 0E w a) ao H U 0- 0)L . U H O U O aZ E 0 C a) 2 cr a) CC a) as a) o o ', -0 CT a) a) -o C as a) > J as 3 C a) _c u- cr T) a)a) } T E >.� N p 2 U a) > as N as N o (i 0 u) U a) ro 0 C as C 0 0 a) U_ a O c- 0 as Ts o U C 0 0 Subsection N C L) N 0 N C L) O N 0 Document Reference 2 (2 w$ m 2 in f$ 3333^ �2k 7 \m.g } \2@U \E\ /2») / \ //G \%a ®\\\�j \/ ° %§ $%® � /®® }\# a5 < =5 %§.g pwe> fLL - :•-6 •/ t ® § G \ % E E % o E % § { \ $ \ % i $ # [ @ / $ / / \ m %4 <0 72o mlm7 See Section 4.3 of Rouge Watershed Modelling and Analysis Report for effects of forecasted water and land use on groundwater levels. See Chapter 5.0 of the Rouge River Watershed Plan for management strategies. York Region's Long Term Water Project Master Plan Update, April2004 Conformity Assessment All upper -tier and single -tier municipalities in the Rouge River watershed have developed water use profiles and forecasts as part of preparing water use assessment reports and /or water efficiency plans and programs. York Region has developed water -use profiles and forecasts as part of the Water Master Plan Update, 2004. The forecasts consider the effect of planned water conservation measures on future demand. These profiles and forecasts are updated with the master plans. Drawing on this information, a watershed -based water use profile and forecast was developed as part of preparing the Rouge River Watershed Plan. A watershed -scale evaluation of the predicted effects of forecasted water and land use on groundwater levels was completed in support of the Rouge River Watershed Plan. Based on this evaluation, appropriate land and water use management strategies have been provided in the final draft plan. Further plans for any such facilities are being evaluated by York Region as part of its updated water supply strategy and will be reviewed in the context of the updated watershed information. Requirement (d) develop a water -use profile and forecast; (e) evaluate plans for water facilities such as pumping stations and reservoirs; Subsection �{ \ o F1' { \ 0 Document Reference \ \ /_ \_ $ 2 . \ N.g 3 = \ \N\o § f \\( /\ . ij °22£DS as ®m� /E® ® ` 3 § \\ \�� \\\/ ° % ° I % _ _ \ • \ « # \ ) ( Cu / / ƒ /§S\ See Section 5.2.3 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update(2007) for the cost analysis of water conservation measures See Section 6.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007) for the recommended program strategy See Section 6.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007)for the recommended program strategy Conformity Assessment ai iu Niuyiai i is LI iai iue! niiy ai iu evaivaie vvaiei conservation measures, incentives and ways of promoting water conservation measures and incentives. The final draft Rouge River Watershed Plan supports the recommendations of the municipal water efficiency plans and programs and describes management strategies that would further contribute to achieving the objectives and targets of these plans/programs. York Region's water rates are currently based on full cost pricing. All upper -tier and single -tier municipalities in the Rouge River watershed have developed water efficiency plans and programs that analyse the costs and benefits of their recommended water conservation measures, incentives and promotion strategies. York Region's Water for Tomorrow program used specific water conservation measures and incentives as part of the original capital plan. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update also recommends the use of specific water conservation measures and incentives. York Region developed an implementation plan for the program as part of the scope of work in 1998. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update has recommended an updated program strategy, the development of an implementation plan for the updated program will begin once the Master Plan Update has been finalized. Requirement euuuauui I, iii INiuveu I I ia! iayei I lei IL Niauuue, a ie use of flow restricting devices and other hardware, water reuse and recycling, and practices and technologies associated with water reuse and recycling, (ii) water conservation incentives such as full cost pricing, and (iii) ways of promoting water conservation measures and water conservation incentives; (g) analyse the costs and benefits of the matters described in clause (f); (h) require the use of specified water conservation measures and incentives; (i) contain an implementation plan for those specified measures and incentives that reconciles the demand for water with the water supply; Subsection �{ \ S \ 25.(2) cont'd 25.(2) cont'd �{ S Document Reference See Section 9.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update(2007) See Section 5.6 of the Rouge River Watershed Plan for recommended enhancements to existing monitoring prog rams. See Rouge Watershed Modelling and Analysis ReportAppendix B - Impervious Cover Assessment Technical Briefing Note. N/A Conformity Assessment York Region's Water Use Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends a monitoring and Evaluation program. The final draft Rouge River Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding changes or enhancements to existing environmental monitoring programs and other area, site -or issue - specific monitoring requirements that provide for, or improve capacity for monitoring of the water budget [e.g., additional climate stations, stream gauges, groundwater monitoring wells etc.]. The Rouge River Watershed Planning study assessed the current and projected future per cent impervious cover for each Oak Ridges Moraine subwatershed (based on methods suggested in draft Technical Paper #13 which excludes Settlement Areas, utilizing subwatershed boundaries defined in draft Technical Paper #9). These estimates indicate that no Oak Ridges Moraine subwatersheds in the Rouge River Watershed exceed the 10% impervious cover criteria for current conditions (based on 2002 land use), nor will they exceed 10% upon build -out of municipal official plans approved as of 2002. No lower percentage is specified. Requirement (j) provide for monitoring of the water budget and water conservation plan for effectiveness. Except with respect to land in Settlement Areas, all development and site alteration with respect to land in a subwatershed are prohibited if they would cause the total percentage of the area of the subwatershed that has impervious surfaces to exceed, (a) 10 per cent; or (b) any lower percentage specified in the applicable watershed plan. Subsection atE \ S \ 27.(1) cont'd 0' o% k k /I EW�s 0 0 7 .g �c f § c o_ I 6 2 $ % E ( a) I /a)m TtsI§ .E T U .0 0 ƒ a) / \ o E aF � % / 2 2 E 0—) _ _ E m \ � s \ \ \a m m E c c c cuctscucts 0000 E c c c .0 .0 .0 .0 2 2 2 2 a a a a a) a) a) a) m m m m c c c c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) a) a) a) c c .§ .§ 0 0 0 0 2222 m m m m a) a) a) a) 0)0)0)0) 2222 ____ cuctscucts 0000 in in in in 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 £ £ £ £ CD CD CD a) E E E E E c c c 0 0 0 0 .5 .5 .5 .5 E c c c LLLL CD CD CD CD 5555 0000 bbbb% m . . . 7 a .c .c '� '� a) \2222/ I Attachment 3 R . E § Ui / \ $ a) o 7 � \ TES .0 \ a) k Document Reference _ \ o 2 2 ) E \ / c I \\E / \ ¥ a) 0Efi \« /0_ c= m e m o = o o a= a : £ S m = E £ 3 2 a _ > $ /§ 2 3 4» m< a_= 2 e E o gam = / £ m = a e \ § = §J \\/ / /� §co \� Ti / E G= a a/ 7 2 2/° m = « @ / \ o G ± 5 \ g / @ w ®$ \ / 3]csf2 /� %7 - �\ \\\ \/ < 3 @ m £ _ # £ * < N 3 = a z < * ¥ o \ cc \ \\ « § \ §/ e e m . /: /� N. % E e a $ \ \ 3 ooas Q o e Conformity Assessment fl VVQLCIJI ICU JLUUy VVQJ II II LIQLCU uy LI IC I FIL# 1, II I partnership with the City of Toronto, Region of York, and area municipalities for the Don River watershed in 2004. An interim report for the Don Watershed ORM subwatersheds, Don River Watershed - Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, was completed in March 2007. While the final watershed plan will be Requirement Z = 0 6 \=I / \ 0 / \ \g§ = 0)C .E = 0 c Q m y o m :e _ < g » E § @ p # _ >, 2. E %Zff/ a�a >= .aa ==2 E _ a) L = 0 = 2 ® E = � f - a = m ) r \� \\-ED E / a coo o _: ®t m\ » - / /%2\ _ _ _ _ _•- 3EoQ {.\ Subsection j Document Reference See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). Section 3.0, Don River Watershed — Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP (rRCA, March 2007). Don Watershed priority subwatershed regeneration actions master spreadsheet, based on: Briefing report, A Principles -based methodology for Identifying Priority Watershed Regeneration Actions (TRCA, March 7, 2007) See Section 3.0 of Don River Watershed — Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP (rRCA, March 2007). Conformity Assessment See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). The interim report, Don River Watershed — Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, describes recommended management strategies regarding existing and future land and water use that will help to protect the ecological and hydrological features and functions in the Oak Ridges Moraine Area. Implementation direction accompanies the recommended management strategies noted in section 24(3)(b).above. Priority regeneration actions have been identified in each subwatershed through an application of the Principles -based Methodology for Identifying Priority Watershed Regeneration Actions. The interim report, Don River Watershed — Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, includes recommendations regarding changes or enhancements to existing environmental monitoring programs and other area, site -or issue - specific monitoring requirements. Requirement A watershed plan shall include, as a minimum, (a) a water budget and conservation plan as set out in section 25; (b) land and water use and management strategies; (c) a framework for implementation, which may include more detailed implementation plans for smaller geographic areas, such as subwatershed plans, or for specific subject matter, such as environmental management plans; (d) an environmental monitoring plan; Subsection 24. (3) 24. (3) cont'd C 4 o N 0 24. (3) cont'd Document Reference See Section 3.0 of Don River Watershed - Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP (rRCA, March 2007). ¥ a) >} 8 1\m A a ) .@ o z{f \ \/ \ %k 7 \ \. C } ¥ /; '2 \ \ / % % [ \ \ 7 §\ \ \�\ e¢% Qo§> Conformity Assessment The interim report, Don River Watershed - Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, contains recommendation management strategies, including the need for environmental management practices and programs. nai i I VVUI n is upucueu, uui uaaeu ui I u iai to a New Don (the previous watershed management strategy; TRCA, 1994). The interim report, Don River Watershed - Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, contains management strategies that provide guidance for the review of land use proposals in terms of their ability to protect groundwater and surface water quality and quantity, hydrological features and functions, as well as terrestrial features and functions, and aquatic communities and habitat. Requirement (e) provisions requiring the use of environmental management practices and programs, such as programs to prevent pollution, reduce the use of pesticides and manage the use of road salt; and, Subsection 24. (3) cont'd Ffi{ 4 0 Document Reference Don River Watershed - Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP (TRCA, March 2007). See document references for section 24.(3) See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2) See document references for section 24.(4) Conformity Assessment The interim report, Don River Watershed - Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, was completed in March 2007. While the final watershed plan will be developed with additional detailed consultation with municipal partners and stakeholders and Conservation Authority Board review, any such revisions will not affect satisfaction of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan requirements. See conformity assessment for section 24. (3) See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). See conformity assessment for section 24. (4) Requirement Major development is prohibited unless, (a) the watershed plan for the relevant watershed, prepared in accordance with subsection 24.(3), has been completed; (b) the major development conforms with the watershed plan; and (c) a water budget and conservation plan, prepared in accordance with section 25 and demonstrating that the water supply required for the major development is sustainable, has been completed. An application for major development to which this subsection applies shall not be approved unless, (a) the relevant municipality has complied with clause (c) of subsection 24.(4); or Subsection 4 N 24. (4) cont'd 24. (4) cont'd 24. (8) Document Reference k: \pmCJ »g / § 5 \ ® % \ / =m32�±\7 7 = 01. u) \(\\/. \ /) 0 0 L -012- o c = # o » a m o o = /f \ate\.\0 a. >.\\ {k < I m 3 & E Conformity Assessment For any applications received prior to completion of watershed plans, in accordance with the ORMCP, conformity will have been reviewed and confirmed through applicant submitted studies. A water budget study was initiated by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, in partnership with the City of Toronto, Region of York, and area municipalities for the Don River Watershed as part of the overall Don River Watershed Plan. The Region of York began preparing a water conservation plan for the entire Region in 1997. The program included a 6 year capital program along with a 2 year maintenance program. This 8 year program came to completion in summer 2006, with a sustained savings of 20.33 million litres per average day. Requirement (b) the applicant, (i) identifies any hydrologically sensitive features and related hydrological functions on the site and how they will be protected, (ii) demonstrates that an adequate water supply is available for the development without compromising the ecological integrity of the Plan Area, and (iii) provides, with respect to the site and such other land as the approval authority considers necessary, a water budget and water conservation plan that, (A) characterizes groundwater and surface water flow systems by means of modelling, (B) identifies the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and (C) identifies water conservation measures. Every upper -tier municipality and single -tier municipality shall, on or before April 22, 2003, begin preparing a water budget and conservation plan, in accordance with subsection 25.(2), for every watershed whose streams originate within the municipality's area of jurisdiction. Subsection R{ % S \ Document Reference R 0 0 r 0 0 Ro�c5 N O U Q3 U N 1 '0 N H N OH Conformity Assessment In February 2006 the Region began its Water Efficiency Master Plan Update, it will be completed in spring of 2007. Once completed an implementation plan will be developed to update the Water for Tomorrow program to include some or all of the measures recommended in the report. During this time the Water for Tomorrow program is maintaining its public and youth education programs along with a shower head and toilet flapper retrofit maintenance program. The interim report for the Don Watershed ORM subwatersheds, Don River Watershed - Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, includes a quantitative description of the major components of the water balance equation on an average annual basis, over the watershed surface area. An initial water budget was developed based on land use characteristics, interception abstractions, vegetation, surficial soils, and spatial variations in long term average precipitation, temperature and evaporation across the watershed using Hydrologic Simulation Program - Fortran (HSP -F) software. This water budget will be updated in the final watershed plan to conform with the jurisdictional standard prepared for the source water protection program. Requirement A water budget and conservation plan shall, as a minimum, (a) quantify the components of the water balance equation, including precipitation, evapotranspiration, groundwater inflow and outflow, surface water outflow, change in storage, water withdrawals and water returns; Subsection ,- -. '----. C id O N 0 E- Lf) N Document Reference Don River Watershed — Current Conditions Report on Geology and Groundwater Resources, draft January 2, 2007. Don River Watershed — Current Conditions Report on Surface Water Hydrology, Hydraulics and Storm water Management, draft October 24, 2006. Don River Hydrology Update. MMM Ltd., 2004 See 24(3)(f) above for targets and criteria. See section 4.0 of York Region's Long Term Water Project Master Plan Update, April 2004 Conformity Assessment The groundwater flow system of the Don River watershed has been characterized by development and calibration of a groundwater flow model that utilizes MODFLOW software. The surface water flow system of the Don River watershed has been characterized by development and calibration of a hydrologic model based on Visual OTTHYMO software. See 24(3)(f) above for targets and criteria. The Regional Municipality of York's Water for Tomorrow program outlined specific goals for both education and water conservation measures as outlined in the initial scope of work. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends new and /or updated programs for public education and water conservation measures. New goals for education and water conservation measures will be set once the program implementation plan is completed and approved by council. All upper -tier and single -tier municipalities in the Don River watershed have developed water use profiles and forecasts as part of preparing water use assessment reports and /or water efficiency plans and programs. York Region has developed water -use profiles and forecasts as part of the Water Master Plan Update, 2004. The forecasts consider the effect of planned water conservation measures on future demand. These profiles and forecasts are updated with the master plans. Requirement (b) characterize groundwater and surface water flow systems by means of modelling; (c) identify, (i) targets to meet the water needs of the affected ecosystems, (ii) the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and (iii) goals for public education and for water conservation; (d) develop a water -use profile and forecast; Subsection N C N O ` C N N O - N N O Document Reference York Region's Long Term Water Project Master Plan Update, April 2004. \ e $ / \ \t\ '� , N �a \f /\ \k \\ \/ m2§% §2§/ 2 s = 0 0 » § \ /k/ �k 0 ` 0 C ( ® \ § \= /E m- e = =m 2/�/2\/C \ri \ \ \[§\ =�,GS -o @g /\\�( /ow See Section 5.2.3 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update for the cost analysis of water conservation measures See Section 6.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update for the recommended program strategy Conformity Assessment Drawing on this and additional information from the Permit to Take Water database, a watershed -based water use profile and forecast was prepared as part of the interim report for the Don Watershed ORM subwatersheds, Don River Watershed — Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP. Plans for any such facilities are being evaluated by York Region as part of its updated water supply strategy and will be reviewed in the context of the updated watershed information. IilL) I !VIII ILJ. VVQLCI l,L)I IJCI VQLILJI I II ICQJUI CJ CU IU incentives. The interim report for the Don Watershed ORM subwatersheds, Don River Watershed — Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP supports the recommendations of the municipal water efficiency plans and programs and describes management strategies that would further contribute to achieving the objectives and targets of these plans/programs. York Region's water rates are currently based on full cost pricing. All upper -tier and single -tier municipalities in the Don River watershed have developed water efficiency plans and programs that analyse the costs and benefits of their recommended water conservation measures, incentives and promotion strategies. York Region's Water for Tomorrow program used specific water conservation measures and incentives as part of the original capital plan. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update also recommends the use of specific water conservation measures and incentives. Requirement (e) evaluate plans for water facilities such as pumping stations and reservoirs; 1 101 U VV QI C, VV QLCI I CUJC CU IU I CLyL,III I J, CU Iu practices and technologies associated with water reuse and recycling, (ii) water conservation incentives such as full cost pricing, and (iii) ways of promoting water conservation measures and water conservation incentives; (g) analyse the costs and benefits of the matters described in clause (f); (h) require the use of specified water conservation measures and incentives; Subsection �{ \ o 25.(2) cont'd �{ \ 0 25.(2) cont'd 25.(2) cont'd Document Reference See Section 6.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update for the recommended program strategy See Section 9.0 of York Region's Water Efficiency Master Plan Update Don River Watershed — Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP (TRCA, March 2007). See Don River Watershed Impervious Cover Assessment Technical Briefing Note (TRCA, 2007). Conformity Assessment York Region developed an implementation plan for the program as part of the scope of work in 1998. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update has recommended an updated program strategy, the development of an implementation plan for the updated program will begin once the Master Plan Update has been finalized. York Region's Water Use Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends a monitoring and Evaluation program. The interim report, Don River Watershed — Conformity to Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP, includes recommendations regarding changes or enhancements to existing environmental monitoring programs and other area, site -or issue - specific monitoring requirements that provide for, or improve capacity for monitoring of the water budget. Current and projected future per cent impervious cover has been assessed for each Oak Ridges Moraine subwatershed (based on methods suggested in draft Technical Paper #13 which exclude Settlement Areas, utilizing subwatershed boundaries defined in draft Technical Paper #9). These estimates indicate that no Oak Ridges Moraine subwatersheds in the Don River Watershed exceed the 10% impervious cover criteria for current conditions (based on 2002 land use), nor will they exceed 10% upon build -out of municipal official plans approved as of February 2006. No lower percentage is specified. Requirement (i) contain an implementation plan for those specified measures and incentives that reconciles the demand for water with the water supply; (j) provide for monitoring of the water budget and water conservation plan for effectiveness. Except with respect to land in Settlement Areas, all development and site alteration with respect to land in a subwatershed are prohibited if they would cause the total percentage of the area of the subwatershed that has impervious surfaces to exceed, (a) 10 per cent; or (b) any lower percentage specified in the applicable watershed plan. Subsection a,1 7. \ S �{ \ S \ 27.(1) cont'd 0' o% c a) I o0 0 0 � .g f §� cka) I % 6 2 % 'E § /%\� I /0m �I®§ g .0 0 .k ƒ 2 / \ o ƒ ; % / 2 2 y_\ a) / -o -0 c m \ C0� a) m R \ \ \/ ascrscrscts 0000 cccc 4q1. .0 0 .0 .0 CO 2 2 2 2 a a a a (3) (3) (3) (3) m m m m c c c c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (3) (3) (3) (3) c .§ .§ .§ .§ 0 0 0 0 2222 m m m m (3) (3) ( ( 0) 0) 0) 0) 2222 ____ w at 0000 to to to to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • • • • CD CD CD CD 0 E E E c c c c 0 0 0 0 .5 .5 .5 .5 c LLLL a) a) a) a) 5555 0000 bbbb% . m II) a) a 'c 'c 'c c c 0)2222/ 2 ' s e i s e Lu RES. #D10/07 - RENEWAL OF THE CANADA - ONTARIO AGREEMENT RESPECTING THE GREAT LAKES BASIN ECOSYSTEM (2007 -2010) Comments of support regarding the Canada - Ontario Agreement respecting the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem for submission to Ontario's Environmental Bill of Rights and to Canada's Gazette. Moved by: Seconded by: Pamela Gough Grant Gibson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) acknowledge its strong support to the governments of Canada and Ontario for the signing of the 2007 -2010 Canada - Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes (COA); THAT the governments of Canada and Ontario be encouraged to ensure funding provided through COA used to support Great Lakes protection activities is not interrupted; THAT the governments of Canada and Ontario be encouraged to aim for continual improvements to COA and consider Authority Resolution #A21/07; THAT TRCA submit the staff comments in the attached report to the governments of Canada and Ontario contact persons for COA; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA's watershed municipalities and Conservation Ontario be advised of TRCA's comments regarding COA. CARRIED BACKGROUND COA is a framework through which the governments of Canada and Ontario work cooperatively to restore, protect and conserve the aquatic health of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem. COA assists the Government of Canada in meeting commitments under the Canada - United States (U.S.) Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). The ministries of the Environment, Natural Resources, and Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs are Ontario's signatories to the current COA and are responsible for Ontario's commitments under the agreement. Signed in March 2002, the current COA expired on March 22, 2007. In January 2007, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) posted a draft of a 2007 COA on the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) Registry Number PAO7E001 for public comment. At Authority Meeting #1/07, held on February 23, 2007, Resolution #A21/07 was approved as follows. The following recommendation, along with more detailed comments, were submitted to the EBR: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) submit comments on the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry (EBR) to the Government of Ontario acknowledging strong support for the three year extension of the Canada - Ontario Agreement (COA) to ensure COA related activities to protect the Great Lakes are maintained; 65 THAT the Government of Ontario be encouraged to develop new Annexes which aim to conserve biological diversity, encourage the promotion of sustainable communities, better understand the impacts of climate changes on the Great Lakes and determine strategies to adapt to a changing climate and protect the Great Lakes as a source of drinking water and unique ecosystem of global significance; THAT the provincial and federal governments be requested to increase the funding for TRCA 's jurisdiction which includes Toronto Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Area to $200,000,000 (2007-2010) to provide partner funding to significantly advance the implementation of the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan and other plans now in place to move the Toronto Area of Concern closer to a target of becoming an 'Area of Recovery'; THAT the federal and provincial governments be urged to fund the Healthy Great Lakes proposal submitted previously by Conservation Ontario to address watershed management issues throughout Ontario; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA 's watershed municipalities and Conservation Ontario be advised of TRCA 's comments regarding COA. After a period of public comment and consultation, the governments of Ontario and Canada returned to negotiations to finalize a more detailed COA. On March 16 2007, this draft agreement was posted for a 90 -day public comment period by both the federal and provincial governments. Staff recommend that the following comments be provided to the governments of Canada and Ontario in response to the EBR posting regarding the 2007 -2010 COA: General Comments • TRCA strongly supports the ongoing process whereby the governments of Canada and Ontario are continuing their commitment to working together under COA to ensure the vision of a healthy, prosperous and sustainable Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem for present and future generations; recognizing the importance of the basin as the home to many Canadians and for the important contribution the Great Lakes Basin makes to the economy to all of Canada. TRCA is supportive of principles defined in the 2007- 2010 COA, in particular the net -gain principle. • TRCA is supportive of the proposed three -year COA, in order to align it with a possibly renewed Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. The Issues • TRCA recommends that the governments of Canada and Ontario continue to address issues that have been identified in earlier COAs and continue to plague the Great Lakes, still requiring resources in order to understand and mitigate them. Of particular concern is the re- emergence of nearshore water quality issues specifically as they pertain to drinking water quality concerns. 66 • TRCA strongly supports the forward thinking to expand COA to include issues not addressed in the previous COA. Several of the issues listed on the EBR Registry #PA07E001 for comment were of critical importance to TRCA, including: conservation of biological diversity; promotion of sustainable Great Lakes communities; protection of Great Lakes as sources of drinking water; understanding and adaptation to climate change; continued support of the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (RAP); recognizing the role of conservation authorities in protecting the Great Lakes, and focusing on watershed planning. TRCA recommends these issues continue be more prevalent in future COAs. • TRCA strongly supports elevating the importance of conserving biodiversity by prioritizing issues. TRCA recommends the governments of Ontario and Canada continue to the support development of the Lake Ontario Biodiversity Conservation Strategy, a Lake Wide Management Planning (LaMP) initiative lead by the Nature Conservancy of Canada and the U.S. Nature Conservancy. • TRCA recommends that the governments of Canada and Ontario focus attention on issues relating to the impact of climate change on the Great Lakes including adaptation, mitigation and understanding. • TRCA recommends that the governments of Canada and Ontario strengthen their commitments to monitoring and provide assurances that analysis of the data will be undertaken and reported out to the public in a timely manner. Local Planning and Governing • TRCA recommends that the governments of Canada and Ontario increase their support of, and expand their recognition of, the important contributions that local governments are making to protect the Great Lakes. Strengthening their collaboration with organizations such as the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative will help increase the local governments' voice in Great Lakes planning initiatives. • TRCA recommends that in the future there be an increased recognition and support of programs which help lessen the impact that city regions have on the Great Lakes, especially ones growing as rapidly as the Greater Toronto Area. TRCA is acutely aware of the impact the city region is having on Lake Ontario and is moving to make this region cleaner, greener and healthier; these principles are embodied with TRCA's The Living City vision. TRCA recognizes the need to go beyond its traditional roles in order to preserve and protect the quality of life in this region. To do so, TRCA is partnering with others to make gains toward achieving sustainability in the region. Watershed Planning • TRCA recommends the inclusion of a watershed management annex or at least stronger references to the importance of watershed planning and management. 67 • TRCA recommends the governments of Canada and Ontario support the strengthening of linkages between watershed planning and the Lake -wide Management Plans (LaMPs). The proposed COA can do this by stipulating the coordination of actions among watershed management plans, lakefront development and the adjacent near shore zone. • Conservation Ontario's Healthy Watersheds, Healthy Great Lakes, submitted to the federal government on a previous occasion, aims to prevent the listing of future Areas of Concern by investing in the protection of healthy watersheds today. Support of this proposal is key to ensuring the protection of the Great Lakes. Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan • TRCA supports the governments' commitment to review and revise delisting criteria (Result 2.6) for the Toronto and Region AOC. Although, Toronto and Region was designated an AOC along with 17 others "hotspots" on the Canadian side of the Great Lakes - it is unique amongst the now 15 other AOCs. The scale and size of Toronto and Region alone makes the AOC unique. The challenges of dealing with over 200 years of industrialization and urbanization while the area still faces some of its fastest growth are without precedent in any other AOC. Toronto needs to expedite the implementation of plans such as the Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan and TRCA's Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy, and the forthcoming implementation plans for the Don, Humber and Rouge rivers. Given the development pressures on the region combined with effects of climate change, original timeframes for the implementation of these actions are too long and funding too small to effect any real change. Greater concerted effort by the federal, provincial and municipal governments, and the private sector will be required for sustained leadership, continuing funding and creative programs under a renewed COA to preserve the remaining ecological values of the area that are critical to the sustainable future for the region. Funding and Support • TRCA recommends that the government of Canada and Ontario ensure funding is not disrupted to the important work supported by the Toronto and Region RAP. At this time, TRCA has received indication that funding provided by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment to support the Remedial Action Plan for the Toronto and Region AOC will not be interrupted. TRCA has not yet received a similar indication from Environment Canada. An interruption of funding will delay and possibly jeopardize certain project deliverables. TRCA works with many partners and is able to leverage the federal and provincial funding support on behalf of the governments. Partners such as the municipalities take note of projects which have RAP funding. On March 7, 2007, the Chief Administrative Officer of TRCA requested a meeting with the Minister of the Environment to discuss the interruption of funding and concern regarding the lack of funding mechanisms which allow for the administration and implementation of projects necessary to remediate the Toronto and Region. The request is currently being brought to the Minister's attention and TRCA requests that this meeting take place as soon as possible. 68 • TRCA has requested the governments of Canada and Ontario increase funding for TRCA's jurisdiction which includes Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Area to $200,000,000 (2007 -2010) to provide partner funding to significantly advance the implementation of the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan and other plans now in place to move the Toronto Area of Concern closer to a target of becoming an "Area In Recovery". Staff from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment has requested that TRCA provide additional details to support this funding request; TRCA staff is currently working on this request which will be submitted to both the federal and provincial governments for consideration. • TRCA recommends that the governments of Canada and Ontario strengthen their partnerships with, and build capacity in, the conservation authorities as they continue to have a vital role in the implementation of COA initiatives. • TRCA recommends that in light of the importance of the Great Lakes, that the governments ensure future COAs do not lapse. • TRCA welcomed the opportunities to comment as 2007 -2010 COA was developed, and urges the federal and provincial governments to coordinate early consultation among parties, including conservation authorities, on future COA initiatives. The comments provided to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment for its ERB posting #PA07E0001 on February 9, 2007 are available upon request. Report prepared by: Kelly Montgomery,extension 5576 For Information contact:Adele Freeman , extension 5238 Date: April 10, 2007 RES. #D11/07 - TOWN OF MARKHAM SPECIAL POLICY AREA Updated Rouge River Flood Plain Mapping. The Town of Markham is updating the boundary of the Special Policy Area through amendments to their Official Plan (OPA No. 153) and implementing Zoning By -laws to reflect adjustments arising from Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Rouge River flood plain mapping update. Moved by: Seconded by: Pamela Gough Grant Gibson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the request by the Town of Markham to amend the boundary of the Special Policy Area designation, as described within Official Plan Amendment No. 153, and the associated implementing Zoning By -law Amendments be supported for approval by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH); 69 THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff work with the Town of Markham, where appropriate, in the planning and development review process, to investigate opportunities to reduce the flood risk through flood remediation measures within the Special Policy Area; AND FURTHER THAT MNR, MMAH, the Region of York and the Town of Markham be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Province of Ontario has a one zone policy approach to managing flood risk through the planning process which essentially requires that no new development be permitted within the flood plain. The Province of Ontario provides a mechanism known as a "Special Policy Area" designation to recognize the unique circumstances of historic communities that existed within flood vulnerable areas prior to the implementation of a provincial flood hazard planning policy and where the application of the one zone approach would result in a significant socio- economic impact. This special approach to flood plain management was introduced by the province as a policy option in the 1988 Provincial Flood Plain Planning Policy Statement and associated Implementation and Technical Guidelines. Special Policy Areas (SPAs) are defined in the current Provincial Policy Statement as: "an area within a community that has historically existed in the flood plain and where site - specific policies, approved by both the Ministers of Natural Resources and Municipal Affairs and Housing, are intended to provide for the continued viability of existing uses (which are generally on a small scale) and address the significant social and economic hardships to the community that would result from strict adherence to provincial policies concerning development. The criteria and procedures for approval are established by the Province. A Special Policy Area is not intended to allow for new or intensified development and site alteration, if a community has feasible opportunities for development outside the flood plain" The policies and boundaries of a SPA are determined through a consultative process between the municipality, the conservation authority, MNR and MMAH, and implemented through amendments to a municipality's Official Plan and Zoning By -law. In 1990, the Town of Markham was granted approval by MNR and MMAH, to implement a Special Policy Area approach to the Unionville area through Official Plan Amendment No. 100 (Special Policy Areas) and an implementing Zoning By -law. The SPA designation was supported by TRCA. At that time a partial deferral was incorporated into the Amendment to permit an update to the flood plain mapping in the Fonthill area. The deferral was subsequently approved in 1993. 70 In 2000, TRCA commenced a project to update the hydrologic and hydraulic modeling for the Rouge River watershed. The intent and scope of the project was to update the existing flood plain mapping for the entire watershed to address current land uses, existing road crossings, establish storm water management requirements and incorporate new modeling software. The modeling exercise generated new flood plain mapping for the Rouge River watershed in 2004. The new mapping identified variances to the flood plain boundaries resulting from the ability to produce a finer scale of mapping and accurate modeling software to account for flood plain influences within the watershed, including lands subject to the town's approved SPA designation. The change to the flood plain mapping generated a need to revise the SPA boundaries to ensure the mapping at the Town of Markham is consistent with the mapping used by TRCA. As a result of the update, the proposed revisions will result in a reduction to the SPA designation by approximately 19.45 hectares. Public Consultation Process: On June 22, 2004, Town of Markham Council directed their staff to initiate a technical Official Plan and Zoning By -law amendment process to adjust the Special Policy Area boundaries to reflect the updated flood plain mapping. Town of Markham staff met with MNR, MMAH and TRCA on November 17, 2004 and June 14, 2005 to discuss the flood plain boundaries and the approval process required by the province. The Town of Markham held a public meeting on June 13, 2005 to present the updated flood plain mapping produced by TRCA and a revised proposed Special Policy Area boundary consistent with the new flood plain mapping. A pubic meeting was held on May 16, 2006 for public review and comment of the draft Official Plan and Zoning By -law amendments to implement the boundary adjustments to the SPA. A further opportunity for public input was provided prior to the Council meeting on June 13, 2006. TRCA staff attended all three public meetings and responded to questions from the public and members of Council related to technical and flood plain management issues. RATIONALE The updated flood plain mapping created variances to the flood plain boundary on lands currently designated SPA. TRCA's updated mapping and the provincial criteria for the designation of Special Policy Areas has been used to determine appropriate adjustments to the lands designated SPA in the Town of Markham. This is the first comprehensive technical update to the boundary of the SPA since the original approval of the SPA by MNR and MMAH in 1990. There are no revisions to the town's Special Policy Area policies as part of this update. The SPA policies will be reviewed in the context of the Official Plan Environmental Policy Review and Consolidation exercise that the Town of Markham is currently undertaking, in consultation with TRCA. On the basis of provincial technical criteria, including depth of flooding, velocity of flow, the feasibility of floodproofing new development, the appropriateness of other flood plain management measures such as the one zone approach, etc., TRCA staff in consultation with Town of Markham staff, recommended adjustments to the boundary of the SPA, as per Attachment 1. These recommended changes were supported by Town of Markham Council. However, Council did raise a concern about TRCA's recommendation to remove the Unionville parking lot from its current SPA designation. TRCA's rationale to recommended removal of the parking lot area from the SPA designation was based on the technical criteria evaluation that 71 this area is highly constrained by more significant flood depths and therefore more appropriately managed for this flood risk by the one -zone approach. In a report to Markham Council dated June 13, 2006, town staff noted that the Unionville parking lot serves a significant parking need in support of the residents and businesses in Main Street Unionville and the proposed removal of the SPA designation on the parking lot could potentially impact future options for modifications to the parking lot. As such, town staff recommended that the SPA designation as currently approved be retained to ensure Council is afforded the flexibility in addressing future parking matters on these lands. On June 13, 2006, Markham Council adopted Official Plan Amendment No. 153 to amend the SPA boundary as per Attachment 2, which includes the boundary adjustments recommended by TRCA and the retention of the SPA designation on Unionville parking lot. TRCA recognizes the significance that the Unionville parking lot provides in terms of servicing the economic viability of the businesses and residents in Main Street Unionville. It is currently an at grade parking lot and TRCA would work cooperatively with Markham staff regarding any improvements to better serve the community, such as minor grading or drainage improvements. Based on the continued use of this area as an at grade parking lot, TRCA would be supportive of retaining the SPA designation. However, the Town of Markham should be advised that the Unionville parking lot is highly constrained for any new development and that reduction and remediation of the flood hazard would be necessary prior to consideration of any proposed change in use or new development on the parking lot. SUMMARY On June 13, 2006, the Town of Markham Council adopted Official Plan Amendment No. 153 to amend the boundary of the Special Policy Area to reflect TRCA's updated Rouge River flood plain mapping. As a result of the revisions, the SPA designation will be reduced from approximately 65.63 ha to 46.18 ha. OPA No. 153 adopted by Council is awaiting provincial approval from MNR and MMAH. As part of the provincial approval process, a resolution from the Authority on the revisions to the SPA boundary has been requested by the MNR and MMAH. Report prepared by: Laurie Nelson, extension 5281 For Information contact: Laurie Nelson, extension 5281 Date: April 17, 2007 Attachments: 2 72 Attachment 1 73 Attachment 2 74 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #D12/07 - CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES MORAINE COALITION 2006 Accomplishments. Receipt of the 2006 accomplishments of the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Gay Cowbourne IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report and brochure on the 2006 Accomplishments of the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND The nine conservation authorities with watersheds on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) partnered together in late 2000 as the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC). The mission of the CAMC is to: • advance the science and understanding of the Oak Ridges Moraine; and • work toward government, agency and community support for the form, function and linkages of the ORM. The goals of the CAMC are to: • define and protect natural heritage and water resource systems of the ORM through watershed studies and monitoring; • support an accessible trail system; • ensure effective stewardship services on the moraine; and • build partnerships to provide education, information and land securement opportunities on the ORM. Wayne Wilson, Chief Administrative Officer for the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, served as Chair of CAMC for 2006. David Burnett, Manager, Provincial and Regional Policy, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), has been the coordinator of the CAMC since mid -2001. 2006 ACCOMPLISHMENTS Details of the 2006 Accomplishments of the CAMC are found in the brochure in Attachment 1 that has been distributed to municipal councils and senior staff, provincial MPPs, federal MPs, CAMC partners and ORM stakeholders. The brochure is also posted on the CAMC page on the TRCA website. The close of 2006 marked the 5th year since Oak Ridges Moraine legislation was passed in December 2001. 2006 also marked the first full year of the "Caring for the Moraine Project ", a strategic partnership among stewardship organizations to deliver coordinated outreach, education and watershed stewardship services to private landowners across the moraine. This resulted in 39 stewardship projects across the moraine in 2006 by CAMC member authorities, equalling in one year almost half the number of conservation authority stewardship projects on the ORM in the preceding 4 years (83 projects in total from 2002 to 2005). 75 Similarly, land securement projects (acquisitions, donations, conservation easements) on the ORM by conservation authorities in 2006 have shown great momentum since the enactment of the moraine legislation. From 2002 to 2005 CAMC member authorities secured a total of 1,842 acres of land. In 2006 alone, CAMC members secured 1,850 acres of environmentally sensitive ORM lands. Details for both stewardship and land securement projects are found in the Attachment 1. Lastly, the 2006 Accomplishments brochure reports the highlights of the ongoing York, Peel, Durham, Toronto (YPDT) CAMC Groundwater Study, including the launch of the public web site. The brochure also lists and thanks the numerous partners that the CAMC has worked with in bringing these projects to fruition. Hard copies of the CAMC 2006 Accomplishments brochure will be available at the board meeting upon request. Report prepared by: David Burnett, extension 5361 For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361 Date: March 26, 2007 Attachments: 1 76 Attachment 1 Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition Central Lake Ontario Credit Valley Ganaraska Region Kawartha Region Lake Sirncoe Region Lower Trent Nottawasaga Valley Otonabee Region Toronto and Region onservation Authority onservation Authority servatlon Authority Conservation Authork Conservation Author l ConservationAuthonty onservat ion Authority onservation Authority nsorvation ority Accomplishments 2006 77 Conservation Authority Oak Ridges Moraine Stewardship Projects 2002 -2006 ( `� lt-y I - • • ii r r - - II theta Region .. r. -. Ib rnTon Total number of alewadifiip proles real number yr etewardebip prujede City Al Karnanba Lakes - t„ Peterborough ,t County Northumberland County N1 2002 - 2005 53 in 2000 39 by Conaervalm Authormes from by Cornervelron Aulhonbes Legend CA SteverSabip Pregame 2002'. -2005 w • CASleenlehvpPrgacle 2006 ® Can ng Prole[, Areas O upper ce Single -Fier Munmpal,lies 9.1bI0 Lama .ewer -ter Mun¢ipallaes Oak Ridges Heroine Repaciormea by rte CAMS oaten Jima, 20050Aai ucenor eU the Aram HOUen9 002 normal Stewardship Highlights A strategic partnership among stewardship organizations called the "Caring for the Moraine Project" (CMP) was officially launched in 2006. With funding from the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation and the project partner organizations, the CMP partners are working together to provide coordinated services for landowners across the moraine. Following are the steward- ship accomplishments from year one achieved through the CMP partnership • made 11 presentations to local groups and partner organizations • contacted 63,658 landowners through newspaper flyers • contacted 4,072 landowners through direct mail • conducted 6 landowner workshops • contacted nearly 20% of the Moraine residents • visited 79 Moraine properties • planted 2,500 prairie plants • planted 170,500 trees over 66 hectares' • restored 2.4 kilometres of stream • created 3 hectares of wetland - protected 50 new hectares of wetland through 10 -year agreements • restored 6 hectares of prairie vegetation • completed 14 welt decommissioning and wellhead protection projects' includes several Pan-CMP projects by Conservation Authorities Coffey Creek. Photo: Jeff Hladun. Trout Unilmned THE MORRINE FAD I WEI The Oak Ridges Moraine Symposium February 12 -13, 2007 www.ormf.com /symposium 78 Conservation Authority Oak Ridges Moraine Securement Projects 2002 -2006 legend CA 58cumment anemia zWZ - zoos O Lipase cc Singe tee MUMnpalrtt _j Lower Ter Musinseulies • CA '_-..renwre Proje..s 200B Public Lands Cat Ridges Mecaere aenmumv w ine OFMF voce Jaen, 2006 wLimn IM1p QnOen0. r.q0 n. lr lessiden Ananc and H.., 2002 Securement Highlights 1. Slokker Canada Inc. This purchase of 69 hectares in the Township of King contains part of the Black Duck Wetland Complex and tributaries of the Humber River. Funding partners include: the Regional Municipality of York, City of Toronto, Township of King, Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust, the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, and Slokker Canada Inc. 2. McLeod Wood Nature Reserve The McLeod family donated 18 hectares of hardwood forest in Aurora, including a block of mature forest and part of the upper headwaters of the East Holland River watershed. The Town of Aurora, the Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust, and Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority are consulting to manage the land in its natural state in perpetuity. 3. Wilder Forest and Wildlife Area These 100 hectares In the Township of Uxbridge, in the headwaters of Duffins Creek, include a portion of the provincially significant Glen Major Wetland Complex. The Vufilders donated seven hectares through the federal Ecogift Program plus $1 million in stork and rash to the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto The Foundation, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, the City of Toronto and the Regional Municipality of Durham contributed the balance. 4. Enniskillen Valley Land Acquisition Project This 530 hectare green space was identified for public acquisition in the early 1960s. It features groundwater resources, open meadows. mature forests and wetlands in the headwaters of Clarington's Rowmanville Creek The Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation, the Region of Durham, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Nature Conservancy Canada have provided financial support for more than 495 hectares since 2004.. In 2006, six new parcels (200 ha) were added. 5. East Cross Forest Mr, Erast Huculak donated 223 hectares to the Nature Conservancy of Canada, who transferred title to Kawartha Region Conservation Authority (KRCA). It is Kawartha's newest natural area, and the first to lie within the Township of Scugog. This environmentally sensitive forest, farmland and pine plantation contains the headwaters of the East Cross Creek and lies entirely within the Oak Ridges Moraine. KRCA is planning to open a multi -use conservation area in 2009. 79 k York Peel Durham Toronto Groundwater Study Highlights Database • an updated, 2006 version of the database has been distributed to all partner agencies • now includes new data from Geological Survey of Canada, MOE, MNR (Oil & Gas wells), and Environment Canada Geological Layer Construction • now incorporates all of Peel, York, Durham and Toronto as well as areas to the east - the geology of the Niagara Escarpment and the linkages to the sediments below the escarpment have been built into the layers along the west Numerical Groundwater Flow Model • completed a comprehensive report on the initial modeling work in York Region and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority watershed - expanded the model westward to the Credit and Humber watersheds and eastwards to cover the Central Lake Ontario watershed and some of the Kawartha watershed • peer review of the model initiated • continued to use model for local projects (e.g. southeast collector study to connect the York sewer system to a Lake Ontario treatment plant) Other Initiatives - launched project website (www.ypdt- camc.ca) • undertook seismic studies in Queensville and Port Perry • assisted source water protection with technical expertise More information C Central Lake Ontario (CLOCA) www.cloca.com - 905- 579 -0411 Credit Valley (CVC) www.creditvalleycons.com - 905 670 -1615 Ganaraska Region (GRCA) www.grca.on.ca - 905 - 885 -8173 Kawartha Region (KRCA) www.kawarthaconservation.com - 705 - 328 -2271 Lake Simcoe Region (LSRCA) www.lsrca.on.ca - 905 - 895.1281 Lower Trent (LTC) www Ito on ca - 613 - 394 -4829 Nottawasaga Valley (NVCA) www.nvca.on.ca - 705 -424 -1479 Otonabee Region (ORCA) www.otonabee.com - 705- 745 -5791 Toronto and Region (TRCA) www.trce on_ca - 418- 661 -6500 Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition www. trca. on.ca /corporate_infolconservation authorities/ Caring for the Moraine Project www.ormf.corn/whats_Caring.ht mi YPDT Groundwater Study www,ypdt- camcc.ca Thank You to Our Partners City of Toronto Conservation Ontario Great Lakes Sustainability Fund Geological Survey of Canada Landowners Nature Conservancy of Canada Oak Ridges Trail Association Ontario Geological Survey ORM Foundation ORM Land Trust ORM Municipalities ORM Stewardship Councils Province of Ontario Save The Oak Ridges Moraine Coalition Seneca College - King Campus Wetland Habitat Fund/wildlife Habitat Canada 50% recycsd. 15% post consumer. acid tree. elemental chlorine free CAMC Mission • to advance the science and understanding of the Oak Ridges Moraine • to work toward government, agency and community support for the conservation and protection of the form, function and linkages of the Oak Ridges Moraine CAMC Goals • to define and protect natural heritage and water resource systems of the Oak Ridges Moraine through watershed science and monitoring • to support an accessible trail system • to ensure effective stewardship services on the Oak Ridges Moraine • to build partnerships to provide education, information and land securement opportunities on the Oak Ridges Moraine 80 RES. #D13/07 - WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Gay Cowbourne THAT Section IV items 8.2.1 - 8.2.3, inclusive, in regards to watershed committee minutes, be received. Section IV Items - 8.2.1 - 8.2.3, Inclusive DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL Minutes of Meeting #10/06, held on November 16, 2006 Minutes of Meeting #11/06, held on December 7, 2006 ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE Minutes of Meeting #1/07, held on January 12, 2007 Minutes of Meeting #2/07, held on February 16, 2007 ROUGE WATERSHED TASK FORCE Minutes of Meeting #10/06, held on November 30, 2006. TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 10:45 a.m., on Friday, April 20, 2007. CARRIED Richard Whitehead Brian Denney Chair Secretary- Treasurer /ks 81 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #2/07 June 8, 2007 The Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #2/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, June 8, 2007. The Chair Richard Whitehead , called the meeting to order at 10:07 a.m.. PRESENT Gay Cowbourne Member Lois Griffin Member Bonnie Littley Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority Alissa Sugar Member Richard Whitehead Chair ABSENT Maria Augimeri Member Bryan Bertie Member Grant Gibson Member John Parker Member Anthony Perruzza Vice Chair RES. #D14/07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Lois Griffin THAT the Minutes of Meeting #1/07, held on April 20, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS (a) A presentation by Steve Holysh, Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition, in regard to item 8.1 - York -Peel- Durham - Toronto Groundwater Management Project. 82 (b) A presentation by Gary Bowen, Watershed Specialist, Duffins /Carruthers, in regard to item 7.1 - Collaborative Source Water Protection Study for Lake Ontario Based Municipal Drinking Water Supplies - Watershed Loadings Assessment Study Progress Report. (c) A presentation by Jim Berry, Manager, Environmental Engineering Projects, in regard to item 8.2 - Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Program - 2006 - 2007 Overview. RES. #D15 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Lois Griffin Alissa Sugar THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED RES. #D16 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Alissa Sugar Gay Cowbourne THAT above -noted presentation (b) be heard and received. CARRIED RES. #D17 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Bonnie Littley THAT above -noted presentation (c) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #D18 /07 - COLLABORATIVE SOURCE WATER PROTECTION STUDY FOR LAKE ONTARIO BASED MUNICIPAL DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES Watershed Loadings Assessment Study Progress Report. Outcomes from the Phase 1 Study with Environment Canada estimating nutrient and suspended solids loads to Lake Ontario. 83 Moved by: Seconded by: Alissa Sugar Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), as the CTC (Credit Valley Conservation, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority) watershed region lead, continue to work with Environment Canada on pollutant loadings assessments for watersheds draining into Lake Ontario; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized and directed to take such actions as is necessary to participate in this study. CARRIED BACKGROUND Under the provincially funded Great Lakes Surface Water System Grant Program, a long term proactive and strategic approach for the protection of drinking water supplies for over 5 million residents is underway. A report on this program was presented at the Watershed Management Advisory Board meeting held on July 14, 2006. The Collaborative Lake Ontario Drinking Water Study is tasked with identifying and evaluating local and lake wide hazards to 33 municipal drinking water intakes around Lake Ontario. Under the first phase of the project, TRCA worked on a study with Environment Canada (EC) to calculate non -point source pollutant loads entering Lake Ontario from the various watersheds between the Niagara Region and Prince Edward County. As directed by the 2006 -2007 CTC Source Protection work plan, TRCA staff is coordinating this work on behalf of all the participating conservation authorities along Lake Ontario. Pollutant loads provide an estimate of the total mass of a contaminant entering Lake Ontario. These estimates serve as useful means of tracking trends through time in pollution exports from watersheds and serves to document the effectiveness of various water quality improvement actions developed through watershed planning and municipal - industrial abatement programs. The initial study focused on water quality parameters that might potentially interfere with the treatment of lake based drinking water supplies. Interference with the treatment process due to turbid water and high nutrients, can put drinking water supplies at risk if the integrity of the treatment process is compromised. In addition, knowledge of the amount and delivery mechanisms for pollutants can assist in the development of Intake Protection Zones as prescribed by the Ministry of Environment Guidance Manuals. Loading assessment techniques developed in Phase 1 of the study can be applied to estimate loads for other more direct, health related water quality parameters (such as Polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs]). Furthermore, loadings estimates for these initial parameters have utility for broader Lake Ontario water quality studies such as Areas of Concern, Canada Ontario Agreement and the Canada -US Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. 84 Work Plan Accurate calculations of pollutant loads requires daily measurements of stream flow and very frequent sampling of water quality. Current monitoring programs such as the TRCA Regional Watershed Monitoring Program sample water quality parameters on a monthly basis. This level of sampling is adequate for our watershed and report card studies, but is not frequent enough to quantify the mass of contaminants being discharged into Lake Ontario. Previous studies have shown that in excess of 70 samples, distributed throughout the year in proportion to stream flow volumes, are required for precise estimates. The intent of this study is to provide reasonable approximations of the loads for the watersheds in order to identify more precisely which watersheds require a more accurate estimate of loadings. For these priority watersheds, enhanced monitoring programs may be required. Environment Canada (EC), the University of Guelph and TRCA have all cooperated to provide preliminary loadings estimates. Watershed pollution loads will be used to identify, from a Lake Ontario drinking water perspective, the priority watersheds that potentially might influence lake based municipal drinking water supplies. Phase 1 loading calculations and analysis were undertaken using a variety of techniques, including: 1. determination of Event Mean Concentrations coupled with runoff volumes as a first approximation of watershed loads across the study area; 2. application of unit area loads from International Joint Commission water quality land use studies (Pollution from Land Use Activities Reference Group [PLUARG]) and other studies to estimate unit area loads (kg /ha) for nutrients on a watershed and sub - watershed basis; 3. event water quality model (Agricultural Non -Point Source [AGNPS]) to estimate peak loads for major storm events; 4. comparison of wet weather flow and other modelling studies with available concentrations and loads; 5. where opportunities exist, use measured flow and stream chemistry data (from Ministry of Environment and EC) to calculate observed loads and calibrate models; and 6. compare results with previous published studies for the Great Lakes. Phase 2 of the Lake Ontario Collaborative drinking water study will require the refinement of loadings estimates for the priority watershed identified in Phase 1. The refined loads will be used as inputs into a Lake Ontario water quality model to define Intake Protection Zones (IPZs) as per ministry guidelines. Follow -up efforts are also required to keep the loading estimates current and to answer any additional information requests from the project consultants and drinking water treatment utilities who operate the 33 intakes. In light of the identified deficit of stream flow and chemistry data and taking into consideration the cost and time required to establish new monitoring programs, the study team is recommending that a continuous water quality model be used to provided the required refinements in load estimates. Through these modelling runs a more comprehensive suite of water quality parameters could be studied. Estimates from the calibrated model will be of sufficient precision for IPZ study purposes and may negate the need for more detailed water quality monitoring beyond current programs. 85 The application of a daily time -step model for the priority tributaries will provide input data to the lakewide water quality simulation model. Modelling runs would answer questions on when and where watershed based pollutants are impacting lake -based drinking water supplies. Based upon watershed modelling reviews by the study team, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model developed in the United States of America was selected as the preferred modelling tool. Previously as part of the Duffins Creek watershed studies, the SWAT has been set up using locally available climate and geographic information systems data sets. Outputs from the SWAT model can match the input time steps required for the lakewide water quality model and IPZ assessments. For phase 2, the SWAT model will be set up for the priority watersheds. This may involve between 3 -10 watersheds around the lake, which will be calibrated with available data and will be compared with Hydrological Simulation Program- FORTRAN (HSPF) runs for Toronto area watersheds and the Credit River. Loading analysis provided by Halton Region Conservation Authority for their Lake Ontario watersheds will be used to compare estimates. A technical report will be prepared to document all the work completed. Conservation authority and municipal staff will be trained on the use of the models and loadings estimation procedures including the phase 1 work. Results of the study will be posted on a data portal for access by conservation authorities and other interested parties. Gary Bowen, Duffins- Carruthers Watershed Specialist, will present the findings to date and answer questions at the June 8th Watershed Management Advisory Board meeting. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for this study was provided by the Ministry of the Environment through a grant to the Lake Ontario Collaborative Study and as well through grants to the CTC. The funds provided to the collaborative study will in turn be transferred to EC. CTC funding will be used to cover staff time and projects that directly related to conservation authority programs. Through these funding arrangements, effective partnerships are being developed and the technical expertise gained through the study is being transferred to capacity building to support this work on a long term basis. Report prepared by: Gary Bowen, extension 5385 Email: gbowen @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Gary Bowen, extension 5385 Email: gbowen @trca.on.ca Date: May 24, 2007 RES. #D19/07 - OAK RIDGES CORRIDOR PARK (Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve at Richmond Hill) 2007 Implementation. Approval of the 2007 Workplan for Site Securement, Monitoring and Habitat Restoration. 86 Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Bonnie Littley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT THE 2007 workplan for site securement, monitoring and habitat restoration in the Oak Ridges Corridor Park be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the workplan be subject to approval of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and owners of the land. CARRIED BACKGROUND On September 23, 2004, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing announced that the Province of Ontario and certain owners of Oak Ridges Moraine lands in the Town of Richmond Hill had reached an agreement to exchange these owners' lands for provincially -owned lands in the City of Pickering. To date, the exchange has not been finalized pending resolution of the Environmental Assessment 'bump up' request related to the Pickering lands. The purpose of the land exchange is to protect the last remaining natural corridor link between the eastern and western parts of the Oak Ridges Moraine in the Town of Richmond Hill. Under the agreement, 1,057 acres (428 hectares) of land in the Town of Richmond Hill will come into public ownership. These lands are currently known as the Oak Ridges Corridor Park but a recommendation has been made to the province that the name be changed to Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve once the land is transferred into public ownership. The park lands are generally located between Bathurst Street and Bayview Avenue, north of Jefferson Sideroad and south of the community of Oak Ridges. Approximately 100 acres (40 hectares) of the lands make up the Bathurst Glen Golf Course abutting the westernmost boundary of the property (see attachments). At the request of the province, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) led the development of a management plan for the Oak Ridges Corridor Park. An advisory committee was established to oversee the work. Members included representatives from TRCA, Regional Municipality of York, Town of Richmond Hill, Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC), Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation, Oak Ridges Trail Association (ORTA), Richmond Hill Naturalists, Save the Oak Ridges Moraine, Jefferson Forest Residents Association and Citizens Environment Watch (C EW) . At Authority Meeting #8/06, held on October 27, 2006, Resolution #A235/06 was approved as follows: THAT the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan, prepared by AMEC Earth and Environmental dated August 2006, be approved; THAT copies of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan be sent to the members of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park Management Plan Advisory Committee with a request that the document be endorsed and they consider opportunities for providing multi year funding to support the implementation of the plan, and operation of the park; 87 THAT staff assist with the establishment of an Oak Ridges Corridor Park Advisory Committee made up of interested citizens, interest groups and organizations, to help with the implementation of the management plan; THAT the province be requested to approve the official name of the park as 'Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve at Richmond Hill'; THAT approval be granted to enter into agreements with the Province of Ontario and the current Oak Ridges Corridor Park land owners to maintain and protect the completed trail on an interim basis and until the lands are conveyed to the Province of Ontario; AND FURTHER THAT appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take such action as is necessary to implement the agreements including obtaining any necessary approvals and execution of documents. The completed management plan and the above resolution has been distributed to all of the members of the advisory committee that assisted in the preparation of the management plan. Preliminary discussions have occurred with the primary partners who would sit as members of an Oak Ridges Corridor Park Advisory Committee. These partners are the province, municipalities, ORTA, CEW and Mr. Gordon Gray, current owner of the Philips Lake property. The province has been asked to consider 'Kettle Lakes Nature Reserve at Richmond Hill' as the formal name of the property. No decision has been made on this as of yet. TRCA staff continue to work with the Ontario Reality Corporation (ORC) in terms of devising a suitable agreement allowing TRCA to be the manager of the property once the land comes into public ownership. It is important that this agreement be completed as soon as possible and be available immediately following the transfer of land to the province. It is important to note that any work on the property cannot proceed without the prior approval and consent of the province and the owners. The owners of the land have committed $3.5 million to assist with the implementation of the management plan. Approximately $1.2 million was spent in 2006 to build a 5 kilometre primary pedestrian trail through the property, construct a fence around Philips Lake to restrict public access, and to build fences and gates at the formal points of access. The balance of the owners' financial contribution will be made as building permits are issued for residential units surrounding the Oak Ridges Corridor Park. These revenues are expected within the next 10 year period. TRCA continues to manage the Bathurst Glen Golf Course, which is within the boundaries of the Oak Ridges Corridor Park. Staff has reviewed the operations of the golf course and have developed an environmental management plan to eventually meet the requirements of the Audubon Sanctuary Program. Reduced mowing, water management and planting of trees and shrubs have been initiated. The golf course is still owned by Mattamy Homes. Revenues in excess of the golf course operations go to Mattamy. This will remain the case until the total 428 hectares, including the golf course, is transferred into public ownership. The province has been asked to fund the $30,000 for gates and fences to control access at the formal entrances, and another $150,000 for operating costs such as enforcement and site maintenance (hazard tree removal, garbage clean up and fence repairs). 88 It is important that the implementation of the overall management plan begin utilizing the revenues received to date from the issuance of permits for building lots. Site securement is a priority to protect the site and is recommended in the next phase of work. Approximately $350,000 is currently available and held by TRCA. FINANCIAL DETAILS The proposed work for 2007 and associated costs are as follows: 1. Site Securement and Monitoring Trail Construction - signs, fences and Yonge St. traffic signal $192,000 Park Infrastructure - entrance planting, bollards $11,000 Monitoring $8,000 Professional/Tech. Services $15,000 Subtotal $226,000 Tax $13,560 Contingency $12,000 Total $251,560 2. Habitat Restoration Buffer Planting $21,600 Forest Establishment $34,500 Grassland Management $5,800 Wetland Enhancement $5,000 Professional/Tech. Services $10,000 Subtotal $76,900 Tax $4,614 Contingency $4,075 Soil Tests and surveys $10,000 Total $95,589 Grand Total $347,149 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • finalize the membership and initiate the property advisory committee; • seek funding from other partners; • develop detailed annual operating plans for subsequent work; and • work with the Ontario Reality Corporation to finalize the property management agreement so that it is ready upon completion of the land exchange. Report prepared by: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 Email: gwilkins @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 Email: gwilkins @trca.on.ca Date: May 30, 2007 Attachments: 2 89 Attachment 1 90 Attachment 2 C 9 go Z U W a 1 a 2. °5— El 91 RES. #D20/07 - ARSENAL LANDS /MARIE CURTIS PARK WEST MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM City of Mississauga (Region of Peel) /City of Toronto. Approval of the Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West Master Plan Addendum and direction to prepare agreements relating to park development and long -term management and operation with the City of Mississauga and the City of Toronto. Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley Lois Griffin THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West Master Plan Addendum, dated November 2006, be approved; THAT the Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West Master Plan Addendum be submitted to the City of Mississauga and the City of Toronto for approval; THAT staff be directed to prepare agreements for park development and long -term management and operation of the Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West in consultation with the City of Mississauga and the City of Toronto; THAT TRCA's contribution to the partnership funding for the implementation of the Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West Master Plan Addendum be included in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) 5 year capital budget plan (2008- 2012); AND FURTHER THAT the City of Mississauga, the City of Toronto and the Region of Peel be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Arsenal Lands is a 15.7 hectare property located south of Lakeshore Road East on the eastern border of the City of Mississauga. The Arsenal Lands were long used for a variety of manufacturing activities, including small arms and munitions production during the Second World War. In October 1992, TRCA purchased the property with the intent of expanding Marie Curtis Park to form a 41 hectare waterfront park. The land purchase was made possible through a joint collaboration involving the City of Toronto, Regional Municipality of Peel, City of Mississauga, Province of Ontario and TRCA. As part of the purchase, TRCA and the former landowner (Canada Post) each contributed $2.5 million to remediate the site. Shortly after the property was purchased, TRCA retained a consulting consortium (consisting of Hough Woodland Naylor Dance Leinster, Raven Beck Environmental Limited, Duke Engineering Services Inc., Angus Environmental Ltd., Michael Michalski Associates and DS Lea Associates) to undertake a park planning and site remediation study. The purpose of this study was to determine the nature and extent of contaminants on the site, identify methods of rehabilitating the lands to permit public use and develop innovative ideas for the incorporation of the site as a major regional attraction on the Lake Ontario waterfront. The consulting team reported to a technical steering committee consisting of staff from TRCA, the City of Toronto, the City of Mississauga and the Region of Peel to ensure that the interests of the participating agencies were addressed. The consulting team also received public input to help direct the site remediation approach and design of the park concept. 92 The Arsenal Lands Park and Site Remediation Master P /an was released in 1998 after extensive input from a partner steering committee and through many public meetings /newsletters. The plan included recommendations for site remediation to achieve the park use guidelines established by the province, a long -term monitoring plan and a park concept based on a conservative landscape rehabilitation approach. The focus of the plan was the rehabilitation of the Arsenal Lands property and the provision of minimal park facilities. The plan also made recommendations to integrate the Arsenal Lands with the Waterfront Trail and Marie Curtis Park. At Authority Meeting #8/98, held on September 25, 1998, Resolution #A174/98 was approved as follows: THAT the project report on the Arsenal Lands Site Remediation Plan and Park Master Plan be received; THAT staff be directed to implement the site remediation plan in accordance with the work program outlined in this report; THAT the Park Master Plan be received and circulated to the partners for comment and approval; THAT staff be directed to report back to the Authority on the partners approval of the Master Plan and in particular on the recommended arrangement for capital development and park management (operation and maintenance); AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto, the City of Mississauga, the Regional Municipal/ty of Peel, the Province of Ontario and the Canada Post Corporation be so advised. Site Remediation In 1990, TRCA performed an environmental audit of the Arsenal Lands to determine the nature and extent of contamination associated with the prior land uses. Testing identified the presence of Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), metals, petroleum compounds, volatile organic compounds and combustible gases in 19 areas of the site. Building demolition resulted in the successful remediation of two of these areas of contamination. The remaining areas of contamination were addressed as part of The Arsenal Lands Park and Site Remediation Master Plan. Following the direction to implement the site remediation plan, TRCA retained INTERA (formerly Duke Engineering and Services) to coordinate remediation of the site in cooperation with TRCA. On October 19, 1998, TRCA initiated the site remediation process in accordance with the Ministry of Environment's Guidelines for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario (MOE, 1996 - revised February 1997). Site remediation involved on -site screening of soils to remove debris, cobbles and rubble, as well as the removal of more than 70,000 tonnes of soil. The acknowledged Record of Site Condition, dated November 8, 2002, was received from MOE Halton Peel District Office on November 13, 2002. 93 A containment facility was constructed on -site to store low -level radioactive soils that were uncovered during the remediation process. The Low -Level Radioactive Waste Management Office supervised construction of this facility. The Low -Level Radioactive Waste Management Office also undertakes ongoing monitoring of the facility on an annual basis. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, in compliance with the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, licensed the consolidation mound on December 5, 2005. As per the conditions of the license, TRCA erected perimeter fencing to restrict public access, which will be signed to identify and explain the purpose of the facility. TRCA achieved substantial savings during the remediation of this site and successfully negotiated with Canada Post to contribute half of the savings from the remediation budget to finance park development ($688,000) and the implementation of an environmental monitoring program ($240,000). Monitoring In 2001, TRCA initiated a monitoring program to ensure that the site remains in a condition that does not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. This monitoring program included periodic sampling of soil, groundwater, surface water, sediment and vegetation. In May 2006, Terraprobe provided a summary of monitoring results, spanning 2001 to 2005. The report concluded that ground and surface water quality trends across the site have been generally established and recommended that the program be discontinued based on the results. However, the report identified that groundwater results for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC's) on a small section of the southwest boundary of the site required further subsurface investigation to determine whether further work or remedial actions were necessary. In 2006, Terraprobe was retained by TRCA to investigate the extent and impact of VOC's, to prepare a report documenting the results of the investigation, and to provide recommendations for additional work if required. On March 5, 2007, TRCA received Terraprobe's report, which confirmed that the impacted groundwater appears to be limited in extent and that the quality of groundwater does not pose a hazard to human health or the local environment. Based on Terraprobe's recommendation, TRCA will sample groundwater on two separate occasions in 2007 to establish stabilized baseline conditions. Leased Area Ontario Power Generation (OPG) leases approximately 24,000 square feet of the office warehouse building situated at the west entrance to the property as a training facility. A small area of the building is also leased to COPS, a community youth group sponsored by Peel Regional Police. In 2003, City of Mississauga staff assessed this building to evaluate opportunities for integration with the future park. The assessment revealed that the cost to repair and retrofit the building to allow for public use would exceed the cost of building a new facility. Based on the results of this assessment, TRCA maintained the current lease arrangement with OPG. 94 In 2004, OPG commissioned two studies to determine required repairs and upgrades to the building. The OPG studies indicated that over the next five to ten year horizon the building could require in excess of $2,000,000 in repairs and upgrades. TRCA subsequently conducted an independent review of the studies, as well as a review of requirements under the Ontario Building Code and Ontario Fire Code for the facility. TRCA's review confirmed that immediate work on the building is required to maintain its use. Essential work includes roof repair, boiler replacement and upgrades in compliance with the Ontario Fire Code. The estimate for these essential repairs is $560,000. OPG expressed interest in continuing to lease the facility, proposing to undertake repairs and upgrade at their expense in exchange for rent abatement. Based on the condition of the building and the success of the partnership with OPG, TRCA approved an 11 -year extension to the lease with OPG via Authority Resolution #A236/06, approved at Authority Meeting #8/06, held on October 27, 2006. Commencing January 1, 2007, the terms of the lease provide OPG with a one -year lease extension to determine if it is feasible for OPG to continue to lease the facility. During this time, OPG will be responsible for all costs associated with the building including repairs and maintenance, structural repairs, realty taxes, insurance (building and liability), and utilities for an annual rent of $1. Pending the results of the leasing study, OPG may lease the building for a five year term, commencing January 1, 2008, with an option to renew the lease for further two and three year terms. The rent will be $1 for each year of the term and OPG would remain responsible for all costs associated with the building and undertake a capital work program of not less that $1,000,000 over the 10 year term (in consultation with TRCA). Upon completion of OPG's 10 year lease term in 2018, TRCA will consult the City of Mississauga and the City of Toronto regarding the future use of the office warehouse building, which may include public use or possible integration with the surrounding parkland. Consultation In 1998, TRCA provided a status report on the Arsenal Lands to the technical steering committee, including a copy of the remediation plan and the Arsenal Lands Site Remediation P /an and Park Master P /an for comment and approval. Following the conclusion of the site remediation process, TRCA reconvened a meeting of the technical steering committee to review the progress made during the site remediation phase and to revisit the original master plan. The steering committee identified several issues that required further assessment and resolution before park development could proceed. Some of these issues included: • change in site conditions; • current needs of the community; • need for a long -term park program and management strategy; • safety concerns associated with inappropriate park use in remote areas; • potential user conflict associated with the proposed layout of the access road; • park facilities to service demand for corporate and large group picnics; and • park features to draw regional users. 95 These issues provided the rationale for TRCA to spearhead the development of a master plan addendum. TRCA led the development of the master plan addendum with direction from the public and the technical steering committee. The public were given the opportunity to provide comment on the master plan addendum in 2006. Public consultation included a questionnaire asking potential park users to identify recreational activities and park amenities that they felt should be available at the Arsenal Lands. Following further revisions, the master plan addendum was peer reviewed in 2006 by key staff from TRCA, City of Toronto, City of Mississauga and Region of Peel to verify the master plan addendum's consistency with the policies and recommendations of TRCA and the partners. The Region of Peel also confirmed that the master plan addendum is in keeping with their approval of the parkland acquisition funds that were provided to TRCA and requested that they be consulted if there are future plans to add to the facilities on the site. The partners and the public are in support of the master plan addendum. The partners must approve of any future modifications to the master plan. RATIONALE Master Plan Addendum The Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West Master Plan Addendum is an update of The Arsenal Lands Park and Site Remediation Master P/an (1998). The master plan addendum is consistent with the goals and objectives of the original master plan. The addendum reinforces the original intent of the partners to form a regional waterfront park. This is accomplished by integrating the Arsenal Lands with the west side of Marie Curtis Park and through an enhancement of the proposed park amenities to suit the park's regional scale. Given the park' s proximity to the border of the cities of Mississauga and Toronto, the park will function as a 'Gateway Park' that will service residents from both municipalities. The addendum provides further information about the current site conditions, planning recommendations, demographics, community needs and public interests. This information was used to update the overall concept for the park and to develop recommendations for future park operations. The revised park concept builds on the original master plan by offering not only trails and picnicking venues, but also complimentary park facilities to make the park experience more enjoyable and attractive to regional users. These complimentary facilities have been selected to meet public demand and have been sited to help deter inappropriate park use in under used areas. The changes to the 1998 master plan concept are as follows: • the major points of access to the park, as well as the supporting system of interior roadways and parking lots, have been redesigned to prevent user conflicts and to create more usable space within the park; • permitted group picnic facilities have been expanded in response to the increased demand; • a new restroom and shelter area has been identified to service the large number of picnickers that will use the Arsenal Lands property; • a new splash pad has been included to offset the use at Lakefront Promenade splash pad, which currently exceeds its designed capacity; • a unique play area has been added to the concept to draw regional park users; • space has been designated for waterfront recreation that is considered compatible with the site conditions and public demand such as beach volleyball; 96 • space has been designated for development of bicycle dirt jumps in the interest of protecting an area of the existing woodlot that is currently being damaged by unauthorized use; • space has been designated for a future 'leash free' area for dog owners to prevent user conflicts; and • public use areas have been repositioned to allow for buffers around sensitive habitats. The addendum outlines the plans to preserve and interpret the unique historic and natural heritage features located within the park, reflecting the partners' commitment to both public recreation and the environment. An overall management approach is included in the addendum, assigning management zones that suggest varying intensities of public use compatible with the site's natural and cultural heritage features. For each management zone, a series of recommendations have been developed to guide park operations and uses. The addendum also recommends that the use of new technologies and materials be explored to develop the park in an environmentally friendly manner. Marie Curtis Park East The portion of Marie Curtis Park located to the east of Etobicoke Creek will be the subject of a future park planning process with the intent that this parkland will continue to be operated by the City of Toronto, albeit as an extension of the Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West. The City of Toronto and TRCA will prepare a master plan update for Marie Curtis Park East to ensure that recreational uses and activities are coordinated between the parks. This master plan update will consider feedback received during the public consultation process for the Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West, which included requests for designated space to facilitate future expansion of the City of Toronto's Community Garden Program, and refurbishment of the Beach Centre, washroom buildings and other park infrastructure. A preliminary estimate for future capital replacements and improvements to Marie Curtis Park East is valued at approximately $1,500,000. This cost estimate will be refined following further public consultation and completion of the Marie Curtis Park East Master Plan Update. Capital Development In 2005, the preliminary capital costs for park development were estimated at $3,000,000 for the Arsenal Lands and $1,000,000 for Marie Curtis Park West. The estimate for the Arsenal Lands considered the cost of implementing the major components outlined in the conceptual park plan such as a new washroom building, play area, splash pad, roadways, trails, parking lots and natural heritage improvements. The cost estimate for Marie Curtis Park West included the decommissioning of the existing parking lots, access road and the boat launch on the west side of Etobicoke Creek, as well as the construction of new park amenities and natural heritage improvements as outlined in the conceptual plan. TRCA has allocated $500,000 over the next two years to implement the habitat restoration recommendations, including decommissioning of the boat launch on Etobicoke Creek. The source of this funding will include TRCA fundraising efforts (i.e. grants from environmental foundations such as Great Lakes Sustainability Fund or TD Friends of the Environment Foundation), as well as TRCA capital budget contributions. Other funding for the development of the parklands will include TRCA's savings from the site remediation program ($688,000), as well as contributions from the cities of Mississauga and Toronto. 97 The City of Mississauga has approved funding for the Arsenal Lands. The City of Toronto advises that Marie Curtis Park is presently not included in the current five -year capital plan. However, there is a 'placeholder' capital project that is comparable to existing projections that is beyond the five -year capital plan. The City of Toronto is presently investigating options to advance monies for this project. Site Management Strategy The overall site management strategy is to achieve a unified approach to the management and operation of the Arsenal Lands and Marie Curtis Park West. As such, it is proposed that these lands be managed as one fully integrated park that will be available to the residents of the cities of Mississauga and Toronto. Based on recent discussions between TRCA, City of Mississauga and City of Toronto, staff is proposing that agreements for the development, management and operation of the Arsenal Lands and Marie Curtis Park West be prepared between TRCA, City of Mississauga and City of Toronto. Through these agreements, it is anticipated that the City of Mississauga would be the project lead for the detailed design, development and operation of the Arsenal Lands and Marie Curtis Park West. TRCA would participate in the detailed design of the Arsenal Lands and Marie Curtis Park West and also retain responsibility for the following: • management of leased area to OPG; • ongoing environmental monitoring of the site; • all aspects of work related to site remediation; • implementation of the habitat restoration recommendations outlined in the master plan addendum; and • all aspects of work affecting the river channel, regulated shoreline, flood control, river protection and erosion control. It is proposed that during operation, the park will be governed by all applicable City of Mississauga by -laws, policies and standards. City of Toronto and City of Mississauga staff are in the process of determining the cost of annual park operations. It has been proposed that the operation costs are to be calculated based on the City of Mississauga's park standards and that any revenues generated by the park (e.g. picnic permits) will be used to offset these costs. Further discussions between City of Mississauga and City of Toronto are required to determine the partners' share of operation costs, as well as contributions to a capital development reserve that would fund future capital expenses, including replacements. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Record of Site Condition Prior to park development, TRCA will file the acknowledged Record of Site Condition in the Environmental Site Registry pursuant to Section 168.4(6) of the Environmental Protection Act. Monitoring TRCA will continue to coordinate ongoing monitoring activities, including terrestrial flora and fauna inventories, fisheries and benthic invertebrate surveys, radon measurements and gamma radiation surveys. TRCA's remaining budget for ongoing monitoring is approximately $115,000 of the original $240,000. 98 Marie Curtis Park East Master Plan Update The portion of Marie Curtis Park located to the east of Etobicoke Creek will be the subject of a future park planning process, with the intent that this parkland will continue to be operated by the City of Toronto. TRCA staff will work in partnership with the City of Toronto on a master plan update for Marie Curtis Park East to complement the Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West Master Plan Addendum. The master plan update for Marie Curtis Park East will ensure full realization of the regional waterfront opportunity for the community by coordinating recreational uses and activities between the parks. This master plan update will include further public consultation and will require City of Mississauga and City of Toronto council approval. Approvals Adoption of the master plan addendum will be subject to the approval of City of Mississauga and City of Toronto councils. Upon receiving Authority approval, TRCA will submit the master plan addendum to the City of Mississauga and City of Toronto for approval. TRCA will secure additional approvals as required to allow for implementation of individual components of the addendum, particularly those that may affect lands adjacent to Lake Ontario or Etobicoke Creek. Community Involvement Following City of Toronto and City of Mississauga councils' approvals, TRCA staff will publish a newsletter for immediate release that provides an outline of the master plan addendum and post it on TRCA's website. Ongoing opportunities for further public consultation and involvement will be provided during detailed design and implementation phases. Development, Management and Operation TRCA will work with the cities of Mississauga and Toronto to prepare agreements related to the development, management and operation of the Arsenal Lands and Marie Curtis Park West. FINANCIAL DETAILS The capital costs for park development are estimated at $3,000,000 for the Arsenal Lands and $1,000,000 for Marie Curtis Park West (based on 2005 dollars). Park development will be funded through savings from the initial site remediation budget and through TRCA, City of Toronto and City of Mississauga capital budgets. Fundraising will also be undertaken by TRCA to offset park development costs. The capital costs for park development for Marie Curtis Park East is estimated at $1,500,000. This cost estimate is considered preliminary and will be refined during the park planning process to be undertaken by TRCA and the City of Toronto. Report prepared by: Laura Stephenson, extension 5296 Email: Itephenson @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Larry Field, extension 5243 Email: (field @trca.on.ca Date: May 30, 2007 Attachments: 2 99 Attachment 1 anserva t►on for The Livin Cit Arsenal Lands /Marie Curtis Park West Property Ownership 100 Property Ownership Region of Peel TRCA Attachment 2 Arsenal Lands/Marie ar. I h d - qI • iUi I I h E g di F I - I a Ai I Ifl RI' III raiii • Leash Free Apia Oltahl • 7 I - 1-A 71 . ; I 3 To- \ Wate riron1 Trail • 4t iislinansimisaF Efotqcoke Creek € ti 2E2 F- I 11 in • itArle late 04, • ions* i IMO Region of Peel Lake Ontario I I 101 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #D21/07 - YORK - PEEL - DURHAM - TORONTO GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT Status Update. Receipt of the 2006 accomplishments of the York -Peel- Durham - Toronto Groundwater Management Study Team. Moved by: Seconded by: Lois Griffin Alissa Sugar IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report and presentation on the 2006 accomplishments of the York -Peel- Durham - Toronto Groundwater Management Study Team be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/07, held on April 27, 2007, amended Resolution #A83/07 was approved, in part, as follows: ...AND FURTHER THAT staff report back on the status of the York-Peel-Durham-Toronto Groundwater Management project. The York -Peel- Durham - Toronto Groundwater Management Study was initiated in 2000 as a partnership between the regions of York, Peel and Durham, the City of Toronto (YPDT) and the associated six conservation authorities (Credit Valley Conservation Authority, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, Kawartha Region Conservation Authority, Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority). It was initiated with the goal of arriving at consistency in groundwater management both from a technical and analytical perspective, as well as from a policy and management perspective. With similar goals and objectives, staff, acting on behalf of the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC), also direct groundwater work across the entire Oak Ridges Moraine. The Province of Ontario recognized the value of this effort and through the ministries of Northern Development and Mines and the Environment contributed significant grants to the project. The Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) and the Ontario Geological Survey (OGS) have also provided technical input into this project. A key product of this work has been the development of a regional groundwater model by Earthfx Inc. that has led to a broad understanding of the subsurface geological and hydrogeological conditions across the moraine area. The goal is to now have the model used by the various partner agencies in every -day decision making. Towards this goal, the model and associated data have already been used for a variety of groundwater related projects, including the Rouge Watershed Plan, Humber Watershed Plan and the York - Durham Sanitary Sewer System infrastructure installation project. Further details on deliverables completed in 2007 are provided below: Database • updated, 2006 version of the database has been distributed to all partner agencies; • includes new data from Geological Survey of Canada, Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Natural Resources (Oil & Gas wells) and Environment Canada. 102 Geological Layer Construction • incorporates all of Peel, York, Durham and Toronto as well as areas to the east; • the geology of the Niagara Escarpment and the linkages to the sediments below the escarpment have been built into the layers along the west. Numerical Groundwater Flow Model • completed a comprehensive report on the initial modelling work in York Region and the TRCA watershed; • expanded the model westward to the Credit and Humber watersheds and eastwards to cover the Central Lake Ontario watershed and some of the Kawartha watershed; • peer review of the model initiated; • continued to use model for local projects (e.g. southeast collector study to connect the York sewer system to a Lake Ontario treatment plant). Other Initiatives • launched project website (www.ypdt - camc.ca); • undertook seismic studies in Queensville and Port Perry; • assisted source water protection with technical expertise. FINANCIAL DETAILS This project was jointly funded by the regional municipalities of Peel, York and Durham and the City of Toronto with a budget of $500,000 in 2006. A $400,000 budget allocation was approved for 2007 to continue the important work of this partnership. Report prepared by: Don Ford, extension 5369 Email: dford @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Don Ford, extension 5369 Email: dford @trca.on.ca Date: May 28, 2007 RES. #D22/07 - VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION PROGRAM 2006 - 2007 Overview. Staff has prepared an overview of the Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Program, 2006 - 2007 highlighting erosion control projects constructed or that have commenced during that time period. This report accompanies a presentation that will be made by staff at the June 8, 2007 Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting. Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Bonnie Littley 103 IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the list of erosion control projects identified herein be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND The goal of the Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Program is to minimize the risk to life and property as the result of erosion on riverbanks, valley walls and shoreline, while protecting and enhancing the natural attributes of the valleys and waterfront. Within the City of Toronto and the regions of Peel and York, staff monitored over 350 erosion control structures and more than 50 erosion sites, through the Erosion Monitoring and Maintenance Program in 2006. In 2007 all of these structures and sites will be reinspected, and the structures located in the Region of Durham will also be inspected for the first time. The data collected from the inspections is then used to identify and prioritize maintenance works for the upcoming year, as well as to identify projects which will require a Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) under the Conservation Ontario C /ass Environmental Assessment for Flood and Erosion Control Projects (2002). The following is a list of Class EAs that were in progress during 2006 -2007: PROJECT NAME STATUS 121 -129 Col. Danforth Trail - Highland Creek Complete 345 Beechgrove Drive - Highland Creek Complete Gibraltar Point - Lake Ontario Waterfront Complete 4 - 8 Atwood Place - Humber River Initiated 2006 Meadowcliffe Drive - Lake Ontario Shoreline Initiated 2006 CN Rail at Charles Sauriol Conservation Reserve - Don River Initiated 2007 104 The planning and design process of a Class EA project is illustrated below: Yes INITIATE CLASS EA PUBLISH NOTICE OF INTENT 4 ESTABLISH COMMUNITY LIAISON COMMITTEE I PREPARE BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY I EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE REMEDIAL MEASURES & SELECT PREFERRED MEASURE I- CONDUCT DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ICAN ALL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BE AVOIDED, MITIGATED OR COMPENSATED? 1 UNCERTAIN No PREPARE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT (ESRI i PROVIDE NOTICE OF fILINC TO INTERESTED PARTIES (Appendix E) j ARE IMPACTS DEEMED ACCEPTABLE? PREPARE AND FILE NOTICE OF ADDENDUM AS NECESSARY TO ADDRESS COMMENTS IAPPend Ix El PUBLISH NOTICE OF FILING FO (Appendix E) ARE ALL CONCERNS ADDRESSED? No Pert II Order Requests) Yes No PREPARE INDIVIDUAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OR REASSESS PROGRAM OPTION See Figure 1A) Part II Order PROJECT APPROVED UNDER EA ACT PROVIDE NOTICE OF PROJECT APPROVAL & PROCEED TO CONSTRUCTION (see Figure 1C) MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT I REVIEWS PART II ORDER REQUEST 1 Detailed geotechnical studies were conducted at the following locations: • 30 - 48 Royal Rouge Trail - Rouge River; • 95 Portico Drive - Highland Creek. Request Denied Other special projects identified as the result of the annual erosion monitoring program include: • Highway 10 and Steeles Avenue - Etobicoke Creek - Peel special budget for addressing climate change. Remedial erosion control works were undertaken at the following sites: • 221 Martin Grove Road - Mimico Creek; • 99 Alamosa - Don River; • Guild Inn Shoreline - Lake Ontario Waterfront; • 67 Jellicoe Avenue - Etobicoke Creek; • Wicksteed Channel Realignment - Don River; • Military Trail Slope Regrading - Highland Creek. 105 Maintenance projects for the repair or replacement of existing structures in poor condition were carried out at the following locations: • Westleigh Crescent - Etobicoke Creek; • St. Clair Ravine - Don River; • Warden Woods - Don River; • 1900 Bayview Avenue; • Yvonne Public School - Humber River; • Summerlea Park West Berm reconstruction- Humber River. The technical priorities for the monitoring and maintenance program are reassessed annually through inspections to each site and structure. This review reflects the dynamics of the erosion processes and the addition of new sites, to ensure that the works carried out (both remedial and maintenance) in any given year are addressing the most hazardous sites on a priority basis. The number of extremely hazardous erosion sites has been significantly reduced over the years, while the number of structures requiring repair is increasing. This is due to the fact that TRCA has utilized the priority ranking system to address and remediate many of the severely eroded sites. Further to this, TRCA developed the Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program as a tool, and has been working extensively with member municipalities on urban planning and proposal review, to ensure that new development adjacent to shorelines and in valley and stream corridors does not introduce the potential for hazardous areas. Report prepared by: Patricia Newland, 416- 392 -9690 Email: pnewland @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416- 392 -9690 Email: pnewland @trca.on.ca Date: May 30, 2007 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:15 a.m., on Friday, June 8, 2007. Richard Whitehead Brian Denney Chair Secretary- Treasurer /ks 106 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #3/07 September 14, 2007 The Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #3/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, September 14, 2007. The Vice Chair Anthony Perruzza, called the meeting to order at 10:09 a.m.. PRESENT Maria Augimeri Member Bryan Bertie Member Gay Cowbourne Member Grant Gibson Member Bonnie Littley Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority John Parker Member Anthony Perruzza Vice Chair ABSENT Lois Griffin Member Alissa Sugar Member Richard Whitehead Chair RES. #D23/07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley Bryan Bertie THAT the Minutes of Meeting #2/07, held on June 8, 2007, be approved. PRESENTATIONS (a) CARRIED A presentation by John Stille, Environmental Technician, TRCA, in regard to item 7.1 - Habitat Implementation Plan. (b) A presentation by Deborah Martin- Downs, Director, Ecology, TRCA, in regard to the American Fisheries Society Conference, attended on September 2 -7, 2007, in San Francisco, California, approved by Resolution #B58/07. 107 (c) A presentation by Andrew Taylor, Hydrogeologist, TRCA, in regard to the National Ground Water Association Environmental Forensics Short Course, attended on June 26 -27, 2007, in Fairlawn New Jersey, approved by Resolution #A130/07. (d) A presentation by Bill Snodgrass, Senior Engineer, Water & Wastewater Services, Works & Emergency Services, City of Toronto, in regard to item 7.2 - Highland Creek Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan Implementation.. RES. #D24 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Grant Gibson John Parker THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED RES. #D25 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley Grant Gibson THAT above -noted presentation (b) be heard and received. CARRIED RES. #D26 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Maria Augimeri John Parker THAT above -noted presentation (c) be heard and received. CARRIED RES. #D27 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley John Parker THAT above -noted presentation (d) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #D28 /07 - HABITAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2007 Summary Report. 2007 summary report of the Habitat Implementation Plans (HIP) for the individual watersheds within the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) jurisdiction. 108 Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley Grant Gibson THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT staff continue to work with the City of Toronto, Region of Peel, York Region, Durham Region, municipal partners and community organizations to implement the Habitat Implementation Plans (HIP) for the individual watersheds within the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) jurisdiction; THAT staff be directed to use the individual watershed HIP's as the foundations for targeting habitat restoration opportunities, and the mechanism for achieving watershed targets in TRCA's jurisdiction; AND FURTHER THAT staff report annually to the Authority on the progress of the implementation of the HIP's. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 2003, the Restoration and Environmental Monitoring Projects group of Restoration Services initiated Habitat Implementation Plans as a means to strategically implement restoration projects throughout TRCA's jurisdiction. The HIP is a targeted site -level implementation strategy, based on watershed targets. Generated from desktop and field assessments, the HIP contains a catalogue /database of potential restoration sites which are linked to geographic information system (GIS) information layers. The information stored within the database includes general site descriptions, existing habitat components, the potential habitat opportunities identified and an implementation priority score. The HIP database of projects functions through a dynamic process based on querying data to determine the highest priority site for restoration. HIPs act as a mechanism by which the concepts of the terrestrial natural heritage program, fisheries management plans and watershed management strategies can be implemented. For a complete methodology, refer to the HIP reports for Etobicoke - Mimico, Humber, Duffins and Don watersheds; as well as the waterfront terrestrial HIP. To date, HIP assessments have been completed (primarily on TRCA -owned property) for the following watersheds and the waterfront: • Etobicoke and Mimico creeks watersheds (2003); • Humber River watershed (2004); • Duffins and Carruthers creeks watersheds (2004); • waterfront terrestrial (2005); • Don River watershed (2006). The current HIP process involves assessing opportunities on TRCA -owned lands and, where possible, other public lands (municipal, hydro, etc.) which varies from watershed to watershed. The application of the HIP findings can help staff do the following: • present a list of high priority restoration sites that represent the general principles of the various strategies and management plans; • create a workable database that contains a prioritized list of sites that may be recommended for implementation by interested stakeholder groups /partners as funding opportunities arise; and 109 • utilize the database to identify overall contributions to watershed targets, track completed projects and to quantify specific deliverables. A number of external partnerships have been expanded to ensure that a more complete and targeted implementation strategy can be fulfilled. The nature of these partnership relate to funding, planning and implementation. External partners include: Peel Region, Durham Region, York Region, City of Toronto, City of Brampton, City of Ajax, the Greater Toronto Airport Authority, Ministry of Natural Resources, Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation and private land owners. Through these partnerships, to date, we have successfully implemented 41 habitat projects. Collectively they represent 23.3 ha of wetland, 22.7 ha of forest and 9,250 m of riparian cover. RATIONALE The individual watershed HIPs have enabled TRCA to develop a database of habitat restoration opportunities on publicly -owned lands. These opportunities can be cataloged and assessed to develop priority locations for restoration. This has enabled TRCA to become more efficient and strategic in its project implementation. The database of opportunities can be used to achieve watershed targets, plan for compensation measures, or direct external partners to priority areas. It also enables TRCA and partners to more effectively forecast and target opportunities to develop multi -year implementation program and strategies. The HIP can be utilized by all departments within TRCA to achieve watershed -wide goals (natural heritage, fisheries management), and enables for efficient reporting and tracking. DETAILS OF THE WORK TO BE DONE The next step is to assess opportunities on private lands and to continue assessing new public lands, to generate a complete watershed -wide HIP, and to engage private landowners on high priority sites to implement projects. HIPs involve detailed field visits where staff walk areas of interest on public lands (primarily TRCA -owned properties) to determine restoration opportunities. However, this is not possible on private lands, unless permission is granted by the landowner. Also, It would become too time consuming to walk the entire watershed in search of restoration opportunities so new tools for more remote assessments became needed. A methodology was developed which included a more detailed desktop analysis and driving tours with a laptop, camera and GPS to identify restoration opportunities on areas that can not be walked. These findings will be combined with public land assessments, and will be done for each watershed in TRCA's jurisdiction. 110 A variety of new desktop assessment techniques are being used to allow assessors to determine specific land details based on elevation and drainage. By using tools in Arc Hydro, a GIS application, a drainage line can be derived from the Digital Elevation Model (DEM). Using the DEM, sub - watershed catchments are delineated and Arc Hydro drainage lines are calculated within them. These drainage lines are influenced by area, flow direction and flow accumulation. In many cases, these drainage lines go beyond the original TRCA GIS mapping river layer, which may lack segments of a watercourse, such as intermittent streams or swales (i.e. first order or headwater streams). In addition, these lines represent areas of accumulated flow which indicate possible historical wetland cover. Identifying these lines aids the assessors by enabling them to speculate where, historical or present day, wetlands or first order riparian corridors are. Thus, making it an easier and more efficient way to delineate cover opportunities (wetland, riparian or forest) from each other in areas where TRCA staff is not permitted to walk. This method, coupled with the knowledge of a Restoration Services trained field assessor, will give a relatively accurate preliminary picture of the implementation opportunities for a given site. It is important to remember that these identified opportunities are preliminary only. They are used to target and prioritize implementation opportunities. Once a high priority site is targeted, the planning and design phase begins, where full assessments of the site garner detailed site prescriptions. To date, the new HIP assessment methodology are being used, and will be used, to identify restoration opportunities for the following: • Transport Canada (Durham Federal Airport Lands)- Utilized Phase 2 assessment techniques to identify and implement priority riparian cover projects. 6 km of stream bank cover completed in spring 2007. • Rouge Park - In partnership with Rouge Park, HIP assessments are being completed for the Little Rouge sub - watershed, with the goal of completing a HIP for the entire Rouge River watershed. • Duffins River Watershed - Phase 2 assessments are being conducted within the Duffins River watershed, which will allow TRCA to strategically engage private landowners in high priority areas. • ORM CPA4 - Phase 2 techniques will be utilized to identify and implement cover opportunities within the Oak Ridges Moraine CPA4 designated area. Future restoration initiatives will target both public and private lands through an integrated watershed approach. There are many benefits to this: • watershed -wide implementation opportunities can be integrated with watershed planning targets for forecasting and reporting on deliverables; • providing funders with complete targeted and measurable implementation projects within multi -year time frames; • engaging private landowners in a manner that targets those within priority areas to get a more substantial multi- benefit result in regard to ecosystem health. 111 This watershed integrated approach will allow TRCA to identify priorities from the perspective of increasing natural cover through reforestation projects, improving hydrologic function and water quality through wetland projects, and improving stream quality and habitat through riparian restoration. FINANCIAL DETAILS The total budgets for the individual 2007 watershed HIPs are represented in the following chart. Funding is provided through the City of Toronto, regions of Peel, York and Durham, and Great Lakes Sustainability Fund. Watershed HIP Account Code Budget Duffins 109 15 $42,000 Don 114 40 $60,000 Humber 114 43 $106,500 Etobicoke /Mimico 114 39 $40,000 Waterfront 113 51 $73,500 Report prepared by: John Stille, extension 5396, Ralph Toninger, 5366 Emails: jstille @trca.on.ca, rtoninger @trca.on.ca For Information contact: John Stille, extension 5396, Ralph Toninger, 5366 Emails: jstille @trca.on.ca, rtoninger @trca.on.ca Date: August 31, 2007 RES. #D29/07 - HIGHLAND CREEK WET WEATHER FLOW MANAGEMENT MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION City of Toronto. Progress update on the Highland Creek studies and design process to implement channel restoration works following the recommendations of the City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan. Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne John Parker THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the City of Toronto's commitment to implement long -term objectives for stream restoration in Highland Creek be acknowledged; THAT in consideration of the above commitment, the general direction of the Highland Creek Geomorphic Systems Master Plan and the Valley Segment 8 and 4A Environmental Assessments be supported; 112 THAT the City of Toronto be requested to explore opportunities to enhance the Highland Creek valley system by restoring natural habitat, reconnecting the channel to the floodplain and improving the trails and other recreational amenities through the development of a comprehensive Greening Strategy for the Highland Creek watershed; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto invite a panel of academic experts to perform a formal review of the Highland Creek studies, including the Highland Creek Geomorphic Master Systems Plan and the Valley Segment 8 and 4A Environmental Assessments. CARRIED BACKGROUND Due to the highly dynamic nature of Highland Creek, the City of Toronto has initiated a study process to mitigate the effects of uncontrolled stormwater discharge to protect infrastructure and property from erosion. This process began with the development of the Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan (WWFMMP), and has evolved, in part, into the ongoing development and implementation of a Geomorphic Systems Master Plan, valley segment specific environmental assessments and channel restoration works. In consultation with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), the city has committed to long -term planning objectives for Highland Creek to create a stable, sustainable and enhanced valley system. These works represent the application of innovative design concepts in an urban stream system, the scope and complexity of which are unparalleled in TRCA's jurisdiction. This progress update has been prepared to inform the Authority of the history, status and future direction of restoration works in Highland Creek, and to recommend action to ensure the long -term viability of the proposals. Current Conditions Highland Creek is a fully developed watershed, heavily channelized in the northern sections with virtually no stormwater management facilities such as detention ponds. As a result, it is a volatile watershed, subject to flash floods and rapid, severe erosion. In addition, much of the infrastructure in the area was historically constructed within the Highland Creek valley corridor and now parallels and traverses the watercourse. Creek reconstruction has taken several forms, most particularly during urbanization between 1970 and 1990. Interventions have included channel shortening to provide more land for urban development, channel straightening, creating concrete lined channels, and constructing bank protection structures to keep the creek away from landfills and to protect property and infrastructure such as pedestrian pathways, bridge footings and sub - surface pipelines. The combination of a harsh hydrologic regime, inadequate setbacks and unsuitable in- stream engineering have resulted in a consistent trend of increasing problems over time as the creek bed and banks have eroded. This has further resulted in exposed and damaged infrastructure, property loss and impacts to aquatic habitat. Of particular concern have been the effects of recent storms on May 12, 2000 and August 19, 2005. High flows and excessive erosion during these events led to significant channel migration, which resulted in the exposure of infrastructure within the channel and the breaching of a trunk sewer in 2005. Since 2005 the city has initiated emergency works to stabilize and restore sections of the creek. The city has begun an expedited study process to better understand the Highland Creek system and to develop and implement a comprehensive solution to the problems. 113 Wet Weather Flow Wet weather flow consists of untreated or uncontrolled stormwater. The city undertook the Highland Creek WWFMMP study between 1999 and 2003 to develop a long -term plan to reduce, and ultimately eliminate, the adverse impacts of wet weather flow on the built and natural environment. The WWFMMP provided watershed specific recommendations to address this issue based on 13 technical objectives which includes the implementation of source, conveyance and end -of -pipe controls. The plan identified Highland Creek as a highly impacted channel system and noted that retrofit stormwater management controls would not be sufficient on their own to stabilize the channel. The WWFMMP developed a generalized approach for stream restoration activities in the Highland Creek watershed, indicating that the removal of the existing infrastructure (including sewers, watermains and other utilities) from the valley corridor would be cost prohibitive and generally not feasible. Within the broad framework of the WWFMMP, the city has recognized the need to integrate a more rigorous and holistic understanding of the mechanisms of channel instability and erosion in the Highland Creek system and to then develop a mitigation strategy. Geomorphic Systems Master Plan As a result of the WWFMMP, the city commissioned the Highland Creek Geomorphic Systems Master Plan (GSMP) in 2005 to provide recommendations on how the watercourse should be managed to protect the infrastructure. The GSMP will develop a strategy for restoration of all creeks and streams within the Highland Creek watershed. The immediate priority is the watershed sections located south of Highway 401. These sections were identified in the WWFMMP as priority areas for stream restoration in the first 15 years of the implementation. The second priority is to develop a strategy for stream reconstruction and rehabilitation for the channelized sections north of Highway 401. The time frame for these sections is the next 50 to 100 years. The latter analyses will also inform future studies related to the feasibility of rehabilitating controlled channels in other watersheds which are reaching the end of their design life (e.g. the lower sections of Black Creek and the East Don River). The GSMP will provide recommendations on a valley segment basis, to be developed within an adaptive management framework. It will evaluate the type of intervention needed, from a focus on local sites of limited extent of intervention through to complete channel reconstruction either using the natural channel systems method or a significantly constrained engineered natural channel system method. The development of the GSMP is underway and ongoing. However, the immediate need for stabilization in certain sections of the Highland Creek has prompted the initiation and implementation of certain specific valley segment studies in parallel with the GSMP. Although these studies are being conducted separately from the GSMP, they will be linked to the general objectives and preliminary design of the plan. 114 Valley Segment Environmental Assessments It was determined that the repair of several sites after the May 12, 2000 and August 19, 2005 storms was too narrowly scoped. This led the city to initiate broader -scale systems studies. The GSMP was scoped to examine the watershed as a whole at a systems level, with subsequent detailed designs to follow. Additional specific studies were initiated and scoped to analyse particular valley segments in detail to develop design solutions. Two valley segments on the east branch of Highland Creek were identified as highest priority based on unstable conditions and high risk to infrastructure. These include Valley Segment 8, from the confluence of the Malvern and Markham branches south to Morningside Park, and Valley Segment 4A, from Markham Road on the Markham branch east to Segment 8. The environmental assessment (EA) for Segment 8 was completed in 2006, and the subsequent construction of portions of Phase 1 and Phase 3 were completed in 2007. Segment 8 was declared an emergency by the city following the sanitary sewer break associated with the August 19, 2005 storm. As a result the works were authorized by Fisheries and Oceans Canada based on the City of Toronto Emergency Works Protocol. In addition, the EA and detailed design submissions were reviewed by technical staff and the design proposals were approved by the Executive Committee under Permits C -06358 (Phase 1 Stage 1), C -07380 (Phase 1 Stage 2) and C -07405 (Phase 3 Stage 2). The restoration works for Phase 1 Stage 1 are complete. Design submissions on the remaining stages are expected shortly, while design proposals for Phase 2 are anticipated within 2 years. A status update in December, 2006 and partial draft characterization report for Segment 4A was reviewed by technical staff. The final report is anticipated in the fall of 2007. The area for the Valley Segment 4A study has been extended upstream into Valley Segment 4 to include an additional area of concern west of Markham Road. Emergency works for three sections of exposed sewer were completed in 2006. Another emergency works application is under review to address bridge and sewer impacts. It is expected that detailed design will commence in late fall, 2007 or early 2008. Repairs within the Scarborough Golf and Country Club have been completed at 9 sites within the club, as of March, 2007. In consideration of the immediate need to protect damaged and exposed infrastructure, TRCA staff has expedited the review and approval of these emergency works projects through the existing City of Toronto Emergency Works Protocol. The need for refinements to this protocol to better reflect the application, review process and approval responsibilities to appropriately address emergency works has been identified. This has prompted a separate review of the current protocol to assess and implement the necessary changes. State of Good Repair Projects and Emergency Works The stream restoration projects flowing from the WWFMMP were designed to holistically address channel instability and threatened infrastructure over the long -term, while providing ecological benefits to the extent possible. However, the damage from the August 19, 2005 storm re- prioritized the implementation strategy of the 25 -year WWFMMP Implementation Plan to provide a focus on emergency works and state -of -good repair projects for the foreseeable future. The response to the storm of May 12, 2000 required 4 years to address approximately 75% of the problem sites, including additional design changes at a few sites to address fish passage issues. It is anticipated that a similar time frame will be required to address the damage from the August 19, 2005 storm. 115 Although these state of good repair projects will be the primary focus of restoration work in the Highland Creek, the city has developed a priority list for damaged sites to provide the framework for repair projects, accommodate new sites and to prioritize stream restoration projects in the context of the GSMP. The GSMP and the Valley Segment EAs will guide the implementation of priority works to ensure that the design solutions are framed into a tributary systems scale perspective that will provide a holistic approach to the implementation of the restoration works. Objectives Through the development of the WWFMMP and the review of the GSMP, the Valley Segment EAs and the detailed design submissions, the city, in consultation with TRCA has committed that the implementation of the works to date, and all future proposals, will meet the following long -term objectives: • protection of municipal infrastructure from exposure due to stream migration and erosion processes; • development of a proactive long -term rehabilitation strategy that will allow for the gradual, planned stabilization of the creek rather than continuing to address problems using a reactive, piecemeal approach; • adoption of an adaptive management approach for long -term channel management, founded on a forecast of channel response based on the implementation of a series of channel interventions, monitoring and learning from the channel response, and determining the next necessary actions over a 25 to 100 year time - frame; • provision of a solution that is consistent with the WWFMMP objectives and the treatment train approach; • implementation of an aquatic rehabilitation plan to improve the connectivity, quality and diversity of fish habitat in the Highland Creek; • development of a riparian zone management plan for Highland Creek to address habitat restoration and enhancement; • establish a long -term, life -cycle based asset management strategy which includes operational inspection, science -based monitoring, rehabilitation and reconstruction of newly built stream structures, older erosion control structures and concrete -lined channels; and • assurance that a financial framework is developed for the city to actively monitor and maintain the channel works. Implementation It is recognized that stream erosion control projects have traditionally been conducted using a reactive approach and limited to a local site length perspective. In particular, the repair of several sites after the May 12, 2000 storm were too narrowly scoped and prompted the city, with the support of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the Ministry of Natural Resources and TRCA, to initiate the broader scale systems studies. An overall concept plan was developed, which has guided the implementation of emergency works to date. This concept plan will be finalized through the completion of the GSMP. 116 The recent emergency works caused TRCA staff to raise concerns during the review process regarding the piecemeal approach of the design and implementation of Valley Segments 4A and 8, in consideration for the fact that the GSMP has not yet been completed. Staff recognize that due to the erosive nature of the creek and the vulnerability of the existing infrastructure, these segments are high priority and the protection and stabilization works must be completed in advance of the finalization of the GSMP. However, should the GSMP require modification to the design of these segments so that the final design for Highland Creek can be properly implemented, the city has committed to modify them accordingly. It is the general consensus that the overall direction of the proposals to date are acceptable, but that the city must be encouraged to complete the GSMP as soon as possible to provide a coherent governing document for the design and construction of in- stream works on Highland Creek. The long -term implications of the maintenance and performance of the proposed channel works are significant. The proposed designs incorporate extensive stabilization through the use of non - native stones and material to prevent erosion. Due to this, there is no natural upstream supply of bed material to regenerate the constructed channels as they are weathered over time by the extreme flow regime. As such, the channels will require maintenance in perpetuity as they cannot be sustained through natural processes as would natural streams. Further, experience has shown that when constructed channels of this nature fail, they can cause massive erosion and damage to aquatic systems. Staff has suggested that an integral part of the reconstruction of Highland Creek will be the development of a program to monitor and maintain the proposed channel works at a frequency sufficient to ensure that their integrity is maintained and that aquatic habitat objectives are met. This program should include the development of financial instruments to ensure that sufficient funds for monitoring and maintenance activities are available for the life of the channel. The immediate priority within Highland Creek is to mitigate the effects of erosion. In consideration of this, the design submissions to date have limited the scope of restoration to the channel and surrounding banks. The design submissions for Valley Segments 4A and 8 will provide only localized restoration to stabilize the channel works. The city has committed to developing a riparian zone management plan for Highland Creek to address habitat restoration at a site - specific scale. However, staff identify that the development of the GSMP provides an opportunity to develop a comprehensive strategy for the Highland Creek watershed to guide the implementation of habitat restoration and valley improvements to maximize the ecological and recreational benefits of the proposed works. Staff suggest that the city develop a greening strategy for Highland Creek that will outline an overall plan to enhance the surrounding natural features, to reconnect the channel to its floodplain and valley system and to improve the habitat value of the watershed. As part of this strategy, the city should also investigate opportunities to improve the existing trail system and recreational amenities within the valley. 117 The proposed concepts emerging from this study process represent a large -scale reconstruction of Highland Creek that blends engineering and geomorphic design principles. There are few examples of this type of widespread channel restructuring in watercourse systems as urbanized and as unstable as Highland Creek. As a result, it is difficult to predict the durability and longevity of the constructed channels, as well as the impacts that widespread channel restructuring will have on the physical processes of the creek and associated valley system. As these principles have not been applied in a system with the scale or complexity of Highland Creek, staff has suggested that a panel of academic experts be retained to provide a peer review of the Highland Creek studies, including the Highland Creek GSMP and the Valley Segment 8 and 4A EAs to direct the refinement of the overall design. It is acknowledged that the city has engaged in a degree of peer review through consultation with partner agencies and the interaction of the two consulting teams that have been retained. However, no formal review has taken place to assess the overall direction of the studies and the potential effects of the proposed works on the Highland Creek system as a whole. Such a review would serve to confirm the suitability of the overall design concepts, which can then be used to direct the detailed design. It is suggested that the city contact the group of professors Kostaschuk (University of Guelph), Ashmore (University of Western Ontario) and Desloges (University of Toronto), or other experts who have conducted extensive academic research on Highland Creek and in applied and urban fluvial geomorphology and invite them to perform this review. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The City of Toronto will move forward with the completion of the GSMP in 2008. In parallel, the development of the EA for Valley Segment 4A will continue with regard for the general objectives and preliminary design of the GSMP. The development of detailed design plans for the remaining phases of Valley Segment 8 will commence as necessary. All of these studies will proceed in consideration of the long -term objectives noted above. Report prepared by: Alex Blasko, extension 5714 Email: ablasko @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Beth Williston, extension 5217 Email: bwilliston @trca.on.ca Date: August 22, 2007 RES. #D30/07 - FULFILMENT OF OAK RIDGES MORAINE CONSERVATION PLAN WATERSHED PLANNING REQUIREMENTS - HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED Approval of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan conformity assessment for the Humber River watershed and approval to use the draft watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine. 118 Moved by: Seconded by: Grant Gibson Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the conformity assessment for the Humber River Watershed Plan and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be deemed to fulfil the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP; 2002); THAT the conformity assessment for the Humber River Watershed Plan and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be approved for use by the appropriate implementation authority on an interim basis in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine until such time as municipal consultation is completed and a final watershed plan is brought back to the Authority for approval; AND FURTHER THAT the regional and local watershed municipalities and the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/07, held on April 27, 2007, the Authority approved conformity assessments for the Duffins Creek watershed plan, Rouge River watershed plan and the Don River watershed plan and use of watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessments in the review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine, pursuant to requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Act and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP, 2002). The watershed planning requirements of sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP require the municipalities to ensure all major development commenced on or after April 23, 2007 on the Oak Ridges Moraine conforms with the completed watershed plan, 2 2 otherwise major development (i.e. 4 lots or greater; 500 m (5000 ft) or greater or major recreational use) cannot be approved. At the time of the April Authority meeting, staff indicated that a conformity assessment for the Humber watershed would be reported back at the Authority's June meeting, to allow municipal staff the opportunity to review the first full draft Humber River Watershed Plan. Peel Region and York Region municipal staff had expressed preference for this timing. Consultation with municipalities and the public is underway and comments on the draft watershed plan are anticipated to be received in September. Review of the conformity assessment report (Table 1) by municipal staff has been completed. Based on the content of the draft Humber River Watershed Plan, TRCA staff has prepared a conformity assessment summarizing how this watershed plan has addressed the ORMCP requirements and identifying the appropriate document references of where the information can be found (Table 1). The ORMCP's watershed planning requirements mainly involve the characterization of the watershed's water budget, surface and groundwater flow systems, natural heritage, determination of appropriate land and water use management strategies, and criteria to protect these resources. 119 Staff feel confident that the information and management direction contained in the draft watershed planning documents has an adequate scientific basis to allow municipal and TRCA staff to begin to use this information in the review of major development applications, if any such applications are submitted after April 23, 2007 and before final watershed planning documents can be brought back for approval by the Authority early in 2008. The watershed plans provide updated technical information about existing conditions and systems in the watershed that is unlikely to change substantively as the plans are finalized. Many of the management recommendations are not new, but rather endorse the continuation of accepted practice using the updated technical information. New approaches are being recommended in the following areas: • The particular need to protect groundwater recharge and flow directions in the upper Credit River watershed, as this area is an important source of water to the upper Main Humber River watershed. • The need to protect and expand natural cover in the watershed, as an integral component of the water management strategy and also to achieve objectives for biodiversity consistent with the Toronto and Region Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy. • The need to manage water balance, particularly as part of community planning and stormwater management designs. Community designs that minimize impervious surfaces and incorporate innovative stormwater management techniques will be needed to mitigate impacts on pre - development rates of infiltration, evapotranspiration and surface runoff. • The need to design and build more sustainably in greenfield developments, redevelopments and retrofits, by addressing a range of objectives including those noted above. The watershed plan does not contain land use policies for the review of major development applications under the Planning Act but rather, contains guidance and recommendations that are intended to inform the decisions of municipalities and other approval authorities regarding their land use policies. It should also be recognized that the watershed plans provide guidance at both watershed and subwatershed scales of detail. This information represents a valuable contribution and context, which will assist development proponents. However there will still be further study requirements and planning refinements to be carried out by development proponents at a greater level of detail in order to meet the requirements of the ORMCP at a minimum. Interim approval to use the draft watershed planning documents will allow TRCA and municipal staff to work cooperatively with development proponents on the early stages of implementation, should any applications be submitted. Lessons learned from these experiences can be considered and incorporated into the final watershed planning and implementation documents. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • The first full draft of the Humber River Watershed Plan was released for broad municipal and stakeholder consultation in June 2007. • While a preliminary consultation session was convened with watershed municipalities on March 30, 2007, individual meetings will be scheduled with each municipality to discuss the recommendations and implementation approaches in more detail during the fall of 2007. 120 • Public meetings will also be held during the fall of 2007. • Background technical reports and the draft implementation guide are expected to be available for review concurrent with and following the release of the watershed plan. • Aim to report back to the Authority with the final Humber River Watershed Plan in February 2008, pending comments received. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for the watershed planning studies was provided by the Regional Municipality of Peel, Regional Municipality of York and City of Toronto as part of the municipal capital budgets. Report prepared by: Dean Young, extension 5662 Email: dyoung @trca.on.ca For information contact: Sonya Meek, extension 5253, Dean Young extension, 5662 Emails: smeek @trca.on.ca; dyoung @trca.on.ca Date: September 5, 2007 Attachments: 1 121 Attachment 1 Table 1: Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Watershed Planning Requirements Conformity Assessment Report - HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED This report documents how requirements of sections 24 and 25 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2002) have been satisfied for the portions of the Humber River watershed located in the Oak Ridges Moraine Area, based on direction provided by the province's draft technical guidance documents (Ministry of the Environment, 2007)1 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 24.(1) Every upper -tier municipality and single -tier municipality shall, on or before April 22, 2003, begin preparing a watershed plan, in accordance with subsection 24.(3), for every watershed whose streams originate within the municipality' s area of jurisdiction. Watershed planning and on -going watershed management have been activities the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has carried out in partnership with its municipalities for a number of years. Therefore a watershed plan was deemed to have been initiated prior to April 22, 2003, acknowledging that some study components required updating to varying degrees. A watershed planning study was initiated by the TRCA, in partnership with the Region of York, Region of Peel, and City of Toronto and area municipalities for the Humber River watershed on June 25, 2004. A first draft of the Humber River Watershed Plan was completed on June 11, 2007. Aworkplan to fulfill the watershed planning requirements of the ORMCP and direction to initiate the Humber River Watershed Planning Study according to the initial work program was approved by the Authority on Sept. 26, 2003 (Authority Res. #A196/03). A detailed workplan for the Humber River Watershed Planning Study was approved by the Authority on June 25, 2004 (Authority Res. #A191/04). 24.(3) A watershed plan shall include, as a minimum, (a) a water budget and conservation plan as set out in section 25; See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). 122 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 24.(3) (b) land and water use and The draft Humber River See section 5.0 of the Humber cont'd management strategies; Watershed Plan describes recommended management strategies regarding existing and future land and water use that will help to protect the ecological and hydrological features and functions of the watershed, including the portions in the Oak Ridges River Watershed Plan. Moraine Area. Key strategies include the need to expand natural cover and build sustainable communities, particularly with an aim to maintain or restore pre - development water balance. 24.(3) (c) a framework for Implementation direction and See section 5.0 of the Humber cont'd implementation, which may include more detailed implementation plans for smaller geographic areas, such as subwatershed plans, or for specific subject matter, such as environmental management plans; initial considerations for priority actions and areas, at watershed and subwatershed scales, accompany the management strategies in the draft Humber River Watershed Plan. Specific policies within the framework for implementation may be subject to revision based on detailed consultation with municipal partners and stakeholders and Conservation Authority River Watershed Plan. Board review. Any such revisions will not affect satisfaction of this Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan requirement. 123 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 24.(3) cont'd (d) an environmental monitoring plan; The draft Humber River Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding changes or enhancements to existing environmental monitoring programs and other area, site -or issue - specific monitoring requirements. See section 5.6 of the Humber River Watershed Plan for recommended enhancements to existing monitoring programs. 24.(3) cont'd (e) provisions requiring the use of environmental management practices and programs, such as programs to prevent pollution, reduce the use of pesticides and manage the use of road salt; and, The draft Humber River Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding environmental practices and programs. Many Humber watershed municipalities already require the use of environmental management practices (e.g., by -laws to control idling, dumping, filling, pesticide use, sewer use, and tree cutting, and salt management plans) See section 5.0 of the Humber River Watershed Plan. Also see endnotes for list of relevant municipal by -laws and salt management plans.2 24.(3) cont'd (f) criteria for evaluating the protection of water quality and quantity, hydrological features and hydrological functions. The draft Humber River Watershed Plan includes a framework of watershed objectives, indicators and targets to be used to track or evaluate long term watershed health. This framework provides criteria for evaluating development proposals regarding protection of groundwater and surface water quality and quantity, hydrological features and functions, as well as terrestrial features and functions, aquatic communities and habitat and sustainable community design. See Appendix D of the Humber River Watershed Plan for a summary of watershed objectives, indicators and targets. 124 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 24.(4) Major development is prohibited unless, (a) the watershed plan for the relevant watershed, prepared in accordance with subsection 24.(3), has been completed; A draft Humber River Watershed Plan was completed on June 11, 2007. While the draft watershed plan may be subject to revisions based on detailed consultation with municipal partners and stakeholders and Conservation Authority Board review, any such revisions will not affect satisfaction of Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan requirements. See draft Humber River Watershed Plan (June 11, 2007). 24.(4) cont'd (b) the major development conforms with the watershed plan; and See conformity assessment for section 24.(3) See document references for section 24.(3) 24.(4) cont'd (c) a water budget and conservation plan, prepared in accordance with section 25 and demonstrating that the water supply required for the major development is sustainable, has been completed. See conformity assessments for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2). See document references for sections 25.(1) and 25.(2) 24.(8) An application for major development to which this subsection applies shall not be approved unless, (a) the relevant municipality has complied with clause (c) of subsection 24.(4); or See conformity assessment for section 24.(4) See document references for section 24.(4) 125 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 24.(8) (b) the applicant, For any applications received cont'd (i) identifies any hydrologically prior to completion of sensitive features and watershed plans, in related hydrological accordance with the Oak functions on the site and Ridges Moraine Conservation how they will be protected, (ii) demonstrates that an Plan, conformity will have been reviewed and confirmed adequate water supply is through applicant submitted available for the development without compromising the ecological integrity of the studies. Plan Area, and (iii) provides, with respect to the site and such other land as the approval authority considers necessary, a water budget and water conservation plan that, (A) characterizes groundwater and surface water flow systems by means of modelling, (B) identifies the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and (C) identifies water conservation measures. 126 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(1) Every upper -tier municipality and single -tier municipality shall, on or before April 22, 2003, begin preparing a water budget and conservation plan, in accordance with subsection 25.(2), for every watershed whose streams originate within the municipality's area of jurisdiction. A water budget study was initiated in January 2003 by the TRCA, in partnership with the Region of York, Region of Peel, and City of Toronto and area municipalities for the Humber River watershed in advance of the overall Humber River Watershed Planning Study. The Region of York's Water for Tomorrow program outlines specific goals for both education and water conservation measures as outlined in the initial scope of work. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends new and /or updated programs for public education and water conservation measures. New goals for education and water conservation measures will be set once the program implementation plan is completed and approved by council. The Region of Peel's Water Conservation Plan was initiated in 2002 and completed in May 2004. The objectives of the plan are to reduce average annual day demand by 10 per cent, peak day demand by 10 per cent, and wastewater flows by 7 per cent, by the year 2015. Key components of the Region's water efficiency efforts include public education through 'Water Smart Peel', rebate programs and other incentives. The program is targeted to residents throughout the Region. The City of Toronto completed a water efficiency plan in 2002. The plan targets a reduction of peak day water demands by 275 ML /day or approximately 14% of 2001 levels, and a reduction of wastewater flow by 86 ML /day, by 2011. See TRCA 2003 Capital Budget Workplan and Authority approval to hire consultants to undertake a study terms of reference. Approval to initiate the Humber River Watershed Planning Study according to a general workplan, including a water budget study component, was granted at the Sept. 26, 2003 meeting of the TRCA (Authority Res. #A196/03) and further approval of a detailed workplan was granted on June 25, 2004 (Authority Res. #A191/04). York Region Water Efficiency Master Plan Update, 2007. Regional Municipality of Peel Water Efficiency Plan - Final Report, Region of Peel, 2004. Water Efficiency Plan, City of Toronto Works and Emergency Services, 2002. 127 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(2) A water budget and conservation plan shall, as a minimum, (a) quantify the components of the water balance equation, including precipitation, evapotranspiration, groundwater inflow and outflow, surface water outflow, change in storage, water withdrawals and water returns; The Humber River Watershed Plan includes a quantitative description of the major components of the water balance equation on an average annual basis over the watershed surface area. The water budget was developed based on available information regarding land use, land cover, surficial soil characteristics, surficial geology, stream flow at permanent stream gauges, permitted water withdrawals and spatial variations in long term average precipitation, temperature and evaporation across the watershed. It was developed using Precipitation Run -off Modelling System (PRMS) software. The PRMS model generated recharge estimates for input to the groundwater flow model (MODFLOW software), developed through the York - Peel- Durham - Toronto partnership (YPDT), which was used to estimate the groundwater components of the water budget. Section 3.2 of the Humber River Watershed Plan describes the overall water budget for the watershed. The Humber River Watershed Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report provides a more detailed description of the existing water budget, including maps and tabular summaries, and the predicted effects of future land and water use and management scenarios on water budget components. 128 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(2) (b) characterize groundwater The groundwater flow system See section 4.0 of the Humber cont'd and surface water flow of the Humber River River State of the Watershed systems by means of watershed has been Technical Report — Geology modelling; characterized by the groundwater flow model (MODFLOW software), developed through the and Groundwater Resources for a characterization of the groundwater flow system. York -Peel- Durham - Toronto partnership (YPDT). See section 5 of the Humber River State of the Watershed Technical Report — Surface The surface water flow system of the Humber River watershed has been characterized by developing and calibrating a hydrologic model based on Hydrologic Water Quantity for a summary of the surface water flow system. The Humber River Watershed Scenario Modelling and Simulation Program — Fortran (HSPF) software. This model was originally developed by the City of Toronto in support of work on the Toronto Wet Weather Flow Management Plan, and was refined for TRCA to support work on the Humber River Watershed Analysis Report provides more detailed descriptions of the existing surface and groundwater flow systems, including maps and tabular summaries, and the effects of future land and water use and management scenarios on these systems. Plan. 129 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(2) (c) identify, The draft Humber River See 24(3)(f) above for cont'd (i) targets to meet the water needs of the affected Watershed Plan includes criteria in the form of maps watershed targets. ecosystems, (ii) the availability, quantity and and targets (both quantitative and qualitative) for the See the Humber River State of the Watershed Technical quality of water sources, and protection of groundwater and surface water quality and Report — Geology and Groundwater Resources and (iii) goals for public education quantity, hydrological Humber River State of the and for water conservation; features and functions, as well as terrestrial features and functions and aquatic communities and habitat. Watershed Technical Report — Surface Water Quantity for summaries of information on the availability and quality of water sources. Water efficiency plans or programs of the Region of Section 5.6.3 of the Humber York, Region of Peel and City of Toronto have set goals for water conservation and public education. River Watershed Plan addresses water conservation and supports continuation of municipal water efficiency and public awareness programs. See York Region Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007) See section 2.0 of Peel Region's Water Efficiency Plan (2004) See section 1.0 of City of Toronto's Water Efficiency Plan (2002) 130 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(2) (d) develop a water -use profile The Region of York, Region of See section 4.0 of York cont'd and forecast; Peel and City of Toronto have developed water -use profiles and forecasts as part of studies to update their water master plans. The forecasts consider the effect of planned water conservation measures on future demand. Region's Long Term Water Project Master Plan Update, April 2004 for water use forecast. See Peel Region's Water Efficiency Plan (2004) for water use forecast. A watershed -based water use profile and forecast was developed as part of preparing the Humber River See City of Toronto's Water Efficiency Plan (2002) for water use forecast. Watershed Plan. See section 5.3 of the Humber River State of the Watershed Technical Report - Surface Water Quantity for the watershed -based water use profile. Also see section 5.3 of the Humber River State of the Watershed Technical Report - Geology and Groundwater Resources for a summary of groundwater takings in the Humber River watershed. 25.(2) (e) evaluate plans for water A watershed -scale evaluation of See section 5.0 of the Humber cont'd facilities such as pumping the predicted effects of River Watershed Plan for stations and reservoirs; forecasted water and land use on groundwater levels was completed in support of the management strategies. The Humber River Watershed Humber River Watershed Plan. Based on this evaluation, appropriate land and water use management strategies have been provided in the draft watershed plan. Scenario Modelling and Analysis Report provides a summary of predicted effects of forecasted water and land use on groundwater levels. Further plans for any such facilities are evaluated by municipalities as part of environmental assessment studies and /or updates to water supply master plans and will be reviewed in the context of watershed -based information from the Humber River Watershed Plan, supporting technical reports and available databases. 131 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(2) (f) identify and evaluate, All upper -tier and single -tier See section 5.6.3 of the cont'd (i) water conservation measures such as public municipalities in the Humber River watershed have Humber River Watershed Plan. education, improved developed water efficiency See sections 5.0 and 6.0 of management practices, the plans and programs that York Region's Water Efficiency use of flow restricting identify and evaluate water Master Plan Update (2007) for devices and other hardware, water reuse and recycling, and practices and conservation measures, incentives and ways of promoting water conservation the identification, evaluation and recommendation of water conservation measures and technologies associated with water reuse and measures and incentives. The draft Humber River education. recycling, (ii) water conservation Watershed Plan supports the recommendations of the See sections 6.0 and 9.0 of Peel Region's Water Efficiency incentives such as full cost pricing, and municipal water efficiency plans and programs and Plan (2004). (iii) ways of promoting water describes management See sections 4.0 and 6.0 of conservation measures and strategies that would further City of Toronto's Water water conservation incentives; contribute to achieving the objectives and targets of these plans /programs (e.g., adopting policies and providing incentives to support the practice of rainwater harvesting for stormwater management and water conservation benefits). Efficiency Plan (2002). 25.(2) (g) analyse the costs and All upper -tier and single -tier See Section 5.2.3 of York cont'd benefits of the matters municipalities in the Humber Region's Water Efficiency described in clause (f); River watershed have developed water efficiency plans and programs that analyse the costs and benefits of their recommended water conservation measures, incentives and promotion strategies. Master Plan Update(2007) for the cost analysis of water conservation measures See section 8.0 of Peel Region's Water Efficiency Plan (2004) See section 5.0 of City of Toronto's Water Efficiency Plan (2002) 132 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(2) (h) require the use of specified York Region's Water for See section 6.0 of York cont'd water conservation Tomorrow program used Region's Water Efficiency measures and incentives; specific water conservation measures and incentives as part of the original capital plan. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (2007) for the recommended program strategy. Master Plan Update also recommends the use of specific water conservation measures and incentives. See section 6.0 of Peel Region's Water Efficiency Plan (2004.) See section 4.0 of City of The Region of Peel and City of Toronto water efficiency plans also use specific water conservation measures and incentives such as system leak detection, computer controlled irrigation, watering restrictions, toilet replacement, clothes washer replacement, and indoor and outdoor water audits. Toronto's Water Efficiency Plan (2002). 25.(2) (i) contain an implementation York Region developed an See Section 6.0 of York cont'd plan for those specified implementation plan for the Region's Water Efficiency measures and incentives program as part of the scope Master Plan Update (2007)for that reconciles the demand of work in 1998. The Water the recommended program for water with the water supply; Efficiency Master Plan Update has recommended an updated program strategy, the development of an implementation plan for the updated program will begin once the Master Plan Update has been finalized. strategy See section 9.0 of Peel Region's Water Efficiency Plan (2004). See section 6.0 of City of Toronto's Water Efficiency Plan (2002). The Peel Region and City of Toronto water efficiency plans include implementation schedules. 133 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 25.(2) (j) provide for monitoring of the York Region's Water Use See Section 9.0 of York cont'd water budget and water Efficiency Master Plan Update Region's Water Efficiency conservation plan for effectiveness. , Peel Region's Water Efficiency Plan and City of Master Plan Update(2007) Toronto's Water Efficiency See section 9.0 of Peel Plan recommend monitoring and evaluation programs be implemented. Region's Water Efficiency Plan (2004). See section 6.0 of City of The draft Humber River Toronto's Water Efficiency Watershed Plan includes recommendations regarding changes or enhancements to existing environmental monitoring programs and other area, site -or issue - specific monitoring requirements that provide for, or improve capacity for monitoring of the water budget (e.g., additional climate stations, stream gauges, groundwater monitoring wells etc.). Plan (2002). See section 5.6 of the Humber River Watershed Plan for recommended enhancements to existing monitoring programs. 134 Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference 27.(1) Except with respect to land in The Humber River Watershed See Humber River Watershed Settlement Areas, all Planning Study assessed the Scenario Modelling and development and site alteration current and projected future Analysis Report Appendix B — with respect to land in a percent impervious cover for Oak Ridges Moraine subwatershed are prohibited if each Oak Ridges Moraine Subwatersheds Assessment they would cause the total percentage of the area of the subwatershed that has impervious surfaces to exceed, (a) 10 per cent; or subwatershed (based on methods suggested in draft Technical Paper #13 which exclude Settlement Areas, utilizing subwatershed boundaries defined in draft Report. Technical Paper #9). These estimates indicate that no Oak Ridges Moraine subwatersheds in the Humber River Watershed exceed the 10% impervious cover criteria for current conditions (based on 2002 land use), nor will they exceed 10% upon build -out of municipal official plans approved as of January 2005. 27.(1) (b) any lower percentage No lower percentage has N/A cont'd specified in the applicable watershed plan. been specified. Endnotes: 1. - Ministry of the Environment (2007) Oak Ridges Plans, Technical Paper #9. - Ministry of the Environment (2007) Oak Ridges Technical Paper #10. - Ministry of the Environment (2007) Oak Ridges Conservation Plans, Technical Paper #11. - Ministry of the Environment (2007) Oak Ridges (Impervious Surfaces), Technical Paper #13. Moraine Conservation Plan — Watershed Moraine Conservation Plan — Water Budgets, Moraine Conservation Plan — Water Moraine Conservation Plan — Subwatersheds 2. - City of Brampton Fill By -law, By -law 143 -95. - City of Brampton Refuse By -law, By -law 381 -2005. - City of Brampton Sewage By -law, By -law 90 -75. - City of Brampton Salt Management Plan, 2005. - City of Brampton Tree Preservation By -law, Bylaw 38 -2006. - City of Brampton Woodlot Conservation By -law, By -law 70 -2001 as amended by By -law 402 -2005. - City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapters 455 (Filling and Grading), 517 (Idling of Vehicles and Boats), 548 (Littering and Dumping of Refuse), 612 (Pesticides, Use of), 658 (Ravine Protection), 681 (Sewers), and 813 (Trees), - City of Toronto Salt Management Plan, 2004. - City of Vaughan Fill By -law, By -law 189 -96 as amended by By -law 265 -2006. - City of Vaughan Idling of Vehicles By -law, By -law 170 -2004. 135 - City of Vaughan Littering and Dumping By -law, By -law 3 -2004. - City of Vaughan Private Property Tree Protection By -law, By -law 185 -2007 as amended by By -law 205 -2007. - City of Vaughan Sewer Use By -law, By -law 12 -74. - City of Vaughan Tree Protection By -law (Public Property), By -law 95 -2005. - Dufferin County Forest Conservation By -law, By -law 2006 -15. - Dufferin County Salt Management Plan, 2005. - Region of Peel Salt Management Plan, 2007. - Region of Peel Sewer Use By -law, By -law 90 -90. - Simcoe County Tree - cutting By -law, By -law 5289. - Simcoe County Anti - dumping By -law, By -law 4805. - Town of Caledon Dumping on Private or Municipal Property By -law, 87 -100. - Town of Caledon Fill By -law, By -law 2007 -59. - Town of Caledon Healthy Horticultural Landscapes By -law, By -law 2003 -81 as amended by By -law 2005 -82. - Town of Caledon Salt Management Plan, 2005. - Town of Caledon Woodlands Conservation By -law, By -law 2000 -100. - Town of Richmond Hill Salt Management Plan, 2005. - Town of Richmond Hill Tree Preservation By -law (Private Property), By -law 41 -07. - Town of Richmond Hill Water Use Restrictions By -law, By -law 157 -05. - Township of King Water Restriction By -law, By -law 75 -43. - York Region Salt Management Plan, 2004. - York Region Sewage By -law, By -law S- 0064 - 2005 -009. - York Region Trees By -law, By -law TR- 0004 - 2005 -036. 136 RES. #D31/07 - Moved by: Seconded by: HEADWATER DRAINAGE FEATURES Approval of the Evaluation, Classification and Management of Headwater Drainage Features: Interim Guideline (March, 2007) prepared for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) and other conservation authorities. Grant Gibson Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff commence implementation of the Evaluation, Classification and Management of Headwater Drainage Features: Interim Guideline (March, 2007); THAT staff continue to collaborate with project partners in conducting primary research examining the natural functions of small drainage features in order to facilitate refinements to the guideline; THAT direction be given to staff to engage municipalities and the development industry in policy development and research initiatives; AND FURTHER THAT the interim guideline be updated as necessary based on the results of the research and that the results be reported back to the Watershed Management Advisory Board. CARRIED BACKGROUND Past land uses have altered headwater drainage features through a combination of standard engineering practices (ditching, burying and diverting) and agricultural activities (tile drains and infilling). There remains significant gaps in understanding of the ecological importance of these features, particularly ill- defined, non - permanently flowing features and their functions. These features are referred to as Headwater Drainage Features (HDFs). Because HDFs are small and do not convey flow year round, they may not appear to have significant function. However, the loss of these features may be contributing to watershed -scale impacts on a cumulative basis. This makes evaluation of impacts when alteration is contemplated through the development process very difficult. The lack of understanding can potentially lead to mismanagement of these features and loss of function in the face of new urban development. In order to address these problems, staff has completed a literature review and interim guideline to provide support and direction for headwater management. 137 RATIONALE Staff completed an extensive literature review which examined the current scientific understanding of HDFs. Staff then took the results of the review and incorporated the findings into an interim guideline document. The guideline provides conservation authority (CA) staff with direction on how to evaluate, classify and manage HDFs in the landscape through the development process in order to ensure critical functions are not lost. All neighbouring CAs (including Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, Credit Valley Conservation and Conservation Halton) have been engaged in the development of both the literature review and interim guideline, and will continue to be involved in the next phases of this project. The Town of Markham completed a similar study in 2004, entitled Markham Small Streams Study. While Markham's approach was both progressive and precautionary, staff recognize that there is need for a broader application of the concepts introduced in Markham's study at a watershed scale. TRCA's study will provide consistency amongst CAs in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), and it recognizes that there remains outstanding gaps in the understanding of these systems in Southern Ontario. In order to improve the science and support for the guideline, staff is undertaking a two -year research study examining the hydrological, biological and sediment transport functions of HDFs by collaborating with academic, agency and private sector practitioners. Once the research and reporting are completed, staff intend to use the findings to refine the guideline document, as necessary, and provide support for a finalized guideline by the end of the 2008 fiscal year. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Fieldwork will be conducted on a variety of headwater drainage features throughout the GTA in order to capture differences in soils and land use. Thus far, staff has identified sites in Brampton, Oakville, Uxbridge and possibly Waterloo. Staff will be adding sites in a number of other areas within the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Staff is collaborating with academic experts at the University of Waterloo and the University of Toronto to examine how HDFs contribute food (invertebrates and leaf litter) to downstream aquatic systems, and their role in stormflow attenuation, baseflow contribution and sediment transport processes within streams. The research will be conducted during the field seasons of 2007 and 2008, with data analysis occurring by December of 2008, and refinements to the guideline being completed by March, 2009. FINANCIAL DETAILS Financial support for the initial phase (literature review and guideline development) of this project was provided by the Great Lakes Sustainability Fund, Fisheries and Oceans Canada and The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. The cost of this phase was approximately $10,000. The research component is being supported by the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation, the Regional Municipality of Peel, the Ministry of Natural Resources, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority and Conservation Halton. Thus far, staff has secured $180,000 for the two -year project. Additional funding is being sought from the regional municipalities of Durham and York, the Great Lakes Sustainability Fund and Fisheries and Oceans Canada to fill the outstanding funding gap of $60,000. Stakeholder consultation may require an additional minimal cost of $5,000. 138 Report prepared by: Laura DelGiudice, extension 5334 Email: Idelgiudice @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Laura DelGiudice, extension 5334 Email: Idelgiudice @trca.on.ca Date: August 30, 2007 RES. #D32/07 - MALTON ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP PROJECT Year 3 Progress Report. Progress report on the accomplishments and next steps for the Malton Environmental Stewardship Project. Moved by: Seconded by: Grant Gibson Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) continue to work with the City of Mississauga, Malton residents, Mississauga- Airport Rotary Club, Ontario Trillium Foundation and the Regional Municipality of Peel to implement the Malton Environmental Stewardship Project (MESP) work plan deliverables; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Watershed Management Advisory Board upon the completion of this project in the fall of 2008 to acknowledge the project's four year accomplishments, project partners and how to sustain the project into the future. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #6/06, held on July 28, 2006, Resolution #A169/06 was approved directing staff to continue to report back annually regarding the milestones and accomplishments of the Malton Environmental Stewardship Project (MESP). The MESP began in July, 2004 as a four -year community initiative through an Ontario Trillium Foundation grant of $253,700. Since July 28th, 2006, the Malton Environmental Stewardship Project has continued to provide hands on environmental stewardship opportunities engaging local schools, faith groups, agencies, businesses and the many culturally diverse communities living within the Malton community, City of Mississauga. This project is currently in its fourth and final year of Ontario Trillium Foundation funding, which ends in June, 2008. With the project in its final year, planning has been initiated with the project partners to continue to build capacity within Malton and define the future direction of stewardship within the community. MESP's main stewardship activities are: • creek clean -up and habitat naturalization plantings; • outreach education programs to foster a connection to nature, provide a better understanding of the importance of natural habitats, and promote lifestyle practices to reduce negative environmental impacts; • engage the many segments of Melton's culturally diverse community; and • build community capacity through strong, local partnerships with organizations and residents to continue supporting stewardship in Malton. 139 To date, this project has reached over 15,500 people and engaged over 2,400 volunteers who contributed over 9,250 hours of their time. The program has been very successful in meeting or exceeding targets. A summary of the expected results and accomplishments for year three are summarized as follows: Expected Results (July 1, 2006 - June 30, 2007) Accomplishments (July 1, 2006 - June 30, 2007) 6 naturalization /clean -up /restoration events each year in 7 community action sites during the life of the project. 8 clean -up /habitat naturalization planting events - additional activities include invasive species removal. Approximately 2,000 native trees, shrubs and meadow plants to be planted during the life of the project. 320 native trees and shrubs planted this year (1,352 total to date). Approximately 5,600 square metresof forest, wetland, riparian and meadow areas enhanced during the life of the project. Over 7,800 square metres of riparian, meadow and forest areas enhanced to date. 2 wildlife structures (two hibernacula and two habitat piles) and 18 nest boxes installed for the duration of the project. 20 bird nest boxes constructed for installation in backyards in Malton. 3 community /business education workshops /seminars to be held each year. 3 community workshops /seminars. 6 youth environmental education programs. 2 presentations to community groups. 1 interpretive nature hike. An annual environmental festival hosted each year. 1 annual Malton Stewardship Day festival. Malton Environmental Stewardship Group (Malton Community Action Area Advisory Committee) established with representation from key community stakeholder groups. Malton Environmental Stewardship Group (MESG) formed in fall of 2004 and remains engaged in meetings and assisting with events. An environmental youth corp to be formed for participation in stewardship activities. MESP Youth Action Group formed in late 2004 and has membership of 70+ youth aged 14 -25. 2 schools to participate in stewardship activities each year. 2 schools participated in activities. Sustainable Schools Challenge program introduced to local schools. 15 local schools were provided with information packages which included local environmental activities for their participation. 5 activities and events to be held by each participating school annually. Participating schools engaged in 2 -6 environmental activities each. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will continue to work with the City of Mississauga, Malton residents, Mississauga - Airport Rotary Club, Ontario Trillium Foundation, Regional Municipality of Peel and community partners to implement the work plan deliverables for the final year of the project which ends in June, 2008. Staff will continue to build capacity within the community, along with creating new partnerships and ideas, as part of the future of stewardship in Malton. 140 FINANCIAL DETAILS This project has been granted core funding for four years by the Ontario Trillium Foundation in the amount of $253,700 and subsequently has received annual funding from the Regional Municipality of Peel's Sustainable Communities Program. The amount received for year three stewardship activities was $30,000. MESP has an average annual budget of $100,000. The following funds have also been raised over the last year: • $500 corporate donation from United Parcel Service (UPS); • $5,000 from Cargill Inc. and Cargill Foods Toronto. Report prepared by: Michelle Pongracz, extension 5676 Email: mpongracz @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Michelle Pongracz, extension 5676; Joanne Jeffery, extension 5638 Emails: mpongracz @trca.on.ca; jjeffery @trca.on.ca Date: August 24, 2007 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #D33/07 - UPPER MIMICO CREEK AQUATIC HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECT Update on the commencement of Phase I construction of the Upper Mimico Creek Aquatic Habitat Restoration Project. Moved by: Seconded by: Maria Augimeri John Parker IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on commencement in September, 2007 of Phase 1 of the Upper Mimico Creek Aquatic Habitat Restoration Project be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Upper Mimico Creek Aquatic Habitat Restoration Project site is located in the City of Brampton, bordered by Intermodal Drive to the south, Queen Street to the north, the Canadian National (CN) Brampton Intermodal rail terminal to the west, the A.J. Billes Canadian Tire Distribution Centre to the east and a retired farm field to the northeast. 141 The purpose of this project is to restore the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems of Mimico Creek within the study area, provide integrated and naturalized solutions to stormwater management and generally address issues of water quality, increased flows, natural cover and the impacts of adjacent land uses. Detailed designs and cost estimates have been developed by the consultant for in- stream elements such as natural channel design and associated stormwater attenuation features, as well as barrier mitigation and removal. Detailed designs for terrestrial habitat such as floodplain restoration and habitat enhancement are being developed and simultaneously integrated into the phased components by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff. A natural corridor design is proposed within the project area to restore natural channel form and function. A holistic approach was used to guide the design process, which considers geomorphology, hydrology and downstream reaches with respect to benefits and constraints, and future land use changes. All required approvals have been obtained and the construction of Phase I is ready to commence in September, 2007. RATIONALE This project offers an opportunity to substantially improve channel conditions and aquatic habitat within and beyond the project area. The in- stream barriers that fragment the aquatic system and prevent fish from accessing available habitat will be removed, thereby enhancing the health and productivity of the local aquatic community. Greater variability with respect to topography and vegetation in the floodplain will also improve the terrestrial and aquatic habitat. Wetland and oxbow features will be used to mimic and enhance the retention and detention functions of natural channel systems. Riparian plantings along the watercourse will provide shade to the creek, improve channel stability and increase the diversity of habitat available for local wildlife. The remainder of the floodplain will benefit from greater canopy cover, with strategic nodal plantings used to increase terrestrial habitat value while addressing identified flood risks. Overall, the restoration objective is to employ natural channel design principals to: • re- establish a more naturalized channel form within the valley; • improve terrestrial and aquatic habitat; and • enhance water and sediment retention and detention functions. Project Deliverables • 1.2 km of naturalization and enhancement of upper Mimico Creek; • 1.5 ha of meadow wetland features; • 4 oxbow features; • 220 trees and 4000 shrubs for wetland, riparian and upland plantings; • 1 km of aquatic habitat enhancement with riffle pool sequences; • 3 in- stream barriers removed; • 700 m of concrete lining removed and naturalized bank treatment applied. 142 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • Begin construction of Phase I in September, 2007. • Implement pre- and post- construction aquatic monitoring as part of continual efforts to assess the ecological benefits of project implementation. • Phased implementation of the remaining 4 components of the Upper Mimico Aquatic Habitat Restoration Project will continue throughout 2008 -2010. • Continue to strengthen and pursue relationships with municipal partners and the industrial /commercial community surrounding the upper Mimico site. • Investigate and secure matching funding for future implementation through a variety of private and public partnerships. FINANCIAL DETAILS Phase I construction will cost $361,000. Funding for Phase I implementation is available in the amount of $70,000 through Region of Peel Regeneration and $150,000 through the Regional Municipality of Peel Climate Change Enhancement funding. An additional $141,000 has been made available through TRCA and other private funding sources. Report prepared by: Dushan Jojkic, extension 5667 Email: djojkic @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Rick Portiss, extension 5302 or Dushan Jojkic, extension 5667 Emails: rportiss @trca.on.ca; djojkic @trca.on.ca Date: August 30, 2007 RES. #D34/07 - CLAIREVILLE COMMUNITY STEWARDSHIP PROJECT Status Report. Status report on the Claireville Community Stewardship Project. Moved by: Seconded by: Maria Augimeri John Parker IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on the status of the Claireville Community Stewardship Project be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/06, held on April 28, 2006, Resolution #A88/06 was approved as follows: THAT staff be authorized to take such action as is necessary to implement the Claireville Community Stewardship project; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority on the progress of the Claireville Community Stewardship project. 143 Claireville Conservation Area is an 848 hectare (2,100 acre) property owned by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). The area is located in the West Humber subwatershed in the Humber River watershed. It is one of the most publicly accessible natural environment properties in the Regional Municipality of Peel. It has vast tracts of natural areas, open field, a designated heritage barn and existing recreation and educational facilities. There are many residential communities, businesses and special interest groups who, along with local and regional municipal governments, have expressed an interest in seeing a wider variety of outdoor recreation, education, and commercial recreation activities and programs at Claireville. The Friends of Claireville (FOC) are a volunteer group who, since their inception in 1999, has sought to educate the public on environmental issues and to engage the community in environmental stewardship activities at Claireville Conservation Area. Joint initiatives with TRCA include community plantings (over 21,000 trees planted to date), clean -ups, guided hikes and other community events that reach out to families, seniors, youth and new Canadians. The FOC are also an active group on the Humber Watershed Alliance. TRCA has worked closely with the FOC for over 7 years. During this time, both groups have identified opportunities for restoration projects and the further development of community stewardship. Although Claireville is not an operating conservation area, many residents from the surrounding areas enjoy passive recreation, such as hiking and nature viewing on site. The Claireville Community Stewardship Project (CCSP) was initiated in December of 2005 in partnership with the Friends of Claireville as a three -year community initiative through an Ontario Trillium Foundation (OTF) grant. The goal of the CCSP is to strengthen the organizational structure and capacity of the FOC and to foster awareness, build community and restore the ecological health of Claireville Conservation Area through a hands -on environmental stewardship program that provides youth, adults, community and business leaders with the knowledge and tools required to help revitalize and care for the watershed's natural resources. The CCSP's main stewardship activities and highlights are as follows: 1. Shoreline clean -up and habitat naturalization plantings: • Planted over 2100 native trees and shrubs and over 100 bags of garbage and recyclables collected. 2. Volunteer Environmental Monitoring - Claireville stewards in the field: • 60 registered stewards. • Monitored water quality in the West Humber River at 3 different sites using benthic macroinvertebrates. • Ongoing monitoring of tree growth and success of 5 previous planting sites. Sites include community plantings as well as TRCA staff and mechanical plantings. • Mulched over 1,000 native trees and shrubs to reduce competition by grass. 3. Annual Claireville fishing festival: • Over 100 members of the community attended. 144 4. Community engagement in stewardship activities for the protection, restoration and enhancement of the Claireville Conservation Area. 5. Management plan: • Provide input into the updates of the Claireville Management Plan. To date, this project has reached over 113,000 people, engaged over 610 volunteers, and 2 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Stewardship Ranger Crews. The program has been very successful in meeting or exceeding its targets. Other activities associated with this project include the development of agricultural uses on a portion of the Claireville land and heritage interpretation with the potential assistance of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario. All parties work together to accomplish common and complementary objectives. FINANCIAL DETAILS A total of $100,500 from OTF has been approved over a three -year period. Other funding sources for this project will include: TD Friends of the Environment (proposed), Ministry of Natural Resources: Community Fisheries and Wildlife Involvement Program (CFWIP) (proposed), corporate sponsorship (proposed) and the Region of Peel capital budget ($24,450). The total cost of this three -year project is estimated at $280,718. Report prepared by: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211 Email: gwilkins @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Bethany Foster, extension 5753 Email: bfoster @trca.on.ca Date: September 5, 2007 RES. #D35/07 - WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Maria Augimeri John Parker THAT Section IV items 8.3.1 - 8.3.2, inclusive, in regards to watershed committee minutes, be received. CARRIED Section IV Items - 8.3.1 - 8.3.2, Inclusive DUFFINS CARRUTHERS WATERSHED RESOURCE GROUP Minutes of Meeting #1/07, held on February 21, 2007 ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE Minutes of Meeting #3/07, held on March 23, 2007. 145 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:43 a.m., on Friday, September 14, 2007. Anthony Perruzza Brian Denney Vice Chair Secretary- Treasurer /ks 146 THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #4/07 October 19, 2007 The Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #4/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, October 19, 2007. The Chair Richard Whitehead, called the meeting to order at 10:10 a.m.. PRESENT Bryan Bertie Member Gay Cowbourne Member Lois Griffin Member Bonnie Littley Member John Parker Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority Anthony Perruzza Vice Chair Richard Whitehead Chair ABSENT Maria Augimeri Member Grant Gibson Member RES. #D36/07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne John Parker THAT the Minutes of Meeting #3/07, held on September 14, be approved. PRESENTATIONS (a) CARRIED A presentation by Bud Purves, President, and Chris Wong, Director, Transporation and Master Planning, York University Development Corporation, in regard to item 7.1 - York University (Keele Campus) Stormwater Management, Secondary Plan and Environmental Sustainability. 147 (b) A presentation by Brian Peterkin, Stewardship Coordinator, York Environmental Stewardship, Ministry of Natural Resources, in regard to item 7.2 - Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Stewardship Ranger Program 2006 - 2007. (c) A presentation by Gabe D'Ouste, President, Landscape Planning Limited, in regard to item 7.3 - Bartley Smith Greenway Business and Community Outreach Initiative. (d) A presentation by Jack Imoff, National Biologist, Trout Unlimited Canada, in regard to item 7.4 - Centreville Creek Community Outreach and Environmental Stewardship Program. RES. #D37 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Anthony Perruzza Lois Griffin THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. RES. #D38 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Gay Cowbourne CARRIED THAT above -noted presentation (b) be heard and received. RES. #D39 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley Lois Griffin CARRIED THAT above -noted presentation (c) be heard and received. RES. #D40 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Lois Griffin Bryan Bertie CARRIED THAT above -noted presentation (d) be heard and received. CARRIED 148 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #D41 /07 - YORK UNIVERSITY (KEELE CAMPUS) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, SECONDARY PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY Overview of York University's campus planning initiatives highlighting the current stormwater management plans, City of Toronto Secondary Plan update and environmental sustainability at the Keele Campus. This report accompanies a presentation that will be made by Bud Purves, President, York University Development Corporation, at the October 19, 2007 Watershed Management Advisory Board meeting. Moved by: Seconded by: Anthony Perruzza Lois Griffin THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) commend York University for its contribution to healthy rivers and shorelines, regional biodiversity and sustainable communities through past planning and development initiatives; THAT York University be encouraged to continue to apply principles of environmental sustainability in all facets of its activities and to collaborate when appropriate with TRCA to obtain advice and technical support in pursuit of such goals; AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized and directed to continue its liaison with York University to ensure appropriate assistance and information is available to the university as it pursues its sustainability initiatives. AMENDMENT RES. #D42 /07 Moved by: Seconded by: Anthony Perruzza Lois Griffin THAT the following be inserted before the last paragraph of the main motion: THAT York University be encouraged to adopt the City of Toronto's Green Development Standards, LEED criteria, or similar, for all new development undertaken by the University or resulting from sale of University lands for development purposes; THAT York University be requested to provide a timetable for their sustainability and stormwater initiatives and a report be brought back to the Authority; THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED 149 BACKGROUND In July of 2003, the Canadian Tennis Association began construction of the Tennis Canada - Rexall Centre facility (hereafter referred to as Tennis Canada). The facility was built on land owned by York University and adjacent to TRCA's 5 Shoreham Drive Head Office. The property is bound to the east, south and west by valley corridors and tributaries associated with the Black Creek. In order to accommodate the Tennis Canada facility, an existing culvert under Shoreham Drive was extended, a combination stormwater management and wetland facility was constructed and a significant section of Hoover Creek was restored and naturalized. The stormwater management facility was designed to not only treat on -site runoff, but to also voluntarily improve the water quality of a portion of the untreated water which currently flows from upstream. During review of the Tennis Canada proposal, TRCA, City of Toronto and various other agencies and interest groups raised concerns with the overall management of the Hoover Creek subwatershed. At TRCA Executive Committee Meeting #5/03, held on June 6, 2003, Resolution #B72/03 was approved as follows in part: ... THAT York University be requested to commit to develop and implement over time a comprehensive water management plan in consultation with TRCA and the City of Toronto... York University Development Corporation committed to this request. On July 4, 2003, TRCA's Executive Committee approved the permit application for the Tennis Canada development and also passed Resolution #B97/03 which stated in part: THAT the City of Toronto be requested, through the implementation of the Wet Weather Flow Master Plan, to work with York University to develop a comprehensive stormwater management plan...for the entire Hoover Creek catchment area as it relates to York University stormwater, including retrofitting Stong Pond and the naturalization of the surrounding landscape.... The University has committed to this and other initiatives, including an update of the City of Toronto's Secondary Plan. Stormwater Management Since the latter resolution was passed, York University Development Corporation and Tribute Communities worked in partnership with TRCA and City of Toronto staff to prepare and finalize stormwater management master plans for the north and south precincts of the Keele Campus. The results are comprehensive plans that will guide water management as the campus builds out. 150 The north precinct is located north of The Pond Road, west of Keele Street, south of Steeles Avenue West and east of Murray Ross Parkway. This precinct includes the main campus, Tennis Canada - Rexall Centre, Ice Gardens and significant areas of undeveloped lands along Steeles Avenue West which will accommodate future transit supportive mixed use developments. The ultimate build out of the north precinct will be serviced by a quality and quantity control retrofit of Stong Pond, located in the University's arboretum east of The Pond Road, as well as the Tennis Canada combination stormwater management and wetland facility. Approximately 20 hectares of drainage not currently being treated by the Tennis Canada facility will be diverted to the Stong Pond and some drainage areas located south of The Pond Road will be diverted from Stong Pond to the south precinct system (see below). The plan is predicated on including source and conveyance control features such as rainwater harvesting, green roofs, bioretention areas and vegetation filter strips in future development. In the summer of 2007, Shoreham Drive and The Pond Road were reconstructed and stormwater is now treated in a series of conveyance facilities (bioretention areas and vegetated filter strips) before discharging to the ponds. Stong Pond is currently being retrofitted and naturalized. The completion of the pond and planting of native species in the conveyance facilities and the pond is expected to take place this autumn. The project represents a commitment to implementing the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan. The south precinct is located south of The Pond Road, west of Keele Street and north of Murray Ross Parkway. This precinct currently includes Phase I and Phase II of the Tribute Communities developments and student housing. In future, the precinct will also accommodate future transit supportive mixed use developments. The ultimate build out of the south precinct will be serviced by an expanded Tribute Communities stormwater management pond located on tableland adjacent to the Hoover Creek valley. The plan is predicated on including source and conveyance control features such as rainwater harvesting, green roofs, bioretention areas and vegetative filter strips. These control features will be implemented through Site Plan Control as the campus redevelops. The stormwater management pond is currently being expanded to service Phase II of the Tribute Community and will meet TRCA water quality and quantity control criteria, as well as resulting in significant enhancement of the valley vegetation. Secondary Plan The City of Toronto has initiated a process to update the existing York University Secondary Plan. TRCA Planning and Development and Black Creek Pioneer Village staff are represented on the Secondary Plan Update Steering Committee. The update will include review and approval of a natural heritage study that includes the protection and enhancement of the existing woodlots and Black Creek /Hoover Creek valley corridor, the development of natural linkages to connect the four core woodlots with the valley corridor and the preparation and implementation of management plans for the woodlots. As mentioned above, projects currently underway include renaturalization of the Tribute Communities stormwater management pond, Stong Pond, conveyance facilities associated with The Pond Road reconstruction and a portion of the Hoover Creek valley corridor. The secondary plan will also incorporate principals of sustainable development to be implemented as the campus builds out. 151 Sustainable Development In 2002, York University made a public commitment to sustainability and became an official signatory of the Talloires Declaration, a ten -point action plan for incorporating sustainability and environmental literacy in teaching, research, operations and outreach at colleges and universities. York University has made a commitment to improving its existing operations as well as ensuring that new development on campus lands is sustainable. For example, the Department of Facilities Services has adopted planning and operational principals aimed at reducing the University's ecological footprint such as reduced grass cutting, use of fertilizers and pesticides; development and enhancement of naturalized spaces; increased use of porous paving; and increased recycling, among others. In 2006, the University launched a multi -year Energy Management Program which will see $40 million infused into new electrical and mechanical systems in older campus buildings to reduce energy consumption. A number of buildings have recently been completed or construction is underway. The Computer Science and Engineering Building was constructed with a green roof, the function of which is being monitored by TRCA staff through the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP). The Atkinson Apartments, built in 1973, recently underwent an upgrade of the building envelope to increase energy efficiency and longevity. This included the installation of high- efficiency windows. The Government of Ontario is constructing a new Archives of Ontario building on the north -east side of the University Common. This building was located to take advantage of the extension of the York - Spadina subway line and will be designed to meet the Leadership in Energy and Environment Design (LEED) silver certification. Report prepared by: Steve Heuchert, extension 5311 Email: sheuchert @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Steve Heuchert, extension 5311 Email: sheuchert @trca.on.ca Date: September 28, 2007 RES. #D43/07 - ONTARIO MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES STEWARDSHIP RANGER PROGRAM 2006 - 2007. Staff report on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority involvement with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 2006 - 2007 Stewardship Ranger youth employment program. Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) continue to work with the Ministry of Natural Resources' Ontario Stewardship Ranger Program. 152 AMENDMENT RES. #D44/07 Moved by: Seconded by: Gerri Lynn O'Connor Gay Cowbourne THAT the following be inserted after the main motion: THAT the Chair of the Authority send a letter to the Ministry of Natural Resources expressings TRCA's support for the program and encourage the Ministry to expand their financial commitment to, and promotion of, the program; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA recommend to Conservation Ontario that they schedule a presentation by Brian Peterkin on the program at a Conservation Ontario Council meeting prior to next season. THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED BACKGROUND The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) introduced the Ontario Stewardship Ranger (OSR) Program as a pilot project in 1998. It is modelled after MNR's well -known Ontario Junior Ranger Program, which is now in its 59th year of operation. A key difference between the two programs is that OSR Program participants live and work in their communities instead of living at an Ontario Ranger camp for eight weeks of the summer. Since its inception, TRCA has utilized the OSR Program to help deliver many habitat restoration projects throughout the TRCA jurisdiction. The goal of the OSR Program is to be both a work and educational experience program that involves interested young people in a variety of natural resource management projects in their communities. This youth employment program recruits local 17 -year olds for summer employment in an effort to connect the participants with local conservation initiatives. In 2006 and 2007, the TRCA Restoration Services division secured two stewardship ranger crews to assist in the projects and programs of the division. During both summers, a crew was dedicated to restoration activities at the Claireville Conservation Area and the other crew worked on a variety of projects throughout the TRCA jurisdiction. This Ontario Stewardship Ranger crew had the opportunity to spend their summer participating in a number of conservation projects. At Claireville Conservation Area, the rangers assisted with cattail transplants and aquatic plantings, installing bird and fish habitat, as well as monitoring fish and wildlife, tree plantings and water quality in the Humber River. In addition, the ranger crews worked on a variety of activities throughout the jurisdiction including goose management, fish sampling, colonial water bird management, rabies control and fish and wildlife habitat restoration. The OSR Program is beneficial to TRCA's collective work because: • it connects conservation areas and restoration initiatives with local young people; 153 • TRCA is able to support a meaningful youth employment program developed and delivered by a partner agency; • the program is an excellent value and a significant source of labour for TRCA projects; and • Stewardship Rangers are enthusiastic and contribute significantly to the success of TRCA's projects. This labour intensive work is challenging and provides valuable lessons on good work ethics, hands on job experience and a high degree of personal development. The Stewardship Ranger Program is centred around a ranger crew which includes a vehicle, supervisor and four rangers. Each ranger is provided with workplace safety training, personal safety equipment and job specific and resource management training. The daily work and exposure to conservation activities and programs has given these young people a valuable foothold in natural resource management and environmental careers. FINANCIAL DETAILS The cost of each crew is roughly $30,000 and they are employed during a seven week period in July and August. One crew was supported by the City of Toronto in 2006 and the Regional Municipality of Peel in 2007. The second crew was supported by a variety of our Restoration Services projects in 2006 and 2007. Report prepared by: Gord MacPherson, extension 5246 Email: gmacpherson @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Gord MacPherson, extension 5246 Email: gmacpherson @trca.on.ca Date: September 27, 2007 RES. #D45/07 - BARTLEY SMITH GREENWAY BUSINESS AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH INITIATIVE Partner recognition. Completion of the Bartley Smith Greenway Business and Community Outreach Initiative. Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley Lois Griffin THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT members and partners both past and present be recognized and thanked for their contributions and efforts towards the success of the Bartley Smith Greenway Business and Community Outreach Initiative. CARRIED BACKGROUND Bartley Smith Greenway (BSG) is a 15 kilometre valley corridor that follows the upper west Don River subwatershed through the City of Vaughan, the most rapidly expanding urban community within the Greater Toronto Area. The corridor is named after Anne Bartley Smith of Aurora who, in 1994, made a generous bequest to TRCA for restoration of the Don River. 154 Lands surrounding the BSG will soon be fully developed, creating increased demand on BSG for recreational trails and scenic natural open spaces. The BSG Business and Community Outreach Initiative protects and enhances the ecological health of the BSG through naturalization projects and stewardship activities. In addition, the initiative creates passive recreational opportunities for visitors and local residents. Thanks to the BSG Business and Community Outreach Initiative, the BSG is one of the most successful regeneration efforts in the entire Don watershed. The first large scale restoration piece in the BSG was Langstaff EcoPark, which officially opened in June, 1997. It was the result of a visionary plan realized by a partnership of the Don Watershed Task Force with local businesses, community groups and government agencies who contributed design expertise, labour, materials and financial support. Langstaff EcoPark with its centrepiece, the Keffer Marsh, is the most significant natural regeneration area in the upper West Don. The park now supports a diverse range of flora and fauna both terrestrial and aquatic, despite being surrounded by the Langstaff industrial - commercial district, a 90 hectare site that comprises over 1,000 businesses. Upon completion of the Langstaff EcoPark, it was discussed that regeneration and environmental awareness should expand to the entire valley corridor. In 2001, a need was identified for a full time stewardship coordinator working solely in the BSG to carry on various stewardship and restoration initiatives. In 2002 the Vaughan Chamber of Commerce, in partnership with the City of Vaughan, the Langstaff EcoPark Steering Committee and TRCA obtained a $280,000, five -year grant from the Ontario Trillium Foundation (OTF). These funds allowed for the continued environmental regeneration and outreach in the BSG. The main objectives of the Bartley Smith Greenway Business and Community Outreach Initiative are: • provide environmental awareness to the local community and offer opportunities for stewardship programs; • improve the quality of water and aquatic habitats within the upper west Don River through the development of wetlands; • establishment of riparian habitats to provide provision of in- stream cover while controlling excessive river bank erosion; • increase diversity of habitats through planting a variety of native trees and shrubs species to attract /sustain local and migratory wildlife. • contribute to the linked recreational trail system, within or adjacent to the Don River valley to improve the health and enjoyment of residents and visitors. As per Authority Resolution #A169/02 of Meeting #7/02, held on July 22, 2002, the Bartley Smith Greenway Stewardship and Planning Advisory Committee (BSGAC) was established through the preparation of a collaborative terms of reference and the hiring of a full time project ecologist. The role of the project ecologist has been to implement the work plan as outlined in the OTF proposal with support of the BSGAC. 155 The mandate of the BSGAC is to provide input to the City of Vaughan and TRCA regarding future regeneration and development of the valley corridors associated with the West Don River for the purposes of enhancing natural area management, water management, community involvement and access for trail and related recreational uses. Over the past 5 years the BSGAC and its key partners have played a prominent role in delivering stewardship outreach activities, identifying regeneration opportunities and working to develop further trail linkages in the BSG corridor. As of July 1, 2007 the OFT grant commitment has ended and a final report to OTF is underway. Program Accomplishments 2002 -2007 Partnerships • 37 partnerships with local business and community groups. Trail planning and construction • Trail construction and development - 4 kilometres. • Pedestrian bridges - 2. • Trail maintenance - 7 kilometres. Habitat Enhancements • Planted 10,000 native trees and shrubs. • Planted 1,000 aquatic plants. • 250 nesting boxes for birds installed and monitored. • 3 wetlands developed, 7 hectares in total. • 2 fish barriers removed. • 2 hectares of evasive flora removed. • 11 habitat structures constructed. BSG Stewardship and outreach • Hosted 20 educational workshops. • 8 quarterly newsletters distributed to over 2,000 residents. • Bird Checklist developed for the BSG. • Biological inventory of BSG completed for flora and fauna, utilizing the TRCA's Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy. • BSG invasive control report. • BSG website developed - www.bartleysmithgreenway.org. • 5 newspaper articles and 2 radio interviews given. • Organized 14 community planting events. • Organized 5 corporate planting events. • Worked with 6 local business to educate on lot level waste and on site clean up. • Worked with 6 local business to promote pollution prevention. • Worked with 22 school groups in planting events and aquatic plant programs. • Engaged 7,500 individuals /volunteers, including students, community groups, local residents and businesses. • 2 monitoring programs achieved. • 8 interpretive signs installed. 156 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE • Prepare and submit final report to project partners. • Assist on plans and budget requirements for 1.8 kilometres of new trail development. • Assist in new pedestrian bridge planning. • Install 4 new interpretive signs. • Construct a trailhead kiosk. • Give one workshop on the Healthy Yards program. FINANCIAL DETAILS Key funding in the amount of $616,340 over the 5 years has been provided by OTF, the Regional Municipality of York, The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, Great Lakes Sustainability Fund, City of Vaughan, local businesses and this includes funding for the work to be done. Report prepared by: Greg Sadowski, extension 5668 Email: gsadowski @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Greg Sadowski, extension 5668 Emails: gsadowski @trca.on.ca Date: September 19, 2007 RES. #D46/07 - CENTREVILLE CREEK COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM Final Report. The accomplishments of the Centreville Creek Community Outreach and Environmental Stewardship Program. Moved by: Seconded by: Lois Griffin Bryan Bertie THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) thank and acknowledge the project partners who contributed to the success of the Centreville Creek Environmental Stewardship Program. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/06, held on July 14, 2006, Resolution #A169/06 was approved as follows: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) continue to implement the Centreville Creek Environmental Stewardship Program (CCESP) in partnership with Trout Unlimited Canada, Ontario Trillium Foundation and the Region of Peel; AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to provide an annual project progress report that highlights the milestones and the accomplishments of the program. 157 On July 16, 2004, the Watershed Management Advisory Board (WMAB) approved the commitment to support the Centreville Creek Environmental Stewardship Program (CCESP) in partnership with Trout Unlimited Canada, Ontario Trillium Foundation and the Regional Municipality of Peel. In 2004, the CCESP was granted $159,000 in financial support from the Ontario Trillium Foundation (OTF). This three -year community stewardship program was designed to increase awareness and educate the community about environmental issues impacting the Centreville Creek subwatershed, while protecting, restoring and enhancing the ecological health of the area through naturalization projects and stewardship activities. This program included hands -on initiatives such as monitoring, habitat creation, watershed clean -ups and tree plantings that empowered and engaged the community. The Authority received a program update at Meeting #4/06, held on July 14, 2006, which identified accomplishments to date and work plan priorities for 2006/07. Since that time, the work plan has been completed, the OTF grant commitment and the CCESP has come to an end. The program has recently completed its third and final year. The expected targets and actual achievements are summarized below: Expected Targets Program Accomplishments Engage 1,200 individuals Engaged 3,500 individuals Deliver 12 community planting events Organized and implemented 25 community planting events Deliver 12 community clean -up events Organized and implemented 12 community clean -up events Work with 12 school groups Worked with 57 school groups Plant 600 aquatic plants Planted 1,900 aquatic plants Plant 9,000 native trees and shrubs Planted 17,200 native trees and shrubs Install 50 wildlife habitat structures (duck nesting structures, songbird nesting boxes, snake hibernaculums, etc.) Installed 90 wildlife habitat structures Complete 8 community monitoring programs Completed 9 monitoring programs Deliver 2 educational workshops Hosted 4 educational workshops Assist 3 private landowner with private land stewardship initiatives Assisted 33 private landowners with private land stewardship initiatives These deliverables were achieved through the following program components: • public community events; • a partnership with Albion Hills Conservation Area and the Albion Hills Field Centre; and • private landowner outreach. 158 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Work plan priorities for 2007, as agreed upon by all project partners, include: • prepare and submit final report to project partners; and • develop and install project signage. FINANCIAL DETAILS Key funding in the amount of $340,000 for the CCESP has been provided by OTF and through the Regional Municipality of Peel Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Regeneration Fund, Community Fisheries/Wildlife Involvement Program, Great Lakes Sustainability Fund, Izaak Walton Fly Fishing Club, Ontario Streams, Shell Environmental Fund, TD Friends of the Environment Foundation, Trout Unlimited Canada and Winter Hatches Fly Fishing Club. Report prepared by: Vince D'Elia, extension 5646 Email: vdelia @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Vince D'Elia, extension 5646 Email: vdelia @trca.on.ca Date: September 24, 2006 RES. #D47/07 - ALTONA FOREST WETLAND CREATION PROJECT Construction of a wetland in Altona Forest as a joint project of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, the Altona Forest Stewardship Committee and the Toronto Zoo. Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Altona Forest Stewardship Committee, the Toronto Zoo, the City of Pickering and the Regional Municipality of Durham be advised of the implementation of the project to construct a wetland in Altona Forest. CARRIED BACKGROUND Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) owns approximately 53 hectares of environmentally significant land known as the Altona Forest. The property is located in the City of Pickering, south of Finch Avenue and north of Sheppard Avenue, between Rosebank Road and Altona Road. A key feature of the property is the 12 hectare J. Murray Speirs Ecological Reserve that is dedicated to the protection and observation of birds, plants and other wildlife. The area immediately surrounding the Altona Forest has been developed over the past five years for residential and institutional uses. The Altona Forest property consists of mature forest with old growth characteristics and numerous early to mid successional vegetation communities, such as old fields and wet meadows. 159 Environmental Management Plan Following the property acquisition in 1995, TRCA developed an environmental management plan to secure the site and to protect and maintain the ecological integrity of the property. The management plan was developed with input from other agencies, landowners and community groups. At Authority Meeting #5/95, held on June 23, 1995, Resolution #A160/95 was adopted as follows: THAT the Altona Forest Environmental Management Plan, dated June 23, 1995, be approved; THAT any additional comments received before June 23, 1995 from Dr. Speirs, the Friends of Altona Forest and Petticoat Creek or other be incorporated into the plan, where appropriate, and staff bring any substantive changes to the attention of the Authority; AND FURTHER THAT the 10ha ecological Reserve be formally designated the J. Murray Speirs Ecological Reserve, once Dr. Speirs has donated approximately 2.8ha of his land to be included as part of the Altona Forest property. Altona Forest Hydrologic and Water Balance Analysis In 2003, staff contracted Clarifica to prepare a report on the hydrology and water balance of Altona Forest. This was prompted by visual observations and reports that suggested a trend of reduced surface water existence within typically -wet areas of the forest. In addition, staff had noted changes in the health of the vegetation community consistent with a reduced surface water supply. The purpose of the study was to carry out a review and analysis of the pre - development and post - development drainage conditions within the Altona Forest and to provide preliminary remediation activities that could restore the natural hydrologic regime and protect the ecological integrity of the Altona Forest property. The report found that adjacent subdivisions have resulted in surface water features being removed or partially removed and surface flow paths being disturbed or removed, resulting in reduced water supply to Altona Forest. The report recommended a number of short -term and long -term measures to remediate the effects of reduced water supply to the forest, including: • creating a check dam /berm to pond water at or nearer to wet pockets; • integrating a trail around the wet pocket feature; and • developing a monitoring program to assess water levels and to provide information to direct future long -term water retention actions. 160 The Altona Forest Stewardship Committee has been working with the Toronto Zoo since 2003 to implement the Amphibian Monitoring Program. The Amphibian Monitoring Program, or Frogwatch, is a community -based monitoring program administered through a partnership between the Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network Coordinating Office (EMAN), Environment Canada, the Canadian Nature Federation and coordinators in each province and territory. In Ontario, the Toronto Zoo administers and promotes Frogwatch through the Adopt -A -Pond program. The information that is submitted to the program is assessed to identify changes in local ecosystems, which helps to locate areas of concern so further research can be done. The goal of the Amphibian Monitoring Program was to determine how the rehabilitation of a wetland in Altona Forest, called Lacey's Pond, affected the frog population. Wetland samples taken from Lacey's Pond in the early 1990's revealed 5 species of frogs. This same pond was later drained, decimating the frog populations. In 2003, a berm was built at Lacey's Pond in Altona Forest in an effort to retain wetland features and provide habitat for a variety of species, including green frogs and wood frogs. The project was very successful in creating habitat for these as well as other fauna species. Each year the study has shown the number of wood frogs increasing. Other frog species have been recorded in the wetland, but they are not breeding there as the wetland is not of sufficient size or quality. The results of the annual monitoring indicate a need for additional wetland habitat to provide breeding areas for additional amphibian species, as well as to provide additional habitat for the frog species already present in the forest. In response to the recommendations of the Altona Forest hydrologic and water balance analysis and the Amphibian Monitoring Program, the Altona Forest Stewardship Committee , in partnership with the Toronto Zoo and TRCA staff, developed a wetland creation proposal. The proposal recommends the creation of a wetland to provide habitat for amphibians and other wetland flora and fauna species. The wetland construction project will consist of subtle re- grading to create ephemeral open water pockets targeting frog species. The size and depth of the wetland will depend on the final design and location, but will range in size from 130 - 280 square meters. The wetland bottom will be non - uniform, with deep and shallow areas. Pond depths will range from 0.25 - 0.75 metres. Woody debris will be placed within and at the edges of the wetland. Wherever possible existing plants will be maintained and transplanted, and additional plants will be brought in as necessary. During pond construction, invasive exotic vegetation will be removed from the surrounding area. An interpretive trail will be built from the existing main trail, and will feature interpretive signage, a boardwalk and a small viewing area. The proposal also includes the implementation of a water monitoring regime in the forest. Information from this regime will be used to develop short and long -term recommendations for managing water levels throughout the forest. RATIONALE TRCA staff is partnering with the Toronto Zoo and the Altona Forest Stewardship Committee to continue implementation of the environmental management plan and the recommendations of the hydrologic and water balance analysis by creating additional wetlands in Altona Forest. 161 The annual amphibian monitoring that has taken place in Altona Forest has indicated that wetland creation and rehabilitation is critical to the success of frog species in the forest. Combined with the results of the hydrologic and water balance analysis, this work has led to the recommendation that a wetland be created in the north end of Altona Forest. In addition, this project is supported by the staff of the Toronto Zoo, who have indicated that a wetland in the north end of the forest could successfully capture and retain flow entering the forest and provide habitat for a variety of amphibians and reptiles, particularly wood frogs and grey treefrogs. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The priority actions for 2007 will be to finalize the location of the wetland and to implement the water monitoring regime. This will be done in consideration of the water table at the site, as well as flora and fauna features. Once the location is finalized, site preparation, including removal and treatment of invasive species, will begin. Construction is slated for late 2007 and early 2008. The timing of construction will be dependant on weather and ground conditions so as to minimize disturbance to the site. An interpretive trail, boardwalks and signage will also be implemented. The project will be completed by the end of spring, 2008. FINANCIAL DETAILS It is estimated that the project will cost $16,800. The funds for the wetland creation project has been secured from the following sources: • TD Friends of the Environment = $5,000 • Ontario Power Generation = $5,000 • Durham Terrestrial Natural Heritage Implementation fund = $5,000 • Toronto Zoo = $1,000 • Altona Forest Environmental Management Plan fund = $800 + The Durham Terrestrial Natural Heritage Implementation fund will contribute to machinery and equipment costs under account code 109 -15. The balance of the project cost, including any additional expenses that may arise, have been budgeted for in 2007 as part of the implementation of the Altona Forest Environmental Management Plan, under account code 408 -46. Report prepared by: April Mathes, extension 5320 Email: amathes @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Mike Bender, extension 5287 Email: mbender @trca.on.ca Date: September 20, 2007 162 NEW BUSINESS RES. #D48/07 - PETTICOAT CREEK WATERSHED Moved by: Seconded by: Bonnie Littley Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT WHEREAS the Petticoat Creek watershed located in the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, is experiencing a number of pressures resulting from urban and near urban pressures; WHEREAS interest has been expressed in developing a plan for the protection of the resources of the watershed; WHEREAS the undeveloped portions of the Petticoat Creek watershed are protected by the provincial Greenbelt designation, Rouge Park and previously by agricultural easements; WHEREAS there are a number of planning requirements to bring official plans into conformity with the Greenbelt designations; WHEREAS Petticoat Creek is geographically situated between the Duffins and Rouge watersheds and whereas these adjacent watersheds have undergone extensive review in recent years and that it is reasonable to assume that many of the "lessons learned" in those processes may apply to this smaller watershed; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to meet with interested councillors and the appropriate senior staff of the Region of Durham, City of Pickering to consider the opportunity of holding a one day forum /meeting to discuss the needs and opportunities and to develop an action plan to protect and enhance the watershed resources of Petticoat Creek within the context of the current planning opportunities and initiatives at the provincial, regional and local level; THAT TRCA staff discuss with these persons a cost sharing arrangement to support this effort including, but not limited to, a one day forum /meeting, including development of any background reports, meeting facilitation and preparation of a strategic action plan /report with recommendations based on the forum outcomes; THAT staff report back within the first quarter of 2008 on these discussions including potential funding arrangements and timelines; AND FURTHER THAT staff provide the Altona Forest Stewardship Committee with an overview of the South East Collector and subdivision development projects in the vicinity of Altona Forest. CARRIED 163 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:01 p.m., on Friday, October 19, 2007. Richard Whitehead Brian Denney Chair Secretary- Treasurer /ks 164 c. THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY MEETING OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD #5/07 February 8, 2008 The Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #5/07, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, February 8, 2008. The Chair Richard Whitehead, called the meeting to order at 10:12 a.m.. PRESENT Maria Augimeri Member Bryan Bertie Member Gay Cowbourne Member Lois Griffin Member Bonnie Littley Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair, Authority Anthony Perruzza Vice Chair Richard Whitehead Chair ABSENT Grant Gibson Member John Parker Member RES. #D49/07 - MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Anthony Perruzza THAT the Minutes of Meeting #4/07, held on October 19, 2007, be approved. PRESENTATIONS (a) CARRIED A presentation by Chris Walker, Senior Communications Advisor, Ontario Power Generation, in regard to item 7.1 - Frenchman's Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Project - Final Report. (b) A presentation by Jennifer Vincent, Acting Coordinator, Lake Erie and Lake Ontario Lake Management Plans, Strategic Integration and Partnerships Division, Environment Canada, in regard to item 7.2- Lake Ontario Management Plan and Collaborative Near Shore Studies. 165 RES. #D50 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Lois Griffin Bonnie Littley THAT above -noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED RES. #D51 /07 - PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Maria Augimeri Lois Griffin THAT above -noted presentation (b) be heard and received. CARRIED SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION RES. #D52 /07 - FRENCHMAN'S BAY WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROJECT Final Report. The accomplishments of the Frenchman's Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Project. Moved by: Seconded by: Lois Griffin Bonnie Littley THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) thank and acknowledge the project partners who contributed to the success of the Frenchman's Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Project from 2003 to 2007. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #8/02, held on September 6, 2002, Resolution #B111/02 was approved as follows: THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) continue to implement the Frenchman's Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Project (FBWRP) in partnership with Pickering East Shore Community Association, the City of Pickering, Ontario Power Generation and The Ontario Trillium Foundation (OTF); AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to provide an annual project progress report that highlights the milestones and the accomplishments of the project. 166 In 2003, a new partnership with the Pickering East Shore Community Association resulted in a grant from the Ontario Trillium Foundation in the amount of $125,000. This five -year community stewardship project was designed to increase awareness and educate the community about environmental issues impacting the Frenchman's Bay watershed, while protecting, restoring and enhancing the ecological health of the area through naturalization and stewardship activities. The project included hands -on initiatives such as monitoring, habitat creation, watershed clean -ups and tree plantings that empowered and engaged the community. The Authority received project updates at Meeting #1/03, held on April 11, 2003, Meeting #7/04, held on December 10, 2004 and Meeting #1/05, held on April 15, 2005. These updates identified accomplishments to date and work plan priorities for the following year. As of December 31, 2007 all work plans associated with the Frenchman's Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Project (FBWRP) were completed as detailed in the Ontario Trillium Foundation funding and commitments. The project has recently completed its fifth and final year of The Ontario Trillium Foundation funding. The expected targets and actual achievements are summarized below: Expected Targets Project Accomplishments Engage 2125 individuals Engaged 6939 individuals Enhanced Areas: 2 hectares of meadows 4 hectares of forests 2 hectares of wetland/ riparian area Enhanced 2.5 hectares of meadow Enhanced 4.5 hectares of forest Enhanced 2.0 hectares of wetland /riparian Plant 3000 native trees, shrubs, wildflowers and aquatics Planted 420 aquatic plants Planted 1200 wildflowers Planted 7025 native trees/ shrubs (Total 8645 native plants) Install 145 wildlife habitat structures Installed 205 wildlife habitat structures Develop 94 property naturalization plans Developed 100 property naturalization plans Deliver 49 educational workshops Delivered 96 educational workshops Deliver 8 monitoring programs Delivered 35 volunteer monitoring programs Additional Accomplishments Distributed 215 rain barrels Collected 70 bags of litter Marked 42 storm drains with yellow fish Distributed 159 healthy homes kits. These deliverables were achieved through the following program components: • Hands on the Earth Program; • Volunteer Environmental Monitoring; • Natural Alternative Program. 167 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA and its existing community partners would like to continue to offer a variety of stewardship and outreach education opportunities to the residents of Pickering in 2008. A new shared delivery model and work plan will be designed as resources are confirmed by the project partners. Discussion is underway with current project partners and other key individuals to continue to build capacity through stewardship and outreach education in the City of Pickering. FINANCIAL DETAILS Core funding for the FBWRP has been provided by The Ontario Trillium Foundation and through the Regional Municipality of Durham. Additional funds supporting various initiatives within the project have been provided by Community Fisheries/ Wildlife Involvement Program, Human Resources Development Canada, TD Friends of the Environment, Hydro One, Pickering East Shore Community Association, Ontario Power Generation, the City of Pickering and EcoAction Community Funding Program. Through the successes of this five -year Ontario Trillium Foundation funded project, staff was also able to leverage federal funding from the EcoAction Community Funding Program. This allowed staff to implement the West Shore Habitat Initiative and Pickering Healthy Communities Program. Report prepared by: Michelle Pongracz, extension 5676 Email: mpongracz @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Michelle Pongracz, extension 5676 Email: mpongracz @trca.on.ca Date: January 14th, 2008 RES. #D53/07 - LAKE ONTARIO MANAGEMENT PLAN AND COLLABORATIVE NEAR SHORE STUDIES Presentation on the Lake Ontario Management Plan -based Biodiversity Strategy for Lake Ontario and the Upper St. Lawrence River - Nature Conservancy Canada/ The Nature Conservancy USA. Moved by: Seconded by: Maria Augimeri Lois Griffin THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) continue to assist Conservation Ontario with its efforts to coordinate local conservation authority input for the Biodiversity Strategy; AND FURTHER THAT the Authority support Conservation Ontario's efforts to secure future funding from the Lake Ontario Management Plan (LaMP) for the implementation of actions identified in the Biodiversity Strategy. CARRIED 168 BACKGROUND As part of on -going Bi- National efforts to restore and protect the Great Lakes, LaMP's were developed for each lake. LaMP's are a plan of action to assess, restore, protect and monitor the ecosystem health of a Great Lake. They are used to coordinate the work of all government and nongovernment partners working to improve the lake ecosystem. LaMP's are coordinated on the Canadian side through Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and the Ontario Ministries of Natural Resources and Environment, with input from other ministries and departments. Lake Ontario is an ecosystem at a crossroads. While the lake still harbors significant biodiversity in its native fish, thriving populations of migratory birds, extensive coastal wetlands, and magnificent barrier beaches and dunes, it is threatened by hydrological alteration, nutrient enrichment and continued invasive species introductions, which have vastly altered the food web. The LaMP, in collaboration with 25 agencies, universities and nonprofit organizations in the United States and Canada is developing a binational road map to protect and restore Lake Ontario's biological diversity. This process will integrate the natural resource information and habitat priorities of Ontario and New York into a binational action agenda for Lake Ontario as a single ecosystem. The end result will be a scientifically grounded, common vision of priority strategies that partner organizations can pursue. The process involves selecting important conservation targets, ranking threats to them, and then comparing the recommended strategies to the present actions of public and private partners. Recommended actions will include watershed tributaries to the extent that they effect the biodiversity of the lake. This process will identify gaps in conservation efforts that need to be filled through binational collaboration. By engaging a binational network of partners in developing this action agenda, this project will enhance collaboration and integration of efforts toward achieving the habitat restoration goals of the LaMP. Ontario conservation authorities and district staff from the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources are key Canadian watershed partners to the successful development of this binational biodiversity conservation strategy. Report prepared by: Gary Bowen, extension 5385 Emails: gbowen @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Gary Bowen, extension 5385 Emails: gbowen @trca.on.ca Date: January 30, 2008 169 RES. #D54/07 - FRENCHMAN'S BAY HARBOUR ENTRANCE PROJECT City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham. Acceptance of the City of Pickering's request for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to take a lead role and partner with the City on completion of the environmental assessment, design and funding partnership for the reconstruction of the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance. Moved by: Seconded by: Bryan Bertie Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) accept the lead role in partnership with the City of Pickering to undertake the environmental assessment, public consultation, design, approvals and funding partnership for the reconstruction of the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance; THAT staff be authorized and directed to work with the City of Pickering in the detailed work planning, consultant selection, establishment of a Community Liaison Committee and preparation of the environmental assessment and detailed engineering drawings, and implementation funding partnership with all levels of government and the Frenchman's Bay Stakeholders; THAT TRCA participation be subject to funding being available from the City of Pickering; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Pickering be so advised. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #10/03, held on January 9, 2004, Resolution #A292/03, was approved as follows: THAT staff be directed to prepare a Pickering Harbour Company Waterfront Regeneration Project (the "Project") on a multi -year basis in the City of Pickering, Region of Durham as a component of the Region of Durham's waterfront multi -year project; THAT prior to preparation of the Project, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) obtain written support and a partnership commitment from the City of Pickering and the Pickering Harbour Company for such a major waterfront initiative; THAT the TRCA, in preparing the Project, including a funding partnership, seek commitments from, but not limited to, the Government of Canada, the Province of Ontario, the Regional Municipality of Durham, the City of Pickering and the Pickering Harbour Company; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Pickering and the Pickering Harbour Company be so advised. 170 In 2005, the City of Pickering adopted the 'Framework for a five year implementation plan for Pickering Waterfront and Frenchman's Bay.' At Authority Meeting #6/05, held on July 22, 2005, Resolution #A172/05 endorsing the City of Pickering's waterfront priorities was approved as follows: THAT the report entitled "Framework for a Five Year Implementation Plan for Pickering Waterfront and Frenchman's Bay" prepared by Suzanne Barrett and Nicole Swerhun for the City of Pickering and TRCA dated June 24, 2005 be received; THAT the development of a Five Year Implementation Plan for Pickering Waterfront and Frenchman's Bay be endorsed as requested by the City of Pickering Council at its meeting held June 27, 2005; THAT staff be directed to work with the City of Pickering in the development of a Five Year Implementation Plan for Pickering Waterfront and Frenchman's Bay with priority emphasis on the development of a stormwater management master plan for Frenchman' s Bay watershed as a major initiative to improving watershed health; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Pickering be so advised. RATIONALE Moving forward with the environmental assessment, community consultation, detailed design and securing a funding partnership is consistent with the City of Pickering's Five (5) Year Implementation Plan and priorities for the waterfront: 1. Frenchman's Bay Watershed Stormwater Management Master Plan; 2. Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance; 3. Completion of Waterfront Trail; 4. Education and Community Stewardship. These priorities have also been endorsed by the Authority and direction to continue with strategic acquisitions to implement the City of Pickering waterfront vision and plans. Based on TRCA experience with waterfront environmental planning and implementation, including 35 years of partnership facilitation in working toward a waterfront vision and plans, staff recommend to the Authority that TRCA accept the City of Pickering's request (see attachment 1) to take a lead role and partner with the City of Pickering to complete this project. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA staff will initiate the preparation of a detailed work plan for the approval of City of Pickering staff. Detailed discussions will also occur with the Ministry of the Environment on the environmental assessment approach and utilization of the City's Municipal Infrastructure Class Environmental Assessment. Staff will also be proposing membership suggestions to the community liaison committee for the city's concurrence. 171 FINANCIAL DETAILS The City of Pickering received a provincial grant in 2007 in the amount of $300,000 to fund the environmental assessment, community consultation, detailed design, approvals and securement of implementation funding partnership with all levels of government and key stockholders in Frenchman's Bay. All costs including consultants, TRCA project management and technical staff and other associated costs will be covered by the provincial grant and subject to approval of invoices by the City of Pickering. Report prepared by: Larry Field, extension 5243 Email: Ifield @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Larry Field, extension 5243; Connie Pinto, extension 5387; Laura Stephenson, extension 5296 Emails: Ifield @trca.on.ca; cpinto @trca.on.ca; Istephenson@trca.on.ca Date: January 30, 2008 Attachments: 2 172 Attachment 1 Cibi 4 Ptdhiehgravc Oxiiplog One The Hapiiimade FicknIngrOnhilia Gouda UV 6' !Aid Acme ansa tau Fag is thYdPkizlingAMO OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES DBPARTMENTr Dvadnit 9115.420Afai EsedmQ. - 905.420.4550 oleeiadotie@dtmdckodni - January 4, 2008 Mr. Larry Field Toronto & Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, ON M3N 1S4 Subject Frenchman's By Harbour Entrance - File: A .2800 004 - - As discussed recently, the City of Pickering received a Provincial Grant in 2007, in the amount of $300,000 to complete an Environmental Assessment, Work Plan and Financing Strategy for the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance. The City will be budgeting this project for commencement in 2008. As the TRCA has the experience and knowledge of conducting such studies along the Lake Ontario Waterfront, the City is requesting that TRCA take a Iead role and partner with the City of Pickering to complete this project. The resources and expertise -of you and your staff would be invaluable in completing the project and engaging the right consulting and agency involvement to ensure a successful project Please advise if the TRCA would be able to assist, in a Iead role capacity, with this project understanding that the City's approval of all costs will be required. Your response should include an estimate of associated costs and possible timefiame for completion. Thank you in advance for your-consideration of this request 'Vows tru Everett • ants + ' N ' D., CMM Director. Operations & Emergency Services EB:mld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director,. Corporate Services & Treasurer Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering 173 Attachment 2 Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Project 174 RES. #D55/07 - CANADA GOOSE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2006/2007 Canada Goose Management Egg Oiling Program 2007 report. Moved by: Seconded by: Bryan Bertie Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to continue pursuance of the Canada Goose egg oiling and bird relocation programs with partnering municipalities and agencies; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue participating in the Transport Canada Greater Toronto Area Canada Goose Steering Committee. CARRIED BACKGROUND Since the early 1990's the Canada Goose, specifically the sub - species the Giant Canada Goose (Brenta canadensis maxima), has become a nuisance within the parklands of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) and bordering municipalities. In 1998, TRCA initiated a program to locate and oil Canada Goose eggs within the City of Toronto to address this issue. Since then, the City of Pickering, the Town of Ajax, the City of Vaughan and the City of Brampton have also been brought into the program. The objective of the program is to manage the reproduction of nesting Canada Geese through egg oiling on lands in the Toronto region. This technique compliments other management strategies that are being developed and used by various municipalities along the north shore of Lake Ontario. Canada Geese nests were found by experienced TRCA Environmental Technicians patrolling designated areas. These areas included: • coastal wetlands; • golf courses; • water treatment plants; and • industrial areas adjacent to wetlands. In cases where it was not possible to access areas on foot, a boat was used to search the shoreline from the water; this was particularly useful in the coastal marshes and rivers. Typically the egg oiling program encompasses the entire Toronto waterfront from Etobicoke to Ajax as well as extending northwards to inland bodies of water. Active nests were marked with flagging tape and given an identification number. Eggs were treated with 50 -90 ml of Daedol 50 mineral oil. Daedol 50 is a chemically inert, non - poisonous, 100% pure, white mineral oil that is essentially colourless, odourless and tasteless. The product is registered under the Federal Pest Control Products Act and is used in the food industry to render chicken eggs inert. In order to thoroughly coat the eggs, the eggs were turned over in the nest to ensure complete coverage of the egg with the oil. Once an egg has been oiled the pores become clogged and the egg is no longer viable. Oil was not applied to any nests with eggs that were pipped or starred indicating that hatching had started. 175 Nest locations were noted on appropriately scaled field maps and the data was later transferred into a Geographic Information System (GIS) database. The results were plotted on georeferenced colour aerial photographs. This is an important method to track and archive nest location and egg density. Each site was monitored on three separate dates in order to locate newly built nests and to ensure the effectiveness of the oiling program by determining the fate of each treated nest. Egg oiling was found to be effective in preventing eggs from hatching. There has never been a visual observation by TRCA staff of a treated egg hatching. While performing egg oiling duties staff would also capture nesting Canada Geese when given the opportunity and apply a numeric band on their legs. To date eighty nesting Canada Geese have been banded. Geese were captured on or near their nest with a large fishing net. Canada Geese were then marked with a plastic and metal leg band with a unique identification number and colour. This banding gave us the opportunity to gain valuable information on the trends of nesting Canada Geese. Banded nesting geese in many cases returned to the same site where they were previously banded and in some cases nested in the exact same location. With this information we can see that the urban Giant Canada Goose shows strong site fidelity towards their nesting location. There has not yet been an incidence of a banded goose nesting at another site. Mute Swan eggs were also included in the program using the same methods. The Mute Swan has become a target for the egg oiling campaign for the following reasons: • The Mute Swan is a voracious eater of wetland plants, often uprooting entire clumps of plants while feeding on their roots. This seriously impedes restoration work and damages existing habitat. • The birds are very aggressive, disrupting waterfowl which are less common and more sensitive to disturbance. • Their aggression poses a threat to humans. • The Mute Swan is also a non - native species. Although some concern has been expressed by members of the public regarding this management decision, the ecological benefits of stabilizing the Mute Swan population must be considered. An annual swan egg oiling program will not affect the existing opportunities for public viewing or appreciation. However it will slow the population increase and distribution of this species into waterfront habitats. RATIONALE Increasing numbers of resident and migrant Canada Geese within GTA parklands have become both a problem and a nuisance. North America's current Canada Goose population is estimated at over 4.3 million birds, while the estimated population for Ontario is 700,000. In Eastern Canada, the Giant Canada Goose nests and moults in or near urban and agricultural areas. As a result, there are a number of documented impacts that range from fouling of public lands, habitat destruction, water quality impairment and agricultural crop damage. In addition, they have proven to be a safety concern to road vehicles and airplanes and have demonstrated aggressiveness towards humans during breeding or brood season. 176 Egg Oiling Egg oiling has been identified as an effective technique on a site specific level that reduces the population of young birds in a specific area. Oil is applied to the eggs on three separate occasions to ensure success. Once the oil is applied, it has been documented that in using this technique, Canada Geese will tend to stay on their nests past the estimated hatch date. This ensures that re- nesting will not occur due to the lateness in the season. Since the program began in 1998, over 2056 nests containing 8892 eggs have been treated, preventing approximately 18,000 Canada Geese from entering the resident goose population (given that some of those hatched would have bred successfully). Participation in Steering Committee Since 2004, broader planning has been performed through the Transport Canada Greater Toronto Area Canada Goose Steering Committee. The committee works to collectively review issues, identifies problems and define appropriate solutions. Broader planning ensures that a local solution does not impact on other neighbours. One of the initiatives coming from the committee is to inventory areas of concern, including areas of population concentrations over the years, feeding areas, nesting areas, local water bodies at risk from contamination and habitat conditions. Relocation Program In 2007, TRCA collected and relocated Canada Geese from the Town of Ajax and Bluffers Park, City of Toronto. In total, 825 geese were relocated (500 from the Town of Ajax and 325 from Bluffers Park, respectively). The geese were relocated via transport truck to under populated suitable habitat on private property in Lansdowne, Ontario. The relocation method is one solution to dealing with the problems associated with these birds along waterfront parks. Through previous banding information, it was shown that approximately 15% of relocated birds return to the area of capture immediately, or the following year. The most frequent complaint about Canada Geese within the GTA is the excessive fouling of public lands during moulting season. Such soiling occurs due to the fact that geese are flightless for a 6 -8 week period, beginning in mid -June. In order to survive, an appropriate habitat for this annual phase is required. Geese require an abundant food source such as grass adjacent to water. Such habitat is indicative of most of the Toronto waterfront: large open spaces of manicured grass adjacent to ponds and lakes. During moulting season, resident geese congregate in these moulting habitats. Moult migrants also congregate in these areas, drastically increasing the local goose population during this period. Throughout this flightless period each goose consumes approximately 4 pounds (Ibs) of manicured grass and excretes approximately 2 Ibs of fecal matter daily. In addition, geese lose their feathers, which causes further severe aesthetic impairment. Additional Canada Goose Management Work Since 2003, TRCA staff has also assisted the Canadian Wildlife Service with the Toronto Island Canada Goose Relocation Program. 177 From 2006 to present, TRCA staff has assessed Canada Goose populations across the Toronto waterfront from Marie Curtis Park heading east to Carruthers Marsh in the Town of Ajax. Other designated inland sites were also monitored. Local populations in the GTA are comprised of moult migrants and year round residents. Fluctuations in populations were found to occur seasonally as migrants came and went and as geese move in search of desirable habitat. Understanding local movement and distribution will assist with the further development of management strategies as well as assessing the effectiveness of those strategies. In addition, staff routinely design habitat features to deter nesting and moulting Canada Geese along the Toronto waterfront. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff propose to: • continue with the egg oiling program in 2008 as a means of managing local resident geese; • continue to participate in the Transport Canada Greater Toronto Area Canada Goose Steering Committee; • continue with Canada Goose counts and assessments along the waterfront and designated inland areas; and • continue with relocation efforts as needed in designated areas with the partnering regions and municipalities. FINANCIAL DETAILS $74,825 in funding was obtained from the Cities of Brampton, Toronto, Pickering, Vaughan, the Town of Ajax and the Regional Municipalities of Durham and Peel for the 2006 and 2007 programs. $81,950 is identified in the 2008 Operating and Capital Preliminary Estimates for the 2008 program. Report prepared by: Danny Moro, extension 5372 Email: dmoro @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Danny Moro, extension 5372 Email: dmoro @trca.on.ca Date: January 18, 2008 RES. #D56/07 - WEST NILE VIRUS SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM FOR 2007 Regional Watershed Monitoring Program. Receipt of annual report on West Nile Virus Vector Status in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority wetlands and storm water management ponds in 2007 and direction for similar activities in 2008. Moved by: Seconded by: Bryan Bertie Gay Cowbourne 178 THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Annual Report on West Nile Virus (WNV) Vector Status in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority wetlands and stormwater management ponds in 2007 be circulated to the public health units for the regional municipalities of Peel, Durham, York and the City of Toronto, and the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care; THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to continue to participate in the WNV advisory committee for the regional municipalities of Peel, Durham, York and the City of Toronto; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to plan for WNV vector larval mosquito monitoring in TRCA wetlands and stormwater management ponds during the 2008 summer season. CARRIED BACKGROUND The emergence and persistence of WNV in Canada since 2001 continues to present a threat to public and animal health. West Nile virus is an arthropod borne virus transmitted to humans by adult mosquitoes when a mosquito bites an infected bird and then bites humans. Those who get infected may show mild flu like symptoms and very rarely infection will become fatal. WNV in Canada has now established itself as a seasonal epidemic that flares up in the summer, with peak infections occurring in late August and early September, and continues into the fall until mosquito activity ceases due to cold weather. To minimize the risk of WNV in humans, the public health units of Ontario have set out to identify and eliminate the preferred breeding sites of two key vector species: Culex pipiens and Culex restuans. Wetland habitats such as marshes, woodland pools and ponds have been suspected of providing breeding habitats because of the permanent availability of water and thick vegetation surrounding the water body. Hence in February, 2003, TRCA was asked by the regional health departments of Peel, Durham, York and Toronto to assist in the monitoring of larval mosquito populations in natural areas. Since 2003, TRCA has been conducting mosquito larval surveillance and monitoring of selected wetlands and stormwater management ponds (SWMPs) that are under TRCA jurisdiction in an effort to assist the regional health departments in controlling the two key WNV vectors. Results from the TRCA -wide seasonal surveillance and monitoring from 2003 to 2006 have shown that healthy, functioning wetlands pose little risk to the public in terms of providing breeding habitat for vector species. Occasionally, under favourable conditions, high populations of vector species could be found breeding in a few isolated pockets of stagnant water, warranting an ongoing seasonal monitoring and surveillance of the wetlands and SWMP. RATIONALE Currently it is impossible to predict the level of risk due to WNV in a given year since the vector population dynamics are driven by abiotic and biotic factors, which change from year to year. Therefore, vector surveillance has been the important source of risk assessments undertaken by health units to predict WNV activity. To minimize the risk of WNV infection in humans, TRCA has set out to identify and eliminate preferred breeding sites of the two key WNV vectors on TRCA property and manage them diligently. 179 Surveillance and Larval Monitoring 2007 Staff received 11 standing water complaints during the 2007 WNV season, two of which involved TRCA property. Investigation of the complaints showed the presence of non - vectors at one site and the second site had dried up. As in previous years, TRCA also received a Health Order, dated March 7, 2007, under Ontario Regulation 199/03 from the Regional Municipality of Peel Medical Officer of Health to assist with the implementation of control measures in order to reduce the number of mosquito larvae in the Heart Lake wetland complex when necessary. Follow up communications with the Regional Municipality of Peel staff showed that surface water treatments with Aquabac 200G were undertaken south of the Heart Lake wetland complex at White Spruce Park on May 8, 2007. Investigations carried out during the summer months of 2007 to assess the level of risk that wetlands and SWMPs pose to the public in terms of providing breeding habitats for WNV vectors indicated that only 8% of the natural wetlands surveyed had WNV vector species. In these wetlands, the level of risk was 'low to moderate,' based on average number of larvae per 10 dips. Thirty three (33) percent of SWMPs had vector species in them, but the risk level associated with these sites was 'low to moderate' in the majority of the ponds except for a single location where the risk level was 'high.' This single site contained 84% of the total larvae collected from the SWMPs in 2007. The detection of high numbers of larvae from a few locations emphasizes the importance of regular monitoring. When identified, the WNV vector breeding sites can be managed in part through modifying small depressions to prevent standing water and removing garbage. When high numbers of vectors are found in the wetlands or SWMPs, the application of a larvicide such as Bti (Bacillus thuringiensis var israelensis) may be warranted. The results of the 2007 sampling season are summarized in an annual report. Copies of this report will be available at the meeting, upon request and will also be posted on the TRCA website. The Executive Summary is outlined in Attachment 1. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff recommend continuation of the WNV vector larval mosquito monitoring program in 2008. If approved, staff will continue to liaise with the regional health units and participate in WNV advisory committees. Staff will continue to respond to public inquiries on WNV and reports of standing water on TRCA property, in addition to providing general information for both the public and staff. Staff will continue to identify sites of concern for WNV on TRCA property in the upcoming 2008 field season through larval monitoring and will advise other TRCA sections of maintenance or management duties required to reduce the number of potential breeding sites of major WNV vectors on TRCA lands. TRCA staff will develop the 2008 vector monitoring program and explore opportunities to expand surveillance or data collection to carry out further research on wetlands and SWMP habitat features with regards to providing suitable habitat for WNV vector. 180 FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for the 2007 WNV surveillance program was made available through regional capital funding under the TRCA's Regional Watershed Monitoring Program. This funding, in the amount of $50,000 was sufficient to support the 2007 surveillance, to respond to the standing water complaints and to liaise with the regional health units. This funding does not cover costs associated with any control measures if deemed necessary. Staff will continue to discuss the responsibility for funding with the regional and provincial health departments in the event that control measures are required. Report prepared by: Thilaka Krishnaraj, extension 5665 Email: tkrishnaraj @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Scott Jarvie, extension 5312 Email: sjarvie @trca.on.ca Date: January 17, 2008 Attachments: 1 181 Attachment 1 Annual Report on West Nile Virus (WNV) Vector Status in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority wetlands and storm water management ponds in 2007 Executive Summary West Nile Virus (WNV) is established as a seasonal epidemic in Canada and two key mosquito species, namely Culex pipiens and Culex restuans, have been identified as the principal vector species in spreading the disease in Ontario to humans and animals for the past five years. The severity of WNV seems to vary from year to year and mainly depends on bird hosts and weather conditions. During the 2007 WNV vector surveillance period, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) received 11 Standing Water Complaints, two of which originated from TRCA property. Investigation of complaints showed the presence of non - vector mosquito species at one site (Altona forest) and the other site was found to be dry. A few complaints involved seeking advice from TRCA staff in identifying environmentally sensitive area and larviciding in those areas. Current TRCA standing water complaints procedure does not include providing advice on either identifying and /or larviciding environmentally sensitive areas. Therefore, the TRCA standing water complaints procedure needs to be reviewed to clarify TRCA's role. The Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Natural Resources will be consulted in the review process as these two organizations are the lead agencies responsible for identifying environmentally sensitive areas and issuing larviciding permits for WNV vector control in Ontario. The larval surveillance and monitoring for the 2007 summer was conducted in 36 wetlands, including 7 new sites that are under TRCA's jurisdiction. Surveillance results indicate that there has been an overall reduction in the density and the number of species of mosquitoes occurring in the wetlands. Dry and hot weather conditions were attributed to the reduced number of larvae collected this year. During the survey, 1516 larvae to eight species in total were identified. The majority of the mosquitoes were non - vector species and of these, Culex territans was the predominant (37 %) non - vector species collected from 61 % of the sites, followed by Anopheles punctipennis, which was collected from 39% of sites. Culex pipiens, a key vector species was represented in only 3% of the total larvae. Culex restuans the other key vector was absent in the wetlands during 2007. WNV risk ranking was 'low' for all the vector species (Anopheles punctipennis, Anopheles quadrimaculatus and Culex pipiens) identified. A total of 9 storm water management ponds (SWMP) were monitored for vector abundance and presence in 2007. A total of 2279 larvae in 5 vector species were identified and one non - vector species. Culex pipiens represented 91% of the total larvae identified, while Culex restuans accounted for only 4% . Culex territans (non- vector) larvae represented only 1% of the larvae collected from SWMP during 2007. 84 % of the total Culex pipiens larvae was collected from one SWMP (L'Amoreaux Park North Pond, City of Toronto). This pond represented the only hot spot identified for WNV vectors in 2007 with averages of 45.5 and 478.5 larvae per 10 dips during the second and third sampling events respectively. Risk ranking for the remaining vectors was 'Low.' 182 Data on water quality parameters and total and marginal vegetation were collected during routine monitoring to confirm some of the relationships established between vector presence and the above parameters from previous years. This data will be analysed in the future once necessary resources become available. Based on the surveillance data and the fact that the WNV hot -spots change from year to year, it is suggested that ongoing seasonal monitoring is necessary to help predict WNV vector abundance and identify hot - spots. It is also recommended that additional funding be made available to increase the number of SWMPs monitored and draw improved links with pond design. 183 RES. #D57/07 - DOG - STRANGLING VINE: REVIEW OF DISTRIBUTION, ECOLOGY AND CONTROL Receipt of staff report "Dog- strangling vine - Cynanchum rossicum (Kleopow) Borhidi: a review of distribution, ecology, and control of this invasive exotic plant ". Moved by: Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne Maria Augimeri THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) report entitled Dog - strangling vine - Cynanchum rossicum (Kleopow) Borhidi: a review of distribution, ecology, and control of this invasive exotic plant be received; THAT staff be directed to continue to monitor the extent and distribution of Dog - strangling vine (DSV) within TRCA's watersheds. AND FURTHER THAT staff use the information in the DSV report to assist in the preparation of management and restoration plans for TRCA lands. CARRIED BACKGROUND Dog - strangling vine is native to Eastern Europe but is becoming the dominant ground cover in many of TRCA's natural areas, crowding out native species. In response to the serious threat to biodiversity presented by DSV, TRCA approached the Rouge Park Alliance with a funding application to complete a review of the distribution, ecology and control of this plant. The Rouge Park Alliance accepted the application and provided a grant for $5,000 toward the preparation of a review. Existing reviews of DSV have not looked at all aspects of its ecology, distribution and control. Research has tended to be focused on single aspects of the species ecology relating only to small parts of its geographic range. Thus it was necessary, as part of this project, to integrate the findings from a wide number of sources in order to get a full picture of the plant's ecology, impact and the implications for management in TRCA watersheds. RATIONALE Dog - strangling vine is one of the worst invasive plant species now present in TRCA's jurisdiction. It has overrun considerable areas of TRCA properties, as well as other public and private lands. Valleylands from Toronto to Pickering and Ajax are particularly affected, including the Rouge Park. The species is also present in smaller concentrations elsewhere. A better understanding of DSV is essential if TRCA is to develop effective strategies for its control. The report, "Dog- strangling vine - Cynanchum rossicum (Kleopow) Borhidi: a review of distribution, ecology, and control of this invasive exotic plant ", provides a review of the existing scientific literature supplemented with local field data and information from TRCA watersheds collected by TRCA and Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) staff. The report provides information on the distribution and history of the species, habitat preferences, propagation and colonization strategies and observed and potential impacts on native habitats. The report also provides an overview of existing research on methods of control (mechanical, chemical and biological) with recommendations to prevent or reduce its spread. The report highlights the 184 need for early detection of new populations and the prevention of seed production as being critically important. This is because DSV spreads quickly due to its heavy production of highly fertile wind - dispersed seed. After an initial period of establishment, populations become capable of suppressing native vegetation and expanding explosively. Possible approaches to containment of existing extensive populations are also discussed (mowing, mulching, barrier and windbreak plantings). FINANCIAL DETAILS The report was prepared with the assistance of a $5,000 grant from the Rouge Park Alliance in conjunction with capital funding of $7,000 from TRCA's municipal partners in conjunction with the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The report will be made available shortly on the Rouge Park website. Printed copies will also be available at the Watershed Management Advisory Board meeting to be held on February 8, 2008. The report will also be distributed among TRCA staff to assist with land management and restoration efforts. Staff will work with the Rouge Park Alliance to ensure that the report is made available to municipalities, other agencies and stakeholders (including those concerned with infrastructure and utilities that have land holdings). Report prepared by: Gavin Miller, extension 5258 Email: gmiller @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Gavin Miller, extension 5258 Email: gmiller @trca.on.ca Date: January 17, 2008 RES. #D58/07 - LOWER HUMBER BARRIER MITIGATION Implementation Update. Direction to develop a Memorandum of Understanding with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources for alterations to the control structures for the Lower Humber River Barrier Mitigation Project. Moved by: Seconded by: Bryan Bertie Gay Cowbourne THE BOARD RECOMMENDS TO THE AUTHORITY THAT the commitment by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) to restore the movement of non - jumping fish through the existing series of weirs on the Lower Humber River be acknowledged; THAT the general direction of the project plan as outlined in the Lower Humber River Barrier Mitigation Project Class Environmental Assessment be supported, including the current implementation of the preferred alternative for Weir 5 and the securement of funding to proceed with the works proposed at the other weirs; 185 AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) request that MNR develop a Memorandum of Understanding with TRCA to outline the roles and responsibilities for the monitoring and maintenance of the structures. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 1959, the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority constructed a series of eight weirs for the purpose of flood control along the main stretch of the Lower Humber River, from just north of Bloor Street West upstream to Lawrence Avenue. These weirs serve to reduce the flow and dissipate the river's energy by cascading water over a series of concrete steps. This property is owned by TRCA. In accordance with the recommendations of the Humber River Fisheries Management Plan, alterations were made to the weirs as a temporary solution to facilitate the migration of jumping fish species. The 5 southernmost weirs (Weirs 1 to 5) were altered by cutting a notch out of the top step of each. Weir 6 was not altered, as it was already low enough for fish to jump over. A fishway was constructed at Weir 7 to allow fish passage and Weir 8 was notched similar to Weirs 1 to 5. Weir 1 also acts as a control structure to restrict the movement of sea lamprey. Since 2001, rainbow trout have been observed spawning in the East Humber River as a result of these modifications. Although the work to date has provided passage for jumping species, the weirs still present a barrier to the movement of non - jumping species. Mitigating these barriers to restore connectivity in the Humber River would be a significant accomplishment toward achieving the objectives of the Humber River Fisheries Management Plan. In July, 2007, MNR completed a Class Environmental Assessment for Resource Stewardship and Facility Development to investigate alternatives to restore the movement of non - jumping fish species past the existing series of weirs, while maintaining the current sea lamprey control barrier and addressing financial, operational and safety concerns. The Environmental Study Report identified the reconstruction of a fishway at Weir 1, and the partial removal of the structures through notching at Weirs 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 as the preferred alternative. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE MNR is now proceeding with the implementation of the project plan as outlined in the Lower Humber River Barrier Mitigation Project Class Environmental Assessment through the design and construction of Weir 5. TRCA staff is currently reviewing the plans and design brief for this component of the overall project plan. It is expected that this component will be constructed in the summer of 2008. Staff are encouraging and intend to assist MNR with the project plan implementation by securing funding to complete the works proposed at the other weirs. 186 TRCA has expressed concerns to MNR for the structural integrity of the weirs with the proposed notches. Additional technical analysis by qualified structural engineers has been requested, given that the structures are now 50 years old. The structural engineers have not been able to access the structures in the field. For this reason, staff is requesting that a Memorandum of Understanding be developed with MNR outlining the respective roles and responsibilities for both MNR and TRCA for the monitoring and maintenance of the structures. Report prepared by: Alex Blasko, extension 5714 Email: ablasko @trca.on.ca For Information contact: Deborah Martin - Downs, extension 5706 Email: dmartin- downs @trca.on.ca Date: January 30, 2008 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD RES. #D59/07 - WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES Moved by: Seconded by: Anthony Perruzza Maria Augimeri THAT Section IV items 8.1.1 - 8.1.3, inclusive, in regard to watershed committee minutes, be received. CARRIED Section IV Items - 8.1.1 - 8.1.3, Inclusive DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL Minutes of Meeting #1/07, held on July 17, 2007 Minutes of Meeting #2/07, held on September 25, 2007 Minutes of Meeting #3/07, held on October 25, 2007 Minutes of Meeting #4/07, held on November 22, 2007 HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE Minutes of Meeting #1/07, held on June 19, 2007 Minutes of Meeting #2/07, held on October 16, 2007 ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE Minutes of Meeting #4/07, held on June 15, 2007 Minutes of Meeting #5/07, held on October 5, 2007 Minutes of Meeting #6/07, held on November 23, 2007 187 TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:12 a.m., on Friday, February 8, 2008. Richard Whitehead Brian Denney Chair Secretary - Treasurer /ks 188