Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDon Watershed Regeneration Council 2007THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING #1/07 Conserva t on for The Living City theDon" MEETING OF THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL #1/07 July 17, 2007 Page F1 The Don Watershed Regeneration Council Meeting #1/07 was held, on Tuesday July 17, 2007. Peter Heinz (Acting Chair) called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. PRESENT Peter Heinz Acting Chair Joe Agg Member John Almond Member Sue Arndt Member Shan Dhingra Member George Fells Member Phil Goodwin Member Michael Haider Member Moyra Haney Member Kate Hayes Member Catherine Kurucz Member Vivien Lee Member Brenda Lucas Member Catherine Marsden Member James McArthur Member Margaret McRae Member Doug Obright Member Janice Palmer Member Nick Papa Member John Routh Member Lisa Sealock Member Alan Shefman Member Cheryl Shour Member Tom Waechter Member Andy Wickens Member John Wilson Member David Yudelman Member GUESTS Camilla Burgess Guest Stephen Cockle Guest John Laraway Guest Dali Peng Guest July 17, 2007 Page F2 STAFF Adele Freeman Director, Watershed Management Division Janet Ivey Project Manager, Don Watershed Plan Beverley Thorpe Project Manager, CTC Source Water Protection Kelly Montgomery Project Manager, Remedial Action Plan Amy Thurston Don Watershed Project Manager Michelle Vanderwel Don Watershed Administrative Clerk INTRODUCTION TO THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL Adele Freeman welcomed the Don Council members and guests to the first meeting of the 2007 - 2010 Don Council. Adele Freeman then gave a brief introduction to the history and current mandate of the Don Council. From the 1994 Don watershed plan Forty Steps to a New Don, one of the suggested steps was to develop a committee to implement the steps from this report. This committee is the Don Watershed Regeneration Council (DWRC). The present Don Council marks the fifth term of the DWRC. The Don Council has several responsibilities. Each term, a report card on the watershed is developed. For the last term, the Don Council instead produced a progress report on the watershed since Forty Steps was released. This term, the Don Council's main focus will be on a set of recommendations for the updated watershed plan. TRCA is moving away from individual report cards for each watershed and toward a Living City report card to incorporate all of the watersheds in the TRCA jurisdiction. It is expected that the first Living City report card will be published in 2011; therefore, the Don Council will be invited to provide input toward this report in 2010. In the past, the Don Council has been very involved in policy work. Examples of issues that the Policy Team provided comments on include the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, the Ontario Greenbelt Act, municipal policies and transportation issues. The new Don Council should form its own working committees according to the members' interests, within the Terms of Reference for the Don Council. The DWRC has always operated in a consensus - building fashion. Advocacy has often been in partnership with other groups with an interest in a given issue. TRCA staff with which the Don Council members will liaise will mainly be Amy Thurston, Michelle Vanderwel and for the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project, Ken Dion (who was unable to attend tonight's meeting). Janet Ivey is the staff contact for the updated Don Watershed Plan, and Kelly Montgomery for the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan. Other TRCA staff will at times meet with Don Council members (at full Council meetings or Working Committee meetings) to assist or will provide background information. Copies of the Don Council Briefing Book and past Don watershed report cards were available at tonight's meeting. Each Don Council member was encouraged to consult these sources for more information. Don Council members not present at tonight's meeting will be sent their briefing books by courier. July 17, 2007 Page F3 Janet Ivey provided background on the updated Don watershed plan. The new plan will provide updated guidance, use newer monitoring data, and may incorporate new methodologies developed since 1994's Forty Steps. A current conditions report is presently being developed. Ten background documents for this report are currently in progress. A new Terrestrial Natural Heritage system was developed and a new aquatic system is in the works. Modeling will then be conducted to determine various scenarios in the watershed under different management strategies. These analyses are in the early stages now, and the Don Council will work closely with Janet Ivey and other TRCA staff over the next year to bring all of this information together. Amy Thurston pointed out that the Don Council's involvement with the updated watershed plan is summarized in Appendix 3 of the Don Council Briefing Book. Janet Ivey stated that the real focus of the updated plan is to provide the most strategic, specific recommendations for regeneration in the Don watershed. Adele Freeman informed the DWRC that a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting was held last week with municipal and agency staff from York Region and Toronto. Brenda Lucas is the liaison for the Don Council on the TAC and will report back to the DWRC members at Don Council meetings. The TAC members were enthusiastic and there was great interest in this initiative and also in meeting with other municipalities to talk about this work and to see what others have done. Bev Thorpe, TRCA's Project Manager for the CTC Region for Source Water Protection (and a former DWRC member), will attend TAC meetings and will also sit in on DWRC meetings. The floor was ceded to the municipal Councillors present at the meeting to have them update the DWRC members on local initiatives. Councillor Nick Papa from the Town of Richmond Hill stated that Richmond Hill residents are concerned about the environment and especially about the future of the Oak Ridges Moraine, with past meetings on Moraine issues attracting up to 1,500 people. Environmental and Don watershed issues are certainly of concern to Richmond Hill Council and to Councillor Papa. Councillor Papa stated that that the turnout at tonight's Don Council meeting was encouraging to him and that he looked forward to working with other DWRC members on these issues. Councillor Alan Shefman of the City of Vaughan stated that the environment is Vaughan's number one issue and promoting environmentally responsible planning was top priority for the city. Vaughan is growing rapidly and developers are beginning to come onboard with environmentally friendly initiatives as they begin to see their advantages. For example, an entire subdivision next to Kortright (approximately 1,300 homes) is now Energy Star rated. Vaughan is working with all developers to work toward building to LEED standards. The hope is that as the city builds around rivers that they are incorporated into the community, rather than the community being placed on top of them. Adele Freeman noted that the one block in the Don watershed not yet protected or developed (or slated to be) is in Vaughan and that the hope was that the City of Vaughan would really raise the bar for environmental planning when it comes to plans for this block of land. Councillor Shefman stated that there was strong support on the City Council for an Environmental Master Plan for Vaughan, a first for the city. Councillor Shefman informed DWRC members that he is Co -Chair of the city's Environmental Committee. He agreed that there is lots of opportunity in Vaughan. There is hope to get people out of their cars more often but there is little transit available now in Vaughan. Viva Transit has an aggressive plan and Councillor Shefman hopes that this will greatly improve the transit options in Vaughan. July 17, 2007 Page F4 MINUTES RES. #F1 /07- MINUTES TO MEETING #11/06 Moved by: Seconded by: Janice Palmer Moyra Haney THAT the minutes of meeting #11/06, held on December 7, 2006, Lie approved CARRIED DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTERESTS There were no pecuniary interests disclosed. CORRESPONDENCE INCOMING 4.1 Citizen's Bank announces Green Mortgages Press Release from Citizens Bank, April 17, 2007 4.2 Bathurst Street Improvements, Notice of Study Commencement Letter to Don Council, received April 18, 2007 John Routh informed the Don Council that the writer of this letter is a past president of the Richmond Hill Naturalists. 4.3 New Town of Richmond Hill Tree Preservation By -law (By -law No. 41 -07) Email to Don Council, June 13, 2007 4.4 York Region Natural Heritage Draft Discussion Paper Letter to Don Council, July 4, 2007 RES. #F2/07- CORRESPONDENCE ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: Doug Obright James McArthur THAT correspondence items 4.1 through 4.4 be received CARRIED July 17, 2007 Page F5 INFORMATION ITEMS 5.1 Paddle the Don 2007 Event Summary Communication from Adele Freeman, Director, Watershed Management, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #5/07, June 22, 2007 John Routh questioned whether spots were reserved at Paddle the Don for corporations. Amy Thurston confirmed that they were, as part of the Corporate Canoe Challenge. Seventeen teams, with from one to ten canoes each, participated in the 2007 event. Corporate canoes launched from 9:30 to 10:15 a.m. John Routh raised the concern that the event should not become entirely focused on the corporate aspect; some level of public participation will always be needed. 5.2 Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Environmental Assessment- Incorporating Winning Design Elements from Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation's International Design Competition for the Lower Don Lands Into the Environmental Assessment for the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Communication from Adele Freeman, Director, Watershed Management, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #5/07, June 22, 2007 5.3 Don and Waterfront Interceptor Trunk Capacity and CSO Control Project City of Toronto Report, September 25 - 27, 2006 http: / /tinyurl.com /2wh8a1 5.4 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Participation in Sustainability Projects and Programs Communication from Brian Denney, Chief Administrative Officer, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Sustainable Communities Board Meeting #1/07, April 13, 2007 http: / /tinyurl.com /2ggfn8 (pg 3 -22) 5.5 The Clean Water Act 2006 - Proclamation of the Act, July 3, 2007 Communication from Adele Freeman, Director, Watershed Management, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #5/07, June 22, 2007 5.6 Fulfillment of Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Watershed Planning Requirements Communication from Deb Martin - Downs, Director, Ecology, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #1/07, April 20, 2007 July 17, 2007 Page F6 5.7 Notice of Intent, Charles Sauriol Erosion Control Project Notice of Intent, Toronto and Region Conservation, June 21, 2007 5.8 York Region EA Projects Summary Status Toronto and Region Conservation, June 21, 2007 5.9 Toronto EA Projects Summary Status Toronto and Region Conservation, June 28, 2007 5.10 Collaborative Source Water Protection Study for Lake Ontario Based Municipal Drinking Water Supplies Watershed Loadings Assessment Study Progress Report Communication from Adele Freeman, Director, Watershed Management, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #2/07, June 8, 2007 5.11 Stream Restoration of Wilket Creek, at Edwards Gardens City Park, City of Toronto Communication from Nick Saccone, Director, Restoration Services, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #1/07, April 20, 2007 http: / /tinyurl.com /2uap5z (pgs 6 - 8) 5.12 Renewal of the Canada - Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem (2007 -2010) Communication from Adele Freeman, Director, Watershed Management, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #1/07, April 20, 2007 http: / /tinyurl.com /2uap5z (pgs 76 - 80) 5.13 York -Peel- Durham - Toronto Groundwater Management Project Status Update Communication from Deb Martin - Downs, Director, Ecology, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #2/07, June 8, 2007 http: / /tinyurl.com /367jmy (pgs 23 -24) 5.14 Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Program, 2006 -2007 Overview Communication from Nick Saccone, Director, Restoration Services, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board Meeting #2/07, June 8, 2007 http: / /tinyurl.com /367jmy (pgs 25 -27) 5.15 Richmond Hill Mill Pond Splash 2007 Event Summary Communication from Stephen Cockle, member, Don Watershed Regeneration Council 2004 -2006, to Don Council, Meeting #1/07, July 17, 2007 5.16 2006 Don Watershed Progress Report (Walk -in Item) Communication from Adele Freeman, Director, Watershed Management, Toronto and July 17, 2007 Page F7 Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #4/07, May 25, 2007 5.17 Introduction to the Toronto and Area Remedial Action Plan (Walk -in Item) Communication from Kelly Montgomery, Project Manager, Remedial Action Plan, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Don Council, Meeting #1107, July 17, 2007 RES. # F3/07- INFORMATION ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: Doug Obright James McArthur THAT information items 5.1 through 5.17 be received CARRIED ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION /ACTION 6.1 2007 Meeting Dates Discussion on preferred dates for Don Council meetings Amy Thurston stated that the Don Council had historically met on the third Thursday of each month (with meetings within the summer and December being held at the discretion of the members). A show of hands suggested that Wednesday and Thursday evenings were the most popular suggestions. Toronto City Council meetings are held on Wednesdays, so a concern was raised that Toronto Councillors would be frequently unable to attend Don Council meetings. The third Thursday of each month was unable for the City of Vaughan Councillor (Alan Shefman). Most members were available for the second or fourth Thursday of each month. For September, the second Thursday is Rosh Hashanah, so the next meeting date was agreed to be September 27, 2007. 6.2 Don Council Working Committees for the Present Term Discussion of possible working committees of the Don Council- focus, membership, meeting dates Adele Freeman suggested that the matter of Working Committees may be best discussed over dinner and by email. Staff would then amalgamate DWRC member suggestions and possible Working Committees would then be discussed further at the September DWRC meeting. 8. UPDATES FROM OTHER WATERSHED GROUPS 8.1 Taylor Massey Project Update July 17, 2007 Page F8 Letter from Nancy Penny, Chair, Taylor Massey Project, to Mayor David Miller, February 21, 2007 ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 7:20 pm. Peter Heinz Acting Chair /mv Brian Denney Chief Administrative Officer THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING #2/07 TORONTO AND REGION - onserva tion for The Living City theDon MEETING OF THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL #2/07 September 27, 2007 Page F9 The Don Watershed Regeneration Council Meeting #2/07 was held on Thursday September 27, 2007. Brenda Lucas (Acting Chair) called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. PRESENT Brenda Lucas Acting Chair Joe Agg Member Sue Arndt Member Margaret Buchinger Member Carmela Canzonieri Member Shan Dhingra Member George Fells Member Michael Haider Member Moyra Haney Member Kate Hayes Member Peter Heinz Member Catherine Kurucz Member Nina -Marie Lister Member Catherine Marsden Member Warren May Alternate Margaret McRae Member Doug Obright Member Janice Palmer Member Nick Papa Member John Routh Member Lisa Sealock Member Leah Weller Member David Yudelman Member GUESTS Ivan Fraser Guest John Laraway Guest Jason Murray Guest Dali Peng Guest STAFF Adele Freeman Director, Watershed Management Division Janet Ivey Project Manager, Don Watershed Plan September 27, 2007 Page F10 Khamla Khamphengmueng Administrative Assistant, Volunteerism and Diversity Moranne McDonnell Project Manager, Environmental Engineering Projects Patricia Newland Supervisor, Project Planning and Monitoring Amy Thurston Don Watershed Project Manager Michelle Vanderwel Don Watershed Administrative Clerk PRESENTATIONS CN Rail Embankment at Charles Sauriol Conservation Area Erosion Control Project TRCA staff members Moranne Burnet - McDonnell (Project Manager, Environmental Engineering Projects) and Patricia Newland (Supervisor of Project Planning) gave a presentation on the erosion control project being undertaken on the CN rail embankment within the Charles Sauriol Conservation Reserve. CN Rail had expressed serious concerns about erosion of the embankment within the reserve. Two areas of concern were identified. These locations are both located at the East Don River, north of Eglinton and south of Lawrence, near the intersection of the CN rail line and the CP rail bridge. CN's main concern was the safety of the GO trains using this rail line. Site A is north of the rail line /rail bridge intersection, and is a 120 metre embankment, 2 to 3 metres high with an informal walking trail at the top. Site B is downstream, closer to the rail line /rail bridge intersection. It is an 80 metre stretch of bank comprised of silt and sand, with a very narrow and unsafe trail at its top. The embankment here is being scoured away by the water. The objectives of this project are to: provide long -term, low maintenance protection against erosion and slope instability; prevent loss of property and eliminate risk to CN Rail line; preserve existing trails through project area; provide aquatic and terrestrial habitat improvements; complete the project following the Class Environmental Assessment process; and implement the proposed works within the next year. The trails in the area are not formalized and the project will not change this. The trails will, however, be continued and improvements for the purpose of public safety will be made. The objective to implement the project within one year is due to an evaluation that determined that Site B is presently subject to a high risk of destabilization during a flood event. The Class EA process was briefly described. An Environmental Assessment (EA) is a planning tool that anticipates adverse environmental effects and provides for plans to effectively avoid or mitigate those effects. A Class EA is a group of projects that share a common process of planning, design, approvals, construction, operation and monitoring; and have a predictable range of solutions and environmental effects which are generally responsive to standard mitigation measures. The Class EA being followed for this project is the Class Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Projects. This Class EA applies only to projects undertaken by Conservation Authorities, and are solely for the purpose of protecting life and property from an impending flood or erosion problem in a previously developed area. September 27, 2007 Page F11 Public consultation and input has been an important component of this project and public participation has been good. The project is nearing a preferred alternative. Access to the site is difficult and will be a factor to consider. TRCA is working to avoid bringing equipment into sensitive areas. A realignment of the channel was considered but discarded as unviable. For Site A, a softer approach was preferred. Options include live brush layering and vegetated rip rap or a combination of these. Vegetated rip rap is a harder alternative, but this may be necessary due to upstream velocities. For Site B, a harder approach is needed since the railway embankment is closer to the river here. Options being considered include vegetated rip rap and a combination of hard treatment with rock vanes. Post construction monitoring of success of plantings will continue for one year, as required by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Don Watershed Regeneration Council Comments Comment (G. Fells) Does CN own the right of way at these sites? How much of the area is public land? Response TRCA owns the embankment. CN has a 25 metre easement. Comment (J. Agg) Do the trails at this site make the erosion problem worse? Response Not at Site A, but the trail definitely contributes to the problem at Site B and the trail itself is a safety concern. Comment (C. Canzonieri) What are the lengths of the two sites? Response Site A is 125 metres long, Site B is 80 metres and the two sites are about 180 metres apart. Comment (M. McRae) Are the two sites both covered by the same Class EA? Response There is one EA for the two sites, but with different strategies for each. Comment (K. Hayes) Are Junkers no longer used in bank stabilization? Response (W. May) Lunkers are still used where appropriate. Any approach must be evaluated for effectiveness. Lunkers are usually only an option for more banks more stable than these. (Editor's note: Lunkers are crib -like, wooden structures installed along a stream bank to create overhead bank cover and resting areas for fish in areas with low gradient and little natural overhead cover.) Adele Freeman commented that this presentation was given to the DWRC tonight as it is an ongoing work with the Don but also because the Community Liaison Committee (CLC) for this project September 27, 2007 Page F12 continues to offer input into the project. Don Council members may join the CLC (contact Michelle Vanderwel if interested). It was noted that DWRC member John Routh is presently a CLC member. TRCA's Environmental Volunteers Network Khamla Khamphengmueng, Administrative Assistant for Volunteerism and Diversity, TRCA, gave a presentation introducing DWRC members to the Environmental Volunteers Network (EVN), which Don Council members are automatically included in. EVN is a network of environmentally friendly volunteer, private, not - for - profit and government organizations and members. Environmental organizations have the opportunity to contact over 2,000 volunteers. People wishing to donate their time can find appropriate organizations. For those interested, the EVN can provide Don Council members with the opportunity to be involved with activities outside of the Don Council, including hands -on work in restoration and monitoring, in -class education opportunities, assistance with public events, or administrative tasks. EVN members get involved with plantings, clean -ups, and monitoring of fish, plants, animals and water quality. There are volunteer opportunities at the Kortright Centre, Albion Hills Conservation Area, and Black Creek Pioneer Village. Benefits for the volunteers include: invitations to natural environment conservation seminars, technical training sessions, and other educational programs through the EVN; passes to Toronto area attractions (after 30 hrs. of volunteer work); training and experience; networking opportunities; a volunteer reference letter; and the chance to make a difference and give back to the community. EVN is launching a new environmental blog at http:// www. trca. on. ca /Website/TRCANolunteerBlog.nsf in early October 2007. There is also a volunteer opportunity board. Don Council members will receive the attraction pass after 30 hours of time devoted to the Don Council. Meeting time will be measured by the sign -in sheets, and these hours will be forwarded to Khamla by Michelle Vanderwel. Please email Michelle if you have additional hours outside of meeting times for full Council meetings and Working Committees (e.g. review of DWRC correspondence, review of technical documents, travel time) to be sure to receive your pass after completing 30 hours. Amy Thurston added that the passes entitle holders to visit dozens of places within Toronto and Ontario. Adele Freeman pointed out that this program offers many opportunities for high school students, should Councillors or others get requests for such placements. Don Watershed Regeneration Council Comments Comment (G. Fells) How do you attract the volunteers? Response We work with employers and organizations. They post their opportunities on our job board. Comment (G. Fells) What area do you cover? September 27, 2007 Page F13 Response We work within the GTA. We work with over 40 organizations, including Sherwood Park Advisory Committee, Earth Rangers, Friends of the Don East and Evergreen. Comment (S. Dhingra) Are we already volunteers, then, if involved with the DWRC? Response Yes. If anyone is aged 80 or over, please let us know. We need this information for insurance purposes. (Editor's note: No Don Council member that attended the meeting identified themselves as being in this age group. If any members did not attend the meeting but are aged 80 or over, please contact Michelle Vanderwel.) Comment (J. Palmer) I am always looking for volunteers to work in Sherwood Park. Half of the volunteers that I work with found my organization through the blurb posted on TRCA's volunteer board. I've received interest from kids and adults alike. Many of my regular volunteers found me through this site and I highly recommend it. Updated Don River Watershed Plan Janet Ivey (Project Manager, Don Watershed Plan, TRCA) gave a presentation on current conditions and a project overview for the Updated Don River Watershed Plan. It was noted that much of the information in the presentation had been previously seen by attendees of the DWRC Info Sessions held in April 2007; however, some new information is presented here. The presentation is available for any Don Council members; please request a copy from Michelle Vanderwel. Some highlights are included here. There are two types of opportunities for green development within the watershed. There are a few, small locations where new development is occurring, within the northern portions of the watershed. The much larger opportunity is with sites being redeveloped. Discharge was defined as locations where groundwater returns to the surface. Some of the discharge within the Don actually originates from recharge areas in the Humber watershed. Discharges are very important for maintaining baseflow and, within the Don, discharge areas support some of the best aquatic habitat, especially discharge locations on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) and South Slope. Special Policy Areas (SPA) are areas within a community that have historically existed in the flood plain and where site - specific policies 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 Lower Don is presently classified as a SPA; however, this classification may be lifted from parts of the area once the Flood Protection Landform is built as part of the Lower Don River West Remedial Flood Protection Class EA. September 27, 2007 Page F14 About 75% of the urbanized area of the watershed has no stormwater control in place. It was pointed out that monitoring and maintenance of stormwater facilities is also an important part of managing stormwater. Sources of water contamination include stormwater, combined sewer overflows (CSOs), 47 known closed /abandoned landfills, road salt, and other factors. E. ca levels are known to be very high in locations such as Taylor- Massey Creek, due to the presence of CSOs and illegal sanitary-storm sewer cross - connections. E. co//levels are also high in areas in the Upper East Don, although the reasons for this are less clear. The graph showing chloride levels on the West Don shows one of the effects of development, with its increase in roads, traffic, and road salting. Even though salt management programs are in place, winter chloride levels greatly increased during the 2002- 2004 period, when development was greatly increased in this area. Chloride may also leach from abandoned landfills. Spills are also a concern for water quality. On average, there is one reported spill (to water, land and air) every three days within the Don. Regarding aquatic habitat, there are only a few coldwater sites remaining within the Don. These are located in the Upper East Don and German Mills Creek. There is a suggestion in the data that the temperature may be increasing in these sites, as natural cover is lost. • Aquatic biodiversity is low across the Don. Only half the number of species present prior to development are still found. These are mainly the pollution - tolerant species. Riparian vegetation is lacking on about one -third of the river. Redside dace, which are found in a few locations in the Don, are currently classified as a Species of Special Concern under the Species At Risk Act. However, this status may change, as COSEWIC upgraded the species' status to Endangered in April 2007. Many former in- stream barriers have been mitigated since Forty Steps to a New Don was published in 1994, so that Chinook salmon are now seen in the upper reaches of the watershed. • 727 species of flora are found in the Don watershed. Of these, 61 % are native and 41 % are species of concern as identified by TRCA. The key deliverables of the updated watershed plan are: Phase 1 —Ten technical background reports on current watershed conditions; confirmation of goals, objectives and working targets Phase 2— Modelling of lot level stormwater retrofit scenarios; identification of regeneration priorities; development of updated land and water management strategies Phase 3 —Fish Management Plan; Watershed Plan; implementation plan; concept sites The role of the DWRC in the updated Don watershed plan was identified as follows: assist with the development, consultation and review of the updated watershed plan and its components; review and provide comment on draft watershed plan documents; provide input to developing September 27, 2007 • Page F15 management strategies and specific, strategic regeneration priorities; advocate for the Don and assist with public consultation on the watershed plan. Next steps for the watershed plan and milestones are that interested DWRC members should join the Watershed Plan and Policy Working Committee. Review of the vision and objectives for the watershed plan will take place at the first meeting of this committee and will be reviewed at the full Don Council meeting scheduled for October 25, 2007. Subsequent Fall/Winter meetings will further review material. Public consultation will be held with assistance from members of the Community Education and Outreach Working Committee. Topic- specific management summits (e.g., salt management) will be held. Modeling results will be presented. Draft management strategies and draft regeneration priorities will be developed with review by the Don Council. The target date for a draft watershed plan is Winter 2008. Don Watershed Regeneration Council Comments Comment (M. McRae) Are hydro corridors included in the portion of the watershed classified as meadow? Response Yes. Comment (S. Dhingra) Where does the York Region Big Pipe project fit in? Who is the responsible authority for this? Response Stormwater flows through municipal infrastructure and is the responsibility of municipalities. Shan Dhingra then asked what influence the DWRC has on such projects. Janet Ivey stated that municipalities are working on stormwater management issues, for instance Toronto's development of the Wet Weather Flow Management Plan. Leah Weller pointed out that the public has a say in the outcome of an EA before it is implemented through public consultation meetings. It was agreed that this issue is an involved one, and that discussion would continue by the Watershed Plan Committee. Comment (G. Fells) In general, what clout does the Don Council have on decisions and implementation? Response (J. Ivey) For the watershed plan, which the DWRC will strongly influence and guide, the updated plan is required under provincial legislation and municipalities are required to include its findings into their planning documents. We work with the municipalities so that they see what recommendations are being made, and are involved with the process. (A. Freeman) The work at the mouth of the Don has been because of citizen input. This is a multi - million dollar project that was not even part of the City's plan 15 years ago. Comment (N. Papa) Stormwater ponds in Richmond Hill have undergone retrofits, including one pond that cost $5 million to retrofit. These measures were put into place due to public desire for these changes. Response (A. Freeman) Some really tangible results have been seen from DWRC influence. A stormwater pond in Earl Bales Park was moved on the advice of Peter Heinz and other Don Council members to a golf course, where it can be September 27, 2007 Page F16 used for irrigation also. The Terraview - Willowfield rehabilitation project was due to the influence of local residents and the DWRC was involved with this project. The Don Council has provided comment on many provincial and municipal policies. When York Region was drafting their Natural Heritage Strategy, they approached the DWRC for input. The Don has the ability to lead the way in retrofitting within the GTA. Watershed report cards were a Forty Steps initiative first done for the Don and now seen everywhere. RES. #F4/07- PRESENTATIONS Moved by: Seconded by: Carmela Canzonieri Moyra Haney THAT the presentations be received and THAT TRCA staff be thanked for their presentations CARRIED MINUTES RES. #F5/07- MINUTES TO MEETING #1/07 Moved by: Seconded by: Moyra Haney Nick Papa THAT the minutes of meeting #1/07, held on July 17, 2007, be approved, subject to an amendment of the title to #1/07 from #11/06 CARRIED DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTERESTS There were no pecuniary interests disclosed. CORRESPONDENCE INCOMING 4.1 Taylor Massey Project Outfall Analyses Letter to DWRC from Grainne Ryder, Chair, Water Quality Committee, Taylor Massey Project, August 26, 2007 September 27, 2007 Page F17 RES. #F6/07- CORRESPONDENCE ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: Janice Palmer Moyra Haney THAT correspondence item 4.1 be received CARRIED INFORMATION ITEMS 5.1 Canada — Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem Press release from Ontario Ministry of Environment, August 16, 2007 5.2 Crothers' Woods Trail Management Strategy Email from Scott Laver, City of Toronto, August 21, 2007 5.3 Fines for Pesticide Bylaw Begin September 1 Press release from City of Toronto, August 30, 2007 5.4 Waterfront Toronto Annual General Meeting Notice of meeting on October 2, 2007 5.5 14th Annual Charles Sauriol Environmental Dinner for The Living City Notice of event on November 7, 2007 5.6 Permeable Pavement and Bioretention Swale Demonstration Project Communication from Deb Martin - Downs, Director, Ecology, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Sustainable Communities Board, Meeting #2/07, September 7, 2007 5.7 The Living City Policies for Watersheds Communication from Carolyn Woodland, Director, Planning and Development, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Sustainable Communities Board, Meeting #2/07, September 7, 2007 5.8 Habitat Implementation Plan Communication from Nick Saccone, Director, Restoration Services, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board, Meeting #3/07, September 14, 2007 5.9 Headwater Drainage Features Communication from Deb Martin - Downs, Director, Ecology, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board, Meeting #3/07, September 14, 2007 September 27, 2007 Page F18 5.10 Sustainable Stormwater Management for the Don River Watershed Communication from Deb Martin- Downs, Director, Ecology, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Executive Committee, Meeting #7/07, September 7, 2007 RES. # F7/07- INFORMATION ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: Janice Palmer Moyra Haney THAT information items 5.1 through 5.10 be received CARRIED ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION /ACTION 6.1 Don Council Working Committees for the Present Term Adele Freeman noted that she and Amy Thurston met and went over the responses received from Don Council members regarding their interests. Two groups were noted: those that wished to work on the watershed plan and those whose interests, while they may be specific, fell under the general category of outreach and education. Policy issues may fall under the Watershed Plan Working Committee's domain - i.e. how policy may affect the watershed plan and vice versa. However, other policy issues may be taken on by the Outreach and Education Committee or a group of interested Don Council members that may straddle the membership of the teams. Smaller groups could form from the larger committees, but TRCA can only support two to three working committees on a regular basis. Ad hoc committees may be formed on an occasional basis. Adele Freeman asked for confirmation that DWRC members were comfortable with this structure and no disagreement was stated. She then asked for a show of hands regarding interest in each committee. Ten members expressed interest in the Watershed Plan Working Committee and ten in the Community Outreach and Education Working Committee. Shan Dhingra requested the opportunity to speak separately to Adele on his ideas and the best fit for him. Adele Freeman stated that the working committees report on their work back to the full Don Council. For members that cannot attend the meetings, it is possible to be a corresponding member to receive all materials and correspond by email. Kate Hayes asked for more information on the Watershed Plan committee. Adele Freeman clarified that for the 10 technical reports, the hope is that Don Council members with the relevant expertise look through these reports, whether sitting on the Watershed Plan committee or not. This committee will also look at policies as they are developed; for instance, what is missing, what should be emphasized most? For targeted implementation, what do the committee members want to see done first? Regarding public consultation, the Community Outreach and Education Working Committee members would be encouraged to develop novel September 27, 2007 Page F19 consultation ideas, such as tours, events for children and families, etc. York Regions' Planning for Tomorrow will need comment from the DWRC. The new provincial government after the October election will develop policies that will be relevant to the Don watershed. No federal government funding has yet been received for the RAP; this would be a policy issue for comment from the Don Council or Watershed Plan committee. Kate Hayes asked whether the two groups may come together for implementation issues. Adele Freeman agreed that they may; the full Don Council could discuss this. The Education and Outreach Committee could be more hands -on in terms of what citizens can do themselves on watershed issues. Brenda Lucas stated that there are responsibilities of the working committees on the watershed plan but Tots of opportunities for the members to decide what they want to do; Adele Freeman agreed. DWRC members present at the meeting were asked to confirm their committee choice by choosing a committee on the sign -up sheets available. A request to sign up to the committee of their choice will be sent by email to those Don Council members not present tonight. RES. # F8/07- DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL WORKING COMMITTEES Moved by: Seconded by: Catherine Marsden Michael Haider THAT the working committee structure and priorities for the Don Watershed Regeneration Council (DWRC) as outlined in Agenda Item 6.1 (with a Watershed Plan Working Committee and a Community Education and Outreach Working Committee) be adopted; AND THAT members choose their preferred working committee CARRIED 6.2 2007 Meeting Dates Don Watershed Regeneration Council Discussion on dates for full Don Council meetings centred on Wednesday and Thursday evenings, as the previously identified best potential days of the week for the meetings. Thursday was preferred by the majority of Don Council members present. Thursday October 25, 2007 was confirmed as the date for Don Council Meeting #3107. The fourth Thursday of each month was preferred by a majority of Don Council members present; therefore the date for Don Council Meeting #4/07 was confirmed as Thursday November 22, 2007. Whether a meeting will be held in December 2007 and potential meeting dates within 2008 were not discussed and should be confirmed at a future DWRC meeting. September 27, 2007 Page F20 Working Committees Watershed Plan Working Committee- The possibility of afternoon meetings was discussed, but a number of members that had expressed interest in this committee could not commit to regular afternoon meetings (occasional afternoons may work). Wednesday October 17, in the evening, was agreed upon as the first Watershed Plan Working Committee meeting date. The meeting location was not decided. Several options were provided by DWRC members, including rooms at Ryerson University (Nina -Marie Lister), Dillon (in the Sheppard /404 area, Catherine Marsden), Richmond Hill library (Shan Dhingra), downtown locations such as Metro Hall, or the North York Civic Centre. (Editor's note: It was determined that the first Watershed Plan committee meeting would be held at North York Civic Centre. An email was sent to all DWRC members asking that they choose their committee and, if interested in the Watershed Plan committee, to provide the starting time that worked best for them, 6:00 or 6:30 PM. A majority of committee members chose 6:30 PM.) Community Education and Outreach Working Committee- The committee members agreed on Thursday October 18, 2007, at North York Civic Centre, for the first meeting of the Community Education and Outreach Working Committee. The starting time of the meeting was agreed upon as 6:00 PM rather than 6:30 PM. External Committees Adele Freeman explained that the Bartley Smith Greenway Advisory Committee may no longer require a DWRC representative, as the funding supporting the committee was coming to an end. Also, the Crothers Woods Master Plan is complete at this time. There may be more work to be done on this project at a later date, but for the time being no DWRC representative is needed. There was confirmation of Carmela Canzonieri to continue as the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Community Liaison Committee representative. To replace Don Cross on this committee, it was agreed that Moyra Haney would be the Don Council alternate representative. Shan Dhingra was confirmed as the Don River Park Community Liaison Committee representative. Margaret Buchinger was confirmed to continue as the Wet Weather Flow Master Plan Implementation Advisory Committee representative. RES. # F9/07- DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL MEETING DATES AND APPOINTMENTS TO OUTSIDE COMMITTEES Moved by: Seconded by: Moyra Haney George Fells THAT the meeting dates for the full Don Council and the Watershed Plan Working Committee and Community Education and Outreach Working Committee above be adopted; September 27, 2007 Page F21 AND THAT appointments to outside committees be confirmed as above CARRIED 11. NEW BUSINESS Moyra Haney recommended that the past Acting Chair of the Don Council, Don Cross, be honoured in recognition of his years of support to all previous terms of the DWRC. Also, Don Council members whose contributions greatly exceed that of meeting attendance (e.g. Margaret Buchinger, who devoted many hours to reviewing policy documents and drafting response from the Don Council) be similarly honoured. Adele Freeman agreed to come back to the DWRC with some ideas. Joe Agg informed the DWRC that University of Toronto (U of T) has expressed interest in potentially selling a mature woodlot in Richmond Hill where the David Dunlap Observatory is currently located. This area represents an opportunity for conservation that would may be lost should the property be sold and developed. Nick Papa added that the Town of Richmond Hill is cataloguing the buildings for potential heritage designation. Shan Dhingra added that his understanding is that the Town of Richmond Hill would like to conserve the property but that U of T wants to sell it. Nick Papa agreed, and stated that, at this time, no applications for development have been made for the property. It was decided that a Don Council letter be drafted to send to Richmond Hill and possibly to U of T showing the interest of the Don Council in the conservation of this property. Joe Agg stated that the Dunlap family also has claim to the land and that the letter should be forwarded to them. It was also suggested that the letter be copied to the Mayor of Richmond Hill and the Ministry of Natural Resources. Adele Freeman explained that, during the last term of the DRWC, it was agreed that letters sent from the Don Watershed Regeneration Council be reviewed by the Chair and Vice -Chair of the DWRC and the Chairs of the working committees before release. It was decided that, prior to an election for the Chair and Vice -Chair positions, interested Don Council members would review the letter, and that it would be signed by Brenda Lucas as the Interim Chair. Margaret Buchinger, Janice Palmer, Joe Agg, Michael Haider, Sue Arndt, David Yudelman, Carmela Canzonieri, Shan Dhingra and Brenda Lucas agreed to review the draft of the letter. RES. # F10 /07- LETTER REGARDING THE DAVID DUNLAP OBSERVATORY PROPERTY Moved by: Seconded by: George Fells Peter Heinz THAT a letter be drafted to the University of Toronto, copied to the Mayor of Richmond Hill, representatives of the Dunlap family and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, regarding the DWRC's interest in the conservation of he David Dunlap Observatory property and the potential disbursement of it; AND THAT the letter be circulated to the individuals listed above for review CARRIED September 27, 2007 Page F22 Nina -Marie Lister informed the DWRC about the Alphabet City Festival presented by the Greenbelt September 29 - October 20 and circulated promotional material on this event. The festival promotes food policies centred on organics, eating locally, and ecologically and socially responsible food production and distribution. ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:20 pm. Brenda Lucas Acting Chair /mv Brian Denney Chief Administrative Officer THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING #3/07 TORONTO AND REGION Y onserva tion for The Living City theDoit MEETING OF THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL #3/07 October 25, 2007 Page F23 The Don Watershed Regeneration Council Meeting #3/07 was held on Thursday October 25, 2007. Adele Freeman called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. PRESENT Phil Goodwin Chair Joe Agg Member Sue Arndt Member Janet Davis Member Shan Dhingra Member George Fells Member Michael Haider Member Kate Hayes Member Peter Heinz Member Catherine Kurucz Member Vivien Lee Member Brenda Lucas Member James McArthur Member Margaret McRae Member Doug Obright Member Janice Palmer Member Lisa Sealock Member Alan Shefman Member Leah Weller Member Andy Wickens Member David Yudelman Member GUESTS John Laraway Guest STAFF Brian Denney C.A.O. Adele Freeman Director, Watershed Management Division Janet Ivey Project Manager, Don Watershed Plan Bev Thorpe Project Manager, Source Water Protection, CTC Region Amy Thurston Don Watershed Project Manager Christine Tu Supervisor, Aquatic Management Michelle Vanderwel Don Watershed Administrative Clerk October 25, 2007 Page F 24 PRESENTATIONS The Living City Brian Denney, CAO, Toronto and Region Conservation gave a presentation on TRCA's The Living City vision. TRCA has traditionally been focused on watersheds in our jurisdiction, but recently a more global and Great Lakes - focused view has been adopted. TRCA's jurisdiction includes over 40,000 acres of greenspace with many lands currently under development. The GTA is expecting high growth and increased urbanization over the next 20 years. The Don watershed includes vitally important areas for green redevelopment. As an example, the Don Mouth renaturalization project is one of the most important environmental works currently being conducted in Canada. The Living City Campus is being planned at the Kortright Centre. The existing building at Kortright is 25 years old and needs to be renovated using current green technology. The Living City Campus will involve several zones, each with a specific focus. Research in the Biodiversity Zone will focus on issues such as habitat and gardening for wildlife. The Core Zone will concentrate on renewable energy. Other zones will concentrate on areas of research such as wetland creation, near urban agriculture and sustainable living and education. There is a partnership with Ryerson University to bring academic researchers into the Living City Campus. Congratulations are due to Markham Centre, which has put into place a combined heating and energy plant. The next big initiatives for The Living City involve; • eco- industrial parks such as the new partnership being developed with Pearson Airport; • the next generation of the private automobile such as the new plug -in hybrid TRCA vehicle; • the new source water protection committee, which will develop a new integration between traditional water management and public health; • the World Green Building Council. Canada is a leader of the WGBC and is one of 11 countries with a Green Building Council - the target is for 100 countries to have one within the next three years (important because buildings account for 30 - 40% of greenhouse gas emissions); • community energy planning. TRCA's agenda is to assist municipalities and regional governments; • near urban agriculture. As part of climate change initiatives it is important to forge stronger connections between farmers and urban markets. Signs of hope include the City of Guelph's energy plan, a comprehensive new initiative. Toronto's Green Development Standard shows the increased profile of green building technologies. LEED certification is beginning to be embraced by the development community. York Region has developed a new sustainability plan. The Seaton community plan will be a new community with 40,000 people to be built within the next few years, with a great opportunity for sustainable October 25, 2007 Page F 25 initiatives. The Greater Toronto Home Builders Association now offers Green Builder Awards to recognize sustainable builders. Don Watershed Regeneration Council Comments Comment (D. Yudelman) Regarding TRCA's support of electric vehicles, does TRCA have a policy regarding electricity production? Response We have not done a position paper. We need to invest in energy conservation and improve efficiency. We support increased use of electricity in transportation as preferable to the use of gasoline. Comment (G. Fells) Has there been any work by TRCA on reduction of use of cars, e.g. by promotion of car -free zones? Response We have concentrated on the building aspect. Promoting live /work communities and support of public transit will result in reduced car use. We support the work of the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority; Rob Maclsaac is its Chair. The province will need to provide resources to this group. The municipalities support its goals but do not have the budgets to fund these initiatives. Comment (J. faraway) Has TRCA done any work on community supported agriculture, projects where communities pay the farmer in advance and receive the produce as it becomes available? Response We have a program at Black Creek Urban Farm, and there are also community gardens throughout Toronto. We support programs where use of local produce is encouraged. Draft Don River Watershed Based Fisheries Management Plan: Process, Current Conditions and Issues Christine Tu, Supervisor, Aquatic Management, Toronto and Region Conservation, gave a presentation on the Draft Don River Watershed Based Fisheries Management Plan. A 1997 Don fish management plan had been developed by Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), The Don Watershed Council and TRCA as a follow up to Forty Steps to a New Don, but it remained in draft form. The current plan is an update to that draft report. A technical committee made up of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, MNR, University of Toronto, TRCA and the Town of Richmond Hill is developing the fisheries management plan. Consultation will involve the general public, plus target groups such as the Don Council, angling groups, etc. The fisheries management plan will be a resource document and guiding tool rather than a policy document. It is considered to be a Provincial document, with MNR approving the final version. The Don watershed was divided into Fish Management zones, based on areas with similar conditions such as water temperature, geology and slope. The fish communities are expected to be similar within a management zone. October 25, 2007 Page F 26 All influences on the aquatic systems across the landscape, in particular stormwater, are considered as streams and rivers are the ultimate receiving bodies of overland flow. One of the key issues for the Don is sedimentation at the mouth of the river. This increase in sediments is due to stormwater flows throughout the watershed and the low slope or gradient that characterizes the bottom of the Don. High and flashy flows during storm events have resulted in lower diversity of fish species mainly due to loss of instream habitat and poor water quality. The result is a fish community tolerant to turbid and high sediment conditions. This issue is seen more in the lower reaches of the Don but is increasing throughout the watershed. The top nine factors identified by the report as relevant to fish management in the Don were: fish community; instream habitat; benthic invertebrate community; stream temperature; water quality; groundwater regime; surface water regime; land cover type; and fish passage. The Don is moving from a system with cold, cool and warm zones to a more uniformly warm system. Approximately five species dominate the system; species that are tolerant to turbidity and sediment, are broadcast spawners, habitat generalists and use cool -warm water habitat. Redside dace are found in the Upper East Don (Fish Management Zone 1) and are classified as Endangered under the Ontario Endangered Species Act and as a Species of Special Concern under the federal Species at Risk Act (this federal status is under review. Redside dace may be uplisted from Schedule 3 to Schedule 1). The habitat for redside dace still exists in the Don but they are under stress due to active urbanization. Zone 2 in the Don is Tess impaired than the other zones, with relatively high diversity. This area has connections to the Rouge and Humber. Maintaining the health of these headwaters would help to improve the outlook in the lower reaches of the watershed. The objective is to protect the biodiversity that the Don has. Rusty crayfish is a non - native species that has been found in the middle reaches of the Upper East Don (Zone 4). It may be present in other zones but these have not yet been sampled for it. This species outcompetes native crayfish. It is sold as a baitfish for species such as brown trout, which are stocked in the Don. Carp are a problem in the Don, especially in online stormwater ponds. They are physically disruptive, increasing turbidity, and they also outcompete many native species. Another non - native species that may become a problem is the round goby. It made its way into the Lake Ontario via ballast water and is now self- sustaining. Although not yet found in the Don, it has been found in the Rouge and the Humber. As a bottom - dwelling species, it is difficult to sample, and may already be present in the Don. MNR stocks Chinook salmon in the Don. As a result of dam mitigation, they migrate north, and have been spotted as far north as Highway 7. However, there is no assessment of their spawning success. The salmon are not likely reaching the cold water locations where suitable spawning habitat might still be found. They likely built nests and lay eggs but egg survival is believed to be low. Brown trout are stocked in the Upper East Don on an ad hoc basis. These trout are likely resident in the stream and therefore do not migrate to the Lake. They are stocked in the area where the remaining redside dace are found, and they are a predator species which could feed on the dace. October 25, 2007 Page F 27 The management plan will recommend that any future brown trout stocking shift to German Mills Creek, where the redside dace are not found. Benthic invertebrates are sampled as indicators of habitat and water quality. Based on this sampling, there are no unimpaired sites within the Don. Historically, the Don north of Major Mackenzie was a cold water zone. Now, it is a mosaic of water temperatures. This change is due mostly to online stormwater ponds which have increased temperatures. Also, groundwater discharge increases contaminant loads from contact with underground pipes. Temperature mosaics shifting sharply from warm to cold are generally not seen naturally; there is usually a cold to cool to warm progression as water travels downstream. Changes in thermal regime may lead to loss of species if tolerance thresholds are crossed; redside dace were originally present in the Upper West Don but have not been found there for a decade. The literature suggests that with less than 10% impervious cover in the watershed, aquatic conditions will remain good; with 10 - 25% impervious cover decreased diversity will begin to be seen; and with greater than 25% impervious cover most fish communities will no longer be found, only "The 'Fab Five" species (the very common native group of fish that are tolerant of high turbidity, high sediment loads, poorer water quality and warmer water.): creek chub, blacknose dace, fathead minnow, brook stickleback, and white sucker. In the Don watershed, impervious cover is greater than 25% in Zones 3, 4 and 5. In Zone 1, impervious cover is between 10 - 25 %; however, these estimates are based on aerial photos that are a few years old, so Zone 1 likely contains a higher percentage of impervious cover today. Zone 2 is still less than 10% impervious cover. It should be noted that the method for measuring perviousness may vary, and that recent measures to increase perviousness have not been accounted for in these figures. Fish barriers are determined both from aerial photos and from walking the streams and river channels. There is some uncertainty involved in air photo interpretation as to whether a potential barrier is in fact blocking fish migration. Mitigation of these barriers is an agency role but stewardship and community outreach efforts are made to try to prevent materials from being placed in the river. An example of mitigation is the rocky ramps that were installed at the Pottery Road weirs and at Donalda Golf Club. These ramps allow certain fish species to jump over the barrier while an overhanging lip prevents sea lamprey from moving beyond the upstream barrier at Pottery Rd. These ramps are a success story for fish passage as evidenced by sightings of Chinook salmon in the upper reaches of the Don, but habitat quality issues still need to be addressed before spawning can be successful for this species. The Don Council can assist this project by providing their local expertise. Are there barriers in the river in your neighbourhood, or do you know of other issues affecting fish habitat and migration? Any information can be noted on the handout provided and returned to Michelle Vanderwel. Specific locations can be marked on the included map. Public consultation will be held on the fisheries management plan in the new year to reach out to the general public. Don Watershed Regeneration Council Comments October 25, 2007 Page F 28 Comment (J. Agg) Should beaver dams in locations such as German Mills Creek be removed? Response Beaver dams are considered to be natural barriers. In a given zone, beaver management may be needed. Dams would be retained or removed depending on the fish community's ability to tolerate them. Comment (C. Kurucz) Will we ever again see Atlantic salmon in the Don? Response The Don is unlikely to be able to support Atlantic salmon. The current program is reintroducing Atlantic salmon into the Duffins system. They require cold water habitat. Brown Trout may be an option for stocking into the Don; they are resident and can stay in the area into which they are introduced. Comment (L. Weller) This plan works in tandem with the Wet Weather Flow Master Plan (WWFMP) but I think that the contribution of stormwater ponds may be considered differently here. Are there plans for technical studies to mitigate the effects of online stormwater ponds on water temperature? Response The watershed plan is modeling best practices for stormwater management for the Don. This is meant to be synergistic with the WWFMP and will include initiatives such as green roofs, lot level designs, etc. The trend is moving away from online ponds toward offline ponds. Richmond Hill is currently mitigating three online ponds; it is a costly project. Comment (S. Dhingra) What can TRCA do to educate municipalities about stormwater management? Response Implementation of the FMP will be by proactive committees that will bring municipalities together. Municipalities own the stormwater ponds; TRCA provides the guidance and information to work with the municipalities in determining policy. The City of Toronto is addressing stormwater concerns by pursuing the WWFMP at a cost of millions of dollars. Municipalities in the 905 region are conducting retrofit studies and constructing new offline ponds. MINUTES RES. #F11 /07- MINUTES TO MEETING #2/07 Moved by: Seconded by: Janice Palmer Margaret McRae THAT the minutes of meeting #2/07, held on September 27, 2007, be approved CARRIED DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTERESTS October 25, 2007 Page F 29 There were no pecuniary interests disclosed. CHAIR OF THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL Phil Goodwin was nominated as Chair of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council. Nominations for Chair of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council were closed with no further nominations. RES. #F12/07- ELECTION OF THE CHAIR Moved by: Seconded by: Janice Palmer Margaret McRae THAT Phil Goodwin be declared elected by acclamation as Chair of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council CARRIED VICE -CHAIR OF THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL Peter Heinz was nominated as Vice -Chair of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council. Nominations for Vice -Chair of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council were closed with no further nominations. RES. #F13/07- ELECTION OF THE VICE -CHAIR Moved by: Seconded by: Kate Hayes George Fells THAT Peter Heinz be declared elected by acclamation as Vice -Chair of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council CARRIED CORRESPONDENCE INCOMING 5.1 Wetland Concept in the Taylor Creek Park Letter to Janette Harvey, City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation (copied to DWRC) from Andrew McCammon, Taylor Massey Project — October 17, 2007 October 25, 2007 Page F 30 5.2 Unsafe E. Coll levels in Taylor Massey Creek Letter to Kathleen Brown, Ontario Ministry of Environment and Joanne Di Caro, City of Toronto, Toronto Water (copied to DWRC) from Grainne Ryder and Andrew McCammon, Taylor Massey Project - October 23, 2007 Michael Haider questioned what the Don Council's role is in helping TMP. Janet Davis stated that the City of Toronto is continuing with the outfall monitoring program in Taylor Massey Creek. All cross - connections are being investigated and many have been identified. The program has now expanded to other watersheds. The plan is to survey all watersheds within the City over the next five years. All of the results of monitoring are accessible online as they become available, including the Taylor Massey results. The City of Toronto website contains searchable agendas which have links to the relevant reports. Amy Thurston stated that after the addendum was sent out, TRCA received email notice from Andrew McCammon of TMP that there was a missed communication and that there is a budget for item 5.1 and that the City had made this information available to TMP. OUTGOING 5.3 David Dunlap Observatory Lands Letter to David Barrow, Mayor, Town of Richmond Hill, regarding the David Dunlap Observatory property, from Don Watershed Regeneration Council, October 19, 2007 RES. #F14/07- CORRESPONDENCE ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: Peter Heinz . Kate Hayes THAT correspondence items 5.1 through 5.3 be received CARRIED INFORMATION ITEMS 6.1 Environmental Assessments in York Region, Summary Toronto and Region Conservation, September 26, 2007 George Fells questioned why so many of these items had a status of "pending ". Adele Freeman clarified that the EAs are not on hold, they are in progress awaiting new information and studies. These are all capital development projects. 6.2 Environmental Assessment in the City of Toronto, Summary Toronto and Region Conservation, October 15, 2007 6.3 York Regional Council Selects Municipal Partner Projects for Regional Funding in 2007 October 25, 2007 Page F 31 and 2008 Press Release, October 18, 2007 6.4 Don Watershed DRAFT Current Conditions Synthesis Report Communication from Janet Ivey, Watershed Planning Project Manager - Don Watershed, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Meeting #3/07, dated October 19, 2007 6.5 Bartley Smith Greenway Business and Community Outreach Initiative Communication from Adele Freeman, Director, Watershed Management, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Watershed Management Advisory Board, Meeting #4/07, October 19, 2007 6.6 14th Annual Charles Sauriol Environmental Dinner for The Living City Notice of event on November 7, 2007 6.7 Don River Watershed Plan - Proposed Management Framework Communication from Janet Ivey, Watershed Planning Project Manager - Don Watershed, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Meeting #3/07, dated October 19, 2007 6.8 Election of Chair and Vice Chair, Don Watershed Regeneration Council Communication from Adele Freeman, Director and Don Watershed Specialist, Watershed Management, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Meeting #3/07, dated October 22, 2007 RES. # F15/07- INFORMATION ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: James McArthur Shan Dhingra THAT information items 6.1 through 6.8 be received CARRIED ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION /ACTION 7.1 Identification of Policy Issues and Topics Members to identify upcoming policy issues that they wish to see addressed by the Watershed Plan and Policy Committee Amy Thurston stated that this item was a carry -over item from the meeting of the Watershed Plan and Policy Committee (WPP) on October 17, 2007. Don Council members were asked to identify current policy issues that they are interested in and that they feel require Don Council action. No new issues were made known. The walk -in item from former Don Council Chair Don Cross on the City of Toronto proposal on a mandatory downspout disconnection program was discussed. It October 25, 2007 Page F 32 was agreed that the WPP would discuss this item by email and formulate a position paper for the City. Janet Davis stated this issue was on the October 31 Public Works Committee agenda. COMMITTEE REPORTS 8.1 Watershed Plan and Policy Committee Amy Thurston reported that she had chaired the October 17, 2007 meeting of the WPP pending confirmation of a chair for this committee. The David Dunlap Observatory property letter had been submitted to the Mayor of Richmond Hill, who responded very promptly. The Mayor suggested that WPP contact University of Toronto, the province and the federal government with a suggestion to form a partnership to purchase the property. It was agreed that a response letter would be drafted and circulated among the group that had reviewed the original Dunlap letter. (Editor's note: this draft was sent October 26, 2007. The final letter was sent October 29, 2007). Shan Dhingra informed the DWRC that a community centre near the Dunlap property has taken an active interest in this issue and the Rev. Dr. Sam Chan of the community centre would like to be involved in helping to conserve the property. It was agreed that Michelle Vanderwel would send copies of any correspondence that the Don Council sends on this issue to Rev. Dr. Chan. A letter will be drafted by the WPP to MPP Kathleen Wynne, congratulating her on her re- election in Don Valley West, thanking her for her continued support of Paddle the Don and inviting her to paddle in 2008, and informing her of some of the initiatives that the Don Council is pursuing during this term. Janet Ivey reported on the Draft Management Framework (see Addendum Item 6.7) discussion at the WPP meeting. New ideas were brought forward, and Don Council members were encouraged to send any additional thoughts on the Framework to Janet. 8.2 Community Education and Outreach Committee Peter Heinz reported on the meeting with TRCA's website consultant held with the Community Education and Outreach Committee (O /R). The consultant needs to hear how Don Council members use the website and how it could be improved. It was agreed that all Don Council members receive the survey on the website rather than just the O/R members. 8.3 Don Municipal Technical Advisory Committee Brenda Lucas, the Don Council liaison for the Don Municipal Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), reported on the Don watershed bus tour held for TAC members on October 10, 2007. Nine sites were visited, beginning at the Don River mouth. The second site was the nearby Lower Don River West Remedial Flood Protection Project, where a 3.5 m high gently sloping berm is being built to provide flood protection on the west side of the river. October 25, 2007 Page F 33 Site 3 was at Toronto Botanical Gardens where the new extension of the building is LEED silver certified, with a green roof and a rainwater capture system. No City water was used during the last year to water the plants at the gardens. Site 4 was the adjacent Wilket Creek reconstruction. After the summer 2005 storm, this area was very seriously damaged. The reconstruction is attempting to address this damage but also the flashy nature of the creek, which travels underground between York Mills Road and Lawrence Avenue, surfacing just north of this location. Site 5 was Pomona Mills Park, where Markham Councillor Valerie Burke spoke on the community - based plan for fish management, and a plan to decrease erosion. Site 6 was the Harding Park Stormwater Management Pond. This was the first concept site completed from Forty Steps to a New Don. Thirteen years later, the site needs some maintenance. Site 7 was the Pond 4, Block 12 Development. This is the site of new construction, with a new stormwater pond. The site includes rainwater collection and rooftop storage. Site 8 was at Seneca College's King Campus. The Permeable Pavement & Bioretention Swale Demonstration Project divided the parking lot into three areas: asphalt, asphalt with bioswale, and permeable pavement. Quality, quantity and temperature of water run -off were measured. In three years, there was no run -off from the permeable pavement section. Andy Wickens questioned who manages this project. Adele Freeman clarified that TRCA manages it in partnership with Seneca. The permeable pavement was donated, and a donation from the McCutcheon Foundation was also received. TRCA's STEP website includes more information on this project (see http:// www. trca .on.ca/Website/TRCA/Website. nsf/WebPage /SustTechEvalPgm ?Open Document). It was noted that the Canadian Tire on Sheppard at Leslie also has a permeable parking lot. Site 9 was the Langstaff EcoPark & Keffer Marsh, a part of the Bartley Smith Greenway and a site visited during the Don Council introductory bus tour held in June 2007. UPDATES FROM OTHER WATERSHED GROUPS Janice Palmer reported that the Sherwood Park Advisory Committee finished its last planting of the season today. Other projects are continuing. Phil Goodwin reported that the East Don Parkland Partners also completed their final planting for this season recently with a good turnout. On September 28, the first salmon was seen in this area. This is one week later than the fish are usually noted. East Don Parkland Partners' next event is the Quest for Chowder fundraiser in February. October 25, 2007 Page F 34 ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES 10.1 Calendar of Events Michelle Vanderwel reminded DWRC members to send notice of any events that their groups are holding to her for inclusion in the calendar. 10.2 Upcoming Meeting Dates Members did not raise ay issues with any of the proposed meeting dates. Michelle Vanderwel pointed out that December 5, the date of the next WPP meeting, is the beginning of Hanukkah, but no members noted that this was a conflict for them. RES. # F16/07- INFORMATION ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: Janice Palmer Leah Weller THAT the meeting dates for the full Don Council and committees be adopted as per Agenda Item 10.2 CARRIED ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:05 pm. Phil Goodwin Chair /mv Brian Denney Chief Administrative Officer THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING #4/07 TORONTO AND REGION Conser Lion for The Living City theDon MEETING OF THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL #4/07 November 22, 2007 Page F35 The Don Watershed Regeneration Council Meeting #4/07 was held on Thursday November 22, 2007. Phil Goodwin, Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. PRESENT Phil Goodwin Chair Joe Agg Member Margaret Buchinger Member Carmela Canzonieri Member Shan Dhingra Member George Fells Member Michael Haider Member Moyra Haney Member Kate Hayes Member Peter Heinz Member Catherine Kurucz Member Margaret McRae Member Doug Obright Member Janice Palmer Member Alan Shefman Member Leah Weller Member Andy Wickens Member David Yudelman Member GUESTS Don Cross Guest Jean Ennison Guest John Laraway Guest Andrew McCammon Guest Shuchita Ukidave Guest STAFF Cathy Crinnion Archaeologist, Restoration Services Adele Freeman Director, Watershed Management Division Janet Ivey Project Manager, Don Watershed Plan Steve Joudrey Stewardship Assistant, Outreach Education and Stewardship Gavin Miller Field Biologist - Flora, Terrestrial Natural Heritage Amy Thurston Don Watershed Project Manager Michelle Vanderwel Don Watershed Administrative Clerk November 22, 2007 Page F 36 MINUTES RES. #F17/07- MINUTES TO MEETING #3/07 Moved by: Seconded by: Janice Palmer George Fells THAT the minutes of meeting #3/07, held on October 25, 2007, be approved CARRIED DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTERESTS There were no pecuniary interests disclosed. CORRESPONDENCE INCOMING 4.1 David Dunlap Observatory Property Letter to Phil Goodwin, Chair, Don Watershed Regeneration Council, from Hon. Bryon Wilfert, MP, Richmond Hill - November 2, 2007 OUTGOING 4.2 David Dunlap Observatory Property, Town of Richmond Hill Letter to Catherine Riggall, Vice President, Business Affairs, University of Toronto, from Phil Goodwin, Chair, Don Watershed Regeneration Council - October 29, 2007 4.3 Recommendations Outlined in the Staff Report to Public Works and Infrastructure Committee - Implementing a Mandatory Downspout Disconnection Program Letter to Ms. Rosalind Dyers, Committee Administrator, Public Works and Infrastructure Committee, City of Toronto, from Irene Jones, Vice - Chair, Etobicoke - Mimico Watershed Coalition (on behalf of the Humber Watershed Alliance and the Don Watershed Regeneration Council) - October 29, 2007 4.4 York Region Natural Heritage Discussion Paper, Draft June 2007 Letter to Karen Antonio - Hadcock, Long Range & Strategic Planning Branch, Regional Municipality of York, from Phil Goodwin, Chair, Don Watershed Regeneration Council - October 29, 2007 INCOMING 4.5 Evaluation of the Federal Government's Participation in the Toronto Waterfront November 22, 2007 Page F 37 Revitalization Initiative Letter to the Don Watershed Regeneration Council from Don Cross, past Don Council member — November 15, 2007 4.6 Proposed Wetland in the Goulding Reach of Taylor Massey Creek Letter to Janette Harvey, Parks, Forestry & Recreation, City of Toronto (copied to DWRC) from Andrew McCammon, Taylor Massey Project — November 16, 2007 Andrew McCammon, guest of the Don Council and the author of this letter, pointed out that a typo appears on its second page (page 49 of the agenda package). The City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Master Plan is a 25 -year, $1 billion project. RES. #F18/07- CORRESPONDENCE ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: Joe Agg Margaret McRae THAT correspondence items 4.1 through 4.6 be received CARRIED INFORMATION ITEMS 5.1 Net Environmental Gain, York Region Communication from Carolyn Woodland, Director, Planning and Development, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Sustainable Communities Board, Meeting #3/07, dated November 2, 2007 5.2 Green Roof Economic Analysis for the Greater Toronto Area Communication from Deb Martin - Downs, Director, Ecology, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Sustainable Communities Board, Meeting #3/07, dated November 2, 2007 5.3 Renewable Energy Discussion Paper Progress Report Communication from Deb Martin - Downs, Director, Ecology, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Sustainable Communities Board, Meeting #3/07, dated November 2, 2007 5.4 Formation of a Joint Watershed Working Committee Communication from Amy Thurston, Don Watershed Project Manager, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Meeting #4/07, Thursday November 22, 2007 November 22, 2007 Page F 38 5.5 Click With Markham Communication from Amy Thurston, Don Watershed Project Manager, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Meeting #4/07, Thursday November 22, 2007 Amy Thurston inquired as to whether any Don Council members were interested in filling out this online survey on behalf of the DWRC. Margaret Buchinger agreed to do so. 5.6 Formation of a Joint Watershed Working Committee Communication from Amy Thurston, Don Watershed Project Manager, Toronto and Region Conservation, to Chair and Members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Meeting #4/07, Thursday November 22, 2007 Receipt and discussion of this information item was deferred to the next Don Watershed Regeneration Council meeting (to be held January 24, 2008). RES. # F19/07- INFORMATION ITEMS Moved by: Seconded by: Andy Wickens Michael Haider THAT information items 5.1 through 5.5 be received CARRIED COMMITTEE REPORTS Community Education and Outreach Committee The minutes of the meeting appear in the agenda package. Joe Agg updated the Don Council on the issue of the David Dunlap Observatory property in Richmond Hill. Approximately 80 people attended the first neighbourhood meeting held to discuss potential action by community members opposed to University of Toronto's planned sale of these lands. A number of astronomers from the Observatory also attended. The Richmond Hill Naturalists' position is that the property should become a public park (municipal, provincial or federal), retaining the natural environment, the culturally important buildings and their context. Flyers are being developed to inform the community of this issue. A United Nations university has been suggested as a potential use for the buildings, as Canada does not yet have such an institution. Several levels of government would likely need to become involved if the property is to be purchased to become a park. The Town of Richmond Hill does plan to give the buildings heritage status, but this will result in only 1% of the property (that which immediately surrounds the buildings) being protected. Shan Dhingra added that other activities have been held on the site to gather support. It was suggested that University of Toronto's student population should be mobilized to act on this issue. November 22, 2007 Page F 39 George Fells updated the DWRC on fundraising for Don watershed projects. Paddle the Don is the main fundraising activity held by the DWRC, but efforts to expand fundraising are being made. Any Don Council members with thoughts on new fundraising initiatives are invited to contact George Fells. Discussions with several organizations have been begun; it is important to let such contacts know that they do not need to actually paddle to assist with restoration of the Don through Paddle the Don's corporate fundraising. George Fells has discussed fundraising for the Don with David Love of the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. David Love is supplying a list of organizations currently involved with such fundraising to avoid overlap and to focus efforts. Margaret Buchinger questioned whether growth in the corporate interest in Paddle the Don over the last few years has reduced the opportunity for individual paddlers to canoe the river, and whether the paddling experience could be expanded. Phil Goodwin confirmed that the organizing team is planning to attempt to expand the amount of time that canoes can travel the river (this time is finite, however, as it depends on the release of water from the G. Ross Lord dam). TORONTO AND AREA REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN Adele Freeman informed Don Council members that she presented on the Toronto RAP at the A.D. Latornell Conservation Symposium on November 15. Response was positive, and federal staff were highly supportive of the RAP program. The will to support the program is there; the means (i.e. long -term funding) are more difficult to secure. UPDATES FROM OTHER WATERSHED GROUPS Janice Palmer reported that the Sherwood Park Advisory Committee has received eight new volunteers through the TRCA volunteer website since the presentation to the DWRC by EVN staff. Phil Goodwin reported that the East Don Parkland Partners have been honoured with a leaf on the Tree Hall of Fame at Toronto City Hall. Andrew McCammon, Founding Chair of the Taylor Massey Project (TMP), informed the Don Council that TMP will be issuing more correspondence on the issues surrounding Taylor- Massey Creek, especially water quality, in the near future. The Don Council will be copied on all such correspondence. TMP hopes to be involved with consultation on both the Don watershed Fisheries Management Plan and the upcoming Don watershed plan. NATURE -BASED EXPERIENCES AND CULTURAL HERITAGE WORKSHOP Nature -Based Experiences November 22, 2007 Page F 40 Steve Joudrey (TRCA) provided an overview of key concepts relating to nature -based experiences, including "greenspace" and the types of nature -based "experiences" to be had across the watershed. For the purpose of the watershed plans, greenspace has been defined as all publicly -owned land available for nature -based experiences, including municipal parks and conservation lands, and valley and stream corridors, but not including golf courses, cemeteries, and municipal parks intended for intensive recreational use. About 8% of the watershed is considered greenspace (2,850 ha in 2002), most of which is concentrated in the valley corridors. Parks and natural areas are popular spaces for a variety of activities from walking and cycling (both for recreation and transportation), to yoga, horseback riding, fishing and birding. The range of "nature -based experiences" to be had in the Don varies across the watershed with the variable character of greenspaces. A map showing the general locations of the following three major types of experiences was presented (available on request). Headwaters Forest • Located in the northern portion of the watershed, where natural areas are less impacted by urbanization and more natural "viewsheds" can be found (e.g., Maple Nature Reserve, Baker Sugar Bush). • Careful planning is needed to minimize the impact of existing and new residents on sensitive natural areas. Valley -based Recreation • Found throughout the watershed in large municipal parks which are home to a wide range of passive and active recreational activities (e.g., Bartley -Smith Greenway, German Mills Settlers' Park, Pomona Mills, G. Ross Lord, Sunnybrook Park). • Increasing intensity of use due to rising density of development, along with changing demographics, are key stressors. Industrial Heritage • Notably in the southern portion of the watershed, where natural and urban spaces are increasingly blended and key sites for environmental education and community events (e.g., Don Valley Brick Works, Todmorden Mills, Port Lands). • Redevelopment of industrial lands offers opportunities for regeneration and celebration of cultural and natural heritage. In addition to these experiences, Destinations and Events in the Don draw people from across the watershed and much further a field, such as the Toronto Botanical Gardens, Tommy Thompson Park, the Science Centre, Paddle the Don, the Richmond Hill Mill Pond Splash, and other community and cultural events and festivals. The proposed Don River Park at the mouth of the Don will be a key destination in the future. Greenspaces and nature -based experiences face two essential challenges: 1) maintaining and enhancing the quality of greenspace and nature -based experiences, and 2) creating a more robust and interconnected greenspace system. Related issues and stressors include: • Rising intensity of use, • Incompatible use of sensitive natural areas (e.g., off leash pets), November 22, 2007 Page F 41 • Conflicting public uses (e.g., biking & walking), • Safety, • Signage, • Operations & maintenance, • Seasonal access, • Gaps in watershed and inter - regional trail systems, • Informal /unauthorized trails, and • Changing preferences. Council members were asked to respond to the following questions both orally in small groups and by filling out group and individual written questionnaires: 1. How would you describe the nature -based experiences most important to you in the Don? 2. What are the biggest gaps or problems with the Don's greenspaces? 3. What are the most pressing threats to maintaining or enhancing the quality of nature -based experiences in the Don? 4. What or where are the biggest opportunities for improving nature -based experiences in the Don? 5. What key concepts should the watershed plan's objectives for nature -based experiences include? The following responses were identified by the small groups or on individual response sheets: Question 1: Important Nature -based Experiences • Hiking and walking: need connected trails, safety, signage, all season use, quiet, less smelly sewage odour; Sunnybrook Park, Rosedale ravines, Burke Brook, Brick Works • Wildlife viewing (beavers, muskrats, birds): need dogs to stay on leash, less noise and less crowding; appreciate surprise encounters • Biomonitoring - changes in environment (e.g., Taylor Massey Creek) • Future use: swimming in the Don • Spiritual connection to nature, escape from city (need more naturalized spaces) (e.g., East Don Parkland, Mill Pond, Richvale Greenway, Toronto Waterfront) • Biking (along Taylor Massey), rollerblading (hard surfaces in the Upper watershed, Steeles) • Photography (south of Eglinton, Brick Works) • Baker Sugar Bush (walking, photography) • Desired experience: access to interpretative signage including signage of where the Don is and access to it, maps, natural history, cultural heritage • Flooding as a negative natural experience • Visual access to water • Birding: Forks to Queen Street all year, wetlands below Science Centre, wood ducks breeding below North TO STP • Access close to home • Identification of species • Smell - both positive and negative ▪ Paddle the Don Question 2: Gaps and Problems in Greenspaces November 22, 2007 Page F 42 • People vs. nature: intensification of development, population growth, more people using greenspaces • Abuse and bad behaviour: graffiti, vandalism, noise • Public transit access - need it to get to Brick Works on weekends • Lack of understanding; lack of identification with the watershed; knowing where the greenspaces are and how to get there • Information and education - gap - need interpretation centre, trail guides, maps, signs • Conflicting uses - minimal formal management, poor integration of different uses • Disrepair of greenspaces - gabion baskets, trails, debris from August 2005 storm, litter; dumping, garbage • Trails not connected, signage and bridges needed • Invasive species • Lack of under story regeneration - due to trampling? • Vegetation damage from dogs off leash and humans in areas not intended for that use • Lack of variety in vegetation species that thrive • Patchiness of greenspace - lack of connectedness, private lands create gaps, railway tracks are barriers • Safety concerns, lighting, need drinking water • Inappropriate uses - e.g. camping, squatting - lack of supervision • Not enough contact with riverbanks and water itself • Building and erosion; development along the top of bank • Roads - safety • Lack of trails in Sauriol Reserve • Gate at Riverdale Farm often locked • Sewage smell along trails (especially N/W Sheppard /Leslie) Question 3: Future Threats • Non - native vegetation, invasive species • Overuse in urban areas, increased population density, timing - too many users at certain times • Dogs off leash • Cyclists off bike paths • Budget constraints for maintenance; too much $ spent on band -aid solutions • Pollution • Increasing floods due to climate change, climate change impacts on wetlands • Camping sites (inappropriate use) • Lack of supervision of use of greenspaces • Erosion - excessive, unnatural rates • Competing interests of users; intrusion of active recreation • Lack of public transit (especially on weekends) • Too much light pollution • Areas of parks not accessible to public - parts of parks should be reserved for wildlife • Infill development • Lack of advocacy for greenspaces • Woodlots disappear with lack of under story regeneration • Road traffic and road salting • Need more volunteers November 22, 2007 Page F 43 Question 4: Opportunities for Improvement • Integrating education with watershed activities: school activities, Mill Pond Splash, Paddle the Don; increase "watershed presence" at community events, such as Cabbagetown Festival, Riverdale Farm Open Barn • Integrating education of natural and cultural heritage • Create interpretive centers at the Brick Works and Mill Pond • Create lookouts of river with access from side paths (e.g., confluence of Mud Creek, Chester Springs Marsh, Beechwood); dedicated spaces for "water experience" • Add washrooms and recycling bins • Hold meetings to inform residents • Get apartment dwellers to volunteer for stewardship, new Canadians too • Lost Rivers walks website as example • Funding • Connecting trails (e.g., connecting Brick Works and Todmorden Mills) • Paddle the Don extended to other days • Extending season for access to greenspaces (e.g., winter access) • Regeneration: tree planting; naturalization at ET Seton Park and elsewhere • Biomonitoring projects to collect valuable data • Floodplain • Cyclists clean up after their activities • Funding community stewardship, engaging the public • Collaboration: schools and non - organized environmental groups as stewards of neighbourhood greenspaces - kids influence parents; partnership with Science Centre • Engage and empower frontline staff working with the public in these areas • Private donations, easements, purchase of property to make greenspaces more accessible • Capitalize on public concern about pollution and sustainability issues • Audubon Program for the valleys (pesticides, water use, etc) and golf courses • Corporate sponsorship (e.g., global pet food sponsorship of doggie bags) for clean ups • Woodlot policies, expanded protection to top of banks • Clean up contaminated properties and convert them to parks • Redevelopment of Lower Don /Don Mouth • Urban canopy, green roofs • Creation of small new greenspaces during redevelopment • Branding • Create Don "hubs ": Science Centre, TBG, Brick Works, Riverdale Farm, Mouth of the Don Question 5: Key Concepts for the Watershed Plan • Connections between uplands, lowlands and river - the full idea of watershed • Connections between urban complex, valleys and the water • Enhancing biodiversity • Water temperature - more shade will help aquatic flora and fauna • Words translated into actions - overarching idea re: objectives - what do they mean? • Healthy environment = healthy communities = healthy individuals • Access • Linkages • Concept of management zones for parks and natural areas - from nature preserve to November 22, 2007 Page F 44 recreation • Urban canopy, green roofs • Private land stewardship - inclusive, cooperative • Signage and knowledge; public education and engagement • Conservation /preservation of existing greenspaces, both public and private (e.g., Dunlop Observatory), protection of naturalized areas • Broader definition of greenspace to include some private property • Do no harm - no permanent, irreversible harm • Compromise between forms of recreation; managing for mixed uses; inclusivity • Need to reach people who do not currently directly use or value the greenspace • Tangible measurements, iterative improvement • Link to health - community gardens, local food sources Additional feedback was provided by some Council members via email. A concern was raised about the limitations of the definition of greenspace. All public lands - including schools (with naturalized yards or the potential for naturalization as an objective), open space around large institutions (with easements or agreements for passive public enjoyment as an objective), municipal parks (with partial naturalization as an objective) - could be included in greenspace. Also, some private lands (golf courses, cemeteries) should be included as they are currently being used for walking and other nature -based activities, and access and impacts on these lands should be addressed in the watershed plan. Finally, green roofs are a growing asset and should be designed for access and enjoyment whenever possible. Cultural Heritage Cathy Crinnion (TRCA) presented an overview of cultural heritage in the Don watershed. Cultural heritage is the frame to our "sense of place" and belonging, and the thread that connects the past, present, and future through tangible and non - tangible artifacts, features and notions. In the Don, we've identified built heritage features (about 4,900), archaeological sites (196), abstract resources (e.g., Charles Sauriol's books, Lost Rivers walks), and living culture (i.e., contemporary cultural resources). Key issues and challenges relating to cultural heritage include: • Preservation of archaeological sites and built heritage, • Need for better information sharing, • Lack of suitable repository for archaeological artifacts, • Limited public awareness of both the historical and current relationships between people and the watershed, • Changing cultural demographic of the watershed's residents, and • Work with descendant groups. Council members were asked to respond to the following questions during a group plenary and by filling out individual written questionnaires: 1. What are some of the cultural heritage features of the Don that you're most interested in? 2. What are the biggest challenges to preserving and celebrating cultural heritage in the November 22, 2007 Page F 45 Don? 3. How could the cultural heritage of the Don be better celebrated? 4. What key concepts should the watershed plan's objectives for cultural heritage include? The following comments were provided during the plenary session and on individual written questionnaires. Question 1: Cultural Heritage Features • History - e.g. Mills, fires - where things have happened, relevance of sites • Knowing where things were, when they were removed and why they aren't there now • Past uses - no signs of some past uses • Signage for the last active farm in the watershed • Geographic location of things and history - past extent of forests and early agriculture • Growth and footprint of GTA - agriculture disappearing, concentric rings of Toronto's growth • Geological history and significance: Oak Ridges Moraine, Lake Iroquois shoreline, Brick Works • Climate - post - glacial runoff, message for the future; temperature and fauna changes post - glaciation; differences in past climates and link to future climate change • South of Richmond Hill - hospital, old Indian village • Villages, farms, dams, ponds, flood prone areas • 7 mills in East Don Parklands, Cummer Mill dam • First Nations, Aboriginal sites - which peoples, where, pre- historic • Lost rivers (e.g., Helen Mills - signs on site walks) • Ontario Heritage Trust article on the Don Valley Brick Works • Industrial heritage: Don Valley Brick Works complex, Todmorden Mills (historic home and industrial buildings) • Chorley Park, Government House site • Belt line railway • Cemeteries • Overlooked mid -20`h century buildings - bungalows, split -level homes designed by architects such as Ron Thom, Raymond Moriyama, Chapman • Relict homesteads and ruins e.g., in Vaughan an old windmill near Langstaff Eco -Park • Old gardens still visible (e.g., in Nordheimer Ravine) • Names of streams and other features, such as the Hogsback Question 2: Biggest Challenges • Oral history opportunities being lost everyday • General lack of public awareness - especially of ancient peoples /sites; we are lacking pride; lack of interest in the meaning of place; lack of interest of young people in the history of the City • Legislation - should be tighter to avoid demolition • Public need to tell elected officials of importance • Public need to be made aware, education, PR, signage • We don't know enough - e.g. more consultation /communication with First Nations and Aboriginal descendents needed • No repository for artifacts - private firms need to store their own artifacts because TRCA and ROM storage fills up • Public interpretation centers needed - artifacts should be shared through such centers November 22, 2007 Page F 46 • Rapid development taking place before archaeological studies can be completed • Inaccessibility of main sites by TTC • Cost of restoration • Security and vandalism • Infill development Question 3: Celebration of Cultural Heritage • Need public interpretive centers • Put out cultural info "bites" e.g., for group newsletters and websites - "did you know's ?" • Celebrate cultural heritage during special events - especially on Simcoe Day; celebrate anniversary of events • Cultural festivals to celebrate and educate - e.g., Evergreen site, Todmorden Mills • Paddle the Don and Mill Pond Splash as opportunities for cultural heritage celebrations • Interpretive signage and plaques (vandalism resistant) - to show changes in landscape • Photos - e.g., Chorley Park (Rosedale area) - government house had been there - there is no plaque, few photos and access to them is limited; display collections of photo /visual works related to Don history • Remember the site may be there even though the building is gone • Todmorden Mills • Involve schools and community groups - more active involvement e.g., planting • Don brand for.products sold at DVBW, heritage art exhibits, annual art show • Industrial heritage - celebrating the good and the bad - e.g., Domtar site, Don Narrows, cornerstone of building of Ontario; display period maps from 1920s showing detailed industrial heritage • Translate heritage resources into other languages • Self guided tours and "Discover your Don" activities • High quality archiving of material with adequate information attached • Collaboration among agencies (e.g., TRCA, ROM) • Google Earth links to show historical /cultural features • Contact with established families who can narrate history Question 4: Key Concepts for the Watershed Plan • Levels of cultural heritage - e.g., First Nations, industrial, current /living culture, geology • Promote awareness • Transportation sites (e.g., train stations - Todmorden, Rosedale) • Interpretive centre, interpretive signage with cultural heritage aspects included (e.g., as was done for the East Don Parkland) • Policies on consultation with First Nations and Aboriginal descendent groups - recognize Toronto Treaty (which was never settled) especially in Don Mouth naturalization, duty to involve and consult - how should appropriate consultation be held? • Reaching out to other ethnic /cultural /language groups - e.g., videos • Time is a river and while we don't inherit the earth from our ancestors but hold it in trust for our children, we should understand the chapters and lessons of the past • Links among First Nations culture and the land November 22, 2007 Page F 47 ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 9:15 pm. Phil Goodwin Chair /mv Brian Denney Chief Administrative Officer