HomeMy WebLinkAboutAuthority 20091
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY Annual #1/09
February 27, 2009
The Authority Meeting Annual #1/09, was held in the Theatres, Black Creek Pioneer
Village, on Friday, February 27, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting
to order at 9:45 a.m..
PRESENT
Eve Adams Member
Paul Ainslie Member
Maria AugimeriVice Chair
David Barrow Member
Brian Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Glenn De BaeremaekerMember
Mike Del GrandeMember
Bill Fisch Member
Suzan Hall Member
Jack Heath Member
Colleen JordanMember
Bonnie Littley Member
Glenn Mason Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
Linda Pabst Member
Anthony PerruzzaMember
Richard WhiteheadMember
ABSENT
Grant Gibson Member
Lois Griffin Member
Reenga MathivananMember
Peter Milczyn Member
John Parker Member
Maja Prentice Member
Gino Rosati Member
John SprovieriMember
2
RES.#A1/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Maria Augimeri
Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #11/08, held on January 30, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A2/09 -TRCA WEST NILE VIRUS PROGRAM 2008
Updates on TRCA West Nile Virus Monitoring Activities for 2008 and
Revision of existing Standing Water Complaint Procedure.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT the updated procedure to address public complaints about standing water and
West Nile virus (WNV) related inquiries on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) property be approved;
THAT the Annual Report on West Nile Virus Vector Monitoring and Surveillance at TRCA
wetlands and stormwater management ponds in 2008 be received;
THAT the Annual Report on West Nile Virus Vector Monitoring and Surveillance on TRCA
wetlands and stormwater management ponds in 2008 be circulated to the public health
units for the regional municipalities of Durham, Peel, York and the City of Toronto;
THAT staff be directed to continue to participate in the West Nile Virus Advisory
Committee for the regions of Durham, Peel, York and the City of Toronto, and continue to
monitor mosquito larval densities on TRCA properties;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue WNV vector larval mosquito
monitoring in wetlands and stormwater management ponds on TRCA property during the
2009 summer season.
CARRIED
3
BACKGROUND
The emergence and persistence of WNV in Canada since 2001 continues to present a threat to
the health of humans and animals. In Ontario, WNV is transmitted primarily by two key vector
mosquito species namely, Culex pipiens and Culex restuans. To minimize the human health
risks, TRCA has been monitoring larval mosquito populations in TRCA's natural wetlands and
selected stormwater management ponds (SWMPs) since 2003. The objective of the monitoring
is to identify preferred breeding sites of the two key enzootic vectors, and eliminate through
housekeeping activities such as grading small depressions, garbage removal and larviciding, if
necessary. TRCA’s monitoring activities complement the work completed by its regional health
partners in Durham, Peel, York and the City of Toronto. TRCA's WNV Program activities include
addressing public and staff concerns about WNV, collaborating with the regional health units
and conducting mosquito larval surveillance on TRCA-owned lands. At Authority Meeting
#1/08, held on February 29, 2008, Resolution #A14/08 was approved as follows:
THAT the Annual Report on West Nile Virus (WNV) Vector Status in Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority wetlands and stormwater management ponds in 2007 be
circulated to the public health units for the regional municipalities of Peel, Durham, York
and the City of Toronto, and the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to continue to
participate in the WNV advisory committee for the regional municipalities of Peel,
Durham, York and the City of Toronto;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to plan for WNV vector larval mosquito
monitoring in TRCA wetlands and stormwater management ponds during the 2008
summer season.
Summary of WNV Program Activities for 2008
A total of 17 Standing Water Complaints from the public or regional health partners were
addressed in 2008, of which four involved TRCA properties that are under our direct
management. Two out of four TRCA sites had vector larvae in high numbers in several tire
ruts and potholes and were filled with clean fill to prevent further breeding of vector larvae.
The other two complaint sites had no vector larvae. On March 7, 2008, TRCA received a
Health Order from the Medical Officer of Peel Region Health under the Ontario Regulation
199/03 to assist with the implementation of control measures to reduce the number of
mosquito larvae in the Heart Lake Wetland Complex in Brampton, when necessary.
Follow-up communications with the Peel Regional Health staff indicated that a one-time
surface water treatment with Bacillus thuringiensis var israelensis (Bti) was undertaken at
White Spruce Park, Kenpark Avenue Park and Kenpark Park in Brampton respectively during
May/June 2008.
4
Mosquito larvae were sampled at 45 sites (36 wetlands and 9 SWMPs) in the summer of 2008
to identify breeding habitats for WNV vector mosquitoes Culex territans continued to be the
predominant non-vector species collected from 80% of the wetlands constituting about 47%
of the total larvae identified, while the key vector, Culex pipiens represented only 7% of the
total larvae identified and was present in 25% of the sites. Risk ranking for the 36 wetland
sites resulted in Cold Creek pond being the only “hot spot” (ranked as a high risk) where Cx.
pipiens and Cx. restuans, both vector species, were collected during the 3rd sampling period
with an average of 45.25 and 25 larvae per 10 dips respectively. Since the Cold Creek
Conservation Area is under management agreement with the Township of King, the case was
referred to York Regional Health. A follow up communication with York Regional Health staff
indicated that a one time application of Aquabac 200G (Bti) was carried out along the
shoreline of the Cold Creek pond on August 28, 2008 by the York Region larviciding
contractor. Risk ranking for all remaining wetland sites were " Low to Moderate."
Larval sampling from the nine stormwater management ponds resulted in Culex pipiens
being the predominant vector species representing 27% of the total number of larvae
collected from SWMPs while Cx. restuans comprised only 1% of the identified larvae from
SWMPs. Risk ranking for all the SWMPs were at "Low to Moderate" levels. The presence of
occasional "hot spots" stresses that regular monitoring of wetlands and stormwater ponds is
essential to determining the vector activity, WNV risk levels and high risk spots.
A copy of the Annual Report: West Nile Virus Vector Mosquito Larval Monitoring and
Surveillance - 2008 is available on the corporate website (www.trca.on.ca; key word: West
Nile Virus) for reference.
Updates to the Standing Water Complaint Procedure
TRCA addresses the public and staff concerns about WNV following TRCA’s Standing Water
Complaint Procedure. The procedure was developed in 2003 and details the process for
receiving, documenting and screening complaints to determine the appropriate follow-up
actions. The actions include determining whether or not the property in question is owned
and managed by TRCA and if not, directing the complaints to the appropriate contact. The
procedure, which was developed in consultation with the various municipal health
departments, also outlines the standardized sampling methods (developed by the Province
of Ontario) for collecting mosquito larvae at the site. Although mosquito controls had not
been previously undertaken on lands that are managed directly by TRCA, the procedure also
outlined the approval process if control measures were required by the Medical Officer of
Health.
In 2008, three issues emerged that warranted further discussions and updates to the existing
Standing Water Complaint Procedure. The issues are as follows:
1) responding to enquires from regional health units to determine the environmental
sensitivity of areas for the purpose of WNV larvicide application;
2) larviciding on properties that are owned and managed by TRCA; and
3) ensuring that lands regulated by TRCA are also identified through the WNV review
procedure.
5
These issues are not covered by the existing Standing Water Complaint Procedure, so it has
been revised to address the above issues. This revision is necessary as it helps staff to
address each public enquiry in a consistent manner. A copy of the revised Standing Water
Complaint Procedure is attached for reference (Attachment 1).
RATIONALE
Staff anticipate continued requests from the public for actions to be taken to address
perceived mosquito breeding in standing water on TRCA-owned lands that are close to their
property, and from the regional health departments to help determine the sensitivity of natural
areas for the purpose of larviciding. It is important for staff to have a procedure to follow to
ensure consistent responses, advise the private land owners and regional health staff about
TRCA land regulations and avoid a major commitment of staff time to respond to complaints.
The procedure also establishes the process to be followed in the event that WNV vectors are
found in sufficient densities to warrant control measures by the local Medical Officer of Health
or by TRCA.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Staff will continue the surveillance activities at 36 sites on TRCA-owned lands and will
continue to liaise with regional health units throughout the 2009 field season. Complaints will
be reviewed following the revised Standing Water Complaint Procedure. Staff will apply to
Ministry of Environment for a permit to apply larvicide in the event that a sufficient density of
vector mosquito larvae is found. Staff will pre-screen and retain private pest control
contractors for the application of larvicide on TRCA property if required during the 2009
season.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funding for TRCA's 2009 WNV surveillance program is available from TRCA's municipal
funding partners as part of the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program. This funding will be
sufficient to support the 2009 surveillance field work and staff support to liaise with the
regional health units and to respond to complaints. However, the funding is not expected to
cover costs associated with any control measures if deemed necessary. If larviciding or site
remediation is required as a control measure, the associated costs will be covered through
TRCA Land Management Funding.
Report prepared by: Thilaka Krishnaraj, Biologist (Entomology)
For Information contact: Thilaka Krishnaraj, extension 5665;
Scott Jarvie, extension 5312
Emails: tkrishnaraj@trca.on.ca; sjarvie@trca.on.ca
Date: January, 2009
Attachments: 1
6
Attachment 1
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
West Nile Virus Standing Water Complaints Procedure
Revised January 2009
INTRODUCTION
Being the largest land owner in the Toronto Region, the Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA) owns and manages a vast area of natural spaces spanning nine watersheds.
With more than 13,000 ha of lands being used for recreation, as open space, natural cover, and
Conservation Areas, TRCA has the responsibility to manage its natural resources diligently and
take every measure necessary to provide a safe working and recreational environment for
everyone involved.
Since its introduction in 2001, West Nile Virus (WNV) has established itself as a seasonal
epidemic in Ontario that is primarily transmitted by two key mosquito species namely Culex
pipiens and Culex restuans. A variety of wetland habitats on TRCA property such as marshes,
woodland pools and ponds have the potential to provide breeding habitats for mosquitoes
because of the permanent availability of water and thick vegetation surrounding the water body.
As a measure of due diligence and at the request of its Regional Health Partners (Peel, York,
Durham and the City of Toronto), TRCA initiated its WNV Surveillance and Monitoring Program
in 2003 and has been actively implementing vector monitoring and surveillance of larval
mosquito populations in natural wetlands and storm water management ponds (SWMPs). The
data collected determines the health risk associated with these sites and guides any
management actions required.
TRCA also addresses public and staff (internal and Regional Health unit) concerns on various
WNV issues such as mosquitoes breeding in stagnant waters on or near TRCA property, and
any required control measures (i.e. larviciding or habitat modification). The TRCA Standing
Water Complaint Procedure has been developed to provide a formal and consistent approach
to dealing with these complaints and enquiries. A flow chart (attachment 1) has been
developed to illustrate the procedure that is outlined below.
GENERAL PROCEDURE
Step 1. Receiving the Complaint
Complaints about standing water or other WNV related enquiries are received either directly or
indirectly from the public, TRCA staff or from the Public Health Units. Complaints will be
forwarded to the Biologist (Entomology), Watershed Monitoring and Reporting Section,
Ecology Division. Complaints should be handled promptly with every incidence given serious
attention. All complaints will be logged and can be used to determine potential breeding sites
for WNV vectors for future years.
7
Step 2. Screening the Complaint
The TRCA staff Biologist will conduct a brief interview with the caller in order to determine the
nature of the complaint. A standard questionnaire will be used to record the responses for
future reference.
Record the caller’s name, address and phone number and location of the complaint
Record the nature of the complaint
Any enquiry requesting the environmental sensitivity of a site for the purpose of a larviciding
permit should be referred to the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Aurora District Office
(Contact John Pisapio, Area Biologist)
If the enquiry about the sensitivity of an area is received from the Regional Health Units, and
requires immediate attention, then TRCA will direct the enquiries to MNR with comments
about environmental sensitivity of a particular property, list of sensitive fauna and flora
present in that particular area to help speed the process
Provide the caller with information about WNV, including:
that TRCA is diligent and takes every measure to prevent WNV on our property
and monitors representative natural areas such as the wetlands where there is a
potential for mosquito breeding within our jurisdiction
that the results from TRCA’s monitoring has consistently shown that healthy
functioning wetlands pose little to no risk to the public in terms of breeding high
densities of WNV vectors. On a few occasions, WNV vectors could be found in
high numbers in isolated pockets of stagnant water
that the TRCA is committed to identifying these high risk sites and will manage
them appropriately
Determine if monitoring has already taken place in the area of concern
Advise the caller about the action that TRCA will take to deal with areas where high
numbers of vector species are found on lands owned and managed by TRCA or as per
direction from the Medical Officer of Health (MOH). Other areas will need to be addressed
by the appropriate land owner, land manager or Public Health Unit
Step 3. Determining Property Ownership and Regulation
All complaints will be forwarded to TRCA’s Finance and Business Services and Planning and
Development Divisions in order to verify that the property in question is owned by the TRCA
and to determine if the property is regulated by TRCA.
IF the property is not owned by TRCA, but is regulated by TRCA then refer the caller to the
appropriate Public Health Unit and advise both the caller and the appropriate Health Unit
about permit requirements from TRCA in the event that any filling or grading of the
regulated properties may be required.
IF the property is owned by TRCA's but under a management agreement, direct the caller to
the appropriate Public Health Unit and land Manager. TRCA staff will advise the appropriate
Land Manager if it falls within our regulated area.
IF the property is owned/managed by TRCA, then TRCA staff will conduct a field
investigation of the site(s) of concern, determine health risk and take appropriate remedial
action, if required (see Step 4)
8
Step 4. Field Investigation on Properties Owned/Managed by TRCA
Staff will investigate Standing Water Complaints on property owned/managed by TRCA using
the following standardized sampling procedures:
1. For each site, information on the date, time and location will be recorded on a standard field
sample form
2. Use a standard white plastic mosquito dipper (sampler diameter = 13 cm) to take samples of
mosquito larvae
3. At each site under investigation four replicate samples will be taken with each replicate
sample consisting of 10 dips (40 dips/per site)
4. Mosquito larvae will be transferred to specimen containers using an eyedropper and the
number of larvae per dip will be recorded on the field sample form
5. At no time should samples be taken if there is rain falling
6. Samples will be transported back to Boyd Field Centre in coolers for species
identification
Risk ranking* is applied to each site for a given vector species based on the average number of
vector larvae found (40 dips/4 replications). A site is ranked as:
nil/no risk site if no vector larvae are present
low risk site if the average number of vector larvae collected is between 1-2 per 10 dips
moderate risk site if the average number of vector larvae collected is between 2-30 per 10
dips
high risk site if the average number of vector larvae 10 dips is greater than 31 per 10 dips
*Risk ranking is undertaken for each individual vector species found at a site and not on the
cumulative number of vector larvae found. This is due to variation in their biology, host
preference and the efficiency of each vector species to transmit the virus.
If the investigation reveals that there are high risk indicators (i.e. Culex pipiens, Culex restuans,
Aedes vexan, Culex salinarius, Ochlerotatus triseriatus, Anopheles punctipennis, Ochlerotatus
trivittatus, Anopheles walkeri, Ochlerotatus stimulans, Anopheles quadrimaculatus, Ochlerotatus
canadensis, Coquilletidia perturbans), information regarding the complaint along with the
proposed control measures will be forwarded onto the appropriate health unit for their
information.
A recommendation outlining the complaint, the proposed control measures and any funding
issues, will be prepared for review by the Director, Ecology Division. Approval will be granted
by the Director, Ecology Division, or CAO.
IF site remediation is required (i.e. grading or drainage modification) then the case will be
referred to TRCA’s Finance and Business Services Division and Planning and Development
Division (if the site is regulated).
9
IF larviciding is recommended as the preferred control measure, staff will obtain the necessary
permit from the Ministry of the Environment and seek the required authorization from the
Ministry of Natural Resources and then the case will be referred to TRCA’s Finance and
Business Services Division to hire a contractor to apply the larvicide.
All proposed source reduction and control measures including larviciding will be given priority
against any modifications to wetland structure and function. This is reinforced in the "2008
West Nile Virus Preparedness and Prevention Plan for Ontario" put out by the Ministry of Health
and Long-term Care where it states that:
Wetlands must not be drained or altered in any way, unless there is an exceptional
circumstance of significant human health risk from disease-vector mosquitoes.
Consultation with, and permission from, the MNR and the appropriate
Conservation Authority will be required.
Step 5: Follow-up with the Complainant
All outcomes of a complaint investigation will be communicated to complainant including the
results of monitoring or field investigation and any recommended follow-up actions.
Updated by: Thilaka Krishnaraj, Biologist (Entomology), Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority, January, 2009
10
Attachment 1: TRCA Standing Water Complaints Procedure
Updated January 2009
Receive Complaints/Enquiries: Biologist
(Entomology), Ecology Division
Determine nature of
Complaint
WNV / Mosquito related enquiries
Enquiries requesting status of
sensitive natural areas for
larviciding permit
Refer caller to MNR
Aurora District (John
Pisapio)*
TRCA Property?
Determine property ownership, verify land
regulations with Planning & Development
Division
NO YES
Property under
Management Agreement
Property Managed
by TRCANotify Health Units of
Ownership and
Regulations 1
Refer to Health Unit and
land Managers and notify
ifregulated1
Review site, Collect
samples, risk rank site
Notify Health Units of
results
Determine control options and
carryouttreatment2
Verify land regulations
Notify caller1
* Occasionally TRCA will provide MNR with comments about a particular property about environmental sensitivity if the health units
need the complaint addressed immediately.
1 Both the public and the health units are advised to contact TRCA Planning and Development (416-661-6600 x5271) as regulated
properties need permit from TRCA to carry out any filling or grading of the property.
2 Control option recommendations will approved by Director, Ecology Division or CAO and if larviciding is opted as a choice of
control measure, then it will be under the discretion of TRCA Finance and Business Services Division to hire a contractor to apply
the larvicide.
_________________________________________
11
RES.#A3/09 -ROYAL ROUGE TRAIL EROSION CONTROL PROJECT
Initiation of the Class Environmental Assessment process for the Royal
Rouge Trail Erosion Control Project, 30 – 48 Royal Rouge Trail, Rouge
River watershed, City of Toronto.
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT staff be directed to commence a Class Environmental Assessment for the Royal
Rouge Trail Erosion Control Project, 30 – 48 Royal Rouge Trail, City of Toronto.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The area of concern is an area located at the rear of the properties located at 30 - 48 Royal
Rouge Trail adjacent to the Rouge Valley corridor where ongoing erosion is posing a risk to
existing homes and structures. A location map of the study area is shown in Attachment 1.
Royal Rouge Trail is a residential subdivision backing onto the Rouge Valley corridor. The
height of the valley wall in the affected area is greater than 30 m. Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) was first made aware of the erosion problem at the rear of 42
Royal Rouge Trail in the summer of 1989 and carried out minor drainage improvement works in
1992. Despite TRCA’s efforts to control the erosion, slides continued at the rear of the property
prompting TRCA to retain Terraprobe Ltd. in 1994 to complete a slope stability assessment.
Terraprobe concluded that a perched water table and groundwater seepage were the primary
causes of the erosion at this location, and that although there appeared to be no immediate
danger to the existing dwelling, some additional crest loss would be expected. It was
recommended by Terraprobe that temporary stabilization measures be carried out using staked
timbers and vegetation on the exposed areas, and that french drains be considered for a more
permanent solution. As a result, temporary stabilization works were carried out by TRCA in
1998 and again in 2003. Although these measures have reduced localized erosion and
instability to some degree, ongoing groundwater seepage remains a problem at the site.
In 2004, the owners at 30 and 48 Royal Rouge Trail notified TRCA of similar erosion conditions
and expressed concern over the potential risk to their properties over the long term. Inspections
were carried out at these properties shortly thereafter, at which time they were added to TRCA’s
erosion site list for annual monitoring. Staff monitoring records indicated that the erosion
appears active at several sections of valley wall between 30 and 48 Royal Rouge Trail, and
recommended that a slope stability analysis be carried out to determine the level of risk to
these properties. A letter followed in October 2004 signed by the owners of 30, 32, 34, 36, 38,
40, 42, 44, 46 and 48 Royal Rouge Trail requesting a “comprehensive assessment and plan for
permanent repair” be carried out behind all properties from 30 – 48 Royal Rouge Trail.
A comprehensive assessment of the slope, and an updated risk assessment for the properties
on the affected tableland was completed in 2007, and the results of the study indicate that there
is significant risk to property as a result of slope instability. The assessment report
recommended that large scale remedial works be implemented in order to provide long term
protection to the ten properties currently at risk.
12
This information was conveyed to the residents of the 30 – 48 Royal Rouge Trail in a public
information meeting held in July of 2008, with the understanding that TRCA would be
requesting permission to commence a Class Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
development of remedial erosion control works in 2009, pending the approval of funding for the
project.
RATIONALE
The Royal Rouge Trail site has been identified as a priority area for remedial works, based on
the information gathered through the Valley and Shoreline Monitoring and Maintenance
Program and the results of the comprehensive geotechnical and risk assessment funded by
TRCA in 2006.
TRCA’s goal through this project is to:
“Minimize the hazards to life and property that result from erosion of river banks, valley
walls and shoreline and to protect and enhance the natural attributes of the valley and
lakefront settings”
Several of the key objectives outlined in TRCA’s Erosion Control and Lake Ontario Shoreline
Program are:
to implement a program of erosion control works on a priority basis to protect public and 1.
private lands where public safety and property are endangered by erosion;
to implement a program of erosion control works on public and private lands to protect the 2.
natural valleys and shoreline features and associated aquatic and terrestrial habitats
adversely affected by the erosion;
to design remedial works, on a design block basis, as part of an ecosystem approach for 3.
the entire watercourse or shoreline which will limit erosion, enable public access adjacent
to the water’s edge wherever feasible, be conducive to maintenance, and enhance aquatic
and terrestrial resources;
to acquire those properties where the erosion hazard is severe and where the cost of 4.
remedial works is excessive in comparison to the value of the property;
to secure title to the lands where erosion control measures are to be constructed and 5.
where the lands are valuable additions to the green space systems;
to protect and enhance the natural valley and shoreline features and associated terrestrial 6.
and aquatic habitats; and
to comply with the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act and any other 7.
environmental protection legislation.
This project presents an opportunity to meet TRCA’s objective of providing long-term protection
of private property. Therefore, staff request that the Class EA process be initiated to determine
a preferred remedial measure of erosion control.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The planning and design phases of this project will be carried out under the Class
Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion Control Project (2002). The Class
EA approach is considered a suitable means for the planning of remedial flood and erosion
control projects because it provides a consistent, streamlined process that ensures compliance
with Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) requirements.
13
The Class EA process involves the inclusion of members of the general public including;
affected landowners, public interest groups, and any other interested partied in the planning
and design phases of the project lifecycle. Interested individuals are provided with
opportunities to offer recommendations on the development of the remedial solutions, and
objections to design proposals where appropriate.
The Class EA process for this project will include the retention of a geotechnical engineering
consultant to assist staff in the development of alternative options and in the detailed design of
the preferred alternative.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funding is available in from the City of Toronto in TRCA's Valley and Shoreline Erosion Control
budget under account code 144-01.
Report prepared by: Patricia Newland, 416-392-9690
Emails: pnewland@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Moranne McDonnell, 416-392-9725
Emails: mmcdonnell@trca.on.ca
Date: January 23, 2009
Attachments: 1
14
Attachment 1
Area of Concern
_________________________________________
15
RES.#A4/09 -TRCA FACILITIES ENTRANCE SIGN STANDARDS
Recommends approval of TRCA Facilities Entrance sign standards.
Moved by:Richard Whitehead
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT the TRCA Facilities Entrance Sign Standards, as set out in the report dated January
19, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has identified the importance of providing
aesthetically pleasing and inviting entrances to all facilities. A large component of this process
is the development of standard entrance sign design standards and guidelines that will serve to
provide an effective approach to TRCA facility identification, demonstrate continuity between
facilities and ensure aesthetically pleasing entrance signage.
Currently, many of TRCA's existing facilities' entrance signs are outdated, fail to demonstrate
continuity between facilities, do not allow for effective facility identification and do not meet
visitor needs and expectations.
Over the last number of months, staff has worked closely with industry experts to develop
entrance sign design standards and guidelines. A thorough needs assessment was undertaken
to identify requirements, which included:
reflective lettering;
contrasting background;
large facility identification lettering;
incorporation of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority corporate logo;
inclusion of facility's municipal street address;
aesthetically pleasing;
fits into natural surroundings;
vandal resistant and utilizes long lasting materials;
provides both horizontal and vertical construction options;
conforms to municipal by-laws;
double-sided;
does not require hydro for illumination;
provides an aesthetically pleasing sign base.
Using the results of the needs assessment, staff proceeded to prepare and refine detailed
standard design guidelines and produce construction drawings required to move forward to the
tendering and building permit process. Key standard design features include the following:
Vertical Option
Size - 4200mm X 1800mm (may vary slightly to conform to municipal by-laws).
Letter Colour – Reflective White.
Facility Name Letter Size – Upper Case - 350mm / Lower Case – 275mm.
Facility Identifier ie. (Conservation Area) Letter Size – Upper Case –150 mm / Lower Case
–100mm.
Address Lettering - Pin Mounted Aluminum.
Address Letter Size – Upper Case – 150mm / Lower Case 100mm.
16
Sign Face – 3/16 Lexan.
Sign Face Colour – Dark Blue.
Base - 1060mm Block base with Cultured Stone Veneer.
TRCA Logo Size- 1500mm X 500mm.
Horizontal Option
Size – 4800mm X 2700mm (will vary slightly to conform to municipal by-laws).
Letter Colour – Reflective White.
Facility Name Letter Size - Upper Case - 500mm / Lower Case - 400mm.
Facility Identifier ie. (Conservation Area) Letter Size - Upper Case - 300 mm / Lower Case -
225mm.
Address Lettering - Pin Mounted Aluminum.
Address Letter Size – Upper Case – 200mm / Lower Case 125mm.
Sign Face - 3/16 Lexan.
Sign Face Colour - Dark Blue.
Base -1060mm Block base with Cultured Stone Veneer.
TRCA Logo Size – 1500mm X 500mm.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
All previously non-committed TRCA facility entrance sign replacement projects are to conform
to these standards. Appropriate building permit and municipal approvals will be obtained prior
to the installation of any TRCA facility entrance signs. Upon receipt of all required approvals, a
competitive tendering process for the complete supply and installation of each entrance sign
will be undertaken. In addition, staff will establish an entrance sign replacement schedule for all
TRCA facilities based on current state and budget availability.
Any secondary signage to be installed in the facilities should follow same colour palate and
general design feature of the entrance signs.
The Kortight Centre for Conservation facility entrance sign is exempt from these standards
based on the current partnership with Earth Rangers. Also, the Black Creek Pioneer Village
entrance sign is exempt from these standards due to the cultural heritage of the facility; a
separate design will be developed to reflect this theme.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Preliminary cost estimates for each front entrance sign including supply and installation costs is
approximately $20,000. Funds are to be made available through the respective facility operating
and capital budgets.
Report prepared by: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
Date: January 19, 2009
Attachments: 1
17
Attachment 1
_________________________________________
18
RES.#A5/09 -APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS
The Conservation Authorities Act requires each conservation authority to
undergo an external audit of its accounts and transactions each year.
Moved by:Richard Whitehead
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT Grant Thornton LLP be appointed auditors of Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA) for the year 2009, in accordance with section 38 of the Conservation
Authorities Act.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act reads as follows:
38. (1)Every authority shall cause its accounts and transactions to be audited
annually by a person licensed under the Public Accountancy Act . R.S.O.
1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (1).
(2)No person shall be appointed as auditor of an authority who is or during the
preceding year was a member of the authority or who has or during the
preceding year had any direct or indirect interest in any contract or any
employment with the authority other than for services within his or her
professional capacity. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (2).
(3)An authority shall, upon receipt of the auditors report of the examination of its
accounts and transactions, forthwith forward a copy of the report to each
participating municipality and to the Minister. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 38 (3).
RATIONALE
Grant Thornton LLP was appointed TRCA's auditor for the years 2004 to 2008, following a
competition for audit services conducted in the summer of 2004. Although the contract period
is for 5 years starting with 2004, the annual reappointment is subject to performance
satisfactory to TRCA. Staff is pleased to report that the 2007 audit was completed to its
satisfaction and it anticipates similar performance for 2008. Staff recommends the
reappointment of Grant Thornton LLP for the 2009 audit year. During 2009 staff will consider
the process for selection of auditors for a further 5 year term and bring forward a report to the
Budget/Audit Advisory Board.
Report prepared by: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
Emails: rsgambelluri@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Rocco Sgambelluri, extension 5232
Emails: rsgambelluri@trca.on.ca
Date: February 17, 2009
_________________________________________
19
RES.#A6/09 -ECOOFFICES PROGRAM
Certification of Offices and Appointment of Energy Conservation Officer.
Certification of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority offices as
"EcoOffices", update on EcoOffices program and creation of Energy
Conservation Officer.
(Executive Res.#B187/08)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Colleen Jordan
THAT the following Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) administration
offices be certified “TRCA EcoOffices”:
Boyd Centre and Restoration Services Centre (jointly)
Head Office
Downsview Office;
AND FURTHER THAT the Authority recognize the creation of the "Energy Conservation
Officer" position.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A7/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items (8.2.1 - 8.2.50, with the exception of 8.2.8 - City of
Toronto), contained in Section II of Executive Committee Minutes #12/08, held on
February 13, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A8/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Richard Whitehead
THAT the Chief Administrative Officer be delegated the authority to approve permit
application 8.2.8 - City of Toronto, which was deferred at Executive Committee Meeting
#12/08, held on February 13, 2009;
AND FURTHER THAT a permit report be brought to Executive Committee Meeting #1/09,
to be held on March 6, 2009, for ratification.
CARRIED
20
RES.#A9/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT Section II items 8.3 and 8.4, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #12/08,
held on February 13, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
Section II Items 8.3 and 8.4
OUT OF COUNTRY TRAVEL
(Executive Res.#B193/08)
PURCHASE OF VEHICLES
(Executive Res.#B194/08)
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A10/09 -GOOD NEWS STORIES
Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt
of Good News Stories for November and December, 2008 and January,
2009, from all sections of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report on "Good News Stories" for November and
December, 2008 and January, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA), meets monthly to discuss strategic initiatives and organizational
development.
RATIONALE
Key accomplishments of each TRCA section are highlighted at each Management Team
meeting. In keeping with TRCA's objective of Business Excellence, these accomplishments will
be brought to the Authority for the information of the members. The following are the
accomplishments cited from November and December, 2008 and January, 2009, and a brief
description of each.
November
Claremont Field Centre - Recognized by Durham Region with an Eat Smart Award.
York University - Expressed interest in TRCA's Swan Lake property in the Region of York
for environmental learning and research.
21
EcoSchools - Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board has committed to begin
implementing the Region of Peel funded EcoSchools program. We are developing a work
plan and MOU with preliminary work to begin immediately, recruiting of pilot schools to take
place in Jan - March 2009, program roll-out in September 2009, with a target of 16 schools
certified in June 2010.
Education Roundtable - TRCA hosted a Roundtable on Environmental Education and
Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). 75 participants from 35 organizations from
the Toronto region participated. Focus on creating a strategy to support ESD through
environment education. Tremendous interest from participants in assisting with moving this
forward.
TRCA staff from the Kortright Centre, Watershed on Wheels and Education presented 7
workshops on 6 topics at the STAO (Science Teachers Association of Ontario) Conference
in November. TRCA also had a booth showcasing education programs from across the
organization.
Bathurst Glen Golf Course - Achieved their Integrated Pest Management accreditation,
reducing pesticide use by 80%.
Atlantic Salmon - Returned to Duffins Creek, as a result of the stocking program.
Low Impact Development - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation approved $28,000
for low impact development.
Sauriol Dinner - The 15th Annual Charles Sauriol Environmental Dinner hosted more than
840 people and raised over $100,000 for land securement on the Oak Ridges Moraine.
Restoration Services Centre has been published in 1000 X Architects of America book.
EcoParks - Town of Caledon staff received formal direction from Caledon Council to work
in partnership with TRCA to investigate the feasibility of developing eco-industrial zone
opportunities at three industrial/commercial development areas in Caledon.
Tommy Thompson Park - Being used by overwintering owls, including a rare Hawk Owl.
World Green Building Council (WGBC) - Greater Toronto Airports Authority are interested
in getting involved with the WGBC.
GreenBuild Conference - 25,000 people attended conference in Boston. The conference
provided an opportunity to connect with green building peers, industry experts and
influential leaders as they shared innovations in the green building movement.
The Stewards in the Field - Cultural Heritage Landscapes pilot program was launched at a
Family Nature Event with strong positive feedback from the Friends of Claireville members.
The goal is to identify and document all forms of cultural heritage landscapes on
Conservation lands with hands-on participation by local residents to support the two-way
exchange of knowledge, the sense of stewardship and increased protection of heritage
sites. The Archaeology Unit with support from the Education Stewardship and Outreach
group will further the training of the Claireville group in the spring of 2009 and plan to
engage other active stewardship groups across the jurisdiction.
Tree Planting - Brampton reforests another 30 acres of West Humber valleyland, a priority
subwatershed identified in the Humber River Management Plan. TRCA complements the
planting with wetland creation which diversifies the habitat.
December
Oak Ridges Corridor Park - The Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation has approved a second
grant for $94,000 to assist with habitat restoration, monitoring and community outreach in
the Oak Ridges Corridor Park in Richmond Hill.
22
Discovery Walk - City of Toronto has committed $100,000 to refresh the self guided
Discovery Walk in the Lower Humber as part of the Heritage Park action site. This specific
Discovery Walk was originally created by the Humber Watershed Alliance in the early
2000's.
Partners in Project Green - NRCan approved $250,000 funding support towards the
implementation of Pearson Eco-Business Park Eco-Efficiency Program.
Regional Biodiversity - Short-eared owl was spotted - an uncommon visitor to TRCA’s
jurisdiction.
Conservation Foundation - On December 31, the Conservation Foundation contributed
$1,572,154.11 to TRCA's wonderful projects making the Toronto region a cleaner, greener
healthier place to live.
Stormwater Management - Ministry of Environment to provide TRCA approximately
$44,000 to undertake stormwater management initiatives in light of climate change.
Source Protection Planning - After 11 months of effort by the Source Protection
Committee and TRCA staff, and extensive public consultation, the Terms of Reference for
Source Water Protection planning for the Toronto and Region Source Protection Committee
were submitted to the Ministry of the Environment on Friday, December 19, 2008.
Evergreen at the Brick Works - Groundbreaking at Brick Works on December 8, 2008 to
commence the next phase of the $50 million development of TRCA’s property by our
partner, Evergreen.
Planning and Permitting - TRCA ended the year by breaking the 1,000 mark on
construction permits issued.
January
Stormwater Management - $50,000 from the Ministry of the Environment for Stormwater
Management initiatives in light of climate change.
Erosion and Sediment Control - $20,000 from Environment Canada for erosion and
sediment control training.
Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation - TRCA benefits from $3.6 million contributed by the Oak
Ridges Moraine Foundation over the last six years for land acquisition, habitat restoration,
monitoring and research.
Conservation Foundation - Over 750 people now donate monthly to TRCA's good work.
Budget Discussions - TRCA municipal partners, the Regions of Peel and York, have
approved 2009 budgets including priority funding increases for TRCA.
Dog-strangling Vine - A report on the ecology and distribution of Dog-strangling Vine
prepared by TRCA in partnership with Rouge Park was recently published in the (Eastern
European) Thaiszia Journal of Botany
Winter Activities - The cross country ski program at Albion Hills Conservation Area is off to
a great start, eclipsing the $100,000.00 mark at a record setting pace.
Aquatic Habitat Toronto - Restoration Services staff presented the work of Aquatic Habitat
Toronto and our Waterfront Environmental Monitoring Programs at the Great lakes Urban
Habitat Restoration Symposium held in Chicago, Illinois.
Flock of Cross-bills at Head Office - There have been a phenomenal number of crossbills
in and around the GTA this winter. It is unusual and likely due to a very poor crop of spruce
cones in the north and excellent crops here in the south.
23
Western Gateway - Waterfront Toronto has approved the re-allocation of $500,000 of
savings from Phase 1 of the Port Union to partner with the City of Pickering to construct the
$1,000,000 Western Gateway - First Nation's Trail project on the east side of the Rouge
River completing the link between the 3.6 km Port Union project and Petticoat Creek
Conservation Area.
Land Acquisition - TRCA acquired a key 4 acre parcel (former Beare property), in the
Rouge Park.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
Date: December 03, 2008
_________________________________________
RES.#A11/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
THAT Section IV items 7.6.1 and 7.6.2, in regard to watershed committee minutes, be
received.
CARRIED
Section IV Items 7.6.1 - 7.6.2
DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
Minutes of Meeting #10/08, held on November 27, 2008
ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE
Minutes of Meeting #5/08, held on December 5, 2008.
_________________________________________
RES.#A12/09 -SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Maria Augimeri
THAT Section IV item 8.5 - Lowest Bid Not Accepted, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #12/08, held on February 13, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
24
NEW BUSINESS
RES.#A13/09 -EARTH HOUR
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) participate in the 2009 Earth
Hour by turning off non-essential lighting at all TRCA facilities from 8:30-9:30 pm on
March 28, 2009;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA challenge its municipal partners to participate in Earth Hour.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
25
ANNUAL/INAUGURAL MEETING
The Chief Administrative Officer/Secretary-Treasurer, Brian Denney, assumed the Chair for the
Annual Meeting and conducted the 2009 Election of Officers.
APPOINTMENTS TO TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY FOR
2009-2010
The Secretary-Treasurer can advise that all the persons listed below have been duly appointed
and are entitled to sit as Members of this Authority for the 2009-2010 year, or until their
successors are appointed.
ADJALA-TOSORONTIO/MONO Glenn Mason
DURHAM Colleen Jordan
Bonnie Littley
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
TORONTO Paul Ainslie
Maria Augimeri
Bryan Bertie
Laurie Bruce
Gay Cowbourne
Glenn De Baeremaeker
Mike Del Grande
Lois Griffin
Suzan Hall
Reenga Mathivanan
Peter Milczyn
Ron Moeser
John Parker
Anthony Perruzza
PEEL Eve Adams
Grant Gibson
Maja Prentice
John Sprovieri
Richard Whitehead
YORK David Barrow
Bill Fisch
Jack Heath
Linda Pabst
Gino Rosati
_________________________________________
26
RES.#A14/09 -APPOINTMENT OF SCRUTINEERS
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:David Barrow
THAT Mr. Robert Rossow, Partner, Gartner Roberts LLP and Mr. Paul Speck, Vice
President, AON Reed Stenhouse, be appointed as scrutineers for the election of officers,
if required.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
CHAIR OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
Gerri Lynn O'Connor was nominated by Gay Cowbourn.
RES.#A15/09 -MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT nominations for the office of Chair of the Authority be closed.
CARRIED
Gerri Lynn O'Connor was declared elected by acclamation as Chair of Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority.
_________________________________________
VICE CHAIR OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
Maria Augimeri was nominated by Glenn De Baeremaeker.
RES.#A16/09 -MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Colleen Jordan
THAT nominations for the office of Vice Chair of the Authority be closed.
CARRIED
Maria Augimeri was declared elected by acclamation as Vice Chair of Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority.
_________________________________________
27
CITY OF TORONTO REPRESENTATIVES ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Glenn De Baeremaeker was nominated by Suzan Hall.
RES.#A17/09 -MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Richard Whitehead
THAT nominations for the remaining City of Toronto representatives on the Executive
Committee be closed.
CARRIED
Glenn De Baeremaeker was declared elected by acclamation as a City of Toronto
representative on the Executive Committee.
_________________________________________
CITY OF TORONTO REPRESENTATIVE ON THE BUDGET/AUDIT ADVISORY BOARD
Ron Moeser was nominated by Linda Pabst.
RES.#A18/09 -MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS
Moved by:Maria Augimeri
Seconded by:Bill Fisch
THAT nominations for the City of Toronto representative on the Budget/Audit Advisory
Board be closed.
CARRIED
Ron Moeser was declared elected by acclamation as the City of Toronto representative on the
Budget/Audit Advisory Board.
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:40 a.m., on Friday, February 27, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
28
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #2/09
March 27, 2009
The Authority Meeting #2/09, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village,
on Friday, March 27, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to order at
9:42 a.m..
PRESENT
Eve Adams Member
Paul Ainslie Member
Maria AugimeriVice Chair
David Barrow Member
Bryan Bertie Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Mike Del GrandeMember
Bill Fisch Member
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Jack Heath Member
Colleen JordanMember
Bonnie Littley Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
John Parker Member
Gino Rosati Member
John SprovieriMember
Richard WhiteheadMember
ABSENT
Laurie Bruce Member
Glenn De BaeremaekerMember
Grant Gibson Member
Glenn Mason Member
Reenga MathivananMember
Linda Pabst Member
Anthony PerruzzaMember
Maja Prentice Member
29
RES.#A19/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Suzan Hall
Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #1/09, held on February 27, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
DELEGATIONS
(a)A delegation by Paul Scott, Member, Aquatic Park Sailing Club, in regard to item 7.1 -
Double-crested Cormorant Management Strategy for 2009.
(b)A delegation by Liz White, Director, Animal Alliance and spokesperson, Cormorant
Defenders International, in regard to item 7.1 - Double-crested Cormorant Management
Strategy for 2009.
RES.#A20/09 - DELEGATIONS
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Ga Cowbourne
THAT above-noted delegations (a) and (b) be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Deputy Mayor Jack Heath, Town of Markham, in regard to the Final
Report of Markham’s “Rouge Park Implementation Task Force”.
RES.#A21/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back in October on the present governance, roles of the
partners, and current and proposed future uses of the Rouge Park.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
30
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A22/09 -DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANTS MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FOR
2009.
Management of Double-crested Cormorants at Tommy Thompson Park.
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT staff be directed to continue to work with the Cormorant Advisory Group to assist
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) in addressing management concerns
regarding colonial waterbirds at Tommy Thompson Park (TTP);
THAT staff be directed to work with any required regulatory agency to seek approval for
the 2009 management strategy for colonial waterbirds at TTP;
THAT staff be directed to implement the proposed management strategy for 2009;
THAT staff be directed to continue to actively participate in local, regional and binational
committees/working groups addressing the management and protection of colonial
waterbirds;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority annually regarding the
management of Double-crested Cormorants at Tommy Thompson Park.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In 1959, the Toronto Harbour Commissioners (now known as the Toronto Port Authority) began
construction of a spit of land at the base of Leslie Street in the City of Toronto. From 1959 until
present day, a combination of lakefilling and dredging activities has created the current
configuration of TTP. Tommy Thompson Park extends 5 kilometres into Lake Ontario and
occupies an area of approximately 260 hectares of combined land and water.
Tommy Thompson Park has evolved into a significant feature along the shore of Lake Ontario.
It is home to diverse bird, fish, reptile, amphibian, mammal and vegetation communities, which
has resulted in TTP being formally designated as a Globally Significant Important Bird Area
(IBA) and an Environmentally Significant Area (ESA #120). The international IBA designation
demonstrates the significance of TTP both nationally and globally. As an ESA, TTP is
recognized as supporting an unusually high diversity of biological communities.
Double-crested Cormorant (DCCO) populations in the Great Lakes declined dramatically in the
1960s and 70s, primarily because of toxic contaminants such as DDT, which caused thinning of
eggshells and other health problems, leading to reproductive failure. Due to new regulations,
increased enforcement and public awareness, toxic contaminants were significantly reduced by
the 1980s, and cormorant populations have made a dramatic and successful recovery.
Double-crested Cormorants began colonizing Tommy Thompson Park in 1990 when six nests
were built in cottonwood trees at the end of Peninsula B (Attachment 1). In 2008, there were
7,038 nesting pairs, representing a population of about 27,450 individuals including chicks, on
Peninsulas A, B and C.
31
The DCCO colony at TTP is now the largest known colony of cormorants on the Great Lakes,
and represents 31% of the total population nesting in the Lake Ontario basin. The colonies of
Double-crested Cormorants and other waterbirds, including Black-crowned Night-Herons
(BCNH), Ring-billed Gulls and Common Terns, are one of the reasons it is celebrated as an
important ecological site of global significance.
The annual monitoring program data shows a reduction of overall cormorant nests from 7,240
nests in 2007 to 7,038 nests in 2008. Despite the overall nest reduction, the number of nests on
Peninsula C continues to rise from 4,699 nests in 2007 to 4,906 in 2008. Attachment 2
illustrates the continued decline of tree health on Peninsula C. In 2006 approximately half the
nest trees on Peninsula C were classified as healthy or in decline; in 2008 the health of most
nest trees declined further and are now classified as dead or dying. There are areas of healthy
forest within the colonies on Peninsula B and C, specifically the base of Peninsula B and the
base and tip of Peninsula C, which TRCA wishes to retain and improve where possible.
Black-crowned Night-Heron nests declined from 876 nests in 2007 to 536 nests in 2008, which
represents a 14 year low.
In November 2007 TRCA embarked on a process to involve stakeholders and the public in
assessing the need for management of cormorant populations at TTP. TRCA’s first step was to
establish a Cormorant Advisory Group comprised of stakeholders and experts, including
conservationists, academics and interest groups from across the spectrum to provide advice
and input.
The advisory group's mandate is to:
•provide input and advice;
•ensure that all perspectives are considered; and
•provide linkages with other stakeholders.
Many of the members of the advisory group have considerable experience with various aspects
of research, management and protection of colonial waterbirds and associated issues. They
bring a range of expertise, knowledge and perspectives to the process. The committee will
develop consensus where possible, and formally acknowledge dissenting views.
Members of the advisory group include:
TRCA
Restoration Services Division
Federal/Provincial
Canadian Wildlife Service
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
Toronto Port Authority
Transport Canada
City of Toronto
Parks, Forestry and Recreation
Interest Groups / Stakeholders
Aquatic Park Sailing Club
Cormorant Defenders International:
Animal Alliance of Canada
Canadians for Snow Geese
Earthroots
Zoocheck Canada Inc.
Friends of the Spit
Ontario Nature
Toronto Island Residents
Toronto Ornithological Club
Local Experts
32
Academia
University of Toronto
York University
In 2008, with advice from the advisory group, TRCA developed a strategic approach and
consultation framework to address concerns of the growing DCCO colony at TTP. The
following timeline (Table 1) is a summary of the 2008 public consultation process and includes
a description of the topics covered.
Table 1. 2008 Consultation
Meeting/Event Date Discussion Topics/Agenda
Advisory Group
Meeting #1
January 24,
2008
Values and interests of TTP
Conditions and concerns of DCCO colony
Need for management
Strategies to address concerns
Advisory Group
Meeting #2
February 19,
2008
Evaluate management options
Propose alternative approaches
Cormorant
Webpage
launched
www.trca.on.ca
/cormorants
March 3,
2008
Includes background materials, advisory group meeting
notes and presentations, public meeting workbook and
meeting notes, relevant links
Public Meeting April 3, 2008 Advertised in Toronto Star, The Mirror, TRCA website,
TTP information board, TRCA distribution lists, some
advisory group member websites
Canada Newswire press release, Global TV coverage
Presentations, facilitated round table discussion,
individual workbooks for commenting
Advisory Group
Meeting #3
April 23,
2008
Review public response
Discuss 2008 strategy
TTP Spring
Bird Festival
May 10,
2008
Guided tours of cormorant colony
Public survey on TTP cormorants
Authority Board May 23,
2008
Present 2008 strategy for Authority action
A cormorant web page was developed to help disseminate information on the cormorant
management process and included advisory group meeting notes, the public meeting
presentation and links to relevant resources.
Throughout the process an extremely high level of concern was expressed regarding DCCO
populations and their management. Concerns have been raised from both sides of the issue,
on the one hand calling for management, and on the other hand for protection of the birds and
their nesting colonies.
33
Generally, throughout the 2008 process there was agreement that some form of management
is necessary and appropriate, providing that the methods are humane to cormorants and do
not affect other wildlife. TRCA staff strived to achieve consensus among advisory group
members, and the public on a number of matters, however complete consensus was not
achieved on all issues. Dissenting views were in all cases documented and considered in the
formulation of the final Strategic Approach of 2008.
The Strategy Approach for 2008 was completed in April 2008 (Table 2), and adopted by the
Authority on May 23, 2008 as part of Resolution # A110/08. Ten delegations and fifteen
correspondence items were received by the board.
The goal of the 2008 management strategy was to achieve a balance between the continued
existence of a healthy, thriving cormorant colony and the other ecological, educational,
scientific and recreational values of Tommy Thompson Park. The specific objectives of the
strategy were to:
a)Increase public knowledge, awareness and appreciation of colonial waterbirds.
b)Deter cormorants from nesting on Peninsula D.
c)Limit further loss of tree canopy on the Peninsulas beyond the existing cormorant colonies.
d)Continue research on colonial waterbirds in an urban wilderness context.
Due to the timing of the approval, only a portion of the 2008 Management Strategy was
implemented for the 2008 breeding season. This included pre-nesting and post-breeding
deterrents on Peninsula D; the York University’s egg oiling study on Peninsula B; and some
habitat restoration activities. The remainder of the habitat restoration initiatives, and ground
nesting enhancements were implemented at the end of the 2008 breeding season.
Table 2. 2008 Strategic Approach Matrix
Method Peninsula
A
Peninsula
B
Peninsula
C
Peninsula
D
Pre-nesting Deterrents *
Post-Breeding Deterrents **
Enhanced Ground Nesting **
Egg Oiling Research *
Habitat Restoration ****
Human presence (researchers and the public) on Peninsula D was successful at deterring
DCCO from nesting on the Peninsula during the breeding season. Escalating the level of
deterrence beyond human presence was not needed. Cormorants were documented on
Peninsula D a total of nine times during spring 2008, but no nesting attempts were witnessed.
The Tommy Thompson Bird Research Station on Peninsula D was operated at a reduced level
during fall 2008 with less staff and volunteer presence. Cormorants were only documented
roosting on Peninsula D once, and again simple human presence was adequate to discourage
roosting. Cormorants did roost on Peninsula C, however direct post-breeding deterrents were
not used on Peninsula C.
34
Due to colony activity during spring and summer, ground nest enhancements were not started
until fall 2008 and continued throughout the winter of 2008-2009 in preparation for the 2009
breeding season.
York University conducted a successful egg oiling study to examine nest desertion, behavioural
effects and disturbance effects on ground nesting cormorants. The experimental design had
three groups of 30 nests each:
control (eggs not handled);
treatment (eggs handled and sprayed with mineral oil);
sham (eggs handled and sprayed with water).
The study was conducted at night to reduce gull predation on cormorant eggs. York University
researchers have already presented the data at one conference and are currently in the
process of completing the report for peer reviewed scientific publication.
The preliminary findings indicated that egg oiling at night did not cause immediate
abandonment of nests in the treatment group. Pre-chick comparisons for some nesting
behaviours revealed little differences between the groups, indicating that nesting birds did not
alter their behaviours as a result of the experimental oiling. The treatment birds did finally
abandon their nests at a time which corresponds to when all other birds had chicks, therefore
treatment birds were using cues from their neighbors on when to abandon their breeding
attempt. The monitoring portion of this project will be concluded in the 2009 breeding season
to determine if there is any difference in the timing of nest occupancy of the 2008 treatment
nests. This study has also produced a variety of valuable biological data including,
productivity, fledging success, nest attendance, hatching dates and social behaviours on the
TTP DCCO colony. This data will enable TRCA staff to better manage and understand the TTP
DCCO colony and provides a better understanding of the effects of disturbance on nesting
attempts and success.
Since restoration activities are better implemented in early spring at this site, the majority of the
planned 2008 planting and soil enhancement work will occur in spring 2009. There were,
however, some trees and shrubs planted in 2008 at the bases of Peninsulas A and B to help
delineate colony boundaries and buffer the colony from human activities. Herbaceous
plantings were also undertaken near the base of Peninsula C to improve overall habitat. Trees
and shrubs were also planted in selected areas of Peninsula D to increase forest cover and
enhance the shrub layer.
In December 2008, the advisory group was reconvened to work with TRCA staff. The following
timeline and meeting schedule (Table 3) was developed to assist TRCA in assessing the results
of the 2008 Strategy and to advise staff for the development of a 2009 Strategic Approach. The
timeline and discussion topics are as follows:
35
Table 3. 2009 Consultation
Meeting Date Discussion Topics/Agenda
Advisory Group
Meeting #4
December 10, 2008 Review the 2008 population data, and monitoring
program
Review 2008 strategy and preliminary research
results
Review the completion of the 2008 Cormorant
Management Strategy
Begin discussions on a strategic approach for 2009
Advisory Group
Meeting #5
February 4, 2009 Develop the 2009 Strategy
TRCA
Authority
Meeting
March 27, 2009 Present the 2009 Strategy for TRCA Authority
action
Advisory Group
Meeting #6
November 2009 Review the 2009 population data, and monitoring
program
Review 2009 strategy and preliminary research
results
Begin discussions on a strategic approach for 2010
In December 2008, TRCA staff met with the advisory group to discuss the 2008 monitoring
program, the results from the 2008 Strategy, and the timeline for the development of a strategic
approach for 2009. The group discussed the decline in Black-crowned Night-Heron nesting,
York University research preliminary results, colony disturbances, raccoon predation and the
direction of the 2009 Strategy. The group was interested in the results from the York University
study and how TRCA and other wildlife management agencies can apply the research.
The advisory group met again in February 2009 to review additional 2008 data and discuss the
2009 Strategic Approach. Georeferenced data was used to illustrate the expansion of the
cormorant colony, the shift of night-herons to marginal nest areas and the decline of tree health
across the Peninsulas. The group discussed the proposed 2009 Strategic Approach focused
mainly on pre-nesting deterrents and how to successfully apply deterrents and maintain the
night-heron and egret colonies. There was general agreement within the group to proceed with
the development of the 2009 strategy; however two members expressed serious concern about
the use of pre-nesting deterrents in already colonized areas. There was not complete
agreement by the group to use deterrent techniques on the tip and the base of Peninsula C.
Concern was also raised regarding the techniques used for deterrents and their impact on
other species nesting on the peninsula. In all cases, the concerns were documented in the
meeting notes, and considered when the final strategy was developed. Subsequent to the
February meeting an additional concern was brought forward regarding the use of the term
“consensus”. This concern, and the deterrent concerns, have been attached to the February
4th meeting notes as an addendum and are available for review on the TRCA cormorant
webpage. Staff met with concerned individuals to address their specific concerns and will
clarify the advisory group's mandate regarding consensus at the next advisory group meeting.
36
RATIONALE
An extremely high level of concern has been expressed regarding DCCO populations and their
management. Concerns have been raised from both sides, on the one hand calling for
management and the preservation of forest canopy, and on the other hand for protection of the
birds and their nesting colonies. TRCA has an obligation to manage Tommy Thompson Park
as directed by the Master Plan for Tommy Thompson Park and as approved under the
Environmental Assessment Act. To meet the intent of the master plan, TRCA staff feel that there
is a strong rationale for undertaking a strategic approach to the management of Double-crested
Cormorants at Tommy Thompson Park.
Since November 2007, TRCA has involved stakeholders and the public in assessing the need
for management and developing a strategy for cormorants at TTP. Generally, throughout the
process there has been agreement that some form of management is appropriate, providing
that the methods are humane to cormorants and do not affect other wildlife. Some members of
the advisory group have expressed concerns regarding the use of deterrents on Peninsula C in
areas already colonized by DCCO. Some members also continue to raise concerns that nest
removal and egg oiling are not supported techniques. Other members of the advisory group
are concerned that the proposed approach is inadequate in terms of preserving forest canopy
and the species associated with it. They feel that a more aggressive approach should be taken.
While overall populations of DCCO have decreased slightly at the site, the population of DCCO
on Peninsula C is still increasing. Peninsula C is also home to the majority of the BCNH colony
and is part of the park’s largest forest block. This area has also seen a further reduction in
forest health since 2007. TRCA has therefore developed the following strategic approach to the
management of cormorants at TTP for the 2009 season.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Goal and Objectives
The goal of the 2009 management strategy has not changed from 2008. It is to achieve a
balance between the continued existence of a healthy, thriving cormorant colony and the other
ecological, educational, scientific and recreational values of Tommy Thompson Park. The
specific objectives of the strategy are to:
a)Increase public knowledge, awareness and appreciation of colonial waterbirds.
b)Deter cormorants from nesting on Peninsula D.
c) Limit further loss of tree canopy on the peninsulas beyond the existing cormorant colonies.
d)Continue research on colonial waterbirds in an urban wilderness context.
Increasing Public Knowledge, Awareness and Appreciation
TRCA will seek all opportunities to increase public awareness and appreciation of
Double-crested Cormorants and other colonial waterbirds at TTP. A varied approach will be
used including, but not limited to:
public meetings;
TRCA website;
annual Spring Bird Festival (May 23, 2009);
development of interpretive signage;
improving opportunities to view colonial waterbirds, including cormorants using viewing
blinds and platforms;
conducting tours with schools and interest groups;
presenting information at conferences and forums;
37
participation in working groups on colonial waterbirds.
Informational signs at strategic locations that request people to refrain from entering the
colonial waterbird colonies during the nesting season are already in place to discourage the
public from disturbing the bird colonies. Additional interpretive signs will be installed to
educate park visitors on colonial waterbirds and their habitats. Researcher disturbance
associated with TRCA and partner research programs will be controlled to reduce overall
disruption.
In order to solicit more input from the public about the cormorant colonies at TTP, staff will
prepare fact and comment sheets targeting park users at the Spring Bird Festival on May 23,
2009. Park users will have the opportunity to view the cormorant colonies and learn more
about cormorants at TTP from TRCA staff. Anyone interested will be given the opportunity to
express their views via the comment sheet and the results of the survey will be summarized for
inclusion into the summary report for the 2009 season.
Proposed 2009 Strategic Approach
As with the 2008 strategy, TRCA proposes to utilize a variety of techniques in an integrated
adaptive management approach to achieve the goals and objectives for the 2009 strategy. The
following matrix (Table 4) outlines the techniques and strategies at specific locations of the site,
and will help provide insight regarding the interactions of the different techniques.
Management techniques do not include lethal culling. Egg oiling will not be undertaken in
2009; however York University researchers will continue observations of nest attendance at the
study nests to help determine if egg oiling influences future breeding sites.
Table 4. 2009 Strategic Approach Matrix
Method Peninsula
A
Peninsula
B
Peninsula
C
Peninsula
D
Pre-nesting Deterrents ***
Post-Breeding Deterrents **
Enhanced Ground Nesting **
Egg Oiling Research
(follow-up on nest attendance)*
Habitat Restoration ****
The TTP cormorant colony currently occupies three of the four forested peninsulas of the park
comprising three cormorant sub-colonies (Attachment 1). Peninsula A and the current nesting
area of Peninsula B are considered Cormorant Conservation Zones where cormorant nesting
and roosting are encouraged. Within the Cormorant Conservation Zones efforts will be made to
minimize disturbances so that cormorants will continue to use these areas and nesting remains
productive.
Peninsula C is the most recently colonized area containing the largest cormorant sub-colony
and the largest Black-crowned Night-Heron population. Peninsula D is the only forested
peninsula not occupied by colonial waterbird species.
38
The 2009 Strategic Approach will focus on pre-nesting deterrents in the unoccupied forested
areas of Peninsulas B, C and D to reduce stress on the trees and encourage ground nesting in
other areas. Post-breeding deterrents in the forested area of Peninsulas C and D will be used
to reduce stress on living trees, and ground nest enhancements on Peninsulas A and B will
encourage cormorants to nest on the ground instead of in trees. Habitat restoration will be
used to delineate and buffer the colonies from other park uses as well as provide habitat for
other bird and wildlife species. Finally continued research will be encouraged, and will focus
on raccoon predation on cormorant and night-heron nests; nest re-occupancy of nests oiled in
2008; and the use of social attraction techniques to persuade cormorants to nest on the
ground.
Pre-Nesting Deterrents
Pre-nesting deterrents will occur in areas of the colony that currently do not have cormorant
nesting, or have only limited nesting in areas of healthy forest. Pre-nesting deterrents will not
occur in areas that would negatively impact BCNH population. By discouraging cormorants
from nesting in these areas, stress on the forest and understory vegetation will be reduced and
forest canopy will be preserved. Deterrence will also work synergistically with the ground
nesting enhancement areas in the Cormorant Conservation Zones. These areas will be more
attractive to the birds displaced by the deterrent techniques, and can provided safe nesting for
colony birds looking for new nesting sites. Cormorants may be discouraged from nesting in
trees at the base of Peninsula B (approximate area 0.3 ha), the tip of Peninsula C (approximate
area 1.4 ha) and base of Peninsula C (approximate area 0.9 ha), and on Peninsula D
(approximate area 4 ha) (Attachment 3). Daily inspections of these areas will be undertaken,
and deterrence will only occur if nesting attempts by cormorants are documented. If it is
determined that deterrent activities are required, deterrence will occur to prevent nesting in
these targeted areas. Deterrence will not occur on Peninsula A, in the current nesting areas of
Peninsulas B, or in the core colony of Peninsula C. To help achieve this, disturbance to these
areas will be minimized and closely monitored by staff. Displaced tree nesting cormorants will
be encouraged to ground nest on Peninsulas A and B.
Pre-nesting Deterrent Methods
Techniques that limit disturbance to small, localized areas are preferred over other methods.
Staff will use targeted techniques that are humane for cormorants and minimize disturbance to
other wildlife. The techniques utilized will be employed on an increasing scale of activity, with
preference given to the least intrusive means needed (Attachment 4). Deterrence techniques
will begin with human presence and will only progress to the next level should staff determine
that cormorants are not leaving the area using that given technique. Progression to the next
level will occur based on documentation that at least two attempts in one day with a given
technique fails to flush cormorants. Staff will note the dates, times, method and duration of
deterrent activities. Only the minimum number of staff required to complete the deterrence task
will be present in the colonies in order to minimize disturbance. When feasible, staff will enter
the colonies via water or along the shoreline to minimize disturbance.
39
Spring Deterrent Monitoring
Staff will undertake pre-deterrent observations of non-target species (Black-crowned
Night-Herons, Great Egrets and any other species in the area) and cormorants to document the
locations and densities of these species. These observations, combined with nesting location
data from recent years, will provide a baseline to help quantify targeted cormorant movement
and non-targeted species activity. Staff will also conduct observations during deterrent
activities and after deterrent activities have ended. These observations will help determine if
night-herons and egrets are displaced from their nests for an extended period of time as a
result of deterrent activities and/or if cormorants move into traditional night-heron and egret
nesting locations during deterrent activities or after deterrent activities have ended.
Nest attendance and behaviour of night-herons and egrets will be quantified using
standardized focal observations during pre-deterrent, deterrent and post-deterrent activities (30
minute observations/nest/activity). Observers will be equipped with binoculars (minimum 7x42)
and/or spotting scopes and will have two-way radios to communicate with each other.
Observers will also note dates, times and duration of monitoring activities and will also record
species, location, number of individuals and behaviour including:
presence of a bird at the nest site;
presence of a mate;
intensity, duration and outcome of interactions between focal birds and either conspecifics,
other night-herons/egrets and/or cormorants;
behaviour of the bird at the nest site:
- courtship displays and nest building;
- standing in the nest while preening or interacting with a mate;
- incubating/brooding;
- standing in the nest in an ‘alert’ posture;
- perched near the nest;
- flight away from deterrent activities.
Observers will be stationed near the night-heron colonies, within view of the ground nesting
areas on Peninsulas A and B, on Peninsula D and, when feasible, in boats near Peninsulas A
and B to determine where the disturbed cormorants go and to monitor behaviours of non-target
species, specifically night-herons and egrets (Attachment 5). Only the minimum number of
staff required to undertake the monitoring will be present in the colonies in order to minimize
disturbance. Should staff determine that deterrence activities cause an increase of cormorants
moving into night-heron nesting locations or cause non-target species displacement, deterrent
activities will stop. Pre-nesting deterrence activities will also stop once cormorants refuse to
leave a nest or once eggs have been laid.
Post-breeding Deterrents
Cormorants will be deterred from roosting in healthy trees on Peninsulas C and D. By
discouraging roosting activity, the impact of guano on trees is reduced and prospecting for
future nest sites in these areas by younger birds is decreased. After the nesting season has
ended and fledgling cormorants, night-herons and egrets are feeding independently,
post-breeding deterrents will be employed on the tip of Peninsula C (approximate area 1.4 ha)
and on Peninsula D (approximate area 4 ha). Daily inspections of these areas will be
undertaken to support the need for deterrence and will only occur if roosting attempts by
cormorants are documented. Deterrents will not be used on Peninsulas A and B. Displaced
cormorants will be encouraged to loaf in the Conservation Zones of Peninsulas A and B.
40
To help achieve this, disturbance to Peninsulas A and B will be minimized and closely
monitored by staff. Since these areas already support cormorant colonies, and field data
indicates large loafing areas are currently available, staff anticipate that cormorants will readily
use these peninsulas for post-breeding loafing.
Post-Breeding Deterrent Methods
Refer to Pre-Nesting Deterrent Methods. Note that the technique of nest material removal does
not apply.
Fall Deterrent Monitoring
Staff will undertake pre-deterrent observations of non-target species (Black-crowned
Night-Herons, Great Egrets, and any other species in the area) and cormorants to document
the locations and densities of these species. Staff will also conduct observations during
deterrent activities and after deterrent activities have ended. These observations will help
determine if night-herons and egrets are displaced from their roosting areas for extended
periods of time as a result of deterrent activities and/or if cormorants move into areas with
healthy forest during deterrent activities or after deterrent activities have ended.
The behaviour of night-herons, egrets and any other species present will be quantified using
standardized focal observations during pre-deterrent, deterrent and post-deterrent activities (30
minute observations/nest/activity). Observers will be equipped as in the Pre-nesting deterrent
monitoring. Observers will also note dates, times and duration of monitoring activities and will
also record species, location, number of individuals and behaviour including:
presence of a bird at the roosting site;
intensity, duration and outcome of interactions between focal birds and either conspecifics,
other night-herons/egrets and/or cormorants;
behaviour of the bird at the roosting site:
- preening or interacting with a mate or chicks;
- standing in an ‘alert’ posture;
- flight away from deterrent activities.
Observers will be stationed near the base of Peninsula C; within view of the ground nesting
areas on Peninsulas A and B; on Peninsula D; and when feasible, in boats near Peninsulas A
and B to determine where the disturbed cormorants go and to monitor activities of non-target
species (Attachment 5). Only the minimum number of staff required to undertake the
monitoring will be present in the colonies in order to minimize disturbance. Should staff
determine that deterrence activities cause an increase of cormorants moving into areas with
healthy forest or cause non-target species disturbance, deterrence activities will stop.
Enhanced Ground Nesting
In addition to encouraging post-breeding loafing on Peninsulas A and B, these areas will also
be targeted for enhanced ground nesting for the 2009 breeding season. Disturbance to the
ground nest areas will be minimized throughout the season with careful access via water only
when necessary. Nest counts will be conducted at night to reduce disturbance and minimize
predation of ground nests.
41
There are two discreet ground nesting areas currently used on Peninsula B. The 2009 strategic
approach will include the expansion of these ground nesting areas through structural
enhancement. Proven ground nest enhancement techniques employed at cormorant colonies
in other areas will be used on Peninsula B. Staff will create nesting areas using rubber tires
(Attachment 6), covered with natural material including naturally downed cormorant nests and
other nesting materials. Additional natural structure, fallen trees, will be used to simulate
natural ground nest areas between the two existing ground nest areas. Additional woody nest
material will be provided adjacent to the ground nest areas to provide easy access to nest
building materials and reduce branch stripping from forested areas of the park.
Peninsula A does not currently support cormorant ground nesting, however cormorants have
ground nested there in the past. A variety of techniques will be used on Peninsula A to observe
the success of the differing methods to aid future ground nest enhancements. Fallen trees will
be placed throughout the enhancement area to simulate natural ground nest areas. Naturally
downed nests and woody nest material will be placed throughout the fallen trees. Staff will also
provide vertical structure and wooden stakes with old nest material placed at the bases, as
these have been successful in attracting cormorants to ground nest at Presqu’ile Provincial
Park. Additional woody nest material will be provided adjacent to the ground nest areas to
provide easy access to nest building materials and reduce branch stripping from forested areas
of the park. Cormorant decoys will be used throughout the Peninsula A ground nest
enhancement area to suggest an existing ground nesting colony. The decoy technique was
successfully applied to colonies in other areas of the continent.
York University has proposed a study to examine the use of social techniques (decoys) to
attract cormorants to nest on the ground. The study will focus on a discreet ground nest
enhancement area on Peninsula A. Researchers will access the Peninsula via water and enter
a tunnel-blind system to conduct observations of the decoy enhancement areas. Using this
system cormorants cannot see movement or detect activity, and are therefore not disturbed
from the site. Researchers can conduct observations from within the colony without large scale
disturbance and quantify the use of decoys to attract cormorants.
Habitat Restoration
Habitat restoration activities will occur in areas of the peninsulas that are not currently occupied
by colonial nesting waterbirds. The base of the peninsulas, and areas within the peninsulas
that are not occupied by colonial birds, will be restored using site appropriate vegetation and
soil amendments where necessary. Vegetation nodes will be planted with a variety of species
and monitored to assess the efficacy of the restoration and improve future endeavours. Habitat
restoration and enhancement activities will also help delineate the extent of the current
cormorant colonies and buffer the colonies from disturbance. Newly planted trees and shrubs
will also provide future colonial waterbird nesting habitat. Targeted improvements include the
addition of native shrubs at the base of Peninsula B and along the Embayment B back
shoreline area to encourage Black-crowned Night-Heron nesting. Plantings of willow fascines
and appropriate shrubs will occur along portions of the shoreline to provide additional shoreline
stability. Habitat restoration activities will occur in early spring 2009, so the bird colonies are
not disturbed.
42
Monitoring, Research, and Reporting
Annual nest census data for cormorants, night-herons and other colonial waterbirds will be
undertaken in late May using a combination of staff and volunteers. As in past years, the
census will identify the nesting populations of cormorants and other waterbirds, as well as their
spatial nesting distribution within the peninsulas at Tommy Thompson Park. The nest census
for ground nesting locations will be undertaken at night to reduce the effects of disturbance.
Annual tree health surveys will be undertaken in late August/early September to document
changes in the health and condition of nest trees within the three peninsulas at TTP.
An annual summary report of all components of the strategic approach will be completed and
circulated to all regulatory agencies and the Advisory Group, and will be posted for public
review upon completion of the 2009 season. This report will outline all approaches employed
in the 2009 season including the methods used, their relative effectiveness, and the results of
the annual monitoring program. This information will provide a basis for the development of the
2010 strategy using an integrated adaptive management approach.
The next meeting of the Cormorant Advisory Group will be held in fall 2009, after the completion
of the 2009 summary report. This meeting will provide an opportunity to review the results of
the 2009 season and discuss whether any changes are needed for 2010. The public will also
be informed and consulted before the 2010 season.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funds are identified in the Tommy Thompson Park Interim Management account 210-19 and
the Tommy Thompson Park Double-crested Cormorant account 210-25 in the 2009 City of
Toronto Preliminary Capital Budget.
Report prepared by: Ralph Toninger, extension 5366, Karen McDonald, extension 5248
Emails: rtoninger@trca.on.ca, kmcdonald@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Ralph Toninger, extension 5366,
Karen McDonald, extension 5248
Emails: rtoninger@trca.on.ca, kmcdonald@trca.on.ca
Date: March 10, 2009
43
Attachment 1
= 49 DCCO tree nests
= 1074 DCCO tree nests
= 1009 DCCO ground nests
= 4906 DCCO tree nests
Figure 1. TTP Peninsulas and Cormorant Colonies
Existing cormorant colonies
44
Attachment 2
Change in Tree Health between 2006 and 2008
45
Attachment 3
Pre-Nesting Deterrent Locations
46
Attachment 4
Deterrence Technique Escalation
47
Attachment 5
Deterrent Monitoring Locations
48
Attachment 6
Ground nesting cormorant colony enhancements in the Columbia River Estuary, Oregon
_________________________________________
49
RES.#A23/09 -THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK
Request for a Land Conveyance and a Permanent Easement
Rouge River Watershed, Town of Markham, CFN 41942. Receipt of a
request from the Regional Municipality of York for a conveyance of land
for the realignment of 14th Avenue at Don Cousens Parkway and a
permanent easement for South East Collector sewer, Town of Markham,
Rouge River watershed.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:David Barrow
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from the Regional Municipality of York to convey certain lands for the Don Cousens
Parkway re-alignment of 14th Avenue and a permanent easement for South East Collector
sewer, along 14th Avenue between C.P. Rail and 11th Concession, in the Bob Hunter
Memorial Park, Town of Markham;
AND WHEREAS it is the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in
furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conversation Authorities Act, to
cooperate with the Regional Municipality of York in this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA convey a parcel of land for the
re-alignment of 14th Avenue and provide a permanent easement for the South East
Collector sewer, more particularly described as follows:
(a)TRCA land containing 2.02 hectares (4.99 acres), more or less, be conveyed to the
Regional Municipality of York for the Don Cousens Parkway realignment at 14th
Avenue, being Part of Lots 5 and 6, Concession 9 in the Town of Markham, designated
as Parts 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 11 on Plan 65R-31523;
(b)TRCA to grant a permanent easement over land containing 0.80 hectares (1.97 acres),
more or less, to the Regional Municipality of York for the South East Collector sewer,
being Part of Lots 5, Concession 10 in the Town of Markham; designated as Part 1 on
Plan 65R-31487 and Part 1 on Plan 65R-31496;
THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other costs to
be paid by the Regional Municipality of York;
THAT an archaeological investigation be conducted before any site disturbance with any
mitigative measures required being carried out all at the expense of the Regional
Municipality of York;
THAT all permits pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained prior to the
commencement of construction;
THAT the Regional Municipality of York is to fully indemnify and save harmless TRCA
from any and all claims for injuries, damages or loss of any nature resulting in any way
either directly or indirectly from this sale or the carrying out of construction;
50
THAT said conveyance is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended;
THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the execution of any documents;
AND FURTHER THAT the Rouge Park Alliance be so advised.
CARRIED
RATIONALE
The Town of Markham is proposing to construct the south section of the Don Cousens Parkway
in 2009. The south segment extends from Highway 407 south past 14th Avenue to the 9th Line.
To facilitate construction of the parkway, it will be necessary to re-align 14th Avenue to meet the
Canadian Pacific Railway tracks at a more perpendicular angle. York Region will require TRCA
lands on the east side on the tracks for the re-alignment.
The South East Collector trunk sewer is a major twinning of the York Durham Sewage System.
This sewer originates in the Box Grove community and travels east along 14th Avenue to York
Durham Line, then south on the York Durham Line to the Hydro One corridor, then east along
the Hydro One corridor to Liverpool Road and then south on Liverpool Road to Finch Avenue.
The subject lands were acquired by TRCA from the Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) on March
31, 2004 for Rouge Park purposes and on March 30, 2007 for the Bob Hunter Memorial Park.
As part of the 2007 transfer, TRCA and ORC agreed to convey all necessary lands required for
these projects to the Regional Municipality of York.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The Regional Municipality of York has agreed to assume all legal, survey and other costs
involved in completing these transactions.
Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 or Edlyn Wong, extension 5711
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca or ewong@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 or Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca or rdewell@trca.on.ca
Date: March 13, 2009
Attachments: 1
51
Attachment 1
_________________________________________
52
RES.#A24/09 -ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD HEARING
10360 Islington Avenue Inc.. Authorization for party status before the
Ontario Municipal Board on referrals related to applications for an Official
Plan and Zoning By-law amendment to permit the development of a 64
unit residential condominium building or a 90 unit retirement residence
and the Martin Smith House to be retained for amenity purposes.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:David Barrow
THAT authorization be given to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff
to obtain party status before the Ontario Municipal Board regarding a proposed
amendment to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment for the City of Vaughan,
that is not in conformity with the Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program and
with the Natural Heritage policies of the Provincial Policy Statement;
THAT staff be authorized to retain legal counsel to pursue this appeal before the Ontario
Municipal Board;
AND FURTHER THAT the Ontario Municipal Board and all parties and participants to the
hearing be so advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The subject property is approximately 1 hectare in size and is located on the west side of
Islington Avenue, in the community of Kleinburg. The site consists of 2 lots which were
previously severed in 1999. The subject property is known municipally as 10360 and 10384
Islington Avenue.
As noted, the site consists of two parcels. The south parcel is vacant, while an existing heritage
building is situated on the north parcel. A valley corridor associated with the main Humber
River is located on the west side of property and is vegetated.
Previous approvals by Vaughan City Council in February 2005 included permission for the
redevelopment of the south parcel with a 15-unit, two and one-half storey residential building.
Subsequently, in April 2006 a site plan agreement was registered to implement the approved
development, which has not been built. At that time City Council endorsed a structural building
setback of 5 metres from the established top-of-bank. TRCA staff had through correspondence
to the City of Vaughan requested a minimum 10 metre buffer be established in order to protect
the integrity of the feature of the main Humber Valley system.
Planning Applications
Based on the City Planning staff report, there are two planning applications pertaining to this
site. The first is to amend the Official Plan for the City of Vaughan to allow the lands to be
developed to permit: a 64 unit residential condominium building or a 90 unit retirement
residence and the Martin Smith House to be retained for amenity purposes; a maximum
building height of 13.4 metres; and having a minimum buffer of 5 metres from the top-of-bank.
The proposal also includes a request to amend the City of Vaughan By-law (By-law No. 1-88)
from R1 Residential Zone to RM2 Multiple Residential Zone and OS1 Open Space Conservation
Zone.
53
The applications have been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) on the basis of
City Council’s failure to make a decision on the applications within the timeframes prescribed
by the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1993.
TRCA staff has on a number of occasions forwarded written comments to Vaughan Planning
staff advising we had concerns respecting the development proposal as it related to
maintaining an ecological buffer from the top-of-bank. TRCA has requested a buffer having a
minimum width of 10 metres, which is consistent with TRCA’s Valley and Stream Corridor
Management Program (VSCMP).
The proponent has also appealed the City’s Official Plan Amendment No. 633, an amendment
to OPA No. 601 (Kleinburg-Nashville Community Plan), which is a plan to define a “main street
commercial” area that includes policies related to appropriate land use designations,
development standards and the scale and massing of buildings. This matter is not an issue for
TRCA respecting our position on the site-specific applications.
TRCA’s Issues
From our review of the applicant's technical submissions, one major area of concern has been
identified. The issue pertains to the final development limit and the extent of the natural
features line. Specifically, TRCA staff has requested that the proponent provide a 10 metre
buffer from the established top-of-bank.
RATIONALE
The initial OMB pre-hearing, via telephone conference call, for the site-specific applications was
held on October 23, 2008. TRCA staff participated in the call, without legal counsel, to seek
party status. Even though TRCA staff sought and obtained party standing, it was our
expectation that we could negotiate a settlement with the proponent respecting the buffer issue.
Additionally, City Planning staff has also raised the issue of the buffer as being an important
component in the potential redevelopment of the site.
The hearing is scheduled to commence on April 6, 2009 and has been set for 17 days.
Because there are numerous other issues forming part of the hearing, it is our expectation that
TRCA staff will not be in attendance for the duration of the hearing. TRCA will attend when the
matter of the ecological buffer is being addressed during the hearing.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Staff is requesting authorization from the Authority to retain legal counsel to ensure that TRCA
interests are protected and addressed at the hearing. Staff and retained legal counsel will
continue to work with the parties and participants to the hearing to resolve any outstanding
issues, and will continue to represent the interest of the TRCA before the OMB.
Report prepared by: Bill Kiru, extension 5306
Email: bkiru@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214
Email: cwoodland@trca.on.ca
Date: March 17, 2009
Attachments: 1
54
Attachment 1
_________________________________________
55
RES.#A25/09 -AJAX-PICKERING BOARD OF TRADE "ECO-BUSINESS PROGRAM"
Recognition of the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade‘s commitment to
engaging their membership in sustainability through the development
and implementation of the “Eco-Business Program”.
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade be recognized for the launch of their “Eco-
Business Program”;
AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff continue
to support the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade in the development and implementation of
the “Eco-Business Program”.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In the summer of 2007, the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade launched the Environment Task
Force (ETF). The goal of the ETF is “to foster awareness, understanding and action within the
business community that sustainable, environmentally responsible practices must be a high
priority”. The ETF is made up of representatives from the City of Pickering, the Town of Ajax,
TRCA, Durham Sustain Ability, Veridian, Monarch Kitchen and Bath Centre, First Durham
Insurance and Northstar Promotions. The first task undertaken by the ETF was the
development of an Eco-Business Program to engage businesses in sustainable business
practices. The goal of the program is to identify actions a business can take to reduce their
ecological footprint and publicly recognize a business for their commitment to and achievement
toward sustainability.
Program Description
The Eco-Business Program has two primary components, an educational tool in the form of a
series of checklists of sustainable actions, and an recognition tool in the form of a series of
certificates. The ETF used program materials from TRCA's EcoOffices program, which is based
on the Ontario EcoSchools model, as an initial template for the checklist. This model was
selected because of the increasing success of the EcoSchools program within Durham Region
and the efforts already undertaken by TRCA staff to revise the EcoSchools materials for the
EcoOffices program. This program material was reviewed by the entire ETF and edited to
include actions that would be applicable to the broad range of member businesses within the
Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade. The categories included in the checklist are: transportation and
equipment, water conservation, pollution and waste reduction, and energy conservation. This
first phase of checklists includes items that require no cost and/or little effort to implement. The
intention is to develop three phases of checklists with increasingly substantive actions.
A “Certificate of Commitment” is issued to any member business that begins the
self-assessment process outlined in the checklist. When a business has determined that they
have adopted at least 80% of all actions applicable to their business, they will receive a
“Certificate of Accomplishment”.
56
Accomplishments
The Eco-Business Program was launched on January 19, 2009 with a well-received media
event. Two businesses, Messier-Dowty and Monarch Kitchen and Bath Centre were awarded
Certificates of Commitment and Achievements, respectively. A number of businesses have
contacted the Board of Trade expressing interest in the program. TRCA Chair Gerri Lynn
O'Connor attended the event along with Mayor David Ryan of Pickering, Mayor Steve Parish of
Ajax and Regional Chair Roger Anderson, who all commended the Board of Trade for
launching this initiative.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Duffins-Carruthers watershed staff will continue to work with the ETF to increase awareness and
implementation of the Eco-Business Program. The ETF is currently developing phase two
checklists, and will use the EcoOffices material being developed by the TRCA EcoTeams as a
template. These second checklists will include actions that require more significant
investments and/or effort by participating businesses.
Report prepared by: Andréa Dubé-Goss, extension 5633
Emails: adube-goss@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Andréa Dubé-Goss, extension 5633
Emails: adube-goss@trca.on.ca
Date: February 24, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A26/09 -PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN
Revised Terms of Reference and Steering Committee Membership. To
approve the amended Partners in Project Green Steering Committee
Terms of Reference and list of Steering Committee Members.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:David Barrow
THAT the amended Section 5 of Terms of Reference for Partners in Project Green
Steering Committee, as outlined in the staff report, be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT the updated Terms of Reference and membership list as appended,
be approved and provided to the Partners In Project Green Steering Committee.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In partnership with the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), Regional Municipality of Peel,
City of Toronto, City of Mississauga and City of Brampton, TRCA has been working to develop
Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone. Partners in Project Green is an
initiative to develop North America's largest eco-business zone on the industrial lands
surrounding Toronto Pearson International Airport (Toronto Pearson).
57
At Authority Meeting #8/08, held on October 24, 2008, the amended Terms of Reference and
membership of the Partners In Project Green Steering Committee was approved as per
Resolution #A242/08.
Since that time the Partners in Project Green Steering Committee has requested an
amendment to its Terms of Reference to make the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition
(Coalition) a voting member. The following from Section 5 should be removed:
5.8Relationship to the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition
The Chair of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition or designate will be
invited to attend Committee meetings.
Section 5.1 of the Partners in Project Green Steering Committee Terms of Reference which
outlines Committee Members should be amended to add the Chair of the Etobicoke-Mimico
Watersheds Coalition to the existing TRCA membership as follows:
TRCA – the Chair of the Authority or other designated TRCA member or staff (Chief
Administrative Officer) and the Chair of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds
Coalition or alternate.
The proposed amended Terms of Reference are outlined in Attachment 1.
Steering Committee Membership:
With the addition of the Chair of the Coalition, Section 5.1 would be amended to allow for the
steering committee to consist of 28 voting members that will be comprised of 75% businesses
from within the Pearson Eco-Business Zone and 25% government.
At the time of membership approval, confirmation from some business and political
representatives was pending. Staff has now received confirmation and recommend the addition
of the following new members:
Business Representatives:
Brad Chittick, Senior Director, Supply Chain, Canadian Tire Retail
Steven Costello, Vice-President, Unisource
Renee Spurrell, Sourcing Manager, General Electric
Political/Municipal Representatives:
Bob Delaney, MPP, Mississauga-Streetsville
TRCA:
Suzanne Barrett, Chair, Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition or Alternate Irene Jones,
Vice-Chair, Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition.
The proposed amended List of Members is outlined in Attachment 2.
For Information contact: Chris Rickett, extension 5316; Chandra Sharma, extension 5237
Email: crickett@trca.on.ca; csharma@trca.on.ca
Date: March 17, 2009
Attachments: 2
58
Attachment 1
Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone
Steering Committee Terms of Reference (2009-2010) - July 25, 2008
Amended March 27, 2009
1.Background
Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone is developed by the Greater
Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), the Region of Peel, City of Toronto, City of Brampton,
City of Mississauga and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), to
transform the lands surrounding Toronto Pearson into an internationally recognized
community of eco-friendly businesses. The Partners and Project Green Steering
Committee (herein Committee) is being established to implement this vision.
1.1 Authority Direction
At Authority Meeting #6/08, held on July 25, 2008, Resolution #A184/08 was
approved, in part, as follows:
...THAT the Terms of Reference for the Partners In Project Green: A
Pearson Eco- Business Zone Steering Committee, as appended, be
approved and staff be authorized to establish the Partners in Project
Steering Committee to begin the implementation of key priorities;...
At Authority Meeting #2/09, held on March 27, 2009, Resolution # …. was
approved regarding the amendment to the Terms of Reference, in part, as
follows:
(amendment to be added)
2.Vision
The vision of Partners in Project Green is to transform the Pearson Eco-Business Zone
into an internationally recognized community known for its competitive, high
performance and eco-friendly business climate.
3.Mandate
The mandate of the Committee is to:
Assist businesses in the Pearson Eco-Business Zone improve their financial and
environmental performance; and,
Retain and attract green investment in the Pearson Eco-Business Zone.
59
Generally, the Committee will work with all relevant stakeholders to:
Build capacity – to stimulate strategic investments and partnerships that lead to
green market transformation in the Pearson Eco-Business Zone.
Initiate action – to be a catalyst for new ideas, innovation, excellence and
improvement in the employment lands encompassed by the Pearson Eco-Business
Zone.
Specifically, the Committee’s responsibilities will include:
Oversee the development, implementation and management of the Partners in
Project Green Business Plan.
Facilitate, initiate and direct resources to project teams to implement projects and
programs identified through stakeholder consultation.
Champion green economic development and infrastructure investments in the
Pearson Eco-Business Zone.
Provide a regional business perspective in the areas of federal, provincial and
municipal policy and program development as it pertains to green economic
development.
Publish an annual report, undertake regular stakeholder consultation, and commit to
an ongoing process to review, evaluate and improve Partners in Project Green
programs and projects.
4.Reporting Relationship
The Committee is responsible to the broader region and community and the overall
goals of Partners in Project Green. It will be accountable to the goals of Partners in
Project Green by ensuring measurable goals are set and monitored, assessed and
reported.
The Committee will be a subcommittee of TRCA and will regularly provide minutes to the
Authority and report twice a year to the Authority on the status of Partners in Project
Green initiatives, and provide updates to municipal councils and the GTAA board as
requested.
The Committee is free to provide comments on issues concerning the Pearson
Eco-Business Zone and request staff to develop and implement projects and programs.
Projects may be subject to TRCA or other agency approvals. TRCA staff will assist with
obtaining any required approvals.
An evaluation of the Committee’s mandate, role and reporting structure will be
undertaken after the first two years.
5.Structure
The Committee will have a chair and will establish action-orientated project teams to
pursue key initiatives and will be supported by a secretariat provided by TRCA.
60
5.1Committee Members
The Committee will consist of 28 voting members that will be comprised of 75%
businesses from within the Pearson Eco-Business Zone and 25% government.
The breakdown will follow:
Business Community – a minimum of 17 members drawn from the Pearson
Eco-Business Zone and representative of the business community;
Business Organizations – up to three members will be business
organizations with members within the Pearson Eco-Business Zone;
Municipalities – a council member from each of the Region of Peel, City of
Toronto, City of Brampton and City of Mississauga will be invited to
participate or send a Council appointed designate;
Federal and Provincial Governments – one staff will be appointed from
both the federal and provincial governments;
TRCA – the Chair of the Authority or other designated TRCA member or staff
(Chief Administrative Officer) and the Chair of the Etobicoke-Mimico
Watersheds Coalition or alternate.
Committee members will be appointed for two-year terms and can serve up to a
maximum of two terms. It is anticipated that members will commit at least four
days per year to prepare for and attend Committee meetings. Committee
members will be expected to act as advocates at various events (e.g. visibility at
key events and speaking engagements) and participate in or provide members
for project teams.
The Committee will meet on a quarterly basis or at the call of the chair. Meetings
are anticipated to be no more than one-half day in length and an agenda will be
distributed well in advance of meetings.
5.2 Appointment Process
The initial membership for the first two years will be drawn from organizations
that have expressed an interest in participating on the Committee, can make the
time commitment and have the expertise to assist in project development.
Business organizations, municipalities and other levels of governments will be
formally requested to make appointments.
Partners in Project Green founding members will recommend the appointment of
the Chair to the TRCA board. Appointments, including the Chair, will be
recommended by GTAA, Region of Peel and TRCA (founding members), and will
be presented by TRCA staff for formal approval to Authority Meeting #7/08,
scheduled to be held on September 19, 2008.
The Vice Chair will be elected by the members of the Committee.
5.3Committee Chairs and Vice Chair
The Chair will provide leadership in building a shared vision and community
commitment for moving forward with a blueprint for action. The Chair will have
the following additional responsibilities:
61
being the primary spokespersons for Partners in Project Green at public and
official functions;
presiding over Committee meetings, setting the agenda and generally
ensuring the effectiveness of meetings;
recruiting members to project teams and appointing project team chairs;
ensuring that the nomination and appointment of Committee members occurs
through an effective process and in a timely manner; and,
facilitating progress on Partners in Project Green initiatives in collaboration
with working group chairs.
In the absence of the Chair, the Vice Chair will perform the above functions.
5.4Staff Liaison
Additionally, staff from the Region of Peel, City of Toronto, City of Brampton and
City of Mississauga will be requested to designate a staff from their economic
development departments to liaise with the Committee. Additional staff from
planning and works may be appointed to participate on project teams as
required.
5.5Project Teams
Project teams will be task oriented and established based on Committee
priorities as reflected in its work program. Work plans will be prepared for each
working group including projected outcomes and timelines.
Project teams will be comprised of both Committee members and non-members
who have a particular expertise critical to the task at hand. They will meet as
required, will keep the Committee apprised of activities and progress and will
report to the Committee as appropriate.
5.6Project Team Chairs
The Chair of a project team can either be from the Committee or from a Pearson
Eco-Business Zone business or outside organization. They will provide
leadership on specific initiatives and effective communication between the
Committee and project teams, and among project teams as appropriate. Chairs
of project teams will have the following additional responsibilities:
being the primary spokesperson for the project team at public and official
functions;
setting work program and meeting schedule in collaboration with project team
members and the secretariat, and presiding over project team meetings;
recruiting project team members; and,
ensuring project team terms of reference are drafted and confirmed with the
Committee.
5.7Quorum
A quorum will consist of one-third of the members of the Committee.
62
5.8Rules of Conduct
Consensus-based decision making will be the preferred procedure. TRCA Rules
of Conduct and Purchasing Policies will be adhered to as required.
Specific policies governing public-private partnerships may need to be developed
and brought back to the TRCA board for approval during the first term of the
Committee.
6.Secretariat
The Committee, its Chair and project teams will be supported by a secretariat led by
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. The secretariat will provide facilitation,
project and program development and implementation, research and policy analysis,
administrative support, financial management and communications.
7.Funding
Committee and project team members will contribute their expertise as in-kind services.
Compensation for transportation will be provided for attendance at meetings according
to TRCA policy where these are not covered by their agency or other source. Core
funding for Partners in Project Green will come from both public and private sector
organizations, with specific funding for programs and projects being sought from a
variety of funding sources.
63
Attachment 2
List of Steering Committee Members
Business Representatives
Toby Lennox, Vice President, Corporate Affairs and Communications, GTAA
John Coyne, Vice President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary, Unilever
Mike Brandt, Chief Financial Officer, Monteco Group, representing Ontario Environment
Industry Association
Steven Costello, Vice-President, Unisource
Ferg Devins, Vice President, Government and Public Affairs, Molson
Bob Griesbach, Director of Business Consulting, Hatch Energy, representing Mississauga
Board of Trade
Jane Holmes, Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Woodbine Entertainment Group
Ian Howcroft, Vice President, Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association
Walter Kraus, Senior Director, Environmental Affairs, George Weston Ltd.
Neil Lacheur, Vice President, Property Management, Bentall Real Estate
Eric Lange, President, Lange Transportation
Carmen McClelland, President, Brampton Board of Trade
Darryl Neate, Manager of Sustainable Programs, Oxford Properties
Mark O’Connor, Director, Security and Compliance, Kuehne and Nagel
Dan Pastoric, Executive Vice President and Chief Operation Officer, Enersource
Ernie Springolo, Country Head, Bayer Material Science, Bayer Inc.
Renee Spurrell, Sourcing Manager, General Electric
Anne Tennier, Vice President, Environmental Affairs, Maple Leaf Foods
Blair Wolk, Project Manager, Orlando Corporation
Brad Chittick, Senior Director, Supply Chain, Canadian Tire Retail
Political/Municipal Representatives
Eve Adams, Councillor, Region of Peel/Alternate: Chief Administrative Officer or the
Commissioner of Environment, Transportation and Planning Services, Region of Peel
Bob Delaney, MPP, Mississauga-Streetsville
Suzan Hall, Councillor, City of Toronto
Gael Miles, Councillor, City of Brampton/Alternate: Sandra Hames, Councillor, City of
Brampton
Maja Prentice, Councillor, City of Mississauga
Federal Representative – to be appointed
TRCA
Brian Denney, Chief Administrative Officer
Suzanne Barrett, Chair, Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition (Alternative: Irene Jones,
Vice-Chair, Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition)
_________________________________________
64
RES.#A27/09 -HEART LAKE CONSERVATION AREA
Lease of Lands to Treego and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks. Recommends
lease of land for development of the Heart Lake Conservation Area Tree
Top Adventure Course and Zip Line.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:David Barrow
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has received a proposal
from Treego and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks to enter into a long-term lease of lands for a tree
top adventure course at the Heart Lake Conservation Area, City of Brampton, Regional
Municipality of Peel;
AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA, that, in order to further its objectives as set
out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, it is in the best interests of TRCA to
enter into a lease with Treego and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a lease of lands with Treego
and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks for purposes of a Tree Top Adventure Course and Zip Line at
Heart Lake Conservation Area;
THAT the lease with Treego and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks be on the following terms and
conditions:
(i) the term of the lease will be 10 years with option for a 10 year renewal;
(ii) the rental rate is to be $24,000 annually, plus 5% of gross revenue from the Tree Top
Adventure Course, 10% of gross revenue from the Zip Line Course and an additional
1% of the total gross revenue to be paid to a recognized environmental organization;
(iii) Treego and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks shall be solely responsible for all costs and
approvals associated with the installation, maintenance and repair of the facility;
(iv) Treego and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks shall be solely responsible for payment of any
realty or business taxes levied against the property as a result of this use;
(v) any other terms and conditions deemed appropriate by TRCA's staff and solicitor;
THAT an archaeological review is to be completed, if necessary, at the expense of Treego
and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks with any mitigative measures being carried out to the
satisfaction of TRCA;
THAT the lease be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended, if required;
65
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to implement the lease, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
It is the intention of TRCA to draw additional users to Heart Lake Conservation Area in order to
expand and diversify the client base. An expanded and diversified client base will result in
increased revenue. It is also the intention of TRCA to pursue the recommendations outlined in
the Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan in its entirety.
At Authority Meeting #5/06, held on June 23, 2006, Resolution #A133/06 regarding the Heart
Lake Conservation Area (HLCA) Master Plan was approved as follows:
THAT the Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan, dated June 1, 2006 be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT funding for the implementation of the plan be included in the
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) capital budget plan for Peel Region
2007 – 2011.
One of the key recommendations of the Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan, as outlined
in Chapter 5: “Public Use and Recreation Plan,” is:
The development of a skills development area with ropes course… The skills
development area could be managed by trained HLCA staff, tendered to a private
operator, or managed by a park partner (e.g. City of Brampton, or the Ogada Wilderness
Center).
In 2006, TRCA staff was approached separately by two firms, Arbraska Tree Top Trekking and
D’arbre en Arbre (TreeGo), regarding the possibility of the lease and development of various
TRCA properties for a Tree Top Adventure Course and Zip Line. As a result of these unsolicited
inquiries, and in conjunction with the recently endorsed Heart Lake Conservation Area Master
Plan, staff prepared a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) for the lease and development of a
Heart Lake Conservation Area Tree Top Adventure Course and Zip Line.
Request for Proposals were issued to the following firms on March 19, 2007:
Arbraska TreeTop Trekking;
D’arbre en Arbre (TreeGo);
Challenges Unlimited Inc.;
Impact Learning Solutions;
Adventure Works Associates Inc..
A total of two (2) proposals were received by the proposal deadline of 4:00 PM on April 18,
2007, from the following firms:
Arbraska TreeTop Trekking;
D’arbre en Arbre (TreeGo).
66
At Authority Meeting #8/07, held on October 26, 2007, Resolution #A231/07 regarding the
Heart Lake Heart Lake Conservation Area, Lease of Lands for Tree Top Adventure Course and
Zip Line was approved as follows:
THAT WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a
request from Arbraska Tree Top Trekking to enter into a long-term lease arrangement for
lands at the Heart Lake Conservation Area, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of
Peel;
AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interests of TRCA in
furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to
cooperate with Arbraska Tree Top Trekking in this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a long-term lease of lands with
Arbraska Tree Top Trekking for purposes of a Tree Top Adventure Course and Zip Line at
Heart Lake Conservation Area;
THAT the lease arrangement with Arbraska Tree Top Trekking be premised on the
following:
(i)the term of the lease will be 10 years with option for a 10 year renewal;
(ii)the rental rate is to be $24,000 annually, plus 3% of gross revenue and an additional
1% of gross revenue to be paid to a recognized environmental organization;
(iii)Arbraska Tree Top Trekking shall be solely responsible for all costs associated with
the installation, maintenance and repair of the facility;
(iv)Arbraska Tree Top Trekking shall be solely responsible for payment of any realty or
business taxes levied against the property as a result of this use;
(v)any other terms and conditions deemed appropriate by TRCA's solicitor;
THAT an archaeological review is to be completed, if necessary, at the expense of
Arbraska Tree Top Trekking with any mitigative measures being carried out to the
satisfaction of TRCA;
THAT the lease be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended, if required;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the execution of any documents.
As per Resolution #A231/07 staff proceeded to enter into detailed contract negotiations with
Arbraska Tree Top Trekking. However, the parties were unable to come to a mutually agreeable
contract and TRCA subsequently terminated contract negotiations with Arbraska Tree Top
Trekking.
67
In November 2008, staff again evaluated the viability of a potential tree top adventure course
and zip line at Heart Lake Conservation Area and determined that the development of such a
facility will provide an additional revenue stream to Heart Lake Conservation Area, optimize
sustainable recreational uses and public opportunities for varied user groups and skill, levels
and demonstrate TRCA’s commitment to pursuing the recommendations stipulated in the Heart
Lake Conservation Area Master Plan.
Subsequently, on January 19, 2009 staff invited the following firms and individuals to submit
proposals for the Lease of Lands for the Development of a Tree Top Adventure Course and Zip
Line at Heart Lake Conservation Area:
Arbraska TreeTop Trekking;
TreeGo;
Challenges Unlimited Inc.;
Impact Learning Solutions;
Adventure Works Associates Inc.;
Ryan Rattray;
Anthony McQuilter - Eagle Crest;
Boulder City Climbing School Inc.;
Kamm P. Wu.
The request for quotations closed on February 26, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. Quotations were opened
by the following staff on March 2, 2009:
Doug Miller – Manager, Conservation Parks;
Brad Clubine – Project Manager, Parks and Culture;
Kate Pankov – Administrative Assistant, Restoration Services Centre.
Proposals were received from the following firms:
Treego and Eagle Crest Aerial Parks;
The Tree Top Group (Arbraska Tree Top Trekking);
Kamm P. Wu.
ANALYSIS
Proposals were reviewed and evaluated in detail using the following evaluation criteria:
conceptual design;
correlation with TRCA mission, vision and objectives;
preservation and enhancement of natural and cultural heritage features;
optimization of sustainable recreational uses;
optimization of public opportunities for varied user groups and skill levels;
optimal capital development, improvements and maintenance;
financial viability;
financial compensation to TRCA;
reputation;
references;
any other considerations deemed relevant by TRCA.
68
Staff is satisfied that based on the evaluation criteria, current tree top adventure lease and
development properties in Ontario, Technical Standards and Safety Association (TSSA)
approvals, and various professional association memberships, the proposal submitted by
Treego and Eagle Crest Aerial Parks was superior to the others received.
The proposal received from Treego and Eagle Crest Aerial Parks included the following:
1.Term of Lease
a.10 years with option to renew for an additional 10 years for the same terms and
conditions based on mutual agreement.
2.Financial Details
a.Lease Payment: $24,000 per annum to be paid to TRCA. (base rent increases at the rate
of CPI for the Toronto region).
b.5% of gross revenues from the tree top adventure course to be paid to TRCA.
c.10% of gross revenues from the zip line course to be paid to TRCA.
d.1% of gross revenues to be paid to an environmental based organization.
3.Opening Date
a.June 15, 2009.
4.Operating Season
a.Operating Season (March – October).
5.Design
a.4 adult tree top adventure courses.
b.1 child tree top adventure course.
c.150 metre zip line traversing Heart Lake with a returning Line.
6.Insurance Details
a.Provide public liability, property damage insurance including personal injury liability,
contractual liability, non-owned auto liability and owners and contractors protective
insurance coverage with limits of not less than $5,000,000 for each occurrence.
7.Utilities
a.Pay utility charges.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Upon TRCA approval, the necessary negotiations required to implement the lease and
development of the Heart Lake Conservation Area Tree Top Adventure Course and Zip Line will
be completed subject to terms and conditions satiasfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Treego and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks will be responsible for all costs relating to the
developement, construction, mainentance and operations relating to the Heart Lake
Conservation Area TreeTop Adventure Course and Zip Line.
Based on estimated attendance figures from Treego and Eaglecrest Aerial Parks proposal,
projected TRCA net revenues through to 2011, are as follows:
69
Year Project TRCA Revenues
2009 $ 54,848.00
2010 $ 69,448.00
2011 $ 76,248.00
Report prepared by: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
Date: March 17, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A28/09 -GROWING DURHAM
Official Plan Amendment. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
comments on the proposed Official Plan Amendment.
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT the attached Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff comments on
the "Growing Durham" proposed Official Plan Amendment be endorsed;
AND FURTHER THAT the Region of Durham be so advised.
AMENDMENT #1
RES.#A29/09
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Maria Augimeri
THAT the following be inserted after the first paragraph of the main motion:
THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to pay particular regard to the concerns
expressed in the October 24, 2008 report of the Authority in regard to Resolution
#A236/08: from an environmental, flooding and erosion hazards perspective is this the
right area to grow? a comparison of "whitebelt" agricultural lands viability; land needs
analysis for the ten-year local urban boundary; the completion of Durham’s Master Water
and Wastewater Servicing Study; adding an environmental monitoring component to Five
Year Growth Management Reviews; and completion of an update to the Watershed Plan
for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek;
70
AMENDMENT #2
RES.#A30/09
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Richard Whitehead
THAT the following be inserted after Amendment #1:
THAT given the Region of Durham's proposed policy to have the watershed plan update
undertaken by the City of Pickering, that the Region of Durham and City of Pickering be
requested to ensure that the financial and other resources required to undertake the
watershed plan update are made available on a timely basis and that the subsequent
municipal plans be developed in such a way that the health of the Carruthers Creek
watershed is not only protected but enhanced;
AMENDMENT #1 WASCARRIED
AMENDMENT #2 WASCARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WASCARRIED
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
THAT the attached Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff comments on
the "Growing Durham" proposed Official Plan Amendment be endorsed;
THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to pay particular regard to the concerns
expressed in the October 24, 2008 report of the Authority in regard to Resolution
#A236/08: from an environmental, flooding and erosion hazards perspective is this the
right area to grow? a comparison of "whitebelt" agricultural lands viability; land needs
analysis for the ten-year local urban boundary; the completion of Durham’s Master Water
and Wastewater Servicing Study; adding an environmental monitoring component to Five
Year Growth Management Reviews; and completion of an update to the Watershed Plan
for the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek;
THAT given the Region of Durham's proposed policy to have the watershed plan update
undertaken by the City of Pickering, that the Region of Durham and City of Pickering be
requested to ensure that the financial and other resources required to undertake the
watershed plan update are made available on a timely basis and that the subsequent
municipal plans be developed in such a way that the health of the Carruthers Creek
watershed is not only protected but enhanced;
AND FURTHER THAT the Region of Durham, City of Pickering, Town of Ajax and the
ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and Energy and Infrastructure be so advised.
71
BACKGROUND
TRCA staff last reported on the "Growing Durham" planning study (draft Recommended Growth
Scenario and Policy Directions) at Authority Meeting #8/08, held on October 24, 2008. The
Growing Durham study is the planning process of the Regional Municipality of Durham to
amend their official plan to be in conformity with the provincial Places to Grow Act and Growth
Plan. The report to the Authority made one key recommendation - that prior to incorporating the
headwaters of the Carruthers Creek watershed into the Durham Region 2031 urban boundary,
an update to A Watershed Plan for the Duffins and Carruthers Creek be completed to define a
sustainable natural heritage system and address potential flooding and erosion impacts to
downstream residents and infrastructure.
Staff first reported on this issue of a watershed plan update at Executive Committee Meeting
#5/08, held on July 11, 2008 with the recommendation that an update to the watershed plan be
completed prior to the approval of any secondary plan. The board did not approve the report
but rather directed staff to consider how this position could be strengthened. This resulted in a
staff-amended report to Authority Meeting #6/08, held on July 25, 2008 which recommended
that the watershed plan update take place prior to the approval of the local official plan. There
was considerable debate at the board resulting in a board-initiated amendment to the staff
recommendation to state that the update to the watershed plan should take place prior to the
approval of the regional and local official plans. Staff carried forward this direction from the
board in the subsequent report at Authority Meeting #8/08, held on October 24 in
recommending that the Authority not support amending the Durham Region 2031 urban
boundary until completion of an updated watershed plan for the Carruthers Creek watershed.
Growing Durham - Proposed Amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan
Durham's proposed amendment has moved to the middle ground of adopting TRCA's
recommendation to update the watershed plan prior to the expansion of the Durham Region
2031 urban boundary. The consultant's early recommendation was that the watershed plan
update take place in conjunction with approval of a secondary plan at the local municipal level
of planning. The current draft policy proposes that an approved watershed plan would be
required as part of the planning process to expand urban boundaries at the local municipal
official plan amendment (OPA) stage. An OPA to expand urban boundaries at the local level
(City of Pickering, in the case of Carruthers Creek headwaters) would only be considered as
part of a comprehensive review of the local official plan, including among other requirements, a
secondary plan that is prepared based on an approved watershed plan. Durham has correctly
indicated that an update to the watershed plan could not be completed by June 2009, the date
their Growth Plan conformity amendment is required for the province.
TRCA planning staff is satisfied that updating the watershed plan prior to expanding urban
boundaries at the local municipal level represents sound and reasonable environmental
planning. The Authority can be assured that TRCA will undertake an update to the watershed
plan at the appropriate time with the engagement of all stakeholders. This work will ensure that
the environmental implications of development in the headwaters are comprehensive and
incorporate the latest scientific approaches, as advanced in the Rouge and Humber watershed
plans, the emerging knowledge base gained through CTC source protection work, the study of
the nearshore of Lake Ontario and the vital role played by watersheds draining into Lake
Ontario.
72
Attachment 1 lists detailed suggestions that TRCA staff feel should be incorporated into the
OPA. These suggested modifications are proposed to:
add clarity through specific wording changes;
add to the principles for developing a sustainable urban system the need to conduct a
Master Environmental Servicing Plan as a key component study in preparing secondary
plans; and
amending Schedule A, Map A4 Regional Structure, to show the two tributaries of the
Carruthers Creek in north east Pickering as designated Major Open Space Areas.
The staff report to Authority Meeting #8/08, held on October 24, 2008 identified several other
issues that should be addressed prior to approval of the Regional OPA. These issues and how
they were addressed are shown in Attachment 2, which is excerpted from the consultant's
report detailing all agency and public comments.
Report prepared by: David Burnett, extension 5361
Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361
Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca
Date: March 16, 2009
Attachments: 2
73
Attachment 1
Growing Durham – Proposed Amendment to the Regional Official Plan
Policy #Proposed Policy Suggested Modification
3.3.10 Recognizing important economic drivers
including the future airport in Pickering.
Add “potential” in front of “future”.
7.3.13 e)List of criteria and studies on which a
secondary plan should be based,
including:
i) an approved watershed plan;
i) Language should be included to ensure that the
watershed plan is current, such as “a watershed plan
approved no more than 5 years prior to the initiation of
the secondary plan process”.
Add a new criteria “(ix) a comprehensive Master
Environmental Servicing Plan to include, in addition to
other matters, hydrological, hydrogeological and
geotechnical analyses which address groundwater
recharge and discharge, aquifer vulnerability, water
balance and aquatic management.”
8.2.1 List of principles for developing a
sustainable urban system.
Revise section g) to state: “…road pattern while
ensuring the protection and enhancement of the
natural heritage system.”
Add a new principle “(i) best practices in water
management including ensuring that pre- to post-
development water balance is conserved.”
10C.2.1 EIS requirements for development along
the Lake Ontario waterfront.
e) add a new study requirement to address Natural
Hazards pursuant to section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy
Statement.
15A -
Definitions
Definition of “sustainable communities” as
it relates to alternative transportation
options.
After “options” add in “including active transportation”,
a DROP-defined term that includes walking and
cycling.
Exhibit 4
Schedule A
Map A4
Regional
Structure
All rivers shown on this schedule in the
urban areas and “whitebelt” lands are
designated as Major Open Space Areas of
the Greenlands System – except for the 2
main tributaries of the Carruthers Creek in
the proposed north-east Pickering
expansion lands.
These Carruthers Creek main tributaries identified in
the DROP as key natural heritage features should be
designated as MOS area through this amendment so
that they are part of the Regional Greenlands System.
74
Attachment 2
75
76
RES.#A31/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed
Thornhill Ravines Development Corporation, CFN 41998. Purchase of
property located east of Dufferin Street, south of Major Mackenzie Drive,
City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Don River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B3/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT 10.22 hectares (25.26 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 19,
Concession 2 and designated as Blocks 55 and 56 on a draft Plan of Subdivision
prepared by Schaeffer & Dzaldov Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Job No.
03-585-00A, dated August 20, 2008, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York,
located east of Dufferin Street, south of Major Mackenzie Drive, be purchased from
Thornhill Ravines Development Corporation;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to
execute all necessary documentation required.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A32/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed
Rutherford Contwo Investments Limited, CFN 42009. Purchase of
property located south of Rutherford Road and east of Dufferin Street,
City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Don River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B4/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
77
THAT 1.17 hectares (2.90 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 15,
Concession 2 and designated as Blocks 197 and 198 on a Draft Plan of Subdivision
prepared by Schaeffer & Dzaldov Limited, Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Job No.
05-089-01B, dated January 14, 2009, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York,
located south of Rutherford Road and east of Dufferin Street, be purchased from
Rutherford Contwo Investments Limited;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to
execute all necessary documentation required.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A33/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed
Urbacon Properties Limited, CFN 42019. Purchase of property located
west of Hwy 404, north of Major Mackenzie Drive, Town of Richmond Hill,
Regional Municipality of York, under the “Greenlands Acquisition Project
for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River
watershed.
(Executive Res.#B5/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT 9.52 hectares (23.52 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Parts of Lot 22 and
23, Concession 3 and designated as Blocks 5, 11, 12, 13 and 14 on draft M-Plan prepared
by Krcmar. OLS under job no. 05-069, Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of
York, located west of Hwy 404, north of Major Mackenzie Drive, be purchased from
Urbacon Properties Limited;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
78
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to
execute all necessary documentation required.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A34/09 -EMPLOYEE EXPENSE POLICY
Amendment. Approval of amendment to Section 5.0 - to
Conferences/Training Courses and Travel of the Employee Expense
Policy.
(Executive Res.#B6/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT Section 5.0 - Conferences/Training Courses and Travel, of the Employee Expense
Policy be amended, as outlined below in staff report.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A35/09 -SEATON TRAIL AGREEMENT
Ontario Realty Corporation, Province of Ontario. Recommends approval
to enter into agreement with Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) for
funding and construction of a portion of the Seaton Trail
(Executive Res.#B9/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT confidential item 7.5 - Seaton Trail Agreement be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back when the item is completed and can be made
public.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A36/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Richard Whitehead
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT Section II items 9.1 - 9.6, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes
#1/09, held on March 6, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
79
Section II Items 9.1 - 9.6, Inclusive
REVISED PROJECT FOR THE ETOBICOKE MOTEL STRIP WATERFRONT PARK (Revised
March, 1993)
(Executive Res.#B10/09)
SOURCE PROTECTION PLANNING
(Executive Res.#B11/09)
ALBION HILLS FIELD CENTRE RETROFIT PROJECT
(Executive Res.#B12/09)
REGIONAL WATERSHED MONITORING NETWORK
(Executive Res.#B13/09)
OUT OF COUNTRY TRAVEL
(Executive Res.#B14/09)
ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD HEARING
(Executive Res.#B15/09)
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A37/09 -FLOOD FORECASTING AND WARNING PROGRAM
2008 Annual Report and 2009 Work Plan. Annual update on the status of
the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Flood Forecasting and
Warning Program and highlights of current initiatives.
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Colleen Jordan
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the presentation by Laurian Farrell, Manager, Water
Resources (Etobicoke/Mimico), TRCA, in regard to Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority's (TRCA) Flood Forecasting and Warning Program be deferred to Authority
Meeting #3/09, to be held on April 24, 2009;
AND FURTHER THAT the TRCA Flood Forecasting and Warning Program 2008 annual
report and the 2009 work plan as they relate to the Provincial Flood Forecasting and
Warning Implementation Guidelines be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
TRCA staff continued to work throughout 2008 to achieve the objectives outlined in the 2008
work plan, which was received at Authority Meeting #2/08. The work plan was created to allow
the program to meet TRCA's obligations under the Provincial Flood Forecasting and Warning
Implementation Guidelines for Conservation Authorities and the Ministry of Natural Resources
(MNR). These guidelines were based on the GTA Flood Group's Flood Forecasting and
Warning Standards, and were adopted by the Province of Ontario in August of 2008. In
addition, deficiencies in the program which were identified after the August 19, 2005 severe
storm event continue to be addressed through many of the initiatives brought forward in the
work plan.
80
Highlights of the 2008/2009 Work Plan
In 2008, a number of significant goals were realized and are highlighted below:
1.In 2007, the Flood Forecasting and Warning Program focused on staff training and
building capacity into the system. In 2008 TRCA's attention turned to Flood Operations,
as we experienced a year of record rainfall. In total, 23 messages were issued
including: 18 High Water Safety Bulletins, 3 Flood Advisories and 1 Flood Warning.
These events represented numerous opportunities to test our operating system and to
put recent training into practice. The Chief Flood Duty Officer (CFDO) role which was
introduced in 2007 proved to be a significant improvement to operations, as did the
addition of real-time gauge sites across the jurisdiction and the re-establishment of the
River Watch Program (our “eyes in the field”).
2.The real-time gauging network was expanded with the installation of 2 new real-time
stream gauges and 3 new real-time precipitation gauges. Precipitation gauges at
Claireville Dam, Milne Dam and G. Ross Lord Dam were upgraded to heated “all
weather” gauges. Improvements to the functionality of the TRCA gauging website
(utilized by flood duty officers during events) were also implemented.
3.Significant progress was made on the update to TRCA’s Flood Control Strategy (1980)
with the completion of a “query process tool” that assesses the benefit of implementing
flood protection and/or remedial works at flood vulnerable areas (FVA’s). This work
formed part of the Flood Protection and Remedial Capital Works Strategy Update by
Philips Engineering Ltd.. The tool has been tested on the Humber River watershed, and
the next step will be to complete the analysis across the entire jurisdiction to develop a
list of priority sites where flood conditions may be reduced or eliminated. As part of this
study, a pilot EA project has been initiated in the Rockcliffe SPA (Black Creek between
Weston Road and Scarlett Road, in the City of Toronto).
4.TRCA owns and operates flood control infrastructure, such as large and small scale
dams, flood control channels and dykes. In 2008 channel inspections were conducted
and a number of maintenance projects were undertaken. Of note is the successful
interim repair of a significant erosion scar at the Pickering/Ajax Dyke using natural
channel design principles. A study is currently underway to determine a permanent
design to address erosion at this location. In addition, channel cleanouts of sediment
and debris were conducted at the Black Creek (Rockcliffe area, Toronto) and the
Brampton by-pass channel in the Etobicoke Creek watershed. A study was initiated to
address sedimentation in the York Mills channel at Hogg's Hollow in the Don River
watershed.
5.Communications were improved through the re-establishment of TRCA’s connection to
the Toronto Police Metronet Radio system (providing a critical backup communications
system in the event of the failure of telephone and cell phone systems). Media relations
were also strengthened during 2008, which was evident by the media’s consistent and
accurate reporting of our flood messages.
81
6.In October 2008, a presentation was made to TRCA’s Executive Committee regarding
lessons learned at the 2008 Flood Recovery Innovation & Response (FRIAR)
Conference which was held in London, England. One of the key findings was the need
to improve public communications. A request was made by the Executive Committee to
bring forward a plan to address this issue in the work plan for 2009 (Attachment 1 -
Section 3: Communications). The plan identifies only a few of the options for achieving
the goal of improved public communications and at this stage ideas are only conceptual
in nature due to current budget and timing constraints. A scoped project description
will be brought forward in the budget requests for 2010 with the aim of advancing this
aspect of the program.
The Provincial Flood Forecasting and Warning Implementation Guidelines (August, 2008)
identify four program delivery areas: i) Program Delivery/Administration; ii) Forecasting, iii)
Communications and iv) Flood Operations. A status report detailing works completed in 2008
under each delivery area, along with a work plan for 2009, is outlined in Attachment 1. All
program elements can be categorized under these program delivery areas and the main
elements of the 2009 work plan as they relate to the four program delivery areas are listed
below:
i)Program Delivery/Administration
Baseline knowledge of the watersheds will continue to be expanded through a number
of projects including: the Watershed Response Project, field inventories of flood control
structures and the completion of the Flood Protection and Remedial Capital Works
Study.
Improvements to TRCA's monitoring network will continue with the addition of 3 new
real-time stream gauges located on Miller Creek (in the Duffins Creek watershed, Town
of Ajax), German Mills Creek (in the Don Watershed, Town of Richmond Hill) and Font
Hill Creek (in the Rouge River watershed, Town of Markham). TRCA is currently
monitoring 14 wet weather sampling stations in partnership with the City of Toronto.
Operations and maintenance of 31 existing stream gauges and 32 precipitation gauges
will continue through 2009. Quick and efficient access to the information provided by
these gauges will assist flood duty officers in their decision making process during
significant rainfall events. In addition, all flood thresholds that are currently identified in
the flood manuals will be updated in 2009 based on the most up to date topographic
information.
ii)Forecasting
TRCA staff will continue flood forecasting and warning operations. The completion of
the Watershed Response project will result in new tools to analyze the potential for
flooding. The first phase of the project was to develop a tool to convert radar data to
precipitation amounts in “real-time”. The final phase is nearing completion and will
result in the development of watershed based hydraulic models that use the input data
from radar to provide more refined predictions than current methodologies allow (in
terms of flood levels and flood locations).
82
iii)Communications
Flood Warning staff will continue to work with TRCA’s Marketing and Communications
Department to enhance the flood forecasting and warning centre on our website.
Contact with Toronto Police’s Marine Unit and the City of Toronto’s Strategic Marketing
Office will continue to ensure proper coordination of messages. In addition, TRCA will
be holding workshops for our member municipalities to clarify the roles and
responsibilities of the various agencies and to provide information on flood forecasting
and warning operations. A study will be undertaken to identify options (and preliminary
costs) for improving communication with the public. Emphasis will be placed on
emergency preparedness and public safety.
iv)Flood Operations
Improvements to the Emergency Operations Centre at TRCA's Head Office will continue
as required (e.g. upgrading of computer equipment, stocking of food and water for stay
during extended events etc.). Training sessions for staff will be conducted at regular
intervals throughout the year to reinforce the technical requirements for flood
forecasting and warning. A training exercise will also be conducted for essential staff
that will focus on an extreme event scenario. Methods for documenting flood events will
be improved with the completion of a Flood Event Documentation Database.
The weather systems of 2008 required the devotion of the majority of staff time to flood
operations. Fortunately, the systems that were in place functioned as expected and staff were
able to confidently carry out their duties during all of the severe weather events. One of the
main goals of the 2009 work plan is to complete a number of previous initiatives (i.e., the Flood
Protection and Remedial Capital Works Strategy and the Watershed Response Project).
Another key component, which is a new initiative for 2009, will be the development and
implementation of a public communications strategy.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funds have been identified in the 2009 operating budget (account 115-60) for general program
operations. Capital funds for 2009 are identified to undertake any project activities identified in
the 2009 work plan. Funding provided by Peel Region to address the issues of climate change
has allowed for the advancement of the Watershed Response Project, the results of which are
already proving to be instrumental in our efforts to provide timely and accurate information to
our municipal partners and the public during significant flood events.
Report prepared by: Laurian Farrell, extension 5601
Email: lfarrell@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Laurian Farrell, extension 5601
Email: lfarrell@trca.on.ca
Date: March 17, 2009
Attachments: 1
83
Attachment 1
TRCA Flood Forecasting and Warning Program Work Plan 2008/2009
Section 1: Program Delivery/Administration
To develop and maintain an administrative framework to facilitate and support flood forecasting and warning.
GTA Flood Standard
Component
Work Completed in 2008 Work Proposed for 2009
Develop Baseline Knowledge
of Watershed
A database for flood control structures was developed
and populated
Flood control channel inspections
Pickering/Ajax Dyke interim repair of erosion scar
Black Creek Channel clean out
Black Creek Channel concrete slab replacement at
Lambton G.C.
Secord Dam inspection report completed by Hatch Ltd.
Survey conducted at York Mills Channel
Cleanout of sediment in Brampton Channel
Field visits carried out to flood forecast locations to
familiarize staff with these areas
Tours and training conducted for G. Ross Lord Dam and
Claireville Dam
Flood Protection & Remedial Capital Works project 75%
complete)
Developed a radar data conversion tool which will be
used during flood event operations to predict flooding
Integration of Flood Control Structure database
into Erosion Control database (combine Water
Management information with Restoration
Services).
Annual field inventory, assessment and prioritization
for all flood control facilities to be carried out
Fluvial and hydraulic assessment of
Pickering/Ajax Dyke
Emergency repair of Secord Dam collapsed
culvert
York Mills Channel Hydraulic Assessment and
Maintenance Study – Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Stouffville Channel clean out
Concrete repairs at Brampton Channel
Flood Protection & Remedial Capital Works
project to be completed (including risk
assessment and cost-benefit analysis for entire
jurisdiction)
Completion of a pilot Environmental Assessment
project for Flood Protection & Remedial Capital
Works: the Black Creek EA, Toronto
Complete the Watershed Response project and
implement findings into daily operation
procedures (in particular this information will be
used to provide more detailed flood messages in
terms of locations of anticipated flooding etc.)
Thresholds for flooding at all stream gauges
locations will be updated based on the most up
to date topographic information available.
Establish Monitoring
Network
Installation of 2 new real-time stream gauges at Taylor
Massey Creek and Krosno Creek.
Continued monitoring and maintenance of 17 existing
stream gauges
Continued monitoring at 10 snow course locations
Installed, maintained, monitored and retrieved rainfall
data from 32 precipitation stations
Upgrade of 3 precipitation gauges to real-time (Laidlaw
Bus Depot, Albion Hills CA, and G. Ross Lord Dam)
Precipitation gauges at Claireville Dam, Milne Dam, and
G. Ross Lord Dam upgraded to heated "all weather"
gauges
Approvals finalized for the construction of 3 new
real-time stream gauges located on Miller Creek,
German Mills Creek, and Font Hill Creek.
Construction expected to begin in spring 2009.
Continue operation and maintenance of 31
existing stream gauges
Continue operation and maintenance of 32
existing precipitation gauges
Continue monitoring at 10 snow course locations
Continue maintenance and monitoring of 14 wet
weather sampling stations in partnership with the
City of Toronto
Review need for ice monitoring program and
prepare documentation
84
Undertake Yearly Training of
Staff
Training completed by staff included:
Toronto OEM
Flood Forecasting Modelling
Ice Jam & River Watch Tours
Dam Operations
River Watch
Security and Communications
Annual Training Modules to be provided in 2009 to
staff as required:
Program Overview
Daily Planning Cycle
Dam Tours & Dam Operations
Major Event Operations
Safety Training
First Aid Training
Toronto Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
Ice Jam & River Watch Tours
River Watch
Media Training
Security and Communications
Watershed Response
Real Time Gauging & Website Updates
In addition, an emergency operations exercise will be
conducted for all Flood Warning and Essential Staff.
Document Historical Flow
Events
Ongoing operation procedures to document significant
events
Along with Toronto Water, TRCA staff presented a paper
at the May 2008 Institute for Catastrophic Loss
Conference on "The August 19th, 2005 Storm and Urban
Flooding Impacts"
TRCA staff presented an analysis of Summer 2008 storm
events to Durham Region
Analysis of historical events in TRCA jurisdiction was
conducted by staff as part of the Watershed Response
Project
The creation of an ACCESS based database to
document significant events is underway, and will be
completed in 2009. This will allow for information to
be standardized and consolidated in one location
(includes data from daily operating procedures,
photographs from events, messages, media articles
etc).
Maintain Liaison with
Municipalities and Local
Emergency Response
Groups
Partnership between GTA Flood Group and Environment
Canada to examine IDF curve updates continued
Continued interaction with City of Toronto Emergency
Management Office
Re-established protocols with Toronto Police for use of
the Metronet Radio service (backup radio
communications)
ongoing as needed
continue to work with the GTA Flood Forecasting
and Warning Group and the Provincial Flood
Warning Group to advance the program
Coordinate with TRCA Education Team to train
School Boards on protocols for disseminating
information in Messages
TRCA hosted a "meet & greet" with Environment
Canada staff from the Weather Office in February
2009
A joint Municipal Flood Forecasting & Warning
Workshop will be held on April 17, 2009 by TRCA
and the Credit Valley Conservation Authority (CVC)
to provide our shared municipalities with information
about our respective program operations
Maintain Adequate Flood
Plain Mapping and Hydraulic
Model in Accordance with
FDRP Technical Standards
Mimico Creek Hydrology Update completed
Humber River updates to mapping for: Bolton SPA,
Woodbridge SPA, Caledon East and Black Creek (6 map
sheets in total)
Etobicoke Creek Hydraulic Update to be completed in
Spring 2009 (currently 90% complete)
Mimico Creek Hydraulic Update to be completed in
Fall 2009 (currently 50% complete)
Undertake updates to various mapsheets across the
jurisdiction as required
Develop and Maintain the
Flood Forecasting (FFOR)
Model
Initiated the Watershed Response project to develop a
radar based TRCA flood forecasting model
Develop SWMM models for the various watersheds
and utilize radar data to allow for near real-time flood
prediction
85
Develop and Maintain a
Flood Site Database
Flood Vulnerable Database updated for all watersheds
in 2008
Continue to update Flood Vulnerable Database as
new map sheets are created.
Conduct Yearly Update of
Flood Contingency Manual
2008 update completed and distributed to partners annual update for 2009 was completed in January of
this year
Develop and Maintain
Operations Manual
Peer Review of OMS Manual for G. Ross Lord Dam and
Claireville Dam
River Watch Manual updated
Complete Milne/Stouffville Dam OMS update
Ongoing updates to the Flood Warning Manual
Prepare for Emergency
Operations
Weekly Flood Forecasting & Warning meetings were
held in 2008 to recap the events of the week and to alert
all personnel of imminent flood events
All flood warning personnel have been equipped with
Flood Duty Officer Safety Kits
Flood warning personnel have prepared personal 72
hour emergency kits
Annual training of key operational components was
stressed as an important factor for emergency
preparedness.
The River Watch Program was re-established and
training was conducted.
Flood Warning stream gauges programmed to call out
to FDO’s if high rainfall or water levels are present
allowing for improved response times during flood
events
Maintained, monitored and retrieved water level data
from 8 wells at Claireville Dam
Monthly inspections of Claireville, G. Ross, Milne, and
Stouffville Dams were conducted.
Claireville wing wall repair initiated by consultant (Hatch
Acres Ltd.)
Stouffville Dam Structural Study completed by Hatch
Ltd.
Safety signs installed and vegetation removal at large
dams
Weekly FDO meetings will be continued
A Major Event Exercise will be undertaken with all
TRCA Flood Duty staff and Essential staff during
2009.
Standard media messages will be developed to assist
CFDO’s in fielding media questions.
Develop a business continuity strategy for the flood
warning program to be added to the Operations
Manual
Continue monthly inspection of Claireville, G. Ross,
Milne, and Stouffville Dams.
Replacement of transfer switch for the Generator at G.
Ross Lord Dam
Complete Dam Safety Reviews for small dams
(Palgrave, Albion Hills, High Hills and Secord Dams)
Complete Claireville Dam Wing Wall repair (Hatch
Ltd.)
Section 2: Forecasting
To understand and quantify the response and potential impacts within watersheds to specific events
GTA Flood Standard
Component
Work Completed in 2008 Work Proposed for 2009
Follow Daily Planning Cycle
ongoing on a daily basis with
improvements/modifications as needed
ongoing on a daily basis with
improvements/modifications as needed
86
Section 3: Communications
To inform clients of the potential or actual impact of flood events in a concise and timely manner.
GTA Flood Standard
Component
Work Completed in 2008 Work Proposed for 2009
Establish Internal and
External Communications
Protocol
Continued to follow media communications protocol
with TRCA Marketing Department
Provided on-going information and advice to municipal
clients and CA staff
Re-established use of Metronet backup radio system
with Metro Police
Improvements were made to the relationship with local
media and consistent messaging was used
Provided input to Conservation Ontario’s initiative to
standardize Conservation Authorities flood related pages
on websites (TRCA’s website was used as a model)
A major focus for 2009 will be to investigate ways to
provide timely and useful information to the public.
The approach to achieve this goal may include the
development of publications (brochures, flood safety
postcards, ebulletins etc), methods for identifying
watersheds and flood vulnerability on our website,
and messaging to targeted geographical areas to
name a few.
Continue to provide information and advice to
municipal clients and CA staff
Develop a protocol in cooperation with the Weather
Network to provide automated Flood Messages to
media outlets. Advance discussions with MNR and
other CA’s to make this a Provincial initiative.
Enhance the Flood Forecasting & Warning Centre
pages on TRCA’s corporate website
Contact with the Toronto Police Marine Unit and the
City of Toronto’s Strategic Communications Office
was initiated in early 2009 to establish
communications protocols and common messages.
This relationship will be fosters on an ongoing basis
Section 4: Flood Operations
To provide on-going information and advice to municipal clients and CA staff.
GTA Flood Standard
Component
Work Completed in 2008 Work Proposed for 2009
Maintain an Emergency
Operations Centre
Operation of the EOC at Head Office was continued and
an open house was held for TRCA staff (December
2008)
continue to operate EOC at Head Office and upgrade
equipment as required
Monitor Flood Events In 2008, 23 messages were issued including 18 High
Water Safety Bulletins and 4 Flood Advisories and 1
Flood Warning. This represents twice the number of
messages issued in 2007.
ongoing as needed
Follow Reasonable Safety
Procedures
ongoing as needed ongoing as needed
annual safety training to be provided to staff
Document Flood Events ongoing as needed
The development of a new database system for
recording data during significant events was started
paperless documentation was adopted using
Laserfische to store digital copies of all messages
ongoing as needed
a new database system for recording data during
significant events will be completed in 2009
Document Communications
with Internal and External
Clients
communications documented on daily planning cycle
spreadsheet and in log book - all documents on file
ongoing as needed
87
Support Internal and External
Clients
ongoing as needed
letters in support of the Weather Network’s application
to remain part of the basic cable service were sent by
TRCA to the CRTC
Data analysis for the Summer of 2008 storm event
provided to Durham Region to assist with basement
flooding studies
ongoing as needed
Debrief Authority Staff A presentation to TRCA Directors was given to report on
the status of the Flood Forecasting & Warning Program
and the general program operations in 2008
Weekly FDO meetings held to recap the events of the
week and to provide an update on expected weather
ongoing as needed
Debrief River Watch
Personnel
Enforcement staff were instrumental in providing "eyes
in the field" information to FDO’s during significant
events
Ongoing operations of the River Watch program will
continue with training provided to Enforcement staff
annually
_________________________________________
88
RES.#A38/09 -REVISED PROJECT FOR THE ETOBICOKE MOTEL STRIP
WATERFRONT PARK (Revised March, 1993)
V. and E. Gadzala Holdings Limited and 412264 Ontario Limited, CFN
24191. Receipt of the decision and order of the Ontario Municipal Board
relating to compensation for injurious affection resulting from the
expropriation of lands from V. and E. Gadzala Holdings Limited and
412264 Ontario Limited.
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT the following Resolution #A183/08 approved at Authority Meeting #6/08, held on
July 25, 2008, be received and become part of the public record:
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) appeal the decision
delivered by S. J. Stefanko and the Order of the Ontario Municipal Board relating to
compensation for injurious affection resulting from the expropriation of rear
portion of land municipally known as 2143 and 2147 Lakeshore Boulevard West,
City of Toronto, from V. and E. Gadzala Holdings Limited and 412264 Ontario
Limited as prescribed by the Expropriations Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 148, as
amended;
THAT staff be directed to instruct TRCA's legal counsel, Chappell, Bushell, Stewart,
to take such action as is necessary to implement the appeal of the decision
delivered by S. J. Stefanko and the Order of the Ontario Municipal Board;
AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto and the Province of Ontario be so advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #6/08, held on July 25, 2008, Resolution #A183/08 was approved in
camera. Private minutes were retained as a record of this item at the meeting. For
transparency, TRCA reports back on in camera items when they can become public so a
record of the resolution appears in public minutes.
RATIONALE
At the time the report was prepared, information contained in the report included confidential
advice from TRCA's solicitor and direction to TRCA's solicitor. Now that the appeal has been
heard by the Divisional Court and the Divisional Court has rendered its decision, TRCA's
direction to Chappell, Bushell, Stewart is no longer confidential. Details relating to the
Divisional Court decision are set out in a report to the Executive Committee at meeting #1/09
held on March 6, 2009.
Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 or Ron Dewell, extension 5223
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca or rdewell@trca.on.ca
Date: March 10, 2009
_________________________________________
89
RES.#A39/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT Section IV item 7.10.1 in regard to watershed committee minutes, be received.
CARRIED
Section IV Items 7.10.1
ETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHEDS COALITION
Minutes of Meeting #4/08, held on November 20, 2008.
_________________________________________
RES.#A40/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGUALTION 166/06
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items 10.1 - 10.33, inclusive, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #1/09, held on March 6, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:45 p.m., on Friday, March 27, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
90
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #3/09
April 24, 2009
The Authority Meeting #3/09, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village,
on Friday, April 24, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to order at
9:40 a.m..
PRESENT
Eve Adams Member
Maria AugimeriVice Chair
David Barrow Member
Bryan Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Grant Gibson Member
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Jack Heath Member
Colleen JordanMember
Bonnie Littley Member
Glenn Mason Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
Linda Pabst Member
John Parker Member
Anthony PerruzzaMember
John SprovieriMember
ABSENT
Paul Ainslie Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Glenn De BaeremaekerMember
Mike Del GrandeMember
Bill Fisch Member
Reenga MathivananMember
Maja Prentice Member
Gino Rosati Member
Richard WhiteheadMember
91
RES.#A41/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: David Barrow
Seconded by: Suzan Hall
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #2/09, held on March 27, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Laurian Farrell, Manager, Water Resources (Etobicoke/Mimico), and
Sameer Dhalla, Manager, Water Resources (Highland/Don/Duffins/Carruthers), TRCA, in
regard to TRCA's Flood Forecasting and Warning Program.
(b)A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services, TRCA, in regard
to item - 2009 Operating and Capital Budget.
RES.#A42/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
RES.#A43/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT above-noted presentation (b) be heard and received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A44/09 -NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND STAND ALONE PROJECTS
IMPLEMENTATION
2009-2010 Sole Source, City of Toronto. Recommending approval to
proceed with project implementation of various natural environment and
stand alone projects within the City of Toronto.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Colleen Jordan
92
THAT implementation of various natural environment and stand alone projects as
approved by the City of Toronto as part of the 2009 - 2010 sole source project list, be
approved;
THAT implementation be subject to funding from the City of Toronto and terms and
conditions satisfactory to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as is
necessary to implement the approved projects, including obtaining needed approvals,
tendering of work, signing of contracts and execution of documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
TRCA has partnered with the City of Toronto for many years to provide project design,
coordination of approvals and implementation services in support of City-led natural
environment projects throughout the City and across the Toronto waterfront.
In 2006, the City formalized the process and requested TRCA to enter into an agreement which
stipulated terms and conditions for the supply and delivery of projects and services in
accordance with an approved list of projects. The agreement also provided a mechanism by
which TRCA could invoice the City to recover costs for the services and materials supplied.
More recently, the City of Toronto adopted a Financial Control By-Law that stipulates payments
for specific works can be processed without the need for a formal agreement provided the
projects have been identified and have received prior approval by the City in accordance with
their policies and procedures.
For 2009-2010, the approved list of projects/works is as follows:
LOCATION & FEATURE DESCRIPTION OF WORK APPROVED
PROJECT
COST (GST
Included)
STAND ALONE PROJECTS
Todmorden Mills Wildflower Preserve design and implement habitat protection and
enhancement projects
$120,000
Don Valley Brickworks Biodredging undertake pilot project to study biodredging for
aquatic vegetation management
$50,000
Cherry Beach Lakebottom Study GPS/side scan sonar shoreline survey to map
subsurface concrete rubble at Cherry Beach
$8,000
Dogs Off Leash Area Fencing - Sunnybrook,
Bickford and Trinity Bellwoods Parks
install fencing to protect natural environment
areas
$35,000
Trees Across Toronto - Rennie Park and Pine
Point Park
install farm fencing to protect newly
established plantings
$16,000
Ravine Management - High Park install fencing to protect species and sensitive
habitats
$8,000
Trees Across Toronto - Winston Churchill Park implement slope protection measures and
install fencing
$16,000
Trees Across Toronto - Deer Control Fencing -
Humber (Albion) and Rouge
install deer exclosure fencing to protect Trees
Across Toronto plantings at two sites
$8,000
93
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS
City Wide Environmental Initiatives - Milliken
Park Pond Study and Lookout
design and install amphibian habitat viewing
node
$20,000
City Wide Environmental Initiatives - East Point
Park
design and installation of a rain shelter for
protection and interpretive programming
$50,000
City Wide Environmental Initiatives - East Don
Trail
implement Phase 1 construction on the East
Don trail network
$645,000
City Wide Environmental Initiatives -
Interpretive Program
install interpretive signage at various locations $20,000
Milkman's Lane/Beltline Trail implement drainage improvements/erosion
repairs/fencing to improve trail conditions for
safe pedestrian/bicycle access
$100,000
Lower Don Valley Environmental Restoration
and Access
design and construct 1 km natural surface
intermediate single track mountain bike trail at
Crothers Woods, rehabilitate unauthorized
trails
$150,000
Total Request - Stand Alone and Natural Environment projects
$1,346,000
RATIONALE
TRCA and the City of Toronto have a long history of working together on a number of
regeneration and habitat enhancement projects. Many of these projects are on TRCA-owned
lands of which the City is responsible for management.
TRCA is recognized by the City of Toronto as being able to provide cost-effective management
of watershed related projects due to highly specialized expertise, the ability to expedite
required approvals and permits, facilitate community involvement and meet tight timelines.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
All expenditures made in the delivery and management of these approved projects are fully
reimbursable from the City of Toronto.
Tendering and purchases of goods and services will be conducted in accordance with TRCA's
Purchasing Policy.
Report prepared by: Dave Rogalsky, extension 5378
Emails: drogalsky@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Dave Rogalsky, extension 5378
Emails: drogalsky@trca.on.ca
Date: April 01, 2009
_________________________________________
94
RES.#A45/09 -LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
MANUAL
Draft Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Manual and
next steps to facilitate its implementation.
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT the Draft Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Manual (November
2008) prepared for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and Credit Valley
Conservation Authority (CVC) be received;
THAT staff be directed to disseminate the draft manual to municipal staff, the
development industry and other agencies through a workshop and a posting on the
Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program website;
THAT staff be directed to finalize the manual with input from municipal staff, the
development industry and other agencies with experience in Low Impact Development;
THAT staff be directed to develop a stormwater management criteria document, in
consultation with municipal, provincial and other interested stakeholders, that presents
an integrated set of stormwater management criteria (flood protection, water quality
control, erosion control, water balance) which may be used to select and size stormwater
management practices presented in the Low Impact Development Stormwater
Management Manual;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority when the draft stormwater
management criteria document has been developed.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Control of peak flows and attention to water quality, integral parts of the current practice of
stormwater management, are achieving significant benefits in some areas toward protection of
property and public safety, and minimizing the contaminant levels reaching rivers and streams.
However, future scenario modelling reported in TRCA’s recently completed watershed plans
(Rouge, Don and Humber rivers), the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Management Master
Plan and recent research, have concluded that traditional end-of-pipe stormwater management
is not achieving the level of control we now realize is necessary to protect the health of our
streams, rivers, lakes, fisheries and adjacent terrestrial habitat.
TRCA has been extensively involved in integrated watershed-wide environmental monitoring for
many years. The results of this monitoring have shown that the environmental health of our
watersheds continue to decline as urbanization increases. This environmental deterioration has
taken place despite widespread compliance with provincial and municipal requirements for
stormwater management planning and facility design. Conventional stormwater management,
which focuses on controlling peak flow rate and the concentration of suspended solids, has
failed to address the widespread and cumulative hydrologic modifications in watersheds that
increase the volume of stormwater, increase the runoff rate, and cause excessive erosion and
degradation of stream channels.
95
Computer modelling completed as part of TRCA's watershed plans and recent research
conducted by Dr. MacRae (2006), concluded that current practices to offset the hydrologic
effects of urbanization are insufficient to prevent increased erosion and deterioration of aquatic
habitat in streams. Long term monitoring data throughout Ontario has also shown that even
small incremental changes in watershed hydrology commensurate with an increase in
impermeable surfaces of 4%, can result in changes in stream channel characteristics and
aquatic communities. To offset these impacts, an increased emphasis on maintaining natural
water balance and replicating the pre-development hydrologic cycle is required.
Low Impact Development (LID) is a stormwater management strategy that seeks to maintain
natural water balance and mitigate the impacts of increased runoff and stormwater pollution.
LID comprises a set of site design approaches and small scale stormwater practices that
promote the use of natural systems for infiltration, evapotranspiration and reuse of rainwater.
These practices can effectively remove nutrients, pathogens and metals from stormwater, and
they reduce the volume and intensity of stormwater flows. Examples of LID practices include
permeable pavement, rainwater cisterns and greenroofs. These types of practices must be
integrated into watershed and stormwater management in order to better manage baseflow
characteristics, prevent stream erosion and improve water quality.
RATIONALE
Low Impact Development practices reduce runoff and pollutant loadings by managing the
runoff as close to its source as possible. LID typically uses multiple practices on a site and can
be used to reduce the impacts of both development and redevelopment on water resources.
With new development, LID is used to achieve the goal of maintaining or closely replicating the
pre-development hydrology of the site. In areas where development has already taken place,
LID can be used as a retrofit practice to reduce runoff volumes, pollutant loadings and the
overall impacts of existing developments on receiving waters. LID practices can include:
conservation designs;
infiltration practices;
runoff storage;
runoff conveyance;
filtration practices; and
low impact landscaping.
Studies show that implementing LID stormwater management strategies can have multiple
positive environmental effects including:
protection of downstream resources;
abatement of pollution;
recharge of groundwater;
improvement of water quality;
improvement of habitat;
reduced downstream flooding and erosion; and
improved aesthetics in streams and rivers.
96
TRCA's Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Manual (LID SWM Manual) has
been developed by TRCA and CVC as a tool to help developers, consultants, municipalities
and landowners understand and implement sustainable stormwater practices in the TRCA and
CVC watersheds. The LID SWM Manual provides information and direction to assist engineers,
ecologists and planners in landscape-based stormwater management planning and in the
selection, design, construction and monitoring of sustainable stormwater management
practices.
The LID SWM Manual is intended to augment the Ministry of the Environment’s (MOE’s)
Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual (2003). The MOE’s design manual
provides design criteria for “conventional” end-of-pipe stormwater management practices, such
as wet ponds and constructed wetlands but provides only limited information about lot level
and conveyance controls. The MOE’s design manual does however, emphasize the use of a
“treatment train” approach to reduce the impacts of stormwater runoff. A treatment train
approach – a combination of at-source, conveyance, and end-of-pipe stormwater management
practices – is usually required to meet the multiple objectives of stormwater management,
which includes maintaining the hydrologic cycle, protecting water quality, and preventing
increased erosion and flooding.
The LID SWM Manual recommends and supports the use of the treatment train approach for
stormwater management. The LID SWM Manual focuses on a number of at-source and
conveyance stormwater management practices that have been used extensively in Europe, the
United States, Western Canada and at demonstration sites in Ontario (TRCA's Sustainable
Technologies Evaluation Program). Low Impact Development practices presented in the
manual include greenroofs, bioretention, permeable pavement, soakaway pits, grass channels,
dry swales, tree clustering and rainwater harvesting.
The LID SWM Manual draws on published research, literature and local studies to provide
planning and design guidance that reflects regional policies, practices and climate. It provides
information and guidance on the following:
how to integrate stormwater management into the urban planning process;
how to design, construct and maintain a range of Low Impact Development stormwater
management practices; and
environmental and performance monitoring that should be carried out.
In order to translate LID into criteria for stormwater management, TRCA staff plan to update
TRCA's stormwater management criteria. A stormwater criteria document will be developed in
consultation with the Ministry of Environment, municipal staff and the development industry.
Detailed stormwater criteria for new development will be updated for each watershed in TRCA's
jurisdiction to:
preserve groundwater and baseflow characteristics;
prevent undesirable and costly erosion in the watercourse;
prevent any increase in flood risk potential;
protect water quality; and ultimately;
maintain an appropriate diversity of aquatic life and natural features.
97
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
TRCA staff will take the following steps to finalize the LID SWM Manual:
Disseminate the draft manual to municipal staff, the development industry and other
agencies through a workshop in June and a posting on the Sustainable Technologies
Evaluation Program website;
Finalize the manual with input from municipal staff, the development industry and other
agencies with experience in Low Impact Development;
Provide training sessions for municipal staff, consultants and the development industry.
In order to translate LID into criteria for stormwater management, TRCA staff will develop a
stormwater management criteria document that presents an integrated set of updated
stormwater management criteria (flood protection, water quality control, erosion control, water
balance) which will be used to select and size stormwater management practices outlined in
the Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Manual for all new development. Staff
will consult with municipalities, the Province of Ontario and interested stakeholders in the
development of the criteria.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Financial contributions to develop and produce the manual were provided by the Region of
Peel, City of Toronto, Region of York, Credit Valley Conservation, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
and the Ministry of Environment through the Toronto Remedial Action Plan (RAP).
Costs to finalize the LID SWM manual, deliver the training workshop and develop a stormwater
management criteria document have been provided by the financial contributions from the
agencies listed above.
Report prepared by: Sameer Dhalla, extension 5350
Emails: sdhalla@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Sameer Dhalla, extension 5350
Emails: sdhalla@trca.on.ca
Date: April 02, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A46/09 -G. ROSS LORD DAM OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND
SURVEILLANCE MANUAL AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
PLAN
Approval of updated G. Ross Lord Dam Operations, Maintenance and
Surveillance Manual and Emergency Preparedness Plan.
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT the G. Ross Lord Dam Operations, Maintenance and Surveillance Manual and
Emergency Preparedness Plan (September 2008) prepared for Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) be approved;
98
AND FURTHER THAT the staff be directed to follow the updated Operations, Maintenance
and Surveillance procedures presented in the manual.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
G. Ross Lord Dam is a large flood control facility on the West Don River located on the
northeast corner of Dufferin Street and Finch Avenue West in Toronto. It is an earthen
embankment dam and was constructed in 1973 to provide flood control for the West Don River
from Finch Avenue south to the confluence with the East Don River at Don Mills Road. The
primary flood vulnerable area downstream of the dam is the community of Hogg’s Hollow
located at Yonge Street and York Mills Road. The dam is based on a US Army Corps of
Engineers design and is approximately 366 m long and 20 m high. Baseflows are conveyed
through the dam by two mud valves. Two low-level gates are used to control the water level
above elevation 172.50 m and two radial gates with sill elevation 174.35 m are used to control
higher flows.
Operations, Maintenance and Surveillance Manuals dictate the procedures that need to be
followed to ensure that a dam is properly operated and maintained. The Operations component
of the manual contains the rules that must be followed in the operation of the dam's gates
during heavy rains to provide flood protection. The Maintenance and Surveillance component
of the manual lays out the procedures that need to be followed to properly inspect the dam and
all of its components to ensure the facility remains in a good state of repair.
The Emergency Preparedness Plan provides procedures for TRCA staff to follow for various
emergencies that can potentially occur at a dam.
RATIONALE
The G. Ross Lord Dam Operations, Maintenance and Surveillance Manual and Emergency
Preparedness Plan was updated for the following reasons:
The original operations procedures for G. Ross Lord Dam were completed in 1973 when the 1.
dam was built. The land use of the watershed upstream of the dam has undergone
significant changes since that time. As such, the original operations procedure for the dam
needed to be evaluated to determine if it was still applicable given the land use changes
and changes in hydrology upstream of the dam.
Since the dam was constructed in 1973, technology and new tools have become available 2.
that needed to be incorporated to ensure the dam is properly inspected and maintained to
a high standard.
The Draft Ontario Dam Safety Guidelines, prepared by the Ontario Ministry of Natural 3.
Resources (MNR), require that Emergency Preparedness Plans be prepared for large dams
to ensure that appropriate actions were taken in the event an emergency was to occur at
the dam.
99
DETAILS OF WORK COMPLETED
TRCA retained the IBI Group to prepare the Operations, Maintenance and Surveillance Manual
and Emergency Preparedness Plan for G. Ross Lord Dam. Through IBI’s technical analysis, it
was determined that the original operations procedure was still valid. However, the existing
operations procedure was slightly modified to pro-rate gate openings when the rate-of-rise of
the reservoir exceeds the operational threshold. Under the original operations procedure gates
were opened in the same increment, even if the rate of rise in the reservoir exceeded the
operational threshold. The pro-rating of gate openings was necessary to ensure that the
Hurricane Hazel flood could be safely passed through the dam.
It should also be noted that the updated operations procedure formally recognizes that TRCA's
Chief Flood Duty Officers have some flexibility to exercise engineering judgement with respect
to gate operations when weather forecasts and downstream conditions allow for it. This
includes the ability to draw down the dam to normal water levels to ensure the maximum
amount of flood control storage is available in anticipation of a storm event.
The updated maintenance and surveillance program for G. Ross Lord Dam includes a series of
updated inspection checklists to be used by TRCA staff. These checklists itemize each
component of the dam (i.e. electrical, mechanical, structural) and describe what actions and
frequency of inspections are required to be carried out by TRCA staff to ensure the dam is
properly maintained.
Lastly, the updated Emergency Preparedness Plan provides updated direction to TRCA staff on
how to deal with emergencies that may arise at the dam and to safeguard the public within the
dam's potential inundation area. This is achieved through effective dam surveillance, prompt
notification to the City of Toronto's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) and citizen
warning and evacuation when required.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The update to the G. Ross Lord Dam Operations, Maintenance and Surveillance Manual and
Emergency Preparedness Plan was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Water
and Erosion Control Infrastructure (WECI) fund with matching funding from the City of Toronto
and the Region of York.
Report prepared by: Sameer Dhalla, extension 5350
Emails: sdhalla@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Sameer Dhalla, extension 5350
Emails: sdhalla@trca.on.ca
Date: April 08, 2009
Attachments: 1
100
Attachment 1
G. Ross Lord Dam
_________________________________________
101
RES.#A47/09 -MANAGING DOMESTIC ANIMALS
Policy and Procedures. Approval of the amended policy and operational
procedures for Managing Domestic Animals on Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority managed lands.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
THAT the amendment to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Policy for
Managing Domestic Animals, dated April, 2009, be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT the amendment to TRCA's Operating Procedures for Managing
Domestic Animals, dated April, 2009, be received.
AMENDMENT
RES.#A48/09
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
THAT the following be added after the main motion:
AND FURTHER THAT the municipal councils in TRCA's jurisdiction be so advised.
THE AMENDMENT WASCARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WASCARRIED
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
THAT the amendment to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Policy for
Managing Domestic Animals, dated April, 2009, be approved;
THAT the amendment to TRCA's Operating Procedures for Managing Domestic Animals,
dated April, 2009, be received;
AND FURTHER THAT the municipal councils in TRCA's jurisdiction be so advised.
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #6/03 held on July 25, 2003, Resolution #A157/03 was approved as
follows:
THAT the Policy and Operational Procedures for Managing Domestic Animals, dated July
2003, as appended, be approved;
THAT dogs off-leash areas, on selected TRCA properties, be endorsed in principle
subject to a community-based stewardship committee being established;
102
THAT those stewardship committees work with staff to identify appropriate areas, raise
operating funds, maintain and monitor the locations with no added expense to TRCA;
THAT staff work with the City of Brampton and local community to consider a dogs
off-leash area in the Claireville Conservation Area as a pilot project;
AND FURTHER THAT details of any dogs off-leash area on TRCA property be brought
back to the Authority for endorsement.
Since 2003, there has been an increase in demand for dogs off-leash areas in various
municipalities across TRCA’s jurisdiction. As such, municipalities have turned to TRCA looking
for policy and operating procedures with regard to domestic pets and more specifically to
off-leash rules and site selection criteria.
In 2008, TRCA was approached by the City of Toronto for expertise to help define appropriate
site selection criteria for off-leash areas. As requested, TRCA staff led the creation of
scientifically based site selection criteria and suggested revisions to the City of Toronto's off
leash policy.
In preparation for the revisions to the policy and operational procedures for Managing
Domestic Animals, TRCA staff researched and compared the policies, procedures and
guidelines pertaining to domestic animals and dogs off-leash areas that are used by TRCA’s
municipal partners including: City of Toronto; Town of Markham; Town of Richmond Hill; Town
of Caledon; Town of Ajax and the City of Vaughan.
Revisions to the policy and operational procedures for Managing Domestic Animals will
synergize TRCA's policy and operating procedures with those of its municipal partners. Such
revisions include:
addition of a policy statement;
addition of primary and secondary physical criteria; and
addition of primary and secondary biological criteria.
RATIONALE
TRCA staff has amended the policy and operational procedures for Managing Domestic
Animals in order to streamline the policy and strengthen the operating procedures. In addition,
the updated documents incorporate strong ecological principles regarding dogs off-leash area
site selection criteria and harmonize TRCA’s policy and procedures with those of its partners.
This amended policy and operational procedures supports a number of other TRCA strategic
documents including:
The Living City Strategy;
Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy;
Rouge River watershed plan; and
Humber River watershed plan.
103
Physical and biological criteria for dogs off-leash site selection articulate watershed health and
protection of ecological features and linkages that must take precedence over the provision of
dogs off-leash areas. Furthermore, such criteria speak to the protection of natural habitats, wild
species residing in these habitats and the health and safety of the public and domestic pets
using the dogs off-leash areas.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
TRCA staff is preparing for the release of an education package including handouts and new
signage indicating that dogs must be on leash. Recently, TRCA staff posted information
regarding all known TRCA off-leash areas throughout the jurisdiction on TRCA's website. In
addition, it is anticipated that once approved, the updated policy and operational procedures
for Managing Domestic Animals will be made accessible to the public via TRCA's website.
The policy and operational procedures for Managing Domestic Animals are set to be initiated in
spring of 2009 at Claireville Conservation Area. The plan consists of assessment of current land
use, initiation of an action plan and a monitoring phase. The action plan will include public
education and enforcement with the regards to the policy and operational procedures for
Managing Domestic Animals. In addition, TRCA staff will be updating signs on conservation
lands as needed to inform and educate the public with regards to the policy update.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
There are no TRCA funds allocated to establishing off-leash areas on TRCA property. Financial
and in-kind contributions will have to be sought elsewhere by the proponents for establishing
and maintaining off-leash locations.
Report prepared by: Cortney Oliver, extension 5596
Emails: coliver@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Emails: dedwards@trca.on.ca
Date: April 06, 2009
Attachments: 1
104
Attachment 1
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
POLICY FOR MANAGING DOMESTIC ANIMALS
Policy Statement
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) recognizes the social benefits that
conservation areas provide to pets and their owners. TRCA also recognizes the requirement for
responsible pet ownership on all its lands.
This policy pertains to managing domestic animals on TRCA lands as well as provisions of
off-leash areas for dogs on Authority owned or managed lands.
Pets must be kept on leash at all times on all properties unless otherwise posted.
General Policy
Pets are permitted on TRCA managed lands with the exception of Tommy Thompson Park. Pet
access is restricted in areas where there are health regulations that prohibit pets, where pets
would be a threat to wildlife or for other reasons TRCA deems appropriate.
No person shall bring an animal other than a dog or cat on TRCA managed lands except under
a permit issued by TRCA.
No person or family shall bring on TRCA managed lands more than three (3) of any
combination of dogs and cats.
No pet with an order against it under the Dog Owners Liability Act or Medical Officer of
Health shall be allowed on TRCA managed lands.
Responsibility of Owner or Person In Charge of any Dog or Cat
Every owner or person in charge of any dog or cat shall:
ensure that their pet is secured by a leash or chain that does not exceed two metres in
length, except when in a designated off-leash area;
remove excrement left by the dog or cat;
provide adequate and appropriate care, food, water, shelter, exercise, attention and
veterinary care as may be required to meet the need of the species;
ensure that the dog or cat has applicable current licenses and vaccination as may be
required by law; and
ensure that the dog or cat is registered with the municipal government in which it
resides (where required).
No owner or person in charge of any dog or cat shall, on TRCA lands, permit the dog or cat to:
make excessive noise or disturb other persons;
enter water designated for wading, bathing or swimming or be on the beach adjacent to
that water;
be at large (an animal that is secured by a leash more than two metres long shall be
considered to be at large), except in a designated off-leash area; and
leave the dog or cat unattended for extended periods of time.
105
Penalty
Any person or persons found in violation of this policy or any operating procedures created
pursuant to the policy shall be subject to such penalty or penalties as set out in the regulations
of TRCA and TRCA shall have the right at its sole discretion to remove or suspend the person
or persons in violation from using the property or designated off-leash facility.
Procedure for Establishing Off-leash Areas
Individuals interested in developing an off-leash area must form a dog owners group ("the
proponent") with a minimum of 15 members and identify a funding source for covering the
costs of designing, developing and operating the facility; then
requests must follow the TRCA approval process and site selection guidelines;
if an appropriate site is found, initiate a public consultation process and demonstrate
agreement by the general community;
enter into a one year contract agreement to be reviewed annually;
the proponent must be willing to take full responsibility for establishing, monitoring and
maintaining the site, including insurance coverage satisfactory to TRCA; and
satisfy such other conditions as TRCA may require.
Site Selection For Off-leash Areas
TRCA has established criteria for determining appropriate sites for off leash areas. Site
selection criteria and guidelines are listed in the operating procedures.
Rules For Off-leash Areas
While a dog is in an area designated as off-leash, every owner or person in charge of a dog
shall:
carry a leash while the dog is running at large;
immediately leash a dog that shows aggressiveness toward people or other dogs or at
the direction of a police officer, Provincial Offences Officer, municipal law enforcement
officer or employee of TRCA;
ensure that the dog does not leave the designated area while off leash;
ensure that the dog, while running at large is under voice control and within visual sight
at all times;
not bring in or permit such dogs to enter onto TRCA managed land if the dog may or
does constitute a danger to other users;
ensure all dogs are licensed and vaccinated, (puppies under 4 months are not
permitted as they will not yet be fully vaccinated) in accordance with the
provincial/municipal regulations;
ensure the dog is collared with a tag attached that identifies the dog’s name and the
telephone number of the owner;
clean up excrement immediately and dispose of wastes in designated containers;
not allow the dog to dig holes, chase wildlife, or destroy vegetation;
have no more than 3 dogs off leash per visit;
be an adult at least 18 years of age who is able to control the dog;
permit children under the age of 12 in off-leash areas only when accompanied by an
adult;
take responsibility for the actions of their dogs at all times;
use at dog owner's own risk.
106
Attachment 2
OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES FOR
MANAGING DOMESTIC ANIMALS
April 2009
INTRODUCTION
The properties owned by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) provide
permanent sanctuaries for wildlife and vegetation while at the same time they offer recreation
opportunities for outdoor enthusiasts. As development pressure from the expanding population
increases, protecting natural heritage features including wildlife is becoming even more
important across the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Simultaneously, it is important to make
available outdoor recreational opportunities and green space in order to enhance the quality of
life in our communities.
TRCA recognizes the social benefits that conservation lands provide to pets and their owners.
It is critical however that pet owners act responsibly in order to safeguard our natural assets as
well as other users and staff. Dog attacks on animals; particularly deer, ground-nesting birds,
and fish spawning areas have been reported in recent years. When dog owners cooperate with
the rules, the impact of domestic animals on wildlife is reduced. Therefore, we need to work
together to protect and rehabilitate healthy and diverse wildlife populations and vegetation
communities.
TRCA allows recreational use on its land that is consistent with resource protection and
rehabilitation objectives. This includes hikers, cyclists, equestrians, runners, small children,
senior citizens, dog-walkers, photographers, and people temporarily escaping the urban
environment. To help make multiple-use areas work, each user must be aware of the needs of
others. Visitors are required to comply with the rules to create a safe and enjoyable experience
for everyone.
PUBLIC EDUCATION
Education through the provision of information about dogs/pets and their requirements is seen
as a primary method of addressing animal control problems before they occur.
An information/education brochure is available for distribution to inform the public of the Policy
for Managing Domestic Animals and off-leash areas on TRCA managed lands. Online
resources are also available on TRCA’s website including locations of off-leash areas.
Signage
TRCA will post signs in public use areas clearly indicating permitted uses including a symbol to
illustrate that dogs must be on leash. “Trail Manners For You and Your Dog” may be posted on
kiosks at trail heads.
"Trail Manners For You and Your Dog"
Respect wildlife and their habitat. You are in their home.
Respect the environment - do not let your dog dig or cause damage.
Clean up after your dog. Leave all trails as clean or cleaner than when you arrived.
Yield the right-of-way to other hikers. Many people are afraid of dogs.
107
Communicate with others and always keep your dog under control.
Yield the right-of way to equestrians. Move off the trail far enough to allow horses to
pass. Keep your dog close to you, quiet and under control.
Always be courteous. Do not give other trail users any reason to complain. Set an
example for others by being a conscientious owner with a well-behaved dog out
enjoying the trails.
STAFF TRAINING
All TRCA field staff will be provided with in-house training regarding the Policy for Managing
Domestic Animals
Avoiding and Handling Dog Attacks
What Triggers dog bites?
Teasing the dog
Exciting the dog
Rough play
Approaching or touching a sleeping or eating dog or its pups or a sick or injured dog
Unleashed Dogs
Be aware of dogs a block or more ahead; change your route or turn around to avoid
unleashed dogs.
Signs of an Imminent Attack
Barking, snarling, growling
Raised hair; wide eyes; tail moves quickly
Lips curled back over teeth
Handling an Attacking Dog
Remain calm
Do not turn or run
Avoid eye contact and threatening moves; remove sunglasses
Turn sideways and slowly withdraw from the dog’s territory
Keep the dog in view
Hold out hand/arm farthest from the dog
Do not yell at the dog. Speak calmly using phrases such as “Wanna play?” or “Wanna
go for a walk?”
If You are Attacked
Stand still or maintain a constant slow pace out of the dog’s territory
Do not turn around
Do not stare the dog in the eye
Hold something in front of you with both hands to wedge into the dog’s mouth
Use the commands: “No,” “Down,” “Go Home”
If you are knocked down go into the fetal position and cover your face, neck and head
Packs of dogs
If you see a pack of dogs, get away from them BEFORE you are singled out
If confronted, keep your back to a wall, bush or other object to avoid getting encircled
Deal with the leader of the pack as an individual dog
108
Leashed Dogs
DO NOT assume that leashed or fenced dogs are harmless
If you have to approach them, get the owner’s permission and speak admiringly of the
dog to its owner to ease any tension
APPLICABLE LAWS
Laws as they relate to managing domestic animals on Authority land
Provincial
Conservation Authorities Act Ontario Regulation 119 - S. 10(1)(2)(3)
(1)No person shall bring an animal other than a dog or cat into the conservation area
except under a permit issued by the Authority.
(2)No person who owns or controls an animal shall, in the conservation area, permit
the animal to,
(a)make excessive noise or disturb other persons;
(b)enter water designated for wading, bathing or swimming or be on the
beach adjacent to that water; or
(c)be at large.
(3)For the purposes of clause (2) c), an animal that is secured by a leash more than
two metres long shall be considered to be at large.
Trespass to Property Act R.S.O. 1990, Chapter T.21 Section 2.1
(2). 1 Trespass an offence
Every person who is not acting under a right or authority conferred by law and who,
(a) without the express permission of the occupier, the proof of which rests on the
defendant,
(i) enters on premises when entry is prohibited under this Act, or
(ii) engages in an activity on premises when the activity is prohibited under this
Act; or
(b) does not leave the premises immediately after he or she is directed to do so by the
occupier of the premises or a person authorized by the occupier,
is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $2,000.
R.S.O. 1990, c. T.21, s. 2 (1).
Dog Owners Liability Act R.S.O. 1990, Chapter D.16
Proceedings against owner of dog
4. (1) A proceeding may be commenced in the Ontario Court of Justice against an
owner of a dog if it is alleged that,
(a) the dog has bitten or attacked a person or domestic animal;
(b) the dog has behaved in a manner that poses a menace to the safety of persons or
domestic animals; or
109
(c) the owner did not exercise reasonable precautions to prevent the dog from,
(i) biting or attacking a person or domestic animal, or
(ii) behaving in a manner that poses a menace to the safety of persons or
domestic animals. 2005, c. 2, s. 1 (6).
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act S.O. 1997, Chapter 41 (25)
25.1 A person shall not use or be accompanied by a dog while hunting white-tailed
deer, moose, caribou, elk or black bear, except under the authority of a licence issued
in respect of that dog.
Prescribed areas
25.2 Despite subsection (1), a person shall not use or be accompanied by a dog while
hunting white-tailed deer, moose, elk or black bear in an area prescribed by the
regulations.
Dog running at large
25.3 The owner of a dog or any other person responsible for a dog shall not permit it to
run at large,
(a) during the open season for white-tailed deer, moose, elk or black bear, in an area
prescribed for the purpose of subsection (2); or
(b) during the closed season for white-tailed deer, moose, elk or black bear, in an area
usually inhabited by that species.
Power of conservation officer
(4) A conservation officer may kill a dog without incurring
any liability if,
(a) the dog is running at large in an area prescribed for the purpose of subsection (2)
during the open season for white-tailed deer, moose, elk or black bear; or
(b) the dog is chasing white-tailed deer, moose, elk or black bear during the closed
season for that species in an area usually inhabited by that species. 1997, c. 41, s.
25.
Municipal
Municipal by-laws, commonly referred to as canine or animal control by-laws.
Such by-laws deal with dogs at large, off leash, stoop’n scoop, licensing, and removal of
abandoned, injured or stray dogs. Such by-laws do not apply on lands owned by Conservation
Authorities and are therefore not enforceable on such lands. However, Officers of the local
animal control/services departments may pick up injured or stray dogs at large on TRCA lands
on request.
Municipalities may enforce by-laws if given written permission by the TRCA or if the land is
under management agreement.
110
Other
Humane Society - The local office will deal with neglected or abandoned animals. They will pick
up dogs that fall into this category. (Example: dogs left in hot cars or on campsites for extended
periods of time in the heat).
Please note that they will not use any methods that will cause property damage to gain access
to a locked vehicle to rescue a pet in distress.
Prohibition
No dog with an order against it under the Dog Owners Liability Act or Medical Officer of Health
shall be allowed on TRCA lands. Example: muzzle orders.
STAFF GUIDELINES FOR DEALING WITH DOMESTIC ANIMAL RELATED OCCURRENCES
The preferred approach for achieving compliance to the Policy for Managing Domestic Animals
as well as other applicable laws is education and communication. Should such actions fail to
produce the desired behavioural changes in the animal owner or person responsible, legal
recourse under the relevant applicable law may be considered.
When dealing with a pet related occurrence, the investigating staff person should request the
name of the offending party or parties. If circumstances permit, a request for documents to
verify personal identification can be made as well. It should be noted that the offending party is
not obligated by law to provide such identification to anyone other than a police or enforcement
officer. Staff should attempt to secure the license number from the offending party’s vehicle
where possible without causing a confrontation.
1) Minor Occurrences
Minor offenses include those actions that do not pose serious or major risk to other property
users. For example: Dogs off-leash, barking, on the beach, left unattended but not a health risk,
fail to stoop and scoop, or non-aggressive at large.
First Time Minor Offenders
Staff dealing with first time minor offenders shall use discretion in the selection of the
appropriate response option. Subject to the circumstances of the incident they may elect to
communicate TRCA’s Policy for Managing Domestic Animals . Should this prove unsuccessful
or inappropriate due to the attitude of the person in control of the pet, the investigating staff
person may move directly to the repeat offender options.
Repeat Minor Offenders
At the discretion of the investigating staff person the following options for actions may be taken:
deal with the occurrence directly, or
contact either the location supervisor, contract security staff, Provincial Offences Officer
or enforcement officer.
2) Major Occurrences
Major occurrences include incidents where the Dog Owners Liability Act or cruelty to
animals/animal welfare issues come into play. (Examples: bites/attacks that produce injury to
persons, other animals or property, dogs left unattended for extended periods of time in
extreme heat under varying conditions, persons beating/wounding animals, pets that have
sustained major injuries).
111
Staff dealing with a major occurrence should contact:
the appropriate agency such as Police, Animal Control Officers or the Humane Society
in order to deal with the incident immediately;
the on-duty person in charge of the facility shall be notified forthwith.
Dog/Pet at Large
A dog/pet may be at large deliberately or accidentally. If a dog/pet is found at large and the
owner is known, every effort shall be made to return the animal to its owner. The owner shall be
advised of TRCA’s Policy for Managing Domestic Animals and operational procedures as well
as applicable laws.
If the owner is not known or does not step forward at the time the animal is taken under control,
the dog/pet shall be secured in a safe and humane manner. The local animal control agency
shall be contacted to pick up the dog/pet.
Dog Bites/Attacks
All such occurrences that produce injury to persons, animals or damage to property shall be
reported to the location supervisor or officer in charge for further action. In all such cases, the
occurrence shall be reported to the local animal control agency and the Police. Such matters
fall under the realm of the Dog Owners Liability Act.
Responsibility to Report Dog Bites/Attacks
It is the responsibility of the handler (or owner, if present) of any dog involved in a dog bite or
dog attack to:
stop and offer assistance;
provide the other involved party with the involved dog’s license number and/or rabies
vaccination number;
provide the other party with their name and address, and if serious injuries are involved;
immediately report the incident to emergency responders (police, ambulance);
remain at the scene until responders arrive;
provide the responders with their identification information.
Responsibility of Staff
All staff shall have regard for their personal safety and that of those accompanying them as well
as persons in the general vicinity of an offending individual and his/her dog/pet. The duty of
the staff shall be to detect, deter, and contact the appropriate staff or agency upon receipt of a
complaint. Staff without lawful authority as either a Provincial Offences Officer or Enforcement
Officer shall refrain from engaging in confrontational or argumentative exchanges with a
non-compliant dog/pet owner. The exception being the full time TRCA
supervisor/superintendent of the facility or security officers of a licensed security company
providing contracted security services to TRCA.
Charges under applicable law are a response option with respect to any occurrence at the
discretion of an officer appointed as a Provincial Offences Officer or higher with the lawful
authority to lay such charges. Multiple charges would apply subject to the severity of the
occurrence.
112
Occurrence Reports
Detailed occurrence reports for all incidents involving pets, and in particular dogs shall be filed
with the location supervisor/superintendent and processed through normal channels.
3) Warnings
Verbal - These may be issued subject to location rules/requirements and applicable law shall
be provided to the offending party and compliance requested. Such warnings and their
response shall be documented and filed via an occurrence report.
Written - These may be issued by the full time TRCA supervisor or superintendent in charge of
the location or other management personnel such as the Supervisor of Enforcement and
Security as dictated by the circumstances and needs.
OFF-LEASH AREAS
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority will consider the designation of off-leash areas as
per the following procedures and guidelines:
General Requirement for Establishing Off-Leash Areas
Individuals interested in developing an off-leash area must form a dog off –leash
stewardship group (“the proponent”) with a minimum of 15 members and identify a
funding source for covering the costs of designing, developing and operating the
facility; then,
the dogs off-leash stewardship group must identify two key contacts to act as liaisons
with TRCA;
provide “dog-watch” eyes and ears on the park to identify and help educate
irresponsible pet owners;
organize park clean-ups at a minimum of four times per year;
repair areas damaged by dogs/digging;
requests must follow TRCA’s approval process and site selection guidelines;
if an appropriate site is found, initiate a public consultation process and demonstrate
agreement by the general community;
enter into a one year contract agreement to be reviewed annually;
the proponent must take full responsibility for establishing, monitoring and maintaining
the site; and
provide a certificate of general liability insurance of no less than two million dollars
($2,000,000.00) with TRCA listed as additionally insured.
Process for Designation of Off-Leash Area on Authority Land
Step 1 - Initial Proposal Request
The dogs off- leash stewardship group interested in developing an off-leash area must submit a
written proposal to TRCA.
Step 2 - Review of Proposal
TRCA will review the proposal and consult with the local municipality.
Step 3 - Community Input
TRCA will participate in a public meeting with members of the community to establish protocol,
determine suitable areas and identify the dog owners group responsible for developing and
maintaining the off-leash area.
113
Step 4 - Report
TRCA will submit recommendations to the dogs off-leash stewardship group.
Step 5 - TRCA approval after off-leash guidelines are met. Terms of the agreement will be for
one year in duration with renewal options.
Step 6 - Annual Review
TRCA, in consultation with the municipality and the dog owners group will undertake a review
annually to determine if further action is required to improve or remove the off-leash area.
Step 7-Action Plan
Establish a plan of action in the event that the supporting dogs off-leash stewardship group for
the off-leash area is disbanded.
Site Selection Guidelines for Off-Leash Areas
Land Use Considerations
The new land use designation must conform with TRCA master/site plans and should
adhere to land management plans;
The off-leash areas should be separated from other public uses such as: school/field
centre yards, playing fields, playgrounds/play structure areas, beaches, picnic areas,
any lake or pond, or residential housing;
Area should have enhanced vegetative buffers for noise.
Physical Criteria
(1)Primary
Area should not be part of a hydraulic floodway (100 year storm), nor should the
fence of an off-leash area go through a hydraulic floodway (therefore, no off-leash
areas in floodplains or adjacent to watercourses);
Area to be outside the maximum operating level (high water level) of lakes, ponds
and reservoirs, or area boundary should not be nearer than 10 metres to the
shoreline of a lake where not controlled;
Area should be relatively flat (less than 10% natural slope to minimize erosion)
unless site conditions warrant a grade of more than 10% (i.e. fill sites);
Area should be relatively dry or have proper drainage;
Area should not adversely affect the quality of nearby water through erosion,
sedimentation and other contaminants associated with pet waste.
(2) Secondary
Area should be large enough to accommodate the intended off-leash use
(suggested: minimum 350 metre perimeter);
Area should have trees for shade;
Area should have buffers to act as a noise barrier;
Area must have rules posted;
Area should be setback a minimum of 10 metres from the greatest extent of top of
bank/slope and natural features (e.g. natural vegetation);
Access to off-leash area must not be through a sensitive area;
Nearby watercourses/aquatic environments should not pose a drowning risk;
114
A buffer/enhanced vegetative cover should be provided between the nearest water
feature and the off-leash area to filter runoff;
Area must be defined by natural barriers, page wire, chain link fencing or a
combination thereof;
Area should have suitable parking within approx. 200 metres of the off-leash area
and a roadway that can withstand the traffic;
The protection of ecological features and linkages will take precedence over the provision
of off-leash areas;
Biological/Ecological Criteria
(1)Primary
Off-leash areas will NOT be considered in the following:
Areas where habitat restoration has taken place or is being planned;
Existing cover within the Terrestrial Natural Heritage system as defined through
municipal plans, watershed plans or the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy
(TRCA 2007);
Wetlands or their buffer zones;
Environmentally sensitive areas (ESA’s);
Areas of Natural or Scientific Interest (ANSI’s)
Wooded or savannah areas; or
Areas that contain uncommon, rare, threatened or endangered plant, insect or
animal species or that have the significant potential to host such species, especially
SARA/ESA designated species.
Watercourses
Selected areas should not include a watercourse or part of it and should be a
minimum of 10 metres from a natural aquatic environment of any kind, including
(but not limited to) wetlands, marshes, fens, bogs, seeps, ephemeral spring
wetlands, streams, creeks, rivers, ponds, poorly drained areas.
(2)Secondary
Off-leash areas may be considered in planted areas not supporting species of
concern based on site specific evaluation and subject to meeting other criteria;
Off-leash areas may be considered in the potential cover of the Terrestrial Natural
Heritage System based on site specific evaluation and subject to meeting other
criteria;
Off-leash trails may be permitted based on site specific assessment where linking
with appropriate sites;
Off-leash areas may be permitted in areas of non-native plantations, outside the
Terrestrial Natural Heritage System and subject to meeting other criteria.
Rules for Off-Leash Areas
While a dog is in an area designated as off-leash on TRCA lands, every owner or person in
charge of a dog shall:
carry a leash while the dog is running at large;
immediately leash a dog that shows aggressiveness toward people or other dogs or at
the direction of a police officer, Provincial Offences Officer, municipal law enforcement
officer or employee of TRCA;
115
ensure that the dog does not leave the designated area while off leash;
ensure that the dog, while running at large is under voice control and within visual sight
at all times;
not bring in or permit such dogs to enter onto TRCA managed land if the dog may or
does constitute a danger to other users;
ensure all dogs are licensed and vaccinated, (puppies under 4 months are not
permitted as they will not yet be fully vaccinated) in accordance with the
provincial/municipal regulations;
ensure the dog is collared with a tag attached that identifies the dog’s name and the
telephone number of the owner;
clean up excrement immediately and dispose of wastes in designated containers;
not allow the dog to dig holes, chase wildlife, or destroy vegetation;
have no more than 3 dogs off leash per visit;
be an adult at least 18 years of age who is able to control the dog;
permit children under the age of 12 in off-leash areas only when accompanied by an
adult;
take responsibility for the actions of their dogs at all times;
use at dog owner's own risk.
Monitoring
Monitoring of designated off-leash areas is important to ensure that areas are well managed
and that the quality of experience offered is maintained. Decisions about continued use of the
area or revisions to use will be informed by monitoring.
Existing off-leash zones that generally meet the primary criteria will be grand-parented. Those
that do not adhere to the above criteria will be re-evaluated with the intent to be
re-designated/located or decommissioned.
_________________________________________
116
RES.#A49/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
Vito and Marianne Pacifico, CFN 42059. Purchase of property located
east of Kipling Avenue, north of Kirby Road, City of Vaughan, Regional
Municipality of York, under the “Greenlands Acquisition Project for
2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River
watershed.
(Executive Res.#B21/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
THAT 0.34 hectares (0.84 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Part of the West Half
of Lot 31, Concession 7 and designated as Block 7 on draft M-plan prepared by Guido
Papa Surveying Ltd under their reference no.07-130, City of Vaughan, Regional
Municipality of York, located east of Kipling Avenue and north of Kirby Road, be
purchased from Vito and Marianne Pacifico;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action
to complete the purchase including signing and execution of all necessary
documentation.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A50/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed
Delpark Homes (Bondbrooke) Ltd., CFN 42113. Purchase of property
located east of Bathurst Street, south of Gamble Road, Town of
Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, under the “Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Don River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B22/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
117
THAT 0.23 hectares (0.59 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Parts of Lot 10, Plan
4667 and designated as Block 14 on 65M-4115, Town of Richmond Hill, Regional
Municipality of York, located east of Bathurst Street and south of Gamble Road, be
purchased from Delpark Homes (Bondbrooke) Ltd.;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action
to complete the purchase including signing and execution of all necessary
documentation.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A51/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
Diamondwood Properties Ltd., CFN 42228. Purchase of property located
south of Old Church Road and west of Mount Pleasant Road, Town of
Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, under the "Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Humber River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B23/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
THAT 16.76 hectares (41.41 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lots 19 and
20, Concession 8 and designated as Block 20 on a draft Plan of Subdivision prepared by
Rady-Pentek & Edward Surveying Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Job No.
01-048, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, south of Old Church Road and
west of Mount Pleasant Road, be purchased from Diamondwood Properties Ltd.;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
118
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to
execute all necessary documentation required.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A52/09 -REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TRCA OWNED LAND
Rear of 2157 Lakeshore Boulevard West
City of Toronto
Waterfront, CFN 41447. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) is in receipt of a request from Lorraine Properties Limited for the
sale of a parcel of TRCA-owned land located south of 2157 Lakeshore
Boulevard West, City of Toronto, Lake Ontario waterfront.
(Executive Res.#B24/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
THAT a parcel of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) owned land
containing 0.077 acres, more of less, located south of 2157 Lakeshore Boulevard West,
being Part of Water Lots in front of Lots 9 and 10, Registered Plan 1229, City of Toronto
(formerly City of Etobicoke) be declared surplus to the requirements of TRCA having
followed established TRCA policies and appropriate public consultation process;
THAT an offer to purchase the property be invited from the abutting property owner at
2157 Lakeshore Boulevard West;
AND FURTHER THAT a report be brought forward to the Executive Committee at a future
date regarding discussions with owner of 2157 Lakeshore Boulevard West.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A53/09 -ENERSOURCE HYDRO MISSISSAUGA INC.
Request for Permanent Easement for the Relocation and Maintenance of
Overhead Utility Lines, Mimico Creek Watershed, City of Mississauga,
CFN 42101. Receipt of a request from Enersource Hydro Mississauga
Inc. to provide a permanent easement for the relocation and maintenance
of overhead utility lines, west of Airport Road and north of Derry Road
(beside the unopened Drew Road road allowance) - Malton, Mimico
Creek watershed, City of Mississauga.
(Executive Res.#B25/09)
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
119
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc. to provide a permanent easement for the
relocation and maintenance of overhead utility lines, west of Airport Road and north of
Derry Road (beside the unopened Drew Road road allowance) - Malton, Mimico Creek
watershed, City of Mississauga;
AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with the Enersource Hydro
Mississauga Inc. in this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing 0.032
hectares (0.079 acres), more or less, be granted to Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc.
for the relocation and maintenance of overhead utility lines, said land being Part of Lot 12,
Concession 6 EHS, City of Mississauga, designated as Parts 9 and 10 on Plan 43R-32564;
THAT TRCA grant the easement across the subject land on the following terms and
conditions:
(a)The easement price is to be the sum of $10,000.00;
(b)Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc. is to pay all TRCA's legal, appraisal, survey and
other costs incurred to complete the transaction;
(c)Enersource Hydro Mississauga Inc. is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims
for injuries, damages or costs of any nature, resulting in any way, either directly or
indirectly, from the granting of this easement or carrying out construction;
(d)Any additional conditions as deemed appropriate by TRCA's solicitor.
THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained for the construction;
THAT an archaeological investigation be conducted by TRCA Archaeology staff with any
mitigative measures required being carried out at the expense of Enersource Hydro
Mississauga Inc.;
THAT the granting of this easement is subject to written approval from the City of
Mississauga Parks and Recreation Department who manage these lands on behalf of
TRCA;
THAT the granting of this easement is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural
Resources in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O.
1990, Chapter C.27 as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
120
RES.#A54/09 -STANDARDS FOR TRAIL SURFACES
Report on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and municipal trail
surface standards in the Toronto region.
(Executive Res.#B26/09 & Res.#B27/09)
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT the report on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and municipal
trail standards in the Toronto region be circulated to the municipalities in TRCA's
jurisdiction.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A55/09 -ROYAL ROUGE TRAIL EROSION CONTROL PROJECT
Summary of Royal Rouge Trail development planning history.
(Executive Res.#B28/09 & Res.#B29/09)
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT the report on Royal Rouge Trail Erosion Control Project be circulated to the Rouge
Park Alliance.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A56/09 -2009 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET
2009 Operating and Capital Budget is recommended for approval.
(Budget/Audit Res.#C3/09)
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Jack Heath
WHEREAS the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) provides that a conservation
authority, in establishing its annual levy, shall have the power to determine the proportion
of total benefit of any project afforded to all participating municipalities that is afforded to
each of them;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, subject to such regulations under the CA Act
as may be approved by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council:
(i)all participating municipalities be designated as benefiting for all projects included
in the 2009 Operating Budget;
(ii)Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) share of the cost of the
programs included in the 2009 Operating Budget shall be raised from all
participating municipalities as part of the General Levy;
121
(iii)the 2009 General Levy be apportioned to the participating municipalities in the
proportion that the modified current value assessment of the whole is under the
jurisdiction of TRCA, unless otherwise provided in the levy or a project;
(iv)the appropriate TRCA officials be directed to advise the participating municipalities,
pursuant to the Conservation Authorities Act and the regulations made thereunder,
to levy the said municipalities the amount of the General Levy set forth in the 2009
Operating Budget, and to levy the said municipalities the amount of the Capital Levy
set forth in the 2009 Capital Budget and in the approved projects of TRCA;
THAT, subject to finalization of the participating municipalities' apportioned levy amounts,
the 2009 Operating and Capital Budget, and all projects therein, be adopted;
THAT staff be authorized to amend the 2009 Operating and Capital Budget to reflect
actual 2008 provincial grant allocations in order to determine the amount of matching levy
governed by regulation;
THAT except where statutory or regulatory requirements provide otherwise, staff be
authorized to enter into agreements with private sector or government agencies for the
undertaking of projects which are of benefit to TRCA and funded by a sponsor;
AND FURTHER THAT, as required by Ontario Regulations 139/96 and 231/97, this
recommendation and the accompanying budget document, including the schedule of
matching and non-matching levies, be approved by recorded vote.
AMENDMENT
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT the paragraph following item (iv) be amended to read as follows:
THAT, subject to finalization of the participating municipalities' apportioned levy amounts,
and subject to a revision to staff salaries and wages to include a 1% cost of living
increase and a corresponding decrease in the deficit paydown, the 2009 Operating and
Capital Budget, and all projects therein, be adopted;
RECORDED VOTE FOR THE AMENDMENT
Maria Augimeri Nay
David Barrow Nay
Bryan Bertie Nay
Laurie Bruce Nay
Lois Griffin Nay
Suzan Hall Nay
Jack Heath Yea
Colleen Jordan Nay
Bonnie Littley Nay
Glenn Mason Nay
Peter Milczyn Nay
122
RECORDED VOTE FOR THE AMENDMENT Cont'd
Ron Moeser Nay
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorNay
Linda Pabst Nay
John Sprovieri Nay
RECORDED VOTE FOR THE MAIN MOTION
Maria Augimeri Yea
David Barrow Yea
Bryan Bertie Yea
Laurie Bruce Yea
Lois Griffin Yea
Suzan Hall Yea
Jack Heath Nay
Colleen Jordan Yea
Bonnie Littley Yea
Glenn Mason Yea
Peter Milczyn Yea
Ron Moeser Yea
Gerri Lynn O'Connor Yea
Linda Pabst Yea
John Sprovieri Yea
THE AMENDMENT WASNOT CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION WASCARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A57/09 -GOOD NEWS STORIES
Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt
of Good News Stories for February and March, 2009, from all sections of
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report and presentation on "Good News Stories" for
February and March, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA), meets monthly to discuss strategic initiatives and organizational
development.
123
RATIONALE
Key accomplishments of each TRCA section are highlighted at each Management Team
meeting. In keeping with TRCA's objective of Business Excellence, these accomplishments will
be brought to the Authority for the information of the members. The following are the
accomplishments cited from February and March, 2009, and a brief description of each.
February
Archaeology - The Canadian Conservation Institute has chosen to restore and conserve an
archaeological artifact from the Lewis site at Bruce's Mill for long-term public interpretation.
Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP) Training Course - The Ministry of Natural
Resources renewed an agreement with TRCA to administer the OSAP training course in
June. This course is offered to Consultants, Federal and Provincial staff, Conservation
Authorities and private individuals.
Municipal Leaders Forum on Green Building - 70 people attended the forum intended to
accelerate the adoption of Green Building Design and Green Communities in Ontario.
Partners in Project Green - Pearson Eco-Business Zone received $66,785.00 in funding
from Ministry of the Environment's Community Go Green Fund for Small Business
Enterprise greenhouse gas reductions within the Pearson Eco-Business Zone.
Region of Peel Greenlands Securement Project - TRCA is a partner in the project which
received an Honourable Mention in Environmental Planning for the 2008 Awards for
Planning Excellence by the Canadian Institute of Planners. The Greenlands Securement
Project is an excellent example of a collaborative effort to reach out to landowners that
achieves long-lasting protection, preservation and enhancement of the Regional
Greenlands System.
Bio-diesel Equipment - Purchase of bio-diesel approved to facilitate switch from traditional
fuel in all applicable equipment at Bathurst Glen Golf Course, including mowers, tractors,
etc., as well as a fleet of 35 golf carts. This switch requires no alteration to existing
equipment and will help place us at the forefront of environmental golf course management.
Caring for the Moraine Project - The Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation approved a grant of
over $726,000 for year four of the project. $148,000 is for work to be done by TRCA.
Common Redpolls - More Common Redpolls than usual have been seen in our jurisdiction
including a number of the rarer - and paler - Hoary Redpolls.
Environmental Education Symposium - The Ontario Ministry of Education held a
symposium on February 25 & 26 in Toronto. At the symposium the Ministry released its
policy framework for environmental education in Ontario schools, entitled "Acting Today,
Shaping Tomorrow". Over 600 teachers and administrators from across Ontario attended
and participated in lectures, presentations and workshops on environmental topics led by
industry leaders. At the symposium TRCA staff delivered 3 workshops and lectures to over
150 participants on a variety of environmental, sustainability and climate change topics.
Solar Powered Electric Pontoon Boat - Lake St. George Field Centre took delivery of the
first solar powered electric pontoon boat used for commercial uses in North America (and
perhaps the world). It will be used as a zero-emission floating classroom for students
visiting the Field Centre.
Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan - Watershed Planning Group is entering
into a partnership with the Centre for Urban Health Initiatives to develop a set of human
health and wellbeing indicators that are relevant at the community scale, as part of the
Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan project.
124
March
Kortright Centre for Conservation - Ministry of the Environment to provide $77,000 over 3
years from the Best in Science Program for the Kortright Parking Lot Demonstration Project.
Erosion and Sediment Control - 60 people attended an erosion and sediment control
training course for environmental monitors, resulting in a profit of $16,000.
Canada Green Building Council - Glenn MacMillan, TRCA’s Senior Manager, Water and
Energy Management, was elected to the Canada Green Building Council Greater Toronto
Chapter Board of Directors.
Black Creek Pioneer Village - Opened for March Break for 1st time in 20 years and well
surpassed expected attendance with over 8,900 attending over the week. Archaeology unit
participated.
Archaeology - Completed study for King Township to indicate where there are hot spots for
undocumented archaeological resources. Presented to King Historical Society, resulting in
benefactor contributing $10,000 for field studies to implement Phase 1 of the study
recommendations.
Tommy Thompson Park - The park was awarded official status with the Canadian
Migratory Bird Network, joining a group of 25 in Canada.
Paddle the Don - The popular river adventure event is offering sponsorship opportunities
along the bank of the Don River for the first time. We have secured one sponsor and are
looking for two more.
Evergreen Brick Works - TRCA Executive Committee approved the final TRCA permit for
the Evergreen Brick Works project so they were able to proceed with construction.
Geothermal Energy Symposium - Black Creek Pioneer Village was selected as a host
location for a symposium in the fall to study geothermal energy systems.
Black Creek Pioneer Brewery and Beer Museum - Ministry of Culture awarded a $40,000
grant for Black Creek Pioneer Village's newest educational experience.
Maple Syrup Festival - Bruce's Mill and Kortright had record attendance at the festival over
March Break.
Climate Change Symposium - York University and TRCA hosted a climate change
symposium, including video conference participation by two researchers in the United
Kingdom, to explore mechanisms for research capacity building and to announce the
proposals for a regional climate change modelling unit as part of the Climate Change
Conservation Centre under development by York University, TRCA and other partners.
Rouge Park North Management Plan - The plan is now included in Markham's Official
Plan.
LEED for Homes Canada - The program was launched at The Living City Campus at
Kortright. This is the newest rating tool, as part of the family of building and neighbourhood
rating tools, being developed by Canada Green Building Councils for use across Canada.
Tumpeter Swans - Spring came to TRCA's jurisdiction with the arrival of Trumpeter Swans.
Hunted to extinction in Ontario, these beautiful birds have returned thanks to a successful
reintroduction program.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
Date: April 07, 2008
_________________________________________
125
RES.#A58/09 -CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES MORAINE COALITION
Summary of 2008 accomplishments.
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report and brochure of the 2008 accomplishments of the
Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The nine conservation authorities with watersheds on the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) partnered
together in late 2000 as the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (CAMC).
The mission of the CAMC is to:
advance the science and understanding of the Oak Ridges Moraine; and
work toward government, agency and community support for the form, function and
linkages of the ORM.
The goals of the CAMC are to:
define and protect natural heritage and water resource systems of the ORM through
watershed studies and monitoring;
support an accessible trail system;
ensure effective stewardship services on the moraine; and
build partnerships to provide education, information and land securement opportunities on
the ORM.
Richard (Dick) Hunter, CAO/Secretary-Treasurer, Otonabee Region Conservation Authority,
served as Chair of CAMC for 2008. David Burnett, Manager, Provincial and Regional Policy,
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), has been the coordinator of the CAMC
since mid-2001.
2008 Accomplishments
Details of the 2008 accomplishments of the CAMC are found in the brochure in Attachment 1.
The brochure has been distributed to municipal councils and senior staff, Members of
Provincial and Federal Parliament, CAMC partners and ORM stakeholders across the moraine.
The brochure is also posted on the CAMC page of the TRCA website.
2008 marked the third year of the "Caring for the Moraine" project, a strategic partnership
among stewardship organizations to deliver coordinated outreach, education and watershed
stewardship services to private landowners across the moraine. This resulted in 68 stewardship
projects across the moraine in 2008 by CAMC member conservation authorities and partners
which achieved:
48 ha of reforestation and planting of 100,000 trees;
3 ha of wetland creation and enhancement;
2.7 ha of prairie habitat restoration;
3.4 km of riparian (streamside) restoration;
14 educational workshops attracting over 830 landowners; and
direct contact of 2,800 landowners resulting in 111 property visits.
126
Similarly, land securement projects (acquisitions, donations and conservation easements) on
the ORM by conservation authorities have shown great momentum since the enactment of the
moraine legislation. A total of 166 ha of environmental lands on the ORM were acquired by
conservation authorities in 2008, including the acquisition of the Swan Lake property in
Richmond Hill by TRCA and its municipal and other partners. In total, CAMC members now
own and manage more than 10,500 ha of environmentally significant public lands on the ORM.
Details for both stewardship and land securement projects are found in Attachment 1.
CAMC members worked with the Oak Ridges Trail Association, municipal governments and
other partners to expand and improve trail systems across the moraine, much of that on
conservation authority-owned lands. CAMC members were also very active in education and
outreach activities to inform people about the important environmental features and functions
on the ORM and how to care for them. This includes the display of hands-on interactive models
of the water cycle at the regional water festivals; hosting workshops for real estate agents about
stewardship and marketing rural properties on the ORM; the creation of an ORM Discovery
Centre at the Purple Woods Conservation Area in Oshawa; and the annual Charles Sauriol
Environmental Dinner hosted as a fundraiser by The Conservation Foundation of Greater
Toronto in partnership with the Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust.
Lastly, the 2008 accomplishments brochure reports the highlights of the ongoing
York-Peel-Durham-Toronto (YPDT) Groundwater Study, including the numerous municipal
projects that have been supported by this work. Printed colour copies of the CAMC 2008
Accomplishments brochure will be available at the board meeting upon request.
Report prepared by: David Burnett, extension 5361
Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361
Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca
Date: April 03, 2009
Attachment 1:
127
Attachment 1
128
129
130
131
_________________________________________
132
RES.#A59/08 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT Section IV items 7.7.1 and 7.7.2 in regard to watershed committee minutes, be
received.
CARRIED
Section IV Items 7.7.1 and 7.7.2
DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
Minutes of Meeting #1/09, held on January 22, 2009
Minutes of Meeting #2/09, held on February 26, 2009
ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE
Minutes of Meeting #1/09, held on February 6, 2009.
_________________________________________
RES.#A60/09 -SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT Section IV items 12.1 and 12.2, contained in Budget/Audit Advisory Board Minutes
#1/09, held on April 17, 2009, be received.
Section IV Items 12.1 and 12.2
2008 YEAR END FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT
(Budget/Audit Res.#C4/09)
TANGIBLE CAPITAL ASSET ACCOUNTING STATUS UPDATE
(Budget/Audit Res.#C5/09)
_________________________________________
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
RES.#A61/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items 10.1 - 10.84, inclusive, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #2/09, held on April 17, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
133
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:00 p.m., on Friday, April 24, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
134
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #4/09
May 22, 2009
The Authority Meeting #4/09, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village,
on Friday, May 22, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to order at
9:44 a.m..
PRESENT
Eve Adams Member
Paul Ainslie Member
Maria Augimeri Vice Chair
Bryan Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay Cowbourne Member
Glenn De Baeremaeker Member
Mike Del Grande Member
Bill Fisch Member
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Jack Heath Member
Colleen Jordan Member
Bonnie Littley Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair
Linda Pabst Member
John Parker Member
Anthony Perruzza Member
Maja Prentice Member
Gino Rosati Member
John SprovieriMember
Richard WhiteheadMember
ABSENT
David Barrow Member
Grant Gibson Member
Glenn Mason Member
Reenga MathivananMember
135
RES.#A62/09 - MINUTES
Moved by:
Seconded by:
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #3/09, held on April 24, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Marisa Iorfido-Sdao, Supervisor, Diversity and Environmental
Volunteer Network, TRCA, Saifur Rahman, Junior Engineer and Russell Thomas, Project
Manager, Aquatech Dewatering Company, in regard to item 7.1 - Professional Access
and Integration Enhancement Program for Engineering Certification.
(b)A presentation by Laurie Nelson, Senior Manager, Development, Planning and Policy,
TRCA, in regard to item 7.2 - Permit Compliance - Ontario Regulation 166/06 -
"Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and
Watercourses Regulation.".
RES.#A63/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Anthony Perruzza
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
RES.#A64/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT above-noted presentation (b) be heard and received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A65/09 -PROFESSIONAL ACCESS AND INTEGRATION ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM FOR ENGINEERING CERTIFICATION
Bridging Program. Support for work placement of participants of the
Professional Access and Integration Enhancement Program for
internationally trained environmental engineers.
Moved by:Anthony Perruzza
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
136
THAT the municipalities in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA)
jurisdiction be encouraged to hire internationally trained environmental engineers
participating in the Professional Access and Integration Enhancement (PAIE) Program;
THAT the municipal clerks be so advised;
AND FURTHER THAT all host organizations participating in the PAIE Program be thanked
for their participation and support.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The PAIE Program is a continued effort and initiative of the TRCA's Environmental Volunteer
Network (EVN) to improve access to professional environmental work for new Canadians. As
part of TRCA's social and corporate responsibility, the PAIE Program for Geoscientists and
Planners was established in 2006 with the aim of addressing the barriers faced by new
Canadians who are trying to gain local experience, employment and professional registration in
their field of work.
Finding employment is one of the most significant challenges facing new immigrants to
Canada. The PAIE Program facilitates the integration on internationally trained newcomers by
providing them with opportunities to improve their language proficiency and access to
networks that will increase their chances of employment within their field.
By 2011, immigration is expected to account for all net labour force growth. To ensure
continued economic growth and success and to address significant changes in demographic
trends, it is necessary to fully engage all members of the workforce. The PAIE Program helps
to fill current and future gaps by addressing barriers to professional employment and licensure
for the internationally trained. The successful integration of these professionals is good for the
community and for Canada.
As quoted by Minister Michael Chan, Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration,
"Newcomers have the global education, skills and experience Ontario needs to build a strong
workforce. The investment in the PAIE Program helps internationally trained environmental
engineers get work in their field sooner."
TRCA's current PAIE participants have completed 150 hours of English language training and
have received one-on-one soft-skills coaching and training in resume, interview and job search
techniques. By completion of the PAIE Program, participants will have completed 24 technical
workshops and will have attended three field trips and a work term. Through the work term,
participants will gain the necessary experience required for licensure through Professional
Engineers Ontario.
To date 23 of the 45 participants are in work placements or fully employed. TRCA is committed
to securing 12-month work placements for the remaining participants. As such, TRCA's
municipal partners are requested to commit to hire a participant(s) to meet their current
recruitment needs. Authority members are requested to encourage this with their
municipalities.
137
Host organizations are expected to do the following:
provide a 12-month work placement under the supervision of a professional engineer (35 or
40 hours per week);
provide the participant with a minimum honorarium of $2,000 gross per month for the
duration of the work placement;
sign an agreement outlining the responsibilities and expectations of the program;
forward PAIE Program staff an outline of what you are looking for in a participant to assist in
screening applicants;
interview the PAIE Program participants who you feel are best-suited to your organization
and following the interviews, forward program staff a list of your top candidates in order of
preference;
participate in evaluations throughout the work placement to ensure that the program
continues to meet the needs of all relevant parties;
attend a diversity training session prior to or during the work placement;
join TRCA at PAIE Program events and be recognized for your support as we celebrate the
achievements of our participants.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Since the first PAIE Program in 2006, TRCA has received over $775,000 in funding from the
provincial and federal government for the PAIE Program to implement the program.
Host organizations provide the participant with a minimum honourarium of $2,000 gross per
month for the duration of the work placement.
Report prepared by: Marisa Iorfida-Sdao, extension 5582
Emails: miorfida-sdao@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Emails: cmacewen@trca.on.ca
Date: May 07, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A66/09 -PERMIT COMPLIANCE
Ontario Regulation 166/06 - "Development, Interference with Wetlands
and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation". Interim
procedures and strategic approaches to address non-compliance issues
related to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s regulatory
responsibilities under Section 28(1) of the Conservation Authorities Act
and implementation of Ontario Regulation 166/06.
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Jack Heath
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) administers Ontario
Regulation 166/06, “Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to
Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation” under Section 28(1) of the Conservation
Authorities Act;
138
AND WHEREAS TRCA staff is committed to working cooperatively with all of TRCA’s
municipal partners, landowners and stakeholders regarding all aspects of the
implementation of Ontario Regulation 166/06, including permit compliance;
AND WHEREAS TRCA, through its Business Excellence objective, is committed to
improve and streamline the administration of regulation compliance;
AND WHEREAS TRCA has experienced an increase in non-compliance issues resulting in
increased pressures on staff resources, additional costs to TRCA and significant
environmental impacts within the watersheds of TRCA;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the “Interim Procedures” for dealing with
non-compliance matters under Ontario Regulation 166/06 as outlined in the staff report be
approved and implemented;
THAT staff be directed to pursue the additional “Future Considerations and Procedures”
as outlined in this report, including any required consultation with provincial, municipal or
Building, Industry and Land Development (BILD) officials, and TRCA legal counsel, and
report back to the Executive Committee in early 2010;
AND FURTHER THAT municipalities in TRCA's jurisdiction, Conservation Ontario and the
Ministry of Natural Resources be so advised.
AMENDMENT #1
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Mike Del Grande
THAT the fifth paragraph of the main motion be amended to read as follows:
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the “Interim Procedures” for dealing with
non-compliance matters under Ontario Regulation 166/06 as outlined in the staff report be
approved and implemented with the exception that the seventh bullet point of "Interim
Procedures" be amended to read:
Letter of Credit - TRCA will develop and implement a letter of credit as a condition of
permit approval, as a security to ensure permit compliance. TRCA staff will notify the
proponent of the Letter of Credit condition when the application is made. Payment is
to be received in full before the application will be considered by the Executive
Committee.
THAT such procedure be drafted and brought to the Authority for consideration as soon
as possible;
RES.#A67/09
Moved by:Bill Fisch
Seconded by:De Baeremaeker
139
THAT Amendment #1 be referred to staff for consideration and a report back to the
Authority.
AMENDMENT #2
RES.#A68/09
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT the following be inserted before the last paragraph of the main motion:
THAT staff report on mechanisms whereby municipal governments can assist TRCA with
enforcing permit compliance, ensuring best practices and recovering full costs for
violations of TRCA applications;
AMENDMENT #3
RES.#A69/09
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Mike Del Grande
THAT the following be inserted after Amendment #2:
THAT staff report on the feasibility of creation of a “violations list” of contractors and
construction engineers to be shared with contractors, land owners and TRCA
municipalities;
AMENDMENT #4
RES.#A70/09
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT the following be inserted after Amendment #3:
THAT staff be directed to develop a letter to the Premier signed by the Chair outlining the
gaps in the Conservation Authorities Act and the need to amend the Act;
THAT Conservation Ontario be requested to endorse the letter;
AMENDMENT #1 WAS REFERRED TO STAFF
AMENDMENT #2 WAS CARRIED
AMENDMENT #3 WAS CARRIED
AMENDMENT #4 WAS CARRIED
140
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) administers Ontario
Regulation 166/06, “Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to
Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation” under Section 28(1) of the Conservation
Authorities Act;
AND WHEREAS TRCA staff is committed to working cooperatively with all of TRCA’s
municipal partners, landowners and stakeholders regarding all aspects of the
implementation of Ontario Regulation 166/06, including permit compliance;
AND WHEREAS TRCA, through its Business Excellence objective, is committed to
improve and streamline the administration of regulation compliance;
AND WHEREAS TRCA has experienced an increase in non-compliance issues resulting in
increased pressures on staff resources, additional costs to TRCA and significant
environmental impacts within the watersheds of TRCA;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the “Interim Procedures” for dealing with
non-compliance matters under Ontario Regulation 166/06 as outlined in the staff report be
approved and implemented;
THAT staff be directed to pursue the additional “Future Considerations and Procedures”
as outlined in this report, including any required consultation with provincial, municipal or
Building, Industry and Land Development (BILD) officials, and TRCA legal counsel, and
report back to the Executive Committee in early 2010;
THAT staff report on mechanisms whereby municipal governments can assist TRCA with
enforcing permit compliance, ensuring best practices and recovering full costs for
violations of TRCA applications;
THAT staff report on the feasibility of creation of a “violations list” of contractors and
construction engineers to be shared with contractors, land owners and TRCA
municipalities;
THAT staff be directed to develop a letter to the Premier signed by the Chair outlining the
gaps in the Conservation Authorities Act and the need to amend the Act;
THAT Conservation Ontario be requested to endorse the letter;
AND FURTHER THAT municipalities in TRCA's jurisdiction, Conservation Ontario and the
Ministry of Natural Resources be so advised.
BACKGROUND
In the fall of 2008, the Executive Committee requested that staff report back on several
compliance issues related to permits issued under Ontario Regulation 166/06, TRCA’s
"Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses
Regulation". In particular, staff was directed to investigate the adequacy of the current
fees/penalties for:
141
a) works commenced prior to the issuance of a TRCA permit, (i.e. ‘after the fact permits’);
b) TRCA's ability to issue a ticket/stop work order for these offences;
c) whether conservation authorities can obtain legislation similar to that available to
municipalities that allows them to remove the work/offence, restore the site and recover
this cost through a charge on the tax bill or a lien on the property; and
d) the status of any proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act)
related to the implementation of our regulatory responsibilities.
Legislative Framework
It is through Section 28(1) of the CA Act that conservation authorities (CAs), subject to the
approval of the Minister of Natural Resources, are given the authority to implement a regulation
within the area under their jurisdiction to:
prohibit, regulate or require permission of the authority for straightening, changing,
diverting or interfering in any way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or
watercourse, or for the changing or interfering in any way with a wetland (Section
28(1)(b));
prohibit, regulate or require permission of the authority for development if, in the opinion
of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or the
conservation of land may be affected by the development (Section 28 (1)(c));
Section 28 (1) also enables the appointment of officers, or persons to act as officers, to enforce
the regulation. The following summarizes Sections 28 (16) to 28 (24) of the CA Act which relate
to regulation enforcement and offences:
every person who contravenes a regulation made under Section 28(1) is guilty of an
offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $10,000, or to a term of
imprisonment of not more than three months;
in addition, the court, upon making a conviction may order the removal, at the person’s
expense, of any development within a time ordered by the court; and order the
rehabilitation of a watercourse or wetland;
if a person does not comply with a court order, the CA may carry out the works of the
court order; the person convicted is liable for costs of this work which is recoverable by
the CA by action though the court, (i.e. CA must sue parties involved to recover costs);
an enforcement officer may enter a property without a warrant if the entry is for the
purpose of considering an application for a permit or for the purpose of enforcing the
permission that was granted under the regulation; and
in absence of a permit application or a permit, an enforcement officer must give the
property owner reasonable notice to enter; if there are reasonable grounds to believe
‘significant environmental damage’ is likely to be caused, an officer may enter without
notice.
Further to the above, it should be noted that the judicial process for charges laid under a CA’s
regulation is through the Ontario Provincial Court system and procedurally governed by the
provisions of Provincial Offences Act (POA). Convictions, fines and requests for removal of
development or rehabilitation of a watercourse or wetland are at the discretion of the court.
142
Fines are paid to the court and not to the CA. Non-compliance with a court order requires
further court proceedings to be pursued by the CA. There is a six month statute of limitation
associated with non-compliance matters, as per the POA (i.e. it is not in the CA Act). In order to
pursue an offence under the regulation, an enforcement officer must be able to demonstrate
through evidence that the offence was committed or alleged to have been committed within six
months from the last day of the work related to the activity (i.e. construction, filling, alteration).
Current TRCA Trends
Violations within TRCA's jurisdiction range in scale and scope from minor infractions to major
site alterations resulting in significant environmental impacts. In some situations, particularly
with the minor infractions, private residential landowners make an honest mistake about their
site alteration activities and in not obtaining the appropriate TRCA approval. In other cases,
activities are blatantly disrespectful of TRCA's regulation requirements and permitting approvals
process. TRCA staff has identified an increase in the number of violations resulting from winter
construction and financial pressures to complete projects. These occurrences are primarily
associated with major developments such as subdivision sites and infrastructure projects.
Historically, construction has been limited to three seasons. However with mild winter
temperatures in recent years and a booming housing market, construction has continued
throughout the winter months. Extreme weather scenarios during the winter months, such as a
sudden thaw or an intense rain event, have created site conditions that can not be addressed
through standard construction practices, such as those associated with sediment and erosion
control measures. The lack of urgent response to implement emergency environmental
protection measures during these events result in major on-site impacts, as well as adjacent
and downstream impacts. In some circumstances, problems with public and site safety have
been experienced.
In addition to our regulatory responsibilities under the CA Act, TRCA has a Level III Agreement
with Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) to review projects under Section 35(1) of the Federal
Fisheries Act, which states that “no person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in
the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat” (HADD). Where applicable,
TRCA permits are also reviewed under the purview of this agreement and coordinated
accordingly. DFO is responsible for enforcing the Federal Fisheries Act, however in light of our
partnership review agreement, there are established protocols and procedures for TRCA
Enforcement staff to notify and coordinate with DFO when there may be violation of their
legislation.
Recognizing the need to update erosion and sediment control practices and provide
construction, site monitoring and maintenance guidance, the Greater Golden Horseshoe Area
Conservation Authorities developed the "Erosion and Sediment Control Guideline for Urban
Construction" in December 2006. The standards of this document are applied to TRCA permits.
TRCA staff has also held training sessions on this document for our municipal partners and the
construction industry. However, there is still a need for the construction industry to become
more experienced in identifying and implementing erosion and sediment control measures
appropriate for site conditions, monitoring and maintaining these measures and responding in
an urgent and appropriate manner in emergency situations.
Violation Categories and Procedures
The nature and scope of offences under the regulation experienced at TRCA are described in
the following three categories:
143
(i) Minor Infractions
This category includes minor works and activities that were started or recently completed within
a regulated area without the approval of TRCA. Some examples include decks, pools, low
retaining walls, patios and extensions of backyards through filling/landscaping. These projects
generally comply or can be modified to comply with TRCA policies through landowner
cooperation and a permit is issued. These infractions are referred to as ‘after the fact’ permits.
An additional administrative fee is applied to these permits, in accordance with Resolution
#B37/04 approved at Executive Committee meeting #2/04, held on March 5, 2004. This
administrative fee is an additional 50% of the base permit fee for minor/residential properties
and 100% of the base permit fee for larger scale projects (e.g. stormwater management pond
for a subdivision). Since 2004, TRCA has issued 32 'after the fact' permits.
(ii) Violations on Issued Permits
In this category, through the normal course of procedures of inspecting issued permits for
compliance, TRCA Enforcement Officers will discover on site works that deviate, sometimes
significantly, from the approved plans. In these situations, the Enforcement Officer enters into
the negotiation process with the landowner in order to get an urgent response and resolve
impacts quickly. These negotiations, particularly for significant offences, often involve other
TRCA staff, (planning, ecology, engineering, etc) and municipal staff and require on-site
meetings. Negotiations in this category result in an acceptable resolution, either through
removal or restoration, and compliance with the regulation. This is a less costly solution than
the judicial process for the current volume of violations, assuming that the violation is solvable
by acceptable site adjustments. In the past five years, 42 violations have been issued in this
category.
(iii) Judicial Process
In circumstances where there are substantial issues and the offence can not be successfully
resolved through the negotiation process with the landowner, the violation process evolves into
a judicial process. As previously noted, charges are laid before the court. TRCA retains legal
counsel to prosecute significant cases and assist the investigating case Enforcement Officer.
TRCA planning and technical staff are often called upon for their expertise and testimony in
these proceedings, in addition to Enforcement staff. During the period of 2004 to 2008,
Enforcement staff laid 51 charges under the CA Act and made 94 appearances before the
court.
144
Permit and Enforcement Statistics
Statistics on permit and violation activities for the past five years are summarized in Attachment
1. In 2008, 923 permits were issued by TRCA. To manage workload volume and priorities,
Enforcement staff inspect only the regular permits and permissions for routine infrastructure
works and not the minor permits (248 in 2008). Site inspections and compliance monitoring
are also prioritized based on the complexity of applications, level of site development
constraints and associated risks and/or developments that were subject to significant
negotiations during the application process. There were a total of 67 violation notices issued in
2008 (for TRCA permitted and non-TRCA permitted activities); of those 23 were to private
landowners, 23 to corporate entities, 10 to construction companies, 6 to agents and 5 to other
entities. A single violation site may result in the issuance of more than one violation notice,
depending on the number of individuals involved in the offence. The violation notice
procedures generated 10 ‘after the fact’ permits and 9 violations were issued on active permit
sites. Enforcement staff resolved 13 violations through negotiations for removal and/or
restoration. A total of 9 charges were laid through the judicial process and there were 8 court
appearances for all Section 28 active prosecution matters, current and outstanding for 2008.
As noted previously, the trend in violations has been in the large scale developments and
infrastructure projects, both private and public. While the number of violation sites is relatively
low, (43 in 2008), in comparison to the volume of permits processed, the staff resources
required to negotiate and resolve violations is very time consuming and costly.
Opportunities and Constraints
Section 8 of the Building Code Act requires compliance with all applicable laws prior to the
issuance of a building or demolition permit. The Ontario Building Code defines regulations
made by a conservation authority under the CA Act as applicable law. Prior to the issuance of a
building or demolition permit within an area regulated by TRCA, municipal building officials
must receive a copy of the TRCA permit.
TRCA Enforcement staff can issue violation notices when there is an offence under the
regulation. However, unlike municipal building officials, they do not have the ability to issue a
stop work order. The ability to stop work and correct site alterations is particularly important in
sites that pose a public health and safety risk, both on site or where downstream impacts are
significant. Under the provisions of Ontario Regulation 166/06, TRCA’s Regulation that came
into effect in May 2006, TRCA now has the ability to cancel a permit subject to holding a
hearing with the applicant. While in some circumstances this might be an appropriate course
of action, particularly in the case of a construction permit associated with municipal building
permit, in others it may not. Revoking a permit does not necessarily facilitate negotiations or
achieve removal or restoration of an offence. In many cases additional harm to the
environment will be realized if the proponent is prevented from undertaking identified works
and associated stabilization.
145
Through Ontario Regulation 166/06, TRCA now clearly has the opportunity to impose
conditions on permits. To date, through the processing of permit applications, TRCA staff
ensure that all drawings approved with permits include detailed notes about site development
requirements, such as construction timing and methodologies, and sediment and erosion
control measures, in accordance with TRCA requirements (i.e. what may be considered as
‘conditions’). Imposing conditions to address the potential for non-compliance matters could
be considered. For example, for permits involving site grading, a condition could be imposed
to require the applicant to submit certification of final grading by a professional engineer to
ensure the works have been done in accordance with the permission. A standard set of
conditions could be developed, with additional conditions as required.
Municipal Comparison
The Executive Committee requested staff to investigate the legislative tools available to
municipalities in dealing with potential violations of municipal approvals. Under the Planning
Act process, municipalities can hold letters of credit/securities through agreement with the
landowners for compliance with approved grading plans, landscaping plans, etc., for
applications such as subdivisions and site plans. Through this mechanism, if there is a
non-compliance issue, these securities would be used to rectify the situation.
Most municipalities within TRCA’s jurisdiction implement a Fill By-law under the provisions of
the Municipal Act for those lands within the municipality that fall outside areas regulated by a
conservation authority under Section 28 of the CA Act. As per Section 142(8) of the Municipal
Act, a municipal fill by-law cannot overlap with an area regulated by a conservation authority. A
municipality can appoint an employee, officer or agent of the municipality to undertake
compliance inspections for permits issued under their fill by-law. Municipalities often retain
certain securities through the issuance of a permit under their fill by-law. Through the
provisions of the Municipal Act, a municipality also has the ability to recover fines for offences
or removal/restoration of sites under their fill by-law through taxation or liens on the affected
property.
As previously noted, a municipality has the ability to issue a stop work order under the Building
Code Act for matters on non-compliance.
TRCA Enforcement staff make every attempt to solicit support and assistance from TRCA's
municipal partners to coordinate efforts when dealing with non-compliance matters and
strategically use all available legislative tools to resolve these matters. This is not a formalized
process but is done on an individual case basis. The CA Act currently does not contain any
provisions related to taking securities in association with permits. Consideration could be given
to including this as part of the standard conditions. TRCA staff would recommend further legal
assistance is required if consideration of this mechanism, or any other legislative tools similar to
the provisions in the Municipal Act are to be explored to deal with non-compliance matters.
146
Conservation Authorities Act Amendments
Section 28 of the CA Act was last updated in 1998 as part of the Red Tape Reduction Act (Bill
25) to ensure that Regulations under the Act were consistent across the province and
complementary to provincial policies. In May 2004, the regulation to implement the 1998
changes to the CA Act, Ontario Regulation 97/04 “Content of Conservation Authority
Regulations under Subsection 28 (1) of the Act: Development, Interference with Wetlands and
Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses” (i.e. Generic Regulation) was approved. This
Regulation established the content requirements to be met in a Regulation made by a CA. In
May 2006, the Minister of Natural Resources approved individual Development, Interference
and Alteration Regulations for all CAs in the province, consistent with Ontario Regulation 97/04,
including TRCA’s Ontario Regulation 166/06.
Prior to 1998, an offence under Section 28(1) of the CA Act was subject to a fine, upon
conviction of not more than $1,000 or to a term of imprisonment of not more than three months.
In 1998, the fine was increased to $10,000.
Through Conservation Ontario (CO) Council, there have been several requests made to the
Minister of Natural Resources to amend specific provisions of Section 28 of the CA Act. Some
of the requested changes would be considered ‘housekeeping’ amendments, while others
relate more to program implementation. In 2001, CO Council requested an amendment to
allow CAs to prosecute violations for up to 2 years from the date of the violation, thereby
ensuring consistency with the provisions of the Public Lands Act and other environmental
legislation.
TRCA has previously raised concerns similar to those expressed by the current Executive
Committee to the Minister of Natural Resources and Conservation Ontario. In a report to the
Business Excellence Advisory Board at Meeting #4/05, held on September 23, 2005, TRCA
staff, in consultation with TRCA’s solicitor, provided comments on a list of proposed
amendment to various sections of the CA Act, including Section 28. In that report, TRCA also
noted opportunities for future amendments that would assist in the prosecution of violations
and ensure site rehabilitation including:
increase the time frame for prosecutions from 6 month to 2 years;
significantly increase the fines to reflect monetary penalties in line with other compatible
environmental legislation, (for example, offences under the Environmental Protection Act
can carry penalties of $5,000 per day and more);
that in addition to any fine imposed by the court, neutralize any monetary benefit from
the commission of the offence;
imposing such other penalties and sanctions that may result, in part, with the redirection
of monies to CAs as compensation to remedy, avoid or remediate damages done, or to
advocate or implement proper environmental management practice in line with CA
policies and objectives;
require restoration and rehabilitation of land once the development has been removed
(currently the section speaks of rehabilitation of wetlands but no other lands);
a method of cost recovery similar to other legislation (Ontario Water Resources Act,
Municipal Act, Environmental Protection Act) such as through the offender’s tax bill.
147
In 2007, CO sent another report consolidating all previously recommended amendments to the
CA Act, including those related to Section 28, to the Minister of Natural Resources. To date, the
requested amendments have not been made by MNR. However, CO staff continues to take
every opportunity through various initiatives to recommend to MNR amendments to Section 28
of the CA Act, including those that have arisen in the past few years through the implementation
of the new Regulations, that would result in improved program efficiencies and delivery.
Recommended Approach
In light of the above discussion, including works initiated without TRCA approval, lack of urgent
response to implement emergency protection measures and to recover staff resources for
negotiation and resolution of violations, TRCA staff recommends to the Executive Committee
that the procedures for dealing with non-compliance issues related to the implementation or
TRCA’s Regulation be addressed as follows:
Interim Procedures
Current enforcement procedures for dealing with non-compliance matters under Ontario
Regulation 166/06 be updated, effective immediately, to include the following:
‘After the Fact’ Permit Fee - increase the current administrative fee from 50% of the
base permit fee for minor/residential properties and 100% of the base permit fee for
larger scale projects to 100% of the base permit fee for all permit categories. For
example, a minor residential ‘after the fact’ permit would be $690 ($345 base fee) and a
stormwater management pond ‘after the fact’ would be $7,730 ($3,865 base fee).
‘After the Fact’ Permit Approval Period - Permits issued under Ontario Regulation
166/06 are valid for a maximum period of 24 months. In instances where works have
already been completed without a TRCA permit, the approval period to the TRCA permit
shall be reduced to a time frame deemed appropriate by the Director, Planning and
Development, based upon coordination with municipal requirements and TRCA
enforcement requirements.
Additional Fees for Site Meetings, Technical Team Meetings - the current TRCA fee
schedule includes a fee structure for additional site visits ($600 for up to half a day;
$1,200 for up to a day including travel time) and for pre-consultation technical team site
visits ($2,500). This fee structure shall be applied and charged to applicants that enter
into negotiations with TRCA in order to recover the level of staff service, including
multiple meetings and site visits required to resolve non-compliance issues. TRCA staff
will work with our solicitor for the appropriate leverage to collect these fees.
On-Site Non-Compliance Reports - Enforcement staff currently issue violation notices
to applicants upon securing all required information to initiate non-compliance matters
under the CA Act. In addition to this normal procedure, primarily for the larger project
sites, enforcement staff shall issue on-site, non-compliance reports at the time of site
investigation. This will serve not only as an initial notice to the owner/agent/construction
company, etc. that there is an offence occurrence under the Regulation, but also
document and record on-going offences and associated meetings.
Post Violation Correction and Restoration - As part of the compliance process for
those violations that do not go through the judicial process, remediation and restoration
of the site and/or monetary compensation for damages will be negotiated between the
owner and TRCA.
148
Training and Monitoring - TRCA staff will continue to work with our municipal partners
and the construction industry to provide training and guidance on erosion and sediment
control practices, site monitoring and maintenance. In addition, TRCA will begin to
track and monitor the performance of these activities and share this information with our
municipal partners and the development industry.
Letter of Credit - In special circumstances, TRCA will implement a Letter of Credit as a
condition of permit approval, as a security to ensure permit compliance. In these
situations, TRCA staff will notify the proponent of the intention to impose a Letter of
Credit condition in advance of the permit being considered by the Executive Committee,
in order for the proponent to confirm acceptance of the condition or afford the
proponent the opportunity to object to the condition at a Hearing.
Future Considerations and Procedures
Staff recommends that the following additional actions, which may require further provincial,
municipal or TRCA legal consultation, be pursued in an effort to address the issues associated
with regulatory non-compliance:
Municipal Consultation and Partnership - Municipalities rely on TRCA’s technical 1.
experience when dealing with natural hazards and environmentally sensitive sites. Staff
will continue to dialogue with TRCA's municipal partners and seek opportunities to
coordinate better environmental compliance through all available tools. This may
include increasing letters of credit and securities through municipal tools, such as site
plan agreements, to ensure appropriate level of site remediation and restoration is
available for emergency and non-responsive situations. Changes to construction
practices, site management and adaptive environmental monitoring should also be
explored through this process. It is recommended that opportunities to implement third
party environmental monitoring of construction sites, (i.e. professionals that do not
report to owner/applicant/contractor), through municipal legislative tools and TRCA
permitting conditions, be explored as a means of ensuring compliance with complex
development applications, particularly in sensitive areas.
Consultation with BILD (Building Industry and Land Development Group) - TRCA 2.
staff has already started discussions with BILD about the quality of construction
compliance and the need to recover additional TRCA staff costs resulting from
negotiations to resolve offences of TRCA's permit approvals. The next scheduled
update for TRCA fees is 2010. As part of that update, staff intend to consider fees
designed to recover non-compliance matters, which might include inspection fees for
major development permits, fees for additional site visits and technical staff time for
negotiations, adding a premium for emergency works, a ‘violation consultancy service
fee’ to resolve municipal/public violations, etc..
Legislation - TRCA will continue to work with Conservation Ontario and the Ministry of 3.
Natural Resources to advocate for legislative amendments to the CA Act or the ability for
CAs to use other existing legislative tools that would promote regulatory compliance
and cost recovery to the CA. In particular, the additional CA Act amendments
recommended by TRCA to CO and MNR in 2005, as outlined in this report, will be
promoted.
149
Permit Conditions - TRCA staff will develop a standard set of conditions that address 4.
both permit compliance (e.g. certification of final grading, floodproofing measures, etc.)
and the potential for non-compliance issues (e.g. certification of on-site erosion and
sediment control measures).
Report prepared by: Laurie Nelson, extension 5281
Emails: lnelson@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Laurie Nelson, extension 5281;
Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214
Emails: lnelson@trca.on.ca; cwoodland@trca.on.ca
Date: May 14, 2009
Attachments: 1
150
Attachment 1
TRCA Permit and Enforcement
Statistics
2004 to 2008
The following is a summary of activities under Section 28 of the CA Act from 2004 to 2008. Please note
that Ontario Regulation 158 was in effect in 2004/05 and replaced by Ontario Regulation 166/06 in May
2006.
PERMITS ISSUED:
20042005200620072008
Standard/Regular Permits:405465515550639
*Permission for Minor Works:165*260*248*
**Permission for Routine Infrastructure:36**
Total:405 465 680 810 923
* Permission for Minor Works Implemented in 2006; No inspection by Enforcement staff for
compliance.
**Permission for Routine Infrastructure Implemented in 2008
VIOLATIONS:
20042005200620072008
Total number of Violation Notices Issued:
(Includes TRCA permitted and Non-TRCA permitted activities)
801095512567
To private landowners 4044276323
To corporate entities 1917133023
To construction companies72481810
To agents1220586
Number of other entities
(e.g. consultants, engineers, etc.)
2 4265
Total number of violation sites:4658378643
Total number of permits generated from Violation Notice
procedure:
58 3610
Total number of Violations issued on Active
Permits sites:
715389
Total number of violation sites resolved through negotiations for
removal and /or restoration
by Enforcement staff
208211613
Total number of charges laid by Enforcement 1157199
Total number of court appearances for all Section 28 active
prosecution matters, current and outstanding
302218168
151
RES.#A71/09 -HEADWATER DRAINAGE FEATURES
Approval of the update to the Evaluation, Classification and Management
of Headwater Drainage Features: Interim Guideline (March, 2009)
prepared for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Credit Valley
Conservation (CVC) and other conservation authorities, and an update
on the research study and preliminary findings.
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT the update to the Evaluation, Classification and Management of Headwater
Drainage Features: Interim Guideline (March, 2009) be approved;
THAT staff report back to the Authority for approval of the final guideline based on the
results of the ongoing research;
AND FURTHER THAT the municipal clerks in TRCA's jurisdiction and the Greater
Golden Horseshoe conservation authorities be so advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Headwater drainage features (HDF) can be small, ill-defined features that do not necessarily
flow year round, however their number and spatial extent could have substantial implications
on the aquatic integrity of watersheds. These features can account for 70-80% of the total
catchment area within a watershed, and 90% of a river’s flow may be derived from catchment
headwaters. However, due to their small size and because their functions are poorly
understood, headwater drainage features can be vulnerable to impacts resulting from
agricultural and urban land uses, including ditching, burying and diverting, tile drains and
infilling. This makes evaluation of impacts very difficult when alteration is contemplated through
the development process. The lack of understanding can potentially lead to mismanagement
of these features and loss of function in the face of new urban development.
Previously, staff has completed a literature review and interim guideline to provide support and
direction for headwater management, which were reported to the board in September 2007. At
Authority Meeting #7/07, held on September 28, 2007, Resolution #A210/07 was approved as
follows:
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff commence
implementation of the Evaluation, Classification and Management of Headwater Drainage
Features: Interim Guideline (March 2007);
THAT staff continue to collaborate with project partners in conducting primary research
examining the natural functions of small drainage features in order to facilitate
refinements to the guideline;
THAT direction be given to staff to engage municipalities and the development industry
in policy development and research initiatives;
152
AND FURTHER THAT the interim guideline be updated/revised, as necessary, based on
the results of the research, and that these results be reported back to the Watershed
Management Advisory Board.
Since the last report to the board, staff has undertaken primary research to assess the
biological and hydrological functions of these streams and have some preliminary results to
share. As a result of the research findings and consultation with agencies and consultants
using the Interim Headwater Guideline, an update to the document was completed to improve
its clarity and user-friendliness.
RATIONALE
The guideline provides conservation authority (CA) staff and development consultants with
direction on how to evaluate, classify and manage HDFs in the landscape through the
development process in order to ensure critical functions are not lost. The guideline provides
direction on the field data required to evaluate HDFs, including information about flow, fish
habitat, vegetation, channel form and linkages. These field data is then used to classify the
stream into one of five habitat categories for the stream reach. Management recommendations
are then applied to the stream reach based on the assigned classification through the
development process (i.e. plan review), such as maintaining an open drainage feature,
maintaining external flow and/or whether the feature’s functions can be replicated through Low
Impact Development measures. A few copies of the guideline will be made available at the
Authority meeting and additional copies will be made available upon request. The updated
version of the guideline will also be made available on the TRCA website.
All neighbouring CAs (including Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, Lake Simcoe
Region Conservation Authority, Credit Valley Conservation and Conservation Halton) have been
engaged in the identification of research priorities, study design development and study
implementation. TRCA's study will provide consistency amongst CAs in the Greater Toronto
Area (GTA), and it recognizes that there remain outstanding gaps in the understanding of these
systems in southern Ontario.
In 2007-2008, in collaboration with the universities of Waterloo and Toronto, TRCA undertook
research to examine the hydrological and biological functions of headwater streams. Some of
the key findings thus far are:
While there are existing policies and legislation to protect the natural functions of
headwater streams (Federal Fisheries Act, Conservation Authorities Act, Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan, Greenbelt Plan, etc.), there is little direction provided to
resource managers on how to specifically recognize and protect these features and
their functions. There are also outstanding threats to these features despite the
available tools. It is anticipated that this study will provide a vehicle for transfer of
science and best management practices through the identification of outstanding gaps
in research and policy.
The natural variability associated with these systems means that planning decisions
must rely on high quality and extensive field monitoring, which are currently not, to our
knowledge, being conducted in a standardized way by any agencies within
south-central Ontario.
153
Biological systems are more greatly influenced by variability than their average
condition. As resource managers, we need to move away from mitigating to maintain
the average conditions. Instead, we need to begin monitoring headwater systems to
understand the variability of natural flow regimes so that mitigation can be directed to
replicate this natural variability in flows and functions. This is in contrast to the current
practice which is designed to minimize variability (i.e. stormwater management ponds).
This provides further support for the requirement of at-source controls for stormwater
management and Low Impact Development mitigation measures, which are already
being promoted by TRCA and CVC.
On fine-textured soils, these features can contribute substantially to surface flows and
food sources for downstream aquatic systems.
The main function associated with headwater drainage features on forested sandy or
gravelly soils on the Oak Ridges Moraine is groundwater recharge as opposed to
surface flow conveyance, or organic drift (insects and leaf litter) or sediment transport.
It is very difficult to predict permanence of flow. The classification of HDFs used to
influence management decisions should recognize that these systems are dynamic.
Point in time measurements do not lend themselves to predicting where the thresholds
are in terms of flow permanence. We need to err on the side of caution with regard to
management decisions because of the temporal (climatic) variability and differences in
landscape condition (land use, soils, catchment size, catchment slope) associated with
these systems.
This study has improved CAs scientific understanding of headwater drainage features and
addressed some of the outstanding gaps in knowledge. However, in order to continue to
improve the science for the guideline, staff is undertaking additional research in coming years
to address additional outstanding gaps. Once the research and analysis are completed, the
findings will be used to make further refinements to the guideline document, as necessary.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
A workshop is planned for May 20, 2009 to disseminate the findings of this, and other research
currently being conducted on HDFs. This will be an agency-focused workshop, and all of the
conservation authorities within the Greater Golden Horseshoe have been invited to attend.
Current approaches in monitoring, existing policy and assessment tools will be discussed, with
the intent of identifying remaining gaps in these areas, and strategies for addressing these
gaps.
In 2009, fieldwork will be conducted on a variety of headwater drainage features throughout the
GTA in order to assess the distribution and extent of seasonal fish habitat. The 2009 research
program will build and expand on the 2007-2008 research. A subset of sites examined through
the 2008 work will be studied again this year. These streams were selected based on
hydrologic data collected in 2008 indicating sustained flow within the streams until at least the
end of May. Given that this is an emerging science, there are many outstanding research
questions on this topic. This work was given in-kind support by University of Toronto and
University of Waterloo, who will be pursuing publication of the research findings. Additional
research for future years (2010-2011) is currently being planned, and continued partnerships
with academic institutions are being fostered. All of the results of the research will provide
scientific support for further refinements to the headwater guideline, which will eventually be
finalized.
154
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Financial support for the 2007-2008 research was provided by the Oak Ridges Moraine
Foundation, the Regional Municipality of Peel, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority,
Conservation Halton, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Toronto and Region Remedial
Action Plan, which totaled over $260,000. There were also many other partners that provided
in-kind support. This year’s work is being supported by Peel Region Climate Change, York
Region, Great Lakes Sustainability Fund, Lake Simcoe Region CA, and Credit Valley
Conservation, which totals $95,000. Additional sources of funds continue to be sought.
Report prepared by: Laura Del Giudice, extension 5334
Emails: ldelgiudice@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Laura Del Giudice, extension 5334
Emails: ldelgiudice@trca.on.ca
Date: May 5, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A72/09 -TORONTO URBAN FARM AT BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE
Participation in a food festival and seeking funding for the Toronto Urban
Farm.
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the City of Toronto Parks,
Forestry and Recreation Department host an end-of-the season food festival to promote
the accomplishments of the Toronto Urban Farm;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA assist with acquiring funding from external sources to
support the Toronto Urban Farm.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #1/03, held on February 21, 2003, Resolution #A18/03 was approved, in
part, as follows:
THAT the concept of developing an Urban Agriculture Project at Black Creek Pioneer
Village be endorsed;...
The concept of an urban farm was developed in 2002. Shortly thereafter, TRCA requested
support from the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department to realize the
concept. In 2003, an advisory committee was established to support project implementation.
In 2004, TRCA and the City of Toronto formed a memorandum of management for eight acres
of land located at the southeast corner of Jane Street and Steeles Avenue, in the City of
Toronto. The City was given management over this parcel of TRCA-owned land for the
establishment of an organic urban farm. Prior to this, the City demonstrated its expertise in
managing a successful Community Gardens Program (CGP).
155
The Toronto Urban Farm at Black Creek Pioneer Village will play a key role in revitalizing the
local food system in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Growing local food is necessary to help
reduce the GTA's ecological footprint. Local food can reduce ecological footprints by reducing
greenhouse gas emissions related to food transportation, which in turn helps to reduce the
impacts of climate change. The Toronto Urban Farm will also promote greater social equity
and food security in one of Toronto's most vulnerable communities by:
engaging youth and the community in urban organic farming;
providing skills and leadership development opportunities;
fostering greater interaction among community members;
providing jobs and meaningful work for the local community;
providing increased opportunities for access to fresh and healthy foods.
The project will also involve social entrepreneurship through the production of heirloom and
ethnocultural vegetables for niche markets such as specialized caterers, restaurants and
ethnocultural communities. Revenue generated through food sales and other activities will be
re-invested in the project to enhance long term sustainability. In the longer term, some
produce may be donated to food relief programs.
The Toronto Urban Farm project is complementary to TRCA's Sustainable Communities
objective of The Living City vision. As growing local food has a connection with conservation,
this project provides TRCA with the opportunity to become an integral partner in the community
by offering land and in-kind services. The Toronto Urban Farm project also fulfills Toronto City
Council's mandate to promote green economic development through local food production
pilot projects.
Farming practices at the Toronto Urban Farm favour organic methodologies which often take
longer to reach a state of full production. There is no use of pesticides or fertilizers and a
limited amount of machinery has been employed. As a result, it will take longer to bring the
farm into full organic production. When considering these timelines, it is important to recognize
that the project is about community enhancement as much as it is about local food production.
Project Goals and Objectives
To create meaningful employment opportunities for local youth.
To increase youth leadership and entrepreneurial skills.
To increase participants' knowledge and skills in organic farming, environmental
stewardship and local food systems.
To build community capacity to address local food security and environmental issues.
To promote healthy nutrition and active lifestyles.
To increase the availability of rare and nearly extinct vegetable and other plant species.
To generate and disseminate knowledge in sustainable agriculture and community
development.
To promote community engagement.
Partner Roles and Responsibilities
The role of the advisory committee is to guide management decisions of the farm and support
project implementation. The committee is comprised of representatives from:
TRCA;
City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation;
156
African Food Basket;
Seeds of Diversity Canada;
Umoja Learning Centre;
Jane Finch Community Citizens Council;
Lawrence Heights Community Centre;
University of Guelph;
York University;
FarmStart.
The following is a description of some of the prominent partner roles and responsibilities:
City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation
farm management;
staff support;
funding proposals;
community mobilization;
strategic planning;
infrastructure: financing, installation and vegetation management.
TRCA
access to land;
staff support;
training workshops;
administrative and technical expertise;
meeting space;
management of advisory committee.
Current Project Accomplishments (2008)
Hired 15 youth (including 14 returning employees from previous years), all visible
minorities.
Conducted leadership and employability skills training on various topics.
Conducted on-the-job gardening skills training and in-class training.
Initiated trial production of various heirloom crops on four 100ft. x 100ft. plots. Crops
included heirloom varieties of eggplants, tomatoes, beans, squash, pumpkin, carrots,
beats, okra, peppers, parsley, basil, onion, sage and leeks.
Held a design charette in January 2008 with architecture and engineering students from
Ryerson University. Student teams developed design plans for the conversion of Braeburn
House and the surrounding production area to a sustainable training facility.
Hosted an end-of-season celebration which was organized by youth participants in August
2008.
Engaged staff and volunteers from various community agencies in harvesting crops for food
security programs. Agencies included: Green Gardeners Group, Seeds of Diversity,
Mustard Seed, The Stop Community Food Centre and a seniors’ group.
Organized four tours and two children’s work camps during the 2008 season.
Site Work Done to Date
vegetation removal;
tilling;
soil amendment;
fence installation;
157
water line installation from Jane Street;
installation of storage facilities;
construction of access gates via Jane Street;
initiation of renovations at Braeburn House, a former TRCA rental property, into a training
facility, washrooms and offices for the site.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
In 2003, the Community Gardens Program (CGP) applied for funding from the Ontario
Works Incentive Fund and received $178,000 to establish the farm over a two-year pilot
period. Although the grant was less than half of the amount requested, it enabled the CGP
to initiate farm installation and provide youth with employment and training in urban
agriculture and life skills.
In 2007, the CGP secured $184,000 from the City of Toronto base operating budget for
youth employment and training in urban agriculture and life skills.
In 2008 and 2009, the CGP secured $250,000 from the City of Toronto base operating
budget for youth employment and training in urban agriculture and life skills, as well as
materials and supplies.
In 2009, the City of Toronto Environment Office, through their Live Green Program allocated
$50,000 for septic system upgrades at the Toronto Urban Farm. This is not enough funding
to connect the farm to the municipal sewer system which is estimated to cost over
$100,000.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Continue youth employment and training.
Provide community and children’s programming.
Continue site preparation and crop production.
Build an energy efficient greenhouse that will ensure year-round food production.
Continue to renovate Braeburn House to create facilities for food processing and storage.
TRCA and the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department to investigate an
end-of-the season food festival in 2009.
TRCA and the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department to develop a
website and marketing material for urban agriculture, including the Toronto Urban Farm.
TRCA to help seek funding from external sources to support the Toronto Urban Farm.
TRCA to convene the Toronto Urban Farm Advisory Committee and recruit new members to
take on an active role to implement priority components.
TRCA and the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department to investigate
opportunities for internal skills development training that can be offered to seasonal
employees of the Toronto Urban Farm.
TRCA's stewardship staff to be consulted about developing on-site educational
opportunities at the Toronto Urban Farm.
Seek funds to connect the farm to the municipal system in the future. In the meantime
Toronto staff will investigate suitable options for enlarging the existing private septic system
with the funding they expect from the Toronto Environment Office.
Report prepared by: Sonia Dhir, extension 5291
Emails: sdhir@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211
Emails: gwilkins@trca.on.ca
Date: May 5, 2009
158
RES.#A73/09 -TORONTO BEACHES PLAN
City of Toronto. To provide an update on the recently approved City of
Toronto "Toronto Beaches Plan" and obtain direction to assist the City in
the investigation of new City beach locations.
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT staff be directed to work with the City of Toronto to investigate the opportunities to
include swimming beaches in the development of the Arsenal Lands/Marie Curtis Park
West, Colonel Samuel Smith Park and Port Union Waterfront Park Phase 2 in consultation
with the adjacent communities;
AND FURTHER THAT staff assist the City of Toronto in looking at opportunities to
improve the littoral zone, including the lake bottom within 20 meters of the shore from,
algae blooms and lakefill debris that undermines the swimming experience at Cherry
Beach.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
On February 23, 24 and 25, 2009, the City of Toronto Council endorsed the report entitled
"Great City, Great Beaches: Toronto Beaches Plan" (January 2009). The Toronto Beaches Plan
identifies actions to further enhance beach water quality, maintenance and operations, facilities
and amenities, programming, and education and communications. The plan is driven by a
vision of getting all Toronto swimming beaches to and beyond the Blue Flag standard – the
international eco-label for quality beaches. Coupled with existing operations and other planned
continuous service improvements, the actions proposed in the plan will maintain the Blue Flag
status of six City of Toronto beaches, bring five other beaches up to the Blue Flag standard and
potentially create a new swimming beach. If the proposed actions are implemented, all or most
Toronto beaches could satisfy the award criteria of the Blue Flag program as early as 2010.
The report is available on the follow website
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2009/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-18573.pdf.
Toronto's lakeside beaches will be safer, cleaner, more usable, more accessible and greener
than they are today. Opportunities to swim and wade at supervised beaches will continue to be
distributed equitably across the waterfront. All swimming beaches will fly the Blue Flag, hosting
a range of recreational uses with the necessary supporting amenities, while ensuring that the
natural environment is protected, enhanced or restored.
In Toronto, a great swimming beach will have:
Beach water quality that allows swimming and wading to take place every day during the
beach season, is communicated to users in a more timely manner, is more rigorously
monitored for sources of pollution, and is supported by safer and more comfortable lake
bottom conditions.
Maintenance and operations that offer extended beach lifeguard protection during hot
weather, provide cleaner washrooms and change rooms, reduce fouling by birds, animals,
nuisance algae and floating debris, and respond better to storm debris and higher levels of
use attributed to climate change.
159
Facilities and amenities that are in a good state of repair, attractive, environmentally
sustainable, accessible to people with disabilities, more easily reached by transit, foot and
bicycle, offer more and better shade opportunities, and generally support a highly satisfying
beach experience.
Programming that better manages potential conflicts between different waterfront user
groups, enables visitors to learn about beach ecosystems and issues, encourages
community stewardship to restore nature, and brings more children from non-waterfront
neighbourhoods to the beach.
Education and communications that makes beach conditions and regulations more
understandable to users, increases local awareness of the Blue Flag program and beach
improvement initiatives, and attracts tourists to Toronto’s beaches.
To achieve this vision, the Toronto Beaches Plan proposes a five-point improvement strategy:
1.Commit to bringing all of Toronto’s swimming beaches to the Blue Flag standard as quickly
as possible.
2.As short-term priorities, take steps to improve beach water quality at Sunnyside, Marie
Curtis and Rouge beaches to meet the Blue Flag standard.
3.Undertake other improvements relating to beach water quality, maintenance and
operations, facilities and amenities, programming, and education and communications.
Target actions at specific beaches based on need or opportunity.
4.Request the provincial and federal governments to support local efforts to improve beach
conditions in Toronto and across the Great Lakes.
5.Over the longer term, make additional improvements to achieve zero beach postings and
thus exceed the Blue Flag standard for beach water quality, relying primarily on continued
implementation of the Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan.
The Toronto Beaches Plan proposes 27 actions to implement this strategy, organized around
the themes of beach water quality, maintenance and operations, facilities and amenities,
programming, and education and communications.
Beach water quality: create an enclosed swimming area at Sunnyside Beach; relocate or
undertake remedial works at Marie Curtis Beach East and Rouge Beach, and consider
providing a swimming beach at Col. Samuel Smith Park; use additional stormwater controls to
control waterfront park and beach parking lot runoff; reduce animal-related E.coli loadings
through various measures; review erosion and lake bottom conditions and undertake remedial
works; conduct annual beach pollution surveys; review ways that beach water samples can be
assessed for E.coli more quickly; continue to undertake microbial source tracking studies and
monitoring beach sand science to improve management techniques; examine possible
methods of controlling zebra and quagga mussels to reduce beach fouling by nuisance algae.
Maintenance and operations: extend lifeguard hours during Heat Alerts and Extreme Heat
Alerts at selected Blue Flag beaches on the mainland and at Toronto Island if these sites are
not posted against swimming; develop a new operating arrangement to better manage floating
debris and lakeweed; address beach maintenance pressures arising from climate change.
160
Facilities and amenities: design, build, install and test a new beach lifeguard stand prototype;
develop strategies to retrofit or rebuild beach facilities to meet the Toronto Green Development
Strategy and upgrade amenities not captured by capital state of good repair audits; provide
effective shade measures; assess food concession operations and future needs; provide
additional cycling facilities and trail opportunities; improve access for beach users with
disabilities; incorporate natural heritage objectives into beach improvements.
Programming: develop new environmental education programs; work with communities to
restore and maintain beach ecosystems; bring children from non-waterfront neighbourhoods to
beaches; resolve weekend access issues at Bluffer’s Park Beach; better manage user conflicts
at beaches.
Education and communications: upgrade, consolidate and simplify beach signage; increase
local awareness of the Blue Flag program and other beach-related City objectives and
initiatives; promote Toronto’s beaches as a tourism destination.
Swimmable beaches are often used as an indicator of Toronto's environmental performance
and quality of life. The Toronto Beaches Plan is driven by a vision of getting all Toronto
swimming beaches to and beyond the Blue Flag standard - the international eco-label for
quality beaches. Coupled with existing operations and other planned continuous
improvements, the actions outlined in the plan will maintain the Blue Flag status of six City
beaches, bring five others up to the Blue Flag standard and potentially create a new swimming
beach at Colonel Samuel Smith Park.
RATIONALE
Staff has participated in the development of the Toronto Beaches Plan since April 2007. A
number of actions proposed in the Toronto Beaches Plan relate directly to TRCA and its
mandate on the waterfront.
Beach Water Quality
TRCA has provided input and recommendations into the development of a pilot project at
Sunnyside Beach to enclose a portion of the swimming area to make it more swimmable ad
provide water that meets Ontario's recreational water quality standard. TRCA approved a
permit for this project on April 24, 2009.
The City will initiate a public planning process, involving consultation with the local community
to achieve better water quality at Marie Curtis East Beach, Rouge Beach and Colonel Samuel
Smith Park. At Marie Curtis Park East Beach the site is impacted by pollution from Etobicoke
Creek. The feasibility of deflecting the creek's discharge away from the beach, relocating the
beach to the west side of the creek, or relocating the beach to Col. Samuel Smith Park will be
investigated. At the Rouge Beach the sire is impacted by pollution from the Rouge River and
the lake bottom tails off quickly into deep water. The feasibility of relocating the beach as part
of the development of Port Union Waterfront Park Phase 2 will be investigated.
Facilities and Amenities
The City will investigate erosion and lake bottom conditions at selected beaches and implement
remedial measures (ie. sand nourishment, substrate sorting and cobble/rubble removal) to
improve swimming and wading.
161
Improving the quality of Toronto’s beaches is a widely shared responsibility requiring action by
many City divisions, agencies and partners. At the local level, the key public agencies are
Parks, Forestry and Recreation, Toronto Water, Toronto Public Health, Toronto Police Service
Marine Unit and TRCA. The directions in the Toronto Beaches Plan need to be incorporated
into the waterfront park plans and projects of the City of Toronto, Toronto Waterfront
Revitalization Corporation and TRCA. Integration with the Western Waterfront Master Plan,
which affects Sunnyside Beach, is especially important. At Environment Canada, continued
support from the Canadian Wildlife Service and the National Water Research Institute will be
essential to Toronto’s success. Individual citizens and community organizations – such as
Environmental Defence, Lake Ontario Waterkeeper and Citizens Concerned About the Future of
the Toronto Waterfront, plus numerous watershed groups – also have important advocacy and
stewardship roles to play.
Action beyond the City of Toronto’s boundaries will also affect the condition of our beaches.
Existing forums, such as the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, will be used to
advocate for basin-wide improvements in water quality and a healthy Lake Ontario. Continued
implementation of the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan means pushing for watershed
strategies and actions to address beach pollution, including stormwater management, spills
management, and urban and rural best management practices. Cooperation from “upstream”
municipalities in the Toronto region will be needed to meet the targets required by the
Remedial Action Plan to delist the Toronto region as a Great Lakes Area of Concern. In turn,
delisting will mean that we have made great strides toward making great beaches for a great
city.
Report prepared by: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313
Emails: ngaffney@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313
Emails: ngaffney@trca.on.ca
Date: April 15, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A74/09 -PETTICOAT CREEK CONSERVATION AREA
Master Plan Initiation. Authorization for staff to address the state of
disrepair of the pool and develop a master plan for Petticoat Creek
Conservation Area.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) develop a master plan for the
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area (PCCA);
THAT TRCA undertake redevelopment of the Petticoat Creek pool, prior to completion of
the master plan for the PCCA, subject to availability of funding;
162
THAT staff be directed to establish an advisory committee, which would include TRCA
staff, interested community groups, business representatives, community residents,
agency staff, municipal staff and area councillors to assist with the development of the
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Master Plan and to facilitate the opportunity for public
input;
AND FURTHER THAT the final Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Master Plan be brought
to the Authority for approval.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area is approximately 70 hectares of land located at the mouth of
Petticoat Creek on the north shore of Lake Ontario. It is located in the City of Pickering, in the
Regional Municipality of Durham, at the south end of Whites Road.
The northern portion of PCCA is traversed by Petticoat Creek and is densely forested. There
are additional forested areas along the western edges, and more sparse forests in the central
areas near the waterfront. The remainder of the site is made up of open meadows and fields.
The site provides important habitat for migratory birds and is a key natural corridor for the
Petticoat Creek watershed.
PCCA is an active conservation park that provides a variety of recreational opportunities to local
and regional residents and tourists. The primary feature of the park is a 0.6 hectare
dish-shaped swimming pool, the largest outdoor swimming pool of its kind in Ontario. There
are also picnic areas, numerous trails and public washrooms. The Waterfront Trail runs along
the shoreline of the area, and provides extraordinary views of the bluffs and Lake Ontario.
The major challenge facing the management of the conservation area is the condition of the
pool. Constructed in 1974, as a component of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s
Waterfront Plan, Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool is a 0.6 ha Class B Modified
dish-shaped swimming pool with a 60mm ReTex vinyl liner covering two layers of asphaltic
concrete over a compacted granular base. The mechanical infrastructure of the facility is based
around a 5,000 gallon tank fitted with a Leitch vacuum Diatomaceous Earth filter system with a
surface area of 1050 sq. ft. The tank is gravity fed with a skimmer pump for surface draw. Dual
Armstrong vertical in-line centrifugal double suction pumps re-circulate filtered water to 66
returns on the pool surface (originally 80 returns, were built). Two MA300 stabilized tablet
chlorinators provide disinfections to the 1,000,000 gallons of water.
Since its opening in 1975, Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool has experienced numerous
problems related to compaction, density and porosity qualities resulting in air voids in the
asphaltic surface that creates a high permeability factor. This permeability has resulted in
saturation of the substrate, which has caused significant heaving and breaking of return pipes
due to frost damage. Though some deficiencies have been remedied through the installation of
the Retex Liner, persistent problems remain with heaving and cracking of the asphalt
apron/deck around the perimeter of the pool. Damage has also been encountered in localized
areas around the water return jets, which has contributed to breaks of water return lines. As a
remedy, the broken return lines were simply capped, reducing the number of jets from the
original 80 to the current configuration of 66. The result of this maintenance work has reduced
the rate of water flow and turnover times in the process.
163
The mechanical infrastructure of the pool systems has continued to function effectively
throughout the duration of the operating period, though signs of age and wear have become
evident on the filter tank. There is localized rusting and cracking of the filter elements and in
2003, the filter bags were replaced, which improved the filter capacity of the system by
eliminating voids large enough to undermine the filtration integrity. Another major issue that
needs to be addressed is the condition of the pool liner. The 60mm ReTex vinyl liner that was
installed in 1994 has exceeded its 10 year life expectancy and the subsequent deterioration of
the liner has increased over the last number of years. It is anticipated that the liner will begin to
fail over the short term, which would result in closure of the facility for an extended period of
time, until funds can be secured for redevelopment of the pool.
Currently, PCCA pool requires significant annual capital investment to achieve minimum
operating standards. Staff continues to monitor considerable deterioration of vital pool
components including, asphalt apron/deck around the perimeter of the pool and in localized
areas around the water return jets, 60mm ReTex vinyl liner, filter tank, flow rates and dual
Armstrong 40 hp pumps.
The challenge in carrying out a significant improvement project related to the pool is the lack of
financial resources and a guiding document for Petticoat Creek Conservation Area. A master
plan is needed to guide current and future operation and management of PCCA.
To develop the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Master Plan, staff will use the TRCA model
process that has been successfully used at other TRCA properties. The three phases of work
will include:
Phase 1, (estimated completion February 2010)
develop project terms of reference;
natural and cultural heritage inventories of the property;
establishment of an advisory committee
develop plan vision, goals and objectives;
complete management plan background report for the property;
public consultation.
Phase 2, (estimated completion December 2010)
develop draft for:
management zones;
management recommendations;
trail plan;
public use and recreation plan.
stakeholder consultation;
public consultation.
Phase 3, (estimated completion December 2011)
finalize:
management zones;
management recommendations;
trail plan;
public use and recreation plan.
write final draft master plan;
164
consultation and comment period, including public information session;
production of final master plan.
Staff recommends the establishment of an advisory committee to provide an integrated
approach to the development of the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Master Plan. The
advisory committee will assist with determining management zones and management
recommendations, and provide direction and comment on the public use and recreation plan,
including a trail plan.
TRCA will select and invite agency and community representatives to act as members of the
advisory committee for the duration of the project. Suggested advisory committee
representatives are members of:
TRCA – board member and staff;
City of Pickering – Councillor and staff;
Durham Region – Councillor and staff;
Ministry of Natural Resources;
Pickering Field Naturalists;
local community groups;
user groups;
local ratepayers groups;
representatives from local schools and school boards;
major area landowners;
Waterfront Regeneration Trust;
community residents; and
local business representatives.
RATIONALE
With projected population growth in the City of Pickering and the Regional Municipality of
Durham, PCCA will become an even more popular environmental and outdoor recreation area,
requiring a plan that can address future public use demands while ensuring environmental
protection. The Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Master Plan will move TRCA towards its
vision for The Living City - a new community where human settlement can flourish as part of
nature's beauty and diversity.
A master plan is also vital in order for PCCA to address urgent issues with regard to pool
infrastructure and public use. Given the urgency of the pool repairs, it may be necessary to
undertake works in advance of completion of the master plan for Petticoat Creek Conservation
Area. Initiating the master plan process as soon as possible will create a forum for reviewing
potential improvements and plans for the pool and other recreational pursuits at PCCA, should
such action need to take place.
The Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Master Plan will complement a number of TRCA
initiatives, including:
The Living City vision;
Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy; and
Petticoat Creek watershed strategy that is currently being developed.
165
The goal of the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Master Plan process is to protect, conserve
and manage the property within an ecosystem framework, and in consultation with the
community ensure watershed health, public enjoyment and environmental sustainability.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Provision for the development of a Master Plan for the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area is
available in TRCA's 2009 Public Use Capital Infrastructure Budget under account number
408-45.
Currently funds are not available for redevelopment of the pool. TRCA is seeking funds through
federal and provincial programs. The works will not be commenced until funds have been
secured.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Phase 1 (2009)
Develop a project terms of reference, which will include the scope of work and projected
timelines.
Initiation of background report, including natural and cultural heritage inventories and data
collection.
Establishment of an advisory committee.
Development of draft plan vision, goals and objectives.
Initial public information session.
Seek funding for the redevelopment of the PCCA pool.
It is anticipated that the Master Plan will be completed by December 2011.
Report prepared by: David Boccia , 416-791-0322; April Weppler, extension 5320
Emails: dboccia@trca.on.ca; aweppler@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Emails: dedwards@trca.on.ca
Date: May 22, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A75/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Duffins Creek Watershed
City of Toronto (Brock North and South), CFN 24260. Request to the City
of Toronto to convey to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority the
Brock North and South Landfill Site located on the north and south sides
of 5th Concession Road, east of Brock Road, in the City of Pickering and
the Town of Ajax, Regional Municipality of Durham.
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Colleen Jordan
166
WHEREAS the City of Toronto properties (approximately 969 acres / 362 hectares)
located on the north and south sides of the 5th Concession Road, east of Brock Road in
the City of Pickering and the Town of Ajax, known as the Brock North and Brock South
Landfill Sites, have been declared surplus to the City of Toronto's Solid Waste
Management Division operational requirements;
AND WHEREAS the City of Pickering owns a property (approximately 8 acres / 3
hectares) located on the south side of Highway #7, east of Brock Road, in the City of
Pickering (Pickering property), Regional Municipality of Durham;
AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) had identified the
Brock North, Brock South and Pickering property as part of TRCA's Terrestrial Natural
Heritage Target System;
AND WHEREAS if these properties are renaturalized and managed in conjunction with the
adjacent Greenwood Conservation Area, this complex has the potential to become one of
the most significant natural heritage parcels south of the Oak Ridges Moraine in TRCA's
jurisdiction;
AND WHEREAS the City of Pickering has expressed an interest in using a portion of the
Brock North site for future expansion of the Pickering Museum and a district park facility;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA respectfully request that the City of
Toronto convey the Brock North and the Brock South landfill sites containing 969 acres,
more or less, and being Part of Lots 12 to 16 inclusive and Part of Road allowance
between Lots 12 & 13 and between Lots 14 & 15, Concession 5, City of Pickering and Part
of Lots 15 & 16, Concession 4, Town of Ajax to TRCA for nominal consideration of $2.00;
THAT TRCA staff work with representatives of the Cities of Toronto and Pickering to
determine what portion of the sites can be made available to the City of Pickering for use
as future expansion of the Pickering Museum and a district park facility in accordance
with the following conditions:
(a)payment by the City of Pickering of the appropriate compensation to the City of
Toronto, for lands to be used by the City of Pickering;
(b)City of Pickering convey the Pickering property to TRCA for nominal consideration
of $2.00;
(c)the portion of the Brock North site used for future expansion of the Pickering
Museum and a district park facility would be under a management agreement
between the City of Pickering and TRCA;
(d)also included in the management agreement would be the remainder of Brock North,
the Pickering property and the portion of Greenwood Conservation Area in
Pickering.
THAT TRCA staff work with the City of Pickering and the Town of Ajax to develop a
renaturalization and management plan for the complex that includes Brock North, Brock
South, Pickering property and Greenwood Conservation Area;
167
THAT the Town of Ajax be requested to include Brock South in the existing management
agreement for the portion of Greenwood Conservation Area in Ajax;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect to the foregoing, including the obtaining of necessary approvals
and the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In the late 1960's the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto (now the City of Toronto)
identified the need for three landfill sites in the Region of Durham. In 1969, TRCA granted
approval to the City of Toronto for the temporary use of those lands owned by TRCA falling
within the designated Brock Landfill Sites. In exchange the City of Toronto agreed that on
completion of the landfill sites, the areas would be turned over to TRCA for recreational
purposes. In the 1970's, the City of Toronto acquired the three sites. These sites are identifies
as Brock West, Brock North and Brock South.
Brock West is located west of Brock Road, north of the 3rd Concession Road in the City of
Pickering. This site was used as a landfill site until it closed in the 1990's. The site is presently
leased to Eastern Power. Brock North is located between the 5th Concession Road and
Highway #7, east of Brock Road in the City of Pickering. Brock North was temporarily used as
landfill site in the late 1970’s. All the waste was excavated from Brock North in 1997 and was
deposited in Brock West. Brock South is located south of the 5th Concession Road, east of
Brock Road, Town of Ajax and was never used for waste disposal.
In 2008, the City of Toronto's Solid Waste Management Division declared Brock North and
Brock South sites surplus to its operational requirements. In May of 2008 the sites were
introduced into the city's disposal process. TRCA staff identified to City of Toronto staff, TRCA's
interest in the two sites related to the original agreement between the former Municipality of
Metropolitan Toronto and TRCA and the important environmental features of the properties.
The City of Pickering has also expressed an interest in approximately 170 acres of the site for
the future expansion of the Pickering Museum and a district park facility. Pickering currently
has a deficit of outdoor active recreation areas and playing fields and there is a scarcity of land
in southern Pickering and Seaton to accommodate a large scale facility. The Brock North site
is in a good location and appears to be of sufficient size to accommodate the proposed use.
The district park facility will also act as a buffer to future development to the west. Pickering
also owns a parcel of land located on the south side of Highway #7, east of Brock Road and
containing approximately 8 acres (3 hectares). Pickering staff has indicated a willingness to
add this property to the complex.
The Town of Ajax supports retaining the sites for natural heritage purposes.
168
Brock North is approximately 732 acres (296 hectares) in size and Brock South is
approximately 237 acres (96 hectares) in size for a total of 969 acres (392 hectares) and are
located adjacent to TRCA's 735 acre (297 hectares) Greenwood Conservation Area (CA).
Brougham Creek which is a significant cold water tributary crossed Brock North before it joins
with the East Branch of Duffins Creek in the Greenwood CA. There are also a number of other
smaller tributaries that cross the properties. The sites are located on the former Lake Iroquois
Shoreline which is a complex feature comprising sand, gravel, boulders and other old beach
deposits which are critical terrestrial habitat features. These particular sites have a complex
groundwater flow system, operating as both a recharge and discharge area.
Zoning and Official Plan
Both sites are designated as Major Open Space Area in the Regional Municipality of Durham's
Official Plan. Brock North is designated as Open Space System - Natural Areas in the City of
Pickering Official Plan and is zoned Rural Agricultural Zone A. Brock South is designated as
Rural Areas in the Town of Ajax Official Plan and is zoned Permanent Country.
Greenbelt Plan
The two sites are designated as Protected Countryside - natural heritage system.
Ontario Regulation 166/06
Approximately one quarter of the two sites are regulated by TRCA under Ontario Regulation
166/06. This mainly relates to Brougham Creek and its tributaries.
Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy
The terrestrial ecological value of the Brock sites is partly dependent on its relationship to the
rest of the natural system in the region. The sites are located at the hub of two large natural
corridors, that provide breeding source areas for species and a backbone for their movement
within the Duffins watershed. The Brock sites play their part within the corridors that run
north-south along the East Duffins Creek and east-west along the old Iroquois Shoreline. The
sites are knitted ecologically to the natural system of the Seaton Natural Heritage System to the
west and the Greenwood Conservation Area to the east. South of Taunton Road are the
forests, wetlands and creeks associated with the Duffins Heights planning area. These lands
contain large blocks of contiguous habitat within Urfe and Ganatsekiagon creeks. To the north
are found the forests at the confluence of Spring and Brougham creeks at the Cherry Downs
Golf Course and further north is the Glen Major Tract complex on the Oak Ridges Moraine.
169
Ecological Function
Landscape analysis is the study of ecosystems using remote-sensing, in this case looking at
habitat patch character, size, shape and matrix influence (surrounding land uses) – and at how
that character determines ecological function. The larger and rounder a patch is, and the more
natural its surrounding, the better it can support species communities. TRCA’s landscape
analysis model categorizes habitat patches into a range of L-ranks (local ranks) from L1 to L5
where L5 is very poor and L1 is excellent in terms of size, shape and matrix influence. The bulk
of natural areas in urban lands are L4 patches (poor), but an increase from L4 to L3 is very
significant for biodiversity. The general character of most patches in the existing natural system
throughout the TRCA watersheds is L3. The TRCA Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy
aims to improve this to L2 as the overall character of the target system which is above the
threshold for losses in biodiversity. Improvements in patch ranks will only be achieved by
increasing the size, and improving the shape and matrix of existing patches. The target system
is therefore a combination of “existing natural cover” and “potential natural cover”, the latter
being where ecosystem restoration will be undertaken.
Target System Site Scale Refinement
The target system was designed at the regional scale, that is, without the benefit of site level
knowledge that would guide refinements for local scale decision-making. When the entire
concession block is modeled as a contiguous habitat patch it improves the shape to be more
square and regularly-edged and therefore more resilient to edge effect (sun, wind, human
disturbance, etc.). The outcome of this landscape analysis ranks the patches of the site as L1.
L1 patch character indicates “excellent” habitat considering all lands are restored.
There is currently only one area in the TRCA watersheds with existing L1 patches – the Glen
Major complex. The implementation of the target system would produce more L1 patches,
approximately a dozen in the Humber watershed's headwaters on the Oak Ridges Moraine and
one in the Rouge Park. The Brock/Greenwood complex would become one of only two L1
patches south of the Oak Ridges Moraine with both being located on the Iroquois Shoreline.
Ground level inventories of the subject site have uncovered a variety of wetland types including
thicket swamp, cattail marsh and meadow marsh that provide habitat for species of concern
including Virginia rail, swamp sparrow, wood frog and spring peeper. The scattered treed
communities support magnolia warbler, mourning warbler and ruffed grouse. Wood frog and
spring peeper that breed on the subject site in the spring likely spend their summer and winter
under forest cover on adjacent TRCA lands.
Water Quality and Quantity Significance
These lands afford unique opportunities from a research and monitoring perspective to
understand surface and groundwater linkages in the Duffins Creek watershed, and changes
over time in the quality of groundwater and surface waters. The geology of the site is complex,
as it acts as both a recharge and discharge area at the same time, and has flora and fauna
communities that are adapted to these varying flow regimes. Continued monitoring of stream
flow/water balance at this site will help with the calibration and validation of predictive
groundwater models and may afford opportunities to investigate restoration practices which
help maintain water balance.
170
Aquatic Significance
From an aquatic perspective, the Brock North site is ideally situated to protect and enhance the
aquatic integrity of sensitive habitats within the Duffins watershed. These lands contain the
confluence of two sensitive watercourses, including Brougham Creek, a true cold-water stream,
and Spring Creek, more reflective of a cool water aquatic ecosystem. Brougham Creek,
contains sensitive salmonid species such as Brook Trout, which requires cold, clean water, and
the species often spawns directly over locations of groundwater discharge (upwellings).
Brougham has historically supported redside dace a provincially endangered and nationally
threatened fish species. The habitat potential for this species in this system is likely very high.
The Duffins Fish Management Plan (FMP) identifies high discharge occurring in Brougham
Creek through the subject lands, an important ecological function for both brook trout and
redside dace habitat.
Redside dace has been observed in Spring Creek. This species likely benefits from the cool
water habitat present in the watercourse in association with high water clarity, which enables
the species to capture insect prey above the water column.
The FMP targets both the sections of Brougham and Spring creeks through the subject lands
for redside dace. The Brock North site is also situated along the Iroquois Shoreline, which is
the ancient beach shoreline of Lake Ontario. The sands and gravels of the Iroquois Shoreline
are a recharge/discharge zone, and provide groundwater discharge opportunities for aquatic
species such as brook trout and redside dace.
Since 2006, TRCA and Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) have been stocking Atlantic
Salmon at Greenwood Conservation Area, which is immediately to the east of these lands.
Agencies have been involved in reintroduction efforts through stocking of juvenile salmon. It is
expected that, if the project is successful, once adults return to spawn (starting as early as this
fall) that they will utilize Brougham and Spring creeks.
Restoration of the Brock North lands will mean improved habitat for these sensitive species.
Further, these lands could potentially be critical to the survival of redside dace within the Duffins
Creek given the planned future development within the watershed. The fate of redside dace in
Ganatsekiagon Creek is uncertain because of potential impacts associated with the
development of the Seaton Lands. Redside dace are currently known to occur on the Brock
North lands, along most of the Spring Creek subwatershed and along parts of the Brougham
Creek subwatershed which are in the Greenbelt planning area. Brock North may become a
critical land holding for the long term protection of the species in the watershed depending on
what unfolds in the coming years. The property would become one of only a handful of TRCA
properties where we could work to protect the species for long term survival.
RATIONALE
The subject property falls within TRCA's approved master plan for acquisition for the Duffins
Creek watershed as outlined in the approved Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010.
171
The site currently contributes significantly to achieving Duffins Watershed Plan objectives and
with the implementation of the target system and careful management and restoration of
terrestrial and aquatic habitats, will increase the ecological function of these lands
exponentially. Acquisition of these lands will also facilitate the monitoring of water quality and
quantity to better assist in the development of water balance models and in restoration
planning. These lands offer an opportunity to protect and restore the populations of sensitive
species, including aquatic species at risk. Benefits to north-south-east-west ecological
connectivity and to ecosystem services in the southern portion of the watershed are unusual in
metropolitan regions where urban ecosystems are impacted and not easily comparable to the
healthier headwater areas.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Staff will enter into discussions with the cities of Toronto and Pickering to determine what
portion of the sites can be made available to the City of Pickering for use as future expansion of
the Pickering Museum and a district park facility.
Staff will develop a renaturalization and management plan for the complex that includes Brock
North, Brock South, Pickering property and Greenwood CA with the assistance of the City of
Pickering and the Town of Ajax. The terms of reference and the final management plan will be
brought forward to the Authority at a future date for approval.
The City of Pickering will be requested to manage the entire Brock North property including that
portion of Greenwood CA located in Pickering and the Pickering property. The Town of Ajax is
currently managing that portion of Greenwood CA located in Ajax and has expressed an
interest in managing Brock South. Details of the management of the properties will be
determined through the management planning process.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funds for the costs related to this acquisition are available in the TRCA land acquisition capital
account.
Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 or Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca or rdewell@trca.on.ca
Date: May 15, 2009
Attachments: 1
172
Attachment 1
_________________________________________
173
RES.#A76/09 -REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM
Request for Land Conveyance for Road Widening
Duffins Creek Watershed, City of Pickering, CFN 42282. Conveyance of
land to The Regional Municipality of Durham for the road widening of
Brock Road, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, Duffins
Creek watershed.
(Executive Res.#B41/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from The Regional Municipality of Durham to convey certain lands for the widening of
Brock Road, from Dellbrook Avenue to 3rd Concession Avenue on the west side;
AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of the TRCA that it is in the best interest of the
Authority in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation
Authorities Act, to cooperate with The Regional Municipality of Durham;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT one parcel of TRCA land containing 0.19
hectares (0.46 acres), more or less, be conveyed to The Regional Municipality of Durham
for the widening of Brock Road in the City of Pickering, designated as Part 1 on Plan
40R-25587;
THAT consideration is to be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other
costs;
THAT archaeological investigation is to be conducted before any site disturbance with
any mitigative measures required being carried out, all at the expense of The Regional
Municipality of Durham;
THAT all permits pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained by The Regional
Municipality of Durham prior to the commencement of construction;
THAT The Regional Municipality of Durham is to fully indemnify and save harmless TRCA
from any and all claims for injuries, damages or loss of any nature resulting in any way
either directly or indirectly from this sale or the carrying out of construction;
THAT said conveyance is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to implement the conveyance agreement, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
174
RES.#A77/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
1668135 Ontario Inc., CFN 42301. Acquisition of a property located east
of Highway 27 and north of Langstaff Road, City of Vaughan, Regional
Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for
2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River
watershed.
(Executive Res.#B42/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT 0.59 hectares (1.45 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Lot 11, Concession 8
and designated as Block 46 and 47 on Draft Plan of Subdivision prepared by Humphries
Planning Group Inc. under their file no.06123 and dated revised on March 18, 2008, City
of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, located east of Highway 27 and north of
Langstaff Road, be purchased from 1668135 Ontario Inc;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action
to complete the purchase including signing and execution of all necessary
documentation.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A78/09 -OFFICE ACCOMMODATION
Renew Lease of Office Space from Parc Downsview Park Inc.. Approval
to enter into a lease for an additional five-year term with Parc Downsview
Park Inc. for office space located at 70 Canuck Avenue, City of Toronto.
(Executive Res.#B43/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a lease with Parc
Downsview Park Inc. (PDP) for office space located at 70 Canuck Avenue, City of Toronto;
THAT the term of the lease be for 60 months and 20 days (Five Years and Twenty Days),
commencing July 12, 2009;
THAT the payment be as follows:
175
(i)$13.00 per useable square foot for base rent for the first year of the term (July 12,
2009 to July 31, 2010);
(ii)$14.00 per useable square foot for base rent for the second year of the term (August
1, 2010 to July 31, 2011);
(iii)$15.00 per useable square foot for base rent for the remaining 3 years of the term
(August 1, 2011 to July 31, 2014);
(iv)an additional $3.88 per useable square foot for operating costs and $1.00 per
useable square foot for realty taxes (2008 estimates) be paid on a monthly basis
exclusive of electricity;
(v)$8.00 per useable square foot (annual gross rent over the term of the lease) for
storage space located in the basement of the building;
THAT the terms and conditions of the lease be satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitor;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary
action to implement the lease agreement including obtaining all necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of all necessary documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A79/09 -HEALTHY GREAT LAKES, STRONG ONTARIO DISCUSSION PAPER
Provincial discussion with Ontarians about protecting, restoring, using
and enjoying the Great Lakes.
(Executive Res.#B44/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff work with Conservation
Ontario to finalize a response to the Healthy Great Lakes, Strong Ontario Discussion
Paper;
THAT TRCA express its support for the message from the Ministers of Environment,
Natural Resources and Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs for the adoption of a vision of
sustainability for the Great Lakes;
THAT the Province of Ontario be advised that additional resources will be required in
order for conservation authorities to help the Province achieve their stated Vision, Goals
and Strategies for the Great Lakes;
THAT the efforts of TRCA through its watershed councils, education and stewardship
programs be recognized as an effective means of building local non-governmental
organization (NGO) support and partnerships with watershed municipalities for the
benefit of Lake Ontario;
THAT the contributions that conservation authorities already make toward achieving a
healthy Great Lakes be recognized in the forthcoming renewal of the Canada-Ontario
Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes;
176
AND FURTHER THAT a copy of this report be sent to the Environmental Bill of Rights
Registry (EBR), the ministries of Natural Resources, Environment, Agriculture, Food and
Rural Affairs, Municipal Affairs and Housing, and Energy and Infrastructure, Environment
Canada, Conservation Ontario, Credit Valley-Toronto and Region-Central Lake Ontario
(CTC) Source Protection Committee, and municipalities that border Lake Ontario.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A80/09 -PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN ECO-EFFICIENCY PROGRAM
Award of contract to Ontario Centre for Environmental Technology
Advancement for the delivery of the Partners in Project Green
Eco-Efficiency Program.
(Executive Res.#B45/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT the contract for delivery of the Partners in Project Green Eco-Efficiency Program
through to March 31st, 2010 be awarded to Ontario Centre for Environmental Technology
Advancement (OCETA) at a cost not to exceed $312,600 plus applicable taxes as per
agreements with external funding partners;
AND FURTHER THAT appropriate Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
officials be authorized to execute agreements with OCETA to deliver the Partners in
Project Green Eco-Efficiency Program for up to 60 businesses in the Pearson
Eco-Business Zone.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A81/09 -CITY OF BRAMPTON
Request for a Land Conveyance for road-widening of McVean Drive
Humber River Watershed, City of Brampton, CFN 28086. Receipt of a
request from the City of Brampton for a conveyance of lands for the
road-widening of McVean Drive.
(Executive Res.#B46/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a
request from the City of Brampton to convey certain lands for the widening of McVean
Drive, on the west side of McVean Drive from Castlemore Road to Queen Street;
AND WHEREAS it is the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in
furthering it's objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to
cooperate with the City of Brampton in this instance;
177
THEREFORE THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT TRCA-owned lands
containing 0.35 hectares (0.86 acres), more or less, be conveyed to the City of Brampton
for the widening of McVean Drive in the City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel,
designated as Part of 7, Concession 8, Northern Division;
THAT the City of Brampton be required to provide a new access into Claireville
Conservation Area acceptable to TRCA staff connecting to the original laneway;
THAT consideration is to be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other
costs;
THAT archaeological investigation is to be conducted before any site disturbance with
any mitigative measures required being carried out, all at the expense of the City of
Brampton;
THAT the City of Brampton be responsible for all legal, survey and other costs related to
the land conveyance;
THAT all permits pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained by the City of
Brampton prior to the commencement of construction;
THAT the City of Brampton is to fully indemnify and save harmless TRCA from any and all
claims for injuries, damages or loss of any nature resulting in any way either directly or
indirectly from this sale or the carrying out of construction;
THAT said conveyance is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to implement the conveyance agreement, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A82/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
THAT Section II items 9.1 - 9.5, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes
#3/09, held on May 8, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
Section II Items 9.1 - 9.5, Inclusive
PERMIT COMPLIANCE
(Executive Res.#B47/09)
178
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/09
(Executive Res.#B48/09)
GREATER TORONTO AREA AGRICULTURAL ACTION COMMITTEE
(Executive Res.#B49/09)
CONSULTANT SELECTION FOR RETROFIT OF STORMWATER OUTFALL #13 CATCHMENT
AREA (ETOBICOKE CREEK)
(Executive Res.#B50/09)
URBAN FOREST STUDIES
(Executive Res.#B51/09)
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A83/09 -PORT UNION WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT UPDATE
Progress update for Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project - Phase
2.
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT the project update for the Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project, including the
"Western Gateway" component, be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project was approved in 2002 by the Minister of the
Environment and the City of Toronto. Phase 1 of the park opened to the public in September,
2006. Phase 2 of the project was initiated in March 2008 and stretches from Chesterton Shores
eastward to the mouth of the Rouge River. Project components include the construction of six
cobble beaches and headlands, approximately 2 km of new waterfront trail, a coastal marsh at
the mouth of Adams Creek and terrestrial and aquatic habitat improvements.
Construction started in March 2008. A progress drawing of work completed to the end of April
is outlined in Attachment 1. As of April 2009, three of the six headlands have been completed.
Rubble material continues to be received on-site in order to build the remaining beaches and
headlands. Once the landbase is completed, park development activities including landscaping
and trail construction will be undertaken. Phase 2 is expected to be complete and open to the
public by the fall of 2011.
The Design Concept for the Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project - Phase 2 provided for
a connection and trail improvements on the east side of the Rouge River to the City of
Pickering’s waterfront trail system. At Authority Meeting #11/07, held on January 25, 2007, staff
was asked to report back on the status of this component of the Port Union Waterfront
Improvement Project, called the "Western Gateway", located at the mouth of the Rouge River in
the City of Pickering.
179
The Western Gateway plan provides for ramps and steps to the local neighbourhood via Dyson
Road, a main waterfront trail/path alignment under the CN Rail, a key elevated pedestrian
walkway/viewing platform feature and trail connection to Bella Vista to the east. Attachment 2
provides artist renderings of the elevated boardwalk as a key feature on the east side of the
Rouge River, south of the CN rail.
The Western Gateway component of the Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project is a critical
component of the 720km Lake Ontario waterfront trail that extends from Niagara-on-the-Lake to
the Quebec border on the St. Lawrence River. The "Western Gateway" will maintain the
momentum of waterfront revitalization, and supports the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization
Corporation (TWRC) objective of accessible and dynamic public spaces.
DETAILS WORK TO BE DONE
The Western Gateway project will be led by the City of Pickering, with TRCA staff participating
in project management. The City has tendered the project with award by City of Pickering
Council scheduled for May 19, 2009. In addition, the City of Pickering has approved granting a
release in favour of the City of Toronto from a 1972 agreement between the City of Pickering
and City of Toronto on maintaining access trails on the east side of the Rouge River.
Construction of the Western Gateway is scheduled to commence in early June of this year.
TWRC, as the funding agency for the Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project, is in the
process of organizing a "project construction launch" with the political partners, tentatively
scheduled for the third week of June. Members of the Authority will be advised and receive an
invitation to the event once the date and itinerary are confirmed.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The estimated cost for the Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project is $13.7 million for Phase
2. The Western Gateway component of the park development plan is estimated to be $1 million.
An agreement has been reached between the City of Pickering, City of Toronto, TWRC and
TRCA to fund 50% of the project costs up to a maximum of $500,000 will covered under the
approved Port Union Waterfront Park Improvement Project budget. The remaining 50% of the
project costs will be provided by the City of Pickering.
Report prepared by: Connie Pinto, extension 5387
Emails: cpinto@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Connie Pinto, extension 5387
Emails: cpinto@trca.on.ca
Date: May 12, 2009
Attachments: 2
180
Attachment 1
181
Attachment 2
CITY OF PICKERING
WESTERN GATEWAY
_________________________________________
182
RES.#A84/09 -AUGUST 19, 2005 STORM DAMAGE PROJECT PROGRESS REPOR
To provide an update on the status of restoration works completed under
the umbrella of the City of Toronto - Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority Storm Damage Project.
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT the progress report in regard to the August 19, 2005 Storm Damage Project be
received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Watercourses and adjacent park areas within the City of Toronto sustained a significant amount
of damage as the result of the August 19, 2005 storm event. In response to the damage
caused, the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department (PF&R) entered into an
agreement with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) in February of 2007 to
complete the repairs required to return the damaged areas to a state of good repair in order to
ensure protection of life and property within the City of Toronto parks systems. The sites
requiring repair work were identified specifically in reports from Engineering Management
Systems Inc. (EMS) and Chisholm Fleming and Associates Ltd (CFA); engineering firms
retained by the PF&R to conduct damage inventories for all of the parks networks.
The findings of the report from EMS identified 102 bridges, and 160 damaged trails, pathways
and embankments that sustained varying degrees of damage as the result of the storm event.
Additionally, a separate study was conducted by CFA focused specifically on the assessment
of the damage incurred at Edwards Gardens. This information was used in the development of
the budget proposal package prepared by PF&R, for submission to City Council for approval.
The original cost estimates provided within the report for each of the recommended repairs
identified was based on rough calculations of the quantity of materials required to repair the
damaged sites, without consideration for design, planning and approvals, labour costs and
annual price inflations associated with the actual implementation of the works over several
years.
TRCA staff organized the development of a project management team consisting of
representatives of the TRCA Restoration Services Division, City of Toronto, Parks, Forestry and
Recreation Capital Projects, and Parks Maintenance Groups, and Toronto Water in order to
ensure that repairs were carried out based on the priority of each site and within the approved
budget allocation identified to return each of the sites to a state of good repair. The project
management team worked in cooperation to develop a short-list of priority repairs to be
completed as part of the City of Toronto Storm Damage Repair Project.
Edwards Gardens
Following the August 19th 2005 storm event the City of Toronto retained the services of CFA to
assess and report on the damages to Edwards Gardens that occurred as a result. The overall
study conducted by CFA was for feasibility of rehabilitation and replacement of pedestrian
bridges and related channel works. As part of the study, specialized consultants were retained
by CFA to complete studies in fluvial geomorphology and aquatic habitat. Sexton McKay was
also retained to conduct a detailed topographic survey of the area.
183
The results of these studies identified that the size and alignment of the Lawrence Avenue box
culvert, the channel cross-section, the existing grade control structures, the uncontrolled water
discharge and overall functionality of the watercourse through the formal park area, were key
factors in the magnitude of the damage sustained to Edwards Gardens during the August 19,
2005 storm event.
Fourteen (14) key problem areas were identified in the CFA report including:
Lawrence Avenue culvert;
pedestrian bridges 1 – 6;
west bank and pathway south of Lawrence Ave. culvert;
concrete weir;
online pond;
large concrete weir (gated dam structure);
armoured channel;
tributary culvert;
tributary channel;
failed gabion baskets on west bank.
These items were addressed by TRCA staff, through major channel restoration and bridge
replacement works that commenced in June 2007 and took approximately one year to
compete. The works carried out included the reconstruction of 200 metres of embankment and
associated trail along the west bank of the watercourse at the north end of the park,
improvements to the channel configuration and the removal of a weir, and notching of a large
dam to improve flow. Banks were sculpted and reinforced to improve the connection between
the channel and the floodplain while adding a riparian buffer where possible to reduce flow
velocity during storm events.
City-wide Bridges and Trails
Further to this, the 102 bridges and 160 damaged trails, pathways and embankments that
sustained varying degrees of damage as the result of the storm event as identified in the EMS
report, were prioritized by the Storm Damage Project Management Team with the following
projects ranking the highest level of priority to be addressed.
184
The project short-list by status is included here:
Storm Damage Project Short-list:Status
Wilket Creek Site 1: BN52LD407-074 – Wilket Creek Park Bridge 7 Completed
Wilket Creek Site 2: T & P - Pathway erosion Completed
Wilket Creek Site 3: BN52LD406-073 – Wilket Creek Park Bridge 6 Completed
Wilket Creek Site 4: BN52LD405-072 – Wilket Creek Park Bridge 5 & Drainage Culvert Completed
Wilket Creek Site 5: T &P - Pathway & Embankment Repairs Completed
Wilket Creek Site 6: BN52LD404-071 – Wilket Creek Park Bridge 4 Completed
Wilket Creek Site 7: BN52LD403-070 – Wilket Creek Park Bridge 3 Completed
Wilket Creek Site 8: BN52LD402-069 – Wilket Creek Park Bridge 2 Completed
Wilket Creek Site 9: T & P - Debris Jam 1 Completed
Wilket Creek Site 10: T & P - Debris Jam 2 Completed
Rowntree Mills Park Bridge (BW44QC301-300)Restoration
Derrydowns Parkland South Pedestrian Bridge #3 (BN47PC203-253)Restoration
Derrydowns Park Pathway Repair and Debris Jam Removal (T & P 180)Completed
Northwood Parkland Pedestrian Bridge #2 (BN47PD302-295)Completed
East Don Parklands South Bridge #4 (BN52PB303-98 - #207 Burbank Drive)Completed
East Don Parklands North Vehicle Bridge (BN52PB305 - Cummer Ave. Bridge)Planning
East Don Parklands (German Mills Creek at Leslie St. & Alamosa Drive Sites)Restoration
Birkdale Ravine Park Pedestrian Bridge 2 (BE56MB402-106)HOLD
Brimley Woods Park (T&P 411)Completed
Colonel Danforth Park Trail Realignment HOLD
Lower Don Bike Trail Realignment (P1176-TP)Restoration
Hague Park Pedestrian Bridge #2 (BE57LB302-135)Completed
Cedarbrook Park Pedestrian Bridge #3 (BE57LB303-123) – Possible inclusion HOLD
Morningside Park Vehicle Bridge (BE59MC103-338) – Possible inclusion HOLD
Glen Rouge Park Bridge (BE60NB401-110) – Possible inclusion HOLD
The table illustrates 20 active projects by status of completion. The stages of the existing
projects include:
Planning - design and approval phases of the project are underway;
Restoration - construction is completed, but final site restoration is pending; Completed
- all planning, construction and restoration are completed; and
Hold - a site is on-hold pending availability of funding, permits and approvals, or
direction from PF&R.
CONCLUSIONS
The partnership between TRCA and PF&R developed for the purpose of the Storm Damage
Project has proven to be a successful collaboration, allowing a significant number of repairs to
be completed in parkland areas within a relatively short timeframe. The cooperation of the
project management team in the identification of works required to return at risk areas to a state
of good repair, the prioritization of sites based on community and departmental needs; and in
the implementation of works is a leading factor in the continued success of the project.
Upon completion of the remainder of the short-list projects identified under the Storm Damage
Project, it is anticipated that the partnership and project management team will continue to
work together in cooperation to identify and address future projects and initiatives that can be
jointly managed by TRCA and the City of Toronto.
185
FINANCIAL DETAILS
PF&R petitioned City Council to enter into a partnership agreement worth $5,000,000 with the
TRCA to manage the prioritization, design, approvals and construction of restoration works
recommended in the EMS and CFA reports. This petition was approved by the City of Toronto
Budget Committee in the February 23, 2007 Decision Document.
$2,855,000 of that funding was allocated to the Storm Damage Project, with the understanding
that all funding would be applied to the projects identified by the project management team.
TRCA contributed in-kind resources for the management and implementation of works.
The remaining funds allocated to the Storm Damage Project under account 185-01 are
allocated to storm damage related projects that are to be completed in 2009.
Report prepared by: Patricia Newland, 416-392-9690
Emails: pnewland@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416-392-9690
Emails: pnewland@trca.on.ca
Date: May 03, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A85/09 -BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE
Black Creek Historic Brewery. Follow up with boards of education
regarding establishment of a brewery on site.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
THAT the staff report in regard to follow up with the boards of education about the
addition of a brewery to Black Creek Pioneer Village be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Executive Committee Meeting #10/08, held on December 12, 2008, Resolution #B167/08
was approved, authorizing the establishment and operation of a historic brewery and beer
museum at Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV). During discussion regarding details of the
brewery, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority staff was directed to contact the boards of
education with schools participating in education programs at BCPV to see if they would have
any issues or concerns about their school population visiting a site with an operating brewery.
Letters were sent in April 2009 to senior level contacts at the boards of education for Toronto,
York, Peel and Durham, introducing the program and requesting feedback regarding any
concerns educators may have with their students visiting the site. They were advised that
guided school groups will not participate in any brewery tours or brewing demonstrations,
however the topic of brewing is linked to aspects of social history and the history of trades
depicted at the site.
186
No negative response has been received in the past six weeks, giving staff confidence that the
program does not pose any issue to boards of education and the school group visitors they
represent.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
An opening ceremony for the historic brewery will be held in June, to which Authority members
will be invited. After one year of operation, staff will report back to the Authority on the
operation, as resolved at the December 12, 2008 Executive Committee meeting.
Report prepared by: Marty Brent, extension 5403
Emails: mbrent@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Marty Brent, extension 5403
Emails: mbrent@trca.on.ca
Date: May 13, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A86/09 -SEATON TRAIL AGREEMENT
Ontario Realty Corporation, Province of Ontario, CFN 42363. Receipt of
recommendation approving Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
to enter into an agreement with Ontario Realty Corporation for funding
and construction of a portion of the Seaton Trail.
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT the following Resolution #A35/09 approved at Authority Meeting #2/09, held on
March 27, 2009, be received and become part of the public record:
THAT an Agreement with Ontario Realty Corporation, Province of Ontario, for
construction of a portion of the Seaton Trail in the Regional Municipality of
Durham, be approved;
THAT the Agreement be subject to terms and conditions satisfactory to Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and solicitor;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary
actions to implement the Agreement including obtaining any required approvals
and the signing and execution of documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #2/09, held on March 27, 2009, Resolution #A35/09 was approved in
camera. Private minutes were retained as a record of this item at the meeting. For
transparency, TRCA reports back on in camera items when they can become public so a
record of the resolution appears in public minutes.
187
RATIONALE
Ontario Realty Corporation requested that this matter be kept confidential until such time as the
necessary documentation had been finalized and signed. The Agreement is in its final form
and is being executed, therefore this information can be released.
Report prepared by: Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Emails: rdewell@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Emails: rdewell@trca.on.ca
Date: March 30, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A87/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT Section IV items 7.12.1 - 7.12.3, inclusive, in regard to watershed committee
minutes, be received.
CARRIED
Section IV Items 7.12.1 - 7.12.3, Inclusive
HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE
Minutes of Meeting #4/08, held on October 21, 2008
Minutes of Meeting #1/09, held on January 20, 2009
Minutes of Meeting #2/09, held on April 21, 2009
PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN STEERING COMMITTEE
Minutes of Meeting #1/09, held on January 15, 2009
ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE
Minutes of Meeting #2/09, held on April 3, 2009.
_________________________________________
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
RES.#A88/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Laurie Bruce
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items 10.1 - 10.59, with the exception of 10.13 and 10.56,
contained in Executive Committee Minutes #3/09, held on May 8, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
188
RES.#A89/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items 10.13 and 10.56, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #3/09, held on May 8, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 1:05 a.m., on Friday, May 22, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
189
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #5/09
June 26, 2009
The Authority Meeting #5/09, was held at the Earth Rangers Centre, Kortright Centre for
Conservation, on Friday, June 26, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the
meeting to order at 10:18 a.m..
PRESENT
Eve Adams Member
Bryan Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Grant Gibson Member
Lois Griffin Member
Jack Heath Member
Colleen JordanMember
Bonnie Littley Member
Glenn Mason Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
Linda Pabst Member
Gino Rosati Member
John SprovieriMember
Richard WhiteheadMember
ABSENT
Paul Ainslie Member
Maria AugimeriVice Chair
David Barrow Member
Glenn De BaeremaekerMember
Mike Del GrandeMember
Bill Fisch Member
Suzan Hall Member
Reenga MathivananMember
Peter Milczyn Member
Ron Moeser Member
John Parker Member
Anthony PerruzzaMember
Maja Prentice Member
190
RES.#A90/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Linda Pabst
Seconded by: Grant Gibson
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #4/09, held on May 22, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Gord MacPherson, Manager, Restoration and Environmental
Monitoring Projects, TRCA, in regard to item 7.2 - The Fish Communities of the Toronto
Waterfront: Summary and Assessment 1989-2005.
RES.#A91/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
CORRESPONDENCE
(a)An email dated May 31, 2009, from Andrew McCammon, Taylor Massey Project, in
regard to Major Document Release: Andrew Leaves the Board.
RES.#A92/09 -CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT above-noted correspondence (a) be received;
AND FURTHER THAT Andrew McCammon be thanked for his work on the board of the
Taylor Massey Project.
CARRIED
191
CORRESPONDENCE AUTH6.1
From: The TMP [mailto:eco@thetmp.org]
Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 9:46 AM
To: Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Cc: kstranks@trca.on.ca
Subject: Major document release: Andrew leaves the Board
Importance: High
Dear Ms O'Connor,
Please distribute this to the members of the Authority.
We are pleased to inform the members that we have placed a Powerpoint summary of Reach by
Reach on our website, under "Publications", and that it will take members less than 10 minutes
to read.
Key aspects of Reach by Reach include:
1.) We believe that there should be another round of public consultation on the new Don Plan,
one that includes the availability of the Implementation Guide for public analysis;
2.) As the implementation of the new Don Plan will require expenditure of public funds meant
to assist in the delisting of the Toronto Area of Concern, as identified by the International
Joint Commission, we believe that a future draft of the new Don Plan and its
Implementation Guide must be posted to the Environmental Registry;
3.) We believe that the City of Toronto should become the lead organization for the
regeneration of Taylor Massey Creek, allocating approximately $5M over five years to
implement the top five regeneration priorities in this document while also ensuring the
meaningful participation of local stakeholders and community organizations;
4.) We believe that the City of Toronto should complete the Storm Outfall Monitoring Program
while transitioning it to become a comprehensive surface water quality monitoring
program, with spills and aquatic test results from all levels of government posted to the
internet for public access; and,
5.) We hope the TRCA and the City of Toronto can address improved cooperation on
significant issues not addressed in the new Don Plan, including post-construction natural
restoration, property standards, and encroachment, as well as better stewardship of their
own lands, including where abandoned landfills and snow dumps are located.
While I will no longer be on the Board of the TMP as of June1, members of the TMP would be
pleased to speak with the Authority at its convenience. Chair Nancy Penny can be reached
through this e-mail address.
Sincerely,
Andrew McCammon
192
THE TAYLOR MASSEY PROJECT
Celebrating and Protecting Taylor Massey Creek
May 31, 2009
Two major announcements this month:
1. The TMP releases the final version of Reach by Reach
2. Andrew to leave the Board
1. Reach by Reach
After a tremendous amount of discussion amongst the Board, members, and partner
organizations, as well as consultation with local agencies, the TMP is pleased to release the
final version of Reach by Reach, our regeneration plan for the Creek.
We have placed both a PDF of the full plan and a power-point summary of it on the
website at www.theTMP.org/publications.htm, and reproduce below the Executive
Summary from the full document.
“Taylor Massey Creek is the most polluted and degraded tributary of the Don River - the
most
polluted river in Ontario. Regardless, many of the people who live along its banks love the
potential of this little creek and its accompanying ravines, forests, and meadows, and have
a vision for its regeneration.
This vision, the reach-by reach regeneration of the creek, was prepared by volunteers who
began an inventory of strengths and weaknesses in 2003, conducted an ecological inventory
of Warden Woods in 2006, developed a preliminary draft of this document, and have
discussed and revised the draft since its release at an annual dinner held in November,
2008.
The Board of the Taylor Massey Project is pleased, therefore, to share this final document
expressing our vision for the regeneration of the creek with our members, the public, the
City of Toronto, and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
To our knowledge, Reach by Reach is the first community-led watershed
regeneration plan in Ontario.
It offers a framework to restore Taylor Massey Creek based on:
• a set of sub-watershed of current conditions reports;
• a vision for the Creek with practical restoration objectives for each degraded reach; an
• a set of targets that can be assessed through enhanced monitoring and
publicly-available data and for which progress can reported on in subsequent watershed
report cards.
193
We urge the City of Toronto to take the lead, with support from the federal and provincial
governments and the Toronto & Region Conservation Authority as required, in the
regeneration of Taylor Massey Creek by:
• Implementing the Wet Weather Flow Master Plan in an appropriate watershed
management framework that includes targets with measurable outcomes, engages the
community, and that restores the creek to natural conditions, including the allocation of
a budgetary envelope of about $5,000,000.00 over five years to implement the top five
regeneration priorities in this document;
• Completing the Storm Outfall Monitoring Program while transitioning it to become a
comprehensive surface water quality monitoring program, with spills and aquatic test
results from all levels of government posted to the internet for public access;
• Setting a target that the Creek will meet the provincial water quality objectives for
e-coli 90% of the time by 2015;
• Connecting the whole of the sub-watershed through the creation of the Taylor Massey
Trail, including separate pedestrian and cycling trails in the Warden Hydro Corridor; and
• Conducting extensive plantings in the Warden Hydro Corridor to add 1% to the area of
the sub-watershed in natural cover,
The vision of regenerating local sub-watersheds on a reach by reach basis will help us
protect water quality, remediate our ravines, link our neighbourhoods, and facilitate society’
s transition to sustainable development through enhanced community stewardship
initiatives.”
1. Andrew to leave the Board
Effective June 1, I am resigning from the Board of the TMP.
As indicated in Reach by Reach , the dedicated members of the TMP and their sense of
community have been a breath of fresh air in my life, while teaching me a lot about local
knowledge, goodwill, and partnerships. In a way, it has been a mini-version of Lands for
Life, the community consultative effort that led to the identification of special places that
could be added to or become new provincial parks or protected areas. I hope that
responsible people in local agencies will see Reach by Reach in a similar light: a community
effort to regenerate a treasured natural resource.
I am resigning for a number of reasons. Some are personal. Some revolve around my new
role with the Ontario Headwaters Institute, a registered charity focused on research,
education, and best practices, work which will not allow me to both represent the OHI and
be an advocate for Taylor Massey Creek.
Thirdly, the timing just happens to be right. Those in charge of the process involved in
crafting the new Don Plan appear to not welcome alternate opinions, understand community
advocacy, nor fathom how a not-for-profit can assemble a watershed regeneration plan.
This is, after all, what we think is the first community–led plan of its type in Ontario:
perhaps they need time to adjust.
As described by a presenter at an Integrated Watershed Management symposium staged
earlier this month by Conservation Ontario, however, agencies too-often abandon their
professional responsibility to listen to the whole community and stoop to personal
comments about individual character, demeanor, and purpose when dealing with someone
not signing from their song-sheet.
194
My departure from the Board, therefore, should allow the TMP to send in fresh voices to
demonstrate the breadth of our commitment to the Creek, our common vision, and to
sweep aside personal invective.
In conclusion, I have ultimate faith in the leadership of chair Nancy Penny, in the strong
board around her, and in the TMP’s community partners. I am sure the TMP will find the
course needed, will add new members and new chapters to its accomplishments, and that it
will continue to champion the reach-by-reach regeneration of Taylor Massey Creek.
I thank you all for sharing so much with me, increasing my faith in community
empowerment. I hope to still participate in walks, clean-ups, and of course plantings,
helping in the effort to re-store our creek. See you out there - boots on the ground.
Andrew
_________________________________________
195
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A93/09 -STAFF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Amendment. Amendment to the Staff Organizational Structure
Moved by:Laurie Bruce
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) organizational structure be
amended to create the position of Director, Human Resources, Marketing and
Communications.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The current organizational structure was approved at Authority Meeting #2/05, held on March
11, 2005 by Resolution #A32/05. During the past four years, the scope of the human resources
position has increased due to expansion of the staff complement, the addition of the
Professional Access and Integration Enhancement programs to assist internationally-trained
professionals to find meaningful work in their field, and the repositioning of marketing and
communications to be a core vehicle of behavioural change in our community.
RATIONALE
TRCA is faced with many challenges in the future including succession planning for many key
roles, transformation of TRCA and its culture to embrace an increasingly diverse community
and adaption to new ways of communicating and understanding our world. This proposed new
role would be focused on that transformation.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
With the establishment of this role, the position of Senior Manager, HR, Safety and Marketing
Communications would be deleted and replaced by the Director, Human Resources, Marketing
and Communications. The annual impact of this change would be approximately $10,000.
Report prepared by: Brian Denney, extension 6290
Emails: bdenney@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Brian Denney, extension 6290
Emails: bdenney@trca.on.ca
Date: June 12, 2009
Attachments: 1
196
Attachment 1
TR
C
A
S
T
A
F
F
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
-
F
U
N
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Or
i
g
i
n
a
l
l
y
A
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
0
5
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
0
6
/
0
9
Ex
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
E
v
e
n
t
s
Bo
a
r
d
A
g
e
n
d
a
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
&
M
a
r
k
e
t
i
n
g
HR
&
S
a
f
e
t
y
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
Se
r
v
i
c
e
Cu
l
t
u
r
a
l
He
r
i
t
a
g
e
Ea
r
t
h
Ra
n
g
e
r
s
Ba
t
h
u
r
s
t
Gl
e
n
Vo
l
u
n
t
e
e
r
i
s
m
&
Di
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
&
P
A
I
E
In
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
Su
c
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
St
a
f
f
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
WA
T
E
R
S
H
E
D
MA
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
Ad
e
l
e
F
r
e
e
m
a
n
EX
E
C
U
T
I
V
E
D
I
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
CO
N
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
Da
v
i
d
L
o
v
e
CT
C
S
O
U
R
C
E
PR
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
CH
I
E
F
A
D
M
I
N
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
V
E
OF
F
I
C
E
R
Br
i
a
n
D
e
n
n
e
y
•••
Co
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
FI
N
A
N
C
E
A
N
D
BU
S
I
N
E
S
S
SE
R
V
I
C
E
S
Ji
m
D
i
l
l
a
n
e
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Te
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
&
Sy
s
t
e
m
s
/
G
I
S
Le
g
a
l
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
Pr
i
v
a
c
y
&
Co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
Re
c
o
r
d
s
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
&
Of
f
i
c
e
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
La
n
d
s
&
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Co
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
&
Bu
d
g
e
t
s
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
A
N
D
DE
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
Ca
r
o
l
y
n
Wo
o
d
l
a
n
d
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
RE
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
SE
R
V
I
C
E
S
Ni
c
k
S
a
c
c
o
n
e
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
EC
O
L
O
G
Y
De
b
Ma
r
t
i
n
-
D
o
w
n
s
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
H
U
M
A
N
RE
S
O
U
R
C
E
S
,
MA
R
K
E
T
I
N
G
A
N
D
CO
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
Ca
t
h
e
r
i
n
e
M
a
c
E
w
e
n
MA
N
A
G
E
R
,
CH
A
I
R
A
N
D
CA
O
’
S
O
F
F
I
C
E
Ka
t
h
y
S
t
r
a
n
k
s
GR
E
A
T
E
R
T
O
R
O
N
T
O
A
R
E
A
AG
R
I
C
U
L
T
U
R
A
L
A
C
T
I
O
N
C
O
M
M
I
T
T
E
E
WO
R
L
D
G
R
E
E
N
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
CO
U
N
C
I
L
S
E
C
R
E
T
A
R
I
A
T
An
d
r
e
w
B
o
w
e
r
b
a
n
k
GR
E
A
T
E
R
T
O
R
O
N
T
O
C
H
A
P
T
E
R
,
CA
N
A
D
A
G
R
E
E
N
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
CO
U
N
C
I
L
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Re
v
i
e
w
&
Re
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
Co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
EA
’
s
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
&
Mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
P
o
l
i
c
y
En
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
Mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
L
i
a
i
s
o
n
Oa
k
R
i
d
g
e
s
Mo
r
a
i
n
e
In
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ar
c
h
a
e
o
l
o
g
y
Br
o
w
n
f
i
e
l
d
s
Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Fo
r
e
s
t
M
g
t
To
p
s
o
i
l
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
Ri
v
e
r
&
S
h
o
r
e
l
i
n
e
St
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
&
Ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
&
Re
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
t
Pr
o
p
o
g
a
t
i
o
n
Gr
e
e
n
Te
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
,
En
e
r
g
y
M
g
t
&
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
m
i
n
g
TR
C
A
S
o
u
r
c
e
Pr
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
&
A
i
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
&
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
Fl
o
o
d
W
a
r
n
i
n
g
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
,
An
a
l
y
s
i
s
&
Re
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
Na
t
u
r
a
l
H
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
St
r
a
t
e
g
y
Wa
t
e
r
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
St
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
PA
R
K
S
A
N
D
CU
L
T
U
R
E
De
r
e
k
E
d
w
a
r
d
s
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Pa
r
k
s
Th
e
L
i
v
i
n
g
C
i
t
y
Ca
m
p
u
s
a
t
Ko
r
t
r
i
g
h
t
BC
P
V
Su
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Sy
s
t
e
m
Fl
e
e
t
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Wa
t
e
r
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Sa
l
e
s
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
&
Hu
m
a
n
H
e
a
l
t
h
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Go
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
Li
a
s
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Ca
p
a
c
i
t
y
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
Ne
a
r
U
r
b
a
n
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
To
r
o
n
t
o
Wa
t
e
r
f
r
o
n
t
Re
m
e
d
i
a
l
A
c
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
Ro
u
g
e
P
a
r
k
CT
C
S
o
u
r
c
e
Pr
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
La
k
e
O
n
t
a
r
i
o
&
Ot
h
e
r
G
r
e
a
t
La
k
e
s
I
s
s
u
e
s
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
C
h
a
n
g
e
St
r
a
t
e
g
i
c
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
,
Ad
a
p
t
a
i
o
n
&
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
St
e
w
a
r
d
s
h
i
p
&
Ou
t
r
e
a
c
h
Wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
/
Wa
t
e
r
f
r
o
n
t
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
_________________________________________
197
RES.#A94/09 -REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TRCA LAND
Rear of 2175 Lakeshore Boulevard West
City of Toronto
Waterfront, CFN 38910. Request from South Beach (Lakeshore)
Developments Limited to explore the possibility of a sale of subsurface
rights and granting an easement on a parcel of Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority-owned land located south of Lakeshore
Boulevard West, east of Parklawn Road, City of Toronto, Lake Ontario
waterfront.
(Executive Res.#B60/09)
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from South Beach (Lakeshore) Developments Limited to purchase subsurface rights, a
parcel of land and grant easements on the parcel of TRCA-owned land located south of
2175 Lakeshore Boulevard West;
AND WHEREAS it is in the best interests of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to complete a sale of subsurface rights, a
parcel of land and grant easements to South Beach (Lakeshore) Developments Limited in
this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA finalize a transaction with South Beach
(Lakeshore) Developments Limited on the following basis:
(a) TRCA sell subsurface rights for an underground parking structure for parking,
utilities, heating and air-conditioning services in TRCA-owned lands containing
0.125 hectares (0.309 acres), more or less, the upper limit of the strata will be at a
depth of at least 1.5 metres below grade and the lower limit of the strata is to be
approximately 30 metres below grade of the property described Part of the Bed of
Lake Ontario in front of Lot 29, Registered Plan 1176, City of Toronto being Part 2 on
draft reference plan prepared by J.D. Barnes Limited under their Reference No.
07-22-731-04-A;
(b) TRCA sell a parcel of land for an emergency pedestrian exit stairway containing
0.003 hectares (0.008 acres), more or less, described Part of the Bed of Lake Ontario
in front of Lot 29, Registered Plan 1176, City of Toronto being Parts 5 and 6 on draft
reference plan prepared by J.D. Barnes Limited under their Reference No.
07-22-731-04-A;
(c) TRCA grant permanent easements for maintaining and repairing the parking
structure and facilities and constructing, maintaining and repairing an emergency
pedestrian exit stairway over the land containing 0.122 hectares (0.301 acres), more
or less, described Part of the Bed of Lake Ontario in front of Lot 29, Registered Plan
1176, City of Toronto being Parts 1 and 4 on draft reference plan prepared by J.D.
Barnes Limited under their Reference No. 07-22-731-04-A;
198
(d) TRCA grant a permanent easement for access from the stairway to Marine Parade
Drive over the land containing 0.008 hectares (0.019 acres), more or less, described
Part of the Bed of Lake Ontario in front of Lot 29, Registered Plan 1176, City of
Toronto being Part 4 on draft reference plan prepared by J.D. Barnes Limited under
their Reference No. 07-22-731-04-A;
THAT consideration be the sum of $1,280,000 plus TRCA will be paid an addition sum
based on 50% of $36.47 per square feet of residential gross floor area (GFA) should the
GFA of TRCA property exceed the original GFA of 34,000 square feet used to calculate the
consideration;
THAT TRCA will transfer all density rights to South Beach (Lakeshore) Developments
Limited attributable to the TRCA-owned lands;
THAT TRCA will grant South Beach a temporary licence for a period of two years
commencing within four years of the closing date for construction of the parking
structure;
THAT South Beach is to provide a letter of credit in the amount of $400,000 to ensure that
the restoration of the property is completed to the satisfaction of TRCA and the City of
Toronto;
THAT said conveyance is subject to the necessary Planning Act approvals;
THAT said conveyance is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A95/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
Mr. Patrick George Muise, CFN 41098. Acquisition of land located on the
east side Humber Station Road between Old Church Road and
Castlederg Sideroad, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel,
under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain
and Conservation Component, Humber River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B61/09)
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:John Sprovieri
199
THAT 1.673 hectares (4.134 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 18,
Concession 5 Albion, being Part 2 on Plan 43R-4225, Town of Caledon, Regional
Municipality of Peel, be purchased from Patrick George Muise;
THAT the purchase price be $290,000 of which 50% or $145,000 be payable in cash
payment on closing and the remaining 50% or $145,000 be through the issuance of an
ecological gift receipt pursuant to Environment Canada and Canada Customs and
Revenue Agency guidelines;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
required free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the TRCA extend their appreciation and thanks to Mr. Muise for his generous
donation;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to
complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred
incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be
paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A96/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed
Ventana Homes Inc., CFN 42371. Purchase of property located west of
Dufferin Street, north of Teston Road, City of Vaughan, Regional
Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for
2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River
watershed.
(Executive Res.#B62/09)
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:John Sprovieri
THAT 1.22 hectares (3.02 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of the East Half
of lot 27, Concession 3 and designated as Blocks 85 and 109 on a draft Plan of
Subdivision prepared by Rady-Pentek & Edward Surveying Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors,
under their Job No. 04-256, dated March 3, 2009, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality
of York, located west of Dufferin Street, north of Teston Road, be purchased from Ventana
Homes Inc.;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
200
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A97/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed
Urbacon Properties Limited, CFN 42395. Purchase of property located
west of Highway 404, north of Major Mackenzie Drive, Town of Richmond
Hill, Regional Municipality of York, under the “Greenlands Acquisition
Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge
River watershed
(Executive Res.#B63/09)
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:John Sprovieri
THAT 8.66 hectares (21.39 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Parts of Lot 21 and
22, Concession 3 and designated as Blocks 4, 5, 10 and 11 on draft M-Plan prepared by
Krcmar. OLS under job no. 05-069, Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York,
located west of Highway 404, north of Major Mackenzie Drive, be purchased from
Urbacon Properties Limited;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
201
RES.#A98/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
Dunpar Developments Inc., CFN 42448. Purchase of property located
east of Kipling Avenue, south of Langstaff Road (rear of 8299 and 8355
Kipling Ave., Woodbridge), City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of
York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood
Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B64/09)
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:John Sprovieri
THAT 0.45 hectares (1.10 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lots 9 and 10,
Concession 7 and designated as Part 2 on Plan 65R-31166, City of Vaughan, Regional
Municipality of York, located east of Kipling Avenue, south of Langstaff Road (rear of
8299 and 8355 Kipling Ave., Woodbridge), be purchased from Dunpar Developments Inc.;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A99/09 -SECORD PET CEMETERY
Gateway Pet Memorial Services Inc.
Township of Uxbridge, CFN 41760. Proposal to enter into a License
Agreement with Gateway Pet Memorial Services Inc. to revitalize, beautify
and maintain the Secord Pet Cemetery in the Township of Uxbridge for a
five year period.
(Executive Res.#B65/09)
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:John Sprovieri
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from Gateway Pet Memorial Services Inc. to enter into a license agreement for Secord Pet
Cemetery located on Secord Road, east of the 3rd Concession Road, Township of
Uxbridge, Region Municipality of Durham;
202
AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interests of TRCA in
furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to
cooperate with Gateway Pet Memorial Services Inc. in this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a license agreement for
approximately 0.8 hectares (2 acres), more or less, of land with Gateway Pet Memorial
Services Inc. for revitalization, beautification and maintenance of the Secord Pet
Cemetery, said land being Part of Lot 10, Concession 3, Township of Uxbridge, Regional
Municipality of Durham;
THAT the license agreement with Gateway Pet Memorial Services Inc. be premised on the
following:
(i) the term of the license agreement will be five years;
(ii) the rental rate is to be $1.00 for the five year period;
(iii) Gateway Pet Memorial Services Inc. shall be solely responsible for all costs
associated with the revitalization, beautification and maintenance of the Secord Pet
Cemetery;
(iv) any other terms and conditions deemed appropriate by TRCA's solicitor;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A100/09 -CITY OF VAUGHAN
Request for a permanent easement for municipal servicing located east
side of Highway 27 and Islington Avenue, north of Treelawn Boulevard,
Kleinburg, Regional Municipality of York, CFN 42396. Receipt of a request
from the City of Vaughan to provide a permanent easement for municipal
servicing located on the east side of Highway 27 and Islington Avenue,
north of Treelawn Boulevard, Kleinburg, Humber River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B66/09)
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:John Sprovieri
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from the City of Vaughan for a permanent easement for municipal servicing;
AND WHEREAS it is in the best interests of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with the City of Vaughan in
this instance;
203
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing 3.2 acres
(1.3 hectares), more or less, be granted to the City of Vaughan for the construction,
maintenance and operation of sanitary sewers and watermains, said land being part of
Block 110, Registered Plan 65M-3466, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York,
subject to the following terms and conditions:
THAT consideration is to be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other
costs;
THAT an archaeological investigation and any mitigative measures required are to be
undertaken prior to any site disturbance, all at the expense of the City of Vaughan;
THAT the City of Vaughan is to fully indemnify and save harmless TRCA from any and all
claims for injuries, damages or loss of any nature resulting in any way either directly or
indirectly from this sale or the carrying out of construction;
THAT said conveyance is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to implement the conveyance agreement, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A101/09 -PORT UNION WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PHASE 2)
Tender RSD09-10. Award of Tender RSD09-10 for the supply and delivery
of approximately 6,000 tonnes of 4-6 tonne armour stone.
(Executive Res.#B67/09)
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:John Sprovieri
THAT Contract RSD09-10 for the supply and delivery of approximately 6,000 tonnes of 4-6
tonne armour stone for the Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project (Phase 2), City of
Toronto, be awarded to J.C. Rock Limited for a total unit price of $34.98 per tonne and a
total cost not to exceed $209,880.00, plus applicable taxes, it being the lowest bid
meeting Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A102/09 -AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 2008
The 2008 audited financial statements are presented for the Budget/Audit
Advisory Board's approval and recommendation to the Authority.
(Budget/Audit Res.#C7/09)
204
Moved by:Grant Gibson
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT the transfer of funds from reserves in the amount of $31,275 during 2008, as
outlined in the schedule to the financial statements entitled "Continuity of Reserves", be
approved;
AND FURTHER THAT the 2008 audited financial statements, as presented, be approved,
signed by the Chair and Secretary-Treasurer of Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA), and distributed to each member municipality and the Minister of
Natural Resources, in accordance with subsection 38 (3) of the Conservation Authorities
Act.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A103/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT Section II items EX8.1 - EX8.4, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes
#4/09, held on June 12, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
Section II Items EX8.1 - EX8.4, Inclusive
REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TRCA LAND
(Executive Res.#B68/09)
1504526 ONTARIO INC.
(Executive Res.#B69/09)
PORT UNION WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PHASE 2)
(Executive Res.#B70/09)
PETTICOAT CREEK CONSERVATION AREA
(Executive Res.#B71/09)
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A104/09 -THE FISH COMMUNITIES OF THE TORONTO WATERFRONT:
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 1989-2005
Information on The Fish Communities of the Toronto Waterfront:
Summary and Assessment 1989-2005.
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
205
THAT the report entitled "The Fish Communities of the Toronto Waterfront: Summary and
Assessment 1989-2005" be received for information.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has conducted waterfront fish community
surveys since the mid 1970’s. Fish community monitoring has been integral to all of TRCA's
waterfront development activities. Data collected under TRCA's fish community monitoring
program has been used to secure Environmental Assessment approval and other regulatory
approvals, provide baseline and audit data, as well as assist in the development and design of
waterfront development projects.
In 1989, shortly after Toronto was designated as one of the 43 Remedial Action Plan (RAP)
areas within the Great Lakes, a structured long-term fish community program was developed
and implemented for the waterfront. This long-term fish community monitoring program has
tracked the changes in the structure, population dynamics, growth rates, contaminant loads,
reproductive capability and reproductive success of the waterfront fish community. Fish
communities are sensitive to a wide array of environmental stressors, and the long-term
assessment of community characteristics provides valuable information on the ecological
health of the Toronto waterfront. This document was developed as a partnership project with
the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Toronto Remedial Action Plan and TRCA. It provides an
important update on the Toronto waterfront fish communities and summarizes the changes in
the fish community from 1989 to 2005 for open coast, embayment and estuary/river mouth
habitats of the Toronto waterfront.
TRCA has carried out extensive standardized electrofishing surveys along the Toronto
waterfront in the three habitat types; embayment’s, estuaries and river mouths, and open
coasts. As in other RAP areas, the analysis of this data typically includes the percent
composition of the fish community based on biomass (total weight) and abundance (total
number). Overall, the composition of the Toronto waterfront fish community has changed
relatively little in the 16 years between 1989 and 2005. The common carp and white sucker
continue to dominate the biomass of the waterfront with other species being of lesser
proportion. The proportion of these two species combined (i.e. proportion of degradation
tolerant species) has shown a negative trend over the duration of the time series (1989 to 2005)
in embayments, the open coast and estuaries. Below is Figure 14 from the report that shows
the overall decline in catch per unit effort (CUE) of white suckers and carp in each of the three
habitat types. This reduction in the percent biomass of these degradation tolerant species in
these habitats indicates a less degraded environment and improvement in the fish community
in comparison to previous years.
206
0
20
40
60
80
100
198919911993199519971999200120032005
YEAR
PE
R
C
E
N
T
C
P
U
E
0
20
40
60
80
100
198919911993199519971999200120032005
YEAR
PE
R
C
E
N
T
C
P
U
E
ESTUARIES
0
20
40
60
80
100
198919911993199519971999200120032005
YEAR
PE
R
C
E
N
T
C
P
U
E
OPEN COASTS
EMBAYMENTS
Figure 14 -Annual percent composition by catch per 1000 seconds (CPUE) of degradation-tolerant species (white
sucker and common carp ) of all species excluding alewife and smelt for each habitat type in the Toronto waterfront
from 1989 to 2005.
The fish communities of the Toronto waterfront report summarizes TRCA's monitoring efforts,
and results indicate a positive trend in community health based on the following:
no significant change to species richness;
a marked increase in diversity in embayments, a decline in non-native species in
embayments and open coasts (despite the invasion of round goby);
a recent increase in native species biomass;
increasing but fluctuating native piscivore communities;
increased walleye abundance; and
a reduction in the proportion of degradation tolerant species.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
TRCA will continue this work to evaluate the heath of the Toronto region fisheries and is
committed to working with outside agencies who have a collaborative interest in fish
community health. Future works will include monitoring to support project design and
approvals of many TRCA and partner projects, compliance monitoring and long term tracking
of multiple projects and issues on the waterfront as well as support for research efforts.
Copies of the full report are available upon request.
Report prepared by: Gord MacPherson, extension 5246; Rick Portiss, extension 5302
Emails: gmacpherson@trca.on.ca; rportiss@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Rick Portiss, extension 5302
Emails: rportiss@trca.on.ca
Date: June 9, 2009
207
RES.#A105/09 -ENERLIFE CONSULTING INC.
Status of the business relationship.
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:Eve Adams
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on the status of the business relationship
and programs with Enerlife Consulting Inc. be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) entered into an agreement with Enerlife in
2007 to collaborate in the development and delivery of sector based energy programs. Five
programs are identified in the agreement and include: Mayors' Megawatt Challenge; Greening
Health Care; Sustainable Schools; Home Energy Clinic and Community Scorecard.
At Authority Meeting #7/08, held on September 19, 2008, Resolution #A218/08 was approved,
in part, as follows:
AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report back to the Authority on an annual basis,
with an update on the status of the business relationship.
Program Status
Mayors' Megawatt Challenge
In 2008 the municipalities in the Mayors' Megawatt Challenge were able to save 3.6% on their
electricity, 1.4% on their thermal energy, for a savings of 2.5% in total energy. Water use rose
by a small amount (0.2%) but the municipalities were able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
by 1,689 tonnes and save $640,440 in operating costs.
The Mayors' Megawatt Challenge membership has fallen from a peak membership two years
ago of 14, to a current membership of 11. Members in 2008 included, towns of Ajax and
Richmond Hill, and the cities of Barrie, Burlington, Guelph, Hamilton, Kitchener, Mississauga,
Oshawa, Toronto and Waterloo.
When the Mayors' Megawatt Challenge was initiated in 2003 there were no other programs of
its kind in Ontario. Today the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) offers a similar
program to municipalities in Ontario and the Canada Green Building Council (CaGBC) offers a
similar program to building owners nation wide. Furthermore, Peel Region, in association with
partners, delivers their Energy Matters conference on an annual basis which fosters significant
dialogue in the sector. In addition a number of software firms have developed economical
energy performance management software for government and the private sector.
As a result of these and other changes in the sector, membership in the Mayors' Megawatt
Challenge is not likely to increase over time.
Greening Health Care
In 2008 the hospitals in Greening Health Care saved 1.4% on their electricity and 1.4% on
thermal energy use. Water use declined by 9.6%. Hospitals were able to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions by 2,844 tonnes and saved $718,143 in operating costs.
208
The membership in Greening Health Care decreased slightly in 2008 to 23 hospital
corporations representing 41 hospital sites. This is down from a peak membership of sightly
more that 50 hospital sites. The reduction in participants was principally in Eastern Ontario,
where geography made travel times prohibitive. In 2009 the program will begin experimenting
with webcasting over the internet to eliminate the geographic barrier to hospital participation.
Sustainable Schools
The Sustainable Schools project was completed in 2007 with phenomenal success. In 2008
the program assisted school boards with applying to Enbridge for incentive payments for
savings documented through the program. In total the program identified gas savings of
approximately 430,000 m3 and allowed the school boards to receive nearly $43,000 in incentive
payments from Enbridge.
No further action has been planned for Sustainable Schools given the success of the
EcoSchool program and plans by the Ministry of Education to begin its own building energy
use benchmarking program. Furthermore, the CaGBC offers a Canada wide program for
energy performance monitoring in schools.
Additional Programs
Other programs identified in the agreement with Enerlife Consulting include the Home Energy
Clinic and the Community Scorecard. Activities associated with these projects were suspended
in 2007 and into 2008 to allow staff to focus on the two core programs of Mayors' Megawatt
Challenge and Greening Health Care.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The business partnership with Enerlife Consulting generated total revenues of just under
$300,000 and total expenditures of slightly more than $316,000 (Table 1). This is down from a
peak of more than a million dollars annually. The deficit of $26,072 in 2008 is 10% lower than
the deficit in 2007. Staff believe that the financial deficit will be greatly reduced or eliminated in
2009.
TABLE 1: Financial Overview of Business Partnership with Enerlife Consulting in 2008
PROGRAM TOTAL REVENUE TOTAL EXPENDITURE
Greening Health Care $191,502 $208,145
Mayors' Megawatt Challenge $78,710 $108,139
Sustainable Schools $20,000 $20,000
TOTAL $290,212 $316,284
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The current agreement with Enerlife Consulting expires in 2010. Staff will work closely with
Enerlife Consulting to review the individual programs to address future issues and opportunities
and look for ways to eliminate future deficits.
Report prepared by: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
Date: June 16, 2009
209
RES.#A106/09 -GOOD NEWS STORIES
Highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Work. Receipt
of Good News Stories for April and May, 2009, from all sections of
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
Moved by:Eve Adams
Seconded by:Grant Gibson
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report and presentation on "Good News Stories" for April
and May, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Management Team, a committee made up of senior staff at Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA), meets monthly to discuss strategic initiatives and organizational
development.
RATIONALE
Key accomplishments of each TRCA section are highlighted at each Management Team
meeting. In keeping with TRCA's objective of Business Excellence, these accomplishments will
be brought to the Authority for the information of the members. The following are the
accomplishments cited from April and May, 2009, and a brief description of each.
April
Archetype Sustainable House - Over 350 attended the opening of the Archetype
Sustainable House on Earth Day. The Daily Planet on the Discovery Channel launched
Earth Week from the house.
Staff planted "Alvar" species on the green roof at the Archetype House at Kortright. A
mixture of species was planted including several that were salvaged from an Alvar near
Bobcaygeon that was being impacted by development.
TRCA Budget - Recognizing the need for constraint in difficult economic times, TRCA
approved the 2009 operating budget totalling $34.74 million, about $200,000 less than
2008.
2009 capital budget was approved at $57.74 million enabling TRCA to continue
important capital projects including Toronto waterfront (Port Union, Phase 2),
greenspace acquisition, Peel climate change and parks infrastructure.
Monitoring - TRCA signed an updated memorandum of understanding with Transport
Canada to support on-going monitoring activities on the Pickering Lands.
Two new water quality monitoring stations were added to the Regional Monitoring
Network - 1 in Petticoat Creek and 1 in Pine Creek (Frenchman's Bay).
The Algae Biomonitoring partnership between TRCA and the Ministry of Environment
and Energy was extended for an additional year. An additional $74,000 in funding will
be provided to support this work.
Archaeology Festival - First annual public Archaeology Festival received Ontario Tourism
funding.
May
Mining and Lands Commissioner - Critical decision from the Mining and Lands
Commissioner for 119R Glen Road was issued, based on staff defense of "conservation of
lands" in the urban context, the relevance of TRCA's policy and the Terrestrial Natural
Heritage System Strategy, and the need to deter incremental loss of natural systems.
210
Endangered Species Program - Redside dace program received $15,000 from the Ministry
of Natural Resource (MNR) program. MNR would like to have a media event around this.
Jefferson Salamander research and monitoring received funding from the program as
well.
Headwaters Drainage Features Workshop - Well attended with representation from 15
conservation authorities, MNR, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ministry of Municipal Affairs
and Housing and Environment Canada. The outcome of the workshop was to identify key
gaps in research, monitoring and policy, and to develop strategies to address them.
Mink Frogs - A healthy population of mink frogs were found at a site in Caledon, which are
an indicator of good environmental health.
Ontario Power Generation - Partnered with TRCA to put fixed plot terrestrial monitoring
station on one of their facilities.
West Nile Virus Program - Received funding for studies at stormwater management
ponds.
Species at Risk - Ministry of Natural Resources providing grant funding in the amount of
$27,670 for protection of species at risk on TRCA East Duffins Headwaters properties. An
additional $10,000.00 is being contributed from Durham Conservation. The money will be
spent controlling plant invasive species that are affecting native species at risk on the
properties.
Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project EA - The
renatualization and flood protection of the mouth of the Don River will be the centrepiece of
the Lower Don Lands revitalization which was announced as one of 16 founding projects of
the Climate Positive Development Program of the Clinton Climate Initiative program. This
program will support the development of large-scale urban projects that demonstrate cities
can grow in ways that are "climate positive" and strive to reduce the amount of on-site CO2
emissions to below zero.
Aquatic Plants Program - $24,000 received from EcoAction to expand the program in the
Don River in the City of Toronto.
Black Creek Pioneer Village - BCPV has partnered with the Institute for Canadian
Citizenship to extend free admission to new citizens in the Greater Toronto Area through the
Cultural Access Pass program.
Department of Canadian Heritage awarded $18,000 for the 3rd phase of the artifact
digitization project.
Awarded a Young Canada Works Grant for $15,000 to assist with historic research and
development of interpretive characters for the village this summer.
Greener Side - First Greener Side Celebration at Bruce's Mill. About 1,200 attending,
despite inclement weather. York Region and Safety Village partnered on this.
Media Coverage - Atlantic Salmon program event had good media support.
Received good press on several issues including TTP, especially in the Toronto Star.
Tommy Thompson Park Bird Festival - At least 2,000 people took part in the event. Over
250 people come out for the organized bird hikes and walks.
Education Funding - Husky recommitted to another school year funding of $98,000.
Weston Foundation is interested in funding another 3-year education program.
TD Friends of the Environment Foundation - Participating in Markham Trees for
Tomorrow with $40,000 more in funding in 2009, bringing the total to $90,000 for its site -
MOEE (Ministry of Environment & Energy) Demonstration Stormwater Pond. TRCA
Restoration Services assisted Town of Markham with design and supplied most of the
native plant material.
211
Frenchman's Bay - Additional 6 acres of public land on the East Spit of Frenchman's Bay in
Pickering was opened by Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor and Pickering Authority member -
Regional Councillor Bonnie Littley on Saturday, May 23, 2009.
Boyd Archaeological Field School - The 33rd annual field school is proceeding in
July/August 2009 with a new class of secondary students at the Graham House site on the
Claremont Field Centre property. Attendance has doubled over the past years.
Planting Program - TRCA's spring planting effort has resulted in more than 260,000 units
being planted throughout the watersheds, putting TRCA well on the way to achieving a
2009 annual planting target of 350,000 units. This level of planting surpasses the annual
totals for the years 2005 - 2007, being eclipsed only by 2008's spring total of 293,433.
Heart Lake Conservation Area - Hosted another successful Peel Children's Water Festival,
with approximately 5,000 people attending the public day. Wild Wetland Splash was
officially opened.
Paddle the Don - Close to $50,000 in funds were raised.
Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan - Five year progress report was launched.
Doors Open Toronto - 9,918 people visited Black Creek Pioneer Village for Doors Open
Toronto, an all time high.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
Date: June 10, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A107/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Glenn Mason
THAT Section IV items AUTH7.5.1 - AUTH7.5.3, inclusive, in regard to watershed
committee minutes, be received.CARRIED
Section IV ItemsAUTH7.5.1 - AUTH7.5.3, Inclusive
DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
Minutes of Meeting #3/09, held on March 26, 2009
ETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHEDS COALITION
Minutes of Meeting #1/09, held on February 19, 2009
ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE
Minutes of Meeting #3/09, held on May 1, 2009.
_________________________________________
212
RES.#A108/09 -5TH WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CONGRESS
Moved by:John Sprovieri
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
THAT Section IV item EX9.1 - 5th World Environmental Education Congress, contained in
Executive Committee Minutes #4/09, held on June 12, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
RES.#A109/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:John Sprovieri
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 item EX10.1.1 - City of Brampton, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #4/09, held on June 12, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A110/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Richard Whitehead
Seconded by:Lois Griffin
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items EX10.1.2 - EX10.1.119, inclusive, contained in
Executive Committee Minutes #4/09, held on June 12, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:30 a.m., on Friday, June 26, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
213
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #6/09
July 24, 2009
The Authority Meeting #6/09, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village,
on Friday, July 24, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to order at
9:41 a.m..
PRESENT
Paul Ainslie Member
Maria AugimeriVice Chair
Bryan Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Glenn De BaeremaekerMember
Mike Del GrandeMember
Jack Heath Member
Colleen JordanMember
Glenn Mason Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
Linda Pabst Member
John Parker Member
Anthony PerruzzaMember
Maja Prentice Member
John SprovieriMember
Richard WhiteheadMember
ABSENT
Eve Adams Member
David Barrow Member
Bill Fisch Member
Grant Gibson Member
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Bonnie Littley Member
Reenga MathivananMember
Gino Rosati Member
214
RES.#A111/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by: Linda Pabst
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #5/09, held on June 26, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councillor Anthony Perruzza declared a conflict of interest in regard to item EX8.1 - Terranova
Developments Ltd. and City of Toronto Ontario Municipal Board, as his parents own property
on Rowntree Mill Road.
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Glenn De Baeremaeker, Councillor, City of Toronto and TRCA
member, in regard to the Rouge River National Park Proposal.
(b)A presentation by Stephanie Hawkins, Project Manager, RAP, TRCA, in regard to item
AUTH7.1 - 2007 Remedial Action Plan Progress Report.
(c)A presentation by Sonya Meek, Manager, Watershed Planning, TRCA, in regard to item
AUTH7.2 - Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan Projects.
RES.#A112/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) believes that the Rouge Park is
of national significance and therefore supports consideration of a National Park model for
the Rouge Park governance and financing;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA requests and encourages the Government of Canada and
Province of Ontario to immediately commence a dialogue about their mutual long-term
commitments to the Rouge Park and that they consider establishing a Rouge Valley
National Park as proposed by the Rouge River Valley National Park Now Committee.
215
RECORDED VOTE
Paul Ainslie Yea
Maria Augimeri Yea
Bryan Bertie Yea
Laurie Bruce Yea
Gay Cowbourne Yea
Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea
Mike Del Grande Yea
Jack Heath Yea
Colleen Jordan Yea
Glenn Mason Yea
Peter Milczyn Yea
Ron Moeser Yea
Linda Pabst Yea
John Parker Yea
Anthony Perruzza Yea
Maja Prentice Yea
John Sprovieri Yea
Richard Whitehead Yea
Gerri Lynn O'Connor Yea
THE MOTION WASCARRIED
RES.#A113/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Colleen Jordan
THAT above-noted presentations (b) and (c) be heard and received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A114/09 -2007 REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN PROGRESS REPORT
The release of the 2007 Remedial Action Plan Progress Report – “Moving
Forward”.
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (RAP) website be updated to reflect
the content and direction of the 2007 Remedial Action Plan Progress Report;
216
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff continue to work with the
Toronto and Region RAP team, federal, provincial and municipal staff, the academic
community, environmental non-governmental organizations and others to address the
Key Actions identified in the 2007 RAP Progress Report;
AND FURTHER THAT the progress report be made available to federal government
departments, provincial ministries, Members of Parliament and Members of Provincial
Parliament, councillors, community groups, universities, schools, libraries and the public
throughout the Toronto and Region Area of Concern;
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan was instituted in response to the designation of
the Toronto and Region as a Great Lakes Area of Concern (AOC) in 1987. The AOC
designation, one of 52 (later 53) made by the International Joint Commission, identified the
watersheds of the Etobicoke and Mimico creeks, and the Humber, Don, Highland and Rouge
rivers, as the geographic extent of the AOC.
Under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) and Canada-Ontario Agreement
(COA), Environment Canada (EC) and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) share
responsibility for the ensuring progress in the Great Lakes AOCs. Since 2002, TRCA has led
the administration of the Toronto and Region RAP under agreements with EC and MOE.
Management of the Toronto and Region RAP is undertaken by representatives from EC, MOE,
the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and TRCA.
The 2007 Remedial Action Plan Progress Report “Moving Forward” was released in compliance
with reporting requirements under the aforementioned agreements. “Moving Forward” is the
second major progress report of the Toronto and Region RAP, and updates the progress made
since the release of the 2001 progress report “Clean Waters, Healthy Habitats.” The 2007 RAP
Progress Report is organized into five sections:
Section 1, provides an Introduction to the context and background of the Toronto
and Region Remedial Action Plan;
Section 2 outlines the Existing Conditions of the surface waters, sediments, habitats
and wildlife in the Toronto and Region AOC;
Section 3 reviews the Key Actions that have taken place since 2001 in the Toronto
and Region AOC;
Section 4 assesses the Progress that has been made in the RAP measuring against
the Beneficial Use Impairments and the RAP Interim Targets that were set in 2001.
This section also discusses means of moving toward the delisting of Toronto and
Region as an Area of Concern; and
Section 5 is focused on Moving Forward and includes recommended Key Actions
for 2007-2012 and the next steps for the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan.
The 2007 Toronto and Region RAP Progress Report – “Moving Forward” was officially launched
at a public event, “Moving Forward: Restoring Toronto’s Waters” held at the Gladstone Hotel on
the evening of Wednesday, May 27, 2009.
217
Copies of the 2007 RAP Progress Report are available in print and electronic (CD-ROM)
formats, and are available upon request from Stephanie Hawkins at shawkins@trca.on.ca, or
online at www.torontorap.ca.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Current Remedial Action Plan Initiatives
Toronto and Region RAP funding is currently in the third year (2009-10) of a three-year COA
funding cycle (2007-2010). Resources obtained through the existing EC/MOE-TRCA
agreements have been allocated in support of TRCA programs that contribute to RAP
objectives; these include the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP), watershed
and fisheries management plans, the Terrestrial Natural Heritage program, the Regional
Watershed Monitoring Network, education and outreach programs, and RAP program
coordination.
The funding of stormwater and watershed management projects consumes the majority of
TRCA's RAP budget. Supported projects in 2009-10 include the assessment of infiltration tanks
and permeable pavements through STEP in collaboration with industry, academia and
government, as well as the support of a commercial green parking lot (applying onsite
stormwater solutions) through Partners in Project Green. The development and delivery of
outreach materials on Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater management and erosion
and sediment control (ESC) also received RAP funding, as did STEP assessments of
engineered media for managing sediment in stormwater ponds and phosphorous in green roof
runoff. Supported activities in the watersheds included stewardship councils and watershed
management plans, fisheries management plans and the Regional Watershed Monitoring
Network (RWMN).
Two scientific studies on Toronto and Region Beneficial Use Impairments are currently in
preparation. The first of these documents, “Update on the Status of the Fish Tumour Beneficial
Use Impairment in the Toronto Area of Concern” has undergone external peer review and will
be provided to EC in August 2009. The second report, “Reproductive Success, Morphological
deformities and Egg Contaminant Levels of Colonial Waterbirds on the Toronto Waterfront” will
undergo peer review later this year. Both reports address Beneficial Use Impairments identified
as requiring further assessment, and in both instances it is anticipated that the final reports may
result in reclassification of the respective BUI status’ to “not impaired”.
Several new initiatives are underway in preparation for the next COA funding cycle. An
18-month intensive review of Toronto and Region Beneficial Use Impairment criteria, led by EC,
is in progress and anticipated to be complete by mid-2010. This process will yield concrete,
achievable, scientifically defensible targets against which progress can be assessed and the
Toronto and Region can be delisted as an AOC.
A five-year RAP communications plan is currently in draft format and was presented to the RAP
team on June 16, 2009. The communication plan outlines programs and products, such as the
revised RAP website, to be delivered over the coming years. It also includes a strategy for
engaging a demographically representative panel of citizens from across the AOC jurisdiction –
Toronto, York, and Peel – in the review and establishment of updated AOC delisting criteria.
218
A draft five-year plan for the TRCA component of the Toronto and Region RAP was provided to
MOE in June 2009. The plan will undergo refinement in the coming months and throughout
implementation. On behalf of the RAP team, TRCA staff is also producing a marketing/strategic
vision document, “Getting it done: Context and content of the Toronto and Region RAP 5-Year
Plan, 2010-2015.” This document, to be prepared in consultation with RAP partners, will outline
and advocate for the programs and resources required for the delisting of the Toronto and
Region AOC by 2020.
Challenges for the Future
The existing Canada-Ontario Agreement (COA) will expire on March 31, 2010. On June 13,
2009, the governments of the United States and Canada announced that the parent agreement
of COA, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA), will be renegotiated. It is not
expected that a new COA will be negotiated in advance of GLWQA finalization. Each of these
negotiation processes are estimated, at this time, to take one year to complete.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
TRCA funding for RAP initiatives is provided through three-year funding agreements between
the TRCA and EC ($300,000/year) and with the MOE ($250,000/year); this funding is linked to
the existing COA and will expire on March 31, 2010. Projects from within TRCA apply annually
to the Toronto and Region RAP team and the annual TRCA RAP workplan is developed on the
basis of these proposals.
There have been preliminary indications that the federal and provincial partners plan to extend
Toronto and Region RAP funding at existing levels until such time as a new COA is in place,
however no formal arrangements have yet been made. Based on previous agreements and the
federal/provincial commitment to long-term funding, it is anticipated that new agreements
between EC/MOE and TRCA will be instituted upon the completion of the new COA. The
duration of each of these agreements is expected to be five years; no estimates are yet
available on anticipated funding levels.
Report prepared by: Stephanie Hawkins, extension 5576
Emails: shawkins@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Stephanie Hawkins, extension 5576
Emails: shawkins@trca.on.ca
Date: June 26, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A115/09 -SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBOURHOOD RETROFIT ACTION PLAN
PROJECTS
Launch of workplans and community engagement processes for three
pilot sustainable neighbourhood retrofit action plan projects.
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
219
THAT staff be directed to continue to work with municipal and community partners in the
scoping and development of the three pilot sustainable neighbourhood retrofit action plan
(SNAP) projects;
THAT staff continue to pursue innovative partnerships and funding opportunities to
secure resources and financial support for plan development and implementation, and to
ensure projects realize their full potential;
THAT members of the Authority encourage participation by municipal staff and local
councillors in these partnership projects;
THAT members of the Authority consider potential opportunities for other SNAP project
sites for staff to explore and report back on;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority in March 2010 on progress of the
pilot SNAP projects, potential new sites and preliminary lessons learned for increased
neighbourhood sustainability.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Recent Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) watershed plans clearly confirm the
need for improved sustainability in community design, practices and behaviours, including
within existing communities, particularly to achieve water management and biodiversity
objectives. These efforts are necessary in order to maintain or improve watershed health and
resilience within the context of a changing climate and as planning for urban growth and
intensification proceeds. Similarly, numerous municipal plans and strategies are also calling for
greater attention to sustainable community design, improved stormwater management, urban
greening initiatives, and climate change mitigation and adaptation as integral elements of a
healthy community.
Another finding of the watershed planning studies was that implementation of water
management strategies will have to be undertaken using an integrated approach that considers
other objectives and community interests. This is especially important in existing urban
communities, due to their unique challenges. Unlike greenfield development scenarios where
design can be guided by policy and planning tools, opportunities for taking a strategic and
sustainable approach are limited beyond a site by site basis in existing communities. There is
often limited land available and competing demands for the use of that land. Existing
communities are also comprised of complex social networks, combined with multiple agencies,
organizations and groups operating at the local level. By taking a comprehensive approach at
a neighbourhood scale, there will be greater opportunity to find creative solutions that extend
across both public and privately-owned properties and make a business case for
implementation of options that achieve multiple objectives. Close involvement of all partners
will build capacity for implementation.
220
In follow up to the watershed plans, TRCA sees the role for a catchment-based, neighbourhood
scale of implementation planning that could guide site-specific implementation projects. While
water, energy and natural heritage objectives will be a focus, implementation planning must
also consider ways to address other strategic objectives in the most effective and efficient way.
In many cases, it may well be other objectives that provide the driver for change and
opportunity for implementation.
TRCA is therefore initiating a program of Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan
projects. The overall goals of the SNAP projects are to identify ways to accelerate the
transformation of existing communities to urban sustainability and increase their contributions
to climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Specifically, the SNAP projects will develop an action plan for demonstrating and implementing
a suite of sustainable practices in an existing urban neighbourhood and, through the process,
foster the necessary partnerships among diverse implementing groups. The plan will address
established environmental objectives within a broader sustainability framework that explores
ways to advance social, economic and cultural objectives for the neighbourhood. Innovative
community engagement and non-traditional partnerships will be key to success. Opportunities
for demonstration and early implementation projects will be pursued. These projects will assist
in “kick-starting” the implementation of retrofit programs and partnerships within the context of
a shared neighbourhood scale plan.
The integration of sustainability objectives into new greenfield plans and redevelopment
projects is happening both locally and across the world. However, there are few cases where a
comprehensive approach to sustainable retrofit planning has been taken in an existing
community. Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone is a unique example of
the local leadership that TRCA and its partners are providing for improved sustainability in an
industrial-commercial setting. The SNAP projects represent a similar initiative for predominantly
residential communities. These projects build on the model of concept site plans and
community action plans of previous watershed strategy documents, by taking conceptual
planning to a much more detailed stage and extending work back into the neighbourhoods.
These projects provide an opportunity to showcase a broad range of innovative initiatives of
TRCA and its municipal and community partners.
Three pilot SNAP projects
With funding support provided by the Region of Peel, Region of York and City of Toronto, initial
pilot SNAP projects were identified in each of Brampton , Richmond Hill and Toronto. Site
selection was made in consultation with partners, based on alignment with ongoing municipal
or active community initiatives and with consideration for priorities identified in watershed plans.
Each pilot SNAP project will be unique and tailored to the local needs and interests, however
the pilot projects share a common purpose of creating an action-oriented plan for accelerated
urban sustainability. The projects will address goals within the context of a sustainability
framework encompassing a broad range of themes, including:
water flows (stormwater and stream flow);
water use and conservation;
energy use and conservation;
221
green buildings;
natural heritage;
cultural heritage;
integrated waste management;
transportation;
land use and urban design; and
human services.
Each project will go through a three phased process of:
characterization and identification of retrofit options; 1.
evaluation of integrated retrofit scenarios; and2.
development of the retrofit action plan, including a business case for implementation and 3.
monitoring plan.
Highlights and special focus of each pilot project are provided below:
"County Court" Neighbourhood in the City of Brampton, Region of Peel (Etobicoke-Mimico
Watershed)
Study area boundaries: Hurontario Street to the west, Steeles Avenue and Etobicoke
Creek to the north, Kennedy Road to the east and Highway 407 to the south.
Key initial partners are the City of Brampton and Region of Peel.
Focus of project is on seeking unique solutions to improve water management functions
of the Upper Nine stormwater management pond and its catchment, a facility identified
as a top retrofit priority for the City of Brampton.
Engage businesses, residents and institutions in finding the optimum combination of lot
level stormwater management and naturalized landscaping practices to achieve water
management and biodiversity targets, while achieving other sustainable community
objectives.
Understand, respect and celebrate multicultural community values and foster
stewardship actions through delivery of available programs, such as TRCA’s Healthy
Yards and Region of Peel’s Water Smart Peel.
Analysis will include evaluation of ecoservices provided by the urban forest (e.g.
temperature moderation, carbon sink) and energy and water conservation savings
associated with retrofit options.
"Lake Wilcox" Neighbourhood in the Town of Richmond Hill, Region of York (Humber
Watershed)
Study area boundaries (draft): Focus will be on the community within the catchment area
of Lake Wilcox, bounded by Yonge Street to the west, Bloomington Road to the north,
Bayview Avenue to the east and Old Colony Road to the south.
Key initial partners are the Town of Richmond Hill and Region of York.
Project will build on previous and ongoing Lake Wilcox remediation studies, by
investigating additional community-based measures that could further reduce
phosphorus loads to the lake.
A particular focus on an integrated action plan to address water quantity and quality of
the lake and its catchment, as well as protection and restoration of natural heritage within
a broader sustainable community context.
222
Work closely with other TRCA and partner staff working in the area to engage citizens
and active community groups such as those involved in nearby Oak Ridges Corridor
Park.
Promote available stewardship programs (e.g. Richmond Hill’s Healthy Yards, Region of
York’s Water For Tomorrow) and identify early implementation projects.
"Jane/Finch" Neighbourhood in the City of Toronto (Humber Watershed)
Study area boundaries (draft): Highway 400 to the west, Steeles Avenue to the north,
Black Creek to the east and Finch Avenue to the south.
Key initial partners are the City of Toronto, Jane Finch Family Community Centre and
City of Toronto’s Live Green community animators (Note: There is significant community
group support for development of a shared neighbourhood retrofit plan and, given the
broader area of operations of these groups, there is the potential for this project to be the
first of a series of plans extending downstream along the Black Creek).
Focus of project will be on addressing retrofit planning and implementation objectives
within the context of community issues of poverty, unemployment, safety and food
security, which have contributed to the designation of this neighbourhood as one of
Toronto’s Priority Neighbourhoods.
A focus will be on environmental retrofit options that can also contribute to objectives for
cost savings, green jobs, community safety, health and wellness and local foods.
Advise and support Jane Finch Family Community Centre (JFFCC) in the delivery of their
Green Change project, which promotes local green jobs and delivery of energy and
water conservation, waste management and healthy lifestyle practices (JFFCC’s project
is funded by the Province of Ontario’s Go Green Program).
Partner with the extensive network of established community groups to undertake unique
engagement of this multicultural community and immediate delivery of implementation
and demonstration actions.
Incorporate City of Toronto programs, such as Tower Renewal, Social Housing energy
retrofits and Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan activities.
These SNAP projects will address strategic implementation priorities identified in the respective
watershed plans for these communities – supporting implementation at a neighbourhood scale.
Recommendations of municipal and other strategic plans will be incorporated in the
identification of retrofit plans to ensure coordination and efficiency and wherever possible to
select retrofit options that achieve multiple objectives.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Initial scoping and development of a framework and approach for these pilot projects began in
2008. Finalization of detailed workplans and characterization of issues and opportunities is the
focus of 2009 work, coupled with active community engagement activities. Direct contact with
local and regional councillors and community leaders and groups will begin in July 2009 and
continue throughout the projects. Community workshops, often combined with stewardship
program delivery, and other consultation mechanisms, such as focus group sessions, are
planned for the fall.
223
The Peel Region SNAP project being planned in Brampton is also expected to begin work on
preliminary evaluation of retrofit options in 2009, with completion of this phase by March 2010.
The 2010 work for each of the three SNAP pilots will involve final evaluation of integrated retrofit
options and development of the sustainable neighbourhood retrofit action plan. Work is being
carried out through a combination of TRCA staff and consultants, with strong support and input
by municipal and community partners.
Based on the interest of the initial and prospective partners in this work, TRCA staff anticipate
that the lessons learned from these pilot projects will lead to transferable recommendations for
other communities and to future SNAP projects.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funding has been provided in the 2008 and 2009 capital budgets from the Region of Peel
(129-94; 416-10), Region of York (122-85) and City of Toronto (113-95). Requests for additional
funds to complete the pilot projects are included in 2010 budgets, along with long term funding
requests to support planning cycles for future SNAP projects.
Additional fundraising, incentives and partner development for these SNAP projects will be
pursued in an effort to enhance implementation and expand the demonstration opportunities. It
is anticipated that these high profile and unique projects will attract a broad spectrum of
innovative partnerships.
Report prepared by: Sonya Meek, extension 5253
Emails: smeek@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Sonya Meek, extension 5253; Shannon Logan, extension 5708
(Peel and York SNAP projects); Julie Hordowick, extension 5780 (Toronto SNAP project)
Emails: smeek@trca.on.ca; slogan@trca.on.ca; jhordowick@trca.on.ca
Date: July 8, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A116/09 -ASHBRIDGE’S BAY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Consultant Selection. Award of contract for coastal engineering study.
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) began dredging
operations at Coatsworth Cut to maintain navigation between Lake Ontario and the
boating facilities located at Ashbridge’s Bay Park in 1983;
AND WHEREAS as a result of ever increasing dredging volumes and associated
expenses, TRCA initiated a Conservation Ontario Class Environmental Assessment
(Class EA) to remediate navigation hazards due to sediment accumulation in Coatsworth
Cut in 2002;
224
AND WHEREAS the original Class EA was suspended due to concerns pertaining to water
circulation and possible conflicts with other waterfront planning initiatives being
proposed by the City of Toronto and Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation
(TWRC);
AND WHEREAS the City of Toronto (Toronto Water) completed a Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Coatsworth Cut Combined Sewer Outflow (CSO)
and Stormwater Outfalls Control Project (2007), which included, but is not limited to a 10
hectare treatment wetland, proposed south of the Ashbridge’s Bay Sewage Treatment
Plant;
AND WHEREAS TWRC’s Lake Ontario Park Master Plan (2008) recommends major
modifications to Ashbridge’s Bay Park and adjacent shorelines, including a new 10
hectare stormwater treatment wetland in Coatsworth Cut;
AND WHEREAS TWRC received board approval on May 13, 2009 to proceed with Phase 1
of Lake Ontario Park, which includes the reconstruction of the peninsula at Ashbridge’s
Bay Park;
AND WHEREAS TWRC and the City of Toronto has requested that TRCA reinitiate the
Class EA for Ashbridge’s Bay, and that all costs incurred by TRCA would be covered by
TWRC;
AND WHEREAS TRCA will work closely with TWRC, Toronto Waterfront Secretariat,
Parks, Forestry and Recreation, and Toronto Water throughout the EA process;
AND WHEREAS TRCA will include in the Class EA as part of the evaluation of
alternatives, the alternative proposed in the Lake Ontario Park Master Plan;
AND WHEREAS TRCA staff will require the services of a Coastal Engineering Consultant
to provide support to TRCA throughout the Class EA process;
AND WHEREAS TRCA staff received excellent proposal submissions from Baird and
Associates, and Shoreplan Engineering Limited in response to the Coastal Engineering
Study;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be authorized to enter into a
Delivery Agreement with TWRC to reinitiate the Class EA process for Ashbridge’s Bay;
THAT TRCA staff be authorized to award Shoreplan Engineering Limited the contract for
the Ashbridge’s Bay Coast Engineering Study, at a cost not to exceed $125,000.00 plus
applicable taxes and a contingency allowance of 20%, subject to the required funding
being made available by TWRC;
THAT TRCA staff be authorized to establish a Community Liaison Committee (CLC) to
assist TRCA and consultants in maintaining contact with community residents, groups,
associations and organizations, and to provide community input into the project and to
coordinate the public consultant process with the other involved agencies;
225
THAT TRCA staff be authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to implement
the foregoing, including the signing of all Delivery Agreements, amendments or other
legal documents deemed required in order to retain the successful firm, subject to
approval of the award by Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation;
THAT staff report back to the Authority with the results of the Class EA in early 2010;
AND FURTHER THAT Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation be so advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In 1983, TRCA began dredging operations at Coatsworth Cut to maintain navigation between
Lake Ontario and the boating facilities located at Ashbridge’s Bay Park. As a result of ever
increasing dredging volumes and associated expenses, TRCA began to investigate shoreline
modification options that would eliminate the need for annual maintenance dredging in 1999.
In 2002, TRCA initiated a Conservation Ontario Class Environmental Assessment to remediate
navigation hazards due to sediment accumulation in Coatsworth Cut. The purpose of the EA
was to develop and evaluate preliminary detailed design plans to reduce or eliminate sediment
deposition in Coatsworth Cut. Consequently, the preliminary detailed design process
produced six design alternatives which were evaluated based on considerations for the positive
and negative impacts on the existing physical, biological, socio-economic and cultural
environments, as well as technical concerns, cost and feasibility. However, a preferred
alternative was not chosen in response to concerns pertaining to potential water circulation
issues and major waterfront planning initiatives that were just underway by City of Toronto and
TWRC. The Class EA was suspended indefinitely.
Following the suspension of TRCA’s EA process, the City of Toronto completed a Municipal
Class Environmental Assessment for the Coatsworth Cut CSO and Stormwater Outfalls Control
in November, 2007. The preferred solution includes source and conveyance controls
throughout the sewershed as well as a 10 hectare treatment wetland, proposed south of the
treatment plant (Attachment 1). The Environmental Study Report prepared in support of this
EA, also noted the need to coordinate design of the wetland in tandem with TWRC’s plans for
Ashbridge’s Bay as per the Lake Ontario Park Master Plan.
Lake Ontario Park, as envisioned by TWRC, is a waterfront park spanning the shoreline from
Cherry Beach to the R.C. Harris Filtration Plant. The Lake Ontario Park Master Plan prepared
by Field Operations and Schollen & Company was released by TWRC in 2008. This master
plan recommends major modifications to Ashbridge’s Bay Park and adjacent shorelines,
including the relocation of the City’s proposed 10 hectare stormwater treatment wetland from
the south side of the Ashbridge’s Bay Sewage Treatment Plant to Coatsworth Cut in order to
facilitate the relocation of the boating facilities.
226
On May 13, 2009, TWRC received board approval to proceed with Phase 1 of Lake Ontario Park
(Attachment 2), which includes construction of a new landform at Ashbridge’s Bay Park to
facilitate relocation of the boat clubs currently located in Coatsworth Cut to the boat basin
currently occupied solely by Ashbridge’s Bay Yacht Club. The pedestrian connection between
Tommy Thompson Park and Ashbridge’s Bay Park, as well as the 1200m x 90m rowing channel
outlined are not part of TWRC’s approved scope of work.
TRCA and Toronto Water have agreed to work cooperatively to achieve TWRC’s vision for
Ashbridge’s Bay Park and Coatsworth Cut. As part of TRCA’s contribution, TRCA staff has
committed to reopen and complete the Class EA process to address local shoreline erosion
and sedimentation issues. The original alternatives identified in the TRCA Class EA will be
re-examined, in addition to the new alternative identified as per the Lake Ontario Park Master
Plan, and any other viable considerations that may arise.
In support of this work, TRCA requires a consultant to provide professional engineering
services in order to fulfill the requirements of the planning and design process outlined under
Conservation Ontario’s Class Environmental Assessment for Remedial Flood and Erosion
Control Projects (2001). A coastal engineering firm is specifically required to:
model the existing coastal and shoreline conditions, including internal circulation of the
harbour of Ashbridge’s Bay;
help develop a range of alternatives for consideration;
conduct an evaluation of the remaining alternatives to select a preliminary preferred
alternative;
further refine the preferred alternative and carry out a detailed assessment of the preferred
on coastal shoreline processes and internal circulation conditions;
provide technical support and attend all meetings, as required; and
provide technical reports, and all modeled input and output.
RATIONALE
The Request for Proposals identified a budget of $125,000 for the assignment, inclusive of all
fees and disbursements, plus GST. The Terms of Reference outlined the specific tasks and
deliverables expected from the consultant. Six consultants were invited to submit a proposal,
based on their previous involvement with similar projects and their expertise in this field.
Proposals were received as follows:
COMPANY QUOTE
(Plus GST)
Additional Costs To Meet
TWRC Professional
Liability Coverage
AECOM Declined to submit N/A
IBI Group Declined to submit N/A
Moffat and Nichol Declined to submit N/A
Riggs Engineering Limited No Response N/A
Shoreplan Engineering Ltd.$125,000.00 $12,000.00
W.F. Baird & Associates Coastal
Engineers Ltd.
$124,951.00 $9,000.00 to $12,000.00
(assume $12,000.00)
227
As part of the proposal process, interviews were held with Shoreplan Engineering Ltd. and W.F.
Baird Associates Coastal Engineers Ltd. on July 14, 2009. Both firms provided excellent details
pertaining to their proposals and answered all questions satisfactorily.
The recommendation of the successful consultant for this assignment is made by a selection
committee consisting of TRCA and TWRC staff, and is based on an appraisal of the proposal
documents and the interview results. The selection committee was unanimous in their opinion
that both firms submitted excellent proposals and were equally qualified to undertake the work.
The criteria used to evaluate the submissions and to select the successful consultant included
the following:
Experience, qualifications and availability of individual team members proposed for the
project, particularly in the areas of coastal engineering.
Consultant understanding of the assignment.
Proposed approach and methodology for the assignment including an assessment of any
anticipated difficulties and the proposed approach to overcome them.
Proposed schedule and work plan, and ability to comply with tentative schedule.
The fee proposal; and
The results of the proposal interviews.
Based on the evaluation, the selection committee concluded that the proposal submitted by
Shoreplan Engineering Limited offered the best value (on a per unit rate of work) for service
and was the consultant that best demonstrated their ability to complete the coastal engineering
study within the approved budget.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The full cost of the Class EA is projected to be a minimum of $300,000.00 including all
administrative, legal and contingency costs. This estimate includes the following assumptions:
external advertising, facility and set-up costs for public consultation expenses will be
covered separately by TWRC and/or City of Toronto;
no major scope of work changes or delays; and
Shoreplan Engineering Limited is not required to purchase the additional Professional
Liability Insurance beyond standard coverage rates.
Discussions regarding budget and funding mechanisms have been underway between TRCA
and TWRC.
Following confirmation of funding for the Class EA from TWRC, TRCA will proceed with the
execution of an agreement with Shoreplan Engineering Limited to an upset limit of $125,000.00
with an available $25,000.00 contingency (20%).
Report prepared by: Thomas Sciscione, extension 5749
Emails: tsciscione@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Ken Dion, extension 5230
Emails: kdion@trca.on.ca
Date: July 24, 2009
Attachments: 2
228
Attachment 1
Treatment wetland proposed as part of the City of Toronto’s preferred solution for the
Coatsworth Cut CSO and Stormwater Outfalls Control Municipal Class Environmental
Assessment, November, 2007.
229
Attachment 2
Lake Ontario Park Concept for Ashbridge’s Bay
_________________________________________
230
RES.#A117/09 -WATER ALIVE! PROPOSAL FOR KORTRIGHT CENTRE FOR
CONSERVATION
Approval in principle of the Water Alive! proposal for Kortright Centre for
Conservation and progress to concept development phase.
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT the Water Alive! proposal for Kortright Centre for Conservation at The Living City
Campus at Kortright be approved in principle;
AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff work with
The Ecologos Institute on the project concept development phase.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The Ecologos Institute is an applied research, demonstration and action network of volunteers
and is a federally registered charitable organization. The aim of Ecologos is to educate,
motivate and inspire a large number of people to make the shift to a sustainable, economically
vital and socially just society. The organization wants to inspire people by creating and
producing high impact public exhibits and immersion media, which meets three strategic aims:
Attract large attendance numbers because they are entertaining and fun.
Offer educational experiences that change minds and hearts and inspire a commitment
to action.
Provide on-the-spot opportunities for visitors to sign up for action projects in their own
communities.
Following the release of the Clean Water Act of 2006, TRCA was approached by The Ecologos
Institute with an interest in developing water education exhibits on TRCA-owned lands. In
consultation with TRCA, The Ecologos Institute completed the development of the Water Alive!
proposal in March of 2009.
The goal of Water Alive! is to evoke a creative and heart-felt response to protect water for today
and tomorrow. It will transform participants from interested spectators into active problem
solvers. Water Alive! will accomplish this transformation through the following five steps:
Step One: provide a keen experience of amazement and gratitude. For example,
demonstrating how humans are composed of mostly water from birth.
Step Two: address the current reality of the issues surrounding our water. For example,
projecting visual images of the current state and future models of a waterless planet in a
manner that envelopes the visitor.
Step Three: provide an experience that shifts from old worldviews to more
encompassing paradigms that open to new views. For example, visitors will be provided
with the opportunity to re-visit the mystery and sacredness of water.
Step Four: enable the visitor to experience the belief that new views are possible. For
example, participants will be exposed to and inspired by others who have joined
together to make change happen.
Step Five: the provision of opportunities for the visitor to make a commitment to action –
the ultimate goal of the journey.
231
It is understood that people learn in different ways and therefore it is expected that various
displays may address similar topics using differing approaches or philosophies. This is
intended to maximize the potential to motivate each visitor to become part of the solution. By
the time participants reach final stages of their journey through Water Alive! they should be
receptive to learning about and becoming involved in initiatives in their communities.
It is proposed that the permanent home of Water Alive! would be located at Kortright. It would
consist of two primary structures – the Water Alive! Vision Dome and the Water Alive!
Transformation Centre. The custom designed Vision Dome will be a new structure as part of
The Living City Campus at Kortright that will introduce visitors to the key water-related issues
combining the concepts of image shifting with state-of-the-art video technology to deliver a high
impact audio-visual performance projected inside the dome. This stage will be approximately
ten minutes in length. With that, it is projected that approximately 200 visitors per hour
(accounting for loading and unloading times) will be able to experience the demonstration. The
dome will be built in place of the glass house currently located at Kortright, thus maintaining the
footprint of the building.
The second facility, the Transformation Centre, will be housed in the current GreenWorks
building at Kortright. This facility will host interactive exhibits using various media such as video,
physical exhibits, auditory exhibits etc. They will be designed to engage and provoke the visitor
to respond emotionally as well as intellectually to the issues of water management and
conservation.
A third aspect of Water Alive! will be the Engagement Centre, and will be tentatively housed in
the current GreenWorks building. This is an area where visitors will become immediately
engaged in water-related issues by volunteering for not-for-profit advocacy groups, connect
with government agencies and departments, connect with job opportunities, or explore
educational experiences all in relation to water issues. This area will incorporate computer
kiosks and a staffed information desk.
An additional component will be the travelling Water Alive! exhibit. It will mimic the current
permanent exhibit at Kortright Centre for Conservation in miniature form. Initially one travelling
exhibit will be created with additional models in the future as demand grows.
Following the development of the Water Alive! proposal, The Ecologos Institute presented the
proposal to the Boyd Lands/Living City Campus Stewardship Committee. The committee
members supported the Water Alive! proposal in principle, including the geodesic dome
theatre in the location of the glass house and a retrofit with additional floor space inside the
GreenWorks building.
RATIONALE
The water messaging proposed by Ecologos for Water Alive! is consistent with the vision and
mission of TRCA. A partnership with Ecologos would further advance the Kortright Centre for
Conservation and
The Living City Campus at Kortright in becoming a premier educational and demonstration
centre in Ontario. The anticipated opening of Water Alive! is December 2010.
232
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Ecologos will prepare project development plans that will complete the business plan
component of the project. In addition, Ecologos will determine all development costs and
operating expenses associated with the project. It is anticipated that this work will take
approximately four to six months.
Ecologos will seek funding partners and sources to undertake the capital development of the
project. During this time, TRCA staff will develop an agreement with Ecologos for the
development and operation of the facility. TRCA staff will bring the agreement to the TRCA
board for approval prior to execution.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
At this time, there are no cost implications to TRCA budgets.
Ecologos has estimated that the total cost of the permanent exhibit located at Kortright is
projected to be $2,100,000. Ecologos will be responsible for conducting its own fundraising for
this project. The full proposal containing further details on costs and revenue generating
projections is available upon request.
Report prepared by: Lesli Rynyk, extension 5579
Emails: lrynyk@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Emails: dedwards@trca.on.ca
Date: July 07, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A118/09 -ALBION HILLS COMMUNITY FARM
Approval to enter into lease negotiations with Caledon Countryside
Alliance, Palgrave Environment Committee, Chesslawn Farms and
Everdale Organic Farm and Learning Centre for the purpose of
establishing an "Albion Hills Community Farm" that will develop a locally
based, ecologically sustainable and economically viable agricultural
enterprise on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority agricultural
land at Albion Hills Conservation Area and Bolton Resource Management
Tract.
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into lease negotiations
with Caledon Countryside Alliance, Palgrave Environment Committee, Chesslawn Farms
and Everdale Organic Farm and Learning Centre for approximately 40 hectares (100
acres) of land located at the Albion Hills Conservation Area and Bolton Resource
Management Tract;
233
THAT the term of the lease agreement not exceed five years with the option of renewal;
THAT the lease payment be at fair market value for the term of the agreement;
THAT the agreement be on terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA solicitors and staff;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Since the 1960s, the Albion Hills farm located at the Albion Hills Conservation Area, with
additional land in the Bolton Resource Management Tract, has been operating as a dairy and
hog farm. The fields have been used for growing hay, corn, soybean, wheat and barley.
Although the farm was a dairy operation for years, it ceased to operate in 2008 due to the large
capital investment needed to repair the buildings and upgrade the manure storage facilities.
The lease for the farm expired in February, 2009. The silos, concrete pad, hog barn and drive
shed on site are scheduled to be permanently removed in 2009.
Although the dairy operation no longer exists, TRCA is still interested in continuing agricultural
use at the Albion Hills farm. TRCA is seeking a new partnership which reflects innovative
business practices that complement TRCA's new Sustainable Near-Urban Agriculture Policy
(2008). The general purpose of the policy is to conserve TRCA's agricultural land base for
conventional farming but also to encourage the production of local food uses and encourage
the use of new and innovative agricultural production methods. In addition, agricultural uses
must complement other TRCA objectives such as the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System
Strategy and The Living City strategy.
The Albion Hills farm provides an excellent opportunity for TRCA to demonstrate its
commitment to growing local food and realize its sustainable near-urban agriculture vision. The
farm is an attractive location for a sustainable near-urban agriculture enterprise due to the
significant number of visitors each year (approximately 100,000). The Albion Hills Field Centre
and Etobicoke Field Centre are also located at the Albion Hills Conservation Area where
approximately 5,500 students attend each year and 48,000 meals are served annually.
In search of a new agricultural partnership, in April, 2009, TRCA issued a Request for Proposals
to lease approximately 40 hectares of land at the Albion Hills Conservation Area and Bolton
Resource Management Tract. In addition to the lands, the former dairy barn, pole barn, farm
house and cover-all were also included in the Request for Proposals. The Request for
Proposals opened on April 17, 2009 and closed on May 29, 2009. It was circulated to
approximately 40 agricultural and food related organizations and advertised in the Brampton
Guardian, Caledon Enterprize and Vaughan Citizen between these dates.
A total of six proposals were received. In addition, two expressions of interest were received
but not considered due to the fact they did not meet the submission deadline.
234
Proposal Organization/Individual
Albion Hills Community Farm Caledon Countryside Alliance, Palgrave
Environment Committee, Chesslawn Farms and
Everdale Organic Farm and Learning Centre
Establishing a Sustainable and Profitable Farm Andrew Seitz
Feastfire Gardens Paul A.D. Richard
Proposal for Albion Hills Farm Organic Meadow
Proposal for Lease of Agricultural Land Locavore Farms and Culinary Arts Inc
Proposal for Lease of Agricultural Lands Humberview Farms Ltd
Evaluation Criteria
TRCA staff has reviewed each proposal and has evaluated the proposals against the following
criteria established in the Request for Proposals:
1.Environmental
Helps to reduce the ecological footprint within TRCA’s jurisdiction by providing locally
grown (for transport within Ontario), raised and sold food, reducing food miles and
greenhouse gas emissions related to food transportation, and by doing so, helping to
reduce the impacts of climate change.
Implements innovative and sustainable environmental and agricultural production
methods such as appropriate technology (i.e., energy efficient greenhouses), Ecological
Goods and Services (EG&S) and Beneficial Management Practices (BMPs).
Provides a positive influence on adjacent natural heritage through the implementation of
agricultural BMPs that complement the terrestrial natural heritage system.
2.Social
Promotes social equity, health and food security in local communities by providing
opportunities for increased accessibility to fresh and healthy foods.
Provides opportunities for celebrating the cultural diversity of communities by growing a
diverse range of crops.
Provides educational opportunities (e.g., but not limited to, the development and
delivery of programming pertaining to the meals at TRCA’s educational or other
facilities).
Provides opportunities to work cooperatively and collaboratively with other
stakeholders.
3.Economic
Increases the amount of available locally grown food.
Provides opportunities for community economic development by helping to reduce the
number of imports and by creating jobs and meaningful work for the local community.
Supports the implementation of the Greater Toronto Area Agricultural Action Plan.
Provides a return to TRCA and/or farmer either financially, exchange for the commodity
produced and/or through EG&S and BMPs.
Creates opportunities for skill development, training and leadership.
235
RATIONALE
Of the six proposals received, representatives from three of the short-listed proposals were
interviewed. TRCA staff recommends that the Albion Hills Community Farm proposal submitted
by the partnership of Caledon Countryside Alliance, Palgrave Environment Committee,
Chesslawn Farms and Everdale Organic Farm and Learning Centre be selected to further
negotiate a lease agreement for agricultural use of land and buildings at Albion Hills
Conservation Area and Bolton Resource Management Tract. The strength of this partnership is
summarized as follows:
Caledon Countryside Alliance, Palgrave Environment Committee, Chesslawn Farms and
Everdale Organic Farm and Learning Centre have extensive experience in the fields of
community organization, educational program development, and active farming of field and
market crops and animals.
The Caledon Countryside Alliance and Everdale Organic Farm and Environmental Learning
Centre are two leading organizations moving forward the local food agenda in the Greater
Toronto Area.
Dwight Matson of Chesslawn Farms has over 30 years of experience farming dairy and
mixed crop in the Town of Caledon. Mr. Matson has also farmed TRCA lands for 13 years.
The partnership provides an opportunity to develop the "Albion Hills Community Farm" into
a leading edge showcase for an environmentally sustainable farm which provides
educational programming and food for TRCA facilities, outdoor education centres and the
local community surrounding Albion Hills. Barb Emerie, who represents the Palgrave
Environment Committee is an outdoor education teacher at the Etobicoke Field Centre who
brings a wealth of knowledge regarding agricultural and environmental education.
Staff experiences and references from clients and stakeholders indicate that the Caledon
Countryside Alliance, Palgrave Environment Committee, Chesslawn Farms and Everdale
Organic Farm and Learning Centre collaborative is a strong candidate to establish a
near-urban agriculture initiative which complements TRCA's goals under The Living City
vision and TRCA's Sustainable Near-Urban Agriculture Policy.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Negotiate a lease agreement with Caledon Countryside Alliance, Palgrave Environment
Committee, Chesslawn Farms and Everdale Organic Farm and Learning Centre.
Develop a long term action plan for the farm once a lease agreement has been negotiated.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The proponent is expected to finance the operation. TRCA has approximately $25,000 from the
Peel capital budget to contribute to farm infrastructure and start up costs.
Report prepared by: Sonia Dhir, extension 5291
Emails: sdhir@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211
Emails: gwilkins@trca.on.ca
Date: July 14, 2009
_________________________________________
236
RES.#A119/09 -ALBION HILLS CONSERVATION AREA
Trail Enhancement Implementation. Authorization for staff to initiate Trail
Enhancement implementation at Albion Hills Conservation Area.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to undertake
trail enhancement implementation at Albion Hills Conservation Area through the federal
Recreational Infrastructure Canada (RInC) Program in Ontario and Ontario Recreation
(REC) Program;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as
required.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Albion Hills Conservation Area (AHCA) is a 446 hectare active-use park north of the Village of
Bolton, Peel Region, which features a campground, lake and sees over 100,000 visitors
annually. Albion Hills Conservation Area is one of Ontario's top mountain biking and hiking
destinations. It is the intention of TRCA to draw additional users to Albion Hills Conservation
Area in order to expand and diversify the client base resulting in increased revenue.
The current trail system, which is used extensively by mountain bikers, hikers, cross country
skiers and represents a key recreational component of Albion Hills Conservation Area, is in
need of various trail upgrades, enhancements and barrier free access features. These
enhancements will increase public and barrier-free access to the trails, maintain low
environmental impact and contribute to the longevity and growth of sport activities within Albion
Hills Conservation Area.
TRCA is committed to providing recreational opportunities for all park visitors, including those
with physical and/or mental disabilities. TRCA's accessibility plan clearly articulates its
commitment to providing barrier-free public access opportunities for all park visitors. TRCA is
dedicated to improving trail accessibility at Albion Hills Conservation Area by widening existing
trails, ensuring surface material and slopes meet accessibility criteria and providing barrier-free
access to trail heads.
As a result of the required trail repairs, barrier free enhancements and other upgrades, TRCA
staff applied for both provincial and federal funding opportunities in order to enhance the
existing trail system at the park.
In May of 2009, the RInC in Ontario and Ontario REC programs announced that government
funding was available for various recreational infrastructure projects. Through the Canada RInC
and Ontario REC programs, the governments of Canada and Ontario were willing to support
Ontario's communities and create jobs through upgrades and improvements to recreational
infrastructure. The government of Canada and Ontario would fund up to one third each of a
project's total eligible cost up to a maximum of $1 million per project from each government
agency.
237
TRCA staff prepared and submitted funding proposal applications for the following work to be
completed at Albion Hills Conservation Area:
creation of 20 kilometres of new mountain biking and fitness trails in order to meet current
public demand;
enhancement of existing trails including re-surfacing, trail widening, bridge and rock work;
improvements to interpretive, educational and directional signage;
installation of accessible and barrier-free trails; and
hazardous tree, shrub and debris trimming and removal.
Due to the aggressive deadlines of the project imposed by the grant conditions, the following is
the proposed schedule and spending breakdown that was submitted to the Canada RInC and
Ontario REC programs:
Sources of FundingFunding % of Total
Project Cost
Year Funding to be
Spent In
Canada RInC funding
requested
$16,500 16.5%2009-2010
Ontario REC funding
requested
$16,500 16.5%2009-2010
Applicant funding $16,500 16.5%2009-2010
Canada RInC funding
requested
$16,500 16.5%2010-2011
Ontario REC funding
requested
$16,500 16.5%2010-2011
Applicant funding $16,500 16.5%2010-2011
TOTAL $100,000.00 100%2009-20111
On July 7, 2009 the Canada RInC and Ontario REC Program released an official list of all
projects approved for funding. Albion Hills Conservation Area trail enhancement was approved
for funding at a cost of $100,000, two thirds of the cost covered by Canada RInC and Ontario
REC funding.
Drawing on the rich history and natural attributes Albion Hills Conservation Area, the overall
objectives of the trail enhancements are:
maintain the park's financial viability and therefore continue to support the Albion Hills
Conservation Area;
continue to provide recreational opportunities for the GTA, in particular the Town of Caledon
and City of Brampton ;
create accessible outdoor recreation in a naturalized environment;
continue to provide employment opportunities; and
continue to promote health, wellness, recreation and an active lifestyle.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funding in the amount of $67,000 is available through the Canada RInC and Ontario REC
Program. The remaining $33,000 is available through the Conservation Land Care funds from
the Region of Peel in account #440-01.
238
The Canada RInC and Ontario REC Program require construction to commence within sixty
(60) days of the anticipated September 1, 2009 construction start date indicated on the funding
application. In addition, program requirements indicate 50% of total funding is to be spend by
March 31, 2010 and projects to be completed by March 31, 2011.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Work to be completed in 2009 includes:
Research, Inventory and Design Development:
Research provincial trail accessibility standards.1.
Undertake an assessment of user needs.2.
Complete inventory of existing trails on site.3.
Review site natural heritage information and data to route trail and for gaps.4.
Prepare trail design plan including sign design. 5.
Base Plan Preparation and Site Surveys
Carry out topographical survey of the site to obtain accurate base information required for 1.
the trail design and prepare digital base map.
Investigate and survey all existing site services, both above and below grade.2.
Complete a detailed site inspection in proposed development area.3.
Complete archaeology survey of proposed trail route for clearance. 4.
Complete any necessary site natural heritage inventories of proposed trail route and obtain 5.
clearance.
Contract Drawings and Documents
Prepare working drawings, specifications and contract/construction documents (tender 1.
documentation) for issuance.
Bidding and Tender Review Phase
Review bid submissions and recommend award.1.
Construction Phase
Enhance existing trails including re-surfacing, trail widening, bridge and rock work. 1.
Complete trail route site preparation and clearing. 2.
Complete excavation, grading, necessary gravel placement and earth work for 10 3.
kilometres of new trail.
Complete 50% of accessible and barrier free trail construction.4.
Manufacture and install 50% of the trail signs. 5.
Work to be completed in 2010 includes:
239
Construction Phase
Complete trail route site preparation and clearing. 1.
Complete excavation, grading, necessary gravel placement and earth work for 10 2.
kilometres of new trail.
Complete 50% of accessible and barrier free trail construction.3.
Manufacture and install 50% of the trail signs. 4.
Report prepared by: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Mike Bender, extension 5287
Emails: mbender@trca.on.ca
Date: July 14, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A120/09 -HEART LAKE CONSERVATION AREA
Outdoor Swimming Pool Development. Authorization for staff to initiate
development of Heart Lake outdoor swimming pool.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to undertake
the development of Heart Lake Conservation Area outdoor swimming pool and supporting
visitor and staff infrastructure through the federal Recreational Infrastructure Canada
(RInC) Program in Ontario and Ontario Recreation (REC) Program;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as
required.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
It is the intention of TRCA to draw additional users to Heart Lake Conservation Area in order to
expand and diversify the client base resulting in increased revenue. It is also the intention of
TRCA to pursue the recommendations outlined in the Heart Lake Conservation Area Master
Plan in its entirety.
At Authority Meeting #5/06, held on June 23, 2006 the Heart Lake Conservation Area (HLCA)
Master Plan was endorsed. Resolution #A133/06 was adopted as follows:
THAT the Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan,dated June 1 1006 be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT funding for the implementation of the plan be included in the
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) capital budget plan for Peel Region
2007 – 2011.
240
One of the recommendations of the Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan is the
development of a plunge pool that is to replace natural swimming at Heart Lake Conservation
Area and add to the recently constructed aquatic playground facility. Heart Lake suffers from
algal blooms and has a murky bottom which contributes to a poor swimming experience. In
order to support Heart Lake’s restoration to a warm water fishery, swimming was discontinued
and coincided with the installation of the aquatic playground facility in 2008. It is the desire of
TRCA to enhance the water play experience for Heart Lake Conservation Area visitors through
the addition of an outdoor swimming pool.
As a result of the desired outdoor swimming pool installation at Heart Lake Conservation Area,
TRCA staff applied for both provincial and federal funding in order to replace the existing pool
with a new aquatic facility.
In May of 2009, the RInC in Ontario and Ontario REC programs announced that government
funding was available for various recreational infrastructure projects. Through the Canada RInC
and Ontario REC programs, the governments of Canada and Ontario were willing to support
Ontario's communities and create jobs through upgrades and improvements to recreational
infrastructure. The government of Canada and Ontario would fund up to one third each of a
project's total eligible cost up to a maximum of $1 million per project from each government
agency.
TRCA staff prepared and submitted funding proposal applications for the following work and
features to be completed and implemented at Heart Lake Conservation Area:
re-grading and earth work;
installation of new swimming pool, plumbing and mechanical infrastructure;
concrete works, including pool shell and decking;
utilization of green technologies;
renovation to existing washroom, change room and staff facilities; and
various soft and hard landscaping.
The application requested $1,066,000, two thirds of the cost provided by Canada RInC and
Ontario REC funding, with TRCA required to secure the remaining $533,000. On July 7, 2009
the Canada RInC and Ontario REC Program released an official list of all projects approved for
funding. The Heart Lake Conservation Area Outdoor Swimming Pool project was approved for
the funding requested. The funding arrangement includes aggressive deadlines as grant
conditions which requires the work to be completed in 2009-2010..
RATIONALE
Drawing on the rich history and natural attributes of Heart Lake Conservation Area, the overall
objective is to create a setting where the complex and parklands combine to make Heart Lake
“the place to be” in Peel Region. From a functional perspective, the complex will include all
amenities to adequately meet the needs and expectations of the identified target market.
Preliminary design features of the new swimming pool at Heart Lake Conservation Area will
include:
Swimming Pool
feature a design that appears as an extension of existing aquatic playground (splash pad);
241
capacity of 500 - 600 patrons;
appropriate design for a variety of user groups;
accommodate individuals of beginner and advanced skill level;
incorporate innovative and unique design features;
provide for an interactive swimming experience;
incorporate both traditional entry and beach entry;
vandal resistant;
fully accessible; and
other green technologies where deemed feasible and/or appropriate.
Mechanical Infrastructure
utilization of existing aquatic playground mechanical infrastructure where feasible;
state of the art filtration and sanitation systems;
designed to function without staff supervision; and
energy and cost efficient.
Other Amenities and Landscaping
include picnic shelters and sitting areas with shade trees;
various soft and hard landscaping;
upgrades to signage;
development of additional or retrofit of existing change room and washroom facilities.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
$1,066,000 in funding is available through federal and provincial sources through the Canada
RInC and Ontario REC funding programs. The remaining $533,000 is budgeted to be available
through the 2010 Heart Lake Master Plan Implementation funds in account number 419-49.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The Canada RInC and Ontario REC Program requires construction to commence within sixty
(60) days of the anticipated September 1, 2009 construction start date indicated on the funding
application. In addition, program requirements indicate 50% of total funding is to be spend by
March 31, 2010 and projects to be completed by March 31, 2011.
Work to be completed in 2009 includes:
Research and Design Development:
Carry out research to identify any LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) 1.
standards necessary for the design.
Undertake a preliminary assessment of program/needs.2.
Develop architectural detailed design services for the swimming pool, mechanical 3.
infrastructure and other amenities.
Approve final design.4.
Prepare working drawings, specifications, contract/construction documents (tender 5.
documentation) and accurate itemized cost breakdown.
Survey and Base Plan Preparation
Carry out topographical survey of the site to obtain accurate base information required for 1.
the design.
242
Investigate and survey all existing site services, both above and below grade.2.
Investigate, obtain and verify information concerning all utility services necessary for the 3.
design, both public and private, above and below grade.
Carry a detailed site inspection.4.
Contract Drawings and Documents
Prepare working drawings, specifications and contract/construction documents (tender 1.
documentation) for issuance.
Budget Development
Develop a detailed operating budget, including appropriate overhead costs, staffing levels, 1.
materials and supplies, utilities and programming for the approved design.
Develop a detailed capital budget, including appropriate contingencies and design fees, for 2.
the construction of the approved design.
Annualize major maintenance that is likely to occur over the first 20 years of operation.3.
Bidding and Tender Review Phase
Review bid submissions and recommend award.1.
Building Permit Phase
Liaise with agencies and departments to apply for and obtain approvals for all required 1.
permits from appropriate City of Brampton departments and other authorities with
jurisdiction.
Construction Phase
Complete excavation, grading and earth work.1.
Installation of plumbing and mechanical infrastructure2.
Installation of swimming pool. 3.
Work to be completed in 2010 includes:
Construction Phase
Installation of swimming pool. 1.
Upgrades to existing washroom, change room, snack bar and other infrastructure. 2.
Concrete works including pool shell and decking. 3.
Various soft and hard landscaping. 4.
Updates to signage.5.
Report prepared by: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
Date: July 13, 2009
_________________________________________
243
RES.#A121/09 -PETTICOAT CREEK CONSERVATION AREA
Aquatic Facility Redevelopment. Authorization for staff to initiate
redevelopment of the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to undertake
the redevelopment of Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool through the federal
Recreational Infrastructure Canada (RInC) Program in Ontario and Ontario Recreation
(REC) Program;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as
required.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area (PCCA) is approximately 70 hectares of land located at the
mouth of Petticoat Creek on the north shore of Lake Ontario. It is located in the City of
Pickering, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, at the south end of Whites Road.
PCCA is an active conservation park consisting of picnic areas, numerous trails and public
washrooms and other various amenities, providing a variety of recreational opportunities to
local, regional residents and various tourists. The primary feature of the park is a 1,300 person
capacity swimming pool, the largest outdoor swimming pool of its kind in Ontario.
Constructed in 1974 as a component of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s
Waterfront Plan, Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool is a 0.6 ha Class B Modified
dish-shaped swimming pool.
Since its opening in 1975, Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool has experienced numerous
problems related to compaction, density and porosity qualities resulting in air voids in the
asphaltic surface that creates a high permeability factor. This permeability has resulted in
saturation of the substrate, which has caused significant heaving and breaking of return pipes
due to frost damage. Though some deficiencies have been remedied through the installation of
a Liner, persistent problems remain with heaving and cracking of the asphalt apron/deck
around the perimeter of the pool. Damage has also been encountered in localized areas
around the water return jets, which has contributed to breaks of water return lines. As a remedy,
the broken return lines were simply capped, reducing the number of jets from the original 80 to
the current configuration of 66. The result of this maintenance work has reduced the rate of
water flow and turnover times in the process.
The mechanical infrastructure of the pool systems has continued to function effectively
throughout the duration of the operating period, though signs of age and wear have become
evident on the filter tank, localized rusting and cracking of the filter elements. In 2003, the filter
bags were replaced, which improved the filter capacity of the system by eliminating voids large
enough to undermine the filtration integrity.
244
The vinyl liner that was installed in 1994 has exceeded its 10 year life expectancy and the
subsequent deterioration of the liner has increased over the last number of years. It is
anticipated that the liner will experience complete failure over the short term.
Currently, PCCA pool requires significant annual capital investment to achieve minimum
operating standards. Staff continues to monitor considerable deterioration of vital pool
components.
As a result of such significant repairs and investment required for ongoing Petticoat pool
operations, TRCA staff applied for both provincial and federal funding in order to replace the
existing pool with a new aquatic facility.
In May of 2009, the RInC in Ontario and Ontario REC programs announced that government
funding was available for various recreational infrastructure projects. Through the Canada RInC
and Ontario REC programs, the governments of Canada and Ontario were willing to support
Ontario's communities and create jobs through upgrades and improvements to recreational
infrastructure. The government of Canada and Ontario would fund up to one third each of a
project's total eligible cost up to a maximum of $1 million per project from each government
agency.
TRCA staff prepared and submitted funding proposal applications for the following work to be
completed at Petticoat Creek Conservation Area:
demolition of existing pool, plumbing and selected components of the mechanical
infrastructure;
re-grading and earth work;
design and installation of a new aquatic facility, plumbing and mechanical infrastructure;
concrete works, including pool shell, splash pad and decking;
utilization of green technologies;
renovations to existing washroom, change room and staff facilities; and
various soft and hard landscaping.
The application requested $3,000,000, two thirds of the cost provided by Canada RInC and
Ontario REC funding, with TRCA required to secure the remaining $1 million. On July 7, 2009
the Canada RInC and Ontario REC Program released an official list of all projects approved for
funding. Redevelopment of Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool was approved for funding
requested. The funding arrangement includes aggressive deadlines as grant conditions which
requires the work to be completed in 2009-2010.
RATIONALE
It is the intention of TRCA to draw additional users to Petticoat Creek Conservation Area in
order to expand and diversify the client base though an aquatic entertainment facility that will
boast a strong civic function while delivering both economic and noneconomic benefits to
TRCA. The existing infrastructure and park features will be enhanced to create an ambiance in
keeping with the importance of the existing site and peripheral property. From a functional
perspective, the complex will include all amenities to adequately meet the needs and
expectations of the identified target market.
245
Preliminary design features of the new aquatic facility at Petticoat Creek Conservation Area will
include:
Aquatic Playground “splash pad”
both traditional and apparatus style elements;
interactive elements include sprayers, buckets, cannons, ladders and stairs;
sensor and/or user activated;
sunning decks with cooling misting tubes for observers;
vandal resistant;
fully accessible; and
other green technologies where deemed feasible and/or appropriate.
Swimming Pool
capacity of 900 – 1,000 patrons;
appropriate design for a variety of user groups;
accommodate individuals of beginner and advanced skill level;
incorporate innovative and unique design features;
provide for an interactive swimming experience;
incorporate both traditional entry and beach entry;
vandal resistant;
fully accessible; and
other green technologies where deemed feasible and/or appropriate.
Mechanical Infrastructure
utilization of existing mechanical infrastructure where feasible;
upgrades to sanitation and filtration systems;
designed to function without staff supervision; and
energy and cost efficient.
Other Amenities and Landscaping
include sports courts, picnic shelters and sitting areas with shade trees;
various soft and hard landscaping;
upgrades to signage; and
incorporate renovations or relocation of existing snack bar facility.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Two million dollars in funding is secured through the Canada RInC and Ontario REC Program.
The remaining one million dollars is to be secured by TRCA.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The Canada RInC and Ontario REC Program requires construction to commence within sixty
(60) days of the anticipated September 1, 2009 construction start date indicated on the funding
application. In addition, program requirements indicate 50% of total funding is to be spend by
March 31, 2010 and projects to be completed by March 31, 2011.
Work to be completed in 2009 includes:
246
Research and Design Development:
Carry out research to identify any LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) 1.
standards necessary for the design.
Undertake a preliminary assessment of program/needs.2.
Develop architectural detailed design services for the outdoor aquatic playground, 3.
swimming pool, mechanical infrastructure and other amenities.
Approve final design.4.
Prepare working drawings, specifications, contract/construction documents (tender 5.
documentation) and accurate itemized cost breakdown.
Survey and Base Plan Preparation
Carry out topographical survey of the site to obtain accurate base information required for 1.
the design.
Investigate and survey all existing site services, both above and below grade.2.
Investigate, obtain and verify information concerning all utility services necessary for the 3.
design, both public and private, above and below grade.
Carry a detailed site inspection.4.
Contract Drawings and Documents
Prepare working drawings, specifications and contract/construction documents (tender 1.
documentation) for issuance.
Budget Development
Develop a detailed operating budget, including appropriate overhead costs, staffing levels, 1.
materials and supplies, utilities and programming for the approved design.
Develop a detailed capital budget, including appropriate contingencies and design fees, for 2.
the construction of the approved design.
Annualize major maintenance that is likely to occur over the first 20 years of operation.3.
Bidding and Tender Review Phase
Review bid submissions and recommend award.1.
Building Permit Phase
Liaise with agencies and departments to apply for and obtain approvals for all required 1.
permits from appropriate City of Pickering departments and other authorities with
jurisdiction.
Construction Phase
Complete demolition of existing Petticoat pool. 1.
Complete excavation, grading and earth work.2.
Installation of plumbing and mechanical infrastructure. 3.
Work to be completed in 2010 includes:
Construction Phase
Installation of aquatic playground and swimming pool. 1.
Upgrades to existing washroom, change room, snack bar and other infrastructure. 2.
Concrete works including pool shell and decking. 3.
247
Various soft and hard landscaping. 4.
Updates to signage.5.
Report prepared by: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
Date: July 13, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A122/09 -CROTHERS WOODS NATURAL SURFACE TRAIL BUILDING AND
GLEN MAJOR FOREST NATURAL SURFACE TRAIL BUILDING
To award a sole source contract to Sustainable Trails Ltd. for the
implementation of natural surface trail improvements and enhancements
at Crothers Woods (Lower Don Valley), City of Toronto and at Glen Major
Forest in the Town of Uxbridge, Region of Durham.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
THAT the contract for the improvement and enhancement of natural surface trails at
Crothers Woods in the City of Toronto be awarded on a sole source basis to Sustainable
Trails Ltd. at a total cost, including disbursements and contingency allowance, not to
exceed $134,101. plus applicable taxes;
THAT the contract for the improvement and enhancement of natural surface trails at Glen
Major Forest in the Township of Uxbridge be awarded on a sole source basis to
Sustainable Trails Ltd. at a total cost, including disbursements and contingency
allowance, not to exceed $24,480. plus applicable taxes; subject to funding being
available;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized staff be directed to take the action necessary to
implement the contracts including obtaining necessary approvals and signing and
execution of documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Crothers Woods
The City of Toronto has partnered with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for
several years to implement various natural environment and stand alone projects to assist them
in the design, planning and delivery of priority trail works. The 2009/2010 work program was
approved by Authority Resolution #A44/09 at Meeting #3/09, held on April 24, 2009. The
sustainable trail improvements at Crothers Woods are part of the ongoing Lower Don Valley
Trail Management project.
248
In 2008, TRCA contracted with Sustainable Trails Ltd. to implement a program of trail
improvements under a sole source contract with a total contract value of $44,714 (plus
applicable taxes). For 2009, TRCA continues to work cooperatively with City of Toronto staff
(Natural Environment and Community Programs) to implement various priority upgrades and
safety improvements to the mountain biking trail network located at Crothers Woods in the
Lower Don Valley. City staff has identified that they expect this type and scope of work to
continue for the foreseeable future given the interest and desire of the cycling community to
participate in and enjoy a healthy, active lifestyle within the confines of the City of Toronto.
The improvements and upgrades proposed are documented in the Crothers Woods Trail
Management Strategy prepared by The Planning Partnership for the City of Toronto. The
design of all trail improvements and upgrades are in compliance with International Mountain
Biking Association (IMBA) standards for user safety and environmental sustainability.
Sustainable Trails Ltd. has quoted the 2009 work on a cost per segment of the trail(s) to be
constructed and/or closed.
The work is proposed to proceed immediately to take full advantage of the summer
construction season and to be completed not later than November 1, 2009.
Glen Major Forest
TRCA has submitted a grant application for federal stimulus funding for trails across Canada for
1.5 kilometres of sustainable trail development on its lands at Glen Major Forest in the
Township of Uxbridge. Notification of successful proposals will be received on July 26, 2009.
The trail work is supported by the East Duffins Headwaters Stewardship Committee, along with
the Durham Mountain Biking Association, Uxbridge Horseman's Association, Oak Ridges Trail
Association and the Durham Conservation Association. This project involves the replacement of
three sections of trail. The existing trail was created by users previous to TRCA ownership.
Presently, it does not conform to sustainable trail design guidelines. With this, the trail is now
severely eroded, unsafe and virtually unusable.
The new trail will be entirely separate from the existing trail and will be a multi-use trail (hiking,
biking, horseback riding, cross-country skiing) that will be enjoyed by the variety of users.
Current trail design trends are focusing on combining user interest with the best elements of
trail design. This approach ensures that the trail will survive the usage expected without eroding
or deteriorating. The specialized trail work is very similar in nature to the Crothers Woods
project outlined above where improvements and upgrades are being implemented in an
environmentally sensitive forest environment in compliance with IMBA standards for trail user
safety and environmental sustainability.
Sustainable Trails Ltd. has quoted on the Glen Major Forest trail work at a cost of $16.32 per
metre of new forest trail. The work is scheduled to take approximately 4-5 weeks to complete.
The specific completion date will be determined once the grant has been approved. As trail
construction cannot occur once the ground has frozen, the objective will be to have the trail
completed before freeze up and before the March 31, 2010 federal deadline.
249
RATIONALE
This type of trail building and maintenance is quite unique and specialized given the restrictions
in site accessibility and working in natural areas (ie. significant side slopes, wooded areas,
seeps, etc.). The general intent is to create and maintain natural surface trails that will
withstand the anticipated intensity of use through the application of sustainable trail principles
as promoted by IMBA Canada. These trails differ from conventional trails (granular or hard
surface trails) in that they are more dynamic in their response to use and require ongoing
management to prevent damage to trail surfaces and tree roots from rutting, erosion scouring
and soil compaction while providing users a safe and pleasurable cycling experience. Properly
designed and constructed trails protect the environment by keeping users on a designated
route and protect the users by ensuring a safe experience.
While there are other recognized trail design/build contractors in Canada/USA, Sustainable
Trails Ltd. is the only dedicated natural surface trails construction provider. They are also the
only Canadian trailbuilder accredited by the Professional Trailbuilders Association.
City of Toronto staff has had extensive previous experience in working with Sustainable Trails
Ltd. and is recommending that this contractor is the preferred selection for this assignment.
Sustainable Trails Ltd. has the training and specialized equipment required to work on projects
of this type and has also successfully completed projects for TRCA in the past.
As a result, staff is recommending awarding the contract on a sole source basis as per Section
1.14.5 of TRCA's Purchasing Policy as follows:
The required goods and services are to be supplied by a particular vendor or supplier
having special knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be provided by any
other supplier.
Based on a review of the submitted pricing, staff is of the opinion that this quotation offers fair
value for the specified work including the supply of specialized equipment necessary to access
the challenging terrain at both Crothers Woods and Glen Major Forest.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funds have been approved by the City of Toronto as part of the 2009-2010 Natural
Environment and Stand Alone works under the heading of Lower Don Valley Trail and
Environmental Restoration project.
All charges, including TRCA project management fees, will be assigned to account 117-51 and
are fully recoverable.
The Glen Major Forest trail work will only be undertaken if the federal grant money is approved.
The grant would provide $12,240 with the remainder being provided by Durham Conservation
Association $10,140; Durham Mountain Biking Association $2,000; and Uxbridge Horseman's
Association $100.
250
All Glen Major charges will be assigned to account 408-96 and would be fully recoverable.
Report prepared by: Dave Rogalsky, extension 5378, Mike Bender, extension 5287
Emails: drogalsky@trca.on.ca, mbender@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Dave Rogalsky, extension 5378, Mike Bender, extension 5287
Emails: drogalsky@trca.on.ca, mbender@trca.on.ca
Date: July 13, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A123/09 -GREENING RETAIL PROGRAM
Approval of the current research report and next steps for the Greening
Retail program.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT the Greening Retail research report on the environmental best practices of leading
retailers from around the world be approved;
THAT TRCA staff be directed to distribute copies of the report to member municipalities;
THAT TRCA staff be directed to work with member municipalities and other levels of
government to develop mechanisms to assist, encourage and require retailers to
implement appropriate environmental best practices;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to seek funding for additional research
projects, stemming from this report, from other levels of government and the private
sector.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #3/06, held on April 28, 2006, Resolution #A86/06 was approved, as
follows:
THAT staff pursue funding and partnership opportunities in order to develop and
implement a new program of the Living City that engages the retail sector in the
application of sustainable practices and technologies.
The premise of the Greening Retail program is that retailers that implement environmental best
practices can enhance their bottom line; thus, it makes good business sense. The goal of the
program is to provide retailers with specific tools, strategies and programs to improve their
energy efficiency and environmental performance, and play a major part in the creation of
sustainable communities.
251
The program is being developed in partnership with the Ted Rogers School of Management at
Ryerson University, Centre for the Study of Commercial Activity at Ryerson University, Retail
Council of Canada and Environment Canada. Development of the Greening Retail program has
been undertaken in stages including:
preliminary internet-based research to identify leading retailers worldwide and to document
case studies on implementation of environmental best practices;
development of a greening retail website and searchable database of case studies;
documentation of the environmental best practices being implemented by 15 leading
retailers from around the world.
The results of the current research project are summarized below, and copies of the report will
be made available at the meeting.
The purpose of this research project is to examine the environmental best practices of 15 of the
leading retailers in the world to identify the strategies, tactics and tools they use to be
successful and to communicate this knowledge to the retail sector. This initiative is designed to
assist the sector in adopting sustainable practices, and demonstrate that undertaking these
initiatives can enhance their bottom line.
Internet-based research and consultation with industry experts was used to identify leading
retailers worldwide that were implementing environmental best practices. From that initial list of
retailers, effort was made to obtain a representative sample that reflects the broad spectrum of
retail in terms of merchandise, size, format, ownership structure and geography. It included
retailers in North America as well as in Europe and Asia. Once these leading retailers were
identified, further internet-based research was undertaken on each target company before
in-person or telephone interviews were conducted with key executives in the participating
companies. The companies interviewed and their country of origin is identified in the table
below.
The following table lists the corporate participants and their head office locations:
CompanyCountry Company Country
Aeon Japan Monoprix France
Alliance Boots U.K.Monsoon U.K.
Carrefour France Mountain Equipment Co-Op Canada
Home Depot Canada & U.S.Musgrave Group Ireland
H-E-B U.S.Tesco U.K.
IKEA Sweden Wal-Mart Canada & U.S.
LUSH U.K.Woolworths Company* Australia
Marks & Spencer U.K.
* unrelated to the U.K. or U.S. Woolworth Company
Interviews were structured to identify the strategies, tactics and tools used to address 14
categories of environmental best practices. This framework of environmental best practices is
outlined in the table that follows.
252
Framework of Environmental Best Practices
1Energy Efficiency and Conservation
2 Solid Waste
3 Green Products
4 Supply Chain and Purchasing
5 Transportation
6 Financial Impacts
7 Customer Education and Marketing
8 Benchmarks and Measurement Indicators
9 Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
11 Green Energy
12 Water Quality and Conservation
13 Incentives and Staff Training
14 Environmental Charity Giving
In addition, over the past two years, TRCA has been collecting brief stories of environmental
best practices from retailers around the globe and has, to date, collected information on almost
500 case studies. These have been summarized according to the 14-point framework, and the
stories are available in an interactive database on the TRCA website at www.greeningretail.ca.
Following the interviews, a report was prepared on each company and a summary report
written to identify the overall findings and best practices of all the retailers. Each of the
company reports is published as a separate case study. As well, a summary document was
prepared, which synthesized the findings of the case studies and recommended next steps.
Key Findings
The scope of the study makes it a challenge to distill the breadth and depth of information from
each retailer as company strategies varied widely according to such factors as merchandise
category, number of stores, format, size and ownership structure. The earliest adopters of
environmental best practices tend to be the grocery chains, followed by department stores and
other large space users, and then speciality stores. Some companies embraced sustainability
from the outset as it was ingrained in their culture, often from the founder.
Although the framework for achieving best practices varied among the retailers, there were
common threads including:
a deeply held conviction by the Chief Executive Officer/owner/founder/senior
management that the company must reduce its impact on the environment;
an environmental strategy and plan;
an environmental management structure;
staff who was appointed with environmental responsibilities at the head office and
store level;
external advisors to assist in developing the strategies and providing advice;
sustainable strategies, actions and indicators integrated into existing operations and
management structure;
policies with broad sustainability principles and specific functional or issue-related
policies; and
policies disseminated internally and, most often, externally.
253
The many reasons for adopting environmentally sustainable practices are compelling:
these actions generate lower costs and higher profits;
competitive pressures dictate environmental action;
customers expect it and will increasingly demand it;
energy supplies are dwindling and costs are uncontrollable;
landfills are overflowing;
water shortages, in terms of quality and quantity, are real;
access to new markets—according to the Stern Review, markets for low carbon
products and services are likely to exceed $500 billion per year by 2050 (
www.bitc.org);
improved reputation—“responsibility to the environment” is an important criterion for
customers in brand trust;
improved recruitment and retention—recent research has shown that nearly half of
all staff want to work for organizations with strong environmental policies. (
www.bitc.org); and
it is good risk management and a key part of corporate social responsibility.
Three strategic focuses have emerged, either individually or in combination including
operational, market transformation and supply chain. Each are described in detail below.
Operational
Many companies began the sustainability journey by undertaking the least expensive actions
and subsequently graduated to the more costly measures. The top three Return on Investment
(ROI) actions for most are as follows:
Appointing champions throughout the organization with responsibility for achieving 1.
sustainability goals.
Reducing energy: The four focal points for retailers in conserving energy are lighting 2.
(changing habits, reduction of wattage and retrofits), various building improvements,
refrigeration, and tracking usage and reductions. Major reductions were also found in
energy used for transportation. Improved logistics and modal shifts top the list of
transportation carbon emissions reduction. and
Reducing waste: Retailers acknowledge that major savings can be realized from 3.
waste reduction and recycling, but many have just begun to explore the options
available in this significant area of opportunity. Monetizing waste is a profitable
business.
Although not a major focus for most retailers, with increasing water shortages, more retailers
are beginning to turn their attention to using water more efficiently.
Almost all retailers are interested in developing their own green energy sources, but consider
the expenditure too high. Over half purchase green energy produced off-site.
Over 80 percent of the companies measure and track energy usage, waste produced and
diverted, CO2 emissions, transportation and water usage. Energy and waste top the list. Many
publish goals for reduction and track progress from benchmarks. Thirteen of the 15 companies
produce corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports and the other two will be doing so in the
near future. They also provide regular updates of sustainability policies and achievements,
typically every one to three years.
254
There were three main approaches to measuring success:
cost savings—focuses on reducing costs;1.
carbon emissions reduction—success is a reduction in CO2 emissions;2.
revenue generation—success through the sale of green products.3.
Market Transformation
This focus relates to the environmental impact that retailers have as a result of their influence on
customers. Over half of the companies have developed their own private brand green products.
As well, most retailers communicate their environmental information and policies to customers,
and find this a valuable way to develop and promote their brand and build customer loyalty.
Suppliers
This focus relates to the environmental impact that retailers have as a result of their influence on
their supply chain. Managing the supply chain is critically important because research
indicates that between 80 and 90 percent of the retailer’s total footprint comes from the
products that are carried. Virtually every retailer has established a procurement policy that
contains specific environmental standards.
The adoption of greener and more sustainable retailing practices among the leading
international retailers in this research was based on voluntary participation rather than on
regulatory control, though the spectre of impending regulation has generally spurred the
European and Asian companies to earlier endorsement.
Barriers
It is important to recognize and address the barriers that may prevent retailers from adopting
sustainable practices.
External Barriers
location in a shopping centre that does not have facilities to allow action, e.g., no
recycling, no water-saving fixtures, no control over heat and air conditioning;
poor urban design and lack of community resources, e.g., poor public transit, no
sidewalks, no green energy source, greenfield development, no opportunity for aquifers
or bio-swales; and
lack of a level playing field for shopping centre developers in terms of environmental
zoning and/or building requirements.
Internal Barriers
lack of awareness of the issues, solutions and opportunities;
lack of a champion;
not knowing how or where to start, overwhelmed by the range of potential activities or
the task of implementation across the organization;
lack of knowledge or information about products (e.g., which are the best light bulbs,
furnaces or building materials);
complicated technical language;
fear of expense and ability to compete;
time and expense required for certification;
255
fear of false claims or liability, accusations of “greenwashing”;
lack of knowledge about educating employees; and
difficulties in auditing and monitoring.
RATIONALE
The retail sector has the potential to effect significant change in society in a way that no other
industry can because of its broad reach. Retailers can define environmentally-oriented
purchasing requirements. At the store level, they can educate consumers. Retailers control and
act as the gatekeeper for the goods and services consumers are offered. As such, retailers
have the ability to influence behaviour and consumption patterns. Furthermore:
one in every eight workers in Canada is employed in retail;
there are 1.2 million retail and service business locations in Canada;
retail occupies 350 million sq.ft. of shopping centre space, 90 million sq.ft. in power
centres and 660 million sq.ft. of other retail space;
there is 30 sq.ft. of retail space per person in Canada;
in 2004, total Canadian retail trade was $346 billion; and
Ontario accounts for over 40% of Canadian retail space and sales.
The sheer scale of the retail sector points to the significant role it could play in building a
sustainable future. For example, even small inroads in the application of best practice across
the retail sector can have a significant impact. If just 5% of retailers and their suppliers in
Canada were to participate in energy reduction programs and achieved energy savings of 10%,
the estimated savings in year 1 would be:
at retail locations3.5 Pj (pica joules of energy)
at related supply chain8.0 Pj
at related transportation5.1 Pj
Total16.6 Pj
The magnitude of this potential savings is equivalent to the energy needs of 465,000 homes for
a year or taking 233,000 cars off the road for a year, and could reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions by 1.3 million tonnes.
The extent and influence of the retail sector and its suppliers makes their engagement in the
application of environmental best practices key to achieving the Sustainable Communities
objective under The Living City vision as well as meeting the sustainability and climate change
objectives of the various municipalities.
The findings of this research report provides the basis for developing programs with federal,
provincial and municipal governments to assist, encourage and require retailers to adopt
environmental best practices that are also good for the bottom line.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Complete the design and publication of the Greening Retail research summary report and
individual retailer case studies.
Distribute the reports to member municipalities as well as relevant federal and provincial
agencies.
256
Meet with member municipalities as well as appropriate federal and provincial agencies to
begin developing appropriate programs to accelerate adoption of environmental best
practices.
Undertake research to identify the environmental best practices of leading shopping centres
around the world to assist retailers and developers to jointly adopt environmental best
practices. This will incorporate a wide range of factors, including operations, buildings,
identification of standard requirements and green leases, to name a few.
Assess the feasibility of developing environmental sustainability guidelines for retailers and
shopping centres. The guidelines would be based largely on the results of the current and
planned research.
Update the website to include the new research and re-launch the program at the
International Council of Shopping Centres conference in Toronto in September.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
This program is funded out of the Community Transformation Program accounts, which
includes capital funding from municipal partners as well as funds raised from other levels of
government and the private sector. The research on environmental best practices of 15 leading
retailers from around the world was funded in large part by SmartCentres, the Founding
Sponsor of the program.
Report prepared by: Anne Reesor, extension 5202
Emails: areesor@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
Date: July 13, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A124/09 -ONTARIO'S GREEN ENERGY AND GREEN ECONOMY ACT, 2009
Implications for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and support
for the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009
Moved by:John Parker
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Chair send a letter of support
for the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 to the Minister of Energy and
Infrastructure;
THAT TRCA staff meet with staff from the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure to discuss
the potential for collaboration in transforming the market for renewable energy;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to report back to the Authority on the results
of the meeting with the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, and on the implications of
additional regulations that will be released under the Green Energy and Green Economy
Act, 2009.
257
AMENDMENT
RES.#A125/09
Moved by:John Parker
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT the following replace the first paragraph of the main motion:
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) applauds the promotion of
green energy throughout the Province of Ontario;
AND FURTHER THAT the second paragraph of the main motion be amended to read:
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff meet with staff from the Ministry of
Energy and Infrastructure to discuss the potential for collaboration in transforming the
market for renewable energy, with regard for the Green Energy and Green Economy Act,
2009;
THE AMENDMENT WASCARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WASCARRIED
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) applauds the promotion of
green energy throughout the Province of Ontario;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff meet with staff from the Ministry of
Energy and Infrastructure to discuss the potential for collaboration in transforming the
market for renewable energy, with regard for the Green Energy and Green Economy Act,
2009;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to report back to the Authority on the results
of the meeting with the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, and on the implications of
additional regulations that will be released under the Green Energy and Green Economy
Act, 2009.
BACKGROUND
On February 23, 2009 the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure introduced Bill 150, the Green
Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 (GEA), to the legislature and the bill was passed into law
on May 14, 2009. The stated purpose of the GEA is to:
"facilitate the development of a sustainable energy economy that protects the
environment while streamlining the approvals process, mitigates climate change,
engages communities and builds a world-class green industrial sector. It will enable all
Ontarians to participate and benefit from green energy as conservers and generators, at
the lowest cost to consumers."
258
The Province of Ontario believes that the Act will result in the creation of an estimated 50,000
jobs during the first three years.
The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 amends and repeals a variety of existing Acts
including:
Building Code Act, 1992;
Clean Water Act, 2006;
Conservation Authorities Act;
Conservation Land Act;
Co-operative Corporations Act;
Electricity Act;
Energy Conservation Leadership Act;
Energy Efficiency Act;
Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993;
Environmental Protection Act;
Greenbelt Act;
Ministry of Energy Act;
Ministry of Natural Resources Act;
Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act, 1998;
Ontario Water Resources Act;
Places to Grow Act, 2005;
Planning Act;
Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act, 2006;
Public Lands Act.
There are five key areas of focus for the GEA:
Renewable Energy Generation;1.
Role of LDC's and Municipal Governments;2.
Implementation of The Smart Grid;3.
Conservation and Demand Management;4.
Streamlining of Approvals.5.
Renewable Energy Generation
The GEA is largely focused on fostering the growth of renewable energy projects across the
Province. The Act creates the right to access the electricity grid, which would obligate the
transmitters and distributors to provide priority connection access to their systems for a
renewable energy generation facility that meets the economic tests that will be prescribed by
regulation. The regulations will contain the specific criteria that must be met by a renewable
energy generation facility in order for it to receive a priority connection access.
259
The Minister will be authorized to direct the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) to develop a feed-in
tariff (FIT) program that is designed to procure energy from renewable energy sources. Pricing
for the FIT has been released separate from the Bill for consultation and is outlined in the table
below. Public consultation on the feed-in-tarrif's is being conducted by OPA. Overall, the FIT
provides a range of prices for renewable energy from 80.2 cents per kWh for small roof or
ground mount solar PV installations to 10.3 cents per kWh for large landfill gas-based electricity
generators. The pricing has been developed by the OPA to reflect what they believe, through
research and consultation, is an adequate price to provide a reasonable rate of return on
investment for a project.
Feed-in Tarrif Proposed Price Schedule
Renewable FuelsCapacity Range Revised
Proposed Price
(¢/kWh)
Rooftop or Ground
Mounted Solar PV
< 10 kW 80.2
Rooftop Solar PV > 10 kW < 250 kW 71.3
Rooftop Solar PV > 250 kW < 500 kW 63.5
Rooftop Solar PV > 500 kW 53.9
Ground Mounted
Solar PV
> 10 kW < 10 MW 44.3
On-shore Wind Any size 13.5
Off-shore Wind Any size 19.0
Waterpower < 10 MW 13.1
Waterpower > 10 MW < 50 MW 12.2
Biomass < 10 MW 13.8
Biomass > 10 MW 13.0
Biogas < 500 kW 16.0
Biogas > 500 kW < 10 MW 14.7
Biogas > 10 MW 10.4
Landfill gas < 10 MW 11.1
Landfill gas > 10 MW 10.3
Role of LDC's and Municipal Governments
The GEA makes it clear that local distribution companies (LDC's) or distributors are required to
play a critical role in the implementation of the Province's emphasis on renewable energy and
conservation in Ontario's electricity sector. Amendments to the Electricity Act, 1998 and the
Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998 provide LDC's not only the tools, but the imperative, to facilitate
the increased presence of renewable energy generation, to continue its leadership role in
conservation and demand management, and to develop critical infrastructure for the building of
a smart grid in Ontario.
Through the GEA, the LDCs will be required to connect renewable energy generation facilities
and give them priority access to the grid in accordance with the regulations, market rules and
any licence issued by the Ontario Energy Board (OEB). An LDC will be required to prepare
plans and seek OEB approval for the expansion or reinforcement of its distribution system to
accommodate the connection of renewable energy generation facilities.
260
The GEA specifically permits a distributor to own a renewable energy generation facility that
does not exceed 10 megawatts (or such other capacity prescribed by regulations), a generation
facility that uses technology that produces thermal energy from a single source and/or energy
storage facility. The act also allows a municipality, municipal service board, city board or a
municipal service corporation to generate energy provided that the generation facility is a
renewable energy generation facility of less than 10 megawatts and that the generation facility
meets criteria, which are to be prescribed by the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure. The
GEA will give municipalities greater flexibility in establishing renewable energy generation
facilities and in structuring joint ventures with third parties for the renewable generation of
electricity.
Implementation of The Smart Grid
The GEA commits Ontario to the comprehensive development of a smart grid. The
implementation of smart grid technology across Ontario will have a profound effect on the
Province's transmission and distributions systems. The job of developing the smart grid
concept across the Province will be vested in transmitters and distributors. Every transmitter
and distributor will be required to submit to the OEB plans for the development and
implementation of the smart grid in their system.
Conservation and Demand Management
One of the tenets of the GEA is to create a culture of conservation. Consequently, the theme of
conservation and demand management runs throughout the amendments to the various Acts.
Various government departments and agencies will be tasked with ensuring the development
of energy efficiency, with the Environment Commissioner's office being responsible for
reporting on progress (both energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions reductions).
The GEA would further allow for "mandatory home efficiency disclosure" instead of mandatory
home energy audits for those attempting to sell or lease prescribed properties. A purchaser of
a residential property will now have the right to obtain "such information, reports or ratings as
are prescribed, relating to energy consumption and efficiency" before the seller can accept
their offer. The purchaser may, in writing, waive this right.
The building code will be amended to establish standards for conservation and to make
conservation a clear purpose of the code. The amendments would also require reviews of the
code every five years and a Building Code Energy Advisory Council is to be established to
advise on those energy conservation standards.
The GEA would provide authority for regulations requiring public agencies and prescribed
consumers to prepare energy conservation and demand management plans and report at
predetermined intervals. These plans will be required to include:
a summary of annual energy consumption for each of the public agency's operations;
a description and a forecast of the expected results of current and proposed activities and
measures to conserve the energy consumed by the public agency's operations and to
otherwise reduce the amount of energy consumed by the public agency;
a summary of the progress and achievements in energy conservation and other reductions
since the previous plan.
261
Streamlining of Approvals
Renewable Energy Facilitation Office
The GEA would establish the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office (REFO) to be led by a
renewable energy facilitator. The objects of the REFO will be to facilitate the development of
renewable energy projects and to assist proponents of such projects with approval and
procedural requirements at both federal and provincial levels of government.
Environmental Approvals
To promote and facilitate renewable energy projects, the amendments streamline the permitting
and approval process. A new class of approval has been added for renewable energy projects.
The amendments to the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) combine approval requirements
under the EPA and Ontario Water Resources Act (OWRA) into a single new renewable energy
approval.
Municipal Approvals
The GEA removes most of the municipal planning approval requirements for renewable energy
generation facilities and renewable energy projects, significantly reducing the role a local
municipality can play in regulating these facilities. However, the regulations propose that
proponents be required to provide public notice and conduct public consultation in the early
stages of project development, before detailed studies are undertaken. Once the detailed
studies are completed and the proponent is ready to submit an application to the Ontario
Ministry of the Environment (MOE), the proponent is required to conduct one or more
additional community consultations and is expected to be able to demonstrate to the Ministry
that they tried to address community issues and concerns. Once MOE has received a complete
application, they will post the project to the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) for a period of
public comment before commencing their formal review. Once MOE has made a decision on a
renewable energy project, third parties would have a 15-day period in which to appeal the
decision and the Environmental Tribunal that hears the appeal would have 90 days to respond.
A renewable energy generation facility or renewable energy project is also exempt from the
need for site plan approval and in municipalities with a development permit by-law, a
development permit will not be required. The Planning Act's demolition control provisions,
which are used by municipalities to prevent the demolition of residential buildings until a
demolition permit has been obtained, are no longer applicable to renewable energy generation
facilities and renewable energy projects.
The removal of most planning approval requirements for renewable energy generation facilities
and renewable energy projects will significantly reduce the ability of a municipality to regulate
these facilities. Certain tools available to municipalities, such as interim control by-laws, are
rendered inoperative by the GEA. Certain controls, however, will remain, such as tree cutting
by-laws, ravine control by-laws and property standards by-laws.
Implications for the Conservation Authorities Act
The GEA amend the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) related to the implementation of
Section 28 (1) Regulations (i.e. Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to
Shorelines and Watercourses Regulations). The GEA ACT amends Section 28(13) of the CA
Act by adding sub-section 13.1 as follows:
262
Grounds for refusing permission
(13.1) If the permission that the person requests is for development related to a
renewable energy project, as defined in section 1 of the Green Energy Act, 2009, the
authority or executive committee, as the case may be, (a) shall not refuse the permission
unless it is necessary to do so to control pollution, flooding, erosion or dynamic
beaches; and (b) shall not impose conditions unless they relate to controlling pollution,
flooding, erosion or dynamic beaches.
Under the current CA Act legislation, CAs may grant permission for development within
regulated areas, if in their opinion, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution
or the conservation of land will not be affected by the development. Additionally, permission is
required for the interference in any way with a watercourse or wetland. Renewable Energy
projects remain subject to Section 28(1) of the CA Act and will require permission if located
within a regulated area. However, the amendment to the CA Act removes "conservation of land"
as a consideration/reason for permit refusals or imposing of conditions on permit approvals for
renewable energy projects.
Proposed Regulations
On June 9, 2009 the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and MOE posted the first
proposed regulations under the GEA on the EBR. Both ministries issue approvals for
renewable energy projects and are proposing a new coordinated approach to administering
the process. Comments on both EBR postings are due on or before July 24, 2009.
Conservation Ontario has prepared a review of MNR's proposed process and will be submitting
comments on behalf of all conservation authorities.
The new and amended regulations posted to the EBR are intended to implement the GEA. The
EBR posting includes a discussion paper that sets out the “complete submission” requirements
for an application for a Renewable Energy Approval, including plans, studies, public notice and
community consultation, the general requirements for all facilities, and technology-specific
requirements that apply to the different types of facilities (i.e. land-based and off-shore wind
turbines, biogas anaerobic digesters, biomass thermal treatment, landfill gas facilities, hydro
electric facilities and solar photovoltaics).
MNR has also posted its proposed approval and permitting requirements for renewable energy
projects. The MNR requirements will need to be addressed as part of any renewable energy
project application to MOE.
Additional regulations are expected to be posted to the EBR in the late summer and fall. These
regulations will deal with issues such as renewable energy connecting to the existing grid,
definition of terms such as "biomass", "biogas" and "biofuel", along with others.
DISCUSSION
Through the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, the provincial government is
attempting to transform the market for renewable energy in Ontario. In doing so, it expects to
achieve significant gains in green energy related jobs (50,000 over three years) and reductions
in greenhouse gas emissions associated with the shift to renewable energy supplies and the
shift away from coal-fired generation.
263
Jurisdictions around the world are in a heated race to lead the development and deployment of
the next generation of technology(s) that will drive economic growth. The Green Energy and
Green Economy Act, 2009, is recognized as the leading energy policy legislation in North
America and is likely to be a beacon for capital investment and job growth.
Furthermore, in order for society to deal with the issue of climate change and the potential to
surpass critical concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, in the very near future,
this aggressive legislation which facilitates Ontario's movement to lower carbon energy
sources, is of global significance.
TRCA supports renewable energy technologies as part of Ontario's energy mix and has been
active in this field for more than 25 years. The Living City Campus at Kortright hosts the largest
renewable energy training facility in Canada, providing passive and active education and
training for homeowners and industry professionals. In more recent years, TRCA staff has
developed partnerships with the University of Toronto, York University and Ryerson University
to identify and address critical barriers to the transformation of the market for alternative energy
technologies. A draft report was prepared last year on the "Business Case for Alternative
Energy Technologies in Ontario" but needs to be updated based on the new feed-in-tarrif
prices. As well, a "Road Map for Renewable Energy in Ontario" was recently completed in
partnership with York University. The results of this later report and a subsequent workshop
with key stakeholders from municipal and provincial governments, universities and the private
sector to identify local issues, barriers and opportunities to facilitate deployment of renewable
energy technology, are the focus of a separate board report on Renewable Energy Roadmap
Discussion Paper and Workshop. Staff has also been monitoring renewable energy facilities in
the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) through the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program
(STEP) to better understand actual performance of renewable energy technologies.
TRCA also owns a number of renewable energy installations at The Living City Campus at
Kortright and the Restoration Services Centre. All but one of these facilities are configured for
net-metering, meaning that the facility only pays for electricity in excess of what it generates.
One facility on the Archetype Sustainable House produces 4 kW of electricity under OPA's
previous Standard Offer Program (SOP), thus providing a small amount of revenue. In
partnership with Sanyo Canada, TRCA is investigating the potential for a 10 kW solar PV
installation at the campus under the new FIT program. The new FIT program provides TRCA
with the opportunity to generate revenue with its existing renewable energy installations and the
potential for revenue from future installations.
Staff believe that TRCA's current activities including market transformation programs, STEP, as
well as education and training at The Living City Campus at Kortright, will assist the Province in
achieving its goal to be a leader in renewable energy. Furthermore, there are a number of
significant opportunities for TRCA to play an even larger role in transforming the renewable
energy market in Ontario. Details of these opportunities can be found in the board report on
Renewable Energy Discussion Paper and Workshop.
264
While there are many opportunities with the GEA and associated regulations, as posted on the
EBR they do not adequately advise proponents of the conservation authority's regulatory
mandate and need for consultation and permits. Pre-consultation with conservation authority
staff is critically important to ensuring adequate technical assessment and timely approvals
later on. As such, staff believe that the proposed regulations will cause confusion, delays in
obtaining appropriate permits and could result in significant environmental damage. For
example, proponents that lack awareness of the need for review and permits from a
conservation authority could result in incomplete submissions to MOE and thus result in project
delays. Where the incomplete submission is not identified, the proponent could undertake
works that require a permit, thus resulting in a violation and environmental impacts. In the
proposed regulations, conservation authorities will have to monitor the EBR posting in order to
identify renewable energy projects that require review and potentially permits for works. This
will not result in timely review and input. Staff believe that this would not be an efficient process
and would likely confuse proponents and result in unnecessary delays in project reviews and
approvals. Conservation Ontario is aware of this issue and will be submitting comments to the
ministries on behalf of all conservation authorities.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Prepare a letter from the Authority to the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure in support of
the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009.
Meet with staff from the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure to identify TRCA's renewable
Energy activities and discuss the potential for collaboration.
Report back to the Authority, on the results of meetings with the Ministry of Energy and
Infrastructure and the additional regulations and guidelines that will be released in the fall.
Report prepared by: Bernie McIntyre, ext 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, ext 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
Date: July 14, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A126/09 -RENEWABLE ENERGY ROADMAP DISCUSSION PAPER AND
WORKSHOP
Identifying strategic actions needed to transform the market for
renewable energy.
Moved by:Maria Augimeri
Seconded by:John Parker
THAT the report "Ontario's Road Map to Prosperity: Developing Renewable Energy to its
Full Potential" be received;
THAT the report "Developing Ontario's Green Energy and Green Economy Act to its Full
Potential: Results of a Practical Workshop - June 19, 2009" be approved;
265
AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to undertake consultations with municipalities,
local distribution companies, universities and the private sector to identify areas where
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) can play a significant role in the
deployment of renewable energy technologies.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Adoption of renewable energy technology has been identified as one of the key areas where
society can address the issue of climate change and significantly reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. TRCA has a 50-year history of environmental management and sustainable
development and through Kortright Centre for Conservation, including The Living City Campus
at Kortright, has been involved in renewable energy education and training for more than 25
years. In fact The Living City Campus at Kortright boasts Canada's largest renewable energy
training facility, The Power Trip Trail, providing passive and active education and training for
home owners and industry professionals. Recently, TRCA staff has developed partnerships with
the University of Toronto, York University and Ryerson University to identify and address critical
barriers to the transformation of the market for renewable energy technologies. Staff has also
been monitoring renewable energy facilities in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) through the
Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP) to better understand actual performance.
Furthermore, renewable energy technologies were incorporated into the Archetype Sustainable
House and staff will be developing new programming to complement this new opportunity.
The Renewable Energy Roadmap is a project designed to build on TRCA's current renewable
energy experience and initiatives to identify strategic leverage points (opportunities) for TRCA
and its partners to transform the marketplace for renewable energy in the GTA, and beyond.
In this project, staff compiled and synthesized all of the recommendations and issues identified
in key documents published by governments, nongovernment organizations and industry
associations. The matrix that was created was used as the basis for retaining researchers at
York University to undertake interviews with renewable energy experts, and prepare a report
identifying barriers to deployment of renewable energy in Ontario and practical solutions to
those barriers. Copies of the report prepared by York University will be made available at the
meeting.
As the roadmap report was being completed, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure was
releasing Bill 150, The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 (GEA). Review of the GEA
by staff at TRCA and York University indicated that although the GEA is on the cutting edge of
renewable energy legislation in North America, there are still outstanding barriers that need to
be addressed. To assist with moving the agenda foreword with the GEA and to identify parts of
the roadmap that have not yet been addressed by the GEA, TRCA and York University held a
workshop with industry experts to complete a gap analysis and identify recommendations for
next steps. The workshop, held June 19, 2009, featured speakers from the Ministry of Energy
and Infrastructure, York University, the City of Toronto and the Lord Mayor of Freiburg
Germany. There were 35 attendees at the workshop with one third from municipalities, one
third from industry and one third a mix of Local Distribution Companies (LDC) and universities.
266
A copy of the workshop report will be made available at the meeting. The gap analysis
indicated that there are many barriers that have not yet been addressed by the GEA and that
there are also key recommendations in the roadmap that have not been addressed by the GEA.
The outstanding recommendations include:
Provide new funding (e.g. loan guarantees) to facilitate access to zero interest loans for
financing renewable energy systems in residences and small businesses throughout
Ontario.
Re-focus existing budget commitments to develop new renewable energy training initiatives
in colleges and universities and to fund professional secondments (essential to develop
local capacity and meet growing renewable energy market needs).
Provide new funding to create municipal funds (similar to the Toronto Atmospheric Fund)
that allow municipalities and LDCs to provide revolving loans for renewable energy systems
in schools and other municipal buildings.
Replenish Ontario’s Community Power Fund so it can be expanded.
Start a province-wide renewable energy promotion program that builds on the Every
Kilowatt Counts program to promote Ontario’s renewable energy programs and to increase
awareness about the multiple benefits of renewable energy.
Create a highly visible province-wide network of education and demonstration centres and
projects (fixed-site and mobile) to ensure that Ontarians can see and experience renewable
energy and other environmental technologies in action. Existing model examples of these
initiatives include The Living City Campus at Kortright, Evergreen’s Brick Works site and
Toronto's Exhibition Place.
The Province of Ontario and relevant authorities, in cooperation with municipalities and
LDCs, should begin the transition to smart grid infrastructure.
Storage should become a priority for expanding and firming up renewable sources.
The Province should implement groundbreaking strategies to develop a strong local
manufacturing industry for renewable technologies.
The Provincial Sales Tax exemption for renewable energy developers should be renewed.
New educational and training initiatives should be implemented to develop local capacity
and to establish effective international partnerships with leading jurisdictions.
Develop a new Ontario-based effort to collaborate actively with leading international
renewable energy agencies (e.g. International Feed-in Cooperation, International
Renewable Energy Agency) so local capacity can be developed in a sustained manner and
to position Ontario as a leading international ‘know-how’ jurisdiction.
The intent of the Roadmap workshop was to provide a practical contribution to the
implementation of the GEA and staff believe that it has accomplished that task. The report on
the workshop results and the workshop presentations will be provided to the workshop
attendees as well as all of the individuals invited to the workshop for all to consider in moving
the renewable energy agenda forward.
The intent of the Roadmap project overall was to assist TRCA in identifying the strategic role it
could play in helping to transform the market for renewable energy. Given the history that
TRCA has in renewable energy, its strength in education and training, public and business
outreach as well as the new playing field that the GEA has created with new roles and
responsibilities for Local Distribution Companies and municipalities and the change in the
business case for deployment of renewable technologies, presents a significant opportunity for
TRCA to play a strategic role.
267
In order to identify the key areas for TRCA to contribute to this new future for renewables, staff
are proposing to undertake a series of consultations with municipalities, LDC's, provincial
agencies, the private sector and universities. The results of the consultations will be
synthesized into a renewable energy strategy for TRCA to work with its partners in new and
expanded roles.
In the meantime, TRCA is proceeding to explore opportunities through Partners in Project
Green and through staff involvement with the Social Housing Services Corporation and GLOBE.
RATIONALE
Deployment of renewable energy technologies including the smart grid and energy storage
technologies are arguably the most important actions society can take, at this time, in order to
mitigate climate change. Other areas of activity are very important, including, existing building
energy retrofits, green building construction and urban intensification, but have implementation
timeframes that exceed the projected time it will take for atmospheric carbon dioxide
concentrations to reach levels that will irreparably harm the earth's ecosystems.
TRCA is in a position, through The Living City Campus at Kortright, to work with partners in all
levels of government, the community and the private sector, to speed the deployment of
renewable energy technology and begin to have a significant, measurable impact on climate
change mitigation.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Total cost for this project was approximately $56,000 over two years and was funded through
the Community Transformation Program accounts with Peel Climate Change Mitigation funding.
Funding for additional work has not yet been identified.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
prepare a Request for Proposal and retain a consultant for the consultation process;
undertake a SWOT (strength/weakness/opportunities/threats) analysis of TRCA with respect
to renewable energy;
undertake consultations with municipalities, LDC's, provincial agencies, universities and the
private sector.
prepare a renewable energy strategy and business case for TRCA.
Report prepared by: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
Date: July 14, 2009
_________________________________________
268
RES.#A127/09 -ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AMENDMENT ACT
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority comments in support of
Environmental Protection Amendment Act (Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Trading) 2009 – Bill 185.
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) comments outlined in
Attachment 1 be approved for submission to the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR);
THAT the TRCA Chair send a letter to the Minister of the Environment requesting TRCA’s
participation on the stakeholder group to assist the Province of Ontario with the
development of protocols and legislation related to Bill 185;
THAT staff be directed to undertake preliminary actions provided in this report to ensure
rigorous delivery and positioning of TRCA initiatives that have the potential to provide
offsets under the proposed legislation;
AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report back to the Authority on incorporation of
Bill 185 objects in TRCA’s programs once the draft protocols and regulations have been
released.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Bill 185 is “An Act to amend the Environmental Protection Act with respect to greenhouse gas
emissions trading and other economic and financial instruments and market-based
approaches.” Bill 185 re-affirms and clarifies the authority of the government to set up an
emissions trading system for greenhouse gases (GHGs) by creating relevant regulations, and
adds a definition for GHGs. It is promoted by the Ministry of the Environment.
Status
Bill 185 was carried through first reading on May 27, 2009. The first comment period started in
December, 2008. Feedback has been reviewed and included in a second discussion paper
issued in June, 2009, “Moving Forward, A Greenhouse Gas Cap-and-Trade System for
Ontario”. Comments are being received on the EBR until July 26, 2009. Further consultation is
foreseen through the fall of 2009. The second reading would happen after legislature resumes
in fall, 2009.
Key Implications and Opportunities
Bill 185 has only received first reading. As no draft regulations have been released, it is difficult
to assess the full implications of the Act on TRCA initiatives. However, this presents an
opportunity for TRCA to work with the Province of Ontario to shape the regulations.
269
Areas of TRCA’s Interest
Conservation authorities own significant amounts of land within the Province that present
opportunities for afforestation and agriculture related offsets. TRCA and other conservation
authorities have an excellent track record as key providers of outreach, training and compliance
support for business emitters. Furthermore, TRCA’s role in supporting industry transition
through Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone (PPG) and Community
Transformation Programs is significant in this context.
TRCA’s programming will likely interact with the cap-and-trade system through:
provision of services to large emitters in capped sectors, e.g. the participation of those 1.
businesses in PPG initiatives (the following sectors are likely to be regulated in a
cap-and-trade system: base metal, cement, chemical, electricity, lime, natural gas,
petroleum, pulp and paper, and steel);
facilitation/delivery of offset generating projects (afforestation, agriculture and waste 2.
management);
aggregation of offsets generated within TRCA’s jurisdiction;3.
facilitation/delivery of education and training regarding the legislation, and means of 4.
generating and buying/selling offsets; and
development and deployment of tools to help calculate GHG emission offsets (in progress 5.
through PPG).
There are potential opportunities for TRCA in the following areas:
forestry;1.
eco-efficiency;2.
green building retrofits;3.
resource reutilization4.
renewable energy/district management;5.
transportation solutions;6.
policy harmonization;7.
green jobs.8.
Forestry
TRCA is one of the largest landowners in the GTA. TRCA has completed a carbon forest
feasibility analysis to determine the potential of providing offsets through afforestation projects.
A detailed inventory of forestry is currently underway with an objective to establish baseline and
measures to develop Ontario's first afforestation based offset project.
Action:
Given the references to the U.S. federal legislation, and the likelihood that the
provincial program will align with the Western Climate Initiative and Government of
Canada legislation, TRCA staff will familiarize themselves with any protocols for
baseline creation and performance measurement created under those schemes, and
ensure that projects are delivered in a manner that will allow TRCA and its partners to
justify emission offset claims.
270
Being one of the largest and most experienced natural resource management
agencies in the Province, TRCA must initiate the dialogue with partners and the
Province to lead research and develop protocols to quantify carbon capture from
riparian ecosystems, wetlands and other regeneration efforts, if required by the
Province.
Eco-Efficiency
Programs to encourage energy and water conservation and waste reduction are currently
underway through PPG and TRCA’s Community Transformation Programs.
Action:
Ensure that eco-efficiency, audits/energy plan consider offset calculation protocols
and help to establish compliant baselines/benchmarks.
Implementation should include performance measures compliance with provincial or
other recognized protocols.
Seek legal advice and structure contracts with funders and participating businesses to
assign offsets commensurate to the level of support provided for eco-efficiency
projects.
Green Building Retrofits
A number of initiatives at TRCA seek to demonstrate green building technologies and
performance (e.g. Archetype Sustainable House, PPG, Sustainable Technologies Evaluation
Program).
Action:
Ensure that retrofit studies consider offset calculation protocols and help to establish
compliance baselines/benchmarks.
Implementation should include performance measures compliant with provincial or
other recognized protocols.
Seek legal advice and structure contracts with funders and participating businesses to
assign offsets commensurate to the level of support provided for green building
projects.
Resource Reutilization
Feasibility studies to identify opportunity for developing a regional waste exchange and
potential for bio-gas in the Pearson Eco-Business Zone are currently underway.
Action:
Bill 185 specifically identifies waste management as an approved offset category.
PPG’s wastewater management projects will be relevant. TRCA recommends that this
scenario be contemplated in Bill 185 and its future regulations.
TRCA recommends that provincial protocols for baselines and measurement are
practical, and that any projects in the meantime use methodologies accepted in other
jurisdictions.
Waste-to-energy is not discussed at all in the discussion paper for Bill 185. This seems
to be an oversight. TRCA to provide comment on this issue to the Province.
271
Renewable Energy/District Energy
A feasibility study to identify the potential for a district energy system around Pearson Airport is
being initiated through PPG.
Action:
Bill 185 does not reference district energy at all. It is unclear how offsets from district
energy would be handled. TRCA to work with the Province to seek clarification on this
issue, and, ideally recognition of district energy as an offset generator.
The PPG Feasibility Study should consider the implications of this legislation and
projected regulations, as well as the potential value of offsets.
Through TRCA's role in plan review, proponents should be encouraged to incorporate
district energy systems.
Transportation Solutions
PPG is working with Metrolinx to develop a Transportation Management Association (TMA).
Staff is also working with the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) and Canadian Tire on
the business case for hydrogen at their facilities.
Action:
Staff to look into the feasibility of claiming offsets from fuel switching or fuel
conservation initiatives implemented as part of the TMA. TRCA’s right to these offsets
should be established contractually.
Bill 185 does not address transportation-related emissions at all. If the potential for
offsets through sustainable transportation is contemplated, then acceptable baselines
and performance measures will be critical.
Policy Harmonization
A Policy harmonization initiative is currently underway to provide recommendations for
municipal policies within the Pearson Eco-Business Zone to encourage green development and
retrofit projects.
If partner municipalities are going to want to claim credit for the reductions associated with their
policies, they will need an acceptable baseline before they enact the policy, and an acceptable
means of measuring offsets afterwards. It should be noted that once municipalities regulate an
activity e.g. energy performance targets for buildings, the owners of those buildings cannot
claim the offsets. Therefore, regulating energy performance might remove a financial incentive
to businesses, which could use the sale of the offsets to finance any increased capital cost.
TRCA is undertaking an update to its policy framework and assisting municipalities with their
official plan reviews.
Actions:
Staff to work with municipalities to ensure a balanced approach is adopted when
municipalities are contemplating polices to require renewable energy, energy
performance, or to generally reduce emissions e.g. through transit-oriented
development.
272
Municipal action to reduce energy used to convey or treat wastewater may also
generate offsets, as per the current Bill 185. Municipal agricultural and forested lands
may also generate offsets. Staff to work with municipalities to contractually clarify
offset allocation for joint projects.
Green Jobs
TRCA is currently working with a variety of partners to facilitate a green jobs program across
TRCA's jurisdiction and specifically within the Pearson Eco-Business Zone. Training programs
are offered at The Living City Campus at Kortright.
Bill 185 and the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 will create demand for skills to:
develop a baseline and measure greenhouse gas emissions; verify offsets; develop and
administer contracts associated with generating offsets; and develop and install renewable
energy technologies. Internships that build these skills would be valuable. Building skills to
develop and install renewable energy technologies is important not just to position youth for the
future green jobs market, but also to help existing industries make the transition to a ‘green
economy’. Trades training for renewable energy installation will also be important (e.g. for the
construction of geoexchange systems and solar installations).
Action:
TRCA to partner with universities, colleges, businesses and government agencies to
develop and pilot the training and placement of youth and new Canadians as needed.
TRCA to expand existing training programs for trades.
CONCLUSIONS
A recurring theme is that of the need for a compliance baseline. If TRCA wishes to claim offsets
from these initiatives, then it will be critical that a rigorous baseline is established. The Province
has yet to table draft protocols for baseline calculation. A second related recurring theme is the
need for compliant performance measurement.
Many of the initiatives being implemented as part TRCA programs will reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. Without an acceptable baseline and performance measurement, the Province may
not recognize emission reductions, making them ineligible for participation in the emissions
trading program.
For projects where emission reductions could be substantial, such as green building retrofits,
TRCA needs to retain technical expertise now to ensure that the delivery of these initiatives is as
rigorous as possible, increasing the likelihood that offsets can be claimed in the future.
273
Ownership of offsets will be a complicated area as there will be multiple interests. Staff will be
seeking legal advise to ensure that all contracts with funders and participating businesses
assign ownership of resulting offsets to TRCA as appropriate.
Report prepared by: Chandra Sharma, extension 5237
Emails: csharma@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Chandra Sharma, extension 5237
Emails: csharma@trca.on.ca
Date: July 15, 2009
Attachments: 1
274
Attachment 1
July 24, 2009 EBR Registry Number 010-6740
VIA FACSIMILE: (416) 314 4128
Mr. Steve Borg
Ministry of the Environment
Integrated Environment Policy Division
Air Policy Instruments and Programs Branch
135 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 4
Toronto, ON M4V 1P5
Dear Mr. Borg:
Re: Comments in Support of Environmental Protection Amendment Act (Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Trading) 2009 – Bill 185
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) applauds the Minister's efforts in enhancing
the Environmental Protection Act (EPA). TRCA is pleased to provide comments on Bill 185 and
the second discussion paper issued in June, 2009, “Moving Forward, A Greenhouse Gas
Cap-and-Trade System for Ontario”, and we look forward to working with the Province of
Ontario to shape the regulations.
TRCA has been involved in climate change mitigation for years and is committed to taking
immediate action and providing leadership to support communities and partners in dealing with
climate change issues. TRCA is working with industry leaders to promote green technology
adoption as a way to reduce threats to the Toronto region's resources while building a
sustainable economy. TRCA’s climate change plan, “Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change:
TRCA Action Plan for The Living City”, identifies several community transformation actions to
meet our local and provincial greenhouse reduction objectives. Establishment of North
America's largest eco-business zone within the 12,000 ha Industrial Commercial Institutional
(ICI) area surrounding Pearson Airport is one of TRCA’s major climate change mitigation
initiatives.
Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone (PPG), a partnership between the
Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), Region of Peel, City of Toronto, City of Mississauga,
City of Brampton and TRCA, aims at transforming the lands surrounding Toronto Pearson into
an internationally recognized eco-business zone. TRCA’s goal is to have the companies
recognized globally as the greenest in their sectors, and have the area itself become the first
place progressive, green-tech communities look to locate. The Pearson Eco-Business Zone
currently represents 12,500 businesses and 350,000 jobs, making it Canada's largest
employment area, with transportation/warehousing, automotive supply chain, food processing,
aerospace and plastics being the largest sectors; approximately 5.8 million megawatt hours of
electricity-use, with manufacturing and transportation/warehousing being the largest
consumers; and approximately 108,600,000 m³ of potable water use, with the
transportation/warehousing sector being the largest consumer.
275
The following sectors are likely to be regulated in a cap-and-trade system: base metal, cement,
chemical, electricity, lime, natural gas, petroleum, pulp and paper, and steel. TRCA’s
programming will likely interact with the Cap and Trade system through:
a)provision of services to large emitters in capped sectors, e.g. the participation of those
businesses in PPG initiatives;
c)facilitation/delivery of offset generating projects;
d)aggregation of offsets generated within TRCA’s jurisdiction;
e)facilitation/delivery of education and training regarding the legislation and means of
generating and buying/selling offsets; and
f)development and deployment of tools to help calculate greenhouse gas (GHG) emission
offsets.
TRCA’s provides the following comments on Bill 185 and related discussion papers for your
consideration.
Alignment with Existing Initiatives: The proposed American Clean Energy and Security Act of
2009 is now being reviewed. The Waxman-Markey Bill sets up a carbon trading system for the
United States. Given the importance of its influence on other markets, it is believed that the
American system may indirectly dictate how other systems will look. Alignment of Ontario's
proposed system with the proposed system in the United States will avoid competitive
prejudice to Ontario businesses.
As well, duplication with the proposed federal emission trading regulations should be avoided.
Ontario's system will also align with the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) (BC, MB, ON, QC and
seven U.S. states). We look forward to working with the Province to ensure that proposed
legislation and protocols are practical and align with the existing systems.
Role of Conservation Authorities: TRCA has an excellent track record as key providers of
outreach, training and compliance support for business emitters. TRCA owns a significant
amount of land that presents opportunities for afforestation and agriculture related offsets.
Furthermore, TRCA’s role in supporting industry transition through PPG will be significant in this
context. Consultation with the Greater Toronto Area's (GTA) large business sector impacted by
regulation can be facilitated through PPG. It is recommended that the role of TRCA and others
should be clearly identified and supported in the proposed legislation.
Early Action Emission Reduction Projects: Bill 185 encourages large emitters to take early
actions to reduce emissions. TRCA recommends that early action credits and offsets before the
compliance stage should be allowed.
Incentives for Early Action: Incentives for early action should be provided to make it easier for
utility companies and businesses to provide the energy consumption information needed to
generate accurate benchmarks so that early action credits can be determined fairly and in as
straightforward a manner as possible.
Offset Projects: Agriculture, forestry and waste management projects have been identified for
priority approval:
276
a)Offsets from waste management appear to be limited only to landfill gas recovery and
municipal wastewater management plants. Wastewater is a waste resource, which could be
used by another company to displace potable water or to extract heat prior to discharge to
the sanitary sewer system. TRCA recommends that management of industrial wastewater
that results on GHG reductions should be considered in Bill 185 and its future regulations.
b)Waste-to-energy is not discussed at all in the discussion paper for Bill 185. The Green
Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 might allow for the construction of waste-to-energy
facilities with huge potential for GHG reduction. Waste-to-energy projects should be
considered as an approved offset category in future regulation.
c)Conservation authorities own significant amounts of land within the Province. These lands
present opportunities for afforestation and agriculture related offsets. The role of
conservation authorities as potential generators of offsets through afforestation and
agriculture should be contemplated in future legislation. Furthermore, TRCA will be
interested in leading research and developing protocols to quantify carbon capture from
riparian ecosystems, wetlands and other regeneration efforts, if required by the Province.
d)It is currently unclear how offsets from renewable energy projects would be valued and
would be allowed to participate in a cap-and-trade scheme. Clarity is required on how
offsets generated from renewable energy projects will be treated to provide early direction
and to ensure that such projects have value.
e)Bill 185 does not reference district energy at all. Recognition of district energy as an offset
generator and further clarification in this area is required.
f)Bill 185 does not address transportation-related emissions at all. Offsets from transportation
projects such as fuel switching or fuel conservation initiatives should be considered within
the proposed regulation to encourage and promote sustainable transportation.
We look forward to working with the Province on the proposed legislation and protocols. Please
do not hesitate to contact Chandra Sharma, Etobicoke Mimico Watershed Specialist at
416-661-6600, extension 5237, should you have any further questions regarding our comments.
Yours truly,
Brian E. Denney
Chief Administrative Officer
cc: Toby Lennox, VP Corporate Affairs, GTAA and Chair of Partners in Project Green:
Pearson Eco-Business Zone
Don Pearson, General Manager, Conservation Ontario
_________________________________________
277
RES.#A128/09 -CITY OF PICKERING
Addition of a parcel of TRCA-owned land to the Management Agreement,
CFN 24310. Request from the City of Pickering to add a parcel of Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority-owned land to the Management
Agreement for dogs off leash purposes.
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
WHEREAS the City of Pickering manages a number of parcels of Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) owned lands for park and recreation purposes under a
consolidated management agreement;
AND WHEREAS from time to time by mutual agreement, additional TRCA-owned lands
may be added to the agreement;
AND WHEREAS THE CITY OF PICKERING has requested that certain TRCA-owned lands
located south of the 3rd Concession, west of Valley Farm Road, City of Pickering be
added to the management agreement for dogs off leash purposes;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT that the former Clarendon Woods Ltd. property,
in the vicinity of the 3rd Concession and Valley Farm Road, further described as Part of
Lots 22 and 23, Concession 2, City of Pickering, containing 102 acres, more or less, be
added to the Management Agreement, subject to the following condition:
1.the City of Pickering carry out a site analysis and develop a site plan for the dogs off
leash area within the former Clarendon Woods Ltd. property in compliance with
TRCA's Policy and Operational Procedures for Managing Domestic Animals;
2.approval by TRCA staff of the site plan in a form satisfactory to TRCA staff;
3.any terms and conditions required by TRCA staff and, as necessary, solicitor;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect to the agreement, including the obtaining of necessary
approvals and the execution and signing of any documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #5/06, held on June 23, 2006, Resolution #A135/06 approved a master
management agreement between the City of Pickering and TRCA.
At Authority Meeting #6/03, held on July 25, 2003, Resolution #A157/03 approved the Policy
and Operational Procedures for Managing Domestic Animals, which was amended by
Resolution #A48/09 at Authority Meeting #3/09, held on April 24/09.
278
The City of Pickering has been working with a community group for over a year to establish a
dogs off leash park within the City. As a result, TRCA is in receipt of a request from the City to
add a parcel of TRCA-owned land to the Management Agreement for dogs off leash purposes.
The subject property is located on the south side of the 3rd Concession, west of Valley Farm
Road adjacent to the former Brock West Sanitary Land Fill Site as shown on the attached
sketch. This property is approximately 102 acres in size and staff feel that a dogs off leash area
can be developed within the parcel that will meet the intent of TRCA's Policy and Operational
Procedures for Managing Domestic Animals.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The City of Pickering will be responsible for all costs including taxes associated with the
management and operations of the lands, including the proposed dogs off leash park. TRCA
retains the right to approve any park development proposed by the City.
Report prepared by: Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Emails: @trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Emails: @trca.on.ca
Date: July 21, 2009
Attachments:1
279
Attachment 1
_________________________________________
280
RES.#A129/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed
Silverbrook Homes, Regional Municipality of York, CFN 42536.
Acquisition of property located at 607 Gamble Road in Town of
Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, under the 'Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010,' Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Rouge River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B79/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT 0.67 hectares (1.66 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Part of Lot 5,
Registered Plan 4667 and designated as Block 6 on draft M-Plan prepared by
Rady-Pentek & Edward Surveying Ltd. under job no. 07-253, Town of Richmond Hill,
Regional Municipality of York at 607 Gamble Road, be purchased from Silverbrook
Homes;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A130/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek Watershed,
Regional Municipality of Durham
Amit Gupta, CFN 42591. Acquisition of a conservation easement, located
at 464 Toynevale Road , south of Highway 401, and west of Rosebank
Road, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham.
(Executive Res.#B80/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
281
THAT a conservation easement for the protection of the environmental features and
functions containing 0.40 hectares (0.99 acres), more or less, consisting of an irregular
shaped parcel of land being Part of Lot 121, Registered Plan No. 350 and designated as
Part 2 & 3 on the draft R-plan prepared by Donevan Fleischmann Petrich Ltd., Job No.
2009-62-1, City of Pickering, be purchased from Amit Gupta;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT Amit Gupta be responsible for the cost of preparing a survey to identify the
conservation easement;
THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete the
transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to
the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A131/09 -CITY OF VAUGHAN
Request for a Permanent Easement to Maintain the Southern Portion of
Existing Stormwater Management Pond No. 98, Humber River
Watershed, Regional Municipality of York, CFN 42592. Receipt of a
request from the City of Vaughan to provide a permanent easement for
the maintenance of the southern portion of existing Stormwater
Management Pond No. 98, east of Vaughan Mills Road, north of
Langstaff Road, in the City of Vaughan.
(Executive Res.#B81/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from the City of Vaughan to provide a permanent easement for the maintenance of the
southern portion of existing Stormwater Management Pond No. 98, east of Vaughan Mills
Road, north of Langstaff Road, in the City of Vaughan;
AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in
furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conversation Authorities Act, to
cooperate with the City of Vaughan in this instance;
282
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of
0.069 hectares (0.170 acres), more or less, be granted to the City of Vaughan for the
maintenance of the southern portion of existing Stormwater Management Pond No. 98,
said land being Part of Block 36, Registered Plan 65M-2871, City of Vaughan, Regional
Municipality of York, as shown on a Proposed Easement Plan prepared by the City of
Vaughan Engineering Department, received on June 19, 2009;
THAT consideration is to be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other
costs to be paid by the City of Vaughan;
THAT the City of Vaughan is to fully indemnify and save harmless TRCA from any and all
claims for injuries, damages or loss of any nature resulting in any way either directly or
indirectly from this easement or the carrying out of construction;
THAT an archaeological investigation be conducted before any site disturbance with any
mitigative measures required being carried out all at the expense of the City of Vaughan;
THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained prior to the
commencement of construction;
THAT all TRCA valleylands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated / stabilized
following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan
be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA
landscaping guidelines;
THAT the granting of this easement is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural
Resources in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O.
1990, Chapter C.27 as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A132/09 -REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TRCA-OWNED LAND
Rear of 2157 Lakeshore Boulevard West
City of Toronto
Waterfront, CFN 41447. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) is in receipt of a request from Lorraine Properties Limited for the
sale of a parcel of TRCA land located south of 2157 Lakeshore Boulevard
West, City of Toronto, Lake Ontario waterfront.
(Executive Res.#B82/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
283
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of an offer
from Lorraine Properties Limited to purchase a parcel of TRCA land located south of 2175
Lakeshore Boulevard West;
WHEREAS it is in the best interests of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to complete a sale to Lorraine Properties
Limited in this instance;
AND WHEREAS the subject parcel is not regulated by TRCA;
AND WHEREAS the City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation staff and the Ministry
of Natural Resource's staff have no objection to the disposal;
AND WHEREAS the appropriate public consultation has been undertaken in conjunction
with the City of Toronto's planning and development application process;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a parcel of TRCA land containing 0.077 acres,
more of less, located south of 2157 Lakeshore Boulevard West, being Part of Water Lots
in front of Lots 9 and 10, Registered Plan 1229, City of Toronto (formerly City of
Etobicoke) be sold to Lorraine Properties Limited;
THAT the purchase price be $370,000;
THAT said conveyance is subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27 as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be authorized and directed to take
whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of
necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A133/09 -GUILD INN REVITALIZATION AND REDEVELOPMENT
Agreement with City of Toronto and Centennial College, CFN 23035.
Request to enter into an agreement with City of Toronto and Centennial
College for the revitalization and redevelopment of the Guild Inn, City of
Toronto.
(Executive Res.#B83/09)
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
WHEREAS the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is the owner of the
Guild Inn and the City of Toronto leases the subject lands;
284
AND WHEREAS TRCA is in receipt of a request from Centennial College and the City of
Toronto to enter into agreements for the revitalization and redevelopment of the Guild Inn;
AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to enter into these agreements in this
instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA officials be directed to take the following
actions:
1.negotiate and settle any amendments required to the head lease to carry out the City's
requirements;
2.to review and approve, as may be appropriate, the proposed sublease between the
City of Toronto and Centennial College or its nominee;
3.if required, obtain the Minister's approval of any amendment to the lease between
TRCA and the City of Toronto;
4.make such arrangements and obtain such issuances as are reasonable as to the
condition of the lands at the termination of the head lease;
5.ensure any development adequately protects and does not interfere with the TRCA's
interest in and activities on the Bluffs and in areas regulated by TRCA;
6.require any development is covered by bonds, insurance and indemnities that
adequately protects TRCA against liens and third party liability during the term of the
lease;
7.approve site plans and development that are in accordance with TRCA and the City of
Toronto's requirements; and
8.generally grant approvals, give consents and enter into such agreements and take all
such other actions as may be reasonable to permit the development of the 6.7 acres
as contemplated in the City of Toronto Staff Report dated June 10, 2009 and the
Appendices thereto, consistent with TRCA’s interests, and other conditions
recommended by TRCA solicitor.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A134/09 -PROVINCIAL POLICY FRAMEWORK ON ENVIRONMENTAL
EDUCATION
Release of Provincial Policy Framework on Environmental Education.
(Executive Res.#B84/09)
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT staff continue to work with the Ministry of Education to support the implementation
of the Policy Framework on Environmental Education;
285
THAT staff continue to advocate to the Ministry of Education and other relevant ministries
and agencies for a stable funding strategy in support of environmental education
programs and infrastructure;
AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to report on education program developments and
provincial policy initiatives that are relevant to TRCA education programs and facilities.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A135/09 -SUPPLY OF RENTAL RATES FOR OPERATED HEAVY
CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AND DUMP TRUCKS
Tender RSD09-18. Award of Contract RSD09-18 for the supply of
operated heavy construction equipment and dump trucks.
(Executive Res.#B85/09)
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT the Restoration Services Division utilize, as required, the services of Sartor and
Susin Limited for the supply of operated heavy construction equipment and dump trucks
for the period August 1, 2009 to July 31, 2010, it being the proposal that bests meets
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA's) requirements at a competitive
cost;
THAT staff be authorized to use the next lowest tender if the need arises.
AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the necessary action to
implement the contract including the signing and execution of documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A136/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT Section II items EX8.1 & EX8.2, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #5/09,
held on July 10, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
286
RES.#A137/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT Section II items EX8.3 - EX8.8, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes
#5/09, held on July 10, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
Section II Items EX8.3 - EX8.8, Inclusive
TERRANOVA DEVELOPMENTS LTD. AND CITY OF TORONTO ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD
HEARING
(Executive Res.#B86/09 & Res.#B87/09)
DUNPAR DEVELOPMENTS INC. AND CITY OF TORONTO ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD
HEARING
(Executive Res.#B88/09)
ALBION HILLS FIELD CENTRE RETROFIT
(Executive Res.#B89/09)
BOYD CENTRE WORKSHOP/STORAGE FACILITY
(Executive Res.#B90/09)
ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE GOVERNANCE, ORGANIZATION AND FINANCE REVIEW
(Executive Res.#B91/09)
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A138/09 -SUMMARY OF REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONS AND REQUESTS FOR
PROPOSALS
January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2009. Receipt of the 2009 mid-year summary
of procurements approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or his
designate.
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Mike Del Grande
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) procurements approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or his designate for
the January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2009 period be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #5/05, held on June 24, 2005, Resolution #A124/05 approved the
Purchasing Policy, and resolved, in part, as follows:
staff report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board semi-annually with a list of all
Requests for Quotations and Requests for Proposals approved by the Chief
Administrative Officer pursuant to Schedule 'A';
287
Pursuant to the resolution quoted above, the summary of Requests for Quotations and
Requests for Proposals from January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2009, is found in Attachments 2 and
3, respectively. The report includes approvals of $10,000 or greater, to the maximum allowable
limit under the policy, approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or his designate.
The attached summary includes the criteria as to why non-competitive procurement was
appropriate for the particular goods or services procured, as per Section 1.14 of Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority's Purchasing Policy (Attachment 1).
As permitted under the approved policy, the Chief Administrative Officer has designated senior
staff, generally including director and manager level positions, approval authority for purchases
up to $10,000 (including PST but not GST as TRCA recoups GST).
The Province of Ontario is reviewing purchasing regulations and TRCA is awaiting this
information about any new purchasing regulations that will apply to conservation authorities.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Email: kstranks@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Email: kstranks@trca.on.ca
Date: July 15, 2009
Attachments: 3
288
Attachment 1
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
PURCHASING POLICY
Section 1.14Non - Competitive Procurement Process
A non-competitive procurement process shall only be used if one or more of the following
conditions apply and a process of negotiation is undertaken to obtain the best value in the
circumstances for the TRCA. Authorized Buyers are authorized to enter into negotiations
without formal competitive bids, under the following circumstances:
1.The goods and services are only available from one source or one supplier by reason
of:
A statutory or market based monopoly
A fluctuating market prevents the TRCA from obtaining price protection or owing to
market conditions, required goods or services are in short supply
Existence of exclusive rights (patent, copyright or licence)
Need for compatibility with goods and services previously acquired and there are no
reasonable alternatives, substitutes or accommodations
Need to avoid violating warranties and guarantees where service is required
2.An attempt to purchase the required goods and services has been made in good faith
using a competitive method and has failed to identify a successful supplier.
3.When the extension or reinstatement of an existing contract would prove most
cost-effective or beneficial. The extension shall not exceed one year.
4.The goods and services are required as a result of an emergency, which would not
reasonably permit the use of the other methods permitted.
5.The required goods and services are to be supplied by a particular vendor or supplier
having special knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be provided by
any other supplier.
6.Any other sole or single source purchase permitted under the provisions of this policy
including those noted in Schedule ‘B’.
289
Attachment 2
REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION
Sole Source (up to $50,000)
January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Sole Source
Criteria
(Section 1.14
of TRCA's
Purchasing
Policy)
Aquatic Plant Propagation Materials Acorus Restoration 47,000.00 2
BATHURST GLEN GOLF COURSE
Alcohol Products Beer Store and LCBO 20,000.00 1
Supply of John Deere Parts Podolinsky Turf Equipment 18,000.00 2 & 5
Food Items and Kitchen Supplies Sysco Foods 16,000.00 1
Environmental Equipment Wash Station - Phase
2
ESD Waste2Water, Inc.23,000.00 +
freight
1
Seedling Planting and Tending Services at Oak
Ridges Corridor Park
Bartram Woodlands 23,452.00 +
7,089.00
Contingency
Allowance
5
Repairs to John Deere Wide-Area Mower Nobleton Farm Service 10,277.12 5
Promotions for 2009 Sugarbush Maple Syrup
Festival
EZ Rock Radio 11,875.00 3
KORTRIGHT CENTRE FOR CONSERVATION
Natural Stone For Entrance Sign Rock Valley Natural Stone Incorporated 18,000.00 5
Energy Workshop Canadian Solar Industries Association 10,823.91 5
Construction Manager for the Archetype
Sustainable House Project at the Kortright
Centre for Conservation be awarded to Mr. for
a cost not to exceed $
Alan MacDonald of Teak Enterprises 12,583.45 3
Construction Management Services - Phase 1
of Albion Hills Field Centre Retrofit
Percon Construction Inc.49,614.54 5
Hydro Installation at Two Permanent Monitoring
Stations (WWFMMP)
Foretech Electric 34,082.00 5
Crothers Woods Trail
Deconstruction/Reconstruction - Supply of
Supplemental Labour
Urban Forest Associates Inc.42,000.00 5
Security Guard Services from April to
September, 2009 and 2010 for Petticoat Creek
Conservation Area, Heart Lake Conservation
Area, Boyd Conservation Area, Boyd Centre,
Kortright Centre and Restoration Services
Centre
Knights On Guard Protective Services 2009
27,000.00 +
Occurrence
Fees
2010 (upon
satisfactory
review)
27,000.00 +
Occurrence
Fees
5
290
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Sole Source
Criteria
(Section 1.14
of TRCA's
Purchasing
Policy)
Confectionary Items for the Indian Line
Campground Store
KARRY'S 25,000.00 3
Public Information Centres and Community
Liaison Committee Meetings for the Don Mouth
Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection
Project Environmental Assessment, and for
Public Consultation Meetings for the Don
Watershed Plan, and other services as required
Nicole Swehurn 49,000.00 5
Specialty Brick Floor Tile for the Half Way
House Restaurant, Black Creek Pioneer Village
Thames Valley Brick and Tile 12,750.00 2
291
REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION
Lowest Bid (up to $100,000)
January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested /
Complete Bids
Received
KORTRIGHT CENTRE FOR CONSERVATION
Installation of 5 kw Turbine for Power Trip Trail Sentinel Power Systems 51,500.00 3/3
Kitchen Upgrades PCI Contracting / Mechanical 25,125.00 3/3
Snow Removal Services (Black Creek Pioneer
Village and Head Office)
Marbro Building Maintenance &
Contracting Ltd.
18,000.00 3/2
BATHURST GLEN GOLF COURSE
Beverage Products Coca-Cola Bottling Group 19,000.00 n/a *
Rental of Golf Carts Bennett Golf Carts 19,000.00 2/2
Fuel Supply (regular gas and biodiesel)Armstrong Petroleum LTD.12,000.00 3/3
Fertilizer Supply Agrium Advanced Technologies 30,000.00 3/2
Heart Lake Conservation Area Boathouse
Construction Project
Dardan Contractors Ltd.19,900.00 3/3
Horse Drawn Wagon Rides for the Sugarbush
Maple Syrup Festival
A & A Farmyard Friends 18,000.00 12/2
MAPLE SYRUP PRODUCTS
Packaged Maple Syrup Smokey Kettle Maple Company
Limited
73,363.12 17/3
Bulk Maple Syrup Smokey Kettle Maple Company
Limited
14,760.00 17/2
Peel Invasive Plant Management Urban Forest Associates 20,430.00 3/3
ACQUISITION OF VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT
Two New 2009 Midsize Pickup Trucks Yorkdale Toyota 57,890.00 15/7
One New 2009 Cargo Van Maciver Dodge Limited 19,425.00 15/4
One New 2009 Hybrid SUV Dixie Ford Sales Ltd. 35,669.00 15/5
One New 2009 Midsize Wagon Downsview Kia 20,224.00 12/5
One New Loader/Tractor Nobleton Farm Service 63,155.00 8/2
One New Front Mower Nobleton Farm Services 40,550.00 8/2
Paper Purchases Buntin Reid 30,000.00 n/a **
* Competitive process since the National Golf Course Owners Association (NGCOA) provides its members
with access to a pre-negotiated comprehensive purchasing program.
** Lowest bid received by the City of Toronto using a competitive process that best meets TRCA/City
specifications for various paper products.
292
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested /
Complete Bids
Received
SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING REMOVAL SERVICES (2009 and 2010)
Bruce’s Mill Conservation Area, Claremont Field
Centre, Lake St. George Field Centre, Albion
Hills Field Centre, Albion Hills Conservation
Area, Glen Haffy Conservation Area, Restoration
Services Centre, Bathurst Glen Golf Course and
Downsview Office
Turtle Island Recycling
Corporation
68.842.40 12/7
Head Office Martin Disposal Ltd.6,084.00 12/7
Kortright Centre for Conservation, Petticoat
Creek Conservation Area, Black Creek Pioneer
Village, Indian Line Campground, Heart Lake
Conservation Area and Boyd Centre
U-Pak Disposal 87,626.80 12/7
Boyd Conservation Area Waste Management of Canada
Corporation
10,520.00 12/7
BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE
Replacement of Washroom Vanity Units at
Visitors Centre
Solid Creations Limited 12,729.80 3/3
Replacement of the Cedar Shingle Roof on
Sawyer's Sawmill
Traditional Roofworks Inc.35,500.00 3/3
Preventative Maintenance Plumbing Contract
for 2009 to 2012
Nor-line Plumbing Ltd.15,321.00 5/3
CHARLES SAURIOL CONSERVATION RESERVE CONCRETE SLAB REPLACEMENT PROJECT
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 800
tonnes of 3 to 5 Tonne Armour Stone
Glenn Windrem Trucking total unit price
of 42.60 per
tonne and a
total cost not to
exceed
34,080.00
7/4
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 500
Tonnes of 225mm-450mm Rip Rap Stone
Glenn Windrem Trucking total unit price
of 26.80 per
tonne and a
total cost not to
exceed
13,400.00
7/3
Construction Support (Excavator and Operator)
of Various Habitat Restoration Projects
Valefield Contracting Inc.94,990.00 3/3
ALBION HILLS FIELD CENTRE RETROFIT PROJECT
Kitchen Electrical Division Luxmar Electrical 28,900.00 3/3
Kitchen Demolition Division JR Property Services 48,500.00 3/3
Kitchen Drywall Division Spectrum Drywall & General
Contracting Inc.
20,900.00 3/3
Kitchen Flooring Division LAB Flooring Industries 26,184.00
293
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested /
Complete Bids
Received
Kitchen Finish Carpentry and Millwork Division Second Generation Furnishings
Inc.
23,310.00 3/3
Kitchen Rough Carpentry Division In2Deep Limited 19,175.00 3/3
Renovation and Upgrades of Albion Hills
Conservation Area Beach Building and Chlorine
Building
Glen The Plumber 48,754.00, plus
a 10%
contingency of
4,875.40
5/5
Benthic Invertebrate
Taxonomic Identification
ZEAS Incorporated 31,416.00 3/1
Sales, Catering and Meeting Room
Management Software
Tier One Hospitality Solutions 32,260.00 3/3
Washroom Partitions at Heart Lake
Conservation Area Beach Centre
Rally Distributors 9,390.00 3/3
PORT UNION WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PHASE 2)
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 700
Tonnes of 4 to 6 Tonne Armour Stone
J.C. Rock Limited total unit price
of 42.00 per
tonne and a
total cost not to
exceed
29,400.00
6/4
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 800
Tonnes of 225mm-450mm Rip Rap Stone
J.C. Rock Limited total unit price
of 26.00 per
tonne and a
total cost not to
exceed
20,800.00
6/4
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 1,800
Tonnes of 150mm-300mm Boulders
Glenn Windrem Trucking total unit price
of 31.83 per
tonne and a
total cost not to
exceed
57,294.00
9/4
Printing the Humber Book, titled "Humber River:
The Carrying Place"
Creative Path 74,800, plus
delivery
3/3
Bruce's Mill Conservation Area Roofing Project Robertson Construction
Services
40,350.30 5/3
TRCA CONSERVATION AREA ENTRANCE SIGN PROJECT
Nine Entrance Signs Fontasy Sign and Display Inc.49,712.25 5/2
Nine Entrance Sign Bases Dardan Contractors Ltd.57,802.50 5/4
294
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested /
Complete Bids
Received
TOMMY THOMPSON PARK ROAD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 800
Tonnes of 19mm Crusher Run Limestone by
Bottom Dump Trailer
Franceschini Brothers
Aggregates
total unit price
of 17.23 per
tonne and a
total cost not to
exceed
13,784.00
4/2
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 1,200
Tonnes of 19mm Crusher Run Limestone by
Triaxle Truck
Nelson Aggregate Company total unit price
of 19.18 per
tonne and a
total cost not to
exceed
23,016.00
4/2
Bagged Firewood for Resale at TRCA
Campgrounds
Quality in the Bag 31,220.80 3/3
Water Quality Analytical Services York-Durham Regional
Environmental Lab
34,552.00 2/2
REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION
Lowest Bid Not Accepted (up to $25,000)
January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested /
Complete Bids
Received
Print the Humber River Watershed Plan Swiss Print International 18,869.00 3/3
295
Attachment 3
REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL
Sole Source (up to $50,000)
January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Sole Source
Criteria
Phases 1 and 2 of the Greater Toronto Area
Agricultural Profile Study
Planscape in association with Regional
Analytics
27,500.00 5
Review of TRCA Realty Taxes Altus Derbyshire 21,000.00 5
Water Balance Model and Don Watershed
Concept Site Plans
The Municipal Infrastructure Group
Limited
26,400.00 5
Greater Toronto Area Agricultural Action
Committee Project Coordinator
Janet Horner 36,000.00 +
travel &
disbursements
4
Legal Services for Taxation of Conservation
Lands
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP 36,456.00 +
expenses
5
Eco-Business Zone Implementation Eco-Industrial Solutions Inc.45,000.00 5
Ontario Stewardship Ranger Program, York
Environmental Stewardship
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 32,000.00 1 & 5
Slope Stability and Erosion Risk Assessment at
35 - 51 Troutbrooke Drive, Toronto
Terraprobe Limited 30,000.00 5
296
REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL
Competitive Bid (up to $100,000)
January 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested /
Complete Bids
Received
Yonge and York Mills Flood Control Channel
Hydraulic Assessment and Maintenance Study
Stantec Consulting 86,620.00 4/4
Don River Watershed Plan Concept Site Plans Schollen and Company Inc.45,000.00 10/2
Source Protection Committee E-learning
Modules
Halight 90,000.00 5/4
Duffins Creek Flood Protection Dyke Erosion
Risk, Level of Service Assessment and
Maintenance and Improvement Study
Sernas Group 37,922.00 plus
a contingency
allowance of
12,000.00
3/3
Royal Rouge Trail Erosion Control Project Terraprobe Limited 21,285.00 +
2,500.00
contingency
allowance
3/3
Risk Assessment 48-66 Denison Road West &
28 Sykes Avenue, Toronto
Golder Associates Limited 25,105.00 +
2,500.00
contingency
allowance
3/2
Geomorphological Services for the Alfred
Kuehne Blvd./ Etobicoke Creek Aquatic
Restoration Project
Geomorphic Solution (member
of The Sernas Group)
34,348.00 3/2
Pyrotechnics Display for Caledon Canada Day
Celebration
Firemaster Productions 12,380.95 12/3
2009 Floodline Mapping Update R.J. Burnside & Associates
Limited
31,139.00 +
11,300.00
contingency
allowance
3/3
PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN
Sector Regional Resource Reutilization
Feasibility Study
Emerald Group 36,000 .00 3+/4 *
Green Sector Communication Strategy and
Business Ambassador Program
Innovolve Group 72,000.00 9/8
2009 Laboratory Analytical Services AGAT Laboratories 46,001.50 5/4
Media Relations Services for Black Creek
Pioneer Village
Philpott Communications 32,000.00 +
disbursements
109/4 **
* TRCA circulated to three companies, plus it was distributed by Waste Diversion Ontario to its membership.
** The RFP document was posted on www.biddingo.com, a Canadian public sector tendering web portal. The
document was accessed by 109 prospective suppliers. Four proposal submissions were received by the
deadline.
_________________________________________
297
RES.#A139/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Mike Del Grande
THAT Section IV items AUTH7.15.1 - AUTH7.15.3, inclusive, in regard to watershed
committee minutes, be received.
CARRIED
Section IV Items AUTH7.15.1 - AUTH7.15.3, Inclusive
ETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHEDS COALITION
Minutes of Meeting #2/09, held on May 21, 2009
DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
Minutes of Meeting #4/09, held on May 14, 2009
ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE
Minutes of Meeting #4/09, held on May 29, 2009.
_________________________________________
RES.#A140/09 -SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Glenn Mason
THAT Section IV items EX9.1 - EX9.3, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #5/09, held on July 10, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
Section IV Items EX9.1 - EX9.3, Inclusive
5TH WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CONGRESS
(Executive Res.#B92/09)
VOTING PROCEDURES
(Executive Res.#B93/09 & Res.#B94/09)
ABSENTEEISM SUMARY 2008
(Executive Res.#B95/09)
_________________________________________
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
RES.#A141/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
298
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 item EX10.1 - EX10.72, inclusive, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #5/09, held on July 10, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:30 p.m., on Friday, July 24, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
299
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #7/09
September 25, 2009
The Authority Meeting #7/09, was held in the Theatres, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on
Friday, September 25, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to order
at 9:47 a.m..
PRESENT
Paul Ainslie Member
Bryan Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay Cowbourne Member
Glenn De Baeremaeker Member
Mike Del Grande Member
Grant Gibson Member
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Jack Heath Member
Colleen Jordan Member
Glenn Mason Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair
John Parker Member
Anthony Perruzza Member
Richard Whitehead Member
ABSENT
Eve Adams Member
Maria Augimeri Vice Chair
David Barrow Member
Bill Fisch Member
Bonnie Littley Member
Reenga Mathivanan Member
Linda Pabst Member
Maja Prentice Member
Gino Rosati Member
John Sprovieri Member
300
RES.#A142/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Richard Whitehead
Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #6/09, held on July 24, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
DELEGATIONS
(a) A delegation by Peter Orphanos, Chair, Sierra Club Peel, in regard to Peel Region
Official Plan Amendment 21.
RES.#A143/09 -DELEGATIONS
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT above-noted delegation (a) be heard and referred to staff for consideration when
preparing a report to Authority Meeting #9/09, to be held on November 27, 2009.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Sonya Meek, Manager, Watershed Planning, in regard to item
AUTH7.1 - Don River Watershed Plan.
(b)A presentation by Nancy McGee, Supervisor, Education Program Services, TRCA, in
regard to item AUTH8.1 - Weston Environmental Leaders of Tomorrow Program.
RES.#A144/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
RES.#A145/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT above-noted presentation (b) be heard and received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
301
CORRESPONDENCE
(a) A letter dated August 12, 2009 from Minister John Gerretsen, Ontario Minister of the
Environment, in regard to approval of Toronto and Region Source Protection Area
updated Terms of Reference.
(b) A letter dated September 24, 2009 from Nancy Penny, Chair, Taylor Massey Project, in
regard to item AUTH7.1 - Don River Watershed Plan.
(c)A letter dated September 23, 2009 from Madeleine McDowell, Chair, Humber Heritage
Committee, in regard to item AUTH7.2 - Western Waterfront Master Plan.
RES.#A146/09 -CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT above-noted correspondence (a) be received.
CARRIED
RES.#A147/09 -CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT above-noted correspondence (b) be received.
CARRIED
RES.#A148/09 -CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Peter Milczyn
THAT above-noted correspondence (c) be received.
CARRIED
302
CORRESPONDENCE (A)
303
304
CORRESPONDENCE (B)
305
306
CORRESPONDENCE (C)
307
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A149/09 -DON RIVER WATERSHED PLAN
Approval of the Don River Watershed Plan and immediate steps to
facilitate its implementation
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT the Don River Watershed Plan be approved;
THAT staff be directed to work with partners to implement the plan;
THAT staff be directed to use the Don River Watershed Current Conditions Reports,
Upper Don River Watershed Sustainable Stormwater Management Study Final Report and
Don River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide as reference documents to inform and
guide ongoing work and long term work planning and budget preparation;
THAT copies of the Don River Watershed Plan be circulated to municipalities
within the Don River watershed and their Councils be asked to adopt the plan
and commit to work with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
to implement the recommendations appropriate to their municipality;
THAT copies of the Don River Watershed Plan be circulated to the provincial and federal
governments as well as all other relevant organizations and interest groups, including
former members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, and they be asked to
provide ongoing support for the implementation of the principles, objectives and relevant
recommendations of the plan;
THAT copies of the Don River Watershed Plan be circulated to local libraries
and copies of the plan and all supporting documents be posted on the TRCA website;
THAT copies of the Don River Watershed Current Conditions Reports, Upper Don River
Watershed Sustainable Stormwater Management Study Final Report and Don River
Watershed Plan Implementation Guide be circulated to watershed municipalities and
made available to other partner organizations and they be encouraged to use these
reference documents to inform and guide their ongoing work;
THAT staff be directed to work with watershed municipalities and other partners to
develop five year workplans and budgets for top priority projects identified in the
Don River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide and incorporate them into
the annual capital budget process;
308
THAT the revised Conformity Assessment for the Don River Watershed Plan in
Attachment 3 and the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity
assessment be deemed to fulfill the watershed planning requirements of the Oak
Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP; 2002) and be approved for use in the
review of major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine and that the
regional and local municipalities, Province of Ontario and Conservation Authorities
Moraine Coalition (CAMC) be so advised;
AND FURTHER THAT staff meet on an annual basis with municipal staff
and other stakeholder representatives from the Don watershed, and in
conjunction with other watershed groups where appropriate, to facilitate
partnerships, share knowledge and best practice and track progress in implementation.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The Don River watershed planning study was initiated in partnership with watershed
municipalities and the Don Watershed Regeneration Council in response to a number of policy
developments, including the need to fulfill York Region’s watershed planning requirements
under the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP). The study was also designed to
update the management strategy outlined in Forty Steps to a New Don (1994), augment the City
of Toronto’s Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan by providing direction in the ‘905’
region and apply TRCA’s vision for The Living City at a watershed scale.
The Watershed Plan is intended to inform and guide municipalities, provincial and federal
governments and TRCA as they update their policies and programs for environmental
protection, conservation and restoration within the contexts of land and water use and the
planning of future urban growth and intensification. The plan also provides direction to local
non-governmental organizations and private landowners with regard to best management
practices and environmental stewardship. Watershed plans are well recognized in legislation
and local plans and policies. However, it is only the ORMCP which requires municipalities to
undertake watershed plans, incorporate their objectives and requirements into municipal official
plans and ensure that major development on the Oak Ridges Moraine conforms with the
watershed plan (see Table 1: Selected Policy Documents Promoting Watershed Planning).
Table 1: Selected Policy Documents Promoting Watershed Planning
Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2002)
Watershed plans
24. (1) Every upper-tier municipality and single-tier municipality shall, on or before April 22,
2003, begin preparing a watershed plan, in accordance with subsection (3), for every
watershed whose streams originate within the municipality’s area of jurisdiction.
(2) The objectives and requirements of each watershed plan shall be incorporated into the
municipality’s official plan.
Growth Plan for Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006)
3.2.5 Water and Wastewater Systems
7. Municipalities, in conjunction with conservation authorities, are encouraged to prepare
watershed plans and use such plans to guide development decisions and water and
wastewater servicing decisions.
309
Greenbelt Plan (2005)
3.2.3 Water Resource System Policies
The following Water Resource System policies apply throughout the Protected Countryside…
2. Watersheds are the most meaningful scale for hydrological planning, and
municipalities together with conservation authorities should ensure that watershed plans
are completed and used to guide planning and development decisions within the
Protected Countryside.
Municipal Official Plans
City of Toronto, 2002
The Official Plan makes reference to watershed plans in the context of managing
stormwater. Official Plan policy states that the City will work with neighbouring
municipalities and the Province to develop a framework for dealing with growth across
the GTA which will, among other things result in better water quality through water
conservation and wastewater and stormwater management based on watershed
principles. In addition, the Official Plan indicates that private city-building activities and
changes to the built environment, including public works, will “reduce the adverse
effects of stormwater and snow melt based on hierarchy of watershed-based wet
weather flow practices…”.
York Region, 2004
2.3 Water
It is the policy of Council:
1. To cooperate with area municipalities, the conservation authorities and other
agencies in the preparation of watershed planning initiatives to:
a)identify headwaters areas and better understand their function, linkages and
sensitivities;
b)establish and achieve water quality objectives for the watershed;
c)address the long-term cumulative impact of development on the watershed;
d)create an inventory of existing geology, hydrology, hydrogeology, groundwater
recharge areas, limnology, aquatic and terrestrial habitats and other environmental
data;
e)recommend appropriate stormwater management techniques, including, but not
limited to best management practices, the use of natural vegetative drainage
corridors and the use of permeable surfaces; and
f)identify the form and constraints under which development may be permitted and
provide guidelines for development, design and construction.
Restoration Plans
Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (1994)
Recommends a watershed-based approach to de-listing impaired beneficial uses of the
Toronto waterfront and watersheds, and notes Action 41: Include Watershed Perspectives in
Planning Process.
Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan (WWFMMP; 2003)
The City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan identified a specific need to
undertake restoration to mitigate impacts of development in the 905 area and to complement
actions being taken in the downstream portion of the watershed. A key guiding principle of
the WWFMMP is wet weather flow will be managed on a watershed basis with a natural
systems approach being applied to stormwater management as a priority.
310
Watershed Planning Process
At Authority Meeting #7/03, held on September 26, 2003, Resolution #A196/03 approved
overall workplanning processes for the Rouge, Humber and Don rivers watershed planning
studies being undertaken in support of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The Don
watershed planning study was scheduled to follow the major periods of work on the Rouge and
Humber rivers, in recognition of the relatively limited area of remaining developable lands on
the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) in this watershed. The Rouge and Humber watershed plans
were brought forward for Authority approval in March and June 2008, respectively. The Don
watershed studies took place primarily during 2006 to 2009.
The study focused mainly on filling information gaps, guiding land use planning and approval
decisions (particularly re-development), and providing direction to advance implementation of
regeneration priorities. The study also developed a new set of “concept site plans”, similar to
the successful approach used in Forty Steps to a New Don, to illustrate how the Watershed
Plan’s recommendations could be implemented at the local level and provide tools to facilitate
the renewed engagement of community leaders in watershed regeneration.
Public and stakeholder consultation was recognized as an essential component of the Don
watershed planning study work program. The multi-stakeholder Don Watershed Regeneration
Council (DWRC) played a central role in guiding the Don watershed planning process. Further
details of the consultation process are included later in this report.
Supporting Documents
The following principle documents support the Don River Watershed Plan:
Current Conditions Reports - A series of eleven Don River Watershed Current Conditions
Reports (TRCA, 2009) document the current watershed conditions and issues in relation to the
watershed objectives, according to the theme areas: Air Quality, Aquatic System, Baseflow and
Water Use Assessment, Cultural Heritage, Fluvial Geomorphology, Geology and Groundwater
Resources, Land and Resource Use, Nature-based Experiences, Surface Water
Hydrology/Hydraulics and Stormwater Management, Surface Water Quality and Terrestrial
Natural Heritage.
Upper Don River Watershed Sustainable Stormwater Management Study Final Report (XCG
Consultants, 2008) – summarizes the modelled watershed response to future land use and
management scenarios. This work identified the relative effectiveness of various stormwater
management strategies and provided a basis for recommendations in the Watershed Plan and
priority areas for stormwater retrofit projects. This study in the “905” portion of the watershed
complements the City of Toronto’s Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan.
Action Plan for Sustainable Practices – Implementation Strategies for the Residential and
Business Sectors in the Greater Toronto Area (Freeman Associates, 2006) – a social marketing
based study which recommended strategies for accelerating the uptake and adoption of
sustainable practices, with a focus on lot level stormwater management and naturalization.
These key strategies were included in the Watershed Plan.
311
Don River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide (TRCA, 2009) – organizes the Watershed Plan
recommendations according to the relevant implementation tools and assembles additional
information to inform initial action. The Guide summarizes a proposed workplan of
implementation projects, within the context of existing programs and likely implementing
partners.
Don River Fisheries Management Plan – This document is being developed in concert with the
Watershed Plan, but is following an independent consultation and approval process.
Consultation Process
During development of the draft Don River Watershed Plan, TRCA consulted with a range of
Don watershed stakeholders. The purpose of the consultation was to identify key issues and
management objectives, review technical work, build consensus on management strategies,
and identify any errors or omissions in the draft Plan. Input was solicited throughout the
watershed planning study, as well as at milestones associated with the release of draft
documents for review.
Consultation mechanisms included:
1.Meetings and workshops held with the DWRC from 2007 to 2009.
2.A Municipal Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) composed of planning, works and
parks staff from partner municipalities (City of Toronto, York Region, Town of Markham,
Town of Richmond Hill and City of Vaughan). The committee was formed for the
purposes of this planning study and met 2-4 times per year from 2007 to 2009.
3.Formal and informal workshops and meetings on specific issues, involving relevant
experts and stakeholder groups.
4.Individual meetings with municipal councilors and interested non-governmental
organizations.
5.Circulation of draft reports for written comment by municipal staff, DWRC and others, as
well as posting of draft reports on TRCA’s website for public comment:
a draft management framework was released to the DWRC in September 2007;
a draft synthesis report on current watershed conditions was released to the DWRC
in October 2007, and a revised draft was released to the public in May 2008;
eight draft technical background reports on current conditions were released for
municipal, DWRC and public comment in August 2008;
drafts of the remaining three current conditions reports were released for municipal,
DWRC and public comment in March 2009;
an early draft Don River Watershed Plan was released to the DWRC for review in
September 2008;
a revised full draft Don River Watershed Plan was released for municipal, DWRC and
public review in March 2009;
a draft Implementation Guide was released for municipal and DWRC review in June
2009 and was made publicly available in July 2009. Development and release of the
draft Implementation Guide followed the public comment period on the draft
Watershed Plan in order to integrate feedback received on the management
recommendations. The guide re-organizes Watershed Plan recommendations
according to relevant implementation tools, in a format conducive to practitioners.
6.Public open houses held in June 2008 and April 2009 (meeting minutes are available at
www.trca.on.ca/donwatershedplan).
312
Feedback received through these mechanisms throughout the watershed planning process
was integrated into the technical background reports, Watershed Plan and Implementation
Guide. More detailed information on this feedback is available through meeting minutes (Public
Open House reports, TAC, DWRC and TRCA staff technical team).
RATIONALE
At a high level, feedback from municipalities, DWRC and the public reflected:
support for the goals, objectives and strategic directions of the Watershed Plan;
suggestions for minor revisions to specific management strategies and associated
recommended actions;
requests for clarification of some technical issues, including a more detailed explanation
of the target terrestrial natural heritage system and associated priority regeneration sites,
the rationale for selection of certain target aquatic community indicator species, and
planning triggers for master environmental servicing plans for redevelopment;
suggestions for minor modifications to the draft concept site plans; and
interest in implementation details, including next step projects, roles and responsibilities,
and potential funding sources (many of which are addressed in the Implementation
Guide or will be resolved through long-term work plan and budget planning by
implementing partners).
Taylor Massey Project Input
The Taylor Massey Project (TMP), a non-governmental community organization, also provided
comments throughout the planning study. A summary of the TRCA staff response to TMP’s
detailed comments on the draft Don River Watershed Plan was provided in a report to the Don
Watershed Regeneration Council at their July 23, 2009 meeting. While the TMP has described
the Watershed Plan as having “significant merit and commendable goals”, a desire for
subwatershed-scale monitoring and reporting, and additional implementation details (specific
agency roles and responsibilities and budget commitments), were key concerns identified by
TMP.
TRCA staff felt that a set of watershed-scale reports was the most cost effective and efficient
means for summarizing watershed and subwatershed current conditions for a watershed plan
required under the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The technical background reports
prepared in support of the Watershed Plan present an understanding of system function and
current conditions in a watershed context. Subwatershed specific data and information are
highlighted within the overall watershed context, where conditions are unique to that
subwatershed or where factors within or beyond the subwatershed boundaries are contributing
to its conditions. Subwatershed goals and regeneration plans are key features of Chapter 6 of
the Watershed Plan. More detailed subwatershed planning may be a valuable tool for future
planning in Taylor/Massey Creek (and other subwatersheds); however, it was beyond the
scope and budget of the current project.
313
Some of TMP’s requested detail on implementation issues has been provided in the
Implementation Guide, although the specific roles, responsibilities and budget commitments of
implementing partners are expected to be resolved through long-term work plan and budget
preparations throughout the coming years of implementation. TRCA staff continues to meet and
work with TMP to address implementation of the Warden Woods concept site plan and assist
with other regeneration priorities where appropriate, including a number of priorities identified
in TMP’s Reach by Reach plan. In July of 2008, in response to a presentation by TMP, TRCA
passed a motion that the “Authority supports seeking reach by reach funding from senior levels
of government to support watershed plan implementation”.
Final Draft Don River Watershed Plan
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council, at their final meeting held on July 23, 2009,
approved the following resolution regarding the draft Don River Watershed Plan:
THAT the staff report on the consultation process be received;
THAT the Don Watershed Regeneration Council approve the recommended revisions to
the draft Don River Watershed Plan as presented in Table 1, such that their incorporation
in the February 23, 2009 draft Watershed Plan will constitute the final draft Don River
Watershed Plan;
THAT TRCA be requested to approve the Don River Watershed Plan;
THAT TRCA direct staff to work with partners to implement the Plan;
THAT TRCA direct staff to use the Reports on Current Conditions, Upper Don River
Watershed Sustainable Stormwater Management Study, Action Plan for Sustainable
Practices and Don River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide as reference documents
to inform and guide ongoing work and long term work planning and budget preparation;
AND FURTHER THAT the Municipal partners, the Provincial and Federal governments as
well as all residents, organizations and relevant interest groups be requested to provide
their ongoing support for the implementation of the principles and goals of the Don River
Watershed Plan.
Don River Watershed Plan – Key Findings and Recommendations
The Don River Watershed Plan concludes that we are beginning to “hold the line” on further
degradation of the watershed (Attachment 1 - Watershed Plan Executive Summary). Going
forward, our primary challenge will be to better manage wet weather flows and to restore a
more balanced flow regime to the river and its tributaries. With the build-out of the watershed
nearly complete, the Don River has been transformed into an almost fully urbanized river. The
focus is now shifting from greenfield development toward redevelopment, intensification,
infilling and infrastructure renewal to accommodate the anticipated growth of the Greater
Toronto Area and neighbouring regions. This period of urban renewal affords TRCA an
opportunity to implement a number of the measures required to improve watershed health.
TRCA must take advantage of every opportunity to achieve an overall net gain in watershed
conditions.
314
The Watershed Plan identifies three strategic themes for the regeneration of the watershed:
1.Build, re-build and retrofit our communities to restore water balance and improve
sustainability.
2.Regenerate the aquatic and terrestrial landscapes.
3.Engage the people of the Don
The management strategy recommendations are as follows:
Caring for Water
1.Implement source, conveyance and end-of-pipe stormwater management facilities
(retrofit and new) and maintain existing stormwater facilities across the watershed.
2.Manage flood risks.
3.Protect groundwater recharge and discharge areas.
4.Improve erosion and sediment control and site regeneration.
5.Improve stream form.
6.Prevent and remediate pollution.
7.Monitor, evaluate and adjust.
Caring for Nature – Aquatic System
1.Implement Redside Dace Recovery Team recommendations (in development) to
investigate the existing redside dace population status and habitat improvement and
protection opportunities (in FMZ 1 where this species is currently known to occur and in
FMZs 2 and 3 where a population may be recovered).
2.Protect and improve instream habitat for the Target Community Indicator Species
(Figure 25), as per recommendations in Chapter 6 of this watershed plan and the
fisheries management plan (FMP).
3.Create or enhance riparian wetlands, with focus on reaches that still support aquatic
communities that rely on this habitat (e.g., known populations of brassy minnow), as per
recommendations in Chapter 6 of this watershed plan and the FMP.
4.Complete an instream barrier assessment for the entire watershed and identify priority
barrier mitigations that would achieve the most improvement to fish passage and
habitat.
5.Improve the water balance (surface water and groundwater regimes) and stormwater
management (quality and quantity), and identify aquatic standards and best
management practices to guide the work (see management strategies under Caring for
Water in Section 5.1).
6.Establish an implementation committee for the updated Don River Fisheries
Management Plan.
7.Improve monitoring of fish communities and habitat, particularly for existing populations
of redside dace and walleye.
8.Develop education and stewardship programs to address invasive species awareness
(round goby, common carp, rusty crayfish) and the potential for invasive species
transfer between watersheds (e.g., bait fish transfer between Humber and Don rivers),
the role of fish as indicators of riverine health, and best management practices to
protect and regenerate the aquatic system (especially riparian plantings) targeted at
landowners and land maintenance staff.
315
Caring for Nature – Terrestrial System
1.Improve ecological function of the entire urban landscape, from the natural areas to the
built areas, by increasing vegetation cover through better urban design and land
management.
2.Secure the Target Terrestrial Natural Heritage System (Figure 26) and look for additional
opportunities for expansion (e.g., additional lands identified in City of Toronto’s Official
Plan, Map 9).
3.Regenerate and enhance the quality of the natural system by increasing natural cover
quantity, improving patch size and shape, and managing invasive species.
4.Mitigate the impact of human activities on natural areas by developing a broader
understanding of ecosystem health and a commitment to stewardship among the public
and businesses.
Caring for Community – Cultural Heritage
1.Identify, investigate and conserve cultural heritage prior to changes in land use or
redevelopment.
2.Establish a comprehensive communication plan with Aboriginal (First Nations and
Métis) groups and other more recent descendant populations.
3.Fill gaps in archaeological knowledge.
4.Develop and support existing active and participatory programs to increase awareness
of cultural heritage and living culture.
Caring for Community – Nature-based Experiences
1.Protect and enhance the quality and extent of public greenspaces throughout the
watershed, and in particular, in areas of increasing population density and
redevelopment.
2.Expand the network of formal trails to connect key destinations and improve
connectivity with neighbouring watersheds, the Oak Ridges Moraine and the waterfront.
3.Promote the natural and cultural heritage of the watershed and engage the community
in their protection, regeneration and celebration.
Caring for Community – Land and Resource Use
1.As municipal Official Plans are updated across Don watershed municipalities, TRCA
should work with municipalities to incorporate watershed plan strategies into these
plans and to encourage strategic planning in advance of redevelopment, to enhance the
sustainability of urban form and resource use.
2.Master Environmental Servicing Plans (MESPs) for Redevelopment areas and
regeneration areas should be required to coordinate property redevelopment and
regeneration in a comprehensive way.
3.Implement sustainable urban form and adopt green development standards for
neighbourhoods, sites, and buildings.
4.Improve planning for and continue implementation of flood remediation.
5.Terrestrial natural cover on historical lots of record that extend into ravines should be
protected from loss during redevelopment or intensification by designating it “open
space” in municipal official plans.
6.Explore opportunities to secure financial resources for creating new greenspaces and
supporting regeneration, operations and maintenance of existing greenspaces from
development charges when areas are subject to growth through intensification.
7.Implement sustainable infrastructure planning, implementation and monitoring.
316
8.Increase water efficiency and conservation.
9.Reduce energy use and increase non-fossil fuel alternatives.
10.The amount of waste generated should be reduced and wherever possible, “waste”
should be used as a resource.
Implementation Guide – Top Priority Implementation Projects
The Implementation Guide organizes the Watershed Plan recommendations according to
relevant implementation tools (e.g. policy, regeneration, land securement, stewardship and
education, operations and maintenance, enforcement and monitoring) and identifies top priority
projects for initial implementation (Attachment 2 - Implementation Guide Executive Summary).
Like the Watershed Plan, the Implementation Guide is intended to inform and guide. The
proposed projects contained in the guide are meant to serve as a basis for discussion among
implementing partners and as a source for the further development of individual partners’ own
long-term work plan and budget preparations. Upon approval of the Don River Watershed Plan,
TRCA will initiate discussion with key implementing partners to develop five year workplans and
budgets for the top priority projects, and incorporate them in capital budgets.
Revised ORMCP Conformity Assessment
At Authority Meeting #3/09, held on April 27, 2007, Resolution #A102/07 was approved as
follows:
THAT the conformity assessment for the Don River Watershed Plan in Attachment 2 and
the watershed planning documents referenced in the conformity assessment be deemed
to fulfill the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan (ORMCP; 2002) and be approved for use on an interim basis in the review of major
development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine until such time as a final Watershed
Plan is brought back to the Authority for approval ;
Staff has revised the conformity assessment, based on the final watershed planning document
references (Attachment 3 – ORMCP Watershed Planning Requirements Conformity Assessment
for Don River Watershed). Staff recommends that the revised conformity assessment and the
final watershed planning documents referenced therein be approved for use in the review of
major development proposals on the Oak Ridges Moraine portion of the Don River watershed.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
TRCA staff will take the following steps to facilitate the transition from plan to action:
design the desk-top-published version of the Don River Watershed Plan document and
distribute it to watershed partners;
meet with municipal staff and other key implementing partners to incorporate top priority
projects in future years workplans and budgets;
continue to work towards renaturalization of the Don River mouth;
pursue implementation of the concept site plans for Warden Woods, Mud Creek and
industrial land uses and work with municipalities to identify future locations for the
preparation of neighbourhood retrofit plans;
reconstitute the Don Watershed Regeneration Council with a role in guiding
implementation of the Watershed Plan and reporting on progress;
meet with municipal staff and other stakeholders to share knowledge, review
implementation progress and identify updated priorities for action.
317
Many municipalities, other agencies and local groups, have already begun to use the
watershed plan to inform their ongoing land use plans, projects and new initiatives.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funding for the Don River watershed planning study was provided by the Region of York and
City of Toronto as part of the municipal capital budgets for TRCA. Additional funding was
provided by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and Environment Canada’s Great
Lakes Sustainability Fund in support of the watershed modelling and subwatershed
regeneration plans, respectively.
Implementation of the Watershed Plan will be a multi-year exercise involving numerous public
and private sector partners. TRCA and watershed municipalities should continue to identify
capital workplans and budgets for implementation priorities, including stormwater management
infrastructure retrofits and maintenance, monitoring and evaluation of innovative technologies,
and community stewardship. Watershed partners should also seek special funding for the
plan's implementation through innovative sources.
Report prepared by: Sonya Meek, extension 5253
Email: smeek@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Sonya Meek, extension 5253 OR Adele Freeman, extension 5238
Emails: smeek@trca.on.ca or afreeman@trca.on.ca
Date: September 04, 2009
Attachments: 3
318
Attachment 1
Don River Watershed Plan
Executive Summary
The Don River Watershed Plan builds on the hard-won gains made to date in protecting,
regenerating and taking collective responsibility for this abused but still beautiful feature
of our natural heritage. It marks the next stage in the revitalization of the Don into a
healthy urban river that will enhance and support The Living City of the future.
The plan relies on the working partnerships forged over the last 15 years and maintains
momentum for many of the important initiatives launched under our first watershed strategy,
Forty Steps to a New Don. However, our experience and the insight into the workings of the
watershed, gleaned since Forty Steps was unveiled back in 1994, have made it clear that we
must better focus and prioritize our regeneration efforts in the years ahead.
Our primary challenge will be to better manage wet weather flows and to restore a more
balanced flow regime to the river and its tributaries. By managing stream flow, we will also
address the root causes of many of the environmental problems that afflict the watershed:
ongoing flooding and erosion, poor water quality, and deteriorating aquatic and terrestrial
communities.
The Don River flows through the heart of central Canada’s urban nexus (Figure 1). From its
headwaters on the Oak Ridges Moraine and South Slope, its two principal tributaries flow south
through the City of Vaughan and Towns of Markham and Richmond Hill, all in the Regional
Municipality of York. The East Don and West Don Rivers cross Steeles Avenue into Toronto and
join together on the Iroquois Sand Plain south of Eglinton Avenue.
German Mills Creek flows into the East Don River just south of Steeles. Taylor/Massey Creek
joins with the East Don River just north of the confluence with the West Don River. And the
Lower Don flows south to the outlet of the Keating Channel where it empties into Toronto
Harbour and Lake Ontario.
For more than ten thousand years, this network of rivers, streams and valleys has provided an
historic highway for the First Nations peoples and, later, the early European explorers, traders
and settlers. Subsequent waves of colonization and urbanization have indelibly marked and
transformed the aquatic and terrestrial landscape, bequeathing both a rich cultural heritage and
some difficult environmental challenges.
Today, almost half of the watershed is devoted to housing, and a fifth to industrial, institutional
or commercial development. There is little undeveloped land left. The natural areas and
greenspaces of the watershed serve as wildlife refuges and a recreational magnet for the 1.2
million residents that live within its boundaries. Unfortunately, the river also serves as a
stormwater conduit, carrying millions of litres of rainwater and snow melt, together with polluted
runoff and sewage overflow, south to the lake. And the valley of the lower Don has become a
conduit for thousands of cars and trucks heading into and out of the urban core every hour of
the day and night.
319
The pressures on the watershed will continue to build as more and more residents settle in the
watershed, either in the last areas of greenfield development in the northern reaches, or in the
four urban growth centres designated for intensive redevelopment by the Ontario government.
Our review of current conditions in the watershed has helped us plot a path for future
action.
The Don River watershed has suffered extensive degradation as natural cover was removed
and the hydrologic system altered through the spread of agriculture and subsequent
urbanization of the watershed. Lack of stormwater control has resulted in flooding, erosion,
poor water quality and degraded terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Rising population density
has led to expanded areas of impervious cover and heavy use of public greenspaces and
natural areas. Concerns about ecological health, the sustainability of our communities, loss of
cultural heritage, and the potential impacts of poor air quality and climate change are
widespread.
Which brings us to the question, what is the role of this watershed plan?
Specifically, the watershed plan is intended to inform and guide municipalities, provincial and
federal governments, TRCA, non-government organizations and private landowners as they
update their policies and practices for environmental stewardship. Implementation of these
strategies will be most effective if existing partners coordinate their efforts, making creative use
of both new and existing tools, as laid out in chapters 5 and 6 of the plan.
This updated watershed plan is part of an adaptive management approach to address the
challenges the watershed faces. Since the publication of our first watershed strategy, Forty
Steps to a New Don in 1994, much has been learned about the watershed from monitoring,
research and the experiences of watershed partners. This plan updates the watershed
management strategies in Forty Steps in light of this new information, a stronger scientific
foundation and better understanding of the effects of human actions on the ecosystem.
There is also a need to respond to a number of recent policy and planning initiatives, including
the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe,
Clean Water Act, City of Toronto’s Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan, stormwater
retrofit studies of other municipalities, and TRCA’s vision for The Living City.
Our vision for the Don River watershed
The quality of life on Earth is being determined in the rapidly expanding city regions. We
envision the future Don as a revitalized urban river, flowing with life-sustaining water through
regenerated natural habitats and sustainable human communities, from its headwater
tributaries to the mouth of the Don River and into the receiving waters of Lake Ontario. We
envision the watershed as an integral contributor to The Living City, where human settlement
can flourish forever as part of nature’s beauty and diversity.
320
To help meet our vision for the Don, a set of three guiding principles and 26 objectives
were developed.
This guiding framework builds on the principles and objectives presented in Forty Steps to a
New Don. The three principles which form the basis for the plan are to: protect and sustain what
is healthy; regenerate what is degraded; and take responsibility for the Don. We must take
advantage of all opportunities to protect and sustain, regenerate and enhance the Don, from
the valleys to the tablelands, and from the natural areas to the urban communities. We must
also motivate and facilitate, organize and coordinate all the stakeholders, both public and
private sector, throughout the watershed.
The next phase of development and urban intensification provides perhaps a final
opportunity to take effective action.
With the build-out of the watershed nearly complete, the Don has been transformed into an
almost fully urbanized river. The focus is now shifting from greenfield development towards
redevelopment, intensification, infilling and infrastructure renewal to accommodate the
anticipated growth of the GTA and neighbouring regions.
This period of urban renewal affords us an opportunity to implement a number of the measures
required to restore a more natural water balance in the Don. Stormwater source, conveyance
and end-of-pipe controls will contribute to reduced flooding, better water quality, stabilized
baseflow levels, increased infiltration and improved groundwater recharge rates. The resulting
benefits—reduced erosion and risk to infrastructure and terrestrial and aquatic habitat, and
greater flexibility to adapt to climate change—will result in regeneration of a healthier river.
The pathway to a regenerated Don River builds on the following 3 strategic themes:
Strategic Theme # 1:
We must build, re-build and retrofit our communities to restore water balance and
improve the sustainability of the urban model.
Redevelopment and intensification, and the remaining greenfield development in the Don River
watershed, offer opportunities to improve stormwater management, protect and expand natural
cover and the urban forest, regenerate greenspaces and cultural heritage structures, expand
trail systems, and improve the sustainability of resource use and consumption within our
communities. Many of these same opportunities exist through public and private stewardship
and capital projects.
In short, we can achieve cumulative gains in watershed function and condition.
Strategic Theme #2:
We must regenerate the aquatic and terrestrial landscapes.
The concerted work of agencies, organizations and individuals have produced some
improvements in watershed conditions. Some water quality parameters have improved,
hundreds of thousands of trees, bushes and wetland flora have been planted, some in-stream
barriers have been mitigated or removed, and trail systems expanded.
321
However, continued development and urban intensification will place additional pressures on
the ecosystems of the watershed. Future gains will be contingent on maintaining the
enthusiasm and support of the local community, businesses and government. In addition to
‘sweat equity’, support must include guaranteed funding to cover the significant capital and
on-going maintenance costs of the requisite infrastructure.
Strategic Theme #3:
We must engage the attention, enthusiasm and support of the people of the Don.
The Don River watershed has a long history of grassroots and agency involvement in and
advocacy for regeneration. Annual celebrations, such as Paddle the Don and the Richmond Hill
Mill Pond Splash, as well as major naturalization and brownfield rehabilitation projects in the
lower Don engage the community and provide a wider awareness of the Don.
The time is ripe to capitalize on that interest across the watershed, and reengage the people of
the Don to achieve the vision of a revitalized urban river. The engagement and voluntary uptake
of sustainable practices — backyard naturalization, lot level stormwater retrofits, etc. — by
residents and businesses in the Don will be essential to achieving the vision. Outreach
education to build understanding of the links between landowner actions and watershed health
will be key.
We must build an even stronger sense of community and common purpose, from the mouth to
the headwaters. If the public doesn’t fight to bring back the Don, the other constituencies
eventually will lose interest. The most powerful impetus for change occurs when the whole
community comes together and demands action.
We have been afforded an opportunity to build on what has already been accomplished
over the last 15 years.
We must allocate the resources, marshal stakeholder support and take the bold steps
necessary to adopt effective stormwater controls and implement sustainable green
technologies. Only by doing so can we hope to perpetuate and accelerate the process of
cumulative gain and ongoing environmental improvement.
If pursued diligently and with the full support of all our partners, the regeneration of the Don
River watershed within The Living City will continue to serve as a model for the salvation of
other endangered urban rivers.
322
Attachment 2
Don River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide
Executive Summary
Introduction
The Don River Watershed Plan was prepared by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) in consultation with its municipal partners and the Don Watershed Regeneration
Council to provide effective guidance for the regeneration of the watershed. The plan builds on
the hard won gains made to date in protecting, regenerating and taking collective responsibility
for this abused but still beautiful feature of our natural heritage. Many stakeholders believe that
it may be possible to “hold the line” and possibly improve watershed conditions, but only if
every opportunity for regeneration is considered seriously. While the major period of
urbanization is nearing completion and the watershed systems are beginning to adjust to these
new land uses, our goal is for improved conditions and we know we must prepare for climate
change affects. The watershed plan is intended to inform and guide municipalities, provincial
and federal governments and TRCA as they update their policies and programs for
environmental protection, conservation, and regeneration within the contexts of land and water
use, and the planning of future urban growth. The plan provides direction to local
non-governmental organizations and private landowners with regard to best management
practices and opportunities for environmental stewardship. To accomplish the management
strategies set out in the plan, there will need to be coordinated efforts by a variety of
implementing partners.
Purpose
The purpose of this Implementation Guide is to facilitate implementation of the
recommendations contained in the Don River Watershed Plan (TRCA, 2009). The Guide
organizes the watershed plan recommendations according to relevant implementation tools
and assembles additional information to inform initial action. The Guide further summarizes a
10 year work plan of implementation projects, within the context of existing programs and likely
implementing partners. Like the watershed plan the Implementation Guide is intended to
inform and guide the ongoing implementation and development of programs and policies. The
proposed projects contained in this Guide are intended to serve as a basis for discussion
among implementing partners and as a source for the further development of individual
partners’ own long term work plan and budget preparations.
Strategic Watershed Management Direction
The Don River Watershed Plan concludes that we are beginning to “hold the line” on further
degradation of the watershed. Going forward, our primary challenge will be to better manage
wet weather flows and to restore a more balanced flow regime to the river and its tributaries.
This will be especially important for mitigating the impacts of climate change on this highly
urbanized water system. The watershed plan identifies three strategic themes for the
regeneration of the watershed:
323
1.Build, re-build and retrofit our communities to restore water balance and improve
sustainability.
The Don River Watershed Plan, especially the wet weather flow control aspects of the Plan,
must be implemented during redevelopment and infilling projects, retrofit of existing built areas,
and development of the remaining greenfield areas. Balancing the flow regime of the Don and
its tributaries through stormwater source controls will yield a number of associated benefits.
The reduction of peak flows following storms and the maintenance of adequate baseflow
between events will reduce the risk of flooding and erosion related damage, while supporting
the protection and regeneration of healthy aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Redevelopment
throughout the watershed will also provide additional opportunities to protect greenspaces and
cultural heritage structures, expand the trail system and urban tree canopy, undertake energy
and water conservation improvements, and, otherwise, achieve incremental, cumulative gains
in watershed function and condition.
2.Regenerate the aquatic and terrestrial landscapes.
The concerted work of agencies, organizations and individuals has produced improvements in
watershed conditions. Some water quality parameters have improved, tens of thousands of
trees and aquatic flora have been planted, a number of in-stream barriers to fish have been
removed, and trail systems have expanded. There is a continued desire to improve watershed
conditions, contribute to de-listing the Toronto Area of Concern (RAP), and regenerate the
Mouth of the Don into an internationally recognized example of a healthy urban river. However,
continued development and urban intensification, coupled with the impacts of climate change
will place additional pressures on the ecosystems of the watershed. Future gains will be
contingent on maintaining the enthusiasm and support of the local community, businesses and
government for regeneration actions. In addition to ‘sweat equity’, support must include
guaranteed funding to cover the significant capital and on-going maintenance costs of the
requisite infrastructure.
3.Engage the people of the Don.
The Don River watershed has a long history of grassroots and agency involvement in and
advocacy for regeneration. Annual celebrations, such as Paddle the Don and the Richmond Hill
Mill Pond Splash, as well as major naturalization and brownfield rehabilitation projects in the
lower Don engage the community and provide a wider awareness of the Don. The time is ripe
to capitalize on that interest across the watershed, and reengage the people of the Don to
achieve the vision of a revitalized urban river. The engagement and voluntary uptake of
sustainable practices — backyard naturalization, lot level stormwater retrofits, water and energy
conservation and many others — by residents and businesses in the Don will be essential to
achieving the vision. Stewardship and outreach education to build understanding of the links
between landowner actions and watershed health will be key.
324
Top Priority Implementation Projects
This Implementation Guide identifies a 10 year work plan of proposed implementation projects
addressing all recommendations of the watershed plan, and organized according to primary
implementation mechanisms:
Policy;
Regeneration;
Land securement;
Stewardship and outreach education;
Operations and maintenance;
Enforcement; and
Monitoring.
The following list of top priority implementation projects has been selected with consideration
for their collective ability to address the three integral actions noted above, in an expeditious
and mutually supportive way. They are not listed in any particular order. The reference
numbers in brackets (i.e., 1-8) are the respective project numbers, as listed in the
implementation work plan tables within the main body of the Guide.
Policy and Policy Related Special Studies
1.Municipalities - Work with TRCA to investigate ways to incorporate the following new
policy directions into municipal planning documents (see Table 1.1 for details) (1-1):
a)All redevelopment should aim to manage for improved water balance on the
development site and net gain in stormwater control across the larger
redevelopment area; all greenfield development should aim to maintain
pre-development volumes of infiltration, evapotranspiration and surface runoff,
with particular emphasis on areas identified as having significant groundwater
recharge.
b)Support retrofits of source/lot level, conveyance and end of pipe stormwater
management measures in existing developments and redevelopment projects
on a comprehensive basis.
c)Require Master Environmental Servicing Plans (MESPs) to be undertaken in
conjunction with planning for urban redevelopment, including redevelopment in
the four provincially designated Urban Growth Centres, municipally identified
redevelopment areas, major infrastructure projects, and major regeneration
projects.
d)Develop strategies and policies to promote sustainable urban form, including
sustainable infrastructure, transportation and energy and resource conservation,
at the neighbourhood, site and building/project scales.
e)Identify a target Terrestrial Natural Heritage System and adopt policies to
protect and regenerate a minimum of 13% of the land base as natural cover in
the Don watershed.
f)Protect and enhance the quality and extent of public greenspaces and trails,
connecting and protecting the natural and cultural heritage of the Don
watershed.
325
g)Conduct comprehensive flood risk assessment plans where redevelopment
or intensification is proposed in a flood vulnerable area and/or a Special Policy
Area that would maintain or decrease the existing level of risk and detail flood
remediation, flood proofing, flood warning, and emergency response measures.
h)Adopt the Greater Golden Horseshoe Conservation Authorities’ Erosion &
Sediment Control Guideline for Urban Construction and update municipal
erosion and sediment control by-laws and fill by-laws as necessary.
i)Adopt policy to recognize and implement the Don River Fisheries Management
Plan.
j)Support updated and expanded monitoring programs, including ambient
monitoring, requirements for pre-development baseline monitoring, cumulative
effects monitoring and the monitoring of new technologies to assess their
contributions to watershed improvements.
2.MEI, MMAH, municipalities, TRCA, AMO, CO, BILD - Establish development standards
for sustainable community design for application to new development proposals,
urban expansions, redevelopment, and intensification. Consider incorporation of LEED
for Neighbourhood and zerofootprint principles (1-3).
3.TRCA, municipalities and other approval agencies - Develop strategies for facilitating
innovative design projects and approvals (1-4).
4.Municipalities, TRCA, BILD – Promote a sustainable redeveloping neighbourhood
demonstration project and a sustainable greenfield neighbourhood demonstration
(1-5).
5.Municipalities, TRCA – Partner to develop a generic Terms of Reference for
redevelopment MESPs (1-7).
6.Each ORM municipality - Recognize the Don River Watershed Plan in its official plan, as
required by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. (1-10)
7.TRCA, municipalities - Undertake a scoped economic assessment of the implications
of implementing the watershed plan's integral recommendations, including: valuation of
ecosystem services; preparation of a methodology for applying the net gain approach;
and development of recommendations for applying fairness and equity in
implementation (1-23).
Regeneration
1.TRCA, municipalities and landowners – Develop sustainable neighbourhood retrofit
action plans using an integrated approach including residential social marketing,
naturalization, urban forest enhancement, stormwater management, infiltration, energy
and effectiveness monitoring (2-1).
2.Municipalities – Undertake end-of-pipe stormwater retrofit projects as opportunities
arise, as identified in municipal stormwater retrofit plans (2-2).
3.Municipalities, TRCA, developers, landowners – Implement stormwater source
controls (infiltration, evapotranspiration, re-use) as opportunities arise in new and
re-development, intensification and infrastructure projects, especially in priority
sub-basins (2-5).
4.Watershed residents, businesses, landowners – Adopt lot level sustainable practices
to improve support water balance, natural heritage and resource use objectives (e.g.,
rain gardens, rain barrels, downspout disconnections, back/front yard naturalization
(partial or complete), household water and energy conservation, waste reduction) (2-9).
326
5.Waterfront Toronto, TRCA, City of Toronto – Continue to implement the Lower Don
River West Remedial Flood Protection Project and the Don Mouth Naturalization
and Port Lands Flood Protection Project to address flood and erosion risk, stream
form, naturalization and aquatic habitat objectives (2-11, 2-12, 2-22, 2-28).
6.Toronto, TRCA – Complete a fluvial geomorphology study of Taylor/Massey Creek,
including: a complete geomorphic systems analysis of the creek; a risk assessment for
all valley land infrastructure and a long term concept to remediate identified concerns
(2-15).
7.Richmond Hill, TRCA – Develop hydrologic and hydraulic modelling for the Enford
Road area to confirm flood risk and potential mitigation alternatives (2-16).
8.Municipalities, TRCA – Remediate erosion in ravines and priority erosion control sites
(as identified in municipal and TRCA databases) where human health, property, or
infrastructure is at risk (2-17).
9.Municipalities, TRCA, NGOs – Develop and implement restoration implementation
plans for natural cover in the whitebelt (2-18) and for targeted lands in priority areas on
the ORM/Greenbelt (2-19) and in existing urban areas (2-20, 2-21).
10.DFO, MNR, TRCA, municipalities, NGOs - Improve native aquatic species diversity,
abundance and distribution, and protect and enhance habitat for Target Community
Indicator Species as outlined in the Don River Fisheries Management Plan (2-29).
11.TRCA, municipalities, NGOs - Undertake detailed planning and develop a long term
funding strategy to implement the Don Watershed Inter-regional Trails network (2-32)
and identify a conceptual route for a Don River Learning Trail (2-33).
12.Establish a facility (GTA-wide) for archaeological artefact storage and document
collections that is accessible to researchers (2-39).
13.Municipalities, TRCA – Pursue additional scoping and study, and implement the Maple
Nature Reserve (Quonset Hut), Mud Creek Neighbourhood, and Warden Woods
Residential Area concept site plans (2-40).
14.Businesses, TRCA, Municipalities, NGOs – Adopt the Partners in Project Green
Eco-Business Zone model and strategic elements of the Industrial Retrofit concept site
plan to engage watershed business communities in adopting sustainable practices.
Start with building relationships in the Leaside Business Area (2-41).
Land Securement
1.TRCA, municipalities, NGOs, golf courses, private landowners – Secure lands to
establish the missing links in municipal trails. Work with private landowners (e.g. golf
courses, hydro corridors) to acquire easements for trail access where acquisition is not
a suitable alternative (3-2, 3-7).
2.TRCA, Toronto, Waterfront Toronto – Seek opportunities to secure additional public
greenspace through the remediation of brownfield sites, re-establishment of a
naturalized mouth of the Don, and redevelopment of lands adjacent to the naturalized
river mouth (3-9).
3.Municipalities, MOE, TRCA – Ensure that publicly-owned lands appropriate for inclusion
into the greenspace system (e.g., regenerated landfill sites) remain as public lands and
any ownership or access issues are resolved (3-10).
327
Stewardship and Education
1.TRCA, municipalities, Green Building Council, BILD and other partners - Deliver
technology transfer workshops, seminars and materials for sustainable technologies
and urban form, site restoration best management practices, and LEED-type
certifications (4-1, 4-6, 4-11, 4-12).
2.Green Building Councils, TRCA, municipalities, BILD, NGOs, media - Continue to
provide opportunities for the public and media to see and learn about sustainable
home products and services (4-13).
3.TRCA, municipalities, NGOs – Develop a strategy for co-ordination of outreach
programs and a lot level marketing campaign (with residential, business and
institutional lands focus), as part of the sustainable neighbourhood retrofit action plans
(4-16, see 2-1).
4.Municipalities, TRCA – Develop and implement pilot outreach education programs for
encroachment on valley lands (residential and industrial) (4-19).
5.Municipalities, TRCA - Implement demonstration projects for stormwater management
retrofit, naturalization and other sustainable practices with the business and institutional
landowners (4-25).
6.TRCA, Municipalities, school boards, utilities, BILD, NGOs - Develop an outreach
program based on the results from the Renewable Energy Road Map to promote the
uptake of renewable energy technologies (4-36).
7.TRCA, School boards - Promote the EcoSchools program to all schools in the
watershed (4-37).
8.Municipalities, TRCA - Promote existing park stewardship programs in parks near
Urban Growth Centres. Enhance current programs with support for volunteer
naturalization projects, invasive species removal, habitat creation work, and monitoring
where suitable (4-47).
9.Develop a communications plan in partnership with Aboriginal groups and descendent
populations (4-58).
10.TRCA – Incorporate experiential learning about past people’s as a component to
existing public events such as tree plantings, festivals and family nature events
Operations and Maintenance
1.Municipalities, TRCA – Develop guidelines for design and establishment of municipal
stormwater facility maintenance programs, including monitoring, rehabilitation and
financing mechanisms, and conduct assessments of sediment accumulation in
stormwater ponds and develop prioritized lists of clean-out projects (5-1, 5-2, 5-3)
2.TRCA, municipalities – Undertake a flood risk reduction study to improve the hydraulic
capacity of road and rail crossings in flood vulnerable areas (5-14).
3.Toronto, TRCA - Prepare a flood emergency response plan for SPAs and flood
vulnerable areas, including an inventory of hazards, prioritization, and emergency
response protocols (5-16).
4.TRCA - Track advances in prediction of regional and local climate change and
re-assess local flood risks and management measures (5-17).
328
Enforcement
1.Various agencies, municipalities - Develop inter-jurisdictional compliance protocols
for erosion & sediment control, tree cutting, topsoil and land disturbance, dumping,
trespassing, and encroachment. Identify gaps in regulatory capability and capacity.
Identify options for addressing gaps. Develop resources and an implementation plan
(6-5).
Monitoring
1.TRCA and partners - Identify technologies that show promise and monitor their
performance using the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP) - i.e.,
rainwater collection and re-use, permeable pavement, infiltration chambers, engineered
media to remove phosphorus, groundwater and soil contamination risk with infiltration
technologies, chloride removal techniques, long term performance and maintenance
costs of any green technology, and green energy systems (7-1, 7-2).
2.TRCA, municipalities, MEI, BILD - Convene discussions with MEI and determine
mechanisms for requiring developers to monitor sustainable technologies and other
innovative design features in Urban Growth Centres to ensure performance targets are
met (7-4).
3.TRCA, municipalities - Launch cumulative effects monitoring programs for innovative
development design (7-6).
4.TRCA - Review recommendations for additional monitoring in the Don watershed as part
of the next review and update of the Regional Watershed Monitoring Network (7-9,
7-11, 7-12, 7-15, 7-19).
5.TRCA, municipalities - Develop and implement a program to monitor the success of
ecological regeneration projects and effectiveness of invasive species control sites
(7-27).
Tracking progress
Progress towards the objectives set out in the watershed plan will be tracked by looking at
watershed conditions compared with the target indicators identified in the plan. Changes and
trends in the watershed conditions will be monitored under the Regional Watershed Monitoring
Network and reported on a regular basis through publications such as the Don newsletter,
TRCA website, Don Watershed Report Card and the TRCA Living City Report Card.
In keeping with the theme of taking advantage of every opportunity to make improvements,
level of effort by watershed stakeholders will be another measure of success. The top priority
projects in the implementation guide will be used as a guide to track progress on key actions.
Regular input from municipal partners, the DWRC and other stakeholder groups will help to
capture the full picture of on-going and emerging projects in the watershed that contribute to
gains in environmental quality and community health.
Cooperation and sharing of resources and ideas will be essential to implementation of the
watershed plan’s recommendations. Recognizing that many issues raised in the Don
Watershed Plan are applicable to all watersheds in the GTA and are of interest to multiple
municipalities, TRCA proposes convening regular ad hoc meetings to build partnerships to
address these common challenges.
329
Attachment 3
ORMCP Watershed Planning Requirements -
Conformity Assessment for the Don River Watershed
September 2009
This report documents how requirements of sections 24 and 25 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan (MMAH, 2002) have been satisfied for the portions of the Don River Watershed located in the Oak
Ridges Moraine Area, based on direction provided by the provincial technical guidance documents
(Ministry of the Environment, 2007)1.
Subsection Requirement Conformity Assessment Document Reference
24.(1)Every upper-tier municipality
and single-tier municipality
shall, on or before April 22,
2003, begin preparing a
watershed plan, in accordance
with subsection 24.(3), for
every watershed whose
streams originate within the
municipality’s area of
jurisdiction.
Watershed planning and ongoing
watershed management have
been activities the Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) has carried out in
partnership with its municipalities
for a number of years. Therefore a
watershed plan was deemed to
have been initiated prior to April
22, 2003, although study
components required update to
varying degrees.
A watershed study was initiated by
the TRCA, in partnership with the
City of Toronto, Region of York,
and area municipalities for the Don
River watershed in 2004.
An interim report for the Don
Watershed ORM subwatersheds,
Don River Watershed – Conformity
to Sections 24 and 25 of the
ORMCP, was completed in March
2007. The final watershed plan
has been developed with
additional technical analysis and
detailed consultation with
municipal partners, stakeholders
and Conservation Authority Board
review.
A workplan to fulfill the watershed
planning requirements of the
ORMCP and direction to
commence the Don River
Watershed Plan in 2004 were
approved at the Sept. 26, 2003
meeting of the TRCA (Authority
Res. #A196/03).
Don River Watershed – Conformity
to Sections 24 and 25 of the
ORMCP
(TRCA, March, 2007).
Approval of the Don River
Watershed Plan and its supporting
documents is pending a TRCA
Board decision on Sept. 25, 2009.
24.(3)A watershed plan shall include,
as a minimum,
(a) a water budget and
conservation plan as set out
in section 25;
See conformity assessments for
sections 25.(1) and 25.(2).
See document references for
sections 25.(1) and 25.(2).
330
(b) land and water use and
management strategies;
The Don River Watershed Plan
describes recommended
management strategies regarding
existing and future land and water
use that will help to protect the
ecological and hydrological
features and functions in the Oak
Ridges Moraine Area. Key
strategies include the need to
protect and expand natural cover
and build sustainable
communities, particularly with an
aim to maintain or restore
pre-development water balance.
See Section 5, Don River
Watershed Plan
(c) a framework for
implementation, which may
include more detailed
implementation plans for
smaller geographic areas,
such as subwatershed
plans, or for specific subject
matter, such as
environmental management
plans;
Implementation direction
accompanies the recommended
management strategies noted in
section 24(3)(b).above.
The Don River Watershed Plan
Implementation Guide provides
more detailed implementation
direction for policy, regeneration
projects, etc. including supportive
maps and criteria.
See Section 5, Don River
Watershed Plan
See Don River Watershed Plan
Implementation Guide
(d) an environmental
monitoring plan;
The Don River Watershed Plan
includes recommendations
regarding changes or
enhancements to existing
environmental monitoring
programs and other area, site-or
issue-specific monitoring
requirements.
The Don River Watershed Plan
Implementation Guide provides
more detailed implementation
direction for the plan’s
recommendations.
See Section 5, Don River
Watershed Plan
See Section 7, Don River
Watershed Plan Implementation
Guide
(e) provisions requiring the use
of environmental
management practices and
programs, such as
programs to prevent
pollution, reduce the use of
pesticides and manage the
use of road salt; and,
The Don River Watershed Plan
contains recommendations
regarding the use of environmental
management practices and
programs. The Implementation
Guide further identifies practices
and policies applicable to the land
use planning and development
process.
See Section 5, Don River
Watershed Plan
See Sections 1 and 5, Don River
Watershed Plan Implementation
Guide
331
(f) criteria for evaluating the
protection of water quality
and quantity, hydrological
features and hydrological
functions.
The Don River Watershed Plan
identifies watershed goals,
objectives, indicators and targets
to be used to track or evaluate
long term watershed health. This
framework is updated, but based
on that in Forty Steps to a New Don
( the previous watershed
management strategy; TRCA,
1994).
The accompanying
Implementation Guide sets out
recommended policies to provide
guidance for the review of land use
proposals to evaluate protection of
groundwater and surface water
quality and quantity, hydrological
features and functions, as well as
terrestrial features and functions,
and aquatic communities and
habitat.
See Sections 2 and 3, Don River
Watershed Plan and supporting
current conditions reports.
Section 1, Don River Watershed
Plan Implementation Guide
24.(4)Major development is
prohibited unless,
(a) the watershed plan for the
relevant watershed,
prepared in accordance
with subsection 24.(3), has
been completed;
The interim report, Don River
Watershed – Conformity to
Sections 24 and 25 of the ORMCP,
was completed in March 2007 and
approved by the TRCA Board as
fulfillment of the ORMCP
requirements. The final watershed
plan has been developed with
additional technical analysis and
detailed consultation with
municipal partners, stakeholders
and the Conservation Authority
Board. The Don River Watershed
Plan and its background
documents now provide the basis
for satisfaction of the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan
requirements and supercede the
interim report. While the
management strategies remain
largely unchanged, the technical
direction and science has been
refined in the later work.
Don River Watershed – Conformity
to Sections 24 and 25 of the
ORMCP (TRCA, March 2007).
Approval of the Don River
Watershed Plan and its supporting
documents is pending a TRCA
Board decision on Sept. 25, 2009.
(b) the major development
conforms with the
watershed plan; and
See conformity assessment for
section 24.(3)
See document references for
section 24.(3)
332
(c) a water budget and
conservation plan, prepared in
accordance with section 25 and
demonstrating that the water
supply required for the major
development is sustainable, has
been completed.
See conformity assessments for
sections 25.(1) and 25.(2).
See document references for
sections 25.(1) and 25.(2)
24.(8)An application for major
development to which this
subsection applies shall not be
approved unless,
(a) the relevant municipality
has complied with clause
(c) of subsection 24.(4); or
See conformity assessments for
section 24.(4).
See document references for
section 24.(4)
(b) the applicant,
(i) identifies any
hydrologically sensitive
features and related
hydrological functions
on the site and how they
will be protected,
(ii) demonstrates that an
adequate water supply is
available for the
development without
compromising the
ecological integrity of the
Plan Area, and
(iii) provides, with respect to
the site and such other
land as the approval
authority considers
necessary, a water
budget and water
conservation plan that,
(A) characterizes
groundwater and
surface water flow
systems by means
of modelling,
(B) identifies the
availability, quantity
and quality of water
sources, and
(C) identifies water
conservation
measures.
For any applications received prior
to completion of watershed plans,
in accordance with the ORMCP,
conformity will have been reviewed
and confirmed through applicant
submitted studies.
333
25.(1)Every upper-tier municipality
and single-tier municipality
shall, on or before April 22,
2003, begin preparing a water
budget and conservation plan,
in accordance with subsection
25.(2), for every watershed
whose streams originate within
the municipality’s area of
jurisdiction.
A water budget study was initiated
by the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority, in
partnership with the City of Toronto,
Region of York, and area
municipalities for the Don River
Watershed as part of the overall
Don River Watershed Plan.
The Regional Municipality of York
identified the need for a water
conservation plan for the entire
Region in 1997. The Region’s Water
for Tomorrow program included a 6
year capital program along with a 2
year maintenance program. This 8
year program came to completion
in summer 2006, with a sustained
savings of 20.33 million litres per
average day.
In 2007 the Region completed its
Water Efficiency Master Plan
Update. The Region has begun to
implement programs recommended
in the master plan including water
efficient fixture rebates, subsidized
rain barrel sales, free pre-rinse
spray valve replacements for
commercial kitchens,
industrial/commercial/ institutional
water audits and capacity buy-back.
As new and updated programs
begin the Region maintains its
public and youth education
programs along with a shower head
and toilet flapper retrofit
maintenance program.
Approval to initiate the Don River
Watershed Planning Study
according to an initial work
program, including water budget
study, was granted at the Sept 26,
2003 meeting of the Authority
(Authority Res. #A196/03).
York Region Water Efficiency Master
Plan Update, 2007.
334
25.(2)A water budget and
conservation plan shall, as a
minimum,
(a) quantify the components of
the water balance equation,
including precipitation,
evapotranspiration,
groundwater inflow and outflow,
surface water outflow, change
in storage, water withdrawals
and water returns;
The Don River Watershed Plan
includes a quantitative description
of the major components of the
water balance equation on an
average annual basis, over the
watershed surface area. The water
budget was developed based on
land use characteristics,
interception abstractions,
vegetation, surficial soils, and
spatial variations in long term
average precipitation, temperature
and evaporation across the
watershed using Precipitation
Runoff Modeling System (PRMS)
software and the groundwater flow
model (MODFLOW) to conform to
the jurisdictional standard prepared
for the source water protection
program.
See Section 3, Don River Watershed
Plan
See Geology and Groundwater
Resources – Report on Current
Conditions (TRCA, 2009).
(b) characterize groundwater
and surface water flow systems
by means of modelling;
The groundwater flow system of the
Don River watershed has been
characterized by development and
calibration of a groundwater flow
model that utilizes MODFLOW
software.
The surface water flow system of
the Don River watershed has been
characterized by development and
calibration of a hydrologic model
based on Visual OTTHYMO
software.
See Geology and Groundwater
Resources – Report on Current
Conditions (TRCA, 2009).
See Surface Water
Hydrology/Hydraulics and
Stormwater Management - Report
on Current Conditions (TRCA, 2009)
Don River Hydrology Update. MMM
Ltd., 2004
(c) identify,
(i) targets to meet the water
needs of the affected
ecosystems,
(ii) the availability, quantity and
quality of water sources, and
(iii) goals for public education
and for water conservation;
See 24(3)(f) above for targets and
criteria.
The Regional Municipality of York’s
Water for Tomorrow program
outlined specific goals for both
education and water conservation
measures as outlined in the initial
scope of work in 1997. The Water
Efficiency Master Plan Update
recommends new and/or updated
programs for public education and
water conservation measures. New
goals for education and water
conservation measures will be set
as program implementation plans
are completed.
See 24(3)(f) above for targets and
criteria.
York Region Water Efficiency Master
Plan Update (2007)
335
(d) develop a water-use profile
and forecast;
All upper-tier and single-tier
municipalities in the Don River
watershed have developed water
use profiles and forecasts as part of
preparing water use assessment
reports and/or water efficiency
plans and programs.
York Region has developed
water-use profiles and forecasts as
part of the Water and Wastewater
Master Plan Update, 2009. The
forecasts incorporate the effect of
planned water conservation
measures on future demand. These
profiles and forecasts are updated
with the master plans.
Drawing on the municipal data and
additional information from the
Permit to Take Water database, a
watershed-based water use profile
was prepared as part of the Don
River Watershed Plan.
See section 3 of York Region’s
Water and Wastewater Master Plan
Update, 2009
See Baseflow and Water Use
Assessment – Report on Current
Conditions (TRCA, 2009).
See Geology and Groundwater
Resources – Report on Current
Conditions (TRCA, 2009).
(e) evaluate plans for water
facilities such as pumping
stations and reservoirs;
Plans for any such facilities are
being evaluated by York Region as
part of its updated water supply
strategy and will be reviewed in the
context of the updated watershed
information.
York Region’s Water and
Wastewater Master Plan Update,
2009
(f) identify and evaluate,
(i) water conservation measures
such as public education,
improved management
practices, the use of flow
restricting devices and other
hardware, water reuse and
recycling, and practices and
technologies associated with
water reuse and recycling,
(ii) water conservation
incentives such as full cost
pricing, and
(iii) ways of promoting water
conservation measures and
water conservation incentives;
All upper-tier and single-tier
municipalities in the Don River
watershed have developed water
efficiency plans and programs that
identify and evaluate water
conservation measures, incentives
and ways of promoting water
conservation measures and
incentives. The Don River
Watershed Plan supports the
recommendations of the municipal
water efficiency plans and
programs and describes
management strategies that would
further contribute to achieving the
objectives and targets of these
plans/programs.
York Region’s water rates are
currently based on full cost pricing.
See Section 5.0 in Don River
Watershed Plan (2009)
See Sections 5.0 and 6.0 of York
Region’s Water Efficiency Master
Plan Update for the identification,
evaluation and recommendation of
water conservation measures and
education.
336
(g) analyse the costs and
benefits of the matters
described in clause (f);
All upper-tier and single-tier
municipalities in the Don River
watershed have developed water
efficiency plans and programs that
analyse the costs and benefits of
their recommended water
conservation measures, incentives
and promotion strategies.
See Section 5.2.3 of York Region’s
Water Efficiency Master Plan Update
for the cost analysis of water
conservation measures.
(h) require the use of specified
water conservation measures
and incentives;
York Region’s Water for Tomorrow
program used specific water
conservation measures and
incentives as part of the original
capital plan. The Water Efficiency
Master Plan Update also
recommends the use of specific
water conservation measures and
incentives including water efficient
fixture rebates, subsidized rain
barrel sales, free pre-rinse spray
valve replacements for commercial
kitchens,
industrial/commercial/institutional
water audits and capacity buy-back.
See Section 6.0 of York Region’s
Water Efficiency Master Plan Update
for the recommended program
strategy.
(i) contain an implementation
plan for those specified
measures and incentives that
reconciles the demand for
water with the water supply;
York Region developed an
implementation plan for the
program as part of the scope of
work in 1998. The Water Efficiency
Master Plan Update has
recommended an updated program
strategy. The development of
implementation plans/strategies for
components of the updated
program are currently being
developed.
See Section 6.0 of York Region’s
Water Efficiency Master Plan Update
for the recommended program
strategy.
(j) provide for monitoring of the
water budget and water
conservation plan for
effectiveness.
York Region’s Water Use Efficiency
Master Plan Update recommends a
monitoring and Evaluation program
which is implemented with each
program component.
The Don River Watershed Plan
includes recommendations
regarding changes or
enhancements to existing
environmental monitoring programs
and other area, site-or issue-specific
monitoring requirements that
provide for, or improve capacity for
monitoring of the water budget.
See Section 9.0 of York Region’s
Water Efficiency Master Plan Update
See Sections 5 and 6, Don River
Watershed Plan.
See Section 7, Don River Watershed
Plan Implementation Guide.
337
Except with respect to land in
Settlement Areas, all
development and site
alteration with respect to land
in a subwatershed are
prohibited if they would cause
the total percentage of the
area of the subwatershed that
has impervious surfaces to
exceed,
(a) 10 per cent; or
Current and projected future per
cent impervious cover has been
assessed for each Oak Ridges
Moraine subwatershed (based on
methods suggested in draft
Technical Paper #13 which
exclude Settlement Areas, utilizing
subwatershed boundaries defined
in draft Technical Paper #9).
These estimates indicate that no
Oak Ridges Moraine
subwatersheds in the Don River
Watershed exceed the 10%
impervious cover criteria for
current conditions (based on 2002
land use), nor will they exceed
10% upon build-out of municipal
official plans approved as of
February 2006.
See Don River Watershed
Impervious Cover Assessment
Technical Briefing Note (TRCA,
2007).
27.(1)
(b) any lower percentage
specified in the applicable
watershed plan.
No lower percentage is specified.
1.Ministry of the Environment (2007) Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan – Watershed Plans,
Technical Paper #9.
Ministry of the Environment (2007) Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan – Water Budgets, Technical
Paper #10.
Ministry of the Environment (2007) Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan – Water Conservation
Plans, Technical Paper #11.
Ministry of the Environment (2007) Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan – Subwatersheds
(Impervious Surfaces), Technical Paper #13.
_________________________________________
338
RES.#A150/09 -WESTERN WATERFRONT MASTER PLAN
City of Toronto. To provide an update on the recently approved City of
Toronto "Western Beaches Master Plan" (May 2009) and obtain direction
to assist the City in the implementation of improvements to the public
realm within the Western Waterfront.
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Peter Milczyn
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) support and endorse the vision
and objectives of the Western Waterfront Master Plan (May 2009);
THAT staff continue to participate as part of the inter-agency working group to identify
priorities and find shared opportunities for implementation of the Western Waterfront
Master Plan;
AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto be so advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
On August 5 - 6, 2009, the City of Toronto Council endorsed the report entitled "Western
Waterfront Master Plan" (May 2009). The Master Plan provides an overall vision for improving
parkland, beaches, breakwalls, trails, promenades, roads, bridges, servicing and recreational
facilities within the Western Waterfront. The Master Plan applies to the waterfront area between
the Humber River and Exhibition Place and includes Sunnyside Beach and Marilyn Bell Park.
The Western Waterfront Master Plan area is approximately 120 hectares in size and 4
kilometers in length. It is bounded by the Humber River to the west, the CN Rail/Gardiner
Expressway corridor on the north, Exhibition Place to the east and Lake Ontario on the south.
The Western Waterfront is a significant waterfront asset that offers one of the City’s longest
unobstructed views of Lake Ontario. It has over 40 hectares of parkland, two trails (Martin
Goodman and Humber River) and three beaches (Sunnyside, Budapest and Sir Gzowski)
jointly known as the Western Beaches. It is home to a number of recreational clubs, including
the Toronto Sailing and Canoe Club, the Argonaut Rowing Club and the Boulevard Club.
Several significant facilities from the early 20th century include Sunnyside Pavilion, Gus Ryder
Pool, Boulevard Club, Royal Canadian Legion, Joy Oil Gas Station and Palais Royale. A
breakwall in Lake Ontario extends across the area and includes a new 600-metre multi-sport
watercourse adjacent to Marilyn Bell Park.
In October, 2007, the City retained a multi-disciplinary consulting team led by planningAlliance,
a planning/urban design firm, to prepare the Master Plan. The eight sub-consultants have
expertise in park design and recreation, landscape planning, ecology, environmental
assessments, road design, coastal engineering, heritage/archaeology and public art. A study
steering committee was formed, comprised of the heads of the City of Toronto Waterfront
Secretariat, Technical Services, Toronto Water, Parks, Forestry and Recreation and City
Planning. An inter-agency work group included representatives of these divisions as well as
Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) and Toronto Transit Commission (TTC).
339
A strong civic engagement strategy was a prerequisite of the Master Plan. A community
advisory group was established to act as a ‘sounding board’ for public stakeholders with
representatives of resident associations, lessees and landowners, pedestrian and cycling
communities, natural heritage and cultural interests and youth. Four meetings of the community
advisory group and five public open houses/meetings were held during the preparation of the
Master Plan. Numerous other smaller meetings and discussions were held with individual
stakeholders and interested members of the public. The December 9, 2008, public open house
fulfilled the requirement for a mandatory public meeting for Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal
Class Environmental Assessment (EA) process.
Highlights of the Master Plan
The Master Plan provides an overall vision for parkland, beaches, breakwalls, trails,
promenades, roads, bridges, servicing and recreational facilities within the Western Waterfront.
The objectives of the Master Plan are to create a beautiful public realm, enhance public access
to and along the water’s edge, provide for a range of compatible land uses, enhance, celebrate
and interpret the area’s heritage and beautify Lake Shore Boulevard West.
The Master Plan is to be implemented in three phases: short (1-5 years), medium (5-20 years)
and long term initiatives (20+ years). The short term projects focus on more readily achievable
and affordable initiatives. Medium and long term projects are more expensive and may require
further study prior to implementation. The concept plan and implementation plan of the Master
Plan are included in Attachments 1 and 2 to this report. A copy of the entire Master Plan and its
annexes can be obtained at http://www.toronto.ca/waterfront/index.htm.
Improved Beaches
Beaches would be expanded and enhanced as a priority, as the Master Plan recognizes the
lake and beach as the major recreational attractions of the Western Waterfront. A beach curtain
is being installed for the 2009 swimming season at Sunnyside as a 3-year pilot project. If the
pilot is successful, the enclosed swimming area would be expanded in size to 12 hectares by
reconstructing the existing breakwall and filling in gaps west from Sunnyside to the Humber
River. The reconstructed breakwall would also stabilize the shoreline and enhance the
protected flat water for non-motorized boaters. Options to deflect flow from the Humber River
into this area would need to be investigated to ensure adequate water quality at the beaches.
Improvements to Existing Breakwall
The Master Plan focuses on improving the existing breakwall due to the relatively low cost ($57
million) and the imminent need for its repair. The potential to lengthen the Western Beaches
Watercourse Facility by construction of a new breakwall further out in the lake is also
maintained. Resolution of outstanding ownership, maintenance and funding responsibilities
related to the breakwall with the federal and provincial governments will be required in order to
reconstruct the breakwall in the short to medium term as proposed in the Master Plan. City staff
has initiated discussions with the other levels of government.
340
Re-Configuration of Lake Shore Boulevard West
The Master Plan proposes that Lake Shore Boulevard West be shifted north between Ellis
Avenue and Dunn Avenue over the medium term. This would create nine hectares of new
waterfront parkland, provide better and shorter north-south pedestrian connections to the
waterfront and more room for Martin Goodman Trail. East of Dowling Avenue, the eastbound
lanes of Lake Shore Boulevard West would be relocated to the north side of the Gardiner,
which adds 2.5 hectares of usable parkland to Marilyn Bell Park. The Master Plan proposes that
an EA be initiated in the short term to address the re-alignment as well as potential narrowing of
Lake Shore Boulevard West within the Western Waterfront.
Better Pedestrian/Cycling Connections
North-south pedestrian/cycling connections would be improved in the short term by closing
Colborne Lodge Drive and Dowling Avenue to private vehicular traffic and improving the
Gardiner Expressway/rail underpasses at Windermere and Ellis avenues and Parkside Drive.
With the realignment of Lake Shore Boulevard, the Jameson bridge over the Gardiner would
become a pedestrian bridge to create an attractive new entrance to Marilyn Bell Park. Over the
long term, the existing pedestrian bridge at Roncesvalles Avenue would be rebuilt and a new
pedestrian bridge would be built at Wilson Park Road.
Two new traffic signals would be added on Lake Shore Boulevard West at Dowling Avenue and
at the Boulevard Club/Palais Royale. The new Dowling Avenue signal would be done in the
short term while the Boulevard Club signal would await realignment of Lake Shore Boulevard
West. Pedestrian crossings at the six existing signalized intersections would also be improved.
Three major east-west pedestrian/cycling connections would be provided: an improved Martin
Goodman Trail; a new promenade; and a rebuilt and realigned boardwalk. Martin Goodman
Trail would run along the south side of Lake Shore Boulevard West and be designed for
higher-speed users. The new promenade would be located south of it for lower-speed users. A
continuous public boardwalk would extend along the water’s edge. The promenade and
boardwalk would be linked by a network of paths.
Three Recreation Hubs
Three major recreation hubs are proposed: at the relocated Joy Oil Station; Sunnyside Pavilion;
and Dowling Avenue. Moderate expansion of facilities and concessions in these areas would be
allowed. Local recreation facilities would be expanded to serve the adjacent neighbourhoods of
Swansea, High Park and Parkdale. Public parking lots would generally be relocated to the north
side of Lake Shore Boulevard West to free up additional parkland south of Lake Shore. The new
recreation hub at Dowling would provide a boat launch for canoes and kayaks.
Environmental Assessment Approvals
The Western Waterfront Master Plan completes Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Class EA for
water, wastewater and stormwater services; roads and bridges; and, the shoreline by means of
a Class EA Master Plan. Phase 1 of the Class EA process identifies the problem or opportunity,
while Phase 2 identifies alternative solutions and establishes a preferred solution.
341
The Master Plan will fulfill the requirements for projects which are minor in nature (Schedule A)
or include improvements and minor expansions to existing facilities (Schedule B). For projects
that include the construction of new facilities or major expansions to existing facilities (Schedule
C), Phases 3 and 4 of the Class EA process will need to be completed. Phase 3 of the Class EA
process identifies alternative design concepts while Phase 4 is the preparation of an
environmental study report summarizing all components of public consultation, evaluation of
alternatives and the rationale for the preferred alternative. A list of the proposed projects and
their EA status is included in Attachment 2.
The draft Master Plan was circulated on April 17, 2009, to the Ontario ministries of Environment,
Transportation, Natural Resources and Culture; the federal departments of Fisheries and
Oceans and Environment Canada; Waterfront Toronto; Toronto Port Authority; and, First
Nations. No comments have been received in response to the circulation.
Preliminary Master Plan Implementation Costs
A preliminary estimate (in 2009 dollars) prepared by the study consultants of the capital cost for
full implementation of the Master Plan is:
Phase 1 (1-5 years) - $23.5 million
Phase 2 (6-20 years) - $196.9 million
Phase 3 (20+ years) - $42.0 million
Total $262.4 million
The cost of Phase 3 would increase in the range of $70 million if deflector islands at the
Humber River are constructed.
These preliminary cost estimates are based on a concept plan level of analysis and the
consultants’ experience with similar projects. A contingency of 30% for land-based projects and
40% for in-lake projects is included. Cost escalation would further increase the costs beyond
2009 dollars, depending on when the projects are implemented.
RATIONALE
The Western Waterfront Master Plan is a coherent plan that knits together all of the elements of
the public realm within the Western Waterfront. The implementation strategy starts with small
incremental, low cost changes in the short term and progresses to more ambitious but costly
projects over the long term. An important innovation of the Master Plan is to embed a Class EA
Master Plan for municipal infrastructure within an urban design document.
The Master Plan recognizes the tension that exists between the role of the Western Waterfront
as an important waterfront park space as part of Toronto waterfront revitalization initiatives and
as a major transportation corridor. Its vision capitalizes on the lake and beach as the greatest
assets of the area. It identifies the need to change the location and character of Lake Shore
Boulevard West as a fundamental step toward expanding and improving the waterfront
parklands.
342
The Secondary Plan for the Central Waterfront: Making Waves, is the City of Toronto's
regulatory document defining land use along Toronto's central waterfront. The secondary plan
covers the waterfront from Coxwell Avenue in the east to Dowling Avenue in the west. The plan
also covers a portion of the Western Waterfront study area and provides additional policies to
guide the Master Plan. Policies identified in the secondary plan that are supported in the
Master Plan are:
achieving compatibility with the planning and urban design goals and objectives of the
Central Waterfront Secondary Plan and the Toronto Official Plan;
enhancing public access to the water's edge;
balancing vehicular and pedestrian needs;
increasing accessibility to parks and open space areas;
protecting for and planning for improved public transit;
improving Lake Shore Boulevard West to be a generously landscaped urban boulevard that
maximizes opportunities for pedestrian crossings and provides ample room for commuter
cycling and pedestrians; and
twining the Martin Goodman Trail with a pedestrian boardwalk.
The Western Waterfront Master Plan also supports goal of TRCA's Lake Ontario Waterfront
Development Program which is "to create a handsome waterfront, balanced in its land uses,
which will complement adjacent areas, taking cognizance of existing residential development
and making accessible, wherever possible, features which warrant public use".
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Implementation of the proposed projects in the Master Plan will be essential to realize the plan's
vision. An inter-divisional staff committee including TRCA and TTC will be established to
coordinate the work program for implementation of the Master Plan. The group will identify
priorities, shared opportunities, divisional responsibilities, phasing and resource requirements
to be addressed in future budget processes.
Community advisory committees will be created for major projects within the Western
Waterfront to continue civic engagement and provide advice on the implementation of the
Master Plan, including future phasing and design. The community advisory committee will
ensure that questions or issues raised by the public will be explored in greater detail during the
design and implementation phases.
Components of the Western Waterfront Master Plan that touch the water's edge will be
coordinated through Aquatic Habitat Toronto (formerly Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat
Restoration) to incorporate strategic habitat enhancements into the final design as well as
meeting all regulatory agency requirements.
Report prepared by: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313
Emails: ngaffney@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313
Emails: ngaffney@trca.on.ca
Date: September 10, 2009
Attachments: 2
343
Attachment 1
344
Attachment 2
345
346
_________________________________________
347
RES.#A151/09 -REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK
Transportation Master Plan. The Regional Municipality of York has
formally requested Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
comments on their Transportation Master Plan.
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
WHEREAS The Regional Municipality of York Council has requested comments from
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) on its 2009 draft Transportation
Master Plan Update (TMP) by September 29, 2009;
AND WHEREAS TRCA recognizes that overall, the Region’s draft TMP is comprehensive,
forward thinking, innovative and in particular, the sustainability principles are reflective of
TRCA's objectives for The Living City;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA fully supports the Region's draft TMP
commitment to exceeding the requirements of the environmental assessment process by
ensuring local and adjacent municipalities minimize infrastructure needs while enhancing
natural heritage and environmental features;
THAT TRCA supports the 2003 recommendation of its Executive Committee that it does
not support the opening of the unopened road allowance between Keele Street and
Dufferin Street without further study of the need for an east - west transportation corridor
on a more comprehensive basis that would include the consideration of other potential
locations;
THAT the Region be requested to amend the draft TMP to include the recommendation
that an Individual Environmental Assessment (IEA) that includes a comprehensive
network analysis and an environmental impact assessment be completed to determine a
preferred transportation strategy for the area, as was committed to in the Region's
recommendations for the final 2003 Teston Road Class EA;
THAT TRCA work with the Rouge Park Alliance and Regional Municipality of York to
ensure the EA process for 14th Avenue satisfies all concerns;
AND FURTHER THAT the ministries of Natural Resources and Environment, as well as the
Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Rouge Park Alliance and City of Vaughan be so
advised.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
On May 28, 2009, York Regional Council requested comments from TRCA with respect to the
2009 draft TMP update. The TMP update was initiated in 2006 to coordinate with the Region's
Growth Management Plan and Water and Wastewater Master Plan updates. Staff has
participated on the technical advisory committee for this TMP and has provided technical
comments through its development. The draft TMP was formally circulated to TRCA for review,
with comments being due on September 29, 2009.
348
The draft TMP update is based on current and detailed transportation modelling studies and
provides detailed schedules of road and transit infrastructure to meet the Region's growth
planning needs until the year 2031. Overall, TRCA staff is very supportive of most
recommendations of the TMP as it:
is a reflection of the Region's sustainability principles as documented in their 2007 York
Region Sustainability Strategy;
provides a transit oriented perspective that is inclusive of pedestrian and cycling amenities;
integrates good planning and design principles that will be carried forward into its updated
official plan and water and wastewater master plan update;
integrates the 2008 Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan;
commits to protecting and enhancing the Region's natural and cultural heritage that
includes avoiding, where possible, significant natural areas;
considers stormwater and water balance measures to counter the adverse impacts of
urbanization;
commits to minimizing infrastructure needs and enhance the natural environment;
commits to providing energy efficiency; and,
commits to minimizing the carbon footprint that will be generated from the infrastructure
and services.
RATIONALE
While TRCA staff has concerns with some of the proposed road widenings or new roadways in
terms of impacts to watercourses and natural areas, TRCA is confident that these issues will be
resolved through the EA process that will be completed for each project. More specifically,
TRCA staff share the concern of Rouge Park Alliance staff regarding the proposed width,
capacity and design of any proposed widening of 14th Avenue in the Town of Markham within
Bob Hunter Memorial Park, as well as their concerns with respect to the location, needs
assessment and potential impacts to Rouge River tributaries also within the Town of Markham
that are proposed for widening roads or new crossings of Highway 404. TRCA staff is
committed to working with Rouge Park Alliance and regional staff to ensure that the EA process
is used to both satisfy our concerns, and to ensure the Region's commitments in the TMP to
protect and enhance natural and cultural heritage, consider stormwater and water balance
measures, minimize infrastructure needs and enhance the natural environment, are fulfilled.
However, TRCA staff does have a significant concern with the proposal in the draft TMP to open
the unopened road allowance on Teston Road between Keele and Dufferin streets. Staff
recommend that the Authority respectfully request that the TMP be revised accordingly. This
crossing is through an area of tremendous environmental significance. In 2003, the Teston
Road Class EA undertaken by the Region recommended a "Do Nothing" approach to this
section of road, and a commitment was made to study this section through an IEA should there
ever be need to reassess the "Do Nothing" option. In 2003, TRCA concerns for the area were
recognized by the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and the Region, and echoed by the Ministry
of Natural Resources (MNR) and the Don Watershed Regeneration Council. It is the
recommendation of TRCA staff that the draft TMP be amended to support the development of a
preferred transportation strategy for the area through an IEA, and that the recommended
strategy be based on both a comprehensive network analysis and a detailed environmental
impact assessment. The rationale for this recommendation, and the planning history of the
Teston Road Class EA, is provided below for information.
349
Significance of the Unopened Road Allowance on Teston Road between Keele and
Dufferin Streets
The unopened road allowance on Teston Road between Keele Street and Dufferin streets
crosses an area of extremely high quality habitat. The unopened road allowance crosses the
headwaters of the East Don River. This is one of the last remaining sections of the Don
watershed that remains in a relatively natural state and is highly sensitive to change. Its
environmental significance has been provincially recognized as an Area of Natural and
Scientific Interest (ANSI) in the 1980s because of its upland and kettle lake features. For these
reasons, TRCA also designated it as the McGill Environmentally Significant Area (ESA) in the
1980s. But most importantly, the road crossing would traverse one of the few remaining Natural
Core Areas that exists in the Don watershed through the Oak Ridges Moraine. The valley
steepness is significant, making the landform character of the area noteworthy in itself. The
environmental features, together with the functions that this area provides to the health of the
Don watershed as a whole, are significant.
The McGill ESA is the last remaining large block of forest in the Don watershed. It contains
numerous rare plants and sensitive animal species. Many amphibian species, such as gray
treefrogs, indicate that the combination of high quality forests and wetlands now reside only in
this portion of the watershed. The species indicate the quality of feature from which waters flow
to the lower parts of the Don River and into Lake Ontario. Many of the forests rest on sandy
soils that make it suitable for dry fresh oak communities that are not found in the clay plain in
other parts of the Don watershed; the size of the feature is unequalled in the lower watershed. It
is imperative to the health of the Don watershed that this area not be bisected again. All
previous intrusions into the ESA have had incremental impacts on the site. The upper Don
watershed was the last area where whip-poor-will bred in the Toronto region; they have not
been seen there in the last twenty years. The ESA currently has 42 hectares of forest interior, 17
of which are located in the subject area and seven of which are estimated to be lost by the road
extension. Intrusions into the ESA would cause loss to core areas, impacts to wildlife habitat
and species, impacts to linkage functions and connectivity, and alteration of surface and
groundwater quality. The costs of the degradation are seen as significant by TRCA. Our
concerns are shared by MNR, the Don Watershed Regeneration Council and the public interest
groups who worked for years in favour of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. These
concerns are also recognized by York Region specifically within the York Region Significant
Woodlands Study and the regional Greening Strategy. Together, these tools enable the
protection and enhancement of forested areas across the Region and confirm that this forest is
regionally significant.
TRCA has been striving to maintain and enhance the high quality habitat of this area and the
corridor function that it performs to the north and south of this area for decades. These efforts
would be jeopardized through any intrusion in or through the ESA, as would occur if the Region
links Teston Road through the unopened road allowance. The exceptional environmental
characteristics of this area would be severely degraded. In addition, this section of road
crossing would require efforts to avoiding impacts to the decommissioned Keele Valley Landfill
Site and the decommissioned City of Vaughan Waste Disposal Site. These concerns are of
particular concern to MOE.
350
Planning History of Teston Road Between Pine Valley Drive and Bathurst Street
On February 24, 2003, the Region filed the Teston Road Class EA with MOE for an area of road
between Pine Valley Drive and Bathurst Street in the City of Vaughan. The 2003 Class EA
studied an area that included both open road, as well an unopened road allowance between
Keele Street and Dufferin Street. The Class EA approved recommended alternatives for various
sections of the road, as follows:
Pine Valley Drive to Weston Road - reconstruct as a two-lane rural road to current regional
standards.
Weston Road to Jane Street - reconstruct as a four to five-lane urban road, including a new
interchange at Highway 400.
Jane Street to Keele Street - reconstruct as a five-lane urban road.
Keele Street to Dufferin Street -“Do Nothing”.
Dufferin Street to Bathurst Street - reconstruct as a three-lane rural road.
The "Do Nothing" alternative for the Keele to Dufferin streets section was based on the
significant environmental impacts of building a new roadway that would be approximately 20
metres wide though the valley corridor and significant forest, combined with the high cost
implications associated with the establishment of a new roadway within this link at $45 million,
that far outweighed any benefits shown through the transportation modelling studies. The
conclusion was that the impacts associated with opening the unopened road allowance were
greater than the benefits of providing a continuous link in the transportation corridor. The 2003
Class EA therefore recommended a "Do Nothing" approach.
While TRCA had no issues with recommendations for the majority of the sections of road, it
shared the concerns of MOE and MNR that such an approach could be seen as "piece
mealing" should it be shown through future study that the discontinuous link would not be a
viable option. As such, subsequent to the filing of the Environmental Study Report (ESR),
TRCA, MOE and MNR, met with the Region to discuss concerns. TRCA comments to the
Region were approved at Executive Committee Meeting #1/03, held on March 7, 2003, through
Resolution #B12/03, as follows:
WHEREAS an Environmental Study Report (ESR) has been submitted to the Minister of
the Environment (MOE) in support of the Class EA for Teston Road improvements, and;
WHEREAS the McGill Area Environmentally Significant Area (ESA #73) is within the study
area, specifically subject to an unopened section of the Teston Road allowance between
Keele and Dufferin Streets, and
WHEREAS TRCA staff and the Don Watershed Council have expressed their significant
concern over the environmental impact of connecting Teston Road through the McGill
Area ESA, and;
WHEREAS the ESR submitted to the MOE concludes that the opening of Teston Road
through the McGill Area ESA does not need to be approved at this time, however should
be subject to further study at a later date;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Region of York be advised that the
Authority concurs with the Region's intent to remove most references to the link between
Keele and Dufferin Streets in the ESR received February 25, 2003;
351
THAT the Region of York be advised that the TRCA does not support assessing the need
for the McGill area connection through further study, but rather through an individual EA
which will assess the need for an east - west transportation corridor on a more
comprehensive basis including the consideration of other potential locations;
THAT staff is directed to work with the Region to ensure that the Environmental Features
and Functions of the McGill Area ESA are protected from any incompatible infrastructure
through any future work;
AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report back to the Authority on any future
studies as necessary.
In a letter dated April 9, 2003 addressed to TRCA, MOE and MNR, the Region responded to the
agencies' concerns with a commitment to ensuring that should the recommended "Do Nothing"
alternative be reconsidered by the Region in the future, the Region would commit to studying
the area as an IEA.
Current Planning Context of Teston Road between Keele and Dufferin Streets
The 2009 draft TMP update recommends, as part of its long-term road network and transit
plans, the connection of Teston Road between Keele and Dufferin streets.This recommendation
is based only on a travel demand study and environmental evaluation that were completed at
the macro level. There is no provision in the draft TMP to complete an IEA for this area as was
committed to through the 2003 Class EA. Rather, the draft TMP simply states that a four lane
connection is needed:
to provide east-west connectivity; 1.
because it is part of the Mid-York East West Corridor Solution; 2.
because it provides for better use of the Teston-400 Interchange; and3.
because if deleted, additional capacity on other east-west corridors would need to be 4.
provided.
Regional staff has concurred that this same outcome as was determined in the 2003 Class EA
is plausible in any future EA. The Region recognizes the importance of this area and that is
why, in 2003, they agreed to undertake any future study as an IEA. TRCA staff is seeking
commitment from the Region that any future study for this area be undertaken as an IEA and
recommending that the draft TMP be so revised. To satisfy staff concerns, it is imperative that
the IEA include a comprehensive needs and justification study in concert with a detailed
environmental evaluation of the area. The IEA must also consider pertinent provincial
legislation, including but not limited to the Oak Ridges Moraine Act, the Greenbelt Act, the
Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statements, as this provincial legislation takes precedent
over all municipal planning decisions.
NEXT STEPS
TRCA staff will continue to liaise with staff of the Regional Municipality of York to finalize the
transportation master plan.
352
TRCA staff through the Environmental Assessment Planning section will participate in the
EAs associated with Teston Road between Keele and Dufferin streets and will report back to
the Executive or Authority as necessary.
Report prepared by: Beth Williston, extension 5217
Emails: bwilliston@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Beth Williston, extension 5217
Emails: bwilliston@trca.on.ca
Date: September 14, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A152/09 -CITY OF TORONTO WET WEATHER FLOW MONITORING PROGRAM
Purchase of Six Extended Deployment Conductivity Sensors. Award of
sole source contract to purchase six extended deployment conductivity
sensors for continuous winter and spring watercourse monitoring as part
of the City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow Monitoring Program.
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT Rockland Oceanographic Services Inc. (ROSI) be awarded a sole source contract
to supply Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) with the instrumentation
necessary to continuously monitor conductivity and temperature at six permanent
watercourse monitoring stations as part of the City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow
Monitoring Program at a total cost not exceed $54,126.00 plus applicable taxes and
shipping.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The City of Toronto completed its Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan (WWFMMP)
which utilizes various control strategies to manage combined sewer overflows and stormwater
discharges. Toronto Water is now undertaking a 25-year monitoring plan to install and operate
several watercourse monitoring stations within the City's jurisdiction for the purpose of
assessing tributary water quality/quantity before and after the implementation of the City's
WWFMMP strategies.
As TRCA has extensive expertise and an on-going role in the monitoring of watercourses within
TRCA's jurisdiction, in November of 2008 the City entered into an agreement with TRCA to lead
the implementation of 14 automated water quality/quantity monitoring stations strategically
located throughout Toronto. Further to the 2008 agreement, the City has requested that
continuous monitoring of conductivity be undertaken at six of the 14 stations. Each station was
chosen as a result of historic concerns of high chloride concentrations during the winter and
spring. The stations are located at the outlet of larger watercourses and will collect data at the
same location over the next 25 years. Watercourses include Etobicoke Creek, Humber River,
Mimico Creek, Don River, Rouge River and Highland Creek.
353
RATIONALE
The City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow Monitoring Program is a high priority project for both the
City and TRCA. The project seeks to document changes in water quality and quantity from
various Wet Weather Flow mitigation projects being undertaken in the City.
The City has authorized the purchase of six conductivity sensors and have specified the make
and model of sensor to be used for this initiative. The sensors are designed with a self cleaning
device that will prevent fouling and comes highly recommended by the Ontario Ministry of the
Environment (MOE). The self cleaning capability will limit employee site visits, increase data
accuracy, allow for long term unattended monitoring and is the only one if its kind. ROSI has
already supplied the City and MOE with several similar self cleaning sensors and both
organizations have been very pleased with their performance. Therefore, staff recommends
that this contract be awarded to ROSI on a sole source basis as per section 1.14.1 of TRCA's
Purchasing Policy which reads, as follows:
1.14.1The goods and services are only available from one source or one supplier by
reason of:
Need for compatibility with goods and services previously acquired and there
are no reasonable alternatives, substitutes or accommodations.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The total cost of the equipment is not to exceed $54,126.00 plus applicable taxes and shipping,
and is fully funded by Toronto Water under account code 120-37.
Report prepared by: Derek Smith, extension 5362
Emails: dsmith@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Derek Smith, extension 5362
Emails: dsmith@trca.on.ca
Date: September 14, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A153/09 -ABSENCE DUE TO ILLNESS
Policy Update. Amendment to accommodate absence due to illness for
employees who have continuous or episodic illnesses.
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:Mike Del Grande
THAT the amendments as outlined in Attachment 1, to the Absence Due to Illness Policy
as described in the following report be approved.
CARRIED
354
BACKGROUND
Absence due to illness is both a health and management issue. Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority's (TRCA) objective is to have a healthy and productive work force. Part
of the management of that healthy work force is the commitment to assisting employees who
fall ill and ensure that absences due to illness are managed fairly for all concerned. Prior to
1981, employees were able to bank sick days. This policy ended in 1981, although there are a
very limited number of staff with banked sick days.
At Authority Meeting #3/04, held on March 26, 2004, Resolution #A82/04 was approved as
follows:
THAT the Absence Due to Illness Policy as described in the following report, be
approved and enacted immediately to support TRCA's excellent performance on lost
time due to illness.
RATIONALE
Currently full time employees who are absent due to illness in a consecutive period of time are
treated differently then employees who are absent due to illness in an episodic way. For
example a full time employee who is absent due to illness for three consecutive weeks (total of
15 days), will be paid 100% of pay for the first two weeks and 75% of pay for the third week. An
employee who is absent 15 days but not in sequence, will be paid at 100% of pay for the entire
time. The proposed amendment to the policy outlined in bold in Attachment 1 would make the
compensation the same in both situations, and does not interfere with confidentiality issues
around the nature of an employee's illness(es).
In addition, some staff members requested that they be able to use vacation days or
accumulated sick day (from the pre 1981 policy) to "top up" their absence due to illness days
from the 75% level to the 100% level.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The financial impacts are expected to be very limited and within the current operating budgets.
Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Emails: cmacewen@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Emails: cmacewen@trca.on.ca
Date: August 17, 2009
Attachments: 1
355
Attachment 1
ABSENCE DUE TO ILLNESS POLICY
All employees are expected to look after their personal health with regular check ups and
monitoring. If an employee is ill for more than 5 consecutive days, a doctor’s certificate is
required to be provided to Human Resources (HR). Cost associated with the Doctor’s note will
be reimbursed by HR.
Any communication from a health care consultant or practitioner, about limitations on an
employee’s ability to conduct his/her job can only be given to HR with the prior consent of the
employee. Limitations on an employee’s ability to meet the expectations of bona fide job
requirements will be carefully considered and if reasonable, accommodated within our
organization. The accommodation of job requirements will be arranged by the employee and
HR in consultation with the employee’s supervisor.
All employee health related information is strictly confidential and will not be shared by HR with
any other employees except direct information on the employee’s functional ability to return to
a particular job. For example, diagnosis and treatment information is strictly confidential to the
employee. If, because of a particular condition, an employee cannot do a certain job function,
that limitation is shared only with HR, the employee and the direct supervisor. An example of a
job limitation might be inability to lift more than 25 pounds.
For eligible supplementary staff, there is a maximum 5 days of absence due to illness per
calendar year at 100% of pay. All other days of absence due to illness for supplementary staff
will be without pay.
For full time employees, during the calendar year, absence due to illness is paid in full for
the first 10 days of accumulated, but not necessarily consecutive, days, and at 75% of
salary in subsequent, but not necessary consecutive days to a total of 13 additional
weeks. After an accumulated total of 15 weeks, if the illness continues, the employee
would apply for long term disability (LTD) through Sun Life Assurance (See the HR for
the necessary forms).
If an employee is absent due to child or elder care issues or other personal reasons, the time
off must not be recorded as absence due to illness (See Employee Policy for Emergency
Leave).
Employees who have been absent due to illness during the year for more than 8 non
consecutive days may be asked to produce a doctor’s certificate or letter at the discretion of
HR. Employees who are ill while on vacation will be considered on vacation and not absent
due to illness. If the employee becomes ill immediately before his/her vacation, the employees
will be considered absent due to illness and the scheduled vacation time adjusted accordingly.
If an employee is ill on a day or days that contain a statutory holiday or CAO floater day, time
off will be recorded as a statutory holiday.
Employees with accumulated vacation days or accumulated sick days from the pre-1981
sick leave program, are eligible to use a portion of that time and “top up" their absence
due to illness pay from the 75% to the 100% level.
356
RES.#A154/09 -REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION
CONSERVATION AUTHORITY-OWNED LAND
Rear of Various Residential Properties along Royalpark Way and
Panorama Crescent, East of Regional Road 27, south of Rutherford
Road, CFN 40996. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is
in receipt of requests from 16 residential property owners to explore the
possibility of a sale of fragments of TRCA-owned land located directly
behind 6, 10, 14, 16, 20, 24, 26, 28, 30, 34, 36, 40, 42, 46, 50 and 52
Royalpark Way, and 5 properties owner along Panorama Crescent, City
of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B112/09)
Moved by:Glenn Mason
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) land located directly behind
6, 10, 14, 16, 20, 24, 26, 28, 30, 34, 36, 40, 42, 46, 50 and 52 Royalpark Way, City of
Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, be retained for conservation purposes;
THAT the TRCA land directly behind 40, 44, 46, 50 and 52 Panorama Crescent, City of
Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, be retained for conservation purposes;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to arrange for the removal of any remaining
encroachments at these two locations.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A155/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component,
Rouge River Watershed
Purchase of Land - Shirley Klees, CFN 38959. Acquisition of land located
on the north side of Stouffville Road, east of Bayview Avenue, Town of
Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, under "Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010,” Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Rouge River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B113/09)
Moved by:Glenn Mason
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT 16.14 hectares (39.3349 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lots 1
and 2, Concession 2, Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, located on
the north side of Stouffville Road, east of Bayview Avenue be purchased from Shirley
Klees;
THAT the purchase price be $1,360,000;
357
That acquisition of this property by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
be conditional on all necessary funding being available from one or more of the following
sources: Regional Municipality of York, Town of Richmond Hill, City of Toronto and other
potential funding sources;
THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing
service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to
complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred
incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be
paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A156/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
Sugarberry Holdings Inc., CFN 42800. Purchase of property located east
of Pine Valley Drive, south of Major Mackenzie Drive, City of Vaughan,
Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project
for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River
watershed.
(Executive Res.#B114/09)
Moved by:Glenn Mason
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT 0.22 hectares (0.54 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 19,
Concession 6 and designated as Block 244 on a draft Plan of Subdivision, prepared by
Guido Papa Surveying Ltd., under their Reference No. 06-541, dated October 14, 2008,
City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, located east of Pine Valley Drive, south of
Major Mackenzie Drive, be purchased from Sugarberry Holdings Inc.;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
358
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A157/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Duffins Creek Watershed
4324404 Canada Inc., CFN 42844. Purchase of property located on the
south side of Bayly Street, east of Church Street (adjacent to 777 Bayly
Street), Town of Ajax, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the
"Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and
Conservation Component, Duffins Creek watershed.
(Executive Res.#B115/09)
Moved by:Glenn Mason
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT 4.21 hectares (10.41 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 14,
Range 3, Broken Front Concession and designated as Part 10 on a draft Plan of Survey,
prepared by Donevan Fleischmann Petrich Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Job
No. 2009-034-2, received August 11, 2009, Town of Ajax, Regional Municipality of
Durham, located on the south side of Bayly Street, east of Church Street (adjacent to 777
Bayly Street), be purchased from 4324404 Canada Inc.;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
359
RES.#A158/09 -CITY OF TORONTO
Request for a Permanent Easement for a Stormwater Outfall and Plunge
Pool/Wetland
Don River Watershed, City of Toronto (North York Community Council
Area), CFN 42851. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to
provide a permanent easement for the construction of a stormwater
outfall and plunge pool/wetland, south of Steeles Avenue, east of Dufferin
Street (adjacent to 1755 Steeles Avenue), Don River watershed, City of
Toronto (North York Community Council Area).
(Executive Res.#B116/09)
Moved by:Glenn Mason
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement for a stormwater outfall and
plunge pool/wetland, south of Steeles Avenue, east of Dufferin Street (adjacent to 1755
Steeles Avenue), Don River watershed, City of Toronto (North York Community Council
Area);
WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with the City of Toronto in
this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of
0.12 hectares (0.30 acres), more or less, be granted to the City of Toronto for a
stormwater outfall and plunge pool/wetland, said land being south of Steeles Avenue,
east of Dufferin Street (adjacent to 1755 Steeles Avenue), City of Toronto (North York
Community Council Area), as shown on a Topographic Plan of Survey of Sanofi Pasteur
Canada, prepared by Speight, Van Nostrand & Gibson Ltd., Ontario Land Surveyors,
under their Job No. 061-0270, dated September 12, 2006;
THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other costs to
be paid by the City of Toronto;
THAT the City of Toronto is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries,
damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the
granting of this easement or the carrying out of construction;
THAT an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being
carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the City of Toronto;
THAT all TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated/stabilized
following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan
be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA
landscaping guidelines;
THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained prior to commencement
of construction;
360
THAT the granting of this easement is subject to receipt of written approval from the City
of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department who manage these lands on behalf
of TRCA;
THAT said easement be subject to approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27, as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A159/09 -EROSION CONTROL MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
Proposed Policy Revision. Update on the Erosion Control Monitoring and
Maintenance Program, and amendment to policy regarding cost-sharing
agreements for benefiting landowners.
(Executive Res.#B117/09)
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) policy regarding the
contributions by private property owners towards valley and shoreline regeneration works
as set out in Resolution #71/81, and confirmed in Resolution #A91/98 be revised by
deleting clause (c) and substituting the following:
(c)Where agreement to policy (b) cannot be achieved, the benefiting owner(s) will be
assessed 100% of the cost of the works.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A160/09 -EAST DON TRAIL (CHARLES SAURIOL RESERVE) PHASE 1
Award of Contract RSD09-24 - Pedestrian Footbridge. Award of contract
for the supply and installation of a pedestrian footbridge over the East
Don River as part of the East Don Trail - Phase 1 implementation at the
Charles Sauriol Reserve.
(Executive Res.#B117/09)
Moved by:Glenn Mason
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
361
THAT the contract for the supply and installation of a pedestrian bridge over the East Don
River be awarded to Hobden Construction Company Limited at a cost not to exceed
$207,509.94, plus applicable taxes, it being the lowest tender meeting Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized staff be directed to take the action necessary to
implement the contract including obtaining any approvals and the signing and execution
of documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A161/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT Section II item EX7.1 - Petticoat Creek Conservation Area, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #6/09, held on August 7, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A162/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Grant Gibson
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT Section II items EX8.1 & EX8.2, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #7/09,
held on September 11, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
Section II Items EX8.2 & EX8.2
ASBESTOS POLICY
(Executive Res.#B119/09)
RELIGIOUS OFFERINGS AND SCATTERING OF ASHES
(Executive Res.#B120/09)
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A163/09 -WESTON ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERS OF TOMORROW PROGRAM
Receipt of staff presentation
362
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the presentation by Nancy McGee, Supervisor, Education
Program Services, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), in regard to the
Weston Environmental Leaders of Tomorrow program be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In 2007, TRCA education staff in collaboration with The Conservation Foundation of Greater
Toronto submitted a proposal to The W. Garfield Weston Foundation asking for support in
funding a unique residential, outdoor education program. The focus of this program was to be
the development of the next generation of environmental leaders and would dedicate a
significant amount of energy on working with participating students and teachers to ensure that
the environmental learning that would take place at TRCA's field centres would not occur in
isolation. A secondary focus was to ensure that the highest priority of participation be given to
schools in Greater Toronto Area (GTA) communities that would not normally have the
resources to provide their students with this type of educational experience. The proposal was
accepted and the full funding of $545,500.00 was granted, ensuring that 60 grade six classes
over the three year period would be able to participate in the Weston Environmental Leaders of
Tomorrow program.
Between February and June of 2008, 15 classes of students (in total) from the Toronto Catholic
District School Board (TCDSB) and the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) participated in the
Weston Environmental Leaders of Tomorrow program at the Lake St. George Field Centre in
Richmond Hill. TRCA education units shared the responsibilities associated with program
development, delivery, assessment, data collection and promotion. Participating school
boards aided with the selection of classes ensuring an equitable process. Features of the
program in this pilot year included:
a 2.5 day residential visit at the Lake St. George Field Centre for each class, including all
meals, snacks, programming supplies and instruction;
transportation to and from Lake St. George;
an Action kit with pre and post visit lessons and resources;
a class camera to document their experiences and complete their post visit lessons;
three additional cameras awarded to students who excelled in the areas of ecological
literacy, community action, and environmental leadership.
During the 2008-2009 school year, significant program expansions occurred. School board
participation was extended to York Region District School Board. TRCA’s Watershed on
Wheels (WOW) team piloted an in class, pre-visit ecofootprint program with a select number of
classes. In class, post-trip visits were delivered by Lake St. George Field Centre staff as
another expansion feature. In total, 26 classes participated in the second year of the Weston
Environmental Leaders of Tomorrow program.
Presently, this program is beginning its' third and final year of the initial three year commitment,
with 20 classes scheduled to participate during the 2009-2010 school year. All aspects of the
original proposal will be maintained (with refinements), and enhancements from year two are
being fully adopted for all visiting classes.
363
Program Details
The program is defined by its “pillars”: ecological literacy, community action and environmental
leadership. Participating classes live, learn and play, using the outdoors as their classroom
and their shared experiences as the foundation for change. Through hands-on participation,
students become increasingly aware of their connections to the environment and are
encouraged to take the leadership role in their homes, schools and communities by modeling
and initiating environmentally responsible behaviours.
The commitment to participate carries with it the expectation that staff and students complete
all aspects of the program, and includes the following provisions, in addition to the program
features identified above for the pilot year, to ensure that financial and time investments are
minimized:
Watershed on Wheels (WOW) in class pre-visit for ‘Weston’ class and three other
classes in the school;
Lake St. George instructor follow-up session at the school;
re-visits for up to two classes per year to further assess understanding and deepen
learning.
Accomplishments to Date
Research and Data Collection
Extensive data is collected to aid in the assessment of impacts and to guide the development
team in making ongoing refinements to the program. A sample of data collected is given in the
table below.
Variables Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Number of School Boards 2 3 3
Number of Classes/Number of Students 15/464 26/724 20/600
% students showing a decrease in Ecofootprint (total)42%56%
% students showing a decrease in Ecofootprint
(respondents)68%84%
Emergent Student Action
Though the data collected offers a benchmark as to how well the program is performing and/or
progressing, it is the non-prescriptive initiatives from program “graduates” that offer a solid
sense of impact. A few of the post-visit emergent activities include:
an E-Waste art installation, presently being displayed at the Royal Ontario Museum;
a school-wide Zero Waste assembly/activity day;
a school-wide environmental art expo;
initiative to be the first school in York Region with compost pick-up;
weekly eco-announcements;
research/science fair projects;
letter-writing campaigns to Prime Minister Harper, David Suzuki and others.
Program Recognition
The Weston Environmental Leaders of Tomorrow program is gaining recognition within the
education community:
364
the program and its pedagogy are currently recognized as the “Weston Model” with
local school boards;
this model was presented on the world stage this spring at the 5th World Congress on
Environmental Education, held in Montreal, and locally to staff at the Ontario Ministry of
Education;
the methodology has been adopted as the foundation for the Peel Environmental Weeks
program offered at the Albion Hills Field Centre, supported by the Region of Peel;
a display of an emergent action project (E-Waste) at the Royal Ontario Museum.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The W. Garfield Weston Foundation has approved a renewed proposal from TRCA for $600,000
over three years. This provides for the continued support of the Weston Environmental Leaders
of Tomorrow program with expansions that would allow increased internal and external
collaborations on integrating program delivery. This new funding program provides funding for
the 2010 through 2012 school years.
Report prepared by: Nancy McGee, extension 5234
Emails: nmcgee@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Nancy McGee, extension 5234
Emails: nmcgee@trca.on.ca
Date: September 3, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A164/09 -IN THE NEWS
Overview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities and
news stories.
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of media coverage and Good News Stories be
received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Since 2006, the Authority has received a staff report on Good News Stories which summarized
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) key accomplishments for the preceding few
months.
Further, at Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #1/06, held on March 3, 2006, it was
requested that an overview of media coverage for TRCA be provided twice yearly. Since April,
2006, staff has provided three-year comparison summaries of media coverage in community
newspapers and major dailies to the board. In preparing the 2009 six-month summary report
and the Good News Stories report for June, July and August, staff saw an opportunity to
provide one report providing highlights of TRCA's activities and an expanded summary the
news coverage, as outlined in this staff report. The new consolidated "In the News" report will
be brought to the Authority for receipt every couple of months in place of the Good News
Stories and Media Summary reports.
365
RATIONALE
Media Coverage Summary January - June 2009
In 2009, the media strategy changed with a new emphasis on high quality and high impact
coverage which can be seen in the highlights for the period listed below.
The following table outlines the quantity of TRCA media coverage obtained during the
six-month period from January through June, 2009. This includes mention of TRCA
conservation areas and campgrounds, Black Creek Pioneer Village, Black Creek Historic
Brewery and Kortright Centre for Conservation. The tracked media includes major daily and
community newspapers, consumer and trade publications, major online media and broadcast
coverage when staff had prior knowledge of the broadcast. Staff collected this coverage data
using FPInfomart media monitoring services and Google news alerts. This table indicates that
the media coverage for TRCA has somewhat plateaued, however the real story is in the high
impact coverage experienced in 2009.
Month2007 2008 2009
Increase/Decrease
Percentages
2009 vs. 2008
January 33 23 16 -30 %
February 20 30 35 +16%
March 47 78 40 -48%
April 47 29 37 +27%
May 82 57 72 +26%
June 35 35 56 +60%
Mid-Year
Totals
264 252 256 +1.5%
The momentum in TRCA media coverage in April, May and June is attributed to TRCA’s
proactive approach to media relations with an in-house staff resource. This includes actively
providing stories to media and identifying new opportunities to promote TRCA stories. Staff is
also continuing to focus not only on major media, but on local community media that reach key
local audiences. TRCA staff is seeing a rise in the number of media requests for expert
spokespeople from TRCA especially with wildlife, green building technology and flood
information, which indicates that the organization is becoming an important media resource.
Public Relations Strategy for 2nd Half 2009
Objectives:
support the priority areas of TRCA’s business plan through proactive public relations
strategies;
acquire media coverage of TRCA programs, events, service area and initiatives;
expand TRCA’s role as environmental leaders in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) including:
TRCA’s role in the development of green buildings and communities, advocates of climate
change programs and pioneers in industrial change;
integrate The Living City into key messages.
366
Strategies:
1. Maintain and develop proactive news stories:
event based public relations (PR): identify key events/programs that require PR and
develop interesting stories for media;
proactive PR: generate monthly story ideas to be pitched to targeted media outlets;
research new opportunities for media coverage;
look for opportunities for joint ventures with municipal and other partnerships.
2. Set up internal PR systems:
develop and maintain TRCA media lists;
update spokesperson roster and conduct media training as necessary;
generate monitoring system and reporting for media coverage;
develop a corporate media kit;
develop and maintain an online media room.
Summary of Stories
The following highlights both media coverage from January to May, 2009 and the Good News
Stories from June to August, 2009. Staff previously reported to the Authority on Good News
Stories from January to May, 2009. The next In the News report will contain the remaining
media coverage highlights up to the time of reporting.
Healthy Rivers and Shorelines
Climate Change - TRCA will be representing Conservation Ontario on the Ontario Regional
Adaptation Collaborative (Ontario RAC) led by MOE. Natural Resources Canada is
funding six climate adaptation collaboratives across Canada. Approximately
$200,000.00 in funding is anticipated to undertake adaptation outreach and training for
source protection across Ontario in partnership with MOE, MNR and York University.
Flood Management - More than 24 hits in print, broadcast radio and TV regarding TRCA
High Water Safety Bulletin/Flood Advisory in February and 14 media hits from the High
Water Safety Bulletin issued in July.
Celebrations and Events - First Annual Archaeology Festival a success at Claremont.
Despite light rain, had just over 100 people as 'guest excavators' at the site.
Approximately 350 in total attended the event. Feedback was very positive and looking
for funding to host again next year. Media coverage for the event includes Snap
Pickering, Pickering Ajax News Advertiser, First Local Durham, and Rogers Daytime
(June).
Paddle the Don yielded coverage in the Globe and Mail, CBC Metro Morning, CFRB
John Moore Show, CBC Fresh Air, CTV, CP24, Toronto Star and Toronto Sun (May).
East Spit Grand Opening makes headlines in Pickering Ajax News Advertiser in story
"East Spit Open to Pickering Public" (June).
TRCA participated in the Port Union Waterfront Festival on June 13th with Chair Gerri
Lynn O'Connor joining Councillor Ron Moeser, Mayor David Miller and other dignitaries
of the ground breaking ceremony for a new GoTransit Parking Lot.
367
Six events were hosted by municipalities and community groups celebrating the 10 year
anniversary of the Humber being designated a Canadian Heritage River. 1,000 guests
participated in family oriented fun, food and entertainment. At one event, Town of
Caledon and TRCA celebrated Canadian Rivers Day by acknowledging the late Conn
Smythe on the Caledon Walk of Fame. Mr Smythe's career and accomplishments are
associated with the human heritage of the Humber River thus contributing to the
Canadian Heritage River designation in 1999. Media coverage of 10th anniversary event
includes stories in the King Weekly and King Sentinel (July).
Human Interest - A TRCA staff wildlife expert guided a Toronto Star reporter on a kayak tour
of Toronto’s waterways for Do It! Magazine Toronto Star’s summer guide. The magazine
was included in the Toronto Star who has a circulation size of more than 400,000.
Professional Development - First stream flow training program was held. Real time gauging
network successfully implemented a station in Credit Valley Conservation's (CVC)
jurisdiction.
Partnerships - The Ontario Road Ecology Group had its first annual general meeting. TRCA
and other conservation authorities have been actively involved in developing the group.
TRCA will continue to play an important role as the group moves forward to help raise
awareness of the impacts roads have on wildlife and ecosystems.
Watershed Management - Remedial Action Plan (RAP) progress report media release was
picked up for coverage by Canoe.ca, Solid Waste and Recycling Magazine, and
ReportonBusiness.com.
Don watershed appears in the spotlight with articles in Torontoist.com, National Post,
Riverdale Mirror and Toronto Star with stories about the new watershed signs and
announcement of Waterfront Toronto's plans for the Lower Don lands (May).
Minister of the Environment approved TRCA's Terms of Reference for source water
protection planning under the Clean Water Act, starting the clock for delivery August,
2010.
Regional Biodiversity
Forestry - Pickering News Advertiser reported on TRCA’s role in determining conditions of
an urban forest in article “Trees crucial for Pickering” (January 14).
Planning and Development - TRCA staff is working with the Town of Ajax to assist with
improvements to their natural heritage policies as part of the Town's Official Plan (OP)
review. The Town is considering incorporating mapping and policies for protection of
TRCA's refined natural heritage system in their OP.
Celebrations and Events - The Tommy Thompson Park Bird Festival drove a new record
number of visitors and received publicity from Breakfast Television and feature articles
in the National Post, Toronto Star and Riverdale Mirror. Tommy Thompson Park Bird
Research Station and TRCA experts were also featured in a Thompson Reuters (a global
news agency) video (May).
CP24 and Global TV covered the South Mimico Tree Planting (April).
Atlantic Salmon Restocking Event in Claremont received media coverage from Rogers
First Local, and four segments on CTV News at Noon with Tom Brown (May).
SNAP magazine reported on the May 9th TD Friends of the Environment Foundation
Markham Chapter $40,000 community planting event in support of Markham's Trees For
Tomorrow initiative. The July Issue of SNAP will include TRCA's May 23rd opening of six
acres on the East Spit of Frenchman's Bay (City of Pickering) by Chair Gerri Lynn
O'Connor and Pickering representative - Regional Councillor Bonnie Littley.
368
Minister Cansfield attended redside dace research site funded by Ministry of Natural
Resources under endangered species act. The event garnered a front page story in the
Richmond Hill Liberal (July).
Trails - Transport Canada has asked TRCA to complete a trail plan for the federal
greenspace lands in Uxbridge.
TRCA received a total of $24,480 for the Glen Major Trail Project. $12,240 is from the
National Trails Coalition who received funding from the federal government 2009 - 2010
National Trails Infrastructure Program, $10,140 from Durham Conservation Association,
$2,000 from Durham Mountain Biking Association and $100 from the Uxbridge
Horseman's Association.
Wildlife - Previously unrecorded in Lake Ontario, a Quillback sucker (fish) was caught by
waterfront monitoring staff.
Black vultures, normally seen much farther south, were spotted a number of times this
summer in TRCA's jurisdiction.
Sustainable Communities
Climate Change - Globe and Mail reports on Climate Change Collaboration between York
University and TRCA in article “Infrastructure Spend!” (January).
TRCA sponsored and helped plan Toronto's Climate Change Forum on Infrastructure
attended by approximately 100 public and private sector participants from Toronto and
GTA. TRCA will be working with the City of Toronto on implementing recommendations
and next steps.
Facilities and Property - Reinitiated the Class Environmental Assessment for Coatsworth Cut
with the intent to finish it early next year in order to commence construction in the fall of
2010.
Celebrations and Events - Over 300 residents of the Jane/Finch neighbourhood were
treated to an afternoon at Black Creek Pioneer Village to launch the Green Change
Project, an environmental action project of the Jane Finch Family and Community
Centre funded by the provincial Go Green fund and supported by TRCA.
The launch of the Archetype Sustainable House garnered media coverage including
articles in the Toronto Star, National Post, Toronto Sun, Daily Commercial News, and
several community papers. The house was also featured on Business News Network
(BNN) with an interview and house tour. BNN is available in 5.5 million households in
Canada.
World Green Building Council (WGBC) and York University launched a program to
involve students in green building in an international perspective. Green Business
Magazine and Canadian Business Magazine picked up the media release on the
WGBC/York event and published it on their websites. Real Estate News Exchanges
interviewed a student for their story (June).
CVC launched corporate greening grounds program in Mississauga. TRCA 's Partners
in Project Green Program was profiled as a major partner and an opportunity for future
collaboration.
Energy - TRCA and York University delivered the renewable energy road map workshop to
35 municipal, academic and private sector participants to identify issues and barriers
not addressed by the Green Energy Act. The results of the workshop will be provided to
the Ministry of Energy and the other stakeholders that attended the workshop to
influence research, policy and practice.
369
Partners in Project Green was the cover story of Energy Management Magazine’s
January/February issue which included a two-page spread (January) and in the National
Post story "Pearson aims to clear the air up there" (July).
Awards and Certifications - All 5 TRCA education facilities and 950 schools (including 17
schools from the Peel EcoSchools program) from 32 school boards across the province
were certified as EcoSchools.
GTAA won the 2009 Airport Council International Creative Innovations Award for leading
the Pearson Eco-Business Zone Initiative with TRCA and our partner municipalities.
Partnerships - HSBC Bank Canada approved $100,000 in funding over three years in the
programs and equipment at the Power Trip Trail at The Living City Campus at Kortright.
Research and Innovation - The Greening Retail project completed its research of
environmental best practices of 15 leading retailers from around the world.
Business Excellence
Facilities and Property - Mississauga News reports on Lakeview historical site (Arsenal
Lands) facing the wrecking ball is owned by TRCA in article “Factory worth Saving”
(January 15).
The Conservation Foundation contributed $90,000 to Sir Casimir Gzowski Park
playground. The City of Toronto more than matched the donation putting over $200,000
into the "state-of-the-art" playground.
Ottawa Citizen reviews National Geographic’s Best of Everything Series of books. The
10 Best of Everything: Families book mentions Black Creek Pioneer Village as one of
the 10 places to take kids in Canada. The article appeared in the front page of the travel
section. (February 28).
Petticoat Creek pool redevelopment announcement about Recreational Infrastructure
Canada (RInC) Program funding got media coverage in Pickering Ajax News Advertiser,
Rogers 1st Local, Snap Pickering and Oshawa Radio KX96 FM (July). TRCA approved
for over $3 million in RInC funding for three projects.
Human Interest - Margie Kenedy completed first aid certification at TRCA and performed
CPR until paramedics removed the patient at a car accident just one week later.
Two TRCA teams completed the Oak Ridges Moraine relay, an event to raise awareness
and funds to support trail development and improvements on the ORM.
Mentoring to Placement for Environmental Professionals (M2P) Program funded by the
Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration was launched. The program provides
three to 12 month paid work placement for 40 internationally trained professionals in the
fields of environmental planning, terrestrial or aquatic biology, ecology or green building
technologies, to assist them in getting the experience and knowledge they need to work
in Ontario. Application dates are August 31 until October 5, 2009. Media release on the
program announcement was picked up by Green Business Magazine and Report on
Business.com (August).
TRCA's 33rd annual Boyd Archaeological Field School had 34 successful graduates
(IDC4U credit and lifelong memories), including two who joined us from the United
States.
Summer media relations resulted in stories about trails, summer events, strike options
and picnics including coverage with Rogers York Region, Canadian Press, CFRB. City
TV, Toronto.com (June-August).
Energy - Lake St. George Field Centre's new solar-powered electric pontoon boat passed
final inspection with Transport Canada. The first school group went out on it in June.
370
Chris Kennedy, Professor of Civil Engineering at University of Toronto presented a joint
paper with TRCA on carbon neutral at the World Bank meeting in Marsailles.
Two new hybrid vehicles added to TRCA's vehicle fleet.
TRCA launched a study to evaluate the emissions of various types of golf carts. The
purpose of the study is to assess the performance of the golf carts with respect to
energy use and associated CO2 emissions, travel distance, dependability and overall
capital and operating costs. The two solar carts will be compared to two standard
electric and two gas golf carts that have been operated over a similar time period and
travel distance.
Celebrations and Events - Ontario Minister of Culture Aileen Carroll officially opened the
new Black Creek Historic Brewery at Black Creek Pioneer Village. The launch of the
Black Creek Pioneer Village Brewery garnered the attention of 24 media outlets
including: City TV, Global TV, Gourmet TV, CBC Radio-Canada, and a two-thirds page
feature story in the Toronto Star. It has also been covered by non-English media such
as Nikka Times, Deutsche Presse and Hindu Abroad, as well as key online media
include BarTowel.com, TasteTO, and Great Canadian Pubs (June).
Articles on the Sugarbush Maple Syrup Festival appeared in Taste TO (March 2009);
York Region Living (March 2009); Canoe.ca (March 2009); Stouffville Sun-Tribune
(March 4); Toronto Star (“There’s Gold in them maple trees” appeared on the front page
of the Greater Toronto Section on March 5, including three photos) and Vaughan Today
(“Cauldron of Sweet Fun” appeared on the front page of the newspaper on March 27).
The festival garnered the attention of an international audience with visits from two
groups of international media. Square Meal Lifestyles Magazine reviews Toronto food
scene and mentions Sugarbush Maple Syrup Festival (July).
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264, Rowena Calpito, extension 5632
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca, rcalpito@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264, Rowena Calpito, extension 5632
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca, rcalpito@trca.on.ca
Date: September 08, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A165/09 -STAFF TURNOVER RATES
Statistics for July 2008 to August 2009 for Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority staff.
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on Staff Turnover Rates as described in the
following report be received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The turnover statistics for an organization is an indicator of overall preformance of its human
capital strategies.
371
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is evolving toward being an organization of
information workers with high levels of expertise in the environmental and cultural fields. These
skills are always in demand and TRCA needs to understand and monitor any changes in our
talent pool so that TRCA can ensure that we meet our commitments to our partners and
stakeholders.
TRCA STAFF TURNOVER RATES
July 2008 to August 2009
Type of Employee Loss Number % of Total Full Time Staff
Regrettable losses 15 4.0%
Contract Completions 3 0.8%
Terminations 11 2.9%
Retirements 3 0.8%
Interns 3 0.8%
Passed Away 1 0.3%
The average resignation levels are around 10 to 15% in Canada depending on the sector, the
size of the organization and the internal practices of organizations. A 5% or less regrettable
losses in key staff is considered desirable. With a 4% regrettable losses in key staff, TRCA is
well within the superior performance level.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The financial impacts of staff losses is primarily due to the costs of finding a replacement.
Depending on the type of role and the economic conditions, it is estimated that 50% to 200% of
the value of the employee's salary is the cost of replacement. Those costs are usually
opportunity costs and are absorbed within TRCA's annual operating budget.
Report prepared by: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Emails: cmacewen@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Catherine MacEwen, extension 5219
Emails: cmacewen@trca.on.ca
Date: August 28, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A166/09 -SOURCE WATER PROTECTION
Terms of Reference. Posting of CTC Terms of Reference Approval on the
Environmental Registry.
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on the Source Water Protection Terms of
Reference be received.
CARRIED
372
BACKGROUND
On Monday, August 17, 2009 the Ministry of the Environment posted notices of approval of the
Terms of Reference for the Toronto and Region, Cental Lake Ontario and Credit Valley Source
Protection Areas which collectively form the CTC Source Protection Region, (Attachments 1, 2
and 3 respectively) to the Environmental Registry (EBR). The notice is published as an
information notice and formalizes the three letters of approval received by Susan Self, Chair,
CTC Source Protection Committee (SPC), and each of the relevant source protection authority
Chief Administrative Officers on August 12, 2009.
As regulated by Section 17 2(a) of Ontario Regulation 287/07, the posting of approval to the
EBR sets a due date of August 17, 2010 for submission of the CTC Source Protection Region's
assessment reports. Within this period two public consultation periods must be held in each
source protection area as regulated by Ontario Regulation 287/07 Sections 15 and 16; one
hosted by the SPC on the draft assessment report and the second by the respective source
protection authority. This is the same process as was required for the Terms of Reference. In
addition to the regulated consultation period staff is recommending to the SPC to conduct initial
(unregulated) consultation with local landowners, businesses and stakeholders for the
purposes of identifying and addressing potential concerns as early as possible.
Further information regarding the public consultation requirements and the proposed
consultation plan for the draft assessment reports can be found in SPC Meeting #6/09 Agenda
Item 6.4 on the website
http://www.ctcswp.ca/meetings-and-events/details/20-spc-meeting-609-september-14-2009.
Chair Susan Self is required to provide quarterly reports to each CTC source protection
authority on progress towards completing their assessment report and source protection plan
(O. Reg. 288/07, Section 21). These quarterly reports will provide information on the progress
on content as well as on the consultation activities.
Report prepared by: Nick Schulz, extension 5392; Beverley Thorpe, extension 5577
Emails: nschulz@trca.on.ca; bthorpe@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Nick Schulz, extension 5392; Beverley Thorpe, extension 5577
Emails: nschulz@trca.on.ca; bthorpe@trca.on.ca
Date: September 10, 2009
Attachments: 3
373
Attachment 1
374
Attachment 2
375
376
Attachment 3
377
_________________________________________
378
RES.#A167/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT Section IV item AUTH8.5.1 - Don Watershed Regeneration
Council, in regard to watershed committee minutes , be received.
Section IV Item AUTH8.5.1
DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
Minutes of Meeting #5/09, held on June 18, 2009.
_________________________________________
RES.#A168/09 -SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by:Laurie Bruce
Seconded by:Glenn Mason
THAT Section IV items EX9.1 & EX9.2, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #7/09,
held on September 11, 2009.
CARRIED
Section II Items EX9.1 & EX9.2
DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY LAND
(Executive Res.#B121/09)
CONSERVATION LAND TAX INCENTIVE PROGRAM
(Executive Res.#B122/09)
_________________________________________
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
RES.#A169/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items EX9.1 - EX9.85, inclusive, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #6/09, held on August 7, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
379
RES.#A170/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Richard Whitehead
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items EX10.1 - EX10.110, inclusive, contained in
Executive Committee Minutes #7/09, held on September 11, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
NEW BUSINESS
RES.#171/09 -EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE NEW BUSINESS
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:John Parker
THAT New Business item EX11.1 - Encroachments, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #7/09, held on September 11, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:28 a.m., on Friday, September 25, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
380
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #8/09
October 23, 2009
The Authority Meeting #8/09, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village,
on Friday, October 23, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to order
at 9:46 a.m..
PRESENT
Maria AugimeriVice Chair
David Barrow Member
Bryan Bertie Member
Mike Del GrandeMember
Grant Gibson Member
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Jack Heath Member
Bonnie Littley Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
Linda Pabst Member
John Parker Member
Anthony PerruzzaMember
Maja Prentice Member
Richard WhiteheadMember
ABSENT
Eve Adams Member
Paul Ainslie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Glenn De BaeremaekerMember
Bill Fisch Member
Colleen JordanMember
Glenn Mason Member
Reenga MathivananMember
Ron Moeser Member
Gino Rosati Member
John SprovieriMember
381
RES.#A172/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Suzan Hall
Seconded by: Jack Heath
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #7/09, held on September 25, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Andrew Bowerbank, Executive Director, World Green Building Council
(WGBC) Secretariat, in regard to update on WGBC activities.
(b)A presentation by Tim Van Seters, Manager, Sustainable Technologies, TRCA, in regard
to Performance Evaluation of Permeable Pavement and Bioretention Swale.
(c)A presentation by Lionel Normand, Terrestrial Biologist
(Duffins/Carruthers/Petticoat/Frenchman's Bay), TRCA, in regard to Examples of
Ecosystem Valuation/Compensation from Other Jurisdiction.
(d)A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Development, TRCA, in
regard to item BAAB7.1 - 2010 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital, and item
BAAB8.1 - 2009 Financial Progress Report.
RES.#A173/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Grant Gibson
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
RES.#A174/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
THAT above-noted presentations (b) and (c) be deferred.
CARRIED
RES.#A175/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT above-noted presentation (d) be heard and received.
CARRIED
382
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A176/09 -TORONTO ISLAND MARINA SEAWALL REPAIR PROJECT
Agreement. Approval of an agreement with the City of Toronto to
implement replacement of failing infrastructure at the Toronto Island
Marina.
Moved by:Maja Prentice
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT approval be granted to enter into an agreement with the City of Toronto for the
implementation of the Toronto Island Marina Seawall Repair Project;
THAT the agreement be subject to availability of funding from the City of Toronto;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the agreement including
obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In 2006, the City of Toronto retained the services of Engineered Management Systems Inc.
(EMSi) to undertake the Due Diligence Assessment Inspections (SGR Audits, Ph.21) of all
Parks seawall and dockwall facilities, including boat launch ramps.
The inspection noted asphalt cracking and settlement near the edge of the wall, and the
wall was given a poor overall condition rating and a RSL (Remaining Service Life) of 5
years. Based on the assessment provided in the report it was anticipated that the wall would
have to be replaced by 2011.
In May of 2009 it was brought to the attention of City staff that the landing area in front of the
Toronto Island Marina main office/restaurant complex was about to collapse into the
Toronto harbour. This is the area identified in the 2006 report as featuring settlement and
cracking in the asphalt. The deficient area is part of the marina road system maintained by
the City of Toronto.
In reaction to the additional failure observed, City staff retained the services of Soderholm
Maritime Services Inc. to undertake a diver’s inspection of the failed sheet pile wall adjacent
to the Toronto Island Marina. The inspection was completed in June 2009, and identified
that a 34 metre section of the seawall would have to be replaced. The failure is reported to
be the result of damage to the tie-rods that anchor the seawall into position.
TRCA was requested to attend a site meeting with City staff in July 2009, to look at the
damaged seawall and adjacent road, and to discuss the possibility of TRCA undertaking the
works on behalf of the City of Toronto. TRCA staff submitted a proposal to the City outlining
the staged approach to the agreement that TRCA would undertake, and this was approved
in September 2009.
383
Scope of the Works
The scope of the works to be undertaken for this project by TRCA will be separated into
three stages; Survey and Planning, Detailed Design and Approvals, and Implementation of
Works.
Stage 1: Survey and Planning
Undertake detailed site survey including the collection of topographic and
hydrographic data as required including the locations of any underground utilities in
the vicinity of the proposed works.
Issue a Request For Proposal (RFP) to retain a consulting engineering firm to
undertake; geotechnical investigation, develop preliminary design option(s), and
cost estimates.
Stage II: Detailed Design and Approvals
Work with consulting engineers to develop preliminary design options for review by
the City of Toronto.
Work with consulting engineers to finalize preferred preliminary option and to
provide stamped engineering drawings of the preferred design, and specifications.
Coordinate the review of permit applications and ensure the receipt of all necessary
approvals. Anticipated approving agencies:
Toronto Port Authority;
Transport Canada –Navigable Waters Protection;
Fisheries and Oceans Canada;
Ministry of Natural Resources.
Development of a detailed cost estimate for the implementation of works.
Stage III: Implementation of Works
TRCA’s involvement with the implementation of works will be dependant on the
preferred design option selected. Involvement in this phase could range from
contract management to complete implementation, and will be determined with
direction from the City of Toronto.
Based on preliminary cost estimates provided by EMSi to the City of Toronto in
2009, it is anticipated that the cost for this stage of the works will be between
$750,000 – $850,000.
RATIONALE
TRCA involvement in the development, planning and implementation of this project was
requested based on the history of cooperative project management between the City of
Toronto and TRCA and TRCA's specialized expertise in works of this type. The City has
requested that TRCA enter into an agreement to implement the project.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funding for this project will be approved in stages, as outlined in the scope of the works.
TRCA staff will not proceed with staged works prior to approval of the proposed Stage
budget by City of Toronto staff. The full costs of the project are 100% recoverable from the
City of Toronto.
384
The approved funding for Stage 1 is $9,900, plus GST.
Report prepared by: Patricia Newland, 416-392-9690
Emails: pnewland@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Jim Berry, 416-392-9721
Emails: jberry@trca.on.ca
Date: October 05, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A177/09 -GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO COALITION
Approval to participate in the Green Infrastructure Ontario Coalition to
advocate for the recognition of the role of greenspace in meeting
environmental goals and objectives.
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) objectives for Healthy
Rivers and Shorelines and Regional Biodiversity are dependent on a system of natural
spaces and stream corridors;
AND WHEREAS green infrastructure includes natural vegetation and vegetative
technologies in urban and rural settings;
AND WHEREAS little public investment and policy change is being directed towards
green infrastructure technologies at the provincial level;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be authorized to participate on the
Green Infrastructure Ontario Coalition Steering Committee to explore the issues of
legislative and policy protection for green infrastructure in Ontario;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority with progress on this initiative.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
TRCA was approached by an emerging coalition of industry groups and nongovernmental
organizations to participate in defining the need for, and further developing, a proposal to the
Province of Ontario for enhanced recognition and protection of green infrastructure. Green
Infrastructure Ontario is a non-incorporated coalition of industry groups, nongovernmental
organizations, academic institutions, educators, citizens, companies and local governments.
Key parties include:
Green Roofs for Healthy Cities – North America Inc. (GRHC) – a non-profit industry
association whose mission is to develop the greenroof and wall industry throughout North
America and its charitable arm, the Green Infrastructure Foundation. www.greenroofs.org
385
Local Enhancement & Appreciation of Forests (LEAF) –an incorporated, not-for-profit,
community-based organization dedicated to the protection and improvement of urban
forests. LEAF programs focus on actively involving diverse communities in urban forest
stewardship. www.yourleaf.org
Landscape Ontario Horticultural Trades Association (LOHTA) – an association representing
over 2,000 horticultural professionals. Members include landscape, maintenance and snow
management contractors, landscape designers, lawn care operators, garden centre
owners, arborists, nursery growers, interior landscapers, and irrigation and landscape
lighting contractors. www.landscapeontario.com
Ontario Parks Association (OPA) – a registered charity that brings together those who are
interested in the development and protection of parks and greenspaces. OPA has over 150
municipal government members and is committed to educate park professionals and
enabling them to meet or exceed industry standards while actively advocating for the
protection and enhancement of parks and open spaces. www.ontarioparksassociation.ca
Evergreen - a registered national charity founded in 1991 with a mandate to bring nature to
cities through naturalization projects. Evergreen motivates people to create and sustain
healthy, natural outdoor spaces and gives them the practical tools to be successful.
www.evergreen.ca
The mission of this group is to develop a provincial vision and legislation to create green jobs,
clean the air and water, conserve energy and increase access to local, sustainably produced
food within our urban areas through significant investment in and protection of green
infrastructure. Typically, the definition of ‘infrastructure’ is taken to mean the traditional
constructed pipes, plants and roads. There is growing recognition that traditional infrastructure
is supported by and benefitted by green infrastructure. The Green Infrastructure Coalition
seeks to expand the definition of infrastructure in Ontario to include green infrastructure -
natural vegetation and vegetative technologies in urban settings that would include the
following:
urban forests;
greenroofs;
green walls;
greenspaces, such as turf, meadows and manicured areas;
rain gardens and bioswales;
community gardens;
greenways;
natural and engineered wetlands and stormwater ponds;
and porous pavement systems.
386
RATIONALE
Ontario has made some important progress towards a more sustainable energy industry with
the Green Energy Act. Hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure investment decisions are
being made to strengthen Ontario’s economy and prepare for future challenges. As it currently
stands however, very little public investment and policy change is being directed towards green
infrastructure technologies at the provincial level. The Coalition has invited a number of
organizations to contribute to the development of a vision and scope to address real and
perceived inequities for green infrastructure in the Province. There is a growing recognition that
green infrastructure not only performs many of the functions of gray infrastructure, it also
complements it by extending the serviceable life of pavement, pipes and waterproofing.
Moreover, green infrastructure technologies provide numerous additional social, economic and
environmental benefits. All of these benefits have been well established through research. The
protection of and investment in green infrastructure is essential to the development of healthy,
vibrant and sustainable communities across Ontario. The benefits of green infrastructure are
numerous, scientifically proven and include the following:
Local and regionally based green jobs creation
– in design, manufacturing, installation and
maintenance
Recharging our groundwater
Cleaning surface water
Reducing stormwater runoff
Reduction of combined sewer overflows
Improving soil quality
Stripping particulate from our air
Cooling our buildings
Reducing the urban heat island effect
Storing carbon from the atmosphere to reduce
climate change
Providing opportunities for renewable biomass
and more efficient solar power
Supporting biodiversity – both flora and fauna
Helping communities adapt to climate change
impacts such as severe heat and storm events
Strengthening the beauty of communities, and
their livability
Improving the productivity of employees
Reducing health care costs, by facilitating
active play for children
Allowing children to have an experience of
nature, thereby addressing the ‘nature
deficit-disorder’.
Improving social cohesion in our communities
Feeding our hungry and disadvantaged
Reducing noise pollution
Improving the marketability of buildings
Increasing tax revenue from improved property
values
Energy conservation at a building and
community-wide scale
Reducing the capital and operational costs
associated with traditional gray infrastructure.
These benefits are consistent with the mandate and The Living City Vision of TRCA.
Participation in this group may result in improved resources for the protection and management
of greenspace in TRCA's jurisdiction.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The Coalition will assess the potential for existing policy and legislative tools to meet the
requirements for enhancement and protection of green infrastructure. Fundraising will be
undertaken to provide the financial resources to undertake this work including consultation with
stakeholders throughout Ontario to gather information and opinion on the need for green
infrastructure tools. After consultation and evaluation, the committee will assess the potential
development of the framework for a Green Infrastructure Act to be presented to the Province for
their action and adoption.
387
FINANCIAL DETAILS
TRCA will assist in preparing fundraising proposals to support the project. The Conservation
Foundation of Greater Toronto will be the repository for the funds initially. A small contribution
of funds and/or inkind services will be provided to the Coalition.
Report prepared by: Deborah Martin-Downs, extension 5706
Emails: dmartin-downs@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Deborah Martin-Downs, extension 5706
Emails: dmartin-downs@trca.on.ca
Date: October 13, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A178/09 -BLACK CREEK CHANNEL MAINTENANCE
Jane Street and Wilson Avenue
Tender RSD09-34. Award of Contract RSD09-34 for Black Creek Channel
Maintenance.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT Contract RSD09-34 for Black Creek Channel Maintenance be awarded to A-Plus
General Contractors at a cost not to exceed $430,500.00, plus applicable taxes, subject to
receipt of all necessary approvals and funding, it being the lowest bid that meets Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the action necessary to
implement the contract including obtaining any approvals and the signing and execution
of documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The project site is located within the Black Creek Channel, near Jane Street and Wilson Avenue
in the City of Toronto. The existing concrete channel was constructed in the early 1960s to
control flow conveyance through the highly urbanized surrounding area, extending from
approximately 225 m upstream of the Jane Street crossing, downstream to the intersection of
Jane Street and Black Creek Drive; a total length of approximately 2.2 km.
Now in excess of 40 years old with little maintenance carried out since construction, the
trapezoidal channel has deteriorated significantly and requires repairs to be carried out to
prevent damage to municipal infrastructure. Due to limited capital funding for maintenance
works at present, only high priority areas (e.g., near bridges, buried sanitary/watermains) have
been scheduled for repairs.
388
The proposed site is located north of Wilson Avenue, immediately west of Jane Street. The
limits of work are bounded by a drop structure at the upstream end to approximately 27 m
downstream of the Jane Street Bridge. At the site, a large erosion scar has formed above the
high flow concrete walls on the right/west bank which has encroached behind the abutment for
the Jane Street bridge, and several concrete panels on both sides of the channel have been
damaged and displaced. It is also noted that the 300 mm Black Creek Sanitary Trunk Sewer
(STS) is located within the limits of construction, as is a 900 mm trunk watermain (Main 94).
Aecom was retained as the engineering consultant, and they developed detailed design plans
for structural repairs that are consistent with both TRCA and City of Toronto policies and
specifications for flood control and the protection of municipal infrastructure, respectively.
RATIONALE
Tender RSD09-34 was publicly advertised in the Daily Commercial News on September 21,
2009 with a mandatory site meeting held on September 24, 2009. Tender packages were sent
to eight contractors as follows:
Dynex Construction Limited;
DIRM Concrete Work;
Bridgecon Construction Limited;
Civil Underground and Excavation Company Limited;
G.C. Romano Sons (Toronto) Limited;
McPherson Andrews Contracting Limited;
Hobden Construction Company Limited; and
A-Plus General Contractors.
The Tender Opening Committee opened the tenders on October 9, 2009 with the following
results:
Tender RSD09-34
Black Creek Channel at Jane Street and Wilson Avenue
BIDDERSTOTAL
(Plus GST)
10% Bid
Security
A-Plus General Contractors $430,500.00 YES
Civil Underground and Excavation Company $569,625.00 YES
Bridgecon Construction Ltd.$864,885.00 YES
G.C. Romano Sons (Toronto) Ltd.$894,206.25 YES
Aecom reviewed the bids received against its own cost estimate and has determined that the
bids are of reasonable value. Further assessment by Aecom of the lowest bidder’s experience
and ability to undertake similar projects was conducted through reference checks which
resulted in positive feedback that the lowest bidder is capable of undertaking the scope of
work. Based on this evaluation, staff recommend that Contract RSD09-34 be awarded to
A-Plus General Contractors for the total cost not to exceed $430,500.00, plus GST, as they are
the lowest bidder that meets TRCA specifications.
389
FINANCIAL DETAILS
As the channel maintenance is required on lands owned by both TRCA and the City of Toronto,
the City agreed to provide matching funding of $350,000 towards the total cost of the repairs.
TRCA funds are available in account #107-10 from the Flood Control Maintenance Budget, with
matching funding provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources.
Report prepared by: Aaron D’Souza, 416-393-6336
For Information contact: Laura Stephenson, 416-661-6600, extension 5296
Email: mstephenson@trca.on.ca
Date: October 2, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A179/09 -HEART LAKE CONSERVATION AREA
Outdoor Pool Construction Project. Award of contract for Heart Lake
Conservation Area Outdoor Pool Construction Project.
Moved by:Grant Gibson
Seconded by:Maria Augimeri
THAT the contract for Heart Lake Conservation Area outdoor swimming pool construction
be awarded to Accent Building Sciences Inc./A Plus General Contractors Corp., at a total
cost not to exceed $1,600,000, plus applicable taxes, it being the lowest bid meeting
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications;
THAT award of the contract be subject to terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff
and legal advisers, including but not limited to determination of the final contract cost not
to exceed the approved amount;
THAT should staff be unable to achieve an acceptable contract with the above-mentioned
contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with other
contractors that submitted tenders, beginning with the second lowest bidder;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized staff be directed to take the action necessary to
implement the contract including obtaining any approvals and the signing and execution
of documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
One of the recommendations of the Heart Lake Conservation Area Master Plan is the
development of a plunge pool that is to replace natural swimming at Heart Lake Conservation
Area and add to the recently constructed aquatic playground facility. In order to support Heart
Lake’s restoration to a warm water fishery, swimming was discontinued and coincided with the
installation of the aquatic playground facility in 2008. It is the desire of TRCA to enhance the
water play experience for Heart Lake Conservation Area visitors through the addition of an
outdoor swimming pool.
390
At Authority Meeting #6/09, held on July 24, 2009, Resolution #A120/09 was approved as
follows:
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to undertake
the development of Heart Lake Conservation Area outdoor swimming pool and
supporting visitor and staff infrastructure through the federal Recreational Infrastructure
Canada (RInC) Program in Ontario and Ontario Recreation (REC) Program;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as
required.
Over the last few months staff worked closely with Harrington and McAvan Ltd. to prepare and
refine detailed design and construction drawings required to move forward with the tendering
and building permit process. Key design features of the outdoor swimming pool include:
fully accessible;
8 feet deep, 810 m2 concrete pool with beach entry;
600 person capacity;
large seating, picnicking, and viewing areas;
state of the art pressurized DE filtration system with skimmers;
barrier-free, 1,500 sq. ft. adjacent pool complex facility featuring low flow toilets, faucets,
motion occupancy and T8 lighting;
viewing deck;
sustainable heating technology;
dual grey water system.
RATIONALE
Request for Tender was publically advertized on September 15, 2009 and the following 13 firms
obtained tender documents and attended a mandatory site meeting:
Accent Building Sciences Inc./ A Plus General Contractors Corp.;
Percon Construction Inc.;
Austin Carroll Pool Construction;
Beta & Associates Inc.;
BECC Construction Group;
Todd Pools;
Western Recreation & Development;
Ferdom Construction;
R. Chad General Contracting;
Alpeza General Contracting;
Acapulco Pools;
Canada Pool Ltd.;
Jadaco Recreation.
Tenders closed on Friday, October 16, 2009 at 4:00 pm and were opened at Tender
Opening Committee Meeting #6/09, held on October 19, 2009 by the following TRCA staff:
Gerri Lynn O'Connor - Chair;
Jim Dillane - Director, Finance and Business Services;
Kathy Stranks - Manager, Chair and CAO's Office;
Brad Clubine - Project Manager, Parks and Culture.
391
The following is a summary of the fee proposals received:
Heart Lake Conservation Area Outdoor Swimming Pool Construction
Firm Cost
(Plus GST)
Accent Building Sciences Inc./A Plus General
Contractors Corp. $1,850,000
Percon Construction Inc. $2,220,000
Austin Carroll Pool Construction No Bid
Beta & Associates Inc. $1,863,500
BECC Construction Group $2,076,154
Todd Pools No Bid
Western Recreation & Development No Bid
Ferdom Construction No Bid
R. Chad General Contracting No Bid
Alpeza General Contracting No Bid
Acapulco Pools No Bid
Canada Pool Ltd. No Bid
Jadaco Recreation No Bid
All proposals were evaluated by TRCA staff according to the following evaluation criteria:
completeness;
compliance with tender requirements;
relevant project experience;
references; and
fee proposals.
Based on the evaluation criteria and recommendations from Harrington and McAvan Ltd., staff
concluded that the tender submitted by Accent Building Sciences Inc./A Plus General
Contractors Corp. meets all requirements set out in the tender documents and is the lowest bid
received.
Subsequently, staff evaluated the tenders and determined that the lowest tendered bid is over
the approved available budget of $1,600,000, plus GST. Staff has taken the following actions to
achieve cost saving measures in order to ensure the project cost is within the available budget:
1)line item deletions: the project’s scope of work to be altered by directly deleting line items
from the tender form;
2)revisions using submitted unit prices: the project’s scope of work to be altered by revising
the quantity of selected design elements (revised prices shall be calculated by applying the
unit prices for addition and deletion of items submitted by the contractor on the tender
form); and
3)negotiated reductions using submitted lump sum prices after redesign: reductions to be
achieved through the redesign of selected project elements and subsequent negotiations
with the contractor.
As a result of implementation of the cost saving measures, the integrity of the project will
remain intact and not be compromised.
392
Staff is confident that as a result of implementing the above outlined cost saving measures
during the contract negotiating phase, Accent Building Sciences Inc./A Plus General
Contractors Corp. will conduct the required tasks in a timely and cost effective manner that
meet the approved facility budget of $1,600,000, plus GST. Timing for completion of the
project is critical to meet the federal/provincial stimulus funding requirements. If staff is unable
to come to a mutually agreeable contract, then staff is requesting authorization to enter into
contact negotiations with the next lowest bidder to complete the project at the budget available.
Staff recommend award of the contract to Accent Building Sciences Inc./A Plus General
Contractors Corp. for Heart Lake Conservation Area Outdoor Swimming Pool Construction
Project at a final project cost of $1,600,000, plus GST.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
One third of the funds required ($533,300) is available within the Heart Lake Master Plan
Implementation budget, funded by the Region of Peel. The remaining required funds
($1,066,600) are available through the federal Recreational Infrastructure Canada (RInC)
Program in Ontario and Ontario Recreation (REC) Program.
Report prepared by: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Brad Clubine, extension 5252
Emails: bclubine@trca.on.ca
Date: October 20, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A180/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Don River Watershed
Don-Greenbelt Developments Inc., CFN 42962. Purchase of property
located between Green Belt Drive and the Don Valley Parkway, north of
the CPR tracks, City of Toronto (North York Community Council Area),
under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain
and Conservation Component, Don River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B132/09)
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
THAT 0.004 hectares (0.010 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 3,
Concession 3, East of Yonge Street and designated as Block 18 on Plan 66M-2389, City of
Toronto (North York Community Council Area), located between Green Belt Drive and the
Don Valley Parkway, north of the CPR tracks, be purchased from Don-Greenbelt
Developments Inc.;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
393
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A181/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Duffins Creek Watershed
Marshall Homes (Riverside) Ltd., CFN 42986. Acquisition of property
located in the Town of Ajax, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the
"Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and
Conservation Component, Duffins Creek watershed.
(Executive Res.#B133/09)
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
THAT 0.789 hectares (1.950 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Part of Lot 17,
Concession 2, and Part of Block 2, Registered Plan 342 and all of Lot 14, Registered Plan
M-1157, and all of Block B, Registered Plan M-1200 and designated as Blocks 2 - 5
(inclusive) on draft M-Plan prepared by J.D. Barnes Limited under reference no.
07-25-990-06, Town of Ajax, Regional Municipality of Durham, located east of Brock Road,
south of Rossland Road West, be purchased from Marshall Homes (Riverside) Ltd.;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid by
TRCA;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
394
RES.#A182/09 -TOWN OF WHITCHURCH-STOUFFVILLE
Conveyance of Land for the Extension of Park Drive, South of Burkholder
Street (Within the Hamlet of Stouffville), Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville,
Duffins Creek Watershed, CFN 42877. Receipt of a request from the
Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville for conveyance of land for the extension of
Park Drive, south of Burkholder Street (within the hamlet of Stouffville), in
the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York.
(Executive Res.#B134/09)
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville to convey certain lands for the extension of Park
Drive, south of Burkholder Street (within the hamlet of Stouffville), in the Town of
Whitchurch-Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York;
AND WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in
furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to
cooperate with the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville in this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a parcel of TRCA-owned land containing 0.057
hectares (0.141 acres), more or less, required for the extension of Park Drive, said land
being Part of Lots 34 and 35, Concession 9, Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, Regional
Municipality of York, designated as Part 2 on a draft Plan on Survey prepared by Holding
Jones Vanderveen Inc., Ontario Land Surveyors, under their Job No. 07-1880-REF1, dated
August 28, 2009, be conveyed to the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville;
THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other costs to
be paid by the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville;
THAT an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being
carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the Town of
Whitchurch-Stouffville;
THAT the conveyance of land be subject to a landscaping plan, subject to the approval of
TRCA staff;
THAT the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all
claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly
or indirectly, from this sale or the carrying out of construction;
THAT said conveyance be subject to approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27, as amended;
395
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A183/09 -CITY OF TORONTO
Request for a Permanent Easement for the Coxwell Sanitary Trunk Sewer
By-pass Pipe
Don River Watershed, City of Toronto (Toronto East York Community
Council Area), CFN 42948. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto
to provide a permanent easement for the Coxwell Sanitary Trunk Sewer
by-pass pipe, west of Coxwell Boulevard, north of O'Connor Drive
(behind Barbara Crescent), Don River watershed, City of Toronto
(Toronto East York Community Council Area).
(Executive Res.#B135/09)
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement for the Coxwell Sanitary Trunk
Sewer by-pass pipe, west of Coxwell Boulevard, north of O'Connor Drive (behind Barbara
Crescent), Don River watershed, City of Toronto (Toronto East York Community Council
Area);
AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with the City of Toronto in
this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of
0.20 hectares (0.49 acres), more or less, be granted to the City of Toronto for the Coxwell
Sanitary Trunk Sewer by-pass pipe, said land being west of Coxwell Boulevard, north of
O'Connor Drive (behind Barbara Crescent), City of Toronto (Toronto East York
Community Council Area), as shown on a plan entitled: EASEMENT REQUIREMENTS,
prepared by City of Toronto - Technical Services, Survey and Mapping, under their Job
No. 2009-0787-C, dated September 3, 2009;
THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other costs to
be paid by the City of Toronto;
THAT the City of Toronto is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries,
damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the
granting of this easement or the carrying out of construction;
THAT an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being
carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the City of Toronto;
396
THAT all TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated/stabilized
following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan
be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA
landscaping guidelines;
THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained prior to commencement
of construction;
THAT said easement be subject to approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27, as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A184/09 -2010 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES, OPERATING AND CAPITAL
Recommends approval of the 2010 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and
Capital.
(BAAB Res.#C10/09)
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT the 2010 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital be approved;
AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and, as
appropriate, the Chair of TRCA, be directed to meet with TRCA funding partners to
present the 2010 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A185/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Section II items EX8.1 - EX8.7, with the exception of EX8.6 - Duffins Creek
Pedestrian Trail, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #8/09, held on October 9,
2009, be received.
CARRIED
397
Section II Items EX8.1 - EX8.6, With the Exception of EX8.6
REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION
AUTHORITY-OWNED LAND
(Executive Res.#B136/09)
ADMINISTRATION OF ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
(Executive Res.#B137/09)
ECOSYSTEM VALUATION AND COMPENSATION PROTOCOL
(Executive Res.#B138/09)
DON VALLEY BRICK WORKS
(Executive Res.#B139/09)
SHERWOOD PARK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS
(Executive Res.#B140/09)
TOMMY THOMPSON PARK MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
(Executive Res.#B141/09)
_________________________________________
RES.#A186/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT Section II item EX8.6 - Duffins Creek Pedestrian Trail, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #8/09, held on October 9, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A187/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Maja Prentice
THAT Section II item EX8.8 - Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan (SNAP),
contained in Executive Committee Minutes #8/09, held on October 9, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A188/09 -SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGIES EVALUATION PROGRAM
Progress Report. Update on the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation
Program.
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:David Barrow
398
THAT the staff report on the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP) be
received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
STEP was developed to provide the data and analytical tools needed to support broader
implementation of innovative technologies and practices. Its main objectives are to:
monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of environmental management technologies;
assess barriers and opportunities to implementing technologies;
develop tools and provide recommendations for policy and guideline development; and
promote broader use of effective technologies through research, education and advocacy.
The program addresses technologies in two major areas: clean water and clean air/energy.
Linkages between these areas are recognized and strengthened within individual technology
evaluations, but the program operates with unique funding and organizational structures for
each resource stream.
The choice of projects reflects priorities identified by municipalities and other levels of
government through various initiatives, including the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow
Management Master Plan, the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan, watershed source
protection plans, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, regional water conservation
programs (e.g. WaterSmart Peel, York's Water for Tomorrow), municipal development
standards and the Clean Air Partnership. Technologies monitored under the program are
demonstration projects that have the potential for widespread application elsewhere in the
Greater Toronto Area (GTA), and contribute significantly to reducing the environmental impacts
of human activities.
Reports and communication materials prepared by STEP and other partner agencies for both
streams are made available through the program website, hosted by Seneca College
(www.sustainabletechnologies.ca). Other avenues for dissemination of study results and
educational materials include conferences, workshops, training sessions, trade shows, peer
reviewed journals and articles in industry publications and the main stream media.
Since 2005, several monitoring evaluations and assessments have been completed or are
currently underway. Examples of completed projects include:
Evaluation of an Extensive Greenroof, York University, Toronto. Evaluates the stormwater
management and biodiversity benefits of greenroofs. Includes a separate laboratory
analysis of the contaminant leaching potential of greenroof media – completed July 2006.
Economic Analysis of Greenroofs. Analysis of the lifecycle costs and savings associated
with building and owning a greenroof in the GTA, based on local survey data, literature and
other sources – completed July 2007.
Performance Evaluation of Permeable Pavement and a Bioretention Swale, King City.
Evaluates parking lot applications of two stormwater infiltration practices with respect to
runoff reduction, surface water quality, the potential for groundwater contamination, soil
quality, clogging and structural integrity – completed November 2008.
Performance Evaluation of Rain Water Harvesting Systems, Toronto. Assesses the benefits
and limitations of rainwater harvesting systems in commercial, institutional and high rise
residential buildings in Toronto – interim reports completed in April 2008 and 2009.
399
Review of the Science and Practice of Stormwater Infiltration in Cold Climates. Reviews
existing guidance on stormwater infiltration practices and provides an overview of the
function and performance of the most common infiltration practices currently being used to
manage stormwater – completed August 2009.
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Natural Channel Design Projects. Develops a monitoring
protocol for natural channel designs (NCD) and provides a preliminary monitoring
assessment of 29 NCD projects in the GTA – two reports finalized in February 2009.
Monitoring is ongoing.
Evaluation of Design Criteria for Construction Sediment Control Ponds, Markham. A
modeling analysis of various pond design scenarios and their effect on sediment removal
based on two years of pond monitoring in Markham - completed June 2006.
Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Evaluation, Vaughan. Demonstration and
evaluation of erosion and sediment control practices, including structural practices,
planning tools and different approaches to construction staging – final draft report currently
under review.
An Integrated Air Biofiltration System, Toronto. Evaluates the energy and air quality
performance of the air biofiltration system in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's
(TRCA) Head Office – completed 2005.
Evaluation of the Energy Efficiency and Performance of TRCA’s Archetype Sustainable
Houses: Set-up and Design of Monitoring Systems, Vaughan. Provides an overview of the
study design for the Archetype Sustainable House monitoring project - completed
December 2008.
Results of the studies completed to date have been widely distributed and presented through
various media, and have served as important resources in the development of training
programs, guidelines and policies on these practices. Examples of guidelines or policies
influenced by STEP studies include the Low Impact Development Stormwater Management
Manual (under review) the Greater Golden Horseshoe Conservation Authorities Erosion and
Sediment Control Guideline for Urban Construction, and Toronto’s Green Roof Strategy and
Construction Standard.
Conferences hosted or co-hosted by STEP are held, at a minimum, once every two years to
disseminate study results and provide information on what other agencies are doing on related
topics. There are fewer evaluations on green energy/air topics completed to date because this
stream of the program was initiated two years later than the clean water stream of the program.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
A number of projects are currently underway or are planned for 2010. Some of these build
upon issues or knowledge gaps identified in earlier studies, while others are new initiatives.
There is a continued focus on Low Impact Development technologies as part of ongoing efforts
to improve the management of stormwater in the GTA. Technology evaluations in this area
include:
infiltration chambers;
permeable pavements;
soil amendments;
engineered media for phosphorus removal;
backyard soakaways; and
bioretention.
400
Program staff has also assisted with preparation of a Low Impact Development manual, jointly
prepared by TRCA and Credit Valley Conservation, and are currently partnering with University
of Guelph in the development of a design and costing tool for rainwater harvesting systems.
Other clean water projects scheduled for 2010 include evaluations of biodredging technologies,
lifecycle cost assessment of Low Impact Development technologies, and a monitoring
assessment of techniques designed to mitigate the thermal impacts of stormwater ponds.
In the area of construction site sediment control, staff is currently evaluating the effectiveness of
various applications of anionic polyacrylamides (i.e. polymers) as a means of enhancing
settling of sediment in construction site runoff. These substances have recently been used with
success in Alberta and many U.S. states to improve sediment management, but have not been
tested under Ontario soil and climate conditions, and in the context of local policy. Training of
erosion and sediment control (ESC) professionals has also been a key focus of efforts in this
area. Deliverables completed in 2008 include an ESC Inspection Guide and a curriculum for
training courses delivered in March 2009 and scheduled again for November 2009. The
planning of an ESC Field Training Facility and associated curriculum was also initiated in 2009,
with the detailed design and construction of the facility to be completed in 2010.
STEP activities on the green energy side of the program are occurring primarily at the Kortright
Centre in Vaughan, where a number of sustainable buildings and renewable energy
demonstrations have been constructed over the years. Investigations currently underway
include evaluations of the energy efficiency and performance of the two Archetype Sustainable
Houses, and monitoring studies examining how best to optimize energy production from solar
photovoltaics, solar hot water and home scale wind turbines. These studies have been
specifically designed to inform and update policies and guidance documents such that current
barriers to broader uptake of the technologies are addressed and overcome.
In Toronto, STEP staff is working closely with the Toronto Atmospheric Fund and the City of
Toronto’s Energy Efficiency Office on their Solar City Technology Assessment Partnership.
This Partnership was developed to collect, analyze and distribute information about urban solar
installations in order to promote best practices, resolve barriers and advance solar energy use
in the GTA.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The table below lists confirmed project/program contributions for provincial/federal fiscal year
2009/10 (March 31, 2009 to March 31, 2010). The budget covers 15 individual projects and
maintenance of the program website.
401
Funding Sources ($000s)/Partners:
Cash In-Kind
Toronto 100
York Region 75
Peel Region 235
Durham Region 0
Local municipality(s) and other
conservation authorities
35
Great Lakes Sustainability Fund 50
Toronto and Region Remedial
Action Plan
80
Toronto Atmospheric Fund 10
Ontario Ministry of the
Environment
25 60
Colleges, Universities 25 100
Private (development industry,
product manufacturers,
associations, etc.)
140 160
Total 775 320
Report prepared by: Tim Van Seters, extension 5337
Emails: tvanseters@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Tim Van Seters, extension 5337
Emails: tvanseters@trca.on.ca
Date: October 5, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A189/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:David Barrow
THAT Section IV item AUTH8.2.1 - Rouge Park Alliance, in regard to watershed committee
minutes, be received.
CARRIED
Section IV Item AUTH8.2.1
ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE
Minutes of Meeting #5/09, held on June 19, 2009
_________________________________________
402
RES.#A190/09 -2009 FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT
To August 31, 2009. Provides information on Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority's financial performance as of August 31, 2009,
and projected to December 31, 2009.
(BAAB Res.#C11/09)
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) 2009 Financial Progress
Report to August 31, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
RES.#A191/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Grant Gibson
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items EX10.1 - EX10.79, with the exception of EX10.7 -
City of Toronto, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #8/09, held on October 9,
2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A192/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 item EX10.7 - City of Toronto, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #8/09, held on October 9, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
NEW BUSINESS
RES.#A193/09 -APPRECIATION DAYS
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
403
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) facilities be closed between
Christmas and New Year's day in 2009, thereby awarding TRCA staff two additional
vacation days in 2009 only to be used excusively on December 30 and 31, 2009, as a one
time additional benefit to TRCA staff;
AND FURTHER THAT should any staff be designated by their Director or Chief
Administrative Officer as providing an essential service and required to work during this
period, that they be compensated by being able to use the 2 additional vacation days
during 2010.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:42 p.m., on Friday, October 23, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
404
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #9/09
November 27, 2009
The Authority Meeting #9/09, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer Village,
on Friday, November 27, 2009. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to
order at 9:41 a.m.
PRESENT
Eve Adams Member
Paul Ainslie Member
Maria AugimeriVice Chair
David Barrow Member
Bryan Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Mike Del GrandeMember
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Jack Heath Member
Colleen JordanMember
Bonnie Littley Member
Glenn Mason Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
John Parker Member
Anthony PerruzzaMember
Gino Rosati Member
John SprovieriMember
Richard WhiteheadMember
ABSENT
Glenn De BaeremaekerMember
Bill Fisch Member
Grant Gibson Member
Reenga MathivananMember
Linda Pabst Member
Maja Prentice Member
405
RES.#A194/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Suzan Hall
Seconded by: Jack Heath
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #8/09, held on October 23, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
DELEGATIONS
(a)A delegation by Peter Orphanos, Chair, Sierra Club of Peel Region, in regard to item
AUTH7.3 - Region of Peel Official Plan Amendment - ROPA 21.
(b)A delegation by Marianne Yake, President, and Natalie Helferty, Past President,
Richmond Hill Naturalists, in regard to item AUTH7.6 - David Dunlap Observatory
Property.
RES.#A195/09 -DELEGATIONS
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT above-noted delegation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
RES.#A196/09 -DELEGATIONS
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:David Barrow
THAT above-noted delegation (b) be heard and received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Tim Van Seters, Manager, Sustainable Technologies, TRCA, in regard
to Performance Evaluation of Permeable Pavement and Bioretention Swale.
(b)A presentation by Lionel Normand, Terrestrial Biologist
(Duffins/Carruthers/Petticoat/Frenchman's Bay), TRCA, in regard to Examples of
Ecosystem Valuation/Compensation from Other Jurisdiction.
(c)A presentation by Brian Denney, Chief Administrative Officer, TRCA, in regard to World
Green Building Council Secretariat and Copenhagen.
406
RES.#A197/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
RES.#A198/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT above-noted presentation (b) be heard and received.
CARRIED
RES.#A199/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Gino Rosati
THAT above-noted presentation (c) be heard and received;
THAT staff be directed to continue to support the Secretariat for the World Green Building
Council (WGBC) as part of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s (TRCA)
operations
THAT the staff be directed to amend the existing agreement between WGBC and TRCA to
provide for the development of the regional governance model for WGBC;
THAT the Board of WGBC be requested to continue its plans to achieve financial self
sufficiency including corporate support as required to meet the financial needs of the
Secretariat in Toronto;
THAT the Board of the WGBC be thanked for the recognition of the TRCA as a Founding
Partner;
AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to
implement the foregoing, including the signing of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A200/09 -PROTECTION OF WOODLANDS
Challenges to protecting woodlands in the planning and development
process in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority jurisdiction.
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
407
WHEREAS policies to protect woodlands in the planning and development process are
limited;
AND WHEREAS woodlands that are protected in the planning and development process
may require remediation, restoration and management;
AND WHEREAS many woodlands are included in the target system of Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy;
AND WHEREAS woodlands provide social, economic and environmental benefits,
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT in the 2010 review of the Provincial Policy
Statement (PPS), the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing be requested to
strengthen the policies to protect woodlands;
THAT in official plan updates, TRCA's municipal partners be requested to create official
plan policies to identify and protect woodlands, in order to implement PPS protection
policies;
THAT in official plan updates, TRCA's municipal partners be requested to establish new
policies that recognize the natural heritage system, including woodlands, as green
infrastructure, a key consideration in community planning;
THAT TRCA work with the Province of Ontario and TRCA's municipal partners to explore
opportunities to establish new mechanisms that would draw funds from the development
approvals process to woodland management;
THAT TRCA raise the awareness of the development industry, through our development
review comments, procedures and guidelines, about recognition and/or efficiencies that
can be gained using a design approach that meets water balance, and other TRCA
stormwater management criteria, to the natural heritage system, including woodlands;
THAT TRCA continue to work with its municipal partners on stewardship and public
awareness projects that educate landowners, in the private and public realms, to maintain
the ecological integrity of woodlands;
AND FURTHER THAT all of TRCA's municipal partners and the Ministry of Municipal
Affairs and Housing be so advised by the CAO's Office.
CARRIED
408
BACKGROUND
The recent TRCA board discussions about woodlands began with a report at Executive
Committee Meeting #6/08, held on August 8, 2008 on an Ontario Municipal Board (OMB)
hearing for an official plan amendment, rezoning and draft plan of industrial subdivision in the
City of Vaughan. The subject property for this application was a 10.11-hectare (24.98-acre) site
containing a 2.5-hectare (6.2-acre) woodland. Through the report, TRCA staff asked the
Executive Committee to authorize them to appear before the OMB regarding these
applications; the report went next to the Authority as an information item. Among the
outstanding issues before the OMB, was the fate of the existing woodland, proposed to be
removed in favour of the development. Despite staff’s original recommendation that the
woodland be retained, limited protection policies at the provincial, regional and local levels
ultimately led to its removal.
A discussion ensued at Authority Meeting #7/08, held on September 19, 2008 about the site in
Vaughan and the challenges of protecting tableland woodlots in TRCA's jurisdiction. The
discussion resulted in approval of Resolution #A208/08, in part, as follows:
...AND FURTHER THAT staff report back with a detailed history of the site.
As well as a site history and chronology (Attachment 1), this report also presents a general
review of woodlands' vulnerability in TRCA's urbanizing region, which will speak to the
Authority's discussions and concerns.
Benefits of Woodlands
The continual urbanization of the city-region seems to have played out a love-hate relationship
with woodlands. The same developers that vehemently propose a woodland’s removal may
charge substantial premiums on lots backing onto any woodlands they are forced to retain;
they are well aware of the attractiveness of trees to the typical homebuyer and the associated
value. Not only are woodlands pleasing to the eye, they are good for our well-being; the
presence of woodlands can encourage a calmer, less stressful lifestyle – they temper urban
noise and make heavily populated areas feel less overpowering. Woodlands also provide an
excellent environment for physical activity and exercise – usually free to visit, they can help
tackle health inequalities and social inclusion issues. Conservation authorities are cognizant of
the value of woodlands for additional reasons, like the ecological services they supply. As well
as providing wildlife habitat, woodlands help clean the air, and aid in regulating climate and the
hydrologic cycle.
Environmental Policy Regime for Woodlands
The Province expresses its interest in woodlands in the Natural Heritage section of the
Provincial Policy Statement (2005) (PPS). Section 2.1.4 b) of the PPS states, that development
and site alteration shall not be permitted in significant woodlands south and east of the
Canadian Shield, unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the
natural features or their ecological functions. Additionally, section 2.1.6 states, that
development and site alteration shall not be permitted on lands adjacent to significant
woodlands, unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has
been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the feature or its ecological
function. These policies represent minimum standards as stated in Section 4.6 of the PPS, so
that planning authorities may go beyond these policies, providing they do not conflict with any
other PPS policy.
409
The PPS calls municipal official plans (OPs), “the most important vehicle” for implementing PPS
policies. The level of protection for woodlands in municipal policy varies from OP to OP within
TRCA’s jurisdiction. Virtually all municipal OPs in TRCA's watersheds are consistent with the
PPS in requiring an environmental impact study (EIS) for any development proposed in or
adjacent to significant woodlands; however, not all official plans identify significant woodlands
to which this requirement for an EIS would apply. Most notably, any woodland that is not
identified as significant, is not subject to Sections 2.1.4 b) and 2.1.6 of the PPS. And this is
indeed the case for many woodlands found in the urbanizing portions of TRCA's watersheds.
Although the Province provides the Natural Heritage Reference Manual to help municipalities
define the "significant" woodlands within their boundaries, certainly a qualifying criterion for
many developing communities can be found in the PPS' definition of significant. It states:
"Significant: means ...c) in regard to woodlands, an area which is ecologically important in
terms of features such as species composition, age of trees and stand history; functionally
important due to its contribution to the broader landscape because of its location, size or due to
the amount of forest cover in the planning area (emphasis added); or economically important
due to site quality, species composition, or past management history." Therefore, by virtue of
woodlands' scarcity in many parts of the city-region, all that remain could be argued to be
significant.
The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2002) (ORMCP) identifies “Significant Woodlands”
as one of eight categories of Key Natural Heritage Features (KNHF). All new development and
site alteration are prohibited in a KNHF, with limited exceptions. A minimum vegetation
protection zone (MVPZ) of 30 metres is required. Further, a Natural Heritage Evaluation (NHE)
is required to be completed for any development proposed within 120 m of a KNHF. The
Natural Heritage Evaluation could recommend an MVPZ of greater than 30 m if it is found that
30 m is insufficient to ensure the ecological integrity of the KNHF. Woodlands that are on the
Oak Ridges Moraine are not subject to the PPS, as Section 4.9 of the PPS states that provincial
plans (like the ORMCP and the Greenbelt Plan) shall take precedence over these policies to the
extent of any conflict.
The Greenbelt Plan (2005) is similar to the ORMCP in that it protects “Significant Woodlands”
as a KNHF, prohibits development and site alteration within the KNHF and its 30 metre MVPZ,
with limited exceptions, and requires an NHE for development and site alteration proposed
within 120 m of the KNHF. These requirements apply only to significant woodlands located
within the Natural Heritage System in the Protected Countryside designation of the Greenbelt
Plan. Outside of the Natural Heritage System, but still within the Protected Countryside
designation of the Greenbelt Plan, the policies of the PPS apply to significant woodlands.
Woodlands that are in the Natural Heritage System of the Greenbelt are not subject to the PPS,
as Section 4.9 of the PPS states that provincial plans (like the ORMCP and the Greenbelt Plan)
shall take precedence over these policies to the extent of any conflict.
410
In development proposals where a Planning Act application is not required (building permit, site
alteration), municipalities have another tool to protect woodlands. The Municipal Act contains
provisions that allow municipalities to enact tree cutting by-laws. In general, TRCA
municipalities that have such by-laws prohibit the cutting or injury of either individual trees of a
certain size, or woodlands of a defined size, unless particular criteria are met and a permit is
granted by either Council or delegated municipal staff. Additionally, some municipalities are
conducting urban canopy studies, which help to recognize the importance of street and yard
trees for the environmental quality of their communities.
The Species at Risk Act (2002) is an act respecting the protection of wildlife species at risk in
Canada; administered by Environment Canada, Parks Canada and Fisheries and Oceans
Canada, it prohibits the destruction of any species listed by the Act as at risk. There are some
woodland species that are listed as at risk (e.g., Butternut) and therefore, federally-owned
woodlands containing these species could not be removed without approval from the
appropriate federal authority.
The Endangered Species Act (2007) is an act respecting the protection of endangered wildlife
species in Ontario; administered by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), it prohibits the
destruction of any species listed by the Act as endangered, extirpated or threatened. There are
some woodland species that are listed under the Act (e.g., Butternut, Jefferson Salamander),
and therefore, woodlands containing these species could not be removed without approval
from MNR.
TRCA’s Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program (1994) (VSCMP), the main
document guiding TRCA's planning and development review process, establishes the
boundaries of valley and stream corridors as 10 metres from the furthest extent of a flood plain,
top of bank, meander belt or significant area. The VSCMP defines significant area as having
been identified as an Environmentally Significant Area by TRCA or the local or regional
municipality; as a wetland identified by MNR, an Area of Natural or Scientific Interest; or, an
area that exhibits the characteristics of any of these classifications. When TRCA staff establish
the boundaries of valley and stream corridors in the planning process, we generally treat any
woodlands that are contiguous to the top of bank, flood plain or meander belt, as significant
areas, so that a woodland becomes part of the valley or stream corridor to be protected. The
VSCMP does not contain policies for woodlands that are not contiguous with a valley or stream
corridor.
411
TRCA’s Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy (2007) (TNHSS) lends credence to the
argument that woodlands be protected, and moreover, expanded. The TNHSS highlights the
inadequacy of the existing natural cover of TRCA's watersheds, and the need to increase
natural cover from 17% to 30% of the landscape to meet goals of quality and biodiversity.
Although the TNHSS is not a policy or regulation, it held weight in a May 2009 Decision of the
Mining and Lands Commissioner on the potential loss of natural cover. The Commissioner
stated the following among her written Reasons and Findings: "A review of the Terrestrial
Natural Heritage System Strategy has convinced the tribunal of the merit of the guidelines
outlined in that document." And further: "The tribunal was convinced of the need to accept this
“primary focus” (retention of valleylands no matter how minor the impacts) of the TRCA and
support [sic] the goal of the Terrestrial Natural Heritage Strategy to strive for an increase in the
natural forest cover in the GTA." Considering its merits in characterizing the cumulative loss of
natural cover in the GTA and the strategy to protect and expand what is left, staff are promoting
that the TNHSS be incorporated into municipal official plan policies, as recommended in
TRCA's watershed plans’ implementation guides (2008, 2009).
TRCA Comments on Planning Act Applications Containing Woodlands
As a commenting agency under the Planning Act, and under Memorandums of Understanding
with TRCA's municipal partners, TRCA acts as an environmental advisor to municipalities in
natural heritage, natural hazards and water resources. Where woodlands are part of a subject
property, in accordance with the PPS, the VSCMP, and the TNHSS where applicable, TRCA
provides the ecological rationale for advocating protection. However, TRCA must ultimately
defer to the municipality since they are the approval authority for Planning Act applications.
Notwithstanding, there exists the option of appeal of the municipality’s decision to the OMB.
The approach of TRCA staff is typically to use any of the applicable legislation and program
interests discussed above to form the basis of staff's argument, that woodlands, as a
diminishing resource in the city-region, should be set aside from the lands to be developed,
and dedicated into public ownership. TRCA's level of success in achieving this end is often
highly dependent on municipal support; generally, where a municipality's OP policies on
woodlands are lacking, this support is not provided.
TRCA Comments on Ontario Regulation 166/06 Applications Containing Woodlands
TRCA natural hazard based Ontario Regulation 166/06, under Section 28(1) of the Conservation
Authorities Act, does not regulate woodlands. The only way in which TRCA's Regulation could
potentially protect a woodland would be if a woodland, either wholly or in part, were to fall into
an area regulated due to other features, e.g., being adjacent to a watercourse, wetland, flood
plain, shoreline or crest of slope. Permit applications made under Ontario Regulation 166/06
are assessed to determine if proposed works will affect the control of flooding, erosion,
dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land. If a permit application proposed site
alterations that would result in the removal of a woodlot situated within a regulated area, there is
the possibility that the tests of "conservation of land" or "erosion" would not be met. In this
instance, staff would not be able to recommend support and the application would be subject
to a Hearing. Whereas, if a property containing a woodland were the subject of a permit
application, but the woodland itself did not fall into a regulated area, TRCA's promotion of its
retention would be on a best efforts basis only.
Challenges to Protecting Woodlands
TRCA's experience in development review lends us insight into why woodlands can be a
vulnerable feature in TRCA's watersheds.
412
1. Legislation
The challenge for woodlands begins with the shortcomings of the legislative framework
established to protect them. The PPS permits development in woodlands and in lands adjacent
to woodlands, where it can be demonstrated that no negative impact will occur; in some cases,
consultants for development applications argue the latter strenuously and succeed. This is
often the case for heavily damaged woodlands like the subject property in the Invar file; the
current permissive nature of the PPS woodland policies does not provide sufficient incentive for
restoration of such degraded features. Further, the PPS is strictly for those woodlands that are
identified as “significant”; unless a municipality has identified a woodland as significant, there is
no legislation to protect them. Some past planning decisions in municipalities operating under
this limited policy framework committed to building envelopes that had little regard for
maintaining woodland features; once a proponent comes forward today to develop or
redevelop a lot based on the previous decision, it leaves little recourse for TRCA and municipal
staff wanting to retain the feature. Among the few municipal official plans that have woodland
protection policies, none are more restrictive than the minimum standards set out in the PPS,
i.e., most policies state that development will be permitted if it can be demonstrated that there
will be no negative impacts to the woodland or its functions. Finally, TRCA’s Regulation and the
VSCMP do not cover woodlands specifically and certainly not tableland woodlots that are
separate from valley or stream corridors.
2. Woodland Management
Where protection of woodlands is achieved, the next challenge is to determine who will own the
feature and who will pay for its management. Generally, woodlands protected through the
planning and development process are either dedicated into public ownership or have a
restrictive covenant registered on their title in favour of a public agency (e.g., TRCA, the
municipality). The ongoing management of the woodland (e.g., control for invasive species,
illegal uses, hazard trees), and any remediation required for long term health, can bear
considerable costs to the owner or to whoever takes on management responsibility; in the case
of a covenant or easement, access to the woodland for enforcement or management may also
be an issue. Essentially, long term woodland management generally does not take place
unless an agreement is reached, at the time of dedication, for a well-funded manager with
access to the site. Such agreements are not commonly established given the limited resources
of most public agencies.
3. Development Design
In order for a woodland to thrive in an urbanized setting, an adequately sized, natural buffer
must be provided, as well as the hydrologic regime (water balance) that exists to support the
woodland in the pre-development condition must be maintained in the post-development
condition. TRCA Planning and Development staff are aware of this and therefore request that
woodlands be protected both in form (by keeping their form in tact within a development), and
in function (by asking proponents to demonstrate how their development will maintain the
woodland over the long term). Staff request that the proposed development’s design
accommodate, to the extent possible, buffers around the woodland, and mimicry of the water
balance currently supporting the woodland in the pre-development condition. This can be a
deterrent for the proponent to agree to protect a woodland, given that not only is the woodland
plus buffer portions of their land unavailable for development, but the land portion permitted to
be developed may be limited by design requirements for water balance.
413
4. Matrix Influence
Once a woodland is secured through the development process, stewardship or lack thereof, is
yet another challenge to its long term health. Neighbours of woodlands in an urbanized setting
can be unaware of the damage caused to a woodland simply from typical housekeeping
activities. For example, some homeowners with yards backing onto a woodlot may plant
non-native species in their yard, extend mowing into the under-storey of the woodland edge,
dump yard waste or other debris into the woodland, keep backyard lights on in the night-time
hours, or unleash pets in the woodland. Similar issues arise with woodlands surrounded by
public open space, whereby users can strain the limits of the resource; indeed, increasing
urbanization and intensification in the GTA may mean an inadequate amount of natural spaces
will be available for the amount of people wanting to enjoy them. All of these activities,
documented as components of the "matrix influence" in TRCA's TNHSS, negatively impact on
the function of a woodland, and possibly on its form if aggressive manicuring occurs. The
influence is exacerbated when adequate buffers to a woodland are not provided by a
development's design. This then can lead to risk of the woodland being removed in future
redevelopment scenarios, justified by its level of degradation.
Addressing the Challenges
Considering the challenges described above, below are a number of suggestions on how these
challenges may be overcome.
1. Legislative Updates
The PPS and corresponding municipal OP policies are a good starting point for strengthening
the legislative framework protecting woodlands. The PPS is due for review in 2010, and the
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO) is already mindful of the attention woodlands
require in this review, as explained in ECO’s Annual Report 2008/2009. First declaring that it:
“does not believe the PPS provides sufficient safeguards to protect the province’s significant
woodlands,” its Recommendation #1, states: "The ECO recommends that MMAH’s 2010 review
of the PPS introduce effective mechanisms for protecting significant woodlands, including
mechanisms for woodland evaluation, designation, tracking, and reporting." TRCA hopes that
heeding this recommendation, in addition to municipal initiatives to go beyond the current
minimum standards, will see municipal OP protection policies for woodlands improved. It is
hoped that municipalities will use the definitions and criteria for "significant" woodlands in the
PPS and the Natural Heritage Reference Manual to identify and protect woodlands through their
OP policies. Certainly the TNHSS model policies and TRCA watershed plan implementation
guides would aid municipalities in this endeavour. The basic premise of the TNHSS is to not
only protect what natural cover that is left, but also to expand it. Indeed, TRCA staff are
currently reviewing our own planning and development policies in the VSCMP (The Living City
Policies project) to incorporate the TNHSS, which will address the gap in VSCMP policies for
tableland woodlots separate from valleylands.
414
2. Green Infrastructure
Focusing on the woodland functions of regulating climate and the hydrologic cycle, especially
in an urbanized setting, makes it no surprise that woodlands as "urban forests" have fallen
firmly into the vocabulary of growth managers touting "green infrastructure" as a key
consideration in city building and re-building (intensification). Green Infrastructure generally
refers to natural vegetation and vegetative technologies in urban and rural settings, including
urban forests. The Green Infrastructure Ontario Coalition has been recently formed to define the
need for, and to further develop, a proposal to the Province for enhanced recognition and
protection of green infrastructure (see item AUTH7.2 considered at Authority Meeting #8/09,
held on October 23, 2009, for TRCA involvement). The Coalition contends that the protection of,
and investment in, green infrastructure is essential to the development of healthy, vibrant and
sustainable communities across Ontario. Should the Coalition be successful, it may result in a
new layer of protection for woodlands, whereby they can at least be identified as green
infrastructure (whether or not they are municipally assessed as significant) and therefore still
merit protection. But at the same time, it is hoped that municipalities will assign appropriate
value to green infrastructure in their official plan updates.
3. Creative Funding Solutions
Perceiving woodlands as green infrastructure could stimulate another avenue to protection and
maintenance of woodlands: if they are indeed infrastructure necessary for the healthy
functioning of developing communities, then the development approvals process should help
pay for them. Such logic could be presented to the Province in requesting that they amend the
Planning Act and the Development Charges Act, to permit the use of development charges for
woodland management.
A similar routing of monies to woodland management may be available to municipalities
through ss. 28 (7.1) of the Planning Act, which states that “environmental remediation” is an
eligible cost of a community improvement plan (CIP). It would be difficult to argue that a
woodland would not improve a community, and therefore could be a task within a CIP that the
area’s woodland be managed for long term health. This opportunity may be hampered,
however, if only a strict interpretation of environmental remediation is permitted, which limits its
applicability to contaminated soil remediation.
It is recognized that changing and updating legislation, or even changing the way its been
interpreted since its inception, is not a quick solution given the lengthy public process required.
Shorter term measures to facilitate greater woodland protection might exist within the routine
proceedings of the development review process. For example, in more than one instance, a
local municipality agreed to include TRCA conditions of approval on a draft plan of subdivision
that contained a wetland. The conditions required the proponent to monitor the wetland and to
provide funds for its remediation if needed; if remediation was not warranted, the funds were to
be allocated to another enhancement project in the same watershed. Similar conditions could
be applied to a draft plan containing a woodland should the municipality and proponent agree;
these conditions can benefit both parties. The municipality can save monitoring and
remediation costs, and the proponent protects their investment given that woodlands are a
selling feature of their developments. Although this solution of conditions of approval is a more
quickly implementable option, it hinges on cooperation among stakeholders. Amendments to
legislation may take longer, but obtaining management funds is assured since they would be
legally required.
415
4. Development Design Efficiencies
Proposed development designs that accommodate water balance to support a protected
woodland should be rewarded in some fashion, acknowledging the hardship such a design
may present for a proponent in terms of time delays and cost of construction, and that they are
providing a benefit not just to their development, but also to the municipality. There are federal,
provincial and local organizations that recognize builders and developers who create green
developments; certainly designs that not only incorporate a woodland, but also work to
maintain it over the long term should qualify for this recognition. Moreover, it is likely that the
measures taken to meet water balance to a woodland would also help fulfill stormwater
management requirements, thereby creating greater efficiency in the technical review process.
5. Encouraging Stewardship
Education of neighbours to, and users of, a woodland is an important step in fostering
stewardship of such features. While inspections of public woodlands adjacent to private lands
can help enforce the protection of a woodland, these are usually done on a limited basis given
lack of municipal resources. A more proactive approach would be for a brochure to be sent to
the front door of neighbours to a woodland describing treatment of the natural area behind
them that will benefit them and generations to come; this could be a joint project of the
municipality and TRCA (e.g., TRCA's Healthy Yards Program). Similarly, education of the public
about municipal tree by-laws or other by-laws serving to protect woodlands is key to their
success; because resources to enforce compliance are low, preventative action would be a
prudent approach for municipalities that have such laws. This, in combination with increases in
penalties for non-compliance, would hopefully improve the effectiveness of these by-laws.
SUMMARY
The existing policy regime for woodland protection in the TRCA jurisdiction is limited. Although
the PPS contains some protection policies for woodlands, for these policies to be effective, they
must be implemented by municipalities in their official plans. Given their planning approval
authority, TRCA staff must rely on municipalities' support when advocating for the protection of
a woodland. Yet municipalities do not always offer this support, especially when they do not
have woodland protection policies in their OPs, or if they feel bound by past planning
decisions. TRCA’s policies (VSCMP) and Ontario Regulation 166/06 are rarely able to augment
an argument to protect a woodland, since neither have tableland woodlots under their
jurisdiction.
Other issues for woodland protection are managing for the long term health of these features,
given that any required restoration and ongoing maintenance necessitate a dedicated manager
and the allocation of funds.
Appropriate design in order to maintain the function of the woodland over time is another
challenge. Even when a design has appropriate buffers and replicates the natural functioning of
a woodland in the post development state, its surrounding users must be educated on how not
to degrade the ecological quality of a woodland, while still being able to enjoy it for recreation
and aesthetics.
416
Essentially, a shift in political will is needed to support stronger woodland protection policies
and to uphold existing protection policies, especially in "difficult" situations such as the Invar
site. The current economic downturn gives municipalities good reason to reassess the value of
woodlands as green infrastructure, from which they can realize cost savings on maintenance of
traditional infrastructure. New and potentially creative funding solutions are required for
sustainability, so that woodlands can be maintained and remain resilient for the long term. The
Province’s “Culture of Conservation” recognizes that the resilience of natural systems, including
woodlands, needs to be reinforced in order that future generations can enjoy the same, and
even improved, social, economic and environmental benefits that woodlands can provide.
These benefits accrue not only to a single development and the host municipality, but also to
the broader regional landscape.
Report prepared by: Mary-Ann Burns, extension 5763
Emails: mburns@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Mary-Ann Burns, extension 5763, Carolyn Woodland, extension
5214
Emails: mburns@trca.on.ca, cwoodland@trca.on.ca
Date: October 30, 2009
Attachments: 1
417
Attachment 1
INVAR (FRESHWAY) LIMITED
Circumstances leading the removal of a tableland woodlot
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #7/08, held on September 19, 2008, Resolution #A208/08 was approved
as follows:
THAT Section II item 9.2 - Invar (Freshway) Limited, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #6/08, held on August 8, 2008, be received;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back with a detailed history of the site.
A) Planning History
The Invar (Freshway) Limited property is approximately 10.11 hectares in size (24.98 acres) and
located east of Jane Street and south of Highway 407 in the City of Vaughan. There are
existing industrial uses to the east and south, a cemetery to the west and Highway 407 to the
north.
A tributary of Black Creek (Humber watershed) traverses the western boundary of the subject
property. The property contained a 2.5-hectare (6.2-acre) tableland woodlot on the southeast
portion of the site.
The owner submitted applications to amend the Official Plan from General Complementary Use
under the Parkway Belt West Plan to Employment Area General, and to rezone the lands to
permit outside storage uses, employment uses, landscaped buffers and a stormwater
management facility. A Draft Plan of Subdivision application was also submitted to facilitate the
development of the 10.11-hectare site.
The applications were appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) by the proponent based
on the City of Vaughan's failure to render a decision on the proposed Plan of Subdivision and
Council’s refusal or neglect to enact the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Official Plan
Amendment, pursuant to the Planning Act.
TRCA staff requested party status before the OMB because there were a number of issues that
needed to be addressed by the applicant such as the submission of a revised functional
servicing report, the preparation of restoration plans, a watercourse realignment and the
proposed removal of the woodlot on the property. The approval authority for these official plan
and rezoning applications rested with the City of Vaughan, while the Region of York and TRCA
were commenting agencies. The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources also had approval
authority under the Endangered Species Act strictly for removal of the Butternut tree species
found in the woodlot. Section B)iii) of this report provides a more detailed explanation of the
regulatory roles and responsibilities for these applications.
418
B) The Woodlot
At Authority Meeting #7/08, held on September 19, 2008, staff were requested to report back
with a detailed history of the site. Specifically, the Authority was seeking further information
relating to the woodlot and the reasons why TRCA staff were unable to prevent its removal.
The following section provides a description of the woodlot and the surrounding site conditions.
The subsequent sections will outline the options examined, the policy regime in place at the
time, and the current status of the planning applications and woodlot.
i) Description of the Woodlot and Surrounding Site Conditions
The 2.5 hectare (6.2 acre) woodlot was located in the southeast corner of the Invar (Freshway)
Limited property. The woodlot was on the tableland portion of the site and was not directly
connected to the stream corridor, which runs along the western property boundary. The
woodlot consisted primarily of deciduous species.
There were 15 Butternut trees within the woodlot, which is an endangered species both
provincially and nationally due to its susceptibility to the Butternut canker. All Butternut within
this woodlot had the disease.
Due to the ecological functions the woodlot provided and the policies regarding the protection
of Butternut habitat, the initial recommendation of TRCA staff was that this woodlot should be
protected. However, several stressors were significantly reducing the woodlot’s function and its
regeneration capabilities. The stressors identified by the applicant were as follows:
Historical fill placement southwest of the property blocked the drainage of the woodlot. As
a result, the trees in the southern portion of the woodlot were subjected to several years of
persistent flooding, which resulted in their dieback. More recent fill activities permitted by
the City of Vaughan to the north and west of the woodlot exacerbated the situation.
Flooding was the most significant factor contributing to the decline of this woodlot.
The deposition of particulates from the neighbouring asphalt plant, crushing plant, CNR rail
line and Highway 407 were also impacting the site, as were wind deposited chemicals and
debris from de-icing activities along Highway 407 to the north.
The woodlot was also isolated from other natural heritage features, the closest feature being
the tributary that runs along the western property boundary. This isolation limited the
dispersal of genetic material to and from the site.
The size of the woodlot also limited the potential for interior forest habitat, which allowed
only urban tolerant species to survive.
Finally, disease and pests were impacting the tree species within the woodlot. Canker was
affecting the Butternut, Black Knot was affecting the under-storey Cherry species and the
Asian Long-horned Beetle was found in the adjacent cemetery.
Having generally agreed with the stressors identified by the consultants and having made our
own assessment of the site, TRCA staff concluded that the long-term protection of this woodlot
and its functions was highly dependent on the appropriate management of the feature. This
included the resolution of the flooding on the property, the establishment of appropriate buffers
and the woodlot’s management for Butternut regeneration. Overall, TRCA staff recognized that
an intense level of management was required on this site.
419
After several meetings between the landowner, TRCA, the City of Vaughan, the Regional
Municipality of York and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), the applicant was
asked to assess alternatives for dealing with the woodlot and to outline why they concluded
that its removal, with compensation, was the option to pursue. The following section outlines
the options examined by the applicant.
ii) Options Examined by the Applicant
Do Nothing to the Woodlot
If the woodlot was left in its current state, it was concluded by the applicant that many of the
trees would die due to the stressors outlined above. Only if the flooding was eliminated and the
woodlot actively managed by the applicant, would there be any benefit to the feature.
However, due to the lack of policy direction, the landowner was under no obligation to conduct
such works, and thus it was expected that the woodlot would continue to decline.
Partial Woodlot Preservation
This option looked at the preservation of the portion of the woodlot not impacted by flooding. It
was concluded that the remaining feature would be subject to the same stressors described
above, except that the flooding would be alleviated for the most part. It was expected,
however, that the soils in the woodlot would remain saturated and would not provide optimum
growing conditions, particularly for the Butternut. It was concluded by the applicant that the
woodlot would continue to decline in this scenario.
Individual Butternut Preservation
This approach involved the preservation of the 15 individual Butternut trees, with a suitable
buffer around each specimen. This approach would provide the trees with more open growing
conditions to allow for potential seed germination. The remaining lands outside the tree
preservation zones would be developed. Under this scenario, it was expected that the
individual trees would be subject to the previously described stressors. These specimens
would also become more susceptible to wind damage, sunscald, competition from invasive,
non-native species and increased levels of pollutants from the adjacent land uses. According
to the applicant, the likely result would be the death of the Butternut trees. Furthermore, this
approach did not protect the many other functions of the woodlot.
Woodlot Removal with Compensation
The final alterative examined was the removal of the woodlot with compensation. This scenario
was based on the expectation that the Butternut would not survive due to the canker and the
existing stressors on the site. The woodlot itself was also expected to decline over time. As
such, it was recommended that the woodlot be removed and compensation provided along the
newly realigned tributary that runs along the western property boundary, the new berm that
would be constructed adjacent to the tributary, the proposed stormwater management pond at
the south end of the development parcel and other lands elsewhere within the City of Vaughan.
These new planting areas would provide better growing conditions for Butternut, which would
be planted at a ratio of 10:1 for each tree removed. A variety of other species was also
proposed. It was noted that the compensation plantings would be better suited to resist the
stressors impacting the current woodlot, due to the design of the plan and the size, age and
species used. The applicant held that this option provided the best opportunity for maintaining
woodlot functions and ensuring the regeneration of the Butternut on this site.
420
iii) Policy Regime
The policy regime in place at the time also limited staff comments on the woodlot’s retention
and management.
TRCA
The woodlot was not contiguous with a valley or stream corridor and, therefore, it did not fall
within the realm of TRCA’s main policy document, the Valley and Stream Corridor Management
Program. Nor was the feature within an area regulated by TRCA pursuant to Ontario Regulation
166/06.
The woodlot, however, was identified as existing natural cover within the targeted system under
TRCA’s Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy. This strategy was approved by the
Authority, but has yet to be incorporated into TRCA policy or the City of Vaughan’s official plan.
In cases such as this, TRCA staff adopt a best efforts approach.
City of Vaughan
The feature was not designated for acquisition by the City of Vaughan under its Woodlot
Acquisition Development Charge By-law.
Staff at the City of Vaughan relied on the expertise of TRCA, the Regional Municipality of York
and MNR regarding the disposition of the woodlot. They did not provide a position regarding
its retention or removal.
Regional Municipality of York
The feature was identified in the 2005 York Region Significant Woodlands Study because of the
presence of the endangered Butternut and the woodlot's proximity to the adjacent watercourse.
The methodology and criteria for designating Significant Woodlands presented in the 2005
study had been endorsed by Regional Council, but the study’s adoption into the York Regional
Official Plan is pending.
Based on their assessment, the Regional Municipality of York opted to proceed with an
approach that would allow for the removal of the woodlot, but would require the applicant to
prepare a Forested Area Compensation Plan to the satisfaction of York Region Natural Heritage
and Forestry Services and TRCA. “The described plan shall outline specific measures to
provide a sustainable forest environment for the Butternut trees” (Regional Municipality of York,
Letter re. Invar (Freshway) Limited, dated October 11, 2007).
Ministry of Natural Resources
MNR’s comments related strictly to the Butternut and the protection of its habitat as stipulated
in the Provincial Policy Statement.
With respect to the Butternut, MNR concluded that “given the worsening condition of the trees,
the decline in suitable Butternut habitat, and the lack of recovery habitat in surrounding lands, it
is the opinion of MNR staff that the Butternut trees at this location do not contribute to the long
term survival or recovery of the Butternut species in any substantive manner, in the current
planning context” (MNR, Letter re. Invar (Freshway) Limited, dated June 23, 2008).
421
In order to allow the applicant to remove the Butternut trees, a permit would be required from
the MNR under the Endangered Species Act.
C) Conclusion and Current Status
In light of the limited policy tools and municipal strategic direction in place to assist with the
woodlot's retention and proper management, it was mutually agreed by all review agencies that
the woodlot could be removed with the preparation of an appropriate compensation plan.
In TRCA’s conditions of draft plan approval, it was requested that the applicant prepare a
Forested Area Compensation Plan to the satisfaction of the City of Vaughan, the Regional
Municipality of York and TRCA, in consultation with MNR. These conditions were forwarded to
the City of Vaughan in July 2008. The Regional Municipality of York provided similar
conditions.
By the end of September 2008, all outstanding issues raised by the parties to the OMB
proceedings were resolved. The Board was informed of this resolution at a settlement hearing
held on October 1, 2008.
The final Forested Area Compensation Plan, prepared by Strybos Barron King Ltd., was
presented to the agencies in late October, 2008 and was subsequently accepted by the
Regional Municipality of York, TRCA and MNR. The details of the compensation are as follows:
The applicant will plant native trees and shrubs along the proposed realigned stream
corridor, landscape berm and stormwater management pond. The total area planted on
and adjacent to the Invar (Freshway) Limited property will be 1.1 hectares (2.7 acres).
The applicant will provide $70,750.00 to TRCA for off-site reforestation in the City of
Vaughan to account for the area of the woodlot that could not be compensated for on, or
immediately adjacent to, the site, which is approximately 1.4 hectares (3.5 acres). These
works will be carried out and managed by TRCA.
The applicant will plant 160 Butternut trees: 90 trees on and adjacent to the property and 70
trees at TRCA’s off-site reforestation project.
The landscape architect and consulting arborist will regularly review the works during the
installation and warranty periods. All monitoring reports will be forwarded to the review
agencies. A two year warranty period will apply to the works. Butternut will fall within a five
year warranty period.
Finally, in March, 2009, MNR authorized the removal of the Butternut trees through a permit
issued under the Endangered Species Act. The entire woodlot, including the Butternut
specimens, has now been removed. The compensation works are underway.
422
References
Environmental Documentation and Assessment of Alternatives for Invar (Freshway) Property,
City of Vaughan, prepared by Gartner Lee Limited, dated May 2008.
Consolidation of Environmental Documentation for Invar (Freshway) Property, assembled by
Gartner Lee Limited, dated April 2008.
Forested Area Compensation Plan, prepared by Strybos Barron King Ltd., dated September
2008.
For Information contact: Coreena Smith, extension 5269
Emails: csmith@trca.on.ca
_________________________________________
423
RES.#A201/09 -LINKING WATERSHED PLANS TO GROWTH PLANNING
Outlining the general policy issues and comments, as informed by recent
watershed plans and provincial directions, that TRCA staff make when
commenting on municipal official plan updates and amendments.
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT the Authority endorse the report on Linking Watershed Plans to Growth Planning,
dated November 17, 2009, as providing general direction to staff when formulating
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Living City policy document and
when commenting on municipal official plan policy updates and site specific development
applications;
AND FURTHER THAT this report be circulated by the CAO's Office for information to all
TRCA partner municipalities, Conservation Ontario and the provincial ministries of
Municipal Affairs and Housing, Energy and Infrastructure, Natural Resources, Agriculture
and Food, and Environment.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Municipalities are required by the Planning Act to review their official plans every five years to
determine the need for an update to the policies based on new information and new provincial
or societal directions. Similarly, the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) undergoes a five-year
review to determine the need to address any new or emerging issues on a province-wide basis.
With the recent completion of updates to the Rouge, Don and Humber River watershed plans,
TRCA has much new information on environmental conditions and issues that is able to inform
new municipal policy directions. Similarly, numerous new policy initiatives have been advanced
by the province in recent years, to which municipal official plans must be brought into
conformity by official plan amendment. These provincial initiatives include: PPS 2005 (which
itself is in the early stages of a review required by 2010); the Greenbelt Plan, 2005; the Planning
and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006; the Places to Grow Act and the
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006); and the Clean Water Act (2006) and
requirements for source protection plans. Additionally, the Development, Interference and
Alteration Regulations for Conservation Authorities, specifically Ontario Regulation 166/06 for
TRCA, were updated in 2006.
Over the past two years, the regional municipalities of Durham, Peel and York have been
engaged in official plan background studies and policy updates. TRCA staff has formulated a
number of consistent policy themes for commenting on official plan updates, based on the
science and policy work developed through the watershed plans. Therefore, staff felt it was
important to inform the Authority members of these directions in advance of the many
upcoming official plan updates soon to be undertaken at the local municipal level. Additionally,
this report will also serve to inform the board as to the directions TRCA will take in transforming
its 1994 Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program (VSCMP) policy document into a
new suite of policies for The Living City.
424
TRCA Policy Comments and Directions
TRCA will continue to work with municipalities as both a partner and a commenting agency in
the updating of municipal official plans, using the science and results of watershed plans to
inform our comments. Staff recognizes that existing municipal official plans contain many good
environmental policies. TRCA policy recommendations, based on new state-of-the-art science,
are meant to strengthen these existing municipal policies or provide environmental policy
direction related to new or emerging topic areas, including growth planning issues such as
intensification or mitigating and adapting to potential climate change impacts. The intent is to
provide broad environmental policy direction that municipal planners can use as the basis for
crafting similar policies, tailored to the local circumstances and formats of their own municipal
official plans, while maintaining the substantive intent of the recommended policy directions.
TRCA staff will continue to work with our municipal partners to assist in the implementation of
these general policy directions in order to address the specific challenges unique to each
municipality.
There are four major environmental policy theme areas for which TRCA staff has formulated
comments for official plan policy updates to address the diversity of issues and landscapes
within the TRCA jurisdiction, as follows:
Comprehensive Flood Risk Assessment Plans; 1.
Integrated “Systems” Planning for Natural Heritage, Open Space and Green Infrastructure; 2.
Sustainable Urban Form and a Culture of Conservation; and 3.
Master Environmental Servicing Plans (MESPs) for Greenfields and Areas of 4.
Redevelopment or Intensification.
1. Comprehensive Flood Risk Assessment Plans
Comprehensive Flood Risk Assessment Plans need to be undertaken at the appropriate scale
(watershed, subwatershed and reach) to help reduce the potential long term economic costs to
municipalities of flood mitigation and remediation. This is particularly associated with aging
municipal infrastructure at risk from severe or frequent flooding events which may increase
under climate change conditions. Comprehensive flood risk assessment plans are
recommended for two main areas of future development:
(1)where redevelopment or intensification is proposed in a Flood Vulnerable Area (FVA) or
Special Policy Area (SPA) in order to maintain or decrease the level of risk and to formulate
specific actions and strategies for flood remediation, flood proofing, flood warning and
emergency response measures; and
(2)for urban boundary expansions in order to determine appropriate stormwater management
criteria for new development and to address and prevent cumulative downstream impacts
to people, property and infrastructure.
Municipal official plan updates should include policies or policy directions to:
be consistent with section 3.1 Natural Hazards of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS
2005, as updated or amended);
identify in the official plan (OP) in text and mapping all Special Policy Areas, Flood
Vulnerable Areas and Flood Damage Sites (as updated or amended from time to time);
contain explicit policies for each SPA and FVA (to address # 1 and 2 above);
require an updated hydrologic study, prepared on a watershed/subwatershed/reach-based
scale (as appropriate), to evaluate the effects of flooding on downstream SPA and FVA from
proposed new developments and to confirm the level of stormwater control needed before
expanding urban settlement area boundaries at the local level;
425
put greater emphasis on shoreline (lake and riverine) natural systems protection, aquatic
restoration, and appropriate forms of development and technical criteria (i.e. use of realistic
buffers and setbacks) for protection from natural hazards.
2. Integrated “Systems” Planning for Natural Heritage, Open Space and Green
Infrastructure:
Natural Heritage Systems in TRCA watersheds continue to decline in area of extent, largely due
to development pressures. What remains continues to be degraded in quality due to over-use
(recreational pressures), inappropriate use (illegal dumping, tree cutting), invasive species
crowding out native species, as well as a general benign neglect and lack of knowledge and
appreciation for the ecological goods and services (EGS) that natural heritage systems provide.
These EGS include multiple environmental, social and economic benefits such as: reducing
storm runoff volumes while protecting property and infrastructure by stabilizing shorelines and
hazard lands; mitigating climate change and reducing urban heat island effects by providing
shade and windbreaks leading to reduced fossil fuel use for heating and cooling; providing
oxygen and improving air quality; increasing biodiversity and resilience of ecosystems;
enhancing urban aesthetics and increasing property values; plus contributing to enhanced
recreational, cultural and spiritual opportunities. Natural heritage systems, in combination with
the urban tree canopy and grassy open space areas for recreation, hydro corridors, backyard
swales, cemeteries, stormwater ponds, etc. need to be viewed as the “Green Infrastructure of
The Living City”. Similar to the hard infrastructure like roads, sewers and public buildings,
society needs to make planned and ongoing investment in the maintenance, renewal and
improvement of its green infrastructure. By adopting a “systems” planning approach for green
infrastructure to integrate natural heritage systems, open space lands and urban design
technologies such as greenroofs, rainwater harvesting, permeable pavement and other
techniques, we have a much better chance to achieve all of the multiple benefits described
above, reduce the negative impacts, and do so in a cost-effective manner.
Municipal official plan updates should include policies or policy directions to:
identify and achieve over time a target terrestrial natural heritage system based on the
applicable watershed plan(s);
recognize the multiple benefits and value of the ecological goods and services provided by
green infrastructure, communicate these benefits to the general public and provide
incentives for their continuation and enhancement through the development approvals
process;
identify, plan and budget for the ongoing maintenance, renewal and improvement of the
municipality’s green infrastructure as part of an integrated systems approach to managing
natural heritage, stormwater, open space, hazard lands and the urban tree canopy;
recognize that natural systems extend beyond municipal boundaries and plan for
connections to large scale systems such as the Oak Ridges Moraine, Niagara Escarpment,
major river valleys and the Lake Ontario shoreline;
recognize that the partial loss of any natural heritage feature, which may be recommended
by a site-specific Environmental Impact Study (EIS), diminishes the entire system and
should be considered only in the context of enhancement, restoration and/or compensation
to the broader natural heritage system;
increase protection of ravine systems through policy links to ravine or tree protection and
site alteration by-laws;
426
manage the interface of the natural heritage system with development, redevelopment and
infrastructure projects through completion of Environmental Impact Studies that contain
recommendations for appropriate buffers, naturalization, restoration and/or edge
management plans;
secure environmental and hazard lands gratuitously into public ownership through the
development approvals process;
consider integrating appropriate locations of significant groundwater recharge areas into
the natural heritage system as one means to address Clean Water Act and possible source
protection plan requirements;
formulate urban forest management plans;
recognize the role of open space areas to integrate and accommodate multiple uses as
urban areas are intensified, such as designing sports fields for managing urban stormwater
in addition to providing recreational uses, to prevent over-use and degradation of natural
heritage systems;
encourage and support education and backyard stewardship programs that protect habitat
for migratory birds by promoting the use of native tree and plant species, the creation of
butterfly and water gardens and the on-site management and use of stormwater;
preserve agricultural lands for their environmental contributions to the landscape habitat
matrix, provision of ecological goods and services and as permeable surfaces for water
infiltration;
increase protection of woodlands as a key component of natural heritage systems, for their
role as green infrastrucuture in providing social and economic, as well as environmental
benefits.
3. Sustainable Urban Form and a Culture of Conservation
Collectively, all partners in the community planning and approvals process need to adopt a
strategic approach to the development of new communities by integrating urban design and
current scientific knowledge. This means building compact, walkable and transit-supportive
communities that reduce per capita energy use over all, while increasing alternative renewable
energy sources. It means promoting green building design elements such as greenroofs, solar
panels, rainwater harvesting and permeable pavement. It requires not just a one-track
approach to climate change adaptation and mitigation, but a comprehensive, integrated
approach that is woven through all sections of an official plan and all departments in an
organization.
Additionally, re-development in existing urban areas such as brownfields, greyfields and
intensification in urban growth centres, needs to achieve an integration of the built form with the
green infrastructure. This could mean retrofitting existing urban areas with district energy or
renewable energy systems. It will require a strong commitment to sustainable urban design,
including public spaces, so that existing parks, open space and ravine lands will not become
degraded through over-use.
Municipal official plan updates should include policies or policy directions to:
formulate a “green living and development” policy framework to support sustainable urban
form and infrastructure tied to accessible, multi-modal transit systems;
require best management practices (BMPs) and sustainable management practices such
as Low Impact Development (LID) including at-source lot level stormwater controls;
427
adopt a “No Regrets” approach to climate change mitigation and adaptation that is
threaded throughout all sections of an official plan including the promotion of public transit,
intensification and greenhouse gas reduction strategies;
encourage and promote energy conservation, district energy projects and the use of
alternative renewable energy sources such as solar, wind and geothermal;
encourage “neighbourhood” retrofit projects incorporating green technologies for industrial
areas (ie. Eco-Industrial parks) and supporting the Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit
Action Plan (SNAP) program to incorporate sustainable environmental changes into existing
stable neighbourhoods;
increase protection of natural systems and water quality through policy links to erosion and
sediment control and site alteration by-laws;
adopt Sustainable Neighbourhood Development Guidelines and require certification
standards such as LEED (leadership in energy and environmental design), Energy Star or
EnerGuide ratings;
undertake strategic transportation corridor and network studies at the master environmental
services plan (MESP) stage to minimize the number of infrastructure crossings of stream
corridors and the natural heritage system;
explore opportunities to remove infrastructure from natural heritage systems and hazardous
lands as re-development occurs;
Promote green building design elements such as greenroofs, solar panels and building
orientation to maximize passive solar gain, dual plumbing for grey water reuse plus harvest
and use of rainwater, low flow water-conserving plumbing fixtures, permeable pavement;
retrofit to the extent possible, existing developments with outdated or absent stormwater
controls, to incorporate a treatment train hierarchy with source, conveyance and
end-of-pipe measures to provide water quality treatment, erosion control, flood control and
address water balance objectives.
promote community gardens and the consumption of locally grown foods for their
environmental contributions to reducing the carbon footprint through greenhouse gas
reductions of reduced transportation distances.
4. Master Environmental Servicing Plans (MESPs) for Greenfields and Areas of
Redevelopment or Intensification
Sustainable community planning requires that the environmental systems framework and the
functional relationship and inter-dependencies of the water resources system and the natural
heritage system be scientifically understood and commitments made before development
proceeds to regenerate or enhance the systems. MESPs are the key tool in determining
development form in relation to the natural systems and environmental servicing infrastructure.
MESP studies identify environmental features, functions and linkages in detail at the block plan
or secondary plan stage and define protection and mitigation measures necessary to address
issues and opportunities identified in watershed plans. To date, MESPs (or their
municipally-named equivalent) have generally been used in greenfield development situations.
However, they should also be used for intensification and re-development situations in existing
urban areas to avoid piecemeal planning by coordinating and integrating opportunities for
stormwater control, flood risk management, green infrastructure, urban design, transit,
infrastructure and recreation.
428
Municipal official plan updates should include policies or policy directions to:
require MESP (or equivalent) studies for greenfields and urban re-development areas such
as urban growth centres, to seek opportunities for stormwater retrofits, natural systems
restoration and other sustainable community initiatives;
define criteria and planning triggers for when MESPs should be undertaken in existing
urban areas and for the definition of study area boundaries;
define the content of MESP studies to include, at a minimum:
water resources system studies, including water balance, geomorphic analysis of
stream meander belts (to identify least risk areas for locating infrastructure) and
conceptual stormwater management systems;
terrestrial natural heritage system studies to implement a target terrestrial natural
heritage system and understand its functional relationship and interdependencies
with the water resources system;
flood and erosion risks, controls and mitigation opportunities;
integration with other municipal studies for transportation strategies and systems,
pre- and post-development monitoring programs, regional open space and
recreational trails systems;
cultural heritage and archaeological investigations and consultation;
cumulative impacts to downstream human and environmental communities;
implementation of water and energy conservation strategies; and
establish detailed design criteria, performance measures and mitigation measures
for development.
Summary
There have been many new policy initiatives advanced by the province in recent years.
Similarly, TRCA has completed updates to several of its watershed plans, using leading edge
science. These plans have concluded that watershed environmental resources will continue to
degrade if planning and development carries on in a business as usual fashion. Through the
development of Watershed Plan Implementation Guides and commenting on regional official
plan conformity amendments, TRCA staff has formulated a number of recommended policy
directions that should also be advanced through local official plan updates.
Report prepared by: David Burnett, extension 5361
Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361
Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca
Date: November 17, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A202/09 -REGION OF PEEL OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT - ROPA 21
Staff report responding to deputation at Authority Meeting #7/09 by Mr.
Peter Orphanos, Chair, Sierra Club of Peel Region.
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
429
WHEREAS Mr. Peter Orphanos, Chair, Sierra Club of Peel Region, made a deputation to
at Authority Meeting #7/09, held on September 25, 209, in regard to his concerns that
Peel Region's ROPA 21 does not adequately protect significant valleylands from active
recreational uses such as golf courses or other incompatible uses;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) encourage the Region of Peel to consider its own official plan restoration
policies, TRCA’s Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy and the recommendations
of watershed plans in assessing whether new golf courses and other active recreational
uses should be a permitted use in Core Area significant valleylands;
THAT the ROPA 21 policy commitment to undertake an assessment of Peel’s future
natural heritage systems planning needs, at the conclusion of the current Peel Region
Official Plan Review, address the natural heritage system strategies and watershed plans
recommendations of both TRCA and Credit Valley Conservation;
THAT TRCA planning staff conduct a re-assessment of the “New Resource-based Use”
policies in the Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program as part of the ongoing
Living City policy update, in consultation with TRCA's municipal partners and the public;
AND FURTHER THAT the Region of Peel, City of Brampton, Credit Valley Conservation
and the Sierra Club of Peel Region be so advised by the CAO's Office.
AMENDMENT
RES.#A203/09
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:John Sprovieri
THAT the following be inserted before the last paragraph of the main motion:
THAT staff report back on the Riverstone Golf Course application prior to providing the
City of Brampton with TRCA's comments;
THE AMENDMENT WASCARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WASCARRIED
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS Mr. Peter Orphanos, Chair, Sierra Club of Peel Region, made a deputation to
at Authority Meeting #7/09, held on September 25, 209, in regard to his concerns that
Peel Region's ROPA 21 does not adequately protect significant valleylands from active
recreational uses such as golf courses or other incompatible uses;
430
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) encourage the Region of Peel to consider its own official plan restoration
policies, TRCA’s Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy and the recommendations
of watershed plans in assessing whether new golf courses and other active recreational
uses should be a permitted use in Core Area significant valleylands;
THAT the ROPA 21 policy commitment to undertake an assessment of Peel’s future
natural heritage systems planning needs, at the conclusion of the current Peel Region
Official Plan Review, address the natural heritage system strategies and watershed plans
recommendations of both TRCA and Credit Valley Conservation;
THAT TRCA planning staff conduct a re-assessment of the “New Resource-based Use”
policies in the Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program as part of the ongoing
Living City policy update, in consultation with TRCA's municipal partners and the public;
THAT staff report back on the Riverstone Golf Course application prior to providing the
City of Brampton with TRCA's comments;
AND FURTHER THAT the Region of Peel, City of Brampton, Credit Valley Conservation
and the Sierra Club of Peel Region be so advised by the CAO's Office.
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #7/09, held on September 25, 2009, Resolution #A143/09 was approved
as follows:
THAT above-noted delegation (a) be heard and referred to staff for consideration when
preparing a report to Authority Meeting #9/09, to be held on November 27, 2009.
The Regional Municipality of Peel has been undertaking the Peel Region Official Plan Review
(PROPR) since 2007. Its purpose is to bring the Regional Official Plan (ROP) into conformity
with major provincial policies including the Greenbelt Plan 2005, the Provincial Policy Statement
(PPS) 2005, the Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, the
Places to Grow Act and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006. To achieve
Official Plan conformity in a manageable fashion, the PROPR is addressing 15 focus areas
including: Energy, Transportation, Sustainability, Water Resources, Monitoring, Employment
Lands and others. Regional Official Plan Amendment # 21 (ROPA 21) in particular addresses
Natural Heritage, Agriculture, Air Quality and Waste Management. Peel conducted extensive
consultation with agencies and other stakeholders throughout the PROPR process.
ROPA 21
TRCA staff participated extensively in the Natural Heritage policy component of ROPA 21. A
TRCA planner and/or ecologist attended a number of meetings and workshops over
approximately 18 months as members of a technical advisory committee (TAC). Along with
Credit Valley Conservation and local municipal staff sitting on the TAC, TRCA staff provided
advice and input to the following elements of ROPA 21 natural heritage policies:
updating of criteria and thresholds to identify Core Area valley and stream corridors as well
as significant woodlands and significant wildlife habitat (the background study document
“Peel-Caledon Significant Woodlands and Significant Wildlife Habitat Study” won an award
in 2009 from the Ontario Professional Planners Institute for Research and New Directions);
431
updating of mapping of the Core Areas of the Greenlands System which resulted in the
addition to the Core Area of 2360 hectares of valley and stream corridors and 5800 hectares
of significant woodlands (these features and lands were formerly protected primarily by the
lower tier municipalities as Natural Areas and Corridors of Peel’s Greenlands System);
new policy areas dealing with Invasive Species Management, Greenlands Management and
Stewardship and the proper management of, and policies for, “adjacent lands” (lands
adjacent to natural heritage features and areas).
A key natural heritage objective for TRCA that was not achieved was the incorporation into the
ROP of the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy (TNHSS) and supporting policies. Peel
deemed that this work was outside the scope of provincial policy conformity and that it would
require extensive consultation on its own. Peel did, however, include a new policy commitment
(7.6.2.10) to undertake a further review of the Region’s natural heritage systems policy
framework to address future natural heritage systems planning needs once the current PROPR
exercise has concluded. From staff’s perspective this would include new policies to expand the
natural heritage system in Peel, based on the directions from Credit Valley Conservation's and
TRCA’s natural heritage system strategies and the more detailed watershed plans. Peel’s
current official plan in section 2.5 - Restoration of the Natural Environment, does contain a
number of policies that support the restoration and enhancement of the existing natural system
where it has been degraded, and encourages these actions through the planning approvals
process.
Deputation by Peter Orphanos
A deputation was made at Authority Meeting #7/09, held on September 25, 2009 by Mr. Peter
Orphanos, Chair of the Sierra Club of Peel Region, regarding the level of protection afforded to
and uses permitted in Core Area valleylands in Peel Region's ROPA 21. The deputation by Mr.
Orphanos was complimentary to TRCA staff in that he supported many of the comments made
by staff in response to the draft ROPA 21 policies. In staff’s assessment, the key issue raised in
the deputation was with respect to permitted active recreational uses in Core Area (significant)
valleylands, in particular golf courses. The related point in the deputation by the Sierra Club
Peel President’s written submission is:
“Exempted activities in Core areas should be deleted unless it is for conservation purposes
and/or that the core area would be enhanced. Additionally, the proponent would have to
prove that there is no alternative location to the undertaking on tablelands. Active recreation
such as soccer, baseball and golf are incompatible uses in core areas. Golf courses
especially cause the most stress on the fragile core area ecosystem. Pesticides, of which
they are provincially exempt, fertilizers, denuding of floodplain lands, significant water
taking and disruption of the corridor continuity are just a few of the reasons. Furthermore,
the access and enjoyment of our rivers belongs to all the people.”
Mr. Orphanos referenced in particular the proposed Riverstone golf course in Brampton, which
he felt should not be approved, and which the Sierra Club would appeal to the Ontario
Municipal Board (OMB), as well as ROPA 21, if it continued to permit golf courses in Core Area
valleylands.
432
Peel Policy Context
Policy 2.3.2.5 of the ROP, as proposed to be amended by ROPA 21, prohibits development and
site alterations in Core Areas of the Greenlands system except for essential infrastructure,
development in approved Special Policy Areas, minor development (generally associated with
changes to existing uses), resource management and conservation/erosion/flood control
works, passive recreation and “compatible recreation within the urban system”. The policy
allows for new recreational uses such as golf courses, soccer fields or baseball diamonds in
valleylands in the urban local municipalities of Brampton and Mississauga, where it can be
demonstrated that there are no alternative locations, and negative impacts to the natural
environment are minimized and mitigated through restoration and enhancement. Changes to
this draft policy to delete the “compatible recreation” clause were discussed at the TAC but not
supported by the City of Brampton. TRCA staff comments to strengthen this policy by making
the demonstration of no alternatives and maximum mitigation a “requirement” instead of an
“encouragement” were supported by regional and local municipal staff and incorporated.
Recently, Peel staff was directed by General Committee to conduct further consultation on
ROPA 21 before bringing the draft amendment to Council for adoption.
TRCA Policy Context
Section 4.1.2 A) New Resource-based Uses of the 1994 MTRCA Valley and Stream Corridor
Management Program recognizes that: “Other types of more intensive uses associated with
outdoor recreation and commercial operations may also be compatible within some valley and
stream corridor reaches such as golf courses, downhill skiing, and sportsfields and playing
fields.”. A number of criteria are associated with this permissive policy, including:
the preparation and approval of a “Corridor Plan” and to ensure that the uses will not affect
the control of flooding and erosion;
that natural vegetation communities, significant areas and natural channel configuration will
be maintained, protected and/or enhanced;
that stormwater management and sediment controls will be required to protect water
quality;
that provision for public access and trails should be included; and
numerous other detailed technical site-specific requirements.
Additionally, the 2008 Humber River watershed plan identified lands associated with the
location of the proposed Riverstone golf course as part of the Target Terrestrial Natural
Heritage System that should be protected and enhanced.
Riverstone Golf Course
This Planning Act application for the Riverstone golf course (official plan amendment - OPA)
has been ongoing for some time and, if approved, will eventually require that an application be
made to TRCA for a permit under Ontario Regulation 166/06. Currently, the proponents of the
Riverstone golf course are preparing their environmental impact study to support the OPA.
Additionally, TRCA has asked them to prepare a planning justification report to assess how the
golf course fits within the relevant policy regimes of the PPS, regional and local municipal
official plans, watershed, subwatershed and fisheries plans, and the Valley and Stream Corridor
Management Program.
433
Summary
As other TRCA staff has been, and remain, involved in the ongoing planning approvals and
review process for the Riverstone golf course, it is not appropriate to make any
recommendations about that file in this report. Staff recommends the best course of action is to
pursue and consult on policy changes that would apply to future similar situations. Two
opportunities are available in the near-term: TRCA’s Living City Policy update and, once the
current PROPR exercise has concluded, Peel Region’s natural heritage systems policy
framework review to address future natural heritage systems planning needs.
Report prepared by: David Burnett, extension 5361
Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361
Emails: dburnett@trca.on.ca
Date: October 29, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A204/09 -GIBRALTAR POINT EROSION CONTROL STUDY
Detailed Design and Approvals. Award of contract to a coastal
engineering firm to undertake detailed design and authorization to
proceed with works.
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
WHEREAS at Authority Meeting #4/08, Resolution #A111/08 identified that the Gibraltar
Point Shoreline Erosion Project Class Environmental Assessment (EA) was complete and
that staff was to request funding from Toronto Water, City of Toronto, to undertake the
Phase II detailed modeling, analysis and design of the preferred alternative;
AND WHEREAS Toronto Water has carried a budget of $500,000 in their 2009 capital
budget to allow Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to proceed with
Phase II of the Gibraltar Point Erosion Control Project;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT staff be authorized to proceed with all
components of Phase II of the Gibraltar Point Erosion Control Project, subject to direction
to proceed from Toronto Water;
THAT the engineering contract be awarded to W.F. Baird and Associates to undertake the
Phase II Coastal Engineering Study and Detailed Design for the Gibraltar Point Erosion
Control Project, at a cost not to exceed $338,205.00, plus applicable taxes;
THAT staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures through the course of the
Phase II study to a maximum of 20% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance, if
deemed necessary.
434
AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to
implement the foregoing, including the signing of any documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Erosion has been documented at Gibraltar Point since 1879. In 1972, significant storm damage
prompted the first of several studies recommending various long-term remedial solutions.
Despite these recommendations, no major remedial actions were financially supported.
Attempts were made to protect the Gibraltar Point shoreline with gabion baskets and rubble.
These attempts had only short-term success at best, as they failed to address the large-scale
coastal processes affecting the site.
A severe storm event in February 2004 caused significant damage to an existing washroom
building and associated infrastructure. At the request of the City of Toronto, TRCA responded
immediately by securing the shoreline adjacent to the washroom with rip rap as a temporary
protective measure and then proceeded to seek Authority approval to undertake emergency
shoreline protection and to design a more long-term solution. At Authority Meeting #6/04, held
on June 25, 2004, Resolution #A194/04 was approved as follows:
THAT staff be directed to proceed with the emergency shoreline protection works at
Gibraltar Point, Toronto Islands as part of the "City of Toronto Valley and Shoreline
Regeneration Project, 2002 - 2006", at a total cost not to exceed $100,000;
AND FURTHER THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) in
conjunction with the City of Toronto commence a design study including required Class
Environmental Assessment (Class EA) to develop a more permanent solution to
stabilizing the shoreline.
At Authority Meeting #4/08, held on May 23, 2008, Resolution #A111/08 was approved as
follows:
WHEREAS the City of Toronto and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
have recognized the need to restore and protect the Gibraltar Point area of the Toronto
Islands;
AND WHEREAS the Class Environmental Assessment for the Gibraltar Point Erosion
Control Project is complete;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the preferred solution as determined through
the Class Environmental Assessment for the Gibraltar Point Erosion Control Project be
endorsed by TRCA;
THAT staff be directed to request additional funding estimated at $450,000 from the City
of Toronto to complete the detailed modeling, analysis and design process (valued at
$500,000);
THAT upon completion of the detailed design process, staff prepare a request for project
funding for submission to the City of Toronto to fund implementation, ongoing
monitoring, and maintenance of the project as part of the 2010 - 2014 Capital Budget
process;
435
AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto staff be so advised.
The preferred concept proposed by the Class EA for the Gibraltar Point Erosion Control Project
was the development of a sand management plan that recognizes that some level of offshore
protection may be required to ensure that the project is technically and economically feasible.
The main purposes of the sand management plan are to provide a level of shoreline protection
and to maintain the natural dynamic backshore processes that require a continuous supply of
sand. Without a sand management plan, the existing dunes and beaches along the western
facing shore will eventually degrade.
The Class EA requires a Phase II Coastal Engineering Study be undertaken to define a concept
plan that best meets the need for shoreline protection, allows for dynamic beach processes to
continue, while minimizes (to the extent possible) the long-term operational costs of
mechanically redistributing sediment along the southern Toronto Island shoreline.
RATIONALE
Request for Proposals (#RSD09-38) for Coastal Engineering and Detailed Design services were
circulated to the following five qualified local engineering firms on October, 19, 2009:
AECOM;
Aqua Solutions;
IBI Group;
Shoreplan Engineering;
W.F. Baird and Associates.
On November 9, 2009, TRCA received two proposals and bids in response to RFP #RSD09-38
as follows.
Engineering Firm Bid Proposal
(plus GST)
Extra Costs
(if deemed appropriate to pursue)
Shoreplan Engineering $340,000.00 $109,680.00
W.F. Baird and Associates $338,205.00 $324,820.00
Following an indepth review of the submitted proposals by the proposal review team, it was
determined that both firms provided excellent proposals and it was generally felt that either
team could successfully undertake this work. In the end it was decided that the proposal
submitted by W.F. Baird and Associates was preferred, in part, due to their much more
aggressive schedule and their larger internal capacity to maintain the schedule, and a slightly
lower bid proposal.
436
The extra costs proposed by both firms mainly pertain to the potential for establishing physical
models to provide an extra level of comfort in the function of the preferred alternative (if deemed
necessary), though approximately $30,000 of the extra costs included in the Shoreplan
proposal included side-scan sonar surveys to identify the location of the new Deep-water
cooling intakes, and additional hydraulic modeling. Baird was involved with the Deep-water
cooling project, and already has that information available. The difference in extra costs
between the two proposals relates to the fact that Baird also offers a highly sophisticated
quasi-mobile bed physical model approach in addition to the 2D fixed bed physical model also
offered by Shoreplan. Depending on the outcome of this study and the level of confidence in
the computer generated models produced, a physical model may or may not be required. If
deemed necessary, a physical model will be identified as a pre-condition for any tender
released in the future for the construction of the preferred alternative.
Given the uncertainty of the final results of the preferred alternative, a decision will instead be
made at the end of the numerical hydraulic modeling design process whether a physical model
will be required, and to what extent that physical modeling should be undertaken. Any physical
model work will be a component of the capital budget for implementing the preferred alternative
as a pre-construction activity. As such, TRCA did not consider the "extra costs" as a
determining factor in the selection of the preferred firm for this phase of the study.
RATIONALE
The primary focus of the project is to develop and implement a long-term and sustainable
solution that halts erosion at Gibraltar Point while ensuring that the quality of the unique Island
dune community and recreational beaches found at Gibraltar Point and Hanlan's Point can be
preserved. Ongoing placement of sand along the beach and nearshore of Gibraltar Point is a
technique that has been used successfully elsewhere in the world to manage shoreline erosion
(though not used extensively in Ontario), while preserving the dynamic nature of the shoreline.
By incorporating offshore protection, the intent would be to reduce the frequency and volume
of mechanically relocated sand that would be required on an annual basis to maintain shoreline
stability and natural sand beach processes.
This detailed coastal analysis will greatly increase the level of confidence that the intended
results can be achieved by the preferred alternative. A decision will be made towards the end
of the detailed design phase whether confirmatory physical model runs will be required as a
pre-construction activity during some future implementation stage.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funds for the consulting team and TRCA staff (for project management, consultation, approvals
and other related activities) will be invoiced and tracked through account number 151-01, and
will not exceed the $500,000 earmarked in Toronto Water's capital budget for 2009.
Report prepared by: Ken Dion, extension 5230
Emails: kdion@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Ken Dion, extension 5230
Emails: kdion@trca.on.ca
Date: November 11, 2009
_________________________________________
437
RES.#A205/09 -TOMMY THOMPSON PARK INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN PROJECT
Contract Extension. Contract extension of Montgomery Sisam Architects
to complete the Tommy Thompson Park Infrastructure Design Project.
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT a contract extension be awarded to the consulting firm of Montgomery Sisam
Architects in the amount of $77,627.87 plus applicable taxes to cover the increased costs
above the original upset limit of $148,150 plus applicable taxes;
AND FURTHER THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) officials be
directed to take such action as is necessary to implement the extension, including the
signing and execution of documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Tommy Thompson Park (also known as the Leslie Street Spit) is one of the single most
significant park spaces on the Toronto waterfront. The park is operated under the Interim
Management Program in accordance with the delegated responsibilities given to TRCA by the
Province of Ontario. The master plan for Tommy Thompson Park was completed in 1989 and
then revised in 1992 through the Minister of the Environment’s approval under the
Environmental Assessment Act.
On May 20, 2004, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, as the agency through
which Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC) project funds flow, announced that
$8,000,000 would be allocated to implement the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan,
achieving its goal of an “Urban Wilderness Park”. In 2005, a Delivery Agreement with TWRC
was developed for the purpose of implementing the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan.
Tommy Thompson Park (TTP) is also one of the most significant features within TWRC's
concept of Lake Ontario Park. Therefore, TRCA and TWRC developed the TTP Infrastructure
Design Project to ensure integration of the Lake Ontario Park planning process into the
discussion and design of TTP infrastructure.
At Executive Committee Meeting #2/08, held on April 11, 2008, Resolution #B31/08, was
approved as follows:
THAT the consulting firm of Montgomery Sisam be retained to complete the Tommy
Thompson Park (TTP) Infrastructure Design Project at a total cost not to exceed
$148,150 plus applicable taxes;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
officials be directed to take such action as is necessary to implement the contract,
including the signing and execution of documents.
TWRC’s goal is to revitalize the waterfront, and this must be characterized by excellence in
urban design. To help achieve and uphold these standards, TWRC created the Waterfront
Design Review Panel. The panel meets monthly, and is advisory to TWRC. It consists of a
Chair and thirteen professionals who are recognized experts in their fields.
438
TRCA staff worked with TWRC to finalize the contract with Montgomery Sisam Architects, and
to develop the final schedule and work plan for the project. At the request of TWRC, TRCA and
our consultant were required to present the project to TWRC’s Waterfront Design Review Panel
for approval. Provisions in the contract were created to accommodate two Design Review
Panel meetings to complete the project. To insure that the designs were also supported by key
user groups and stakeholders, the design process was also brought to TRCA’s Tommy
Thompson Park Advisory Committee (TTPAC).
The project was to be presented to the Waterfront Design Review Panel (DRP) at the
conceptual stage and once again at final design completion. On July 9, 2008, TRCA and
Montgomery Sisam Architects attended the first DRP. The designs had the full endorsement of
TRCA staff, partners, TWRC staff and the TTPAC. The panel recommended that the conceptual
designs should undergo some minor revisions and be presented again to the panel at a later
date.
One of the key concerns with the design approach was how the Tommy Thompson Park
Master Plan integrates into the larger TWRC planning for Lake Ontario Park (LOP). Lake
Ontario Park will be one of Toronto's great new park spaces and a defining destination for the
city. Covering an area of several hundred acres of land and water, Lake Ontario Park stretches
between the Eastern Gap and the RC Harris Treatment Plant and includes Tommy Thompson
Park. TWRC expects LOP to perform at the highest level of design and sustainability, however
the master plan for TTP predates the LOP master planning process, and focuses on
preservation and protection.
The conceptual designs were presented three additional times to the panel on October 8, 2008,
and April 8, 2009 prior to receiving approval to proceed to detailed design on July 8, 2009. The
delays in this process can be attributed to the complex planning framework, and land
ownership in this area.
The entrance structures at TTP are the most important component of the infrastructure design
project as they set the tone for TTP as an urban wilderness park. The entrance features also
represent the first implementation of LOP. The area however is also part of the Port Lands
Beautification, Leslie Street Greening and Unwin Avenue Improvements. These other planning
initiatives have unfortunately complicated and delayed the approval process. The TTP
Infrastructure and Design Project went through four complete conceptual design schemes.
Each reiteration of the design was also vetted through the TTPAC and the project planning
committee.
Montgomery Sisam Architects have incurred additional costs as a result of the additional
meetings required and additional design time to develop four reiterations of the conceptual
designs. TRCA staff has worked with Montgomery Sisam Architects who have offered to
reduce their additional fees by 10%. The anticipated total contract value to complete the
project will be $225,777.87 which represents a $77,627.87 increase over the original $148,150
upset limit.
439
RATIONALE
The additional costs as a result of the overall delay in the project as well as the costs incurred to
create four reiterations of the conceptual design will result in Montgomery Sisam Architects
exceeding the total contract cost of $148,150 to complete the TTP Infrastructure Design Project.
The delays and additional design costs were not anticipated at the time when the contract was
being finalized and the project was commencing. The Waterfront Design Review Panel process
was implemented to ensure all TWRC projects had a consistent design approach, and to
provide added design excellence. TRCA worked closely with TWRC staff throughout the entire
process, and received direction to proceed prior to every presentation. The final approved
conceptual design approach is greatly improved and refined compared to the earlier
approaches. The approach is also better integrated with the various planning initiatives that are
currently underway as part of LOP and Leslie Street Greening. TRCA’s project partners and
advisory committee are very supportive of the current design direction and are eager to
continue into the detailed design.
The current funding available to TRCA for implementation of the Tommy Thompson Park
Master Plan must be spent by March of 2011. To insure that the infrastructure components are
completed in this time period the project must proceed to the detailed design phase.
Construction is scheduled to be competed by the late fall of 2010.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
TWRC is providing the funding necessary to implement the Tommy Thompson Park Master
Plan. Funding has been allocated in the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan Implementation
budgets (accounts 216-42 and 216-32). Funding is available to address the additional costs in
the Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan Implementation project. Funds can be reallocated
within the overall project budget, and TRCA also has commitment from TWRC that additional
funding will be made available to insure that the scope of the Master Plan Implementation
Project will not be impacted.
Report prepared by: Ralph Toninger, 5366
Emails: rtoninger@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Ralph Toninger, 5366
Emails: rtoninger@trca.on.ca
Date: September 29, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A206/09 -DAVID DUNLAP OBSERVATORY PROPERTY
Report on the potential benefits of including the David Dunlap
Observatory property, Town of Richmond Hill, in Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority's list of priority acquisition sites.
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:David Barrow
440
THAT the David Dunlap Observatory property, being Part of Lots 41, 42 and 43,
Concession 1, and designated as Part 1 on Plan 65R-29959, Town of Richmond Hill,
Regional Municipality of York, be added to the Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority's list of priority acquisition sites for the Regional Municipality of York;
THAT staff be directed to work with the Town of Richmond Hill to develop an acquisition
strategy for the property or portions thereof;
AND FURTHER THAT the Town of Richmond Hill be so advised by the CAO's Office.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Executive Committee Meeting #9/09, held on November 6, 2009, Resolution #B174/09 was
approved as follows:
THAT staff be directed to report to Authority Meeting #9/09, scheduled to be held on
November 27, 2009, on the potential benefits of including the Dunlap property, Town of
Richmond Hill, in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's list of priority acquisition
sites.
The David Dunlap Observatory (DDO) property is approximately 76.9 hectares (189.9 acres) in
size and located north of 16th Avenue, west of Bayview Avenue in the Town of Richmond Hill.
The majority of the property that contains the three main buildings that are part of the
observatory campus has a municipal address of 123 Hillview Drive. The southern portion of the
property referred to as the "Panhandle" is occupied by the Elvis Stojko Arena and a park is
municipally known as 350 16th Avenue and is currently leased by the Town of Richmond Hill.
The property is legally described as Part of Lots 42 and 43, Concession 1, and designated as
Part 1 on Plan 65R-29959, Town of Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York.
The DDO opened in 1935, a gift to the University of Toronto by Jessie Donalda Dunlap as a
memorial to her husband David Alexander Dunlap. Since its inception, the observatory has
been a research centre of the Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics and has also carried
out public education and teaching programs. Corsica Development Limited (Metrus)
purchased the property from the University of Toronto in 2008 for a reported $70 million.
In September, 2009, Town of Richmond Hill Council approved the following recommendations
relating to the DDO property:
Designated the property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act to recognize the cultural
and heritage significance of the property;
Approved the preparation of the David Dunlap Observatory Property Planning and
Conservation Management Study. This study intends first, to establish a Conservation
Management Plan that assists in managing and protecting the property’s heritage
attributes; and second, to develop a land use vision and strategic direction for the future of
the site that will celebrate its uniqueness and special value;
Approved a draft terms of reference for a Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP) that
will produce a planning framework that will facilitate the appropriate development of the
property and assist in managing and protecting the property’s heritage attributes, while
celebrating the special value of this site.
441
RATIONALE
The subject property falls within Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) approved
master plan for acquisition for the Don River watershed as outlined in the approved Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010. It is located in the headwaters of the Don River and a
majority of the property is located in TRCA's Terrestrial Natural Heritage Target System. The
property, with its forest cover, small wetlands and relatively permeable soils serves an
important role in managing water balance in German Mills Creek. TRCA's German Mills Creek
Subwatershed Regeneration Plan which is part of the Don River Watershed Plan 2009 identifies
these lands as a priority for regeneration.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Staff will work with the Town of Richmond Hill to develop an acquisition strategy for the
property. This strategy will identify the extent of the property that should be protected through
acquisition and potential funding sources for the acquisition.
Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 or Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca or rdewell@trca.on.ca
Date: November 10, 2009
Attachments: 1
442
Attachment 1
_________________________________________
443
RES.#A207/09 -TERMS OF REFERENCE WATERSHED COMMITTEES, 2010-2012
Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Humber Watershed Alliance and
Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition. Approval of the Terms of
Reference for the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Humber
Watershed Alliance and Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition for
2010-2012.
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
WHEREAS the last term of Don Watershed Regeneration Council, Humber Watershed
Alliance and Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition subcommittees of the Authority,
ended in April, 2009 for the Humber; May, 2009 for the Etobicoke-Mimico and July, 2009
for the Don;
AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) recognizes the
important role these watershed subcommittees have played in building capacity for
securing resources, influencing priorities and establishing linkages between residents,
local environmental groups, businesses, municipalities, agency staff and to elected
officials which together helps TRCA meet The Living City objectives;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Terms of Reference for the Don Watershed
Regeneration Council 2010- 2012, dated November, 2009, as outlined in Attachment 1, be
approved;
THAT the Terms of Reference for the Humber Watershed Alliance 2010- 2012, dated
November, 2009, as outlined in Attachment 2, be approved;
THAT the Terms of Reference for the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition 2010- 2012,
dated November, 2009, as outlined in Attachment 3, be approved;
THAT one member of the Authority be appointed to each of the watershed subcommittees
to assist the Watershed Specialists, the Director, Watershed Management and/or other
Directors as required with the selection of members and provide other direction or
assistance as required;
THAT the regional and local municipalities in the Don, Humber, Etobicoke and Mimico
watersheds be requested to appoint one council member or staff representative from the
regional and local municipalities in accordance with the Terms of Reference to assist the
watershed subcommittees or technical working groups in completing assigned tasks;
AND FURTHER THAT a report be submitted to the Authority identifying the proposed
membership for each of the watershed subcommittees for approval.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In 2009, the members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, the Humber Watershed
Alliance and the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition completed their terms of appointment.
444
These watershed subcommittees began as task forces, and their origins date back to 1992
when the Don Watershed Task Force was formed to develop a watershed plan for the Don
River which resulted in Forty Steps to a New Don. This was followed by the establishment of the
Humber Watershed Task Force which produced Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber and A
Call to Action. The Etobicoke and Mimico Creek Watersheds Task Force developed Greening
Our Watersheds in 2002. The three above-mentioned watershed management plans received
outstanding planning awards. Watershed plan updates have been completed and approved for
the Humber and Don watersheds titled, Pathways to a Healthy Humber and Beyond 40 Steps,
respectively.
Following the completion of each of the watershed management plans, implementation
subcommittees were established. These subcommittees include watershed residents and
representatives from businesses, academia, agencies and local groups. Elected officials and
municipal staff have also been part of the watershed subcommittees directed by a TRCA
Watershed Specialist and other TRCA staff, all of whom work diligently to address the issues
identified in the watershed plans, report cards and other related documents.
The Terms of Reference for these watershed subcommittees have proven to be a valuable
mechanism to convey to the watershed subcommittee members and potential members the
purpose of the subcommittees and the expectations of TRCA. At the end of each term, the
Terms of Reference are reviewed by staff, following consultation with the watershed
subcommittees and others, to refine the Terms of Reference for the next time period.
The following changes have been incorporated in the attached Terms of Reference for each of
the Don, Humber and Etobicoke-Mimico watershed subcommittees for the upcoming term:
The Terms of Reference are valid for three years (2010-2012). At the end of the second 1.
year, membership may be renewed for one year, as approved by the Authority.
Alignment with TRCA's vision for The Living City and strategic plan, including the 2.
importance of climate change mitigation and adaption as important elements of watershed
management, and the promotion of sustainable communities and a culture of conservation
(e.g. energy and water conservation, near urban agriculture).
The transition from individual watershed report cards to the development of The Living City 3.
Report Card, which will address jurisdiction wide issues as well as individual watershed
indicators and targets.
Potential to provide a number of forums/opportunities for the members to work 4.
collaboratively with members of other watershed subcommittees, agencies or groups
regarding TRCA jurisdiction-wide issues.
5.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
send letters to municipalities, agencies and community groups asking them to appoint a
member;
place public advertisements in appropriate community newspapers, on web sites and in
other media sources encouraging residents, businesses and academic representatives to
apply for the respective watershed subcommittees;
staff will contact the offices of elected officials to identify persons who may have an interest
in applying as resident or business members;
staff to contact all previous members of the watershed subcommittees to advise them of the
time lines for applications;
hold information sessions to recruit members, as required; and
445
plan to have the first meeting of the new watershed subcommittees in the first quarter of
2010.
Report prepared by: Gary Wilkins, extension 5211
Emails: gwilkins@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Adele Freeman, extension 5238
Emails: afreeman@trca.on.ca
Date: October 14, 2009
Attachments: 3
DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
2010-2012
Terms of Reference
Toronto and Region Conservation
November 2009
446
DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
TERMS OF REFERENCE
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND AUTHORITY DIRECTION
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council (Council) is a formal community-
based committee of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
which reports to the Authority on a regular basis. It was first established in 1995
following a recommendation of Forty Steps to a New Don (1994) to form a Don
Watershed Regeneration Council to integrate implementation efforts of the
watershed plan. Since then, the Council has completed five successful terms
during which time members have provided exceptional support and service to
TRCA.
We envision a future envision the future Don as a revitalized urban river, flowing
with life-sustaining water through regenerated natural habitats and sustainable
human communities, from its headwater tributaries to the mouth of the Don River
and into the receiving waters of Lake Ontario. We envision the watershed as an
integral contributor to The Living City, where human settlement can flourish
forever as part of nature’s beauty and diversity.
The pathway to a regenerated Don River builds on the following 3 strategic
themes:
• We must build, re-build and retrofit our communities to restore water balance
and improve the sustainability of the urban model.
• We must regenerate the aquatic and terrestrial landscapes.
• We must engage the attention, enthusiasm and support of the people of the
Don.
1.1 Authority Direction
At Authority Meeting #9/04, held on October 28, 1994, Resolution #A224/94
was approved for the first term of the Council in part, as follows:
THAT the Goals, Membership, Organization and Terms of Reference for
the Don Watershed Regeneration Council, as set out in the report, dated
October 1994,be approved;...
Similar resolutions were approved by TRCA for five subsequent terms of the Don
Council.
It is recommended that the Don Watershed Regeneration Council be established
again starting tin the winter of 2010 based on the following terms of reference.
447
2
2.0 GOALS
The goals of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council are to protect, regenerate
and celebrate the Don watershed and more specifically to assist Toronto and
Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA), The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto,
TRCA partner agencies and watershed municipalities, community groups and
the public to:
• achieve The Living City vision of Healthy Rivers and Shorelines, Regional
Biodiversity, Sustainable Communities and Business Excellence within the Don
watershed;
• implement priority recommendations of the Don River Watershed Plan, as
identified in the Implementation Guide.
• implement the recommendations of the Toronto and Region Remedial Action
Plan contained in Clean Waters, Clear Choices: Recommendations for Action
(1994) and strategic directions contained in subsequent reports as they pertain
to the Don watershed;
• implement strategic plans such as the Wet Weather Flow Management Master
Plan (Toronto) and the Region of York’s sustainability initiatives;
• implement source water protection initiatives;
• meet the challenges of climate change through mitigation and adaptation
initiatives;
• secure political support at all levels of government and foster corporate
partnerships to advance TRCA’s vision for The Living City.
3.0 DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP AND
APPOINTMENT PROCESS
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council shall consist of approximately 30
members including:
3.1 TRCA Representative
The Chair of the Authority or other designated Authority member as Ex-officio.
3.2 Federal, Provincial, Regional and Local Political Representatives
Federal and Provincial members of Parliament whose area of jurisdiction is
within the Don Watershed will be invited to participate as Ex-officio members.
448
3
The regional and local municipalities will be requested by TRCA to appoint one
council member from each of the “905" regional and local municipalities in the
Don River watershed. These representatives will be Ex-officio members. A
municipality may appoint a current Authority member. The appointed members
should represent an electoral ward within the Don River watershed.
• Regional Municipality of York;
• City of Vaughan;
• Town of Richmond Hill;
• Town of Markham.
Annually, a separate meeting/forum may be held to share information on
strategic planning initiatives, regeneration activities or other projects being
undertaken by TRCA, municipalities or others to ensure on-going liaison with
appropriate departments and partners.
Municipal staff will be invited to attend meetings of the Council as based on
specific agenda items.
3.3 City of Toronto Community Council Representatives
Within the City of Toronto, the individual community councils will be requested
by TRCA to appoint members of Council. The city may appoint a current
Authority member. These representatives will be Ex-officio members.
One Councillor is requested from each of the City of Toronto’s community
councils which have the Don watershed within its boundaries.
• Toronto North Community Council;
• Toronto South Community Council;
• Toronto East Community Council.
3.4 Other Public Agency Representatives
The following federal and provincial agencies which have a specific interest in
the Don watershed will be requested by TRCA to appoint a representative.
• Environment Canada;
• Ontario Ministry of Environment;
• Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.
3.5 Community Group Representatives
The following community groups which have an interest in the Don watershed
will be requested by TRCA to appoint a representative to the Don Watershed
Regeneration Council.
• The Task Force to Bring Back the Don, City of Toronto;
449
4
• Friends of the Don East;
• Richmond Hill Naturalists;
• Toronto Field Naturalists
• York Region Environmental Alliance
• Toronto Green Community
• Taylor Massey Project
• First Nations representative
• The Society for the Preservation of Historic Thornhill
Others may be added throughout the term should their knowledge, skills and
experience be advantageous to the work of the Council.
3.6 Watershed Residents, Business Members and Academic Institution
Representatives
Applications from watershed residents, businesses and academic institutions will
be solicited through announcements in newsletters, local newspapers, web
sites, volunteer networks, and through press releases. A committee of three
persons, comprised of one member of the Authority, a TRCA senior staff
member and the Don Watershed Specialist will recommend appointments to the
Don Watershed Regeneration Council. This selection will take into consideration
the following:
• demonstrated interest in the watershed/community;
• willingness of the applicant to meet the potential time and work
commitments;
• geographical representation within the watershed and or Lake Ontario
drainage area; and
• technical/professional knowledge, skills and experience in disciplines
that would assist in the implementation of assigned tasks and
responsibilities.
3.6.1 Business Organization Representatives
A maximum of three members representing businesses and/or business
organizations interested in corporate environmental stewardship and the
economic vitality of the Region may be appointed.
3.6.2 Academic Institution representatives.
Two representatives from the university, college and public/catholic/private
school systems interested in watershed management, restoration, research and
integrating sustainability issues into watershed applications and curriculum may
be appointed.
450
5
3.6.3 Watershed Resident Representatives
Fifteen watershed residents with demonstrated experience, knowledge, interest
and skills in one of the following fields may be appointed:
• writing/communications;
• business;
• fund-raising;
• natural environment;
• planning and engineering;
• environmental policy;
• academics/education;
• social marketing;
• culture, heritage and recreation;
• youth engagement;
• sustainable technologies;
• urban agriculture.
4.0 GUESTS
Don Watershed Regeneration Council meetings are open to the public. We
encourage others interested in actively giving their time and talents to the
protection, regeneration and celebration of the watershed to become involved.
These persons are not official embers but will be acknowledged as 'guests' by
the watershed council. They will not have voting privileges nor be eligible for
travel expenses to and from meetings. Guests are not required to be residents of
the watershed.
5.0 TERM OF APPOINTMENT
Members will be appointed for a two year term with a possible extension for one
more year.
Membership will be reviewed on an annual basis. Members, excluding ex-officio
members, who are unable to fulfill their commitments, will be replaced after
missing three consecutive meetings (without notice). Replacements will be
made by the Authority based on nominees recommended by Authority members,
other Council members and TRCA staff.
Notice of resignations and recommendations for new members will be
presented to the Authority on an as required basis for approval.
6.0 ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS
Members will be required to attend regular evening meetings of the Don
Watershed Regeneration Council to be held approximately 8 times annually.
Meetings may be held during regular work hours depending on the preference
and availability of members and staff.
451
6
Ad-hoc working committees may also be held on an as-required basis,
approximately 6-8 times per year. Additional meetings may be required to deal
with specific issues from time to time.
Members will contribute to the work of the watershed council and participate in
at least one ad-hoc working committee.
7.0 SELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
The Chair and Vice Chair will be elected by the Don Watershed Regeneration
Council from amongst its members. The Authority may appoint an interim Chair
until such time that an election can take place. The Chair and Vice Chair will also
be ex-officio members of all working committees.
8.0 REPORTING RELATIONSHIP
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council is considered a subcommittee of
TRCA. The watershed council Chair will report on a regular basis to the
Authority on projects and progress through meeting minutes of the watershed
council, or brief presentations.
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council is not a formal commenting body
regarding review and approval of planning applications or permits. Staff will
advise the watershed council of major projects within the watershed and may
ask them for comments.
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council may, on its own, provide comments
or other information for the consideration of staff and the Authority.
9.0 RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION
COUNCIL
9.1 TRCA Support
TRCA will provide staff support for the watershed council, including technical
project support and community outreach, based on available funding.
Subject to available funding, the staff secretariat will include:
• Don Watershed Specialist / Senior TRCA staff member;
• Project Manager;
• Administrative Assistant (part time).
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council, and its working committees, will
otherwise strive to be self-sufficient in achieving their goals. Staff support and
attendance at ad-hoc working committee meetings will be considered on a case-
by-case basis.
452
7
9.2 Other Resources
Funding may be available for projects and activities of working committees
based on approved work plans and available TRCA funding. Members are
encouraged to secure other resources and partnerships for watershed council
projects and activities, whenever possible in consultation with TRCA staff and
the Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. In-kind or other support for
projects and activities will be welcome from business, industries, other
government agencies, private foundations, educational institutions and others in
accordance with TRCA policies. In-kind or other support will be coordinated with
the assistance of The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, where
appropriate.
10.0 STRUCTURE OF THE DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
10.1 Chair’s Committee
This subcommittee will undertake key advisory and coordinating responsibilities
pertaining to the agenda, workplan and activities of the Council. The committee
may also assist with advocacy actions, exchange information among project
teams and watershed-wide committees, coordinate Council activities, discuss
policy issues, prepare/review correspondence, coordinate outreach to political
representatives, represent the Council at municipal councils, solicit strategic
partnerships and seek out funding resources to meet the objectives of the
Council.
The group will meet prior to the watershed council’s meeting and on other
occasions as needed. This committee will be made up of the Chair, Vice Chair,
working committee chairs, and other key members, as well as the appropriate
TRCA support staff.
10.2 Ad-hoc Working Committees and Project Teams
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council will undertake its work through the
active involvement of its members on at least one ad-hoc working committee or
project team. Ad-hoc working committees and project teams will be established
on an informal and as required basis and will be dissolved when their work is
substantially complete. New committees or teams will be struck to deal with
specific issues as determined by the Don Watershed Regeneration Council and
TRCA staff.
The number of working committees or project teams will generally be limited to
2 or 3 at any one time to ensure that the necessary focus and effort required, is
available from the watershed council members, and staff of TRCA and other
agencies. Staff attendance at working committee and project team meetings will
be considered on a case-by-case basis.
453
8
A chair person for each ad-hoc working committee and project team will be
selected from the Don Watershed Regeneration Council membership. The Chair
will report to the watershed council on a regular basis.
10.3 Jurisdiction-wide Watershed Committee(s)
Members of the Don Watershed Regeneration Council will be encouraged to
work with other watershed advisory committee members to collaborate on
issues of common interest.
11.0 COMPENSATION OF WATERSHED COUNCIL MEMBERS
At regular Don Watershed Regeneration Council meetings, as well as working
committee meetings, members will be eligible for travel expenses according to
TRCA policy where these are not covered by their agency or other source. The
TRCA policy on volunteers is also applicable.
12.0 RULES OF CONDUCT
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council will adhere to TRCA’s Rules of
Conduct as adopted by Resolution A2/08 at Authority Meeting #1/08, held on
February 29, 2008, and as amended periodically. All other TRCA policies are
applicable including Code of Conduct, Conflict of Interest and Volunteer Policy.
13.0 QUORUM
A quorum will consist of one-third of the members of the Don Watershed
Regeneration Council.
14.0 PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES
The Don Watershed Regeneration Council shall:
• Adhere to the basic principles of sound ecosystem management that
recognizes the interrelationship between cultural heritage, physical
characteristics, biological conditions and economic needs, and the
integration of conservation, restoration and economic activities necessary for
the health of the watershed.
• Assist with implementation of the Don River Watershed Plan, with a focus on
addressing habitat regeneration, stewardship and outreach education, and
monitoring projects, as outlined in the Don River Watershed Plan
Implementation Guide.
• Act as the Don watershed advocate in large projects that cross municipal
boundaries and support major projects advocated for by others which will
protect, regenerate and celebrate the Don watershed.
454
9
• Provide advice and comments to staff on issues affecting the Don River
watershed.
• Provide a forum for watershed communication by maintaining and
enhancing contacts within the community regarding watershed management
issues.
• Support local community groups and build capacity to deliver watershed
management products and services.
• Work with TRCA, The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto and
others to seek new partners and sources of funding for identified priority
projects.
• Participate in efforts of Waterfront Toronto with respect to the naturalization
and flood protection at the mouth of the Don and related activities.
• Work collaboratively with TRCA staff, and other watershed/waterfront
advisory committees to develop The Living City Report Card which will
address jurisdiction-wide issues as well as watershed specific indicators and
targets.
• Work collaboratively with TRCA staff, and other watershed/waterfront
advisory committees to address issues of common concern such as
providing input to the Toronto Area Remedial Action Plan, source protection
planning and other regional policy or planning issues.
• Assist TRCA in identifying potential public greenspace and work with owners
to develop conservation easements, donations and bequests in accordance
with TRCA’s Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010 and subsequent
activities.
455
Attachment 1
HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE
2010 - 2012
Terms of Reference
Toronto and Region Conservation
November, 2009
456
HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE
TERMS OF REFERENCE
1.0INTRODUCTION AND AUTHORITY DIRECTION
The Humber Watershed Alliance is a formal community based volunteer task force that reports
to the Authority on a regular basis. It was first established in 1997 in response to a
recommendation in the approved watershed management plan titled “Legacy: A Strategy for a
Healthy Humber”, dated November 20, 1996 . Since then residents, community groups,
academic institutions, business associations, agencies and elected representatives have been
members of the Alliance and have provided exceptional service to Toronto and Region
Conservation (TRCA).
THE HUMBER CHALLENGE
Our challenge is to protect and enhance the Humber River watershed as a vital and
healthy ecosystem where we live, work and play in harmony with the natural
environment.
PRINCIPLES
•Increase awareness of the watershed’s resources;
•Protect the Humber River watershed as a continuing source of clean water;
•Celebrate, regenerate and preserve our natural, historical and cultural heritage;
•Increase community stewardship and take individual responsibility for the health
of the Humber River;
•Establish linkages and promote partnerships among communities;
•Build a strong watershed economy based on ecological health;
•Promote the watershed as a destination of choice for recreation and tourism.
1.1Authority Direction
Direction to establish the Humber Watershed Alliance came on December 20, 1996, at
Meeting #11/96, when TRCA approved Resolution #A261/96 that states in part:
“THAT the Humber Watershed Task Force reports entitled “Legacy: A Strategy for a
Healthy Humber”, dated November 20, 1996 and “A Call to Action: Implementing the
Humber Watershed Strategy”, dated October 30, 1996, be received and endorsed;
THAT the staff be directed to provide a terms of reference and membership proposal for
a Humber Watershed Alliance for the Authority’s consideration in the spring of 1997.”
457
2
Since January 1997, the Humber Watershed Alliance has completed four terms. Their
general mandate is to respond to the Humber Challenge and follow the guiding
principles set out in Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber. The same guiding
framework is in the updated watershed management plan titled Pathways to a Healthy
Humber.
It is recommended that the Humber Watershed Alliance be established again starting in the
winter of 2010 based on the following terms of reference.
2.0GOALS
The goals of the Humber Watershed Alliance are generally to help protect, restore and
celebrate the Humber River watershed and, more specifically, to assist Toronto and Region
Conservation (TRCA), The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, government agencies,
watershed municipalities, community groups and the public to:
•achieve The Living City Vision of Healthy Rivers and Shorelines, Regional Biodiversity,
Sustainable Communities and Business Excellence within the Humber watershed;
•implement priority recommendations in "Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber”
(1997); and the Humber River Watershed Plan: Pathways to a Healthy Humber (2008);
•implement recommended actions to meet the targets identified in the Humber
watershed report cards; “A Report Card on the Health of the Humber River Watershed
(2000)”, “2003 Humber Watershed Progress Report”, and “Listen to Your River: A Report
Card on the Health of the Humber River Watershed - 2007";
•implement the recommendations of the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan
(RAP) contained in "Clean Waters, Clear Choices: Recommendations for Action - 1994”
and strategic directions contained in subsequent RAP reports as they pertain to the
Humber River watershed;
•implement strategic plans such as the Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan
(Toronto) and the regions of Peel and York sustainability initiatives;
•implement source water protection initiatives;
•meet the challenges of climate change through mitigation and adaptation initiatives;
•maintain and improve the natural and human heritage and recreational values that
distinguish the Humber as a Canadian Heritage River;
•seek political support at all levels of government and foster corporate partnerships that
advance the above objectives.
458
3
3.0HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE MEMBERSHIP AND APPOINTMENT PROCESS
The Humber Watershed Alliance shall consist of approximately 40 members including:
3.1 TRCA Representatives
The Chair of the Authority or other designated Authority member as Ex-officio.
3.2 Federal and Provincial Political Representatives
Federal and Provincial Members of Parliament whose area of jurisdiction is within the
Humber watershed will be invited to participate as ex-officio members.
3.3 Regional and Local Political Representatives
The regional and local municipalities will be requested by TRCA to appoint one council
member or staff representative from the “905" regional and local municipalities in the
Humber River watershed. These members will be ex-officio members. A municipality
may appoint a current Authority member. If a council member is appointed and not staff,
the Councillors should represent an electoral ward within the Humber River watershed.
Annually, a separate meeting/forum may be held to share information on strategic
planning initiatives, regeneration activities or other projects being undertaken by TRCA,
municipalities or others to ensure on-going liaison with appropriate departments and
partners.
Humber River watershed municipalities:
Regional Municipality of York;
Regional Municipality of Peel;
Town of Richmond Hill;
City of Vaughan;
Township of King;
Town of Aurora;
City of Mississauga;
City of Brampton;
Town of Caledon;
Town of Mono;
Township of Adjala-Tosorontio
Within the City of Toronto, the individual community councils will be requested by TRCA
to appoint one council member or staff representative. Individuals with skills, knowledge
and experience related to planning, water management, transportation, health,
recreation, heritage or operations would be an asset.
459
4
One representative is required from each of the City of Toronto’s community council
jurisdictions which have the Humber River watershed within its boundaries.
•Toronto North Community Council;
•Toronto South Community Council;
•Toronto West Community Council.
3.4 Other Public Agency Representatives
The following federal and provincial agencies which have a specific interest or mandate
in issues such as source water protection, Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan,
Great Lakes Water Quality, Climate Change, Greenbelt Plan and Places to Grow will be
requested by TRCA to appoint a senior staff .
•Environment Canada;
•Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources;
•Ontario Ministry of Environment;
•Ontario Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation;
•Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.
3.5 Community Group Representatives
The following community groups may be requested by TRCA to appoint a
representative to the Humber Watershed Alliance.
•Black Creek Conservation Project;
•Community Action Sites/Stewardship Groups (i.e. Bolton, Claireville, Boyd, Oak
Ridges Corridor Park;
•Toronto Food Policy Council;
•Farm Start;
•Albion Hills Farm Cooperative;
•First Nations;
•Humber Valley Heritage Trail Association;
•Architectural Conservancy of Ontario;
•Humber Heritage Committee;
•La Societe d’histoire de Toronto;
•Richmond Hill Naturalists;
•Save the Oak Ridges Moraine;
Others may be added throughout the term should their knowledge, skills and experience
be advantageous to the work of the Humber Watershed Alliance.
460
5
3.6 Watershed Residents, Business Members and Academic Institution
Representatives
Applications from businesses, academic institutions and watershed residents will be
solicited through direct recruitment, announcements in newsletters, local newspapers,
web sites, volunteer networks, and through press releases.
A committee of three persons consisting of one member of the Authority, a TRCA senior
staff member and the Humber Watershed Specialist will recommend appointments to
the Humber Watershed Alliance. This selection will take into consideration the
following:
•demonstrated interest in the watershed/community;
•willingness of the applicant to meet the potential time and work commitments;
•geographical representation of the watershed;
•resident members should live within the Humber watershed or an adjacent Lake
Ontario drainage area;
•technical/professional knowledge, skills and experience in disciplines that would
assist in the planning and implementation of assigned tasks.
3.6.1Business Organization Representatives
Three members representing businesses and/or business organizations
interested in corporate environmental stewardship and sustainable community
objectives.
3.6.2Academic Institution Representatives
Three representatives from the university, college and public/catholic/private
school systems interested in watershed management, restoration, research, and
in integrating sustainability issues into watershed applications and/or curriculum.
•University of Guelph;
•York University;
•Seneca College;
•Public and catholic school boards;
•Private school.
3.6.3 Watershed Resident Representatives
Twenty (20) Humber River watershed residents who have demonstrated
experience, knowledge and skills in one of the following fields:
•Sustainable technologies;
•Natural heritage;
•Human heritage;
•Transportation;
461
6
•Urban agriculture;
•Environmental education;
•Fundraising;
•Planning and policy;
•Recreation;
•Social marketing.
4.0 GUESTS
The Humber Watershed Alliance meetings are open to the public. Persons interested in
actively giving their time and expertise to the protection, restoration and celebration of
the watershed are welcome. These persons are not official members but will be
acknowledged as guests of the Humber Alliance. They will not have voting privileges
nor be eligible for travel expenses to and from meetings. Guests are not required to be
residents of the watershed.
5.0TERM OF APPOINTMENT
These Terms of Reference are valid for three years (2010 - 2012). At the end of the
second year, membership may be renewed for one year, as approved by the Authority.
The membership will be reviewed on an annual basis. Members, excluding ex-officio
members, unable to fulfill their commitments will be replaced after missing three
consecutive meetings (without notice) by the Authority based on the nominees
recommended by TRCA staff.
Notice of resignations and recommendations for new members will be presented to the
Authority on an “as required” basis for approval.
6.0ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS
Members are required to attend regular evening meetings of the whole Humber
Watershed Alliance approximately four times annually.
It is anticipated that evening meetings for Humber Watershed Alliance subcommittees,
community action sites and stewardship groups will be held approximately six times
annually. Additional meetings may be required to deal with specific issues from time to
time. Meetings may be held during regular work hours depending on the preference
and availability of members and staff.
Members will contribute to the work of the Humber Alliance, prepare effectively for, and
participate in, at least one subcommittee, community action site or stewardship group.
462
7
7.0SELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR
The Chair and Vice Chair of the Humber Watershed Alliance will be elected from
amongst its members. The Authority may appoint an interim Chair until such time as an
election can take place. The Chair and Vice Chair will also be ex-officio members of all
subcommittees, community action sites and stewardship groups.
8.0REPORTING RELATIONSHIP
The Humber Watershed Alliance is considered a subcommittee of TRCA. The Humber
Watershed Alliance Chair will report to the Authority on projects and progress through
their meeting minutes.
The Humber Watershed Alliance is not a formal commenting body regarding review and
approval of planning applications or permits. Staff will advise the Humber Watershed
Alliance of major projects within the watershed and may ask them for comments.
The Humber Watershed Alliance members may provide comments or other information
for the consideration of staff and the Authority.
9.0RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE
9.1TRCA Support
TRCA will provide staff support for the Humber Watershed Alliance, including technical
project support and community outreach, subject to available funding.
The staff secretariat will include:
Humber Watershed Specialist/Senior TRCA Staff Member;
Project Manager;
Watershed Resources Planner;
Administrative Assistant (part time).
The Humber Watershed Alliance, and its working committees, community action sites
and stewardship groups will otherwise strive to be self-sufficient in achieving their goals.
463
8
9.2Other Resources
Funding may be available for projects and activities of subcommittees, community
action sites and stewardship groups based on approved work plans and available
TRCA funding. Members are encouraged to secure other resources and
partnerships for Humber Watershed Alliance projects and activities, whenever
possible. In-kind or other support for projects and activities are welcome from
businesses, industries, government agencies, private foundations, educational
institutions and others in accordance with TRCA policies. In-kind or other support
will be coordinated with the assistance of The Conservation Foundation of Greater
Toronto, where appropriate.
10.0STRUCTURE OF THE HUMBER WATERSHED ALLIANCE
10.1Chair’s Committee
This subcommittee may be formed to undertake key administrative responsibilities
pertaining to the Humber Alliance’s agenda and work plan. The group will meet prior to
the Humber Alliance meetings and on other occasions as needed. This committee will
be made up of the Chair, Vice Chair, subcommittee chairs, other key members as
required, and the appropriate TRCA support staff.
10.2Subcommittees, Community Action Sites and Stewardship Groups
The Humber Watershed Alliance will undertake its work through the active involvement
of its members on at least one subcommittee, community action site or stewardship
group.
These committees and groups will be established on an as required basis and will be
dissolved when their work is substantially complete. These committees will be
established to deal with specific actions or projects as determined by the Humber
Watershed Alliance and TRCA staff.
Subcommittees, community action sites and stewardship groups will be generally
limited to 3 - 4 at any one time. This will ensure the necessary focus and effort
required, while serving to limit, to a reasonable level, the demands on the Humber
Watershed Alliance members, TRCA staff and other agencies.
A Chair and Vice Chair will be appointed for each of the subcommittees, community
action sites and stewardship groups. The Chair and Vice Chair of each subcommittee,
community action site and stewardship group will be a Humber Watershed Alliance
member or alternate. The Chairs will be responsible for implementing their work plans
as approved by the Humber Alliance and report to the Alliance on a regular basis.
Community action sites and stewardship groups may be active even after the Humber
Alliance has completed its term.
464
9
All members of subcommittees, community action sites and stewardship groups are
welcome to attend Humber Alliance meetings as guests regardless of being approved
members of the Alliance.
10.3JURISDICTION-WIDE WATERSHED COMMITTEE(S)
Members of the Humber Watershed Alliance will be encouraged to work with other
watershed advisory committee members to collaborate on issues of common interest.
11.0COMPENSATION OF WATERSHED ALLIANCE MEMBERS
For regular Humber Watershed Alliance meetings, as well as subcommittees meetings,
members will be eligible for travel expenses according to TRCA policy where these are
not covered by their agency or other source. The TRCA policy for volunteers is also
applicable.
12.0RULES OF CONDUCT
The Humber Watershed Alliance will adhere to TRCA’s Rules of Conduct as adopted by
Resolution #A2/08 at Authority Meeting #1/08, held on February 29, 2008, and as
amended periodically. All other TRCA policies are applicable including Code of
Conduct, Conflict of Interest and Volunteer Policy.
13.0QUORUM
A quorum for Humber Watershed Alliance meetings is one-third of the members. A
quorum for subcommittees, community action sites and stewardship groups is one half
of the members.
14.0PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES
The Humber Watershed Alliance shall:
•Adhere to the basic principles of sound ecosystem management that recognizes
the interrelationship between cultural heritage, physical characteristics,
biological conditions and economic needs, and the integration of conservation,
restoration and economic activities necessary for the health of the watershed.
•Assist with habitat regeneration, natural resource management, stewardship,
recreational and heritage activities in consultation with watershed stakeholders
that will lead to the realization of The Living City vision. This includes but is not
limited to:
465
10
•Initiatives that further TRCA's Sustainable Communities objective such
as near urban agriculture;
•Energy conservation, green building technologies and business-
related community partnerships;
•Identification, protection, celebration and promotion of cultural and
heritage values in the Humber River watershed;
•natural heritage restoration such as the re-introduction of Atlantic
salmon;
•climate change mitigation and adaptation initiatives.
•Provide advice and comments to staff on issues affecting the Humber
River watershed.
•Provide a forum for watershed communication by maintaining and enhancing
contacts within the community regarding watershed management issues.
•Support local community groups and build capacity to deliver watershed
management products and services.
•Work with TRCA, The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto and
others to seek new partners and sources of funding for identified priority
projects.
•Work collaboratively with TRCA staff, and other watershed/waterfront
advisory committees to develop The Living City Report Card which will
address jurisdiction-wide issues as well as watershed health indicators and
targets.
•Act as a Humber watershed advocate in projects that cross municipal
boundaries and support major projects advocated by others which will
protect, regenerate and celebrate the Humber watershed.
•Assist TRCA in identifying potential public greenspace and work with owners
to develop conservation easements, donations and bequests in accordance
with TRCA’s Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010 and subsequent
activities.
•In conjunction with TRCA and others, assist with technical forums leading to
improvements in planning and practice throughout the watershed.
466
ETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHEDS COALITION
2010 - 2012
Terms of Reference
Toronto and Region Conservation
November, 2009
467
ETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHEDS COALITION
TERMS OF REFERENCE
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND AUTHORITY DIRECTION
The Etobicoke –Mimico Watersheds Coalition (Coalition) is a formal community-
based committee of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) which
reports to the Authority on regular basis. It was first established in 2002 in response
to a recommendation in the approved watersheds management strategy titled
“Greening our Watersheds: Revitalization Strategies for Etobicoke and Mimico
Creeks” dated May 2002. Since then, the Coalition has completed two very
successful terms during which members have provided exceptional support and
service to TRCA.
In the year 2025, the Etobicoke and Mimico Creek watersheds will be places where
people live in harmony with the environment, where the water is clean, where green
open spaces are vital and connected, and where fish and wildlife thrive.
In order to realize our vision we must respect, protect and regenerate the natural and
human heritage of the watersheds.
1.1 Authority Direction
At Authority Meeting #5/02, held on May 24, 2002, Resolution #A124/02 was
approved for the first term as follows:
THAT the Terms of Reference for the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition,
dated May, 2002, as appended, be approved;…
It is recommended that the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition be established
again starting in the winter of 2010 based on the following terms of reference.
2.0 GOALS
The goals of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition are to protect and
regenerate the Etobicoke Creek and Mimico Creek watersheds and, more
specifically, to assist the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), The
Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto, TRCA partner agencies and watershed
municipalities to:
• achieve The Living City vision of Healthy Rivers and Shorelines, Regional
Biodiversity, Sustainable Communities and Business Excellence within the
Etobicoke and Mimico Creek watersheds;
• address priorities to meet targets identified in the documents titled, “Turning over
a new leaf: The Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks Watersheds Report Card 2006”
and ”Greening Our Watersheds: Revitalization Strategies for Etobicoke and
Mimico Creeks”;
468
2
• implement the recommendations of the Toronto and Region Remedial Action
Plan contained in Clean Waters, Clear Choices: Recommendations for Action
(1994) and strategic directions contained in subsequent reports as they pertain
to the Etobicoke and Mimico Creek watersheds;
• implement strategic plans such as the Wet Weather Flow Management Master
Plan (Toronto) and the City of Toronto and Region of Peel sustainability
initiatives;
• implement source water protection initiatives;
• meet the challenges of climate change through mitigation and adaptation
initiatives;
• secure political support at all levels of government and foster corporate
partnerships to advance TRCA’s vision for The Living City.
3.0 ETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHEDS COALITION MEMBERSHIP AND
APPOINTMENT PROCESS
The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition shall consist of approximately 30
members including:
3.1 TRCA Representative
The Chair of the Authority or other designated Authority member as Ex-officio.
3.2 Federal and Provincial Political Representatives
Federal and Provincial members of Parliament whose area of jurisdiction is in the
watersheds will be invited to participate as Ex-officio members.
3.3 Regional and Local Political Representatives
The regional and local municipalities will be requested by TRCA to appoint one
Council member from each of the “905" regional and local municipalities in the
Etobicoke and Mimico creeks watershed. These representatives will be Ex-officio
members. A municipality may appoint a current Authority member. The appointed
members should represent an electoral ward within the watershed.
• Regional Municipality of Peel;
• City of Mississauga;
• City of Brampton;
• Town of Caledon.
469
3
Annually, a separate meeting/forum may be held to share information on strategic
planning initiatives, regeneration activities or other projects being undertaken by
TRCA, municipalities or others to ensure on-going liaison with appropriate
departments and partners.
Municipal staff representatives will be invited to attend meetings of the Coalition as
required.
Within the City of Toronto, the Etobicoke Community Council will be requested to
appoint a member of Council to the Coalition. The city may appoint a current
Authority member. This representative will be an Ex-officio member.
3.4 Other Public Agency Representatives
The following federal and provincial agencies which have a specific interest in the
Etobicoke Creek and Mimico Creek watersheds will be requested by TRCA to
appoint a representative. Four Ex-officio representatives will be appointed under this
Category
• Environment Canada;
• Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources;
• Ontario Ministry of Environment;
• Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.
• Other as appropriate
3.5 Community Group Representatives
The following community groups/ENGO’s will be requested by TRCA to appoint a
representative to the Etobicoke Creek and Mimico Creek watersheds. Ten
representatives will be appointed under this category.
Citizens Concerned About the Future of the Etobicoke Creek Waterfront;
Peel Federation of Agricultural or GTA Agriculture Advisory Committee;
• Credit River Anglers Association (mandate includes Etobicoke Creek);
• Ecosource Mississauga;
• Toronto Field Naturalists;
• Peel Environmental Youth Alliance (PEYA);
• Toronto Food Policy Council;
• West Humber Naturalist (mandate includes Etobicoke-Mimico);
• Friends of Heart Lake.
• Brampton Scouts
• Peel Aboriginal Network
Others may be added throughout the term should their knowledge, skills and experience
be advantageous to the work of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition.
470
4
3.6 Watershed Residents, Business Members and Academic Institution
Representatives
Applications from businesses, academic institutions and watershed residents will be
solicited through announcements in the newsletters, local newspapers and through
press releases. A committee of three persons, comprised of one member of the
Authority, a TRCA senior staff member and the Etobicoke Mimico Watershed
Specialist, will recommend appointments to the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds
Coalition. This selection will take into consideration the following:
• demonstrated interest in the watershed/community;
• willingness of the applicant to meet the potential time and work
commitments;
• geographical representation of the watershed and or Lake Ontario
drainage area;
• professional expertise and/or knowledge of the watershed in any area
which would assist in the implementation of assigned tasks.
3.6.1 Business Organization Representatives
Maximum of three members representing businesses and/or business
organizations interested in corporate environmental stewardship and the
economic vitality of the region. The following businesses will be invited to
participate:
• Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA)
• Golf Club Representative/s
• Other local business interested in watershed projects
3.6.1.1 Relationship with Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-
Business Zone
Building on several years of work with the GTAA, in 2007 the Coalition
helped TRCA establish Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-
Business Zone to transform the lands surrounding Toronto Pearson into
an internationally recognized community of eco-friendly businesses
within the Etobicoke- Mimico Watersheds.
At Authority Meeting #6/08, held on July 25, 2008, Resolution #A184/08
was approved, establishing The Partners in Project Green Steering
Committee which reports directly to the Authority.
Chair of the Coalition will represent the Coalition on the Partners in
Project Green Steering Committee. GTAA staff liaison will represent the
GTAA as well as Partners in Project Green on the Coalition.
471
5
3.6.2 Academic Institution Representatives
Two representatives from the university, college and public/catholic/private
school systems interested in watershed management, restoration, research
and integrating sustainability issues into watershed applications and
curriculum.
3.6.3 Watershed Resident Representatives
Fifteen watershed residents including those interested in, or having
experience in, the following fields:
• writing/communications;
• business;
• fundraising;
• natural environment;
• planning and engineering;
• environmental policy;
• academics/education;
• social marketing;
• agriculture;
• culture and heritage and recreation.
4.0 GUESTS
Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition meetings are open to the public. We
encourage others interested in actively giving their time and talents to the protection,
regeneration and celebration of the watershed to become involved. These persons
will be acknowledged as 'guests' by the Coalition and will not have voting privileges
nor be eligible for travel expenses to and from meetings. Guests are not required to
be residents of the watershed.
Community members participating on Coalition Project Teams will be invited to
participate as guests.
5.0 TERM OF APPOINTMENT
Members will be appointed for a two year term with possible extension for one more
year.
Membership will be reviewed on an annual basis. Members, excluding Ex-officio
members, who are unable to fulfill their commitments will be replaced after missing
three consecutive meetings (without notice). Replacements will be made by the
Authority based on nominees recommended by Authority members, other Coalition
members and TRCA staff.
Notice of resignations and recommendations for new members will be presented to
the Authority on an as-required basis for approval.
472
6
6.0 ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS
Members are required to attend regular evening meetings of the Etobicoke-Mimico
Watersheds Coalition approximately three times annually including a training and
networking session.
The first meeting will be held to discuss and endorse workplan priorities and future
actions. The last meeting will be held in November to report on progress and set
direction for the coming year,
It is anticipated that evening/day time meetings or conference calls for Project
Teams and Ad-hoc Working Committees will be held approximately four-six times
annually. Additional meetings may be required to deal with specific issues from time
to time. All meetings scheduled depending on the preference and availability of
members and staff.
Members will contribute to the work of the Coalition, prepare effectively for, and
participate in, at least one Project Team or Ad-hoc Working Committee.
7.0 SELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
The Chair and Vice Chair will be elected by the Watersheds Coalition from the
membership. The Authority may appoint an interim Chair until such time that an
election can take place. The Chair and Vice Chair will also be ex-officio members of
all working committees.
8.0 REPORTING RELATIONSHIP
The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition is considered a subcommittee of
TRCA. The Coalition Chair will report as needed to the Authority on projects and
progress through meeting minutes of the coalition or brief presentations.
The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition is not a formal commenting body
regarding review and approval of planning applications or permits. Staff will advise
the Coalition of major projects within the watershed and may ask them for
comments.
The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition may, on its own, provide comments or
other information for the consideration of staff and the Authority.
9.0 RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE ETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHEDS
COALITION
9.1 TRCA Support
TRCA will provide staff support for the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition,
including technical project support and community outreach.
473
7
Subject to available funding, the staff secretariat will include:
• Watershed Specialist;
• Project Manager;
• Public Programs Coordinator;
• Administrative Clerk (part time).
The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition, and its project teams and committees,
will otherwise strive to be self-sufficient in achieving their goals.
9.2 Other Resources
Funding may be available for projects and activities of working committees based
on approved work plans and available TRCA funding. Project team and committee
members are encouraged to secure other resources and partnerships for coalition
projects and activities, whenever possible. In-kind or other support for projects and
activities will be welcome from businesses, industries, other government agencies,
private foundations, educational institutions and others in accordance with TRCA
policies. All in-kind or other support will be coordinated with, or through, The
Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto.
10.0 STRUCTURE OF THE COALITION
10.1 Chair’s Committee
This subcommittee will undertake key advisory and coordinating responsibilities
pertaining to the agenda, workplan and activities of the Coalition. The committee
may also assist with advocacy actions, exchange information among project teams
and watershed-wide committees, coordinate Coalition activities, discuss policy
issues, prepare/review correspondence, coordinate outreach to political
representatives, represent the Coalition at municipal councils, solicit strategic
partnerships and seek out funding resources to meet the objectives of the
Coalition.
The Chair’s Committee will meet two weeks prior to the Coalition meeting and on other
occasions as needed. This committee will be made up of the Chair and Vice Chair of
the Coalition, representation from Project Teams and Ad-hoc Working Committees
appropriate TRCA staff.
10.2 Ad-hoc Working Committees and Project Teams
The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition will undertake its work through the
active involvement of its members on at least one ad-hoc working committee or
project team. Ad-hoc working committees may be formed to work on such topics as
communications, outreach, report cards or watershed planning. Project teams will
be formed to work on specific projects such as local stewardship projects and
events. These committees and teams will be established on an ‘as required’ basis
and will be dissolved when their work is substantially complete.
474
8
The number of ad-hoc committees will generally be limited to 2 committees at any
one time. This will ensure the necessary focus and effort required, while serving to
limit, to a reasonable level, the demands on the watersheds coalition members, and
staff of TRCA and other agencies.
A Chair for each ad-hoc committee and project team will report to the Coalition on a
regular basis.
10.3 Jurisdiction-Wide Watershed Committee(s)
Members of the Coalition will be encouraged to work with members from other
TRCA watershed committees to collaborate on issues of common interest, for
example to discuss topics/projects with watershed-wide implications, review policy
issues, and prepare joint communications.
11.0 COMPENSATION OF WATERSHEDS COALITION MEMBERS
At regular Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition meetings, as well as project team
and watershed-wide committee meetings, members will be eligible for travel
expenses according to TRCA policy where these are not covered by their agency or
other source. The TRCA policy on volunteers is also applicable.
12.0 RULES OF CONDUCT
The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition will adhere to TRCA’s Rules of Conduct
as adopted by Resolution A2/08 at Authority Meeting #1/08, held on February 29,
2008, and as amended periodically. All other TRCA policies are applicable including
Code of Conduct, Conflict of Interest and Volunteer Policy.
13.0 QUORUM
A quorum will consist of one-third of the members of the Etobicoke-Mimico
Watersheds Coalition.
14.0 PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES
The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition shall:
• Adhere to the basic principles of sound ecosystem management that recognizes
the interrelationship between cultural heritage, physical characteristics,
biological conditions and economic needs, and the integration of conservation,
restoration and economic activities necessary for the health of the watershed.
475
9
• Assist with the implementation of habitat regeneration, stormwater management,
stewardship, recreational and heritage activities that will lead to the realization of
the vision of The Living City and priority actions identified in “Greening our
Watersheds: Revitalization Strategy for Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks", and
“Turning over a new leaf: The Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks Watersheds Report
Card 2006".
• Act as the Etobicoke Creek and Mimico Creek watersheds champion in large
projects that cross municipal boundaries and support major projects advocated
by others which will respect, protect and regenerate the Etobicoke Creek and
Mimico Creek watersheds.
• Provide advice and comments to staff on issues affecting the Etobicoke and
Mimico creeks watersheds.
• Provide a forum for watershed communication by maintaining and enhancing
contacts within the community regarding watershed management issues.
• Build capacity within the general community and influence people’s behavior
through innovative social marketing approaches.
• Work with TRCA, The Conservation Foundation and others to seek new partners
and sources of funding for identified priority projects.
• Assist with projects that further the TRCA Sustainable Communities objective
such as Partners in Project Green within the Industrial Commercial Institutional
(ICI) sector of the Etobicoke and Mimico watersheds.
• Work with the City of Toronto and TRCA’s waterfront team to assist with priorities
identified for the Etobicoke and Mimico waterfront.
• Work collaboratively with TRCA staff and other watershed/waterfront advisory
committees to develop The Living City Report Card which will address
jurisdiction-wide issues as well as watershed specific indicators and targets.
• Work with TRCA staff and other watershed/waterfront advisory committees to
address issues of common concern such as providing input to the Toronto Area
Remedial Action Plan, and other regional policy or planning issues.
• Assist TRCA in identifying potential public greenspace and work with owners to
develop conservation easements, donations and bequests in accordance with
TRCA’s Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010.
476
477
RES.#A208/09 -2010 FEE SCHEDULE
Changes to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2009 Fee
Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming.
Moved by:Bryan Bertie
Seconded by:Jack Heath
THAT the 2010 Fee Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming, including the
proposed changes, be approved effective January 1, 2010.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The 2009 Ontario Budget has proposed a comprehensive package of tax changes. Central to
this proposed tax reform package is a single, value-added sales tax, which would come into
effect on July 1, 2010. It is proposed that Ontario's Retail Sales Tax (RST - commonly referred to
as the provincial sales tax (PST)) be replaced with the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST). The HST
would have a combined tax rate of 13 percent - combining the existing five percent federal
Goods and Services Tax (GST) and an eight percent Ontario component. The HST would be
administered by the Canada Revenue Agency.
As a result of the proposed HST, many services and programs offered by Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) to which only the GST currently applies, will be subject to an
additional eight percent tax increase. Should TRCA's fees remain constant following the
initiation of the HST, approximately $256,000 in revenues will be lost between July 1 and
December 31, 2010. TRCA has therefore revised the 2009 Fee Schedule for Public Facilities
and Programming to reflect the upcoming described changes in 2010.
RATIONALE
Incorporating HST into General Admission Fees
All fees for general admission to conservation areas, Black Creek Pioneer Village and Kortright
Centre are inclusive of tax and are currently subject to GST only. Should admission fees
remain constant throughout 2010, TRCA will lose approximately $118,000 in revenue between
July 1 and December 31, 2010. As a result, TRCA staff proposes that effective July 1, 2010 all
general admission fees be increased to incorporate the HST. An inclusive fee structure is
preferred for easy and timely payment processing at facility gates.
Base Price Plus Applicable Tax Fee Structure
Staff further proposes that effective January 1, 2010, all remaining Public Facilities and
Programming fees (excluding the aforementioned general admission fees) change to a base
price plus applicable tax fee structure to accommodate for the varying taxation rates of 2010
and prevent revenue loss.
Proposed Fee Increases
Staff has closely evaluated pricing structures of programs similar in operations to TRCA across
Ontario. The evaluations determined that TRCA's proposed 2010 fees will remain competitive
with like facilities.Therefore, staff proposes the following additional changes to the 2009 Fee
Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming:
fishing permits, 5% base price increase;
camping permits, 5% base price increase;
Black Creek Pioneer Village admission and tours, 5% base price increase;
478
memberships, 5% base price increase;
ski trail use, 10% base price increase;
ski rental fees, 10% base price increase; and
day camper fees, 10% base price increase.
The proposed changes are recommended in order to offset projected increased operating
costs. Further, the proposed price increases are comparable with the increasing fees of
conducting business in Ontario; the increases accommodate for rising costs of insurance,
energy, services and staff salaries.
Fee surveys of Greater Toronto Area and Ontario attractions, museums and campgrounds,
indicate that TRCA will remain competitive following implementation of the proposed increases.
Changes to the 2009 Fee Schedule for Public Facilities and Programming are outlined in
Attachment 1.
Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Emails: dedwards@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Emails: dedwards@trca.on.ca
Date: November 02, 2009
Attachments: 1
TRCA 2010/2009 Fee Schedule Comparison - Public Facilities and Programs
2009200920102010
Item Description BaseGrossBase GrossEffective Date
1.0 For general admission at Conservation Areas, per day;
1.1 for each adult from sixteen to fifty-nine years of age at Glen Haffy and
Petticoat Creek.4.765.004.875.50Effective July 1, 2010
1.2 for each adult from sixteen to fifty-nine years of age at Boyd, Albion Hills,
Bruces Mill and Heart Lake. 5.716.005.756.50Effective July 1, 2010
1.3 for each senior sixty years of age or over at Glen Haffy, and Petticoat
Creek. 3.814.003.764.25Effective July 1, 2010
1.4 for each senior sixty years of age or over at Boyd, Albion Hills, Bruces
Mill and Heart Lake. 4.765.004.875.50Effective July 1, 2010
2.0 For fishing at Glen Haffy or Heart Lake;
2.1 per day, for each person sixteen years of age or over, exclusive of
general admission.5.055.305.095.75Effective July 1, 2010
2.2 per day, for each person from five to fifteen years of age, exclusive of
general admission.2.522.652.522.85Effective July 1, 2010
2.3 per day, for each person four years of age or under, exclusive of general
admission.0.000.000.00
2.4 for each person sixteen years of age or over, in a group with a
reservation, including angling fee and general admission, per day,
subject to a minimum group size of 20 persons.7.147.507.50 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
2.5 for each person five to fifteen years of age, in a group with a reservation,
including angling fee and general admission, per day, subject to a
minimum group size of 20 persons.3.093.253.25 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
2.6
for the use of a fishing pond at Glen Haffy Conservation Area for up to 75
persons including general admission angling fee, and picnic shelter. 757.14795.00795.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
2.7 for each additional persons 25 or fewer in conjunction with item 2.6.201.90212.00212.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
3.0 For a permit for the use of a fishing pond at the Glen Haffy
Headwaters Trout Ponds, including general admission and the use
of row boats, per day;
3.1 for up to 75 persons.852.38895.00895.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
3.2 for each additional 25 or fewer persons.233.33245.00245.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
3.3 for a membership to Headwaters Fly Fisher’s Club. 461.90485.00485.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
4.0 For the rental of a canoe, pedal boat or rowboat where available,
per hour.12.08 13.65 14.00Effective Jan. 1, 2010
5.0
For a permit to use a designated group campsite at Glen Haffy, Heart
Lake, Boyd, Petticoat Creek and Bruces Mill, subject to a limit of
seven nights use, per night; for a group of up to twenty persons;
5.1 for a group of up to twenty persons.95.24100.00100.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
5.2 for each additional person, in conjunction with a permit issued under item
5.1 3.093.253.25 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
6.0 For each day camper, not overnight, per day, inclusive of general
admission.2.14 2.252.75 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
7.0 For a permit to occupy an individual un-serviced campsite, inclusive
of general admission;
7.1 at Albion Hills, per night.25.7127.0027.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
7.2 at Albion Hills, per week.154.29162.00162.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
7.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days).514.29540.00540.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
7.4 at Indian Line, per night.27.1428.5028.50 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
7.5 at Indian Line, per week.162.86171.00171.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
7.6 at Indian Line, per month (28 days).542.86570.00570.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
7.7 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee
specified in item 7.1 or 7.4 2.86 3.00 3.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
8.0 For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite, with water
and hydro hook-ups, inclusive of general admission;
8.1 at Albion Hills, per night.30.9532.5032.50 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
8.2 at Albion Hills, per week.185.71195.00195.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
8.3 at Albion Hills, per month (28 days).619.05650.00650.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
8.4 at Albion Hills, per season.2166.672275.002275.00 Effective Jan.1, 2010
8.5 at Indian Line, per night.32.3834.0034.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
8.6 at Indian Line, per week.194.29204.00204.00 Effective Jan..1, 2010
8.7 at Indian Line, per month (28 days).647.62680.00680.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
8.8 at Indian Line, per season.2590.482720.002720.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
479
TRCA 2010/2009 Fee Schedule Comparison - Public Facilities and Programs
2009200920102010
Item Description BaseGrossBase GrossEffective Date
8.9 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee
specified in item 8.1 or 8.5 2.863.003.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
9.0
For a permit to occupy an individual serviced campsite with water,
hydro, and sewage hook-up inclusive of general admission;
9.1 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per night.37.1439.0039.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
9.2 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service , per week.222.86234.00234.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
9.3 at Indian Line with 30 amp hydro service, per month (28 days).742.86780.00780.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
9.4 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per night.41.9044.0044.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
9.5 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per week.251.43264.00264.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
9.6 at Indian Line with 50 amp hydro service, per month (28 days).838.10880.00880.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
9.7 on a holiday or other designated date, in addition to the basic permit fee
specified in item 9.1 and 9.4.2.863.003.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
10.0 In addition to basic camping fees as specified in item 7.0, 8.0, 9.0;
10.1 for a permit to park an additional vehicle, per night.8.8510.0010.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
10.2 for a permit to park an additional vehicle, per season.53.0960.0060.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
10.3 for each additional person occupying a campsite over and above the
campground’s specified site limit, per night. 4.765.005.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
11.0 For a permit to occupy a group campsite at Albion Hills or Indian
Line for a group of up to twenty persons, inclusive of general
admission;
11.1 at Albion Hills Pleasantview group campsite, for an adult group.238.10250.00250.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
11.2 at Albion Hills Pleasantview group campsite, for a youth group.190.48200.00200.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
11.3 at Albion Hills Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group campsite, for an adult
group.190.48200.00200.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
11.4 at Albion Hills Meadowvale or Cedar Grove group campsite, for a youth
group.157.14165.00165.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
11.5 at Indian Line group campsite, for an adult group.238.10250.00250.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
11.6 at Indian Line group campsite, for a youth group.190.48200.00200.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
11.7 for each additional person per night, in conjunction with a permit issued
under items 12.1 to 12.6.4.765.005.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
12.0 For a permit for the use of a group picnic site, exclusive of general
admission;
66.67 to
476.19
70.00 to
500.00
70.00 to
500.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
13.0 In addition to a permit for the use of group picnic site as specified in
item 12.0
13.1 for the use of a portable barbecue unit or corn pot.40.70 46.0040.7046.00
14.0 For admission to the swimming area at Petticoat Creek, Heart Lake
and Albion Hills, exclusive of general admission;
14.1 per day, for each person two years of age or over.3.333.50 3.75Effective July 1, 2010
14.2 for a book of ten pool passes.30.0031.5 Replaced with
"Splash Pass"
15.0 For the use of cross-country ski trails at Albion Hills, inclusive of
general admission;
15.1 for each person from sixteen to fifty nine years of age.13.3314.00 16.00Effective Jan. 1, 2010
15.2 for each child five to fifteen years of age.7.62 8.00 9.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
15.3 for each child four years of age or under.0.000.00
15.4 for each senior sixty years of age or over.10.4811.00 13.00Effective Jan.1, 2010
15.5 for a family of one or two adults and their children who are fifteen years of
age or under.33.3335.00 40.00Effective Jan. 1, 2010
16.0 For the use of cross-country ski trails at Albion Hills, inclusive of
general admission, after 1 p.m.;
16.1 for each person sixteen to fifty nine years of age.11.4312.00 13.00Effective Jan. 1, 2010
16.2 for each child five to fifteen years of age.5.716.00 7.00Effective Jan. 1, 2010
16.3 for each child four years of age or under.0.000.00
16.4 for each senior sixty years of age or over.8.579.00 11.00Effective Jan. 1, 2010
16.5 for a family of one or two adults and their children who are fifteen years
of age or under.27.6229.00 30.00Effective Jan. 1, 2010
17.0 For the rental of a cross-country ski equipment package consisting
of skis, boots and poles;
17.1 for each person sixteen years of age or over, per day.17.4819.7519.75 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
17.2 for each person sixteen years of age or over, per day, after 1:00 p.m.13.0614.7514.75 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
17.3 for each child fifteen years of age or under, per day.11.5013.0013.00
17.4 for each child fifteen years of age or under, per day, after 1:00 p.m.9.7311.0011.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
480
TRCA 2010/2009 Fee Schedule Comparison - Public Facilities and Programs
2009200920102010
Item Description BaseGrossBase GrossEffective Date
17.5 for each person sixteen years of age or over, in a group with a
reservation, including trail fees, per day, subject to a minimum group
size.22.1225.0025.00 Effective Jan.1, 2010
17.6 for each person fifteen years of age or under, in a group with a
reservation, including trail fees, per day, subject to a minimum group
size.10.6212.0012.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
18.0 For use of the mountain bike trails at Albion Hills per day, for each
person, exclusive of general admission.1.90 2.00 2.50
19.0 For a guided tour at Bruce's Mill during the maple syrup program,
subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons.6.19 6.506.25 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
20.0 For parking at Black Creek Pioneer Village, per vehicle, per day,
exclusive of general admission.5.31 6.005.316.00
21.0 For general admission to the Black Creek Pioneer Village, during the
regular operating season, per day;
21.1 for each adult from sixteen to fifty-nine years of age.14.2915.0015.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
21.2 for each child from five to fifteen years of age.10.4811.0011.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
21.3 for each child four years of age or under accompanying their family.0.000.000.00
21.4 for each senior sixty years of age or over.13.3314.0014.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
21.5
for each student sixteen years of age or over, with student identification.13.3314.0014.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
21.6 for each student participating in a general tour program, subject to a
minimum group size of twenty persons.9.5210.0010.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
21.7 for each student participating in a specially designated tour program,
subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons.10.4811.0011.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
21.8 for each student participating in a designated activity program, subject to
a minimum group size of twenty persons.12.3813.0013.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
21.9 for each student participating in the Dickson Hill School program, per
day, subject to a minimum group size of twenty persons.9.5210.0010.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
22.0 Black Creek Pioneer Village Membership valid for general
admission, inclusive of parking fees, for Black Creek Pioneer
Village;
22.1 for each individual.57.1460.0060.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
22.2 for a family of one or two adults and their children.90.4895.0095.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
23.0 For a Guided Tour at Black Creek Pioneer Village, as part of a tour
group with a reservation, including general admission;
23.1 for each adult from sixteen to fifty-nine years of age, subject to a
minimum group size of twenty persons.15.2416.0016.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
23.2 for each senior sixty years of age and over, subject to a minimum groups
size of twenty persons.14.2915.0015.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
24.0 For parking at the Kortright Centre for Conservation, per vehicle, per day,
exclusive of general admission.3.54 4.003.544.00
25.0 For general admission at the Kortright Centre for Conservation;
25.1 for each adult from sixteen to fifty-nine years of age.5.716.005.756.50Effective July. 1, 2010
25.2 for each child fifteen years of age and under.0.000.000.00
25.3 for each child four years of age or under visiting as part of an organized
group under supervision.2.382.502.653.00Effective July. 1, 2010
25.4 for each senior sixty years of age or over.4.765.004.865.50Effective July. 1, 2010
25.5 for each student participating in a general tour program, subject to a
minimum group size. 6.907.257.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
25.6 for each student participating in a specially designed tour program,
subject to a minimum group size. 7.62 8.00 7.75 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
25.7 for each adult from sixteen to fifty-nine years of age participating in a
specially designed tour program, subject to a minimum group size. 10.4811.0011.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
25.8 for each senior sixty years or over participating in a specially designed
tour program, subject to a minimum group size. 6.907.2510.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
26.0 Kortright Centre Membership valid for admission, inclusive of
parking fees, to the Kortright Centre for Conservation;
26.1 for each individual.47.6250.0050.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
26.2 for four individuals or a family of one or two adults and their children. 80.9585.0085.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
481
TRCA 2010/2009 Fee Schedule Comparison - Public Facilities and Programs
2009200920102010
Item Description BaseGrossBase GrossEffective Date
27.0 Conservation Membership valid for general admission to all
conservation areas, Kortright Centre for Conservation, and Black
Creek Pioneer Village;
27.1 for an individual.71.43 75.0075.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
27.2 for four individuals or a family of one or two adults and their children.128.57 135.00135.00 Effective Jan. 1, 2010
482
483
RES.#A209/09 -CORRESPONDENCE
(Executive Res.#B151/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of
above-noted correspondence (b) dated October 19, 2009, from the City of Vaughan
advising of Item 7, Report No. 42, regarding Official Plan Amendment (OPA) 620, Steeles
Corridor, Jane to Keele Street, Servicing Strategy Master Plan Class Environmental
Assessments Ward 4;
AND WHEREAS Item 7, Report No. 42, requires that the City of Vaughan enter into a
memorandum of understanding with TRCA for the funding of studies related to the TRCA
lands on the northwest corner of Jane Street and Steeles Avenue (Black Creek Pioneer
Village);
AND WHEREAS the Regional Municipality of York has an interest in the retrofit/expansion
of the stormwater management pond on the TRCA lands on the northwest corner of Jane
Street and Steeles Avenue;
AND WHEREAS it is in the interests of TRCA to enter into an agreement with the City of
Vaughan and the Regional Municipality of York regarding the use of the lands on the
northwest corner of Jane Street and Steeles Avenue;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a memorandum of
understanding with the City of Vaughan and the Regional Municipality of York which will
provide for:
a payment by the City of Vaughan to TRCA of $225,000 to pay for studies related to
the archaeology and ecology of the lands adjacent to the stormwater pond and a
master plan for the use of the lands as part of Black Creek Pioneer Village;
determination of the feasibility of retrofit/expansion of the stormwater management
pond within the TRCA lands at Jane Street and Steeles Avenue; and
such other terms and conditions as TRCA staff and solicitor may require;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as is
necessary to implement the memorandum of understanding, including obtaining needed
approvals and the signing and execution of documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A210/09 -GREENWOOD CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN AND
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
Town of Ajax. Approval to enter into a management agreement with the
Town of Ajax for the management of Greenwood Conservation Area and
update on implementation of the management plan.
(Executive Res.#B152/09)
484
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) enter into a management
agreement with the Town of Ajax for the management of Greenwood Conservation Area
(GCA) subject to the following:
Town of Ajax will develop, maintain and use the lands in accordance with the
Greenwood Conservation Area Management Plan, dated May 2004, at the Town's cost
and will comply with all legislation and regulations;
Town of Ajax will covenant and agree to indemnify and save harmless TRCA;
Town of Ajax will be responsible for insurance, taxes and all costs associated with
inspection and management of the subject lands;
any other terms and conditions as may be required by TRCA staff and solicitor;
THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may be required
to give effect to the management agreement, including obtaining necessary approvals
and the signing and execution of documents;
THAT TRCA staff continue to work with the Town of Ajax and the Greenwood
Conservation Area Stewardship Committee on management plan implementation
activities;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority as necessary on implementation
highlights and accomplishments.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A211/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Duffins Creek Watershed
2112406 Ontario Limited (Skyloft Resort), CFN 41026. Purchase of
property located north of Chalk Lake Road, west of Lake Ridge Road,
Township of Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the
"Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and
Conservation Component, Duffins Creek watershed.
(Executive Res.#B153/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT 40.47 hectares (100 acres) more or less, being Part of Lots 7 & 8, Concession 7,
Township of Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham, located north of Chalk Lake
Road, west of Lake Ridge Road be purchased from 2112406 Ontario Limited;
THAT a conservation easement for the protection of the environmental features and
functions containing 3.34 hectares ( 8.25 acres) more or less, consisting of an irregular
shaped parcel of land, said land being Lot 7, Concession 7, Township of Uxbridge,
Regional Municipality of Durham, located north of Chalk Lake Road, west of Lake Ridge
Road be purchased from 2112406 Ontario Limited;
485
THAT the purchase price for both the fee simple purchase and the conservation easement
be $1,060,000;
THAT the acquisition by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is
conditional on the availability of all necessary funding;
THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land required free from encumbrance, subject to
existing service easements and subject to a 6 metre (20 foot) wide right-of-way in favour
of 2112406 Ontario Limited;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to
complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred
incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be
paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A212/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
William G. Love and Mary Anne McEvenue, CFN 42156. Purchase of a
partial taking from a property, municipally known as 14375 7th
Concession, located on the east side of the 7th Concession, south of the
16th Side Road, in the Township of King, in the Humber River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B154/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT a partial taking of 22 hectares (54.3 acres), more or less, consisting of an irregular
shaped parcel of vacant land together with a right-of-way for access 15 metres in width
along the northerly boundary of the retained lands, said land being Part of Lot 15,
Concession 6, Township of King, Regional Municipality of York, be purchased from
William G. Love and Mary Anne McEvenue;
THAT the purchase price be $787,350, based on $14,500 per acre for 54.3 acres;
THAT acquisition by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is conditional on
all necessary funding being available;
THAT TRCA enter into a Landholding Agreement for the property with the Nature
Conservancy of Canada;
THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land required free from encumbrance, subject to
existing service easements;
486
THAT Gardiner, Roberts, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to complete the
transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to
the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to given effect thereto including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A213/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed
Purchase of land - Canadian National Railway Company, CFN 42115.
Acquisition of land located south of Steeles Avenue East, and east of
Sewells Road, City of Toronto, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project
for 2006-2010,” Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River
watershed.
(Executive Res.#B155/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT 3.066 hectares (7.577 acres) more or less, being part of Lots 7 and 8, Concession 5
and designated as Parts 1 and 2 on Plan 64R-9058, City of Toronto, located south of
Steeles Avenue East, east of Sewells Road be purchased from the Canadian National
Railway Company (CN);
THAT the purchase price be $35,700, together with CN’s legal fees and broker’s
commission to a maximum of $5,000;
THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land required free from encumbrance, subject to
existing service easements:
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to
complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred
incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be
paid;
THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever actions may be required
to give effect thereto including the obtaining of necessary approvals, and the signing and
execution of any documents;
AND FURTHER THAT the Rouge Park Alliance be so advised by the CAO's Office.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
487
RES.#A214/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed,
Seven on the Ridge Development Inc. (Formerly Marchesan Subdivision),
CFN 43095. Acquisition of a property located on Clairewood Court, south
of Old Major Mackenzie Drive, and east of Highway 27, City of Vaughan,
Regional Municipality of York, under the "Greenland Acquisition Project
for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River
watershed.
(Executive Res.#B156/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT 0.0849 hectares (0.22 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Part of Lot 20,
Concession 8 and designated as Block 8 on M-Plan prepared by Ertl Surveyors OLS,
Project 05073, City of Vaughan, be purchased from Seven on the Ridge Development Inc.
(Formerly Marchesan Subdivision);
THAT a restrictive covenant be placed on the rear of Lot 5 on the said M-Plan of 0.02
hectares (0.05 acres), more or less to restrict the placement of fill and the construction of
structures;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete the
transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to
the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A215/09 -SECORD FOREST AND WILDLIFE AREA
Proposal for Fishing and Outdoor Recreation Centre
Lease with 2217014 Ontario Inc., CFN 40172. Recommends a lease of
the Secord lands, pond and associated buildings for a fishing and
outdoor recreation centre.
(Executive Res.#B157/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
488
THAT WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has been requested
by 2217014 Ontario Inc. to enter into a lease arrangement for lands situated within the
Secord Forest and Wildlife Area;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a lease of approximately 17
hectares (42 acres), more or less, said land being Part of Lots 9, 10 and 11, Concession
3, in the Township of Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham, for the development of a
fishing and outdoor recreation centre by 2217014 Ontario Inc.;
THAT the lease with 2217014 Ontario Inc. be subject to the following terms and
conditions:
(a)the term of the lease will be for five years;
(b)the lease rate is to be a base rent of $2.00 per year and a percentage rent of 5% of
annual gross revenue;
(c)2217014 Ontario Inc. will be solely responsible for all costs associated with the
maintenance and operation of the leased lands and facilities;
(d)any other terms and conditions deemed appropriate by the TRCA staff and solicitor;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A216/09 -MEETING SCHEDULE 2010-2011
To provide a schedule of meetings for the forthcoming Authority year,
beginning February 26, 2010 and ending January 28, 2011.
(Executive Res.#B158/09)
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT the Schedule of Meetings 2010-2011, dated October 20, 2009, as amended, be
approved;
THAT the Executive Committee be designated the powers of the Authority during the
month of August, 2010, as defined in Section 2.10 of the Rules of Conduct;
AND FURTHER THAT the CAO's Office distribute this schedule at the earliest opportunity
to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) watershed municipalities and the
Ministry of Natural Resources.
CARRIED
489
Attachment 1
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
MEETING SCHEDULE 2010-2011
JANUARY 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
January 8 9:30 a.m.Authority #10/09
January 15 9:30 a.m.Executive #11/09
January 29 9:30 a.m.Authority #11/09
FEBRUARY 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
February 12 9:30 Executive #12/09
February 26 10:30 ANNUAL Authority
#1/10
Note: January and February 2010 meetings already approved with the Meeting Scheduled
2009-2010
MARCH 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
March 5 9:30 a.m.Executive #1/10
March 26 9:30 a.m.Authority #2/10
APRIL 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
April 9 9:30 a.m.Executive #2/10
April 9 10:30 a.m.BAAB #1/10
April 30 9:30 a.m.Authority #3/10
MAY 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
May 7 9:30 a.m.Executive #3/10
May 21 9:30 a.m.Authority #4/10
JUNE 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
June 4 9:30 a.m.Executive #4/10
June 4 10:30 a.m.BAAB #2/10
June 25 9:30 a.m.Authority #5/10
JULY 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
July 9 9:30 a.m.Executive #5/10
July 23 9:30 a.m.Authority #6/10
490
AUGUST 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
August 6 9:30 a.m. Executive #6/10
SEPTEMBER 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
September 10 9:30 a.m.Executive #7/10
September 17 9:30 a.m.Authority #7/10
OCTOBER 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
October 1 9:30 a.m.Executive #8/10
October 1 10:30 a.m.BAAB #3/10
October 29 9:30 a.m.Authority #8/10
NOVEMBER 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
November 12 9:30 a.m.Executive #9/10
November 26 9:30 a.m.Authority #9/10
DECEMBER 2010 TIME DESCRIPTION
December 3 9:30 a.m.
Humber Room
Executive #10/10
JANUARY 2011 TIME DESCRIPTION
January 7 9:30 a.m.Authority #10/10
January 14 9:30 a.m.Executive #11/10
January 28 10:30 a.m.ANNUAL Authority
#1/11
1.All AUTHORITY meetings will be held in the South Theatre, Visitor’s Centre, Black Creek
Pioneer Village (BCPV), 1000 Murray Ross Parkway, Downsview, Ontario, unless otherwise
noted on the agenda.
2.All EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE meetings will be held in the Victoria Room, Visitor’s Centre,
BCPV, unless otherwise noted on the agenda.
3.Authority and Executive Committee meetings will be held at 9:30 a.m. until 1:30 p.m.,
unless otherwise noted on the agenda.
4.ALL BUDGET/AUDIT ADVISORY BOARD (BAAB) meetings will be held immediately
following Executive Committee meetings in the Victoria Room, Visitor’s Centre, BCPV,
unless otherwise noted on the agenda. Approximate meeting start time is 10:30 a.m., but
members will be given a better indication of start time when the agenda becomes available.
5.Members are requested to be present for the entire meeting time as not doing so puts
quorum at risk.
For further information, please contact Kathy Stranks at 416-661-6600, extension 5264 or
Andrea Fennell at extension 5254.
_________________________________________
491
RES.#A217/09 -ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD HEARING
Michael Labrier and Wendy Homer
Town of Caledon. Authorization to attain party status at the Ontario
Municipal Board on referrals related to Official Plan Amendment and
Zoning By-law Amendment applications relating to two six-storey
apartment buildings containing 122 suites and 78 townhouses on the
subject property.
(Executive Res.#B159/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT authorization be given to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff
to attain party status before the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) regarding proposed
Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications pertaining to the
subject property;
THAT staff continue to work cooperatively with TRCA's municipal partners and the
appellant to ensure TRCA's requirements are implemented as part of the OMB process;
THAT staff be authorized to retain legal counsel to pursue this appeal before the OMB;
AND FURTHER THAT the OMB and all parties and participants to the hearing be so
advised.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A218/09 -ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD HEARING
2964 Seabreeze Road
Town of Ajax
Carruthers Creek Watershed. Authorization for Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority staff to obtain Party Status before the Ontario
Municipal Board on an appeal related to the refusal of a consent to sever
by the Durham Region Land Division Committee at 2964 Seabreeze
Road, Town of Ajax, Carruthers Creek watershed.
(Executive Res.#B162/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT authorization be given to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff
to seek Party Status before the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) regarding the appeal filed
under Subsection 53 (19) of the Planning Act against the decision of the Durham Region
Land Division Committee to refuse a consent to sever a residential lot at 2964 Seabreeze
Road;
492
THAT staff continue to work cooperatively with the Region of Durham, Town of Ajax and
the appellants to ensure that the requirements of the Planning Act, Provincial Policy
Statement and TRCA's Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program are met with
respect to the natural hazards present on the subject lands;
THAT staff be authorized to retain legal counsel to pursue this appeal before the OMB;
AND FURTHER THAT the OMB and all parties and participants to the hearing be so
advised.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A219/09 -1229 BETHESDA ROAD (SWAN LAKE)
CFN 40084. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing letter in support of
an education use at Swan Lake, Town of Richmond Hill, Regional
Municipality of York.
(Executive Res.#B163/09)
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in a receipt of a request
from the Faculty of Education at York University to develop an educational facility at the
recently acquired Swan Lake property;
AND WHEREAS TRCA is in receipt of a letter from Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing (MMAH) confirming that an educational use would be a permitted use at Swan
Lake;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT staff be directed to enter into negotiations for a
lease agreement with York University;
THAT a report be brought forward to the Executive Committee at a future date
recommending further action;
AND FURTHER THAT staff carry out the necessary repairs to stabilize and protect the
integrity of the buildings using the available funds from the purchase of 1229 Bethesda
Road.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A220/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed
Purchase of land.
(Executive Res.#B164/09)
493
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT confidential item EX7.11 - Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010 be
approved;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back when the item is completed and can be made
public.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A221/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Section II items EX8.1 - EX8.3, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes
#9/09, held on November 6, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
Section II Items EX8.1 - EX8.3, Inclusive
EAST DON TRAIL NETWORK - PHASE 1B
(Executive Res.#B165/09)
PORT UNION WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PHASE 2)
(Executive Res.#B166/09)
HABITAT IMPLEMENTATION PLANS AND PEEL CLIMATE CHANGE BUDGETS
(Executive Res.#B167/09)
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A222/09 -IN THE NEWS
Overview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities and
news stories from September and October, 2009.
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of media coverage and Good News Stories
from September and October, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
494
BACKGROUND
Since 2006, the Authority has received a staff report on Good News Stories which summarized
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) key accomplishments for the preceding few
months. Further, at Business Excellence Advisory Board Meeting #1/06, held on March 3,
2006, it was requested that an overview of media coverage for TRCA be provided twice yearly.
The new format is to provide one report providing highlights of TRCA's activities and news
coverage, as outlined in this staff report. The consolidated "In the News" report will be brought
to the Authority for receipt every couple of months in place of the Good News Stories and
Media Summary reports.
Healthy Rivers and Shorelines
Watershed Management - Don River Watershed Plan was approved by the Authority on
September 25, 2009.
The Scarborough Mirror ran a newsbrief about TRCA's participation in a local shoreline
cleanup.
Restoration - Upper Mimico Creek restoration site has been completed where two kms of
trapezoidal channel in Brampton was naturalized and a public opening was launched.
The project took three years to complete and has since convinced the Sithe Global
corporation to commit $120,000 to naturalize the section of Upper Mimico Creek that
flows through their property as well as incorporating three new wetlands. The site is
being used as model project which demonstrates partnerships and engineering
ingenuity and the lessons learned are being incorporated at other sites. Fisheries and
Oceans Canada (DFO)/University of Toronto is interested in using the site as a case
study scenario for their newly developed Habitat Alteration Assessment Tool model for
streams.
Caledon Today published a story and photos of TRCA's Wetland Restoration project
taking place in the region.
Regional Biodiversity
Planning and Development - Concluded Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearing on Greco
site in Kleinburg. OMB cited TRCA as being the big winner in the hearing. We have a
buffer and land going into public ownership.
Wildlife - The City of Toronto has released the Birds of Toronto, the first book in the new
Biodiversity Series. The book was officially launched Sunday, October 18th at the Royal
Ontario Museum. Birds of Toronto is the result of collaboration between the City of
Toronto’s Planning Division, TRCA, the Fatal Light Awareness Program, Toronto Field
Naturalists, Toronto Ornithological Club, Canadian Peregrine Foundation, Toronto Zoo,
Royal Ontario Museum and Ontario Science Centre.
The Butterfly Migration Festival at Tommy Thompson Park was covered by A Greener
Toronto, a weekly TV program that airs on Rogers Cable 10.
TRCA, in cooperation with DFO Science Group monitor the abundance and health of
the fish populations within the City of Toronto. The method of monitoring to date has
primarily been electrofishing which samples the fish using the top five metres of water.
In an interest to obtain a more comprehensive survey of the fish community inhabiting
the Toronto harbour a bottom trawl was used to determine which species of fish use the
deeper areas of the harbour. Using this collection technique round whitefish (
Prosopium cylindraceum ), native species to Lake Ontario, were caught for the first time
by TRCA in the Toronto harbour.
495
During the spring of 2009, Center for Conservation Biology's biologists, in collaboration
with The Nature Conservancy, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, TRCA and Toronto
Ornithological Club, deployed a datalogger in Toronto at Colonel Samuel Smith Park
which connect the whimbrels that stage along the Delmarva Peninsula to the birds
passing through Toronto to the high arctic. This identifies Toronto as a critical spring
bottleneck for migrating whimbrels and supports the need for continued efforts to
support habitat restoration and creation along the waterfront.
Restoration - TRCA, with support from Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation, has
completed the Embayment A Shoreline Enhancement Project to improve the quality and
quantity of shoreline and sheltered embayment wetland habitats. The project
represents an additional 1 km of shoreline with improved stability and habitat features.
It will contribute an additional 2 hectares of sheltered embayment wetland and a total of
5.5 hectares of improved habitat, warm water spawning and nursery habitat, as well as
improved shorebird, amphibian, reptiles and small mammal habitat.
On October 26, TRCA recognized the McCutcheon Foundation's three year funding of
the gravel pit restoration project at the Timbers Brothers Pit by hosting a site review and
lunch with part of his family. After a short hike we unveiled a commemorative plaque at
the site. Later that evening the Township of Uxbridge recognized the McCutheon
Foundation for their contribution to restoration of the Timbers Brothers Pit.
Sustainable Communities
Facilities and Property - Condrain committed $20,000 toward the Kortright Centre parking
lot and Seneca College is doing a video of the construction process.
TRCA acquiring approximately 100 acres of Skyloft Ski Resort property, in the Region of
Durham, in partnership with Ontario Heritage Trust and the Region of Durham.
Education and Stewardship - Received approval from the W. Garfield Weston Foundation
for another three years of funding for the Weston Environmental Leaders of Tomorrow
program. Students from the Weston program created an e-waste art installation that
was on display at the ROM. TRCA worked with the ROM and teachers to publicize this.
Coverage appeared in The Richmond Hill Liberal, First Local Rogers, and Rogers
Daytime.
Fall Healthy Yards media coverage was received on AM680 News, Toronto Sun,
Canadian Business Online, Midland Free Press and Ming Pao Newspaper.
Research and Innovation - Re-launched the Greening Retail Program and released our best
practices report at the International Council of Shopping Centres conference in
downtown Toronto. Media coverage for Greening Retail best practices report was
published in Green Business Magazine, Hardware and Home Centre Magazine, Gifts
and Tablewares News, Greening Retailing News Blog, Eco-Log News, Exchange
Morning Post, The Drive on News 88.9 St. Johns, The Square Foot.com, Retail News
Magazine and an interview was done for Canadian Consulting Engineer Magazine.
City of Toronto developing training program for green development standard using the
Archetype Sustainable House as a sample site.
Partners in Project Green is developing self assessment tools to help SMEs to develop
greenhouse gas strategies. Twenty-three companies were interested in the pilot and 2
were selected. Partners in Project Green was also mentioned in articles about
Pearson's environmental award from the North American arm of Airports Council
International. Stories appeared in the National Post and Mississauga News.
496
TRCA spokesperson participated in a CanWest food waste story called "Turning our
Food into Energy". The story included photos and a mention of Partners in Project
Green. The story appeared in the National Post, Calgary Herald and the Vancouver Sun.
Certification - Bathurst Glen Golf Course fulfilled five of the six components for Audubon
certification so the facility should be fully certified by the end of the year.
Celebrations and Events - At official launch ceremony, new solar pontoon boat at Lake St.
George FC named the "Kathleen Wynne" in honour of her work as Ontario Minister of
Education. Solar Pontoon Naming Ceremony was front page news in The Richmond
Hill Liberal. The event was also covered by Sing Tao Daily, A Greener Toronto, A
Greener York Region , Rogers First Local and the Thornhill Liberal. Photos from the
event are to be posted on the Ministry of Education’s website.
McVean Farm Grand Opening received media coverage from Brampton Guardian, Snap
Brampton, Rogers First Local, A Greener Toronto and with a documentary series called
"The Long Way Around". TRCA's role with the McVean Farm was also mentioned in a
Toronto Star article called "Friends are for Farming".
Partnerships - The Toronto Sun's New Homes and Condos section ran a story called "Good
Stewards". The story featured TRCA's work with examples of green builders.
Business Excellence
Education and Stewardship - TRCA published a book on the Humber River. Contents
include short essays about the watershed, a photo collection of people, landscapes,
events, plants and animals, a chronology of milestones and a summary of quick facts.
Received letter from the Province of Ontario supporting proposed use under the Oak
Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan for an education centre at the house at Swan Lake,
in partnership with York University.
Over 140 people attended Partners in Project Green event to see Bob Willard speak
about business advantage of sustainability. Media coverage from the Partners in
Project Green Turning Green into Gold event included Green Business Magazine,
Brampton Guardian, Mississauga News, Canadian Business Online and Eco-Log News.
The Brampton Guardian story title was "Environmental sustainability on display at airport
event".
Celebrations and Events - TRCA hosted an event in Etienne Brule Park to celebrate the 10th
anniversary of the Humber being designated a Canadian Heritage River. Special guests
included The Honourable Donna Cansfield, Mayor David Miller, Doug Stewart, Chair of
the CHRS Board, Stewart Deline-Maracle, Mohawk elder and Gerri Lynn O'Connor.
Media coverage of the 10th anniversary included a feature story in the Brampton
Guardian and a television appearance on Breakfast Television. Stories also appeared in
L'Express a French community paper and The Caledon Enterprise.
The medicine wheel garden community planting event at Heart Lake Conservation Area
had approximately 50 volunteers. The local MPP Dr.Kuldip Kular came out to the event
and participated in the ceremony and planted some plants. A short follow up article
appeared on the Brampton Guardian website.
TRCA supported media relations for World Green Building Day on behalf of the World
Green Building Council. Coverage appeared in several international news agencies and
media outlets, including Reuters, GreenBiz.com, Daily Commercial News, Construction
Week Online, Yahoo Canada, UK and Ireland, Canada.com.
Restoration - Infrastructure funding to the municipalities has resulted in some contracts for
TRCA to complete the work for the municipalities.
497
Partnerships - Entered into partnership with Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) to
purchase 50 acres in Happy Valley area, Township of King. This is the only area within
TRCA's jurisdiction that meets NCC's criteria for land securement. It is the first time we
have been able to partner with NCC on an acquisition.
Facilities and Property - City of Toronto EcoRoof program awarded grants for the white
roofs at Black Creek Pioneer Village Visitors Centre and Head Office, amounting to
$22,000.
Human Interest - Mentoring to Placement program launch received media coverage in the
Toronto Sun called "Planting the seeds of diversity". The same article also ran in the
London Free Press. Coverage was also in the Epoch Times, York Economic Insights
Newsletter, Green Business Magazine, Globeinvestor.con, Eco-Log News, Canadian
Newscomer Magazine Daily News and InsideToronto.com.
Kortright Centre for Conservation was listed as the venue for the annual Feast of Fields
in the following media outlets: Toronto Star, National Post, Toronto Sun and Tandem
Magazine.
The Toronto Star and Pickering News Advertiser published stories about religious
offerings in area creeks.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264, Rowena Calpito, extension 5632
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca, rcalpito@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264, Rowena Calpito, extension 5632
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca, rcalpito@trca.on.ca
Date: November 9, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A223/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT Section IV items AUTH8.2.1 and AUTH8.2.2, in regard to watershed committee
minutes, be received.
CARRIED
Section IV Items AUTH 8.2.1 & AUTH 8.2.2
DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL
Minutes of Meeting #6/09, held on July 23, 2009
PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN STEERING COMMITTEE
Minutes of Meeting #2/09, held on April 16, 2009.
_________________________________________
498
RES.#A224/09 -CTC SOURCE PROTECTION COMMITTEE
Chair's Quarterly Report on Source Water Protection. Update on source
protection committee activities.
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:David Barrow
THAT the 1st Quarterly Report from the CTC Source Protection Committee (SPC) Chair be
received by the Authority and formally received by the Toronto and Region Source
Protection Authority at its next meeting.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At SPC Meeting #8/09 held on Tuesday, November 23, 2009, the 1st Quarterly Report from the
CTC Source Protection Committee Chair was approved for submission to the 3 CTC Source
Protection Authorities. The submission of a quarterly report to the source protection authorities
is a requirement of the Clean Water Act, 2006 and this report fulfills that requirement. Rather
than convening a separate meeting of the Toronto and Region Source Protection Authority
(TRSPA) solely for the purpose of receiving this report, it is being recommended that the
Authority receive the report and formally receive it at the next meeting of the Toronto and
Region Source Protection Authority.
As required under the Clean Water Act, 2006 the CTC Source Protection Committee must
provide a quarterly report to each of the source protection authorities within the CTC Source
Protection Region. The CTC Chair, in agreement with the Chief Administrative Officers (CAO) of
the three CTC Source Protection Authorities, will provide written quarterly reports in the months
of November, February, May and August until the source protection plan is submitted in
August, 2012. It is the preference of all three source protection authorities that these quarterly
reports be received by the conservation authority board and then accepted as correspondence
by the respective source protection authority at the subsequent convened source protection
authority meeting. Source protection authority meetings will be convened on an as needed
basis to receive key items (such as the draft Proposed Assessment Report) from the CTC
Source Protection Committee Chair.
Terms of Reference
On Monday, August 17, 2009 the Ministry of the Environment posted notices of approval of the
Terms of Reference for TRSPA, Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Authority (CLOSPA)
and Credit Valley Source Protection Authority (CVSPA) (these notices are posted online and
available upon request) to the Environmental Registry (EBR). The notice is published as an
information notice and formalizes the three letters of approval received by Susan Self, Chair
CTC SPC, and the relevant source protection authority CAO's on August 12, 2009 (these letters
are available upon request).
As regulated by Ontario Regulation 287/07 Section 17 2(a), the posting of approval to the EBR
sets a due date of August 17, 2010 for submission of the CTC Source Protection Region's
Assessment Reports to the Ministry of the Environment. Within this time frame two public
consultation periods must be held as regulated by Ontario Regulation 287/07 Sections 15 and
16.
499
The Terms of Reference documents as approved on August 17, 2009 will require amendment
to the Source Protection Planning tasks when the Province on Ontario provides the Source
Protection Planning Regulations. This regulation is expected to be issued in February 2010 and
it is proposed that the public comment period required for these amended Terms of Reference
documents are anticipated to be included with the Assessment Report consultation as outlined
below.
Assessment Report
To meet the tight regulatory timelines imposed by the August 17, 2010 deadline CTC staff has
developed a schedule for activities through to the submission of the last CTC Assessment
Report to the Ministry of the Environment.
Activity Scheduled Date
SPC acceptance of individual technical studies Ongoing through to Feb ’10
Stage 1 consultation period Jan’10 to Feb’10
Draft ARs distributed to SPC for review March 10, 2010
Draft AR approved by SPC for public consultation March 31, 2010
Draft AR released: circulated to clerks and posted for public
comments
April 1, 2010
Notice of public meetings released April 1, 2010
Public meeting period (not to begin sooner than 21 days after the
release of meeting notices and posting of draft AR)
April 26, 2010 – May 14, 2010
Public comment deadline for Draft AR: 40 day public consultation
period proposed to allow for public meetings in wellhead areas
May 14, 2010
Public comments and proposed actions sent to SPC for review May 21, 2010
SPC approval of Proposed AR June 1, 2010
Submit Proposed AR to SPA June 2, 2010
30 day comment period begins: Proposed AR circulated to clerks
and posted for public comments
June 2, 2010
SPA public comment period deadline July 2, 1010
Comments received on Proposed AR sent to SPC and SPAs July 5, 2010
SPA authorize staff to submit Proposed AR & comments to MOE July 2010
Assessment Report submitted to MOE August 17, 2010
Dates shown in bold are currently scheduled and/or fixed
It is the belief of staff and of the CTC Source Protection Committee Chair that there is little room
for deviation from these timelines for the successful completion of the Assessment Reports.
500
Technical leads in CVSPA, TRSPA and CLOSPA have begun a first draft of the Assessment
Report for their respective source protection area. The technical leads recognize the tight
timelines which are required of them and are working diligently to have a complete draft of the
Assessment Reports completed by March 1, 2010. While this deadline appears achievable for
all three source protection areas, CVSPA and TRSPA have identified the receipt of
municipally-led technical studies as a potential barrier to meeting this date. Through the
previous MOE grant funding program to municipalities, the vast majority of municipalities in the
CTC Source Protection Region (SPR) chose to apply directly for funding to lead studies to do
wellhead protection area (WHPA) delineation, vulnerability assessment and threats and issues
evaluations. Some of these studies have been provided to us and a number are scheduled to
be received imminently but there are some that are seriously overdue. An active update status
review process has been established with the technical leads and a number of meetings with
the municipal lead and their senior manager and consultants are being held in an attempt to
bring closure to these technical studies in order for the CTC SPR to meet its Assessment
Report deadlines. These delays appear to be a combination of changing rules requiring
additional work, limited consultant capacity and different interpretations of the work required to
comply with the threats assessment and issues evaluation.
The Project Manager, CTC Region, and technical leads met with Ministry of the Environment
staff on November 13, 2009 to discuss the importance of municipalities meeting the deadlines
for these studies. MOE offered support to assist with obtaining specific studies from municipal
partners as required. CTC staff is of the opinion that this is not required at this time, but will
review as necessary.
Consultation of CTC Assessment Reports
As regulated by the Clean Water Act, 2006, source protection committees must offer two
periods for public consultation on the Assessment Reports. By the Clean Water Act, 2006
regulations (section 15) these consultation periods must include:
making a draft proposed assessment report available for public review;
releasing a public notice that a draft proposed assessment report is available for
comment;
a public comment period of no less than 35 days from the date the public notice is
published;
at least one public meeting in each source protection area, at least 21 days after the
public notice is published;
a second public comment period of no less than 30 days for final public comments
on the proposed assessment report.
At SPC Meeting #6/09, held on September 14, 2009, Resolution #A128/09 approved a staged
consultation approach with the intent of expediting the regulated consultation stage and
providing the SPC and technical leads with advance notice of potential concerns or issues. On
November 5, 2009 the Communications Outreach Working Group of the CTC Source Protection
Committee met to develop a plan for consultation with landowners whose properties are wholly
or partially within vulnerable areas. Following this meeting the Working Group recommended
consultation as outlined below.
501
Stage 1 Consultation
The Communications Outreach Working Group reviewed the proposed materials to be sent for
Stage 1 consultation and examples of the draft materials were distributed to members. These
materials are available upon request. The package will include:
the letter-to-landowner sent to the mailing address of the property with the name of
the owner/tenant/lessee, if known;
a map showing the specific vulnerable area and corresponding vulnerability score
relevant to this property and surrounding properties;
a pamphlet which provides an overview description of vulnerable areas and scoring;
and
an enclosure letter from the municipality responsible for the drinking water well.
Communications Outreach Working Group members recommended that landowner packages
be sent in an envelope of the local municipality and that an enclosure letter from the
municipality be included with the package. It is believed that this approach will lend credibility
to the outreach as more landowners will be familiar with their municipality than with their
conservation authority or source protection committee. This approach will also have the
additional benefit of linking the efforts of the SPC to the municipal partners who may be
ultimately responsible for enforcing source protection plans. Should a municipality not wish to
include an enclosure letter and/or approve the use of their envelopes for the mailing, staff will
proceed with sending the material out in conservation authority envelopes for that area.
The Stage 1 consultation will begin no sooner than January 18, 2010 when a number of
Wellhead Protection Area studies are anticipated to be brought to the SPC for acceptance.
Stage 2 Consultation
Further at SPC Meeting #6/09, Resolution #A128/09 SPC approved and authorized the
Communications and Outreach Working Group to develop a plan for Stage 2 consultation as
well as materials to provide information about the process and on-going information to come
forward to SPC Meeting #1/10, scheduled to be held on January 18, 2010.
The preliminary proposal to exceed minimum formal meeting requirements is to hold a series of
open houses and meetings during the last week of April and early May, in the following
locations:
Orangeville area – focus on wells in Amaranth, Orangeville, Mono and north part of
Caledon (Mono has wells located in Caledon);
Erin/Hillsburgh area – local wells in those communities;
Georgetown/Acton – Region of Halton’s wells for Halton Hills;
Caledon area– focus on Region of Peel wells in Caledon East, Palgrave, Inglewood,
Cheltenham, Alton and Caledon Village;
Vaughan/King City area – focus on Region of York wells in Kleinburg, Nobleton and King
City;
Whitchurch/Stouffville area – focus on Region of York wells in Whitchurch and Stouffville
and Region of Durham well in Uxville;
Whitby area – focus on Lake Ontario intakes in Durham Region to meet the mandatory
minimum requirement for a meeting in the Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Area.
Considering a workshop/presentation on the Lake Ontario Collaborative to be held in
conjunction with this meeting.
502
Toronto area - focus on Lake Ontario intakes in Toronto. Considering a
workshop/presentation on the Lake Ontario Collaborative to be held in conjunction with
this meeting.
Where possible, these consultation opportunities, or additional meetings, would benefit from
being combined with other related activities to encourage attendance and provide more
information to the public. It is proposed to share the plans with adjacent source protection
regions to determine if there are opportunities to share events, particularly where WHPAs and
other vulnerable areas extend into adjacent areas.
Source Protection Plans
On September 2, 2009 the CTC SPC met at Black Creek Pioneer Village to review EBR Posting
#010-6726: Source Protection Plans under the Clean Water Act, 2006: A Discussion Paper on
Requirements for the Content and Preparation of Source Protection Plans. The committee also
conducted "dry-run" exercises to test how the proposed source protection plan policies might
be applied. On September 9, 2009 CTC SPC Chair, Susan Self, submitted comments to MOE
on behalf of the CTC Source Protection Committee. A copy of these comments was sent to the
CAOs of each of the CTC source protection authorities.
At SPC Meeting #8/09, held on November 24, 2009 staff proposed steps to conduct a meeting
with the intent of re-engaging municipal planning staff in source water protection in February
2010. This timing is to coincide with the expected release of the draft source protection
planning regulation. At the November 24, 2009 CTC planning staff proposed that the Chair
send a letter to senior municipal planning staff in all municipalities wholly or partially within the
CTC Region to invite planning staff to attend a meeting that will commence development of a
workplan and budget for source water protection planning, including identifying the appropriate
staff contacts.
As noted in the Terms of Reference section above, once the source protection planning
regulation is released amendments will be required to the Terms of Reference for each of the
CTC source protection areas. The public consultation which is required for these amendments
is proposed to coincide with the public consultation of the Assessment Reports.
NEXT STEPS
The next CTC SPC Chair's quarterly report will be delivered in February 2010 and will provide
an update on the draft Assessment Report work. It is anticipated that in late February or early
March a draft version of the Assessment Reports will be made available to the Source
Protection Authority for review.
Report prepared by: Nicholas Schulz, extension 5932
Emails: nschulz@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Beverley Thorpe, extension 5577
Emails: bthorpe@trca.on.ca
Date: November 24, 2009
Attachments: 1
503
Attachment 1
All 10 attachments listed are available upon request
Attachment 1 - EBR posting of TRSPA TOR approval
Attachment 2 - EBR posting of CLOSPA TOR approval
Attachment 3 - EBR posting of CVSPA TOR approval
Attachment 4 - TRSPA TOR letter of approval
Attachment 5 - CVSPA TOR letter of approval
Attachment 6 - CLOSPA TOR letter of approval
Attachment 7 - the letter-to-landowner sent to the mailing address of the property with the name
of the owner/tenant/lessee, if known;
Attachment 8 - draft map of vulnerable area and corresponding vulnerability score relevant to
this property and surrounding properties;
Attachment 9 - pamphlet which provides an overview description of vulnerable areas and
scoring; and
Attachment 10 - enclosure letter from the municipality responsible for the drinking water well
_________________________________________
504
RES.#A225/09 -SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by:Richard Whitehead
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT Section IV item EX9.1 - 561 Glasgow Road, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #9/09, held on November 6, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
RES.#A226/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Richard Whitehead
Seconded by:Ron Moeser
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items EX10.1 - EX10.70, inclusive, contained in Section II
of Executive Committee Minutes #9/09, held on November 6, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A227/09 -NEW BUSINESS
Moved by:David Barrow
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT New Business item EX11.1 - Dunlap Property, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #9/09, held on November 6, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:33 p.m., on Friday, November 27, 2009.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
505
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #10/09
January 8, 2010
The Authority Meeting #10/09, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer
Village, on Friday, January 8, 2010. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting to
order at 9:40 a.m.
PRESENT
Maria AugimeriVice Chair
David Barrow Member
Bryan Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Glenn De BaeremaekerMember
Mike Del GrandeMember
Bill Fisch Member
Grant Gibson Member
Pamela GoughMember
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Colleen JordanMember
Bonnie Littley Member
Linda Pabst Member
Anthony PerruzzaMember
Richard WhiteheadMember
ABSENT
Eve Adams Member
Paul Ainslie Member
Jack Heath Member
Glenn Mason Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
John Parker Member
Maja Prentice Member
Gino Rosati Member
John SprovieriMember
506
RES.#A228/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Laurie Bruce
Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #9/09, held on November 27, 2009, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
CORRESPONDENCE
(a)A letter dated January 7, 2010 from Michael J. McQuaid, Q.C. of WeirFoulds LLP, in
regard to item AUTH7.2 - 2010-2011 Fee Schedule for Planning, Permitting and
Environmental Review Services.
(b)A letter dated January 7, 2010 from Joe Vaccaro, Vice President, Policy and
Government Relations, BILD, in regard to item AUTH7.2 - 2010-2011 Fee Schedule for
Planning, Permitting and Environmental Review Services.
RES.#A229/09 -CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT above-noted correspondence (a) and (b) be received and responded to by the
TRCA Chair;
AND FURTHER THAT BILD be invited to address the Authority at a future meeting.
CARRIED
507
508
509
510
_________________________________________
511
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A230/09 -APPOINTMENT TO TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION
AUTHORITY FOR 2010
City of Toronto. The Secretary-Treasurer advises that Pamela Gough,
representing the City of Toronto, has been duly appointed and is entitled
to sit as a Member of this Authority for the 2010 year.
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:David Barrow
THAT Pamela Gough be recognized as a City of Toronto citizen member of Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) until November 30, 2010, and until a successor is
appointed;
THAT Reenga Mathivanan be thanked for her service to TRCA;
AND FURTHER THAT election for the vacant City of Toronto position on the Executive
Committee be conducted at Annual Authority Meeting #1/10, scheduled to be held on
February 26, 2010.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In September 2007, City of Toronto Council appointed Reenga Mathivanan to TRCA for a term
of office expiring on November 30, 2010, and until her successor is appointed. In October
2009, Ms. Mathivanan advised City of Toronto that she is unable to complete her term of
appointment to TRCA. Toronto City Council, at its meeting held on November 30 and
December 1, 2, 4 and 7, 2009, appointed Ms. Pamela Gough to TRCA for a term of office
ending on November 30, 2010, and until a successor is appointed.
At Authority Meeting #9/07, held on November 30, 2007, Resolution #A258/07 was approved,
in part, as follows:
...THAT the members of the Executive Committee that were elected for a 3-year term at
Annual Authority Meeting #1/07, held on February 23, 2007, continue to sit on the
Executive Committee until Annual Meeting #1/10, unless any member does not wish or is
unable to continue to hold their position for the remainder of the term;...
Ms. Mathivanan was a member of the Executive Committee representing the City of Toronto so
a vacancy exists on the committee. As the Executive Committee was appointed until Annual
Meeting #1/10, scheduled to be held on February 26, 2010, and only two Executive Committee
meetings are scheduled to be held prior to this meeting, staff recommend that the City of
Toronto position remain vacant until elections for all Executive Committee positions are
conducted on February 26, 2010.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
Date: December 15, 2009
512
RES.#A231/09 -2010-2011 FEE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING, PERMITTING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SERVICES
BILD Working Group Summary. Results of the BILD Working Group
consultations regarding the 2008 Administration Fee Schedule for
Planning, Permitting and Environmental Assessment, and
recommendations for adjustments to the fee schedule and guidelines for
the 2010-2011 fee schedule.
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Colleen Jordan
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and Building Industry
and Land Development Association (BILD) have conducted consultations on issues of
concern to the development industry regarding TRCA's planning and permitting
administration fees;
AND WHEREAS TRCA staff has established administration fees to provide a service
delivery approach for municipalities and the development industry for a wide range of
applications requiring environmental planning and technical expertise related to heavy
growth demands and timelines;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the 2010-2011 Fee Schedule for Planning,
Permitting and Environmental Assessment Review services dated December 18, 2009 and
incorporating a 2% cost of living increase for each of 2010 and 2011, be approved, to be
effective January 8, 2010;
THAT an Administration Fee policy to guide future process around fee procedures be
approved;
THAT all municipalities within TRCA's jurisdiction and the development industry be so
advised of the updates to TRCA's fee schedule;
AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to monitor fee implementation and costs implications
of the current level of service demands for planning, ecology, engineering,
hydrogeology and enforcement.
AMENDMENT #1
Moved by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT the following replace the 3rd paragraph of the main motion:
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the 2010-2011 Fee Schedule for Planning,
Permitting and Environmental Review Services dated December 18, 2009 be amended to
ensure full cost recovery, effective January 8, 2010.
513
RECORDED VOTE
Maria Augimeri Yea
David Barrow Nay
Bryan Bertie Nay
Laurie Bruce Nay
Gay Cowbourne Yea
Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea
Mike Del Grande Yea
Bill Fisch Nay
Grant Gibson Nay
Pamela Gough Yea
Lois Griffin Yea
Suzan Hall Nay
Colleen Jordan Yea
Bonnie Littley Yea
Linda Pabst Nay
Anthony Perruzza Nay
Richard WhiteheadNay
AMENDMENT #2
Moved by: Bill Fisch
Seconded by: Bryan Bertie
THAT the following be inserted after the main motion:
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA move toward full cost recovery as soon as possible in future
amendments to the Fee Schedule for Planning, Permitting and Environmental Review
Services.
AMENDMENT #2, AS AMENDED
RES.#A232/09
Moved by: Bonnie Littley
Seconded by: Collen Jordan
THAT the following be inserted after the main motion:
AND FURTHER THAT in future amendments to the Fee Schedule for Planning, Permitting
and Environmental Review Services, TRCA move toward full cost recovery as soon as
possible, and no later than January 1, 2012.
514
RECORDED VOTE
Maria Augimeri Yea
David Barrow Nay
Bryan Bertie Nay
Laurie Bruce Yea
Gay Cowbourne Yea
Glenn De Baeremaeker Yea
Mike Del Grande Yea
Bill Fisch Nay
Grant Gibson Yea
Pamela Gough Yea
Lois Griffin Yea
Suzan Hall Yea
Colleen Jordan Yea
Bonnie Littley Yea
Linda Pabst Nay
Anthony Perruzza Nay
Richard Whitehead Yea
AMENDMENT #3
Moved by: Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Bryan Bertie
THAT the OMB expedited fee not be removed from the fee schedule.
AMENDMENT #1 WASNOT CARRIED
AMENDMENT #2 WASNOT VOTED ON
AMENDMENT #2, AS AMENDED WASCARRIED
AMENDMENT #3 WASNOT CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WASCARRIED
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff and Building Industry
and Land Development Association (BILD) have conducted consultations on issues of
concern to the development industry regarding TRCA's planning and permitting
administration fees;
AND WHEREAS TRCA staff has established administration fees to provide a service
delivery approach for municipalities and the development industry for a wide range of
applications requiring environmental planning and technical expertise related to heavy
growth demands and timelines;
515
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the 2010-2011 Fee Schedule for Planning,
Permitting and Environmental Assessment Review services dated December 18, 2009 and
incorporating a 2% cost of living increase for each of 2010 and 2011, be approved, to be
effective January 8, 2010;
THAT an Administration Fee policy to guide future process around fee procedures be
approved;
THAT all municipalities within TRCA's jurisdiction and the development industry be so
advised of the updates to TRCA's fee schedule;
THAT staff continue to monitor fee implementation and costs implications of the current
level of service demands for planning, ecology, engineering,
hydrogeology and enforcement;
AND FURTHER THAT in future amendments to the Fee Schedule for Planning, Permitting
and Environmental Review Services, TRCA move toward full cost recovery as soon as
possible, and no later than January 1, 2012.
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #10/07, held on January 4, 2008, Resolution #A287/07 approved a
revised fee schedule for the administration of planning, permitting and environmental
assessment applications. As part of TRCA's ongoing review process to maintain a reasonable
level of service for the division, staff recommended changes to the fee schedule in the total of a
20% overall increase, and modified several application categories to adjust costs to reflect the
scale and complexity of submissions within TRCA's workload. The staff report dated November
28, 2007 incorporated an overview of the trends of applications and technical complexity at that
time. Key adjustments in the schedule included streamlining for site plans, minor works and
changes to site plan, subdivision/condominium applications as well as the addition of a new
Fisheries Timing Window Extension Fee. The most significant adjustment was the inclusion of
an increased fee for Master Environmental Serving Plans (MESP) associated with secondary
and block plan processes for growth areas within the municipalities. This area of review
constituted a key workload demand for TRCA staff that was not covered adequately in the
previous fee schedule and put significant demands on planning and technical teams for
processes that often took several years. With the increasing growth related workload in the
TRCA jurisdiction for MESP’s, the schedule needed to capture appropriate fee coverage.
BILD took exception to the new fee schedule and what they saw as insufficient consultation.
TRCA's consultations with BILD have been underway since early in 2008. It was apparent that
the association representatives were concerned about many areas of the fee schedule and that
clarification was needed around the details of the fee schedules and the process around which
the fee schedule was developed. BILD’s key queries revolved around the following issues:
The 20% increase in fees was not justified - the rationale unclear as to how this increase
was determined and the portion that levy covered versus the private sector fees.
There was a lack of policy and process around the fee schedule preparation with the
building industry, including adequate consultation prior to Authority approval.
The fee schedule needed to address the small builder and the fee pressures associated
with more minor applications.
516
The Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) fee for expedited reviews prior to hearings was wholly
rejected by the membership.
More discussion around the MESP fee requirement was needed with guidelines for how this
fee would be applied.
A BILD Working Group was established in 2008, and several working sessions have been
conducted through 2008 and 2009 to build the knowledge base around the rationale for the
proposed fee schedule and address BILD’s areas of concern.
The following areas of clarification and issues were discussed:
Conservation Authority Mandate: legislative roles - Conservation Authorities Act, Planning
Act, Environmental Assessment Act, applicable law - Building Code, Fisheries Act.
Municipalities and TRCA have memoranda of understanding (MOU) or work informally to
provide similar planning advisory services as described in the Conservation Ontario (CO),
Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH)
MOU on Procedures to Address Conservation Authority Delegated Responsibility (2001).
This MOU is incorporated in the 'Draft Policies and Procedures for Conservation Authority
Plan Review and Permitting Activities' currently posted on the Environmental Bill of Rights
(EBR) Registry. A Conservation Authority Liaison Committee (CALC) with representatives
from MNR, MMAH, MEI, Conservation Ontario, select CAs, the development industry (BILD)
and municipal sector, provided input into these policies and procedures.
TRCA provided an overview of how fee schedules are developed and analyzed to determine
modifications (e.g. assess cross-section of types of applications, shifts in levels of work and
types of applications, trends in types of applications/policy regime/technical complexity,
consultation with applicants and municipalities).
Budgeting approach was reviewed for establishing fees for cost recovery (55% to 60% cost
recovery target).
Base service delivery requirements were discussed to achieve a minimum target of $3
million in revenue to reach 55% - 60% cost recovery. Overall development review budget of
$5.5 million (includes planning, permitting, ecology, engineering and other support services
dedicated to planning and permitting function). TRCA is only just maintaining staff review
capacity for 2010, and reduced staffing in 2009 was required to meet budget restraints.
The working group reviewed 20% impact on individual fee charges within TRCA’s schedule
(detailed review of actual cost alteration to all fees was provided).
TRCA agreed to provide a Policy for Fee Development, Cost Recovery and Consultation.
Policy outline was provided and discussed. Fee appeal process included. (Attachment 1).
A cross-jurisdiction comparison was conducted with other conservation authority's (CA) -
Each CA has a different levy funding approach with each regional municipality.
517
Detailed explanation provided of how and when individual fees are applied and potential
cost savings – sliding scale of fee to accommodate range of scales of applications and
complexity, as well as, blended fee approach.
Reviewed the application of new fees for assisting development applicants and streamlining
(e.g. concept review, pre-consultation field assessment, minor works).
The process and costs for comprehensive secondary/block plan reviews was discussed.
(e.g. the need for MESP fee, upcoming workloads, negotiations tied to scoping of work and
municipal process) – A generic base fee has been proposed by TRCA. Each municipality
has differences in process and planning approach. TRCA reviewed issues of negotiated
schedules and milestone approach, with municipal involvement/lead.
TRCA recognizes the need for a transitional approach for MESP processes already in mid
stages.
The current draft plan of subdivision fee includes an additional $100 per lot fee if an
approved MESP is not in place. Base fee and clearance fee apply according to TRCA’s
approved fee schedule at the time of application.
OMB expedited fee – TRCA agreed not to apply due to BILD’s concerns. Reliance will be
placed on complete application and pre-consultation requirements. TRCA staff will
recommend removal from fee schedule in 2010 update.
Fee appeal process – Appeal starts with Director, Planning and Development, transfers to
Chief Administrative Officer, then the Authority. Approval of budgeting process rests with
the Authority in order to incorporate TRCA's specific budgeting needs. The Authority prefers
full cost recovery.
Preliminary discussion about upcoming fee schedule update for 2010-11 undertaken. It is
proposed that the fee schedule will remain unchanged for 2010 and 2011 except for the
addition of the MESP fee schedule noted above and an inflationary adjustment for each
year beginning with 2% for 2010. Additional Enforcement Violation fee changes were
approved in late 2009 by direction of the Authority.
BILD working committee made helpful recommendations to notes within the schedule to
assist with clarity of fee structure and its implementation for the broader membership.
The new policy statement in Attachment 1 outlines the procedural guidelines for developing
TRCA's fee structure in the future, and conducting a consultative approach with BILD on a
go-forward basis.
518
Trends in Workload and Service Delivery Demand
During 2008 and 2009, TRCA's fee schedule was in place and was implemented without
complications with the exception of the MESP fee requirement. Although TRCA's real estate
inquiries dropped by 50%, the planning applications remained steady in volume and
complexity for the last two years. Construction permits increased by 10% in 2008 and held
through 2009 with the strong volume of construction and new infrastructure applications. Fast–
tracking requirements for new infrastructure and transportation projects has also put pressures
on the staffing capacity. Customized fee-for-service agreements are being negotiated on
several major assignments including such projects as the TTC (Toronto Transit Commission)
subway projects.
The urgent workload and fee pressures to maintain staffing capabilities focus on the need to
address the Secondary/Block planning requirements with 13 current MESP’s either in
mid-process or just being initiated. In addition, the Seaton New Town planning (CPCP)
requires the equivalent of an additional 15 sites for MESP review.
Although the technical requirements are similar, the planning process around each
Secondary/Block Plan can be somewhat different in various municipalities – most take several
years of iterative review process between the proponent, the municipality and TRCA. TRCA’s
fee is still considerably less than what municipalities are charging the development industry for
secondary and block plan processes and TRCA's involvement is integral. This work provides a
critical environmental framework for any new development footprint, determines impacts on the
existing and adjacent landscapes systems, and must be completed as a foundation for land
use and servicing decisions at the project outset.
Considerable BILD working session time was spent discussing the various municipal
processes, technical requirements and the variables that affect MESP costing of efforts. As this
MESP review is a growing demand on TRCA staff resources and a key component of each
municipality’s growth initiative, we need to establish a working resolution of these fees urgently
for 2010 and 2011 budget realization.
Attachment 2 outlines BILD’s areas of concern. These concerns primarily focus on the need for
a 2% cost of living increase to TRCA's fee base, and debate over the MESP fee structure. TRCA
staff has agreed to remove the OMB expedited fee from the new 2010 fee schedule, and staff
will rely on the mechanisms for a “complete application” requirement to address lack of
technical support/input for OMB hearings related to TRCA's planning responsibilities.
The recommended fee schedule for the administration of Planning, Permitting and
Environmental Assessment Services for 2010-2011 is outlined in Attachment 3. The schedule
includes the 2% increase in all fees. All categories of fees remain the same with the exception
of the removal of the OMB expedited fee and proposed guidelines for MESP implementation.
Additional notes have been incorporated into the schedule to assist proponents, as advised by
BILD. A potential requirement for peer review of complex geotechnical and shoreline works has
also been added for certain applications.
Following lengthy discussions around the MESP fee implementation, TRCA staff recommend
the following new guidelines for MESP implementation:
519
MESP Fee Guidelines for Implementation
The 2008 Fee Schedule sets a generic cost across the jurisdiction as follows:
Proposals 25ha or less$ 7,000 Base Fee
Proposals greater than 25ha$14,000 Base fee
An additional charge of $450 per hectare (gross) is applied to each application inclusive
of natural systems.
The TRCA fee assumes an average 2 year timeframe for MESP completion. TRCA reserves the
right to re-evaluate the MESP fee status after a two year process.
A Terms of Reference for the MESP work tasks must be prepared and agreed to by all parties –
the municipality, TRCA and the proponent.
As discussed with BILD, TRCA's 2010 fee schedule includes the following MESP milestone
payment structure:
MESP PHASE OF WORKPAYABLE
1. Preliminary Initiation (at Project start-up)
(Scoping of MESP/Terms of Reference Initiation)Base Fee applies
2. Terms of Reference completion/MESP Initiation 50% payable
(Includes existing conditions report/field work
First MESP Submission/Review)
3. Prior to First Submission Comments20 % payable
4. Prior to issuance of final MESP approval by TRCA30% payable
(Maximum 3 review submissions)
All official plan amendment, zoning and draft plans of subdivision fee requirements that evolve
out of the Secondary/Block planning and MESP process apply separately as per TRCA's
approved fee schedule at the time of submission. No additional per lot charges will apply on
draft plans if a MESP is completed, approved and paid for.
Plans of subdivision that have not been studied under the MESP process, will be charged an
additional fee of $100 per lot, over and above the subdivision base and clearance fees (see
schedule).
On occasion, MESP fee requirements may be scoped to the type of municipal process and
scheduling parameters (e.g. fast-tracked, updates and transitional files, reduced scope of
work).
Construction permits for works under TRCA's provincial regulation are charged separately at
the time of detailed design and construction of draft plan components (such as stormwater
management facilities, road/bridge crossings, pipe boring and drilling works, stream channel
works, etc).
520
CONCLUSIONS
Budget Demands and Cost Recovery
In order to maintain TRCA's current staff capacity for 2010-2011, TRCA will be relying heavily on
a modest increase for cost-of-living of 2% on all development fees. Based on TRCA's $3 million
revenue target for TRCA's whole development review function, this is a potential increase of
approximately $60,000, at the current volume level (no cost of living increase was provided in
2009). TRCA will need to rely on fee requests for MESP studies and specialized asks for large
scale infrastructure projects to cover the increased workload demands and achieve TRCA's
cost recovery target of 55%-60% of the overall development review budget.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The BILD working sessions have served as a meaningful forum for discussion about the
rationale for fee development, trends in development review submissions and next stages of
growth, communications to the building industry, and fee affordability.
Staff will inform TRCA's municipal partners of the revised fee schedule, and will work with
the BILD Working Group to inform the membership of the minor costs changes and
achievements from the lengthy negotiations.
TRCA staff will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the fee schedule and guidelines and
will continue to work in alignment with the new policy/guideline for fees administration and
consult with BILD about the progress in the next two year period.
Although most municipalities within the Toronto region are aware of requirements for MESP
type of subwatershed plans, inclusive of Credit Valley Conservation’s jurisdiction, TRCA
staff will need to work with municipalities and proponents to set clear, integrated planning
and technical review processes that progress in a timely manner with appropriate project
management for all parties. Further dialogue is needed with municipal partners to achieve
an effective process for this work requirement. A heavy onus for clear, agreed Terms of
Reference and consulting excellence is also required on these important community
projects.
Report prepared by: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214
Emails: cwoodland@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Carolyn Woodland, extension 5214
Emails: cwoodland@trca.on.ca
Date: December 15, 2009
Attachments: 5
521
Attachment 1
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
Planning, Permitting and Environmental Assessment Fees Policy/Guideline 2009
A provincial Omnibus Bill was passed in January 1996 which empowered conservation
authorities (CA) to collect fees for services approved by the Minister of Natural Resources
(MNR). Conservation authorities are entitled to set rates, charge and collect fees for services
rendered. The document entitled Policies and Procedures for the Charging of Conservation
Authority Fees (June 1997, updated March 1999), included in the MNR Procedural Manual sets
guidelines for fee collection. The document states that CA fee structures should be designed to
recover, but not exceed, the costs associated with administering and delivering the services on
a program basis. The manual also states that setting fees are dependent on the complexity of
applications and the level of effort required to administer the application.
The following guidelines form the foundation of a policy for the administration and preparation
of fee schedules for TRCA:
Administration of Fees
Administration of Fees for Planning, Permitting and Environmental Assessment services 1.
is under management of the Planning and Development Division of TRCA.
General inquiries and negotiation of fees will be directed through area manager and 2.
Director, Planning and Development on issues of interpretation and scoping of work
requirements.
Technical requirements and engineering/ecological terms of reference will be guided by 3.
and approved by the managers and/or Director, Ecology.
The fee schedule is revised and updated every two years.4.
Fee adjustments will be recommended by the Director, Planning and Development to 5.
Directors Committee as part of the annual budgeting process, and will be submitted to
the Authority for approval.
Methodology for Calculating Fees and Increases
Reporting on the administration of fees and consultation will include analysis of the following
issues and data, where relevant:
Analysis of trends in workload changes, shifts in market and types of applications.
Consultation with developers/municipalities about work effort, new planning/legislative
requirements and streamlining.
General overview of status of cost recovery.
Statistics of numbers of applications and annual changes, where required.
Level of service/review turn-around timing.
Areas of improvement of level of service/staffing demands.
Cost cutting measures as required.
Identification of specific/specialized municipal requirements e.g. MESP’s.
Status of OMB, Mining and Lands appeals – trends in legal costs (no detailed backup of
staff time allocations, and file costs will be included).
522
Cost Recovery
TRCA administers its fee program to achieve a 55% to 60% cost recovery to date for the plan
review function. TRCA will work toward full cost recovery as demand requires and
municipalities direct over time.
Consultation With Development Industry and Municipal Partners
TRCA will consult every two years as proposed fees, and supporting analysis, are 1.
prepared prior to going to the Authority for approval.
TRCA will need to determine its technical requirements and capabilities for new 2.
planning assignments and consult with involved landowners and municipalities about
fee implications.
No guarantees are provided for requested cost adjustments in the consultation process. 3.
Fees are necessary to finance TRCA’s plan review function in the absence of other
provincial or municipal funding.
Appeal Process for Fees
Any dispute about fee calculation, can be appealed through the Budget/Audit Advisory Board
and/or the Authority. Delegation format with justification of appeal request is recommended.
523
Attachment 2
524
525
526
527
Attachment 3
TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For
Planning Services
Effective January 8, 2010
APPLICATION TYPE APPLICATION FEE CLEARANCE FEE
Screening letter
(Refer to Note #9)
$77 N/A
Concept Development/Property Enquiry
(Refer to Note #10)
*minor$245
*major$5,100
with one site visit$350
N/A
N/A
N/A
Variances $350 Refer to Note #5
Consent/Severance/Land Division
(Refer to Note #3)
*minor$705
*major$1,690
N/A
$740
Single Residential Site Plan
(Refer to Note #3)
*minor$490
*major$2,855
N/A
$615
Site Plan
(Refer to Note #3)
*minor$1,070
*intermediate$4,080
*major
- 25ha or less$9,755
- greater than 25ha$14,075
N/A
$1,020
$2,145
$2,145
Official Plan Amendment (OPA)
(Refer to Note #3)
*minor$1,070
*major$4,235
N/A
$1,835
Zoning By-law Amendment/
Rezoning (ZBA/RZ)
(Refer to Note #3)
*minor$1,070
*major$4,235
N/A
$2,145
Multi-Unit Building Application (Rental,
Condominium, mixed use)
*minor
- 5ha or less$10,610
*major
- 25ha or less$21,115
- greater than 25ha$28,150
$3,520
$7,750
$7,750
Draft Plan of Subdivision
(Refer to Note #3)
*minor
- 5ha or less$10,610 (base fee)
*major
- 25ha or less$21,115
- greater than 25ha$28,150 (base fee)
Subdivisions without prior
comprehensive MESP review will be
charged an additional $100 per lot
$3,520
$7,750
$7,750
Golf Courses or Aggregate Pits - 25ha or less$7,140
- greater than 25ha$14,280
N/A
N/A
Block and Tertiary Plans and Master
Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP)
(Refer to MESP Fee Guidelines for Implementation)
- 25ha or less$7,000 (base fee)
- greater than 25ha$14,000 (base fee)
Additional charge of $450 per hectare
for comprehensive MESP
N/A
N/A
528
TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For
Planning Services
Effective January 8, 2010
OTHER APPLICABLE FEES
Description Fee
Pre-consultation meeting No charge
Pre-consultation technical team site visit
(Refer to Note #10)
$2550
Additional Site Visit Charges
(First site review is allowed as part of processing. Multiple field
assessments, stakings and negotiations are charged separately.)
(Refer to Note #10)
Up to 1/2 day$615
Up to 1 day$1,225
including travel time
Additional Clearance fee for Subdivision Phases $1,530
* Applicant Driven Formal Modification $1,020
Re-submission due to *incomplete submissions $3,060
All applications located in Special Policy Area (SPA) or
Flood Vulnerable Area will be charged a 25% premium on the
applicable fee
*See Definitions
Notes
The application fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the municipality. The final 1.
clearance fee will be billed directly by the TRCA and paid prior to final clearance of an application. All
payments must be made within 30 days of TRCA notification in writing. Interest will be charged and
accumulated beyond 30 days.
Re-submission fees will be billed directly by the TRCA and must be paid prior to final clearance of an 2.
application.
Only one set of fees apply when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. a 3.
subdivision/OPA/ZBA). The highest rate of fees applies if review at the same time.
The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees or adjust fees should the review require a 4.
substantially greater level of effort or development application scenarios not captured in the schedule.
Custom fees will be negotiated for fast-tracked or unique circumstances for large scale/complex
review efforts. Peer reviews may also be required for shoreline works, geotechnical and specialized
modelling, and may be charged to the applicant. TRCA reserves the right to assess fee requirements
after one year of processing planning applications. Additional fees can be charged post one year and
unreasonable delays.
Where a site visit and/or extended review is required for a Variance application, a clearance fee of 5.
$100 is applicable.
Subdivisions that have several phases, will be charged a separate clearance fee of $1,530 at the time 6.
of clearing each phase.
All application fees (except Concept Development) include one initial site visit.7.
TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees to reflect requirements under Bill 51 for either planning or 8.
regulatory legislation.
Generally, this fee does not apply to major developments.9.
This is not a mandatory fee. This a guidance tool at the request of the applicant.10.
529
TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For
Planning Services
Effective January 8, 2010
MESP Fee Guidelines for Implementation
The 2008 Fee Schedule sets a generic cost across the jurisdiction as follows:
Proposals 25ha or less$ 7,000 Base Fee
Proposals greater than 25ha$14,000 Base fee
An additional charge of $450 per hectare (gross) is applied to each application inclusive
of natural systems.
The TRCA fee assumes an average 2 year timeframe for MESP completion. TRCA reserves the
right to re-evaluate the MESP fee status after a two year process.
A Terms of Reference for the MESP work tasks must be prepared and agreed to by all parties –
the municipality, TRCA and the proponent.
.
TRCA's 2010 fee schedule includes the following MESP milestone payment structure:
MESP PHASE OF WORK PAYABLE
1. Preliminary Initiation (at Project start-up)
(Scoping of MESP/Terms of Reference Initiation)Base Fee applies
2. Terms of Reference completion/MESP Initiation 50% payable
(Includes existing conditions report/field work
First MESP Submission/Review)
3. Prior to First Submission Comments20% payable
4. Prior to issuance of final MESP approval by TRCA30% payable
(Maximum 3 review submissions)
All official plan amendment, zoning and draft plans of subdivision fee requirements that evolve
out of the Secondary/Block planning and MESP process apply separately as per TRCA's
approved fee schedule at the time of submission. No additional per lot charges will apply on
draft plans if a MESP is completed, approved and paid for.
Plans of subdivision that have not been studied under the MESP process, will be charged an
additional fee of $100 per lot, over and above the subdivision base and clearance fees (see
schedule).
On occasion, MESP fee requirements may be scoped to the type of municipal process and
scheduling parameters (e.g. fast-tracked, updates and transitional files, reduced scope of
work).
Construction permits for works under TRCA's provincial regulation are charged separately at
the time of detailed design and construction of draft plan components (such as stormwater
management facilities, road/bridge crossings, pipe boring and drilling works, stream channel
works, etc).
530
TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule For
Planning Services
Effective January 8, 2010
Definitions
Minor - An application is determined to be "minor" where no technical studies are required, or only a
scoped Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required.
Minor Subdivision - A subdivision application is determined to be "minor" where no technical studies, or
only a scoped Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required and where the site is 5ha or less.
Intermediate - Non-residential site plans of a mid-scale requiring technical studies for estate residential
and commercial/industrial site plans.
Major - An application is determined to be "major" where technical studies beyond a scoped
Environmental Impact Statement (such as Stormwater Management or Geotechnical) are required..
Incomplete Submissions - A submission for review is deemed to be "incomplete " where TRCA has
provided a checklist of requirements, and the application has not met all requirements.
Applicant driven formal modification - A fee for an "applicant driven formal modification " will be charged
where plans are submitted for review after the application has received draft plan approval from the
municipality.
531
Attachment 4
TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for
Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to
Shorelines and Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166/06)
Effective January 8, 2010
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
PERMIT APPLICATION
FEE
Works on Personal Residential Property *minor $350
*major $715
Municipal Projects:
Regional/Local; NO EA required
Emergency Works
$1,060
$3,470
Utilities
Single residential
Development project based
$1,020
$2,805
Projects on Subdivision Lands, Commercial, Industrial and Institutional
Properties, Resource-based Recreation and Other Projects
Standard Projects Include:
SWM ponds and associated outfalls
Other outfalls
Road Crossings
Grading
In-stream Works
Major Projects:
New Road Crossings
Natural Channel Modifications
Minor Improvements
Red Line Revisions by TRCA
$3,940 per project
$5,915 per project
$2,110 per project
$500
All applications located in a SPA (Special Policy Area) or Flood
Vulnerable Area will require an additional 25% on standard fee
Permission for Minor Works - Letter of Approval
(see qualification criteria, as approved June 9, 2006)
$77; $290 with site visit
Municipal: $2,110
Permit Revisions Residential minor/major:
25% of current fee
Others: 50% of current fee
Permit Re-Issuance for Ontario Regulation 158 (1 time only)
Permit Re-Issuance for Ontario Regulation 166/06 (1 time only)
50% of current fee
50% of current fee
No permit required/regulatory and fisheries review & advice only $615
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
PROPERTY INFORMATION
FEE
Solicitor Realtor/Property Inquiry $245
*See Definitions
532
TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for
Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to
Shorelines and Watercourses (Ontario Regulation 166/06
IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES
Effective January 8, 2010
Notes:
1.The permit fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the TRCA. In the event that the
permit fee is not paid at the time of filing an application, fees must be paid prior to issuing a permit.
2.The TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees should the review require a substantially
greater level of effort. Peer reviews may also be required for shoreline works, geotechnical, and
specialized modelling and may be charged to the applicant.
3.All permits are issued for two years.
4.Ontario Regulation 158 was revoked with the approval of Ontario Regulation 166/06. Any request for
an extension for a permit under Ontario Regulation 158 not granted before May 8, 2006, will be
considered under Ontario Regulation 166/06. One permit re-issuance extending the permit approval
for a period of two years will be granted before the works are considered new works. Such requests
will be assessed in accordance with any new updated technical hazard information. Extensions will
not be required for those works not located within an area regulated under the new regulation.
5.There are no extensions for permits issued under Ontario Regulation 166/06. On a one-time basis,
and upon notification 60 days prior to the expiration of an Ontario Regulation 166/06 permit,
applicants may apply for re-issuance of a new permit for the original approved works, before the
works are considered new. Such requests will be assessed in accordance with any new updated
technical hazard information and the current policies in place. There is no guarantee of an
automatic approval.
6.TRCA reserves the right to adjust fees related to regulatory legislation changes or updates.
Definitions
Personal Residential Property
Minor - Applications on a personal residential property determined to be "minor" include ancillary
structures such as decks, sheds, garages and pools; minor additions (less than 50% of the original
ground floor area); and the placement of less than 30 cubic metres of fill.
Major - Applications on a personal residential property determined to be "major" include major additions
(greater than 50% of the original ground floor area), new structures or buildings; all works in the
floodplain; and the placement of 30 cubic metres or more of fill.
533
Attachment 5
TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for
Environmental Assessment and Regulatory Review Services
Effective January 8, 2010
APPLICATION TYPE APPLICATION FEE
ONTARIO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ACT APPLICATIONS OR APPLICATIONS MADE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH UTILITY BOARD ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS
Environmental Assessment Review
Master Plan $10,200 - minor
$25,500 - major
(subject to negotiation)
Individual EA $25,500
(subject to negotiation)
Class EA - Schedule/Category A
- EA pre-approved
- Ont. Reg. 166/06 Permit may be required
n/a
(see below)
Class EA - Schedule/Category B $5,100
Class EA - Schedule/Category C $10,200
EA Addendum Reports $1,835
EA Property Screening or Inquiry $245
Detailed Design Review
Detailed Design $1,835
Environmental Management Plan $1,835
Regulatory Review
Ont. Reg. 166/06 Permit Application
- Class EA - Schedule/Category A (or equivalent)$1,060
Ont. Reg. 166/06 Permit Application
- Individual or Class EA - Schedule/Category B & C $2,450
Revision to Ont. Reg. 166/06 Permit 25% of current fee-minor change
50% of current fee-major change
Section 35 of the Fisheries Act (no permit required)$615
Fish Timing Window Extension $5,100
Permission for Routine Infrastructure Works - Letter of Approval $305 plans only
$615
technical reports or site visit
Emergency Works $3,470
Other
Additional Site Visit Charges
First site review is allowed as part of processing
up to ½ day $615
up to 1 day $1,225
534
TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for
Environmental Assessment and Permitting Services
IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES
Effective January 8, 2010
NOTES
1.The application fee will be paid at the time of filing an application to the TRCA. Applications will
not be processed until fees are received.
2.Only one set of fees apply when processing and reviewing a combined application (e.g. an EA
Property Screening or Inquiry or an Ontario Regulation 166/06 Permit Application). The highest
rate of fees applies.
3.TRCA reserves the right to request additional fees should the review require a substantially greater
level of effort (e.g., Environmental Management Plan Review). Peer reviews may also be required
for shoreline works, geotechnical and specialized modelling and may be charged to the applicant.
4.All application fees (except EA Property Screening or Inquiry) include one initial site visit.
5.Specific Municipal Service Delivery Agreements take precedent over the fee schedule.
6.For the Class Environmental Assessment Act Applications, the schedules or categories specific to
the respective class EA document or environmental assessment review procedures of utility
boards or commissions, including Enbridge, Consumers Gas or Bell Canada, will be applied.
7.Infrastructure Maintenance Minor Works Application review is subject to the respective TRCA
procedure.
8.Emergency Works Application review is subject to the respective TRCA procedure.
9.In accordance with the Crown Agency Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. 48, s.1, and the Conservation
Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. 27 the following Crown corporations or agencies are exempt from
the Conservation Authorities Act:
•Go Transit
•Hydro One
•Ministry of Transportation
•Ontario Realty Corporation
•Ministry of Natural Resources
•Greater Toronto Airports Authority, and
•Downsview Park
As such, these proponents are exempt from review fees and exempt from the TRCA regulatory
approval process (i.e., permits in accordance with Ontario Regulation166/06 are not required).
However, in circumstances where the review is considered major, TRCA can negotiate funding to
compensate for its review time. These proponents may not be exempt from approvals under the
Fisheries Act or the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act and are responsible for obtaining the
appropriate approvals independent of TRCA. In accordance with the Ontario Environmental
Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. E.18, s.4 these proponents are required to consult with TRCA
throughout the EA process.
10.The following corporations are not exempt from the Conservation Authorities Act:
•Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC)
•CN Rail, and
•CP Rail
535
As such, these proponents are not exempt from review fees or the TRCA regulatory approval
process (i.e., permits in accordance with OR 166/06 are required). In accordance with agreements
between TRCA and Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Ministry of Natural Resources, TRCA
will also conduct reviews under the Fisheries Act or the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act. In
accordance with the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, C.E.18, s.4 these
proponents are required to consult with TRCA throughout the EA process.
11.TRCA has extensive environmental and cultural data that is available for use by the proponent,
subject to the waiver of a legal disclaimer and the provision of user fees. Where there are data
sharing agreements in place, municipalities, agencies and Crown corporations or agencies are
exempt from these fees and the data will be provided free of charge. For all others, an application
form for the purchase of such data will be forwarded to the proponent for use at their discretion.
_________________________________________
536
RES.#A233/09 -PETTICOAT CREEK CONSERVATION AREA
Aquatic Facility Redevelopment. Authorization for staff to initiate
redevelopment of the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool.
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Aquatic Facility Redevelopment project be
approved subject to the following terms and conditions:
project description as set out in the communication dated December 16, 2009;
project funding not to exceed $3 million as set out in the communication dated
December 16, 2009;
staff continue to seek outside sources of funds, including the City of Pickering, for the
portion of costs not covered by federal/provincial funding;
staff to report to the Executive Committee on progress of the project at appropriate
intervals;
THAT in accordance with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA)
Purchasing Policy, staff be directed to:
complete final design and specifications based on proposals from selected, qualified
consultants;
subject to completion of final design and specifications, proceed with construction;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary actions
to implement the project including obtaining all necessary approvals and signing and
execution of documents.
AMENDMENT #1
Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker
Seconded by: Mike Del Grande
THAT the following be inserted after the second paragraph of the main motion:
THAT the front gate fee for adults be increased in 2011 to $8.00;
AMENDMENT #2
RES.#A234/09
Moved by: Colleen Jordan
Seconded by: Bonnie Littley
THAT the following be inserted after the second paragraph of the main motion:
THAT any changes in front gate fees for 2011 be referred back to staff;
537
AMENDMENT #3
Moved by: Bill Fisch
Seconded by: Linda Pabst
THAT the following be inserted as the last bullet point in the first paragraph:
approval of $1 million in funding from the City of Pickering;
RECORDED VOTE
Maria Augimeri Yea
David Barrow Yea
Bryan Bertie Nay
Laurie Bruce Nay
Gay Cowbourne Nay
Glenn De BaeremaekerNay
Mike Del Grande Yea
Bill Fisch Yea
Pamela Gough Nay
Lois Griffin Nay
Suzan Hall Nay
Colleen Jordan Nay
Bonnie Littley Nay
Linda Pabst Yea
Anthony Perruzza Yea
Richard WhiteheadNay
AMENDMENT #1 WASNOT VOTED ON
AMENDMENT #2 WASCARRIED
AMENDMENT #3 WASNOT CARRIED
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WASCARRIED
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
THAT the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Aquatic Facility Redevelopment project be
approved subject to the following terms and conditions:
project description as set out in the communication dated December 16, 2009;
project funding not to exceed $3 million as set out in the communication dated
December 16, 2009;
staff continue to seek outside sources of funds, including the City of Pickering, for the
portion of costs not covered by federal/provincial funding;
staff to report to the Executive Committee on progress of the project at appropriate
intervals;
538
THAT in accordance with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA)
Purchasing Policy, staff be directed to:
complete final design and specifications based on proposals from selected, qualified
consultants;
subject to completion of final design and specifications, proceed with construction;
THAT any changes in front gate fees for 2011 be referred back to staff;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary actions
to implement the project including obtaining all necessary approvals and signing and
execution of documents.
BACKGROUND
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area (PCCA) is approximately 70 hectares of land located at the
mouth of Petticoat Creek on the north shore of Lake Ontario. It is located in the City of
Pickering, in the Regional Municipality of Durham, at the south end of Whites Road.
PCCA is an active conservation park consisting of picnic areas, numerous trails and public
washrooms and other various amenities, providing a variety of recreational opportunities to
local, regional residents and various tourists. The primary feature of the park is a 1,300 person
capacity swimming pool, the largest outdoor swimming pool of its kind in Ontario.
Constructed in 1974 as a component of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s
Waterfront Plan, Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool is a 0.6 ha Class B Modified
dish-shaped swimming pool.
Since its opening in 1975, Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool has experienced numerous
problems related to compaction, density and porosity qualities resulting in air voids in the
asphaltic surface that creates a high permeability factor. This permeability has resulted in
saturation of the substrate, which has caused significant heaving and breaking of return pipes
due to frost damage. Though some deficiencies have been remedied through the installation of
a liner, persistent problems remain with heaving and cracking of the asphalt apron/deck around
the perimeter of the pool. Damage has also been encountered in localized areas around the
water return jets, which has contributed to breaks of water return lines. As a remedy, the broken
return lines were simply capped, reducing the number of jets from the original 80 to the current
configuration of 66. The result of this maintenance work has reduced the rate of water flow and
turnover times in the process.
The mechanical infrastructure of the pool systems has continued to function effectively
throughout the duration of the operating period, though signs of age and wear have become
evident on the filter tank, localized rusting and cracking of the filter elements. In 2003, the filter
bags were replaced, which improved the filter capacity of the system by eliminating voids large
enough to undermine the filtration integrity.
The vinyl liner that was installed in 1994 has exceeded its 10 year life expectancy and the
subsequent deterioration of the liner has increased over the last number of years. It is
anticipated that the liner will experience complete failure over the short term.
539
Currently, PCCA pool requires significant annual capital investment to achieve minimum
operating standards. Staff continues to monitor considerable deterioration of vital pool
components.
As a result of such significant repairs and investment required for ongoing Petticoat pool
operations, TRCA staff applied for both provincial and federal funding in order to replace the
existing pool with a new aquatic facility.
Status of Progress
In May of 2009, the Canada RInC and Ontario REC programs announced that government
funding was available for various recreational infrastructure projects. Through the Canada RInC
(Recreational Infrastructure Canada) and Ontario REC (Recreation) programs, the governments
of Canada and Ontario were willing to support Ontario's communities and create jobs through
upgrades and improvements to recreational infrastructure. The governments of Canada and
Ontario would fund up to one third each of a project's total eligible cost up to a maximum of $1
million per project from each government agency.
TRCA staff prepared and submitted funding proposal applications for the following work to be
completed at Petticoat Creek Conservation Area:
demolition of existing pool, plumbing and selected components of the mechanical
infrastructure;
re-grading and earth work;
design and installation of a new aquatic facility, plumbing and mechanical infrastructure;
concrete works, including pool shell, splash pad and decking;
utilization of green technologies;
renovations to existing washroom, change room and staff facilities; and
various soft and hard landscaping.
The application requested $3 million, two thirds of the cost provided by Canada RInC and
Ontario REC funding, with TRCA required to secure the remaining $1 million. On July 7, 2009
the Canada RInC and Ontario REC Program released an official list of all projects approved for
funding. Redevelopment of Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool was approved for total
amount of funding requested. The funding arrangement include aggressive deadlines as grant
conditions require the project to be completed by March 31, 2011.
Subsequently, Resolution #A121/09 for the redevelopment of Petticoat Creek Conservation
Area pool was approved at Authority Meeting #6/09, held on July 24, 2009, as follows:
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to undertake
the redevelopment of Petticoat Creek Conservation Area pool through the federal
Recreational Infrastructure Canada (RInC) Program in Ontario and Ontario Recreation
(REC) Program;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report to the Authority for additional approvals as
required.
540
In addition to Resolution #A121/09, Authority Members also requested an update from staff in
September on securement of funding through partnerships for the Petticoat Creek Aquatic
Facility Redevelopment project.
Following the funding announcement by Canada RInC and Ontario REC, TRCA staff explored
the opportunity of obtaining private funding for the project. However, the grant conditions
stipulate that should the facility be sold, leased and/or encumbered within ten years of its
completion, the recipient must repay a proportionate amount of the grant money. Staff,
therefore, began to focus on exploring public funding opportunities.
Although TRCA staff explored the possibility of obtaining the required funding from Durham
Region, the Region's policies for funding of conservation authorities do not include recreation
or parks infrastructure and facilities. Also, approved Regional Council 2010 funding guidelines
for capital funding of conservation authorities provided that there be no increase over 2009.
In August of 2009, staff commenced funding negotiations with the City of Pickering for the
remaining required project funds of $1 million. City of Pickering senior staff was very receptive
to providing the required funds for project implementation. Such funds would be provided in
exchange for a land lease agreement within the footprint of Petticoat Creek Conservation Area
for an indoor soccer facility and an adjacent playing field. Following five months of negotiations
and several delays in bringing the partnership funding proposal before City of Pickering
Council, it has been brought to TRCA's attention that the probability of receiving the required
funds has greatly diminished due to the City of Pickering's 2010 budget challenges. As a result,
the earliest date that the City of Pickering Executive Committee may vote on the pool funding
decision is February of 2010 with final budget approval in March 2010.
According to the funding agreements with Canada RInC and Ontario REC, the project start date
is September 1, 2009, with a maximum two month grace period making the latest start date
November 1, 2009. In addition, the agreement stresses 50% project completion by March 31,
2010. Although TRCA staff has provided a written explanation regarding the ongoing project
delays and is in the process of receiving approvals to complete the majority of the project
between March 31, 2010 and March 31, 2011, any further time delay will compromise the
funding agreement and jeopardized the available $2 million grant.
RATIONALE
It is the intention of TRCA to draw additional users to Petticoat Creek Conservation Area in
order to expand and diversify the client base though an aquatic entertainment facility that will
boast a strong civic function while delivering both economic and social benefits to the
community and the Greater Toronto Area. The existing infrastructure and park features will be
enhanced to create an ambiance in keeping with the importance of the existing site and
peripheral property. From a functional perspective, the complex will include amenities to
adequately meet the needs and expectations of the identified target market.
The key design concept of the new facility is to build a sustainable aquatic facility that focuses
on energy and water conservation, education and accessibility. The facility's heated swimming
pool and splash pad would operate independently providing for the possibility of unconstrained
operations during spring and fall (periphery seasons). The following principles will drive the
detailed design of the facility:
541
Water Conservation - water recycling system for splash pad; low flow water conservation
features.
Energy Conservation - use of sustainable technology for pool heating (i.e. geothermal,
wind).
Waste Disposal and Diversion - implementation of organics disposal program and waste
diversion through a public education campaign.
Accessibility - create a fully accessible and barrier-free facility.
Health and Safety - ensure that all building enhancements and new facilities meet current
health and safety regulations.
Expansion of Facility Operating Season - separation of splash pad and swimming pool, as
well as implementation of pool heating system.
Public Education - implement interpretive signage to educate the public regarding water
conservation, energy sustainability and waste diversion.
Preliminary design features of the new aquatic facility include:
Aquatic Playground “splash pad”
traditional, interactive and apparatus style elements;
sensor and/or user activated elements;
vandal resistant;
fully accessible; and
other green technologies where deemed feasible.
Swimming Pool
capacity of approximately 900 patrons;
appropriate design for a variety of user groups;
accommodate individuals of beginner and advanced skill level;
incorporate innovative and unique design features;
provide for an interactive swimming experience;
incorporate both traditional and beach methods of entry;
vandal resistant;
fully accessible;
heated to extend use during periphery seasons; and
other green technologies where deemed feasible.
Mechanical Infrastructure
utilization of existing mechanical infrastructure where feasible;
upgrades to sanitation and filtration systems;
designed to function with minimal staff supervision; and
design elements to accommodate for energy and water conservation measures.
Other Amenities and Landscaping
picnic shelters and naturally shaded seating areas;
sunning decks with cooling misting tubes;
integrated soft and hard landscaping;
interactive signage.
542
Preliminary Construction Budget
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Aquatic Facility Preliminary Budget Estimate
Item Cost Estimate
Site Preparation/ Earthworks/Site Restoration $125,000
Hard Landscaping $325,000
Pool Works $1,500,000
Building Renovations $200,000
Sustainability Design Features $245,000
Design Consulting Fees $225,000
Permitting $30,000
Pool Heating $150,000
Contingency $200,000
TOTAL $3,000,000
Projected Revenue
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Income Statement Comparison
Current 3
Year Budget
Average
Proposed
Budget for
New Facility
Variance Explanation
Park Revenue
Swimming
Day Use
Filming
Snack Bar
($443,124)($484,018)Increase swimming revenue by
10% due to increased number of
operating days resulting from
heated pool and splash pad
Increase front gate fees by $1.50
Wages, Salaries and Benefits $224,145 $184,204 Decrease swimming staff by 35
Utilities $55,760 $52,254 Decrease utility costs by 10%
Contract Services $55,108 $20,108 Eliminate contract services
required for pool repair annually
Materials $44,775 $44,775
Other $54,834 $54,834
Total Revenue (443,124)(484,018)
Total Expenditures $434,622 $356,175
NET ($8,501)($127,842)
543
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Projected 5 Year Income Statement Following
Construction of New Aquatic Facility
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Gross Revenue ($484,018) ($517,899)($554,152)($592,943)($634,449)
Gross Expenditure $356,175 $373,984 $392,683 $412,317 $432,933
Net Income ($127,842)($143,916)($161,469)($180,626)($201,516)
Note: Calculations based on annual 7% revenue and 5% expenditure growth
It is important to note that should Petticoat Creek Conservation Area continue to operate
following closure of the current swimming pool, the conservation area will have an annual net
deficit of $44,000.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Due to the lack of financial commitment by the City of Pickering in regard to providing
$1 million in funding for the project and the tight timeliness at hand, staff proposes to
implement internal funding methods to cover the required remaining 33% of the project costs.
TRCA has sufficient cash flow within its reserves (consisting in part of an insurance claim from
Petticoat Creek pool) to mitigate the need for borrowing the required $1 million and
accumulating further debt. It is proposed that the following payback methods be implemented
to recover the capital costs of this project.
Commencing the 1st full operating season, 50% of the net sales with a minimum of $50,000 will
be paid back to the reserves annually over a maximum of 20 years. In addition to the
aforementioned payback schedule, monies raised from the following fund sourcing methods
will be applied directly to the project costs:
Community fund-raising championed by Councillor Bonnie Littley.
Seeking of corporate sponsorships.
Conservation Foundation fundraising.
Seeking of grants and other funding opportunities.
In the event that the City of Pickering is able to finance in whole or in part, the required $1
million, this money will be used in lieu of TRCA reserve funds.
The remaining $2 million in funding is secured through the Canada RInC and Ontario REC
Program.
The proposed internal project funding model is similar to the one implemented in the financing
of the Restoration Services Centre in 2006. This has proven to be an extremely successful way
to acquire a LEED Platinum sustainable facility that has become a key asset for TRCA. In
addition, the Restoration Services Centre has stayed well ahead of its pay back schedule,
demonstrating that this method of internal financing is advantageous.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
Work to be completed includes:
544
Research and Design Development:
Carry out research to identify any LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) 1.
standards necessary for the design.
Develop architectural detailed design services for the outdoor aquatic playground, 2.
swimming pool, mechanical infrastructure and other amenities.
Approve final design.3.
Prepare working drawings, specifications, contract/construction documents (tender 4.
documentation) and accurate itemized cost breakdown.
Survey and Base Plan Preparation
Carry out topographical survey of the site to obtain accurate base information required for 1.
the design.
Investigate and survey all existing site services, both above and below grade.2.
Investigate, obtain and verify information concerning all utility services necessary for the 3.
design, both public and private, above and below grade.
Facilitate a detailed site inspection.4.
Contract Drawings and Documents
Prepare working drawings, specifications and contract/construction documents (tender 1.
documentation) for issuance.
Budget Development
Develop a detailed operating budget, including appropriate overhead costs, staffing levels, 1.
materials and supplies, utilities and programming for the approved design.
Develop a detailed capital budget, including appropriate contingencies and design fees, for 2.
the construction of the approved design.
Annualize major maintenance that is likely to occur over the first 20 years of operation.3.
Bidding and Tender Review Phase
Review bid submissions and award contract.1.
Building Permit Phase
Liaise with agencies and departments to apply for and obtain approvals for all required 1.
permits from appropriate City of Pickering departments and other authorities with
jurisdiction.
Construction Phase
Complete demolition of existing Petticoat pool. 1.
Complete excavation, grading and earth work.2.
Installation of plumbing and mechanical infrastructure. 3.
Construction Phase
Installation of aquatic playground and swimming pool. 1.
Upgrades to existing washroom, change room, snack bar and other infrastructure. 2.
Concrete works including pool shell and decking. 3.
Integrated soft and hard landscaping. 4.
Interactive signage.5.
545
Report prepared by: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Emails: dedwards@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Derek Edwards, extension 5672
Emails: dedwards@trca.on.ca
Date: December 16, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A235/09 -DON MOUTH NATURALIZATION AND PORT LANDS FLOOD
PROTECTION PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation Delivery Agreement.
Authorization to proceed with Delivery Agreement amendment with
Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation and contract amendment
with AECOM (formerly Gartner Lee Limited).
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:David Barrow
THAT the existing (January 2008) Delivery Agreement with Toronto Waterfront
Revitalization Corporation (TWRC) for the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood
Protection Project Environmental Assessment (DMNP EA) be amended by increasing the
upset limit to $5,985,174;
THAT the existing contract with the consultant team led by AECOM (formerly Gartner Lee
Limited) be amended to increase the upset limit of the contract to $3,212,511, subject to
the execution of the amendment for the existing Delivery Agreement between TWRC and
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for the DMNP Project;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take all necessary actions
to implement the foregoing, including the obtaining of any needed approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #10/07, held on January 4, 2008, Resolution #A282/07 was approved, in
part, as follows:
....THAT staff be authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to enter into a
second Delivery Agreement with TWRC and such other legal agreements as may be
necessary, to an upset limit of $1,959,538, subject to the execution of a second
Contribution Agreement between TWRC and the levels of government, in order to
complete the EA for the DMNP Project;
AND FURTHER THAT staff be authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to
implement the foregoing, including the signing and execution of any documents.
546
In November 2009, TRCA staff was informed that the Province of Ontario had amended the
Contribution Agreement for the DMNP EA, thereby allowing TWRC to proceed with the second
Delivery Agreement amendment with TRCA. Since Authority Meeting #10/07, some of the
budget items have been modified during discussions with TWRC. The new budget breakdown
is as follows:
BUDGET ITEM Current Budget New Budget
AECOM (Formerly Gartner Lee) $1,699,548 $3,212,511
Remaining Project Management Costs
(TRCA)
$844,127 $1,478,363
Contingency $0 $150,000
Lower Don River West Remedial Flood
Protection Project Class EA (Completed in
2005)
$1,294,300 $1,294,300
TOTAL $3,837,975 $5,985,174
Key items of note pertain to the $1,512,963 increase in budget for AECOM, the establishment of a
$150,000.00 project contingency, and an increase in TRCA project management costs of $484,236.
These budget increases were required to address the substantial changes in work required to
integrate the International Design Competition results from 2007 into the DMNP EA.
It is anticipated that the DMNP EA will be formally submitted to the Ministry of Environment in
May 2010.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
TRCA expenses will be billed through the 191-series of accounts assigned to the EA for the Don
Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project and will be funded by TWRC.
Report prepared by: Ken Dion, extension 5230
Emails: kdion@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Ken Dion, extension 5230
Emails: kdion@trca.on.ca
Date: December 18, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A236/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Mimico Waterfront Linear Park, City of Toronto
South Beach Investments Limited, CFN 32444. Acquisition of a partial
taking from a property located at 2335 Lakeshore Boulevard West, City of
Toronto (Etobicoke Community Council Area) required for construction of
the Mimico Waterfront Linear Park.
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:David Barrow
547
THAT a partial taking containing 0.729 hectares (1.802 acres), more or less, consisting of
a rectangular shaped parcel of vacant land, said lands being Part of Water Lot in front of
Lots 378 and 379, Registered Plan 164 Patented to Thomas John Jermyn January 3, 1896
(CLS 48170), designated as Part 3, on a draft reference plan prepared by Marshall
Macklin Monaghan Ontario Limited under their drawing no. 20.00.568-14, City of Toronto,
(Etobicoke Community Council Area), located at the rear of 2335 Lakeshore Boulevard
West, be purchased from South Beach Investments Limited;
THAT the purchase price be $695,000 together with the vendor's reasonable legal costs
and the cost of construction of a fence and gate on the new property line;
THAT Gardiner Roberts, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to complete the
transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to
the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
THAT completion of this transaction is conditional on receiving funding from Toronto
Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC);
THAT the authorized Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) officials be
directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto including the
obtaining of necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents.
AND FURTHER THAT Resolution #A160/05 be amended accordingly.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
The Mimico Waterfront Linear Park stretches from Humber Bay West Park in the east to Norris
Crescent in the west along the Lake Ontario shoreline.
In November of 2003, TRCA signed a Delivery Agreement with TWRC for the Mimico Waterfront
Linear Park project totalling $6.5 million. The Environmental Assessment for the Mimico
Waterfront Linear Park was approved by the Minister of the Environment on August 12, 2004.
On December 12, 2004 Human Resources and Skills Development Canada also approved the
project under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
It was necessary to acquire either land, waterlots or riparian rights from 13 private properties in
this area for the project to proceed.
A primary objective of the preferred concept was to minimize the private lands required from
each property owner. Current fence lines and parking lots were maintained as the northern
boundary of the linear park. A fence will be constructed along the boundary of the linear park.
All property owners will have the opportunity to have a gate giving their tenants direct access to
the park.
In early 2005, TRCA in consultation with TWRC determined that there would not be sufficient
funding available in the project to complete the acquisition and construction of the entire
project. The project was split into two phases. The first phase was from Superior Avenue to
Norris Crescent and the second was from Humber Bay West Park to Superior Avenue. It was
determined that there was sufficient funding in the project to complete the acquisition and
construction of Phase 1 plus the acquisition of property rights from willing owners in Phase 2.
548
At that time TRCA was able to complete the purchase of nine of the remaining private
properties owned by eight different owners. This left four private properties owned by three
different owners to be acquired. Construction of Phase 1 commenced in July of 2006 and was
completed in 2008.
At Authority Meeting #6/05, held on July 22, 2005, confidential Resolution #A160/05, was
approved, in part, as follows:
THAT a partial taking containing 0.7292 hectares (1.8020 acres), more or less, of vacant
land, be acquired from South Beach Investments Limited, said lands being Part of Water
Lot in Front of Lots 378 and 379, Registered Plan 164, Patented to Thomas John Jermyn,
January 3, 1896 (CLS 48170), designated as Part 3, on a draft reference plan prepared
by Marshall Macklin Monaghan Ontario Limited under their drawing no. 20.00.568-14,
City of Toronto, (Etobicoke Community Council Area), located at the rear of 2335
Lakeshore Boulevard West;
THAT the purchase price be $555,340 together with the vendor's reasonable legal costs,
reasonable consultant's fees and the cost of construction of a fence and gate on the new
property line;
THAT Gardiner Roberts, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to complete the
transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to
the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
THAT completion of this transaction is conditional on receiving funding from Toronto
Waterfront Revitalization Corporation;
AND FURTHER THAT the appropriate Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
officials be authorized and directed to execute all necessary documentation required.
Staff recommend that the above portion of Resolution #A160/05 be replaced by the
recommendations provided in this staff report, dated December 18, 2009.
South Beach Investments Limited did not accept TRCA's offer within the specified time and
therefore the transaction was not finalized. The purchase price has been adjusted based on
current appraisal information.
On April 9, 2009, TRCA entered into a Change Notice to the original Delivery Agreement with
TWRC which increased the budget to $18.6 million to allow for the completion of Phase 2 of the
Mimico Waterfront Linear Park.
TRCA staff has had discussions with the owner's solicitor George Wisniewski and staff is
recommending a transaction on the following basis:
a)TRCA will acquire 0.729 hectares (1.802 acres) of the South Beach Investments Limited pr
operty for a purchase price of $695,000;
b)TRCA will pay South Beach Investments Limited's reasonable legal costs;
c)TRCA will construct a fence with one gate along the new property line;
549
d)TRCA will restore any disturbed areas on South Beach Investments Limited's retained lands
caused by the construction;
e)South Beach Investments Limited will retain a restrictive covenant on the property for 21
years less a day that no buildings will be constructed on the property and that its use shall
be restricted to one or more of constructing, using and operating a boardwalk, parkland,
open space, shoreline, erosion works or waterfront park;
f)TRCA providing a letter from the City of Toronto confirming that following the transfer of the
property, the building and all other improvements contained within the South Beach
Investments Limited's remaining lands shall either comply with the current zoning by-laws of
the City of Toronto or shall be considered to be legal nonconforming use.
RATIONALE
The subject property is required for the construction of Phase 2 of the Mimico Waterfront Linear
Park.
TAXES AND MAINTENANCE
This parcel of land will be turned over to the City of Toronto under the terms of the existing
management agreement.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The money for this purchase will be provided by the TWRC in account 205-15.
Report prepared by: Mike Fenning, extension 5223
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223 or Ron Dewell, extension 5245
Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca or rdewell@trca.on.ca
Date: December 18, 2009
Attachments: 1
550
Attachments 1
_________________________________________
551
RES.#A237/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Mimico Waterfront Linear Park, CFN 29644. Acquisition of property
interests required to facilitate the construction of Phase 2 of the Mimico
Waterfront Linear Park on the Lake Ontario shoreline, City of Toronto.
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT confidential item AUTH7.6 - Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010 be
approved;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back when the item is completed and can be made
public.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A238/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
Louise Adele Love, CFN 11077. Purchase of property municipally known
as 447 Albion Road located on the west side of Albion Road, north of
Irwin Road/Arcot Boulevard, City of Toronto (formerly Etobicoke).
(Executive Res.#B176/09)
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT 0.14 hectares (0.34 acres), more or less, consisting of a rectangular shaped parcel
of land, improved with a detached, one storey frame dwelling with attached one car
garage, said land being all of Lot 2, Plan M590, City of Toronto, (formerly in the City of
Etobicoke, Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto), known municipally as 447 Albion Road,
Toronto, be purchased from Louise Adele Love;
THAT the purchase price be $380,000, together with payment of vendor's reasonable legal
costs, with the Vendor and any child of the Vendor, being permitted to occupy the
property for up to one year after closing, subject to payment of realty taxes, utilities and
any and all other costs;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
required free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to
complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred
incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be
paid;
552
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever actions may
be required to give effect thereto including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A239/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Duffins River Watershed
Ronald Glen Hingston, CFN 38555. Acquisition of land located west of
Seventh Concession Road, north of Chalk Lake Road, Township of
Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the "Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010", Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Duffins Creek watershed.
(Executive Res.#B177/09)
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT 10.48 hectares (25.9 acres) more or less, consisting of a rectangular shaped parcel
of vacant land, being Part of Lot 6 Concession 6, designated as Part 1 on Registered Plan
40R-5547, Township of Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham, be purchased from
Ronald Glen Hingston;
THAT the purchase price be $130,000 together with Mr. Hingston’s legal costs to a
maximum of $1,000;
THAT the acquisition by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is
conditional on the availability of all necessary funding;
THAT TRCA receive conveyance of the land required free from encumbrance, subject to
existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers and Solicitors, be instructed to
complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred
incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs and disbursements are to be
paid;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
553
RES.#A240/09 -TORONTO LADIES GOLF COURSE EROSION CONTROL PROJECT
Town of Markham Agreement. Recommends approval of an agreement
to deal with slope stabilization for a section of the valley wall in the Don
River watershed, adjacent to the Toronto Ladies Golf Course in the Town
of Markham, Regional Municipality of York.
(Executive Res.#B178/09)
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT approval be granted to enter into an agreement with the Town of Markham for the
completion of erosion control works in the vicinity of Toronto Ladies Golf Course, Don
River watershed, Regional Municipality of York;
THAT the agreement be subject to availability of funding from the Town of Markham and
any other terms and conditions as may be required by Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA) staff and solictor;
THAT TRCA provide up to $25,000 in funding from the 2010 Region of York erosion
control program budget to aid in the implementation of construction;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action
to implement the agreement including obtaining any needed approvals and the signing
and execution of documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A241/09 -REFORESTATION SEEDLING PROCUREMENT, 2010 - 2016
Award of sole source contract to Somerville Nurseries Inc..
Recommends approval of a sole source contract with Somerville
Nurseries Inc. to supply seedlings for Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority's 2010-2016 planting program.
(Executive Res.#B179/09)
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Glenn De Baeremaeker
THAT the contract for the supply of reforestation seedlings for the 2010-2016 program
years be awarded to Somerville Nurseries Inc. at a total cost not to exceed $125,000 plus
applicable taxes, per program year, it being the sole supplier that can provide the product
which best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications at an
acceptable price;
THAT the contract be on terms and conditions satisfactory to TRCA staff and, as
necessary, solicitor;
554
AND FURTHER THAT authorized staff be directed to take the action necessary to
implement the contract including obtaining necessary approvals and signing and
execution of documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A242/09 - SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Richard Whitehead
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Section II items EX8.1 and EX8.2, contained in Executive Committee Minutes
#10/09, held on December 11, 2009, be received.
Section II items EX8.1 and EX8.2
REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION
AUTHORITY-OWNED LAND
(Executive Res.#B180/09)
ECO-BUSINESS ZONE IMPLEMENTATION
(Executive Res.#B181/09)$
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A243/09 -FLOOD FORECASTING AND WARNING PROGRAM
2009 Annual Report and 2010 Work Plan. Annual update on the status of
the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Flood Forecasting and
Warning Program and highlights of current initiatives.
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
Flood Forecasting and Warning Program 2009 annual report and the 2010 work plan as
they relate to the Provincial Flood Forecasting and Warning Implementation Guidelines be
received.
CARRIED
555
BACKGROUND
TRCA staff continued to work throughout 2009 to achieve the objectives outlined in the 2009
work plan, which was received at Authority Meeting #2/09, held on March 27, 2009. The work
plan was created to allow the program to meet TRCA's obligations under the Provincial Flood
Forecasting and Warning Implementation Guidelines for conservation authorities and the
Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR). These guidelines were based on the GTA Flood Group's
Flood Forecasting and Warning Standards, and were adopted by the Province of Ontario in
August of 2008.
Highlights of the 2009/2010 Work Plan
In 2009, a number of significant goals were realized and are highlighted below:
1.In total, 15 messages were issued in 2009 (as of December 9, 2009) including: 11 High
Water Safety Bulletins, 3 Flood Advisories and 1 Flood Warning. This is slightly lower
than the annual average of 22 messages. Although there were several months that
exceeded normal precipitation amounts, the rain events did not necessarily present
conditions that would lead to riverine flooding (for example, storms of short duration and
high intensity such as summer thunderstorms).
2.In an effort to improve TRCA's abilities to provide a comprehensive, risk-based
emergency management program with respect to flood events, two staff members
achieved certification from Emergency Management Ontario in Exercise Program
Management. Under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act (Ontario
Regulation 380/04), municipalities are required to conduct an emergency exercise each
year. TRCA staff assisted the Region of Durham in their 2009 Exercise: Operation
Weather Woes. In addition to the municipalities within Durham Region, staff also
worked closely with the Town of Markham, City of Toronto and City of Brampton staff in
the development of their emergency response plans and exercises.
3."Floods Happen: are you ready?" was a workshop conducted in 2009 in coordination
with Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) and Lake Simcoe and Region Conservation
Authority (LSRCA). The workshop was geared toward presenting our shared
municipalities with information about our respective flood forecasting and warning
programs and the roles and responsibilities of each agency. The workshop also
provided a forum for feedback from municipal staff involved in "response" to flood
events. The workshop was well received in 2009 and will be continued annually (with
the addition of Conservation Halton and Environment Canada as participants in 2010).
4.As part of the Flood Protection and Remedial Capital Works Strategy project, a pilot
Environmental Assessment (EA) project was initiated in the Rockcliffe Special Policy
Area (Black Creek between Weston Road and Scarlett Road, in the City of Toronto).
The EA study was completed in 2009 (draft report) and will be filed in early 2010 with
recommendations for methods to reduce the risk of flooding within the community. As
the most effective options will also require significant capital funds (e.g., replacement of
the Jane Street bridge), recommendations for incorporating flood remedial works into
future capital projects for road works are presented, along with some options for
reducing the frequency of flooding within the area by implementing smaller scale
projects.
556
5.TRCA owns and operates flood control infrastructure, such as large and small scale
dams, flood control channels and dykes. In 2009 channel inspections were conducted
and a number of maintenance projects were undertaken. Of note is the hydraulic
assessments of the Pickering/Ajax Dyke and York Mills Channel; emergency repair of
the Secord Dam; debris removal at G. Ross Lord Dam and completion of the Operations
and Maintenance manuals for Milne Dam and Stouffville Dam. An analysis of the flood
control infrastructure for input to the TRCA Tangible Capital Asset project was also
completed.
6.The real-time gauging network was expanded with the installation of one new real-time
precipitation gauge at the Don Valley Brick Works and an upgrade of the precipitation
gauge at the Dufferin Reservoir to real-time. Interest from other agencies has been
growing steadily since the launch of the real-time network, and in 2009 TRCA staff
expanded the network to CVC with a real-time pilot project in Cooksville Creek. In
addition, a number of website enhancements have been made which allow for quicker
access to information for flood duty officers, as well as improved accessibility for the
public to information.
The Provincial Flood Forecasting and Warning Implementation Guidelines (August, 2008)
identify four program delivery areas: i) Program Delivery/Administration; ii) Forecasting, iii)
Communications and iv) Flood Operations. A status report detailing works completed in 2009
under each delivery area, along with a work plan for 2010, is outlined in Attachment 1. All
program elements can be categorized under these program delivery areas and the main
elements of the 2010 work plan as they relate to the four program delivery areas are listed
below:
i)Program Delivery/Administration
Baseline knowledge of the watersheds will continue to be expanded through a number
of projects including: the expansion of the NexFlood system to the Don River watershed
and field inventories of flood control structures.
Improvements to TRCA's monitoring network will continue with the addition of two new
real-time precipitation gauges. TRCA is currently monitoring 14 wet weather sampling
stations in partnership with the City of Toronto. Operations and maintenance of 31
existing stream gauges and 33 precipitation gauges will continue through 2010. Quick
and efficient access to the information provided by these gauges will assist flood duty
officers in their decision making process during significant rainfall events.
ii)Forecasting
TRCA staff will continue flood forecasting and warning operations. Flood Duty Officers
will begin to incorporate the use of the NexFlood system into their routine operations to
test the system (for Etobicoke Creek, followed by the Don River watershed, while
maintaining current protocols for assessing flood risk).
557
iii)Communications
The "Floods Happen: are you ready?" flood forecasting and warning workshop for our
member municipalities will be continued on an annual basis in coordination with CVC,
LSRCA and Conservation Halton. In addition, partnerships with Environment Canada
and other agencies will be developed in order to improve messaging to our member
municipalities. One of the goals of 2009, that was not realized due to budget and time
constraints, was to initiate a study to identify options (and preliminary costs) for
improving communication with the public. In 2010, this work will be advanced with an
emphasis on emergency preparedness and public safety.
iv)Flood Operations
Improvements to the Emergency Operations Centre at TRCA's Head Office will continue
as required (e.g. upgrading of computer equipment, stocking of food and water for stay
during extended events, etc.). Training sessions for staff will be conducted at regular
intervals throughout the year to reinforce the technical requirements for flood
forecasting and warning. A training exercise will also be conducted for essential staff
that will focus on an extreme event scenario. Methods for documenting flood events will
be improved with the completion of a Flood Event Documentation Database.
Fortunately, the weather systems of 2009 did not present any extraordinary conditions with
respect to riverine flooding within the Toronto region. Once again, the systems that were in
place for TRCA's forecasting and warning system functioned as expected and staff were able to
confidently carry out their duties during all of the severe weather events. One of the main goals
of the 2010 work plan is to complete a number of previous initiatives (i.e., the Flood Protection
and Remedial Capital Works Strategy and expanding the NexFlood system to other watersheds
within TRCA's jurisdiction, beginning with the Don River watershed which is quick to respond to
rainfall events). Another key goal, which was not achieved in 2009, is the development and
implementation of a public communications strategy.
The need to maintain up-to-date floodline mapping has been identified within the MNR Flood
Forecasting and Warning Guidelines, and is further supported by recommendations in the
recent report by the Expert Panel on Climate Change Adaptation, entitled "Adapting to Climate
Change in Ontario", April 2009. TRCA has one of the most advanced mapping programs in
Ontario, however within TRCA's jurisdiction there are many areas where there have been
significant increases in flows or new information has become available, and subsequently
changes to the floodlines have been identified. A comprehensive program that includes
accurate identification of flood risk, communication with TRCA's municipal partners and
implementation of the Flood Protection Strategy is required to address these issues, and will be
a core focus of our work in 2010.
558
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Funds have been identified in the 2010 Preliminary Operating Budget (account 115-60) for
general program operations. Capital funds for 2010 are identified to undertake any project
activities identified in the 2010 work plan. Special projects relating to the advancement of flood
forecasting & warning program operations, such as public outreach and updates to the
NexFlood system will be undertaken with funds from account 107-02 which is funded by the
City of Toronto, and York, Durham and Peel regions.
Report prepared by: Laurian Farrell, extension 5601
Emails: lfarrell@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Laurian Farrell, extension 5601
Emails: lfarrell@trca.on.ca
Date: November 25, 2009
Attachments: 1
559
Attachment 1
TRCA Flood Forecasting and Warning Program 2009/2010
Section 1: Program Delivery/Administration
To develop and maintain an administrative framework to facilitate and support flood forecasting and warning.
GTA Flood Standard
Component
Work Completed in 2009 Work Proposed for 2010
Develop Baseline Knowledge
of Watershed
Annual field inventory for all flood control facilities
completed
Fluvial and hydraulic assessment of Pickering/Ajax Dyke
completed
Emergency repair of Secord Dam collapsed culvert
York Mills Channel Hydraulic Assessment and
Maintenance Study – Stantec Consulting Ltd
Tours and training conducted for G. Ross Lord Dam and
Claireville Dam
Debris removed at G. Ross Lord Dam
Safety booms installed at Albion Hills Dam
Milne Dam and Stouffville Dam Operations, Maintenance,
and Surveillance Manuals updated
Flood Control Infrastructure component for TRCA
Tangible Capital Asset project completed.
Annual field inventory, assessment, and
prioritization for all flood control facilities to be
carried out
Implementation of phase 1 recommendations
from Pickering/Ajax Dyke fluvial and hydraulic
assessment
Implementation of phase 1 recommendations
from York Mills Channel study
Dam Safety Reviews to be completed for Osler
Dam and Secord Dam
Development of a Flood Control Structure
database
Remove debris and sedimentation from
Stouffville Channel
Set up monitoring program for Claireville Dam
wingwall
Complete hydrogeological study for G. Ross
Lord Dam
Replace G. Ross Lord Dam generator transfer
switch
Drainage system and debris removal from
stilling basin at G. Ross Lord Dam
Establish Monitoring Network Installation of 1 new real-time precipitation gauges at
Brickworks
Upgrade of 1 precipitation gauge to real-time (Dufferin
Reservoir)
Real-time pilot project for Cooksville Creek (CVC)
Real-time website enhancements including improved
layout and design, faster and easier access for flood staff,
improved accessibility for the public, enhanced reporting
(google maps and precip reports), RSS feed, and link to
TRCA corporate site.
Data collected at 64 Low Flow indicator sites
Continued monitoring and maintenance of 31 existing
stream gauges
Continued monitoring and maintenance of 6 weather
stations
Installed, maintained, monitored and retrieved rainfall data
from 33 precipitation stations
Continued monitoring at 10 snow course locations
Installed, maintained, monitored and retrieved water
quantity and quality data from 14 wet weather sampling
stations in partnership with the City of Toronto
Enhancements to Real-time network gauging
website
Continue monitoring of Low Flow indicator
sites
Continue operation and maintenance of 31
existing stream gauges
Continue monitoring and maintenance of 6
weather stations
Continue operation and maintenance of 33
existing precipitation gauges
Continue monitoring at 10 snow course
locations
Continue maintenance and monitoring of 14
wet weather sampling stations in partnership
with the City of Toronto
Upgrade Stouffville Dam precipitation gauge
to four-season gauge.
560
Undertake Yearly Training of
Staff
Training completed by staff included:
Daily Planning Cycle
Dam Tours & Dam Operations
Major Event Operations
Toronto Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
Ice Jam & River Watch Tours
Media Training
Security and Communications
Watershed Response
Exercise (Drill) conducted: Equipment Expectations
Annual Training Modules to be provided in 2010 to
staff as required:
Program Overview1.
Daily Planning Cycle2.
Dam Tours & Dam Operations3.
Major Event Operations4.
Safety Training5.
First Aid Training6.
Toronto Office of Emergency Management 7.
Ice Jam & River Watch Tours8.
River Watch9.
Media Training10.
Security and Communications11.
Watershed Response12.
Real Time Gauging & Website Updates13.
In addition, an emergency operations exercise will be
conducted for all Flood Warning and Essential Staff.
Document Historical Flow
Events
Ongoing operation procedures to document significant
events
File backup system implemented for NexFlood system
The development of an ACCESS based database to
document significant events was initiated in 2009
and placed on hold due to limited resources. This
project will be re-activated in 2010 pending staff
availability. The database will allow for information
to be standardized and consolidated in one
location (includes data from daily operating
procedures, photographs from events, messages,
media articles etc)
Maintain Liaison with
Municipalities and Local
Emergency Response
Groups
“Floods Happen: are you ready?” workshop on flood
forecasting and warning was held for municipal staff in
coordination with Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) and
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation (LSRCA) in spring
2009. The workshop provided our shared municipalities
with information about our respective program operations
Contributed to the planning and execution of a weather
related Emergency Exercise for Durham Region (involving
4 Conservation Authorities, Environment Canada and all
Durham Region municipalities)
Working closely with the Town of Markham on the
development of their Flood Emergency Response Plan
(expected completion in 2010)
Continued interaction with City of Toronto Emergency
Management Office, Strategic Communications and
Toronto Police Service
TRCA hosted a “meet & greet” with Environment Canada
staff from the Weather Office in February 2009
ongoing as needed
continue to work with the GTA Flood Forecasting
and Warning Group and the Provincial Flood
Warning Group to advance the program
Coordinate with TRCA Education Team to train
School Boards on protocols for disseminating
information in Messages
Conduct the 2nd annual “Floods Happen: are you
ready?” workshop for our municipal partners in
coordination with CVC, LSRCA and Halton
Conservation
Identify opportunities to partner with Environment
Canada to disseminate weather related information
to our municipal partners using TRCA’s
communication pathways
Establish strong relationship with Emergency
Management Ontario
561
Maintain Adequate Flood
Plain Mapping and
Hydraulic Model in
Accordance with FDRP
Technical Standards
Etobicoke Creek Hydraulic Update (Draft) completed in
2009
Several areas received updated digital elevation mapping
to facilitate future updates to floodlines (including three
special policy areas within the Humber River watershed,
and select areas of the Mimico Creek, Don River, Highland
Creek, Adams Creek and Rouge River watersheds
Mimico Creek Hydraulic Update to be completed in
Fall 2010
Undertake updates to various mapsheets across
the jurisdiction as required. This is inkeeping with
Recommendation #15 of the report “Adapting to
Climate Change in Ontario, Report of the Expert
Panel on Climate Change Adaptation” by the Expert
Panel on Climate Change Adaptation, Nov 2009
which states:
“• The Ministry of Natural Resources in
collaboration with Conservation Authorities should:
Review existing flood plain mapping and
coordinate completion where gaps exist, and
thereafter conduct a review every five years in
the course of which local floodplain hazard
maps should be updated to take account of
climate change projections to a planning time
horizon of 2050 for the purpose of informing
Official Plans, municipal land use planning
and development, emergency management
planning, source water risk assessments,
and transportation planning; and
• Update local and develop regional Intensity,
Duration and Frequency Curves to ensure
the best available data and projections are
accessible to provincial and municipal
planners and decision-makers for purposes
such as land use planning, infrastructure
design, and emergency management. “
Develop continuous hydrologic simulation models
for the Humber and Rouge River watersheds (as
recommended by the Humber River and Rouge
River watershed plan updates). This work will
improve knowledge of floodprone areas, erosion
potential and water balance requirements.
Develop and Maintain the
Flood Forecasting (FFOR)
Model
Completed the first phase of the NexFlood system
(Watershed response project) involving the development of a
radar based TRCA flood forecasting model for use within
Peel Region (Etobicoke Creek)
Expand the NexFlood system to the Don River
watershed
Develop and Maintain a
Flood Site Database
Flood Vulnerable Database updated for all watersheds in
2009
Continue to update Flood Vulnerable Database as
new map sheets are created
Conduct Yearly Update of
Flood Contingency Manual
2009 update completed and distributed to partners annual update for 2010 will be completed in
January 2010
Develop and Maintain
Operations Manual
OMS Manual for G. Ross Lord Dam and Claireville Dam
completed
Complete Milne/Stouffville Dam OMS update
Ongoing updates to the Flood Warning Manual
562
Prepare for Emergency
Operations Weekly Flood Forecasting & Warning meetings were held
in 2009 to recap the events of the week and to alert all
personnel of imminent flood events
Annual training of key operational components was
stressed as an important factor for emergency
preparedness (e.g., Drill conducted to test flood duty
officers knowledge of equipment and procedures)
Monthly inspections of Claireville, G. Ross, Milne, and
Stouffville Dams were conducted
Claireville wing wall repair initiated by consultant (Hatch
Acres Ltd.)
Business continuity strategy for the flood warning program
was developed and will be added to the Operations
Manual
Claireville wing wall repair initiated by consultant (Hatch
Acres Ltd.)
Stouffville Dam Structural Study completed by Hatch Ltd.
Safety signs installed and vegetation removal at large
dams
Weekly FDO meetings will be continued
A Major Event Exercise will be undertaken with all
TRCA Flood Duty staff and Essential staff during
2010
Continue monthly inspection of Claireville, G. Ross,
Milne, and Stouffville Dams
Complete Dam Safety Reviews for small dams
(Palgrave, Albion Hills, High Hills and Secord
Dams)
Complete Claireville Dam Wing Wall repair (Hatch
Ltd.)
Replacement of transfer switch for the Generator at
G. Ross Lord Dam
Complete Claireville Dam Wing Wall repair (Hatch
Ltd.)
Section 2: Forecasting
To understand and quantify the response and potential impacts within watersheds to specific events
GTA Flood Standard
Component
Work Completed in 2009 Work Proposed for 2010
Follow Daily Planning Cycle
ongoing on a daily basis with improvements/modifications
as needed
ongoing on a daily basis with
improvements/modifications as needed
Section 3: Communications
To inform clients of the potential or actual impact of flood events in a concise and timely manner.
GTA Flood Standard
Component
Work Completed in 2009 Work Proposed for 2010
Establish Internal and
External Communications
Protocol
Continued to follow media communications protocol with
TRCA Marketing Department
Provided on-going information and advice to municipal
clients and CA staff
Continued weekly checks of the Metronet backup radio
system with Metro Police
Continued to improve relationships with local media
resulting in consistent messaging and increased media
coverage
Provided input to Conservation Ontario’s initiative to
standardize Conservation Authorities flood related pages
on websites (TRCA’s website was used as a model) as
well as input to the Ministry of Natural Resources flood
portal
Contact with the Toronto Police Marine Unit and the City of
Toronto’s Strategic Communications Office was initiated in
early 2009 to establish communications protocols and
common messages
A major goal for the flood warning program will be
to investigate ways to provide timely and useful
information to the public. The approach to achieve
this goal may include the development of
publications (brochures, flood safety postcards,
ebulletins etc), methods for identifying watersheds
and flood vulnerability on our website, and
messaging to targeted geographical areas to name
a few. To date, a lack of staff resources has
precluded advancement of this goal
Continue to provide information and advice to
municipal clients and CA staff
Develop a protocol in cooperation with the Weather
Network to provide automated Flood Messages to
media outlets. Advance discussions with MNR and
other CA’s to make this a Provincial initiative
Enhance the Flood Forecasting & Warning Centre
pages on TRCA’s corporate website
Continue to develop partnership with Environment
Canada and establish new partnership with
Emergency Management Ontario
563
Section 4: Flood Operations
To provide on-going information and advice to municipal clients and CA staff.
GTA Flood Standard
Component
Work Completed in 2009 Work Proposed for 2010
Maintain an Emergency
Operations Centre
Operation of the EOC at Head Office continued with a
focus on providing technologies for the NexFlood system
and on maintaining the Metronet Radio System
continue to operate EOC at Head Office and
upgrade equipment as required
Monitor Flood Events In 2010, 15 messages were issued including 11 High
Water Safety Bulletins and Flood Advisories and 1 Flood
Warning. This is slightly lower than the annual average of
22 messages.
ongoing as needed
Follow Reasonable Safety
Procedures
ongoing as needed ongoing as needed
Document Flood Events ongoing as needed ongoing as needed
work will continue on the development of a
new database system for recording data
during significant events
Document Communications
with Internal and External
Clients
communications documented on daily planning cycle
spreadsheet and in log book - all documents on file
ongoing as needed
Support Internal and External
Clients
ongoing as needed ongoing as needed
Debrief Authority Staff A presentation to TRCA Directors was given to report on
the status of the Flood Forecasting & Warning Program
and the general program operations in 2009
Weekly FDO meetings held to recap the events of the
week and to provide an update on expected weather
ongoing as needed
Debrief River Watch
Personnel
Enforcement staff were instrumental in providing “eyes in
the field” information to FDO’s during significant events
Ongoing operations of the River Watch
program will continue with training provided to
Enforcement staff annually
_________________________________________
564
RES.#A244/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Linda Pabst
THAT Section IV item AUTH8.2.1, in regar to Rouge Park Alliance Minutes of Meeting #
7/09, held on September 18, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A245/09 -SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by:Colleen Jordan
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Section IV item EX9.1 - Restoration Services Centre, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes #10/09, held on December 11, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A246/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Colleen Jordan
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items EX10.1 - EX10.101, inclusive, contained in
Executive Committee Minutes #10/09, held on December 11, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:01 p.m., on Friday, January 8, 2009.
Maria Augimeri
Vice Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer
565
MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #11/09
January 29, 2010
The Authority Meeting #11/09, was held in the South Theatre, Black Creek Pioneer
Village, on Friday, January 29, 2010. The Chair Gerri Lynn O'Connor, called the meeting
to order at 9:41 a.m.
PRESENT
Eve Adams Member
Paul Ainslie Member
Bryan Bertie Member
Laurie Bruce Member
Gay CowbourneMember
Mike Del GrandeMember
Pamela GoughMember
Lois Griffin Member
Suzan Hall Member
Jack Heath Member
Bonnie Littley Member
Glenn Mason Member
Ron Moeser Member
Gerri Lynn O'ConnorChair
Linda Pabst Member
John Parker Member
Anthony Perruzza Member
John Sprovieri Member
Richard Whitehead Member
ABSENT
Maria Augimeri Vice Chair
David Barrow Member
Glenn De Baeremaeker Member
Bill Fisch Member
Grant Gibson Member
Colleen Jordan Member
Peter Milczyn Member
Maja Prentice Member
Gino Rosati Member
566
RES.#A247/09 - MINUTES
Moved by: Linda Pabst
Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #10/09, held on January 8, 2010, be approved.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
PRESENTATIONS
(a)A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services, TRCA, in regard
to item BAAB7.1 - Participating Municipality Funding.
RES.#A248/09 -PRESENTATIONS
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Mike Del Grande
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A249/09 -TERRESTRIAL VOLUNTEER MONITORING PROGRAM
Invasive Plant Indicator Monitoring Results 2009. Staff report on first year
results for the volunteer monitoring of terrestrial invasive plants in the
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority jurisdiction.
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Richard Whitehead
WHEREAS terrestrial invasive plant species are an identified threat to the biodiversity and
integrity of terrestrial ecosystems in the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) jurisdiction;
AND WHEREAS implementation of monitoring to determine the extent and rate of
expansion for invasive species presenting the highest level of biological concern was a
key recommendation in the Terrestrial Volunteer Monitoring Program: Monitoring Results
2002 - 2007 report received by the Authority at meeting #5/08;
AND WHEREAS the Authority directed staff to modify the Terrestrial Volunteer Monitoring
Program (TVMP) protocols to address the information gaps and enhancements identified
in the report;
567
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT staff be directed to communicate the availability
of the new invasive species monitoring protocol and data both internally and externally to
partners and others involved in efforts to control invasive species and their impacts;
AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to report back on the monitoring results from the
Terrestrial Volunteer Monitoring Program at regular intervals as data analysis indicates.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
Since 2002, TRCA's Terrestrial Volunteer Monitoring Program has conducted terrestrial
ecosystem monitoring throughout the Toronto region. Volunteers visit assigned ten hectare
fixed sites ten times each year to record the presence of a set of 50 native indicator species
representing a range of ecological requirements and sensitivities. Data records compiled
across sub-regions and/or time series provide a basis for analysis of the condition of the
terrestrial ecosystem in the region as a whole, within key land use zones (urban, urbanizing and
rural) and how it is changing over time.
In 2008 a report summarizing the first five years of the TVMP was completed. The report,
Terrestrial Volunteer Monitoring Program: Monitoring Results 2002 - 2007 included a
recommendation that new protocols be developed and implemented to provide for the
collection of data on key invasive plant species by TVMP volunteers as a part of their
monitoring work. This report was received at Authority Meeting #5/08, held on June 27, 2008,
and included a recommendation to expand the program to include invasive plant species.
RATIONALE
In 2009 a new invasive plant indicator protocol was designed and implemented to record the
number of occurrences of each of eight invasive plant indicators, representing forest, meadow
and wetland habitats, along with an estimate of the largest occurrence ("patch") of each found
on the site. This level of semi-quantitative detail provides for the categorization of the degree of
severity of invasion by each species on the site. Monitoring of invasive plant indicators was
combined with the two regular summer surveys, one during each of July and August.
Invasive plant indicators were selected from a larger list of high priority species identified by
TRCA flora biologists, based on the feasibility for volunteers to effectively identify and survey
them on a ten hectare site in a two hour survey. The eight indicators selected are:
garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata);
dog-strangling vine, also known as swallowwort (Cynanchum rossicum & C. nigrum);
common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica);
glossy buckthorn (Rhamnus frangula);
Himalayan balsam (Impatiens glandulifera);
common reed (Phragmites australis australis);
periwinkle (Vinca minor);
European frog-bit (Hydrocharis morsus-ranae).
The new protocol differs significantly from those used to monitor native indicator species, since
it requires volunteers to not only identify the presence of the target invasive species on the 10
hectare fixed monitoring site, but also to count the number of occurrences (i.e. areas of
dominance, or "patches") of each within the site and estimate the size of the largest patch
found.
568
The new protocol is unique to TRCA, largely due to the lack of any pre-existing accepted
standardized protocols applicable to invasive species monitoring over large areas by
volunteers. The protocol has been documented and could be followed by others wishing to
implement a similar monitoring effort.
Summary of Results from 2009
Results for the first year have been compiled, summarized and assessed for the severity of
invasion by individual invasive indicators on the sites. The determination of severity takes into
account both the number of patches found and the size of the largest one. In forest or meadow
habitat, infestation by a species is assessed as severe if that species is dominant in an area
comprising over one hectare of the site, or if more than five patches of dominance are found,
with at least one of them being over 100 square metres. In wetland habitat, which makes up a
much smaller proportion of the site area, the presence of a single patch of an invader that is
larger than 100 square metres results in assessment of the invasion as severe. Analysis has
not yet been conducted to investigate the relationship between the presence or severity of
invasion by an invasive indicator and the presence of native indicator species. This will be
incorporated into the next periodic monitoring results report.
Compiled data for 2009 is summarized as follows:
A total of 44 sites distributed across the TRCA jurisdiction were surveyed in July and August
2009.
Only four of the sites were found to have none of the invasive indicators.
Seven of the eight invasive indicators were found within TVMP fixed sites.
European frog-bit, while not found on any TVMP site, was observed in the Duffins marsh
area, immediately adjacent to a volunteer site and was reported to TRCA staff botanists; it
has been previously reported in eastern Ontario, but this is the first TRCA record.
Common buckthorn was both found at the greatest number of sites (73%) and was the
species with the highest severity of invasion, being categorized as severe at 10 of 44 sites
(23%).
Garlic mustard was also very commonly found (70% of sites), and severe at 6 of 44 (14%).
Dog-strangling vine occurred at 48% of sites with 23% in the severe category.
Himalayan balsam was found at six sites (14%), severely invading one.
Common reed occurred at seven (16%) and was severe at four (9%).
Glossy buckthorn was confirmed at two (5%), neither categorized as severe.
Periwinkle occurred at four sites (9%), severely invading one.
One half of TVMP sites were severely invaded by at least one of the indicators, with 15 sites
(34%) having an invasive species dominant in an area greater than one hectare, which
represents over 10% of the total site area.
The number of invasive indicators found per site ranged from 0 to 4.
The final 2009 survey protocol proved to be feasible for trained volunteers to apply. The
invasive species data will assist TRCA in interpreting the presence/absence results for the
native species monitored under the TVMP in order to draw conclusions regarding the condition
of the regional terrestrial ecosystem and make recommendations toward preserving regional
biodiversity. It will also help to prioritize invasive species management activities by TRCA. The
protocol can be easily modified where additional species of concern are identified.
569
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
As this work represents the first year of a long term effort, ongoing data collection, analysis
and reporting will continue.
TRCA staff will communicate with municipal partners and others to ensure that the
information is made available to municipalities, academia, other agencies and stakeholders.
Staff will continue to make the information available to past and present volunteers and
participating landowners.
Future monitoring will track whether, and to what extent, the recorded invasions increase or
decrease over time and will investigate the impact they are having on the condition of the
ecosystem. Survey results will also be reviewed from the perspectives of protocol
repeatability and consistency of implementation by different volunteers. For example,
should data show erratic changes in the level of invasion, an investigation into the
consistency of protocol application would be undertaken.
Staff will also pursue opportunities to consolidate data on the location and extent of invasive
plant species within the TRCA jurisdiction in order to assist with land management planning,
terrestrial natural heritage recovery planning and restoration activities.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The Terrestrial Volunteer Monitoring Program is a long-term monitoring component of the
Regional Watershed Monitoring Program, funded by the City of Toronto and the regional
municipalities of York, Peel and Durham. The cost to operate the TVMP in 2009 was $60,569.
The addition of new elements related to the invasive species monitoring was timed to coincide
with a periodic update of volunteer support materials and therefore did not add to overall cost.
Report prepared by: Theresa McKenzie, extension 5658
Emails: tmckenzie@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Theresa McKenzie, extension 5658
Emails: tmckenzie@trca.on.ca
Date: January 05, 2010
_________________________________________
RES.#A250/09 -GETTING TO CARBON NEUTRAL: A GUIDE FOR CANADIAN
MUNICIPALITIES
Receipt of report on achieving carbon neutrality and approval of next
steps.
Moved by:Pamela Gough
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT the report on Getting to Carbon Neutral: A Guide for Canadian Municipalities, be
received;
THAT the report be circulated to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
member municipalities and TRCA staff meet with member municipalities and municipal
associations to discuss creation of a working group on climate change mitigation and
getting to carbon neutral;
570
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA seek funding for additional research projects, workshops and
planning tools, stemming from this report.
RECORDED VOTE
Eve Adams Yea
Paul Ainslie Yea
Bryan Bertie Yea
Laurie Bruce Yea
Gay Cowbourne Yea
Mike Del Grande Nay
Pamela Gough Yea
Lois Griffin Yea
Suzan Hall Yea
Jack Heath Yea
Bonnie Littley Yea
Glenn Mason Yea
Ron Moeser Yea
Gerri Lynn O'Connor Yea
Linda Pabst Yea
John Parker Yea
John Sprovieri Yea
Richard Whitehead Yea
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In the fall of 2008 a monetary grant of $30,000 was provided to Chris Kennedy at the University
of Toronto to support M.Sc and PhD students in engineering to undertake research and
prepare a report entitled "Getting to Carbon Neutral: A Guide for Canadian Municipalities".
The purpose of the project was to prepare a guide book that could assist medium to large
municipalities with understanding the concept of carbon neutral and the strategic activities that
could assist them in achieving that outcome. Carbon neutral is defined as a state where direct
and indirect greenhouse gas emissions from the municipality minus sequestered carbon and
offsets, sum to zero. The guide provides:
A collection of case studies of best practices in sustainable urban design and planning
worldwide.
Guidelines for estimating the GHG emission reductions from a wide range of strategies that
may be pursued by Canadian municipalities.
An example of how integration of these strategies can be used to reduce a municipality’s
per capita GHG emissions by over 70%.
The report is primarily a quantitative guide, describing a variety of technological and urban
planning strategies that can be used to substantially reduce community greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions for a municipality. The guide also provides some information on the costs of
strategies and ways in which barriers to implementation have been overcome. These are
demonstrated by about 70 case studies, many of which are included in the guidebook.
571
RATIONALE
Municipalities are well positioned to be able to significantly influence greenhouse gas
emissions in their communities. A recent study by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities
found that municipalities directly or indirectly influence activities that account for 44 percent of
GHG emissions in Canada.
Many municipalities, locally and across Canada, have already undertaken inventories of their
own corporate greenhouse gas emissions and in some cases their communities. Others have
created, or are in the process of creating, Climate Change Action Plans dealing with both
mitigation and adaptation.
With all of this activity and opportunity, in discussions with municipal staff and experts in GHG
emissions, it was felt that there was a gap in knowledge around the strategic actions that could
best assist municipalities in reducing GHG emissions and a lack of understanding of the
concept of carbon neutral and how to get there. This project was initiated to begin filling those
gaps in knowledge and understanding.
Study Findings
Most of the recommendations from the report are not new, which should not be surprising
since the research looked for practices that were being applied today or would be in the near
future. But rather, the report tries to provide a strategic context around these actions to assist
the practitioner in determining the actions that provide the best GHG emission reductions for
the cost. To follow is a brief summary of the project results.
Ten Actions Required by Canadian Municipalities to Become Carbon Neutral
The case studies, estimation guidelines and example application support the following
recommendations as to how Canadian municipalities can become carbon neutral.
1.Develop Bold, Ambitious Building Codes
The state-of-the art in green or sustainable building has already exceeded the requirements
for carbon neutral buildings. By reducing energy demand, utilizing solar energy and
tapping waste heat sources, buildings have already been constructed in Canada that are at,
or close to, carbon neutral. Chapter 3 provides rules for determining savings obtainable
from energy efficient envelopes, photovoltaics, solar water heaters, solar air heaters,
passive solar design and ground source heat pumps. Either working with their provinces, or
independently, Canadian municipalities need to encourage widespread adoption of these
technologies by ambitious updates to their building codes.
2.Accelerate the Retrofitting of the Existing Building Stock
The greatest challenge for reducing building related GHG emissions comes from the
existing building stock. Chapter 3 provides a check-list for a comprehensive building or
facility energy audit, and rules for estimating savings from retrofits to low-rise and high-rise
residential buildings. The expanded example application in Chapter 8 suggests that savings
of 2.7 M t CO2 e / year could be reached in Toronto by retrofitting all buildings to the 2012
building code standard. Particular opportunities lie in retrofitting high-rise buildings, such as
with the Mayor’s Tower Renewal project in Toronto. Municipalities need to accelerate the
retrofitting of buildings – both their own and those of the wider community. This may require
establishing revolving capital funds, or other financial incentives.
572
3.Build Transit Systems Supported by Appropriate Land-use and Financing Mechanisms
Chapter 4 presents the Municipal Transportation and Greenhouse–gases (MUNTAG)
model. The model integrates a series of guidelines on land-use, public transportation, active
transportation, financial policies and vehicle technologies to provide a powerful tool for
assessing potential reductions in urban transportation emissions.
Encouraging the public to shift from automobiles to low emissions public transit is a huge
challenge. Developing transit supportive communities is necessary, but not sufficient;
municipalities also have to find ways of actually building and supporting the transit systems.
Ultimately the development of sustainable urban transportation requires a new financial
model by which revenues from road tolls, area pricing, parking, and other sources are used
to invest in substantial transit infrastructure.
4.Design Neighbourhoods in which Residents Love to Walk and Cycle
One of the four pillars of sustainable urban transportation is to support major transit
infrastructure through local neighbourhood design. Essentially this means creating
attractive, relatively dense, mixed-use neighbourhoods where people love to walk and
cycle. Chapter 4 provides guidelines for estimating the mode share impacts from providing
bicycle facilities, along with case studies of cycling and pedestrian initiatives.
5.Encourage the Adoption of Electric or Low-emissions Vehicles
Changing vehicle technology is another strategy for reducing transportation sector GHG
emissions. Chapter 4 provides data and information on the emissions factors for biofuel,
fuel cell, plug-in hybrid and hybrid-electric vehicles, which are incorporated into the
MUNTAG model. The widespread adoption of these vehicles depends largely on the
incentives provided by federal, state and provincial governments in North America. There
are also ways that municipal governments can help, by greening their own fleets, regulating
taxi fleets and providing reduced parking fees or other advantages to green vehicles.
6.Green the Electricity Supply
Greening the electricity supply is essential not only to reduce emissions from current
demands, but to provide low carbon electricity supply to replace fossil fuel use in other
sectors, e.g., to provide for electric vehicles and ground-source heat pumps. As a review of
GHG inventorying procedures in Chapter 2 shows, however, there are stark differences in
the GHG intensity of electricity supply between Canadian provinces. Municipalities in
Alberta and Saskatchewan have GHG intensities of over 800 t CO2 e / GWh, while those in
British Columbia, Newfoundland, and Quebec are at 20 t CO2 e / GWh or lower due to their
greater reliance on hydro power. Reaching carbon neutral will be particularly difficult for
those municipalities with high carbon intensity electricity. Chapter 3 provides rules for
estimating savings from energy efficient appliances and lighting, as well as photovoltaics.
Municipalities with high carbon intensity will need to consider investing in larger scale green
electricity supply systems. Examples such as wind, small hydro, wave, tidal, concentrating
solar and geothermal power are provided by the case studies in Chapter 5.
573
7.Undertake Integrated Community Energy Planning
A new model of local energy planning is emerging, which enables municipalities to harness
energy from a variety of community sources. As well as the building scale sources of
Chapter 3, technologies such as aquifer and borehole thermal energy storage may be
developed. These may be combined with district energy systems, combined heat and
power facilities, or other energy technologies that tap waste streams, as described in
Chapter 5. This evolving model suggests that the community scale can provide a sufficient
economy of scale for integrated resource recovery and levelling of load diversity, while
maintaining system reliability. To exploit such opportunities, municipalities will need to
fundamentally change the way they undertake energy planning and management.
8.Keep Harvesting the Solid Waste Streams
While GHG emissions from solid waste streams are modest in most Canadian
municipalities, waste management strategies continue to be the ‘low hanging fruit’ in terms
of GHG reduction. This is shown in Chapter 7 which includes calculations of the cost
effectiveness (annual GHG saving per dollar of capital expenditure) for over 20 of the case
studies. Comparison with projects funded by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities
shows that waste projects have generally been the most cost-effective.
Chapter 6 provides guidelines for estimating the emissions reduction for solid waste
management – for recycling, waste incineration and methane capture. The overall principle
of the three Rs (reduce, reuse, recycle) also holds well for lowering GHG emissions.
9.Seek Efficiency in Municipal Services
To provide leadership to the community, municipal governments should aggressively
pursue reductions in GHG emissions from their corporate buildings and municipal services.
Often of significance amongst corporate emissions are those associated with the energy
required to provide municipal water and wastewater supplies. Chapter 6 provides energy
conservation opportunities and strategies for increasing the efficiency of water and
wastewater systems. Guidelines for estimating the energy savings from water, wastewater
and other municipal services are also given in Chapter 6.
10.Green the City
While the focus of this guidebook is mitigation of urban GHG emissions, municipalities also
need to adapt to climate change. Greening the city with greenroofs and urban forestry is of
benefit on both fronts; guidelines for estimating the GHG savings are provided in Chapters
3 and 6. Also included in Chapter 6 are estimation guidelines for urban agriculture and CO2
enriched greenhouses.
NEXT STEPS
The project steering committee recommended the following next steps for the project:
publish the report and provide copies to member municipalities;
present the report findings and next steps to local and regional municipalities as well as
appropriate municipal associations;
establish a working group of municipal staff to foster collaboration and knowledge sharing
around climate change mitigation;
develop a website through which to share information and resources around getting to
carbon neutral;
574
develop an online tool (based on the report) that allows municipalities to use their own
emissions information to evaluate mitigation scenarios at a high level;
host a workshop on climate change mitigation for municipalities.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The report development cost was $50,000 and was funded out of TRCA's Community
Transformation Program accounts, using Peel Climate Change, and York and Toronto capital
funds.
In 2010, TRCA anticipates $50,000 in expenditures associated with report publication and next
steps, which will be funded. Staff will seek additional funding partners.
Report prepared by: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Bernie McIntyre, extension 5326
Emails: bmcintyre@trca.on.ca
Date: October 27, 2009
_________________________________________
RES.#A251/09 -PORT UNION STEWARDSHIP INITIATIVE
Final Report. The accomplishments of the Port Union Stewardship
Initiative.
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Richard Whitehead
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) thank and formally
acknowledge at the next public event the project partners who contributed to the success
of the Port Union Stewardship Initiative from January 2007 to December 31st, 2009.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In 2007, a partnership with the Centennial Community Recreation Association, West Rouge
Community Association and the City of Toronto resulted in the securement of $55,000 in
funding through an Environment Canada EcoAction grant. During this two-year community
stewardship project, we implemented deliverables to raise public awareness of environmental
issues and opportunities within the Adams Creek watershed. These objectives were achieved
through hands-on activities, including tree plantings, bird box installation and community
cleanup events and awareness programs, including displays and articles in community
publications.
As of December 31st, 2009, the EcoAction deliverables associated with the Port Union
Stewardship Initiative were completed.
575
The expected targets and actual achievements are summarized below:
Expected Targets (2007–2009)Project Accomplishments (2007–2009)
Engage a minimum of 600 volunteers per
year for a total of 1200
Engaged 1512 individuals throughout the
two years
Engage the public in a minimum of 4
planting events at the demonstration sites
Hosted 7 planting events in various sites
in the Port Union area
Host 2 public Great Canadian Shoreline
Cleanups
Hosted 2 public Great Canadian
Shoreline Cleanups in Port Union
Waterfront Park
Remove 10 bags of garbage/litter from
local parklands
Removed 18 bags of garbage from the
local parklands
Install and monitor a minimum of 25
songbird boxes
Installed 145 bird boxes in the fall of
2009. Monitoring cannot occur until they
are used.
Develop and install a minimum of 1
interpretive sign per demonstration site
for a total of 2 signs
Installed 1 interpretive sign in the Port
Union Waterfront Park. Second sign is in
the development stage with the City of
Toronto.
Develop 1 Port Union display and setup
at a minimum of 2 events per year
Set up a display at nine events
throughout the two years of the project
Produce a minimum of 8 environmental
articles
Produced 8 environmental articles over
the two years
Engage a minimum of 2 local schools per
year in a school naturalization project
Engaged 2 schools in a school
naturalization project
These deliverables were accomplished in the following areas in the Port Union Community:
Port Union Waterfront Park;
Port Union Village Commons;
Adams Park;
Sir Oliver Mowat Collegiate Institute;
St. Brendan’s Catholic Public School.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The final audit and final report is due to EcoAction by February 28, 2010.
TRCA staff will continue to support the community partnerships that were established and
developed through this two year initiative. As part of the momentum created through this
project, the community has initiated three annual events in the Port Union area. These events
include the Port Union Waterfront Festival organized through Councillor Moeser's office, an
Earth Day cleanup and Winterfest. Stewardship staff will stay connected with community
members and contribute to those events in 2010 as requested.
With the second phase of the Port Union Waterfront Park estimated to be completed in 2011,
there will be additional opportunities for fundraising and stewardship activities in the community
once this park becomes open to the public.
576
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Core funding for the Port Union Stewardship Initiative was provided by Environment Canada’s
EcoAction grant ($55,000) and the Regional Municipality of Toronto ($30,000) for a total of
$85,000. In-kind support from community groups such as the Centennial Community
Recreation Association and West Rouge Community Association totalled $77,699.
Report prepared by: Mary Williams, extension 5753
Emails: mwilliams@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Mary Williams, extension 5753
Emails: mwilliams@trca.on.ca
Date: January 15, 2010
_________________________________________
RES.#A252/09 -HEALTHY HEADWATERS INITIATIVE
Final Report. The successful completion of the Healthy Headwaters
Initiative - A Petticoat Creek Watershed Stewardship project.
Moved by:Gay Cowbourne
Seconded by:Richard Whitehead
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) thank and acknowledge the
project partners who contributed to the success of the Healthy Headwaters Initiative from
January 2008 to December 31, 2009.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
In 2007, a partnership with the Altona Forest Stewardship Committee, City of Pickering,
community groups, Dunbarton High School and TRCA resulted in the securement of $50,000
through an Environment Canada EcoAction grant. During this two-year community
stewardship project, we implemented deliverables to raise public awareness of environmental
issues and opportunities within the Petticoat Creek watershed. These objectives were achieved
through hands-on and awareness building activities such as outreach workshops (including a
Natural Neighbours workshop and a Water Ways workshop), habitat restoration, clean-up
events, volunteer monitoring and newsletters.
As of December 31st, 2009, the EcoAction deliverables associated with the Healthy Headwaters
Initiative were completed.
577
The expected targets and actual achievements are summarized below:
Expected Project TargetsCompleted Project Accomplishments
Hold 4 public events 17 public events, including outreach
workshops, hikes and planting events
Engage 250 volunteers 837 volunteers, including elementary and
high schools, Ontario Power Generation
(OPG) employees, community members
Engage schools in aquatic plants program 3 schools participated in aquatic plants
program
Plant 750 native plants 1002 native plants, including trees, shrubs
and wildflowers
Install 2 wildlife structures 1 butterfly meadow, 20 brush piles, 1
amphibian pond (assisted)
Develop and implement volunteer monitoring
program
1 high school was engaged in a multiple year
monitoring program
A number of additional activities were also accomplished, including the installation of five rain
barrels by community members at their homes, the installation of a trailhead kiosk with map
and a new boardwalk in Altona Forest, the removal of 40 bags of garbage and invasive species
from Altona Forest, and the production of an annual newsletter.
Activities accomplished within Altona Forest with local elementary schools were commended
by the 2008 Communities in Bloom judges.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
The final audit and final report is due to EcoAction by February 28, 2010.
TRCA staff will continue to support the community partnerships that were established and
developed through this two year initiative. Environment Stewardship Pickering (ESP) was
launched in 2008 to expand the work started in the City of Pickering through the Frenchman’s
Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Project (1998 to 2007). Conservation Land Planning and
Stewardship staff will continue to work with new and existing partners to develop and
implement stewardship initiatives throughout the community.
FINANCIAL DETAILS
Two years of funding for this project totaled $70,000. Funding was provided from EcoAction in
the amount of $50,000 and Durham Region in the amount of $20,000. In-kind support from the
partner agencies (City of Pickering, Durham Region, Ontario Power Generation, Altona Forest
Stewardship Committee, Dunbarton High School, Altona Forest Public School, Gandatsetiagon
Public School and St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic School) totaled $50,000.
Report prepared by: Andréa Dubé-Goss, extension 5633
Emails: adube-goss@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Andréa Dubé-Goss, extension 5633
Emails: adube-goss@trca.on.ca
Date: January 13, 2009
_________________________________________
578
SCARBOROUGH WATERFRONT ACCESS PLAN, CITY OF TORONTO
Direction to respond to Toronto Water request for information on
Scarborough waterfront access opportunities.
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to provide
Scarborough waterfront access options for Toronto Water's consideration in response to
a request to the General Manager, Toronto Water by the Public Works and Infrastructure
Committee to report on a beneficial use option for the Biosolids Master Plan as it relates
to the Highland Creek Treatment Plant;
THAT staff be directed to continue to provide other information as required by Toronto
Water;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority on the outcome of Toronto Water's
report to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee.
AMENDMENT
RES.#A253/09
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Paul Ainslie
THAT the following replace the main motion:
THAT the staff report on Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan, City of Toronto, be
received;
AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto be advised that while Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) considers the waterfront trail as an important initiative,
that for environmental reasons it cannot support the use of the waterfront trail for moving
waste management trucks to and/or from the Highland Creek plant, even on an
emergency basis.
RECORDED VOTE
Paul Ainslie Yea
Bryan Bertie Yea
Laurie Bruce Yea
Gay Cowbourne Yea
Mike Del Grande Nay
Pamela Gough Yea
Lois Griffin Yea
Suzan Hall Yea
Jack Heath Yea
Bonnie Littley Yea
Glenn Mason Yea
Ron Moeser Yea
Gerri Lynn O'Connor Yea
Linda Pabst Yea
579
RECORDED VOTE Cont'd
John Parker Yea
Anthony Perruzza Yea
John Sprovieri Yea
Richard Whitehead Yea
THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
THAT the staff report on Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan, City of Toronto, be
received;
AND FURTHER THAT the City of Toronto be advised that while Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) considers the waterfront trail as an important initiative,
that for environmental reasons it cannot support the use of the waterfront trail for moving
waste management trucks to and/or from the Highland Creek plant, even on an
emergency basis.
BACKGROUND
The foundation of waterfront planning and development undertaken by TRCA over the years,
has been based on the Waterfront Plan for the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Area, 1967 (The
Plan), commissioned by the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board. In 1970, the Ministry of the
Environment designated Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (now TRCA)
as the implementation agency for The Plan, with the exception of the central harbour area
which is regulated by the Toronto Port Authority.
TRCA commenced implementation of The Plan in 1971 with the development of major
waterfront amenities including the Humber Bay Park Complex, Ashbridges Bay Park, Bluffers
Park and the Petticoat Creek Conservation Area.
In 1980, TRCA consolidated its resource management plans and programs into the policy
document, Watershed Plan. The Lake Ontario Waterfront Development Program (1980), part of
the Watershed Plan, utilized the Waterfront Plan for the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Area
(1967) as the foundation and devised a Program for its implementation. The objective of the
Program is “to create a handsome waterfront, balanced in its land use, which will complement
adjacent areas, taking cognizance of existing residential development and making accessible,
wherever possible, features which warrant public use”. The Program identified the
Scarborough sector as possessing some of the most spectacular landforms of the entire
waterfront. The preservation of significant natural features, facilitation of public access and the
management of shoreline features continue to be key considerations in this sector.
The Shoreline Management Program (1980), part of the Watershed Plan, addressed the
prevention of potential hazards in areas vulnerable to the effects of flooding and erosion. The
objective of the Program is “to undertake a comprehensive program of shoreline management
designed to prevent, eliminate, or reduce the risk of hazard to life and property, while cognizant
of the natural attributes of the lakefront setting”.
580
In 1991, the Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront released its report,
Regeneration. This report was the culmination of research undertaken by the Royal
Commission, led by the Honourable David Crombie, to inquire into and make
recommendations regarding the future of the Toronto waterfront. The report recommended
that waterfront development follow the ecosystem approach that takes into consideration
ecological, social and economic factors in the development of the waterfront. The key
principles of the ecosystem approach are a clean, green, useable, diverse, open, accessible,
connected, affordable and attractive waterfront.
In 1994, the Municipal Council of Metropolitan Toronto replaced the Waterfront Plan for the
Metropolitan Toronto Planning Area (1967) and adopted the Metropolitan Waterfront Plan. One
of the guiding principles of the plan is accessibility. The plan states, "There must be full public
access to the services, facilities and opportunities on the waterfront." One of the key objectives
identified in the plan is to provide for continuous public access along the Toronto waterfront for
public use and enjoyment.
As recommended in Regeneration (1991), TRCA developed the Integrated Shoreline
Management Plan (ISMP) in 1996 as an evolution to waterfront development. The goal of the
ISMP is “to provide an ecosystem-based framework to ensure that shoreline management
activities result in a clean, green, accessible, diverse, connected, open, affordable, attractive
and useable waterfront”. The ISMP set out recommendations for shoreline regeneration, public
access and safety, natural heritage targets, aquatic habitat restoration and public use for this
area of TRCA’s jurisdiction. The shoreline below Sylvan Park and Sylvan Avenue east of the
Bellamy Ravine, was the first waterfront amenity designed with the ecosystem approach in
mind, combining shoreline protection works with public accessibility and habitat restoration.
TRCA has been implementing shoreline protection and public access projects, on a sector by
sector basis, as funding would allow, over the last 30 years. Various projects have been
proceeding through the approvals process and are awaiting funding. A preliminary concept
was prepared in early 2009 to identify all of the components of work required to complete the
Scarborough shoreline. Recent deliberations at the City of Toronto concerning sewage
treatment and biosolids management at the Highland Creek Water Pollution Control Plant have
raised questions about any possible synergies between the two independent projects ie. the
Highland Creek plant and the shoreline trail.
All aspects of water production, transmission and distribution, wastewater collection and
treatment, and stormwater collection, transmission and treatment in the City of Toronto are the
responsibility of Toronto Water. As part of the City of Toronto's mandate to provide water and
wastewater services, it is responsible for planning and providing for the management of
wastewater biosolids and water residuals. Following the development of a draft Biosolids and
Residuals Master Plan (BRMP), under the Municipal Engineers Association Class
Environmental Assessment (EA) process in 2004, the City undertook a peer review of the draft
BRMP. In light of recommendations made during the peer review (related to scoring criteria
and decision making) and changes to biosolids management opportunities, regulations and
costs and constraints, the City of Toronto initiated the Biosolids Master Plan (BMP) Update in
2008. The goal of this project is to deliver an updated BMP report that the City will use as a
guide to plan for future projects and activities for biosolids management focusing on the City's
four wastewater treatment plants.
581
As part of this exercise, the City is contemplating future improvements to the operation of the
Highland Treatment Plant, which includes consideration of all disposal and transport options for
the sludge that may be available.
Based on TRCA’s mandate and almost thirty years of experience in the planning and design of
waterfront amenities, in November 2009, TRCA staff was asked to prepare a plan for the
Scarborough waterfront that would facilitate continuous access between Bluffers Park and the
Highland Creek Treatment Plant. Providing access along this area of the waterfront poses
significant challenges as this section of the Lake Ontario shoreline is dominated by the
Scarborough Bluffs, which begin east of Victoria Park Avenue and extend 15 km in a
northeasterly direction to Highland Creek. The Bluffs range up to 91.4 m in height, rising to the
spectacular Needles and Cathedral Bluffs near Brimley Road. Erosion, through wave action,
wind action, groundwater seepage, surface runoff and freeze/thaw action, has shaped the
Scarborough shoreline. Large segments of the shoreline are in public ownership; however,
due to grade issues related to the Bluffs there are limited public access points (pedestrian or
vehicular) to the water’s edge except through Bluffers Park at Brimley Road, Guild Inn at
Galloway Road and East Point Park at Beechgrove Drive.
Utilizing the fundamental principles of the aforementioned waterfront planning initiatives, and an
initial concept prepared by TRCA as part of the 2010 budget submission, staff prepared a
preliminary concept and budget for the planning, design and implementation of a potential
Scarborough waterfront access route. This plan outlined an 8.5 kilometre continuous
waterfront access route meeting the specifications provided by Toronto Water and shoreline
requirements, on a sector-by-sector basis, between Bluffers Park and East Point Park. A key
consideration of this plan includes the integration of TRCA’s existing shoreline infrastructure
and works already underway across the Scarborough waterfront. The plan also recognized the
need to address risks associated with ongoing erosion and coastal processes, aquatic and
terrestrial habitat improvements and associated public use amenities.
At the City of Toronto's Public Works and Infrastructure Committee Meeting, held on January 5,
2010, the Committee Decision was as follows:
PW29.9 Biosolids Master Plan Update
Committee Decision
The Public Works and Infrastructure Committee requested the General Manager, Toronto
Water, to report to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee on March 2, 2010, with
the following options for the Biosolids Master Plan as it relates to the Highland Creek
Treatment Plant:
1. The existing staff recommendations with the inclusion of the best available
technology/pollution controls in order to further reduce air emissions to the greatest
extent possible;
2. Option 1 above with an accelerated implementation date as outlined in the
December 2009 Council motion;
3. a Beneficial Use Option with:
emergency road access provided as per the Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority Waterfront Plan; and
rail haulage of biosolids via the CN Line;
582
and further that all options include the necessary budget allocations/adjustment in order
to ensure implementation of the biosolids management plan adopted by Council
RATIONALE
The Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan is currently being prepared by TRCA staff in response
to Toronto Water’s request. It offers four potential concepts for a continuous access route
between Bluffers Park and East Point Park. This plan carries forward the initial access route
prepared by TRCA as per Toronto Water’s initial request, titled Option A, which considers
Toronto Water’s specifications for a continuous 4.5 m wide, high load-bearing asphalt surface
across the Scarborough waterfront. Option A also addresses the need for shoreline protection,
any retrofits to TRCA’s existing shoreline works, a bridge crossing, lighting, and public
amenities such as ancillary trail connections, washrooms, shelters and rest areas.
In addition to Option A, three additional options propose a 3.5 wide, multiuse waterfront trail,
with each option offering modifications to the type or extent of shoreline protection utilized to
achieve a continuous waterfront connection. This reduction of trail width and loading
specifications results in significant savings as the number of shoreline modifications are
reduced. Additional cost savings in these three options have been achieved by eliminating
public use amenities.
Option B offers a similar trail alignment to Option A, however the extent of the proposed
beach/headland shoreline protection identified at the Bluffers Parks shoreline sector is
modified. In Options C and D, the proposed alignment of the trail adjacent to East Point Park
follows Copperfield Road to reduce the need for extensive shoreline modifications along this
shoreline sector. Option D, the most cost-efficient of all the options, contemplates
modifications to the shoreline that achieve the desired waterfront trail alignment and address
public safety issues; however this option reduces the ability to achieve the same degree of
aquatic and terrestrial habitat improvements compared to the other available options.
583
Estimates for the four options are described below:
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Option A Option B Option C Option D
Trails $5,552,359 $969,230 $1,051,630 $1,051,630
Lighting (1 per 50m)$1,938,460 $0 $0 $0
Shore Protection $41,625,596 $38,720,996 $27,648,496 $24,720,000
Retrofits $3,553,500 $3,064,250 $3,064,250 $2,575,000
Shoreline Transfers/Legal Fees $2,291,750 $2,291,750 $1,519,250 $1,261,750
Fish Habitat Compensation $3,132,560 $2,842,100 $1,734,850 $1,497,620
Bridge $360,500 $206,000 $206,000 $206,000
Morningside Outfall Retrofit $154,500 $154,500 $154,500 $154,500
Public Washroom/Shelter $1,411,100 $0 $0 $0
Access Roads $463,500 $463,500 $463,500 $463,500
Waterline $195,700 $0 $0 $0
Sub-total in 2010 funds $60,679,525 $48,712,326 $35,842,476 $31,930,000
Environmental Assessment/
Consulting Fee (5%)
$3,033,976 $2,435,616 $1,792,124 $1,596,500
Additional Amenities
(eg. benches, receptacles,
water fountains)
$1,000,000 $0 $0 $0
Contingency (20%)$12,942,700 $10,229,588 $7,526,920 $6,705,300
GRAND TOTAL $77,656,201 $61,377,530 $45,161,519 $40,231,800
584
Implementation of any of the options being proposed by the Scarborough Waterfront Access
Plan would result in the creation of a continuous access route along the waterfront between
Bluffers Park and East Point Park. This work would accelerate the implementation of priority
shoreline erosion control projects to the hazardous sectors of the Scarborough Bluffs, including
in the Meadowcliffe, Guild Inn and Grey Abbey shoreline sectors. A continuous access route
along the Scarborough shoreline would also provide additional emergency access to Bluffers
Park, which is an issue of concern as outlined in the Life and Fire Safety Report: Scarborough
Bluffs & Bluffers Park Marina (1989). Toronto Water will need to undertake the analysis of the
various options to determine what, if any, benefit the shoreline trail/emergency access route
could provide to the Highland Creek plant.
As per the direction of Toronto Water, TRCA staff are devising an implementation schedule that
would see completion of the planning, design, approval and implementation of all Options
outlined in the Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan by 2017. The accelerated timelines
provided by the plan would support TRCA’s mandate of providing protection to life and
property from the risk of flood and erosion in a timely manner (Conservation Ontario Act, 1954).
It is anticipated that it will take more than 20 years to complete priority erosion control projects
at the present level of annual progress due to the lack of available funding for major shoreline
erosion control works.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE
TRCA staff are in the process of preparing further details of the Scarborough Waterfront Access
Plan, including refining cost estimates for the options described above, and a proposed
schedule for planning, design and implementation of the works. Pending the City of Toronto's
direction and funding commitments to proceed with one of the options, TRCA would proceed
with the completion of an environmental assessment, detailed design and approval process.
Shoreline remedial works for the Meadowcliffe sector are currently the subject of a Class
Environmental Assessment (Class EA), with approval to commence works anticipated for 2010.
Shoreline remedial works in the Guild Inn sector have received approval under the Class EA;
however the project is on hold due to lack of sufficient funding for construction.
Implementation would allow TRCA to expedite current works underway on the Scarborough
waterfront, thereby reducing risks to public safety and hazard land management by providing
long-term shoreline protection and providing public access to improve the functionality of the
waterfront into the future. In addition to the provision of public access and safety, the
Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan will provide opportunities for aquatic habitat restoration
and natural heritage improvements.
585
FINANCIAL DETAILS
The Scarborough Waterfront Access Plan is a key investment in meeting the long-term
objectives of TRCA’s Waterfront Plan. Upon the selection of a preferred option, TRCA staff will
prepare a funding and implementation plan.
Report prepared by: Patricia Newland, 416-392-9690
Emails: pnewland@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Patricia Newland, 416-392-9690
Emails: pnewland@trca.on.ca
Date: January 18, 2010
_________________________________________
RES.#A254/09 -REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION
CONSERVATION AUTHORITY-OWNED LAND
1200, 1220 and 1240 7th Concession Road, Township of Uxbridge, CFN
30663. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of
a request to recognize a right-of-way claim across TRCA property and a
request to explore the possibility of a sale of a portion of TRCA property
directly south of 1200 7th, Concession, Township of Uxbridge, Regional
Municipality of Durham, Duffins Creek watershed.
(Executive Res.#B190/09)
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) land located directly south
of 1200 7th Concession Road, Township of Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham,
be retained for conservation purposes;
THAT TRCA enter into agreements with James McLean of 1200 7th Concession Road,
Kirsten Cherian of 1220 7th Concession Road and Claudio Giancristiano of 1240 7th
Concession Road for the conveyance of a permanent non-exclusive right-of-way to each
of the said persons or their successors in title, the said right-of-way to be over
approximately 20 metres of TRCA-owned land along the rear of 1200 and 1220 7th
Concession Road and the Unopened Road Allowance being part of Lot 2, Concession 7,
Township of Uxbridge, Regional Municipality of Durham, on the following terms and
conditions:
consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other costs to be
paid by James McLean of 1200 7th Concession Road, Kirsten Cherian of 1220 7th
Concession Road, and Claudio Giancristiano of 1240 7th Concession Road;
it will be the responsibility of those owners to obtain at their expense all necessary
severances under the Planning Act, including the costs of all fees, surveys and
registrations in connection with the severances and conveyances - any conditions of
the severances will be satisfactory to TRCA staff;
586
the right-of-ways to be granted shall be for delivery of supplies and materials as
required and for access for maintenance, and not be for regular use as a driveway for
ingress and egress;
the right-of-way agreement and conveyance shall be otherwise satisfactory to TRCA
staff;
the right-of-way agreement and conveyance is to be completed be December 31, 2011,
but without any further obligations or rights by the owners if not completed by then;
THAT TRCA staff be directed to proceed with fencing the boundaries of the TRCA-owned
lands as necessary in the Glen Major hamlet, including 1200 and 1220 7th Concession
and gates placed to provide for the right-of-way;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A255/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Rouge River Watershed
Baif Developments Limited, Regional Municipality of York, CFN 43369.
Acquisition of property located at 607 Gamble Road in Town of
Richmond Hill, Regional Municipality of York, under the 'Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010', Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Rouge River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B191/09)
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT 0.9558 hectares (2.361 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Part of Lots 1, 2
and 3, Registered Plan 4667 and designated as Block 10 on draft M-Plan prepared by
Holding Jones Vanderveen Inc. under job no. 94-597-MPLAN, Town of Richmond Hill,
Regional Municipality of York at 607 Gamble Road, be purchased from Baif Developments
Limited;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
587
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A256/09 -GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2006-2010
Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed
Institute of Gurmat Studies, Regional Municipality of Peel, CFN 43393.
Acquisition of property located at 9658 Goreway Drive in City of
Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, under the 'Greenlands
Acquisition Project for 2006-2010', Flood Plain and Conservation
Component, Humber River watershed.
(Executive Res.#B192/09)
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
THAT 0.9558 hectares (2.361 acres), more or less, of vacant land, being Part of East Half
Lot 9, Concession 7, Northern Division and designated as Block 1 and 5 on draft R-Plan
prepared by Ted Van Lankveld, Ontario Land Surveyors under job no. 09-1930, City of
Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel at 9658 Goreway Drive, be purchased from the
Institute of Gurmat Studies;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land
free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, be instructed to complete
the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental
to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action
may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and
the signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
588
RES.#A257/09 -CITY OF TORONTO
Request for a Permanent Easement for 2250 mm Diameter Watermain
Highland Creek Watershed, City of Toronto (Scarborough Community
Council Area), CFN 43341. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto
to provide a permanent easement for a 2250 mm diameter watermain,
between Old Kingston Road and Stornoway Court, east of Morningside
Avenue, Highland Creek watershed, City of Toronto (Scarborough
Community Council Area).
(Executive Res.#B193/09)
Moved by:Linda Pabst
Seconded by:Gay Cowbourne
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request
from the City of Toronto to provide a permanent easement for a 2250 mm diameter
watermain, between Old Kingston Road and Stornoway Court, east of Morningside
Avenue, Highland Creek watershed, City of Toronto (Scarborough Community Council
Area);
AND WHEREAS it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives as set out in
Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to cooperate with the City of Toronto in
this instance;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a permanent easement containing a total of
0.15 hectares (0.38 acres), more or less, be granted to the City of Toronto for a 2250 mm
diameter watermain, said land being Part of Lot 8, Concession 1, City of Toronto
(Scarborough Community Council Area), as shown on a plan entitled: EASEMENT,
prepared by City of Toronto - Technical Services, Survey and Mapping, under their Job
No. 2009-0529-2;
THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, plus all legal, survey and other costs to
be paid by the City of Toronto;
THAT the City of Toronto is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries,
damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from the
granting of this easement or the carrying out of construction;
THAT an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigative measures being
carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the City of Toronto;
THAT all TRCA lands disturbed by the proposed works be revegetated/stabilized
following construction and, where deemed appropriate by TRCA staff, a landscape plan
be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval in accordance with existing TRCA
landscaping guidelines;
THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06 be obtained prior to commencement
of construction;
589
THAT said easement be subject to approval of the Minister of Natural Resources in
accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter
C.27, as amended;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may
be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the
signing and execution of any documents.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A258/09 -PARTICIPATING MUNICIPALITY FUNDING
Proposal for Additional Funding Arrangements. Options and implications
of changes to the funding of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
by participating municipalities.
(BAAB Res.#C13/09)
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Mike Del Grande
THAT the draft proposal for additional funding arrangements dated December 15, 2009,
be received;
AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to meet with appropriate officials of Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) participating municipalities to review the draft
proposal and report to the Authority on the results of these discussions.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A259/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Mike Del Grande
Seconded by:Glenn Mason
THAT Section II item EX8.1 - Wild Water Kingdom, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #11/09, held on January 15, 2010, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A260/09 -SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Pamela Gough
590
THAT Section II item EX8.2 - Regional Watershed Monitoring Project, contained in
Executive Committee Minutes #11/09, held on January 15, 2010, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RULES OF CONDUCT
Teleconferencing. Use of teleconferencing at Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority board meetings.
THAT the Rules of Conduct for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be
amended to allow for teleconferencing at Authority meetings only when quorum otherwise
cannot be reached.
AMENDMENT
RES.#A261/09
Moved by:Lois Griffin
Seconded by:Suzan Hall
THAT the main motion be replaced with the following:
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on Rules of Conduct be received.
THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED
THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report on Rules of Conduct be received.
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #10/09, held on January 8, 2010, the Authority directed staff to report on
the viability of allowing members to participate in Authority meetings by teleconference when
the agenda is believed to have relatively few items and no major presentations or important
delegations.
Currently Section 26.4 of TRCA's Rules of Conduct reads as follows in regard to this matter:
26.4Teleconferencing shall be an option for TRCA Executive Committee and advisory
board meetings only when:
26.4.1quorum cannot otherwise be reached; or
26.4.2the agenda has a moderate number of routine items and includes no
delegations, presentations or hearings; or
26.4.3 it is the August Executive Committee meeting scheduled to deal with
Section II items only.
591
Staff has also been requested to look into technology that would facilitate more effective
teleconference meetings.
RATIONALE
TRCA staff is recommending that the Rules of Conduct be changed to allow teleconferencing at
Authority meetings only when quorum cannot otherwise be achieved. The above-noted
Section 26.4 would not change as it pertains to Executive Committee and advisory board
meetings. The Rules of Conduct would be amended to read as follows:
26.4 Teleconferencing shall be an option at Authority meetings only when
quorum cannot otherwise be reached, and for Executive Committee and
advisory board meetings only when:
26.4.1quorum cannot otherwise be reached; or
26.4.2the agenda has a moderate number of routine items and includes no
delegations, presentations or hearings; or
26.4.3 it is the August Executive Committee meeting scheduled to deal with
Section II items only.
The recommendation to allow teleconferencing at Authority meetings only when quorum
cannot be reached is based on the following:
1.Public Access
When the Authority approved the change in governance structure, which came into effect
with Annual Authority Meeting #1/08, held on February 29, 2008, to eliminate the Public Use
and Watershed Management advisory boards, Authority members indicated the need to
ensure that the Authority remain a publically accessibly body and that members of the
public always have open access to the members at meetings. Participation in person is
essential to providing this level of service.
2.Agenda Length
The history of Authority meetings in the two years since the new governance structure was
implemented is that no Authority meeting were less than 60 minutes and the average length
of Authority meetings was 150 minutes.
3.Agenda Items
It is very difficult to predict which items will involve significant discussion. Some meetings
which have gone for more than 2 hours were believed by some members to have
represented a "light agenda". The items on these "light agenda" meetings were of
considerable interest to enough members that a meaningful and healthy dialogue ensued
with the meeting being relatively lengthy.
4.Precedent
The Authority has held meetings with participation by teleconference on rare occasions.
Staff recommends that the Rules of Conduct change to allow for teleconferencing only when
quorum cannot be otherwise reached. It is anticipated that this practice would be required very
infrequently as the meeting schedule has been structured to avoid as many conflicts as
possible. This should happen only in exceptional situations.
592
In regard to the matter of technology, staff will consider use of improved teleconference
technology (including video/internet options) subject to financial feasibility and meeting room
constraints. A report will follow later this year.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Emails: kstranks@trca.on.ca
Date: January 12, 2010
_________________________________________
RES.#A262/09 -SUMMARY OF REQUESTS FOR QUOTATIONS AND REQUESTS FOR
PROPOSALS
July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009. Receipt of the 2009 year-end
summary of procurements approved by the Chief Administrative Officer
or his designate.
Moved by:Jack Heath
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
(TRCA) procurements approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or his designate for
the July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009 period, and the 2009 sole source summary, be
received.
CARRIED
BACKGROUND
At Authority Meeting #5/05, held on June 24, 2005, Resolution #A124/05 approved the
Purchasing Policy, and resolved, in part, as follows:
staff report to the Business Excellence Advisory Board semi-annually with a list of all
Requests for Quotations and Requests for Proposals approved by the Chief
Administrative Officer pursuant to Schedule 'A';
Pursuant to the resolution quoted above, the summary of Requests for Quotations and
Requests for Proposals from July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009, is found in Attachments 2 and
3, respectively. The report includes approvals of $10,000 or greater, to the maximum allowable
limit under the policy, approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or his designate.
The attached summary includes the criteria as to why non-competitive procurement was
appropriate for the particular goods or services procured, as per Section 1.14 of Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority's Purchasing Policy (Attachment 1).
As permitted under the approved policy, the Chief Administrative Officer has designated senior
staff, generally including director and manager level positions, approval authority for purchases
up to $10,000 (including PST but not GST as TRCA recoups GST).
593
In 2009, the total amount spent on sole source contracts, for contracts amounting to $10,000 or
more, approved by the Chief Administrative Officer or his designate, the Executive Committee
or the Authority, totalled $3,376,646.30, plus approximately $22,000.00 for contingency
allowances, shipping and dispersements, plus applicable taxes. Some of these purchases are
multi-year contracts. Purchases are also made for goods and services under $10,000, but
TRCA does not collectively track which ones are sole source versus competitive, so these
purchases are not included in the total.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Email: kstranks@trca.on.ca
For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264
Email: kstranks@trca.on.ca
Date: January 12, 2010
Attachments: 3
594
Attachment 1
TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
PURCHASING POLICY
Section 1.14Non - Competitive Procurement Process
A non-competitive procurement process shall only be used if one or more of the following
conditions apply and a process of negotiation is undertaken to obtain the best value in the
circumstances for the TRCA. Authorized Buyers are authorized to enter into negotiations
without formal competitive bids, under the following circumstances:
1.The goods and services are only available from one source or one supplier by reason
of:
A statutory or market based monopoly
A fluctuating market prevents the TRCA from obtaining price protection or owing to
market conditions, required goods or services are in short supply
Existence of exclusive rights (patent, copyright or licence)
Need for compatibility with goods and services previously acquired and there are no
reasonable alternatives, substitutes or accommodations
Need to avoid violating warranties and guarantees where service is required
2.An attempt to purchase the required goods and services has been made in good faith
using a competitive method and has failed to identify a successful supplier.
3.When the extension or reinstatement of an existing contract would prove most
cost-effective or beneficial. The extension shall not exceed one year.
4.The goods and services are required as a result of an emergency, which would not
reasonably permit the use of the other methods permitted.
5.The required goods and services are to be supplied by a particular vendor or supplier
having special knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be provided by
any other supplier.
6.Any other sole or single source purchase permitted under the provisions of this policy
including those noted in Schedule ‘B’.
595
Attachment 2
REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION
Sole Source (up to $50,000)
July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
Sole Source
Criteria
(Section 1.14
of TRCA's
Purchasing
Policy)
Internationally Trained Professionals - Interns Career Edge 17,820.00 5
Black Creek Pioneer Village - Summer
Promotions
EZ Rock Radio 18,750.00 3
Maple Nature Reserve Quonset Hut Site
Regeneration
Schollen and Company, Inc.43,000.00 5
Weston Environmental Leaders of Tomorrow
Program - Digital Cameras
Pentax Canada Inc.11,475.00 3
Healthy Yards Native Plant Cards CJ Graphics Inc.9,900.00 3
City of Toronto Wet Weather Flow Monitoring
Program - upgrade three permanent
watercourse monitoring stations
Avensys 35,597.00
+ shipping
1
Hydraulic Analysis and Floodplain Mapping
Update of the Humber River
R.J. Burnside and Associates
Limited
13,000.00 3
Asbestos Abatement at Albion Hills Field Centre Percon Construction Inc.$26,005.79
+ 10% contingency
4
Heart Lake Conservation Area Beach Centre
Washroom Retrofit Project - interior renovations
B.L.T. Construction Services
Inc.
$46,580.00
+ 5% contingency
3
Kortright Permeable Pavement Evaluation
Study - Four 3 L Tipping Bucket Flow Meters
Geneq Inc.14,285.71 1 & 2
Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action
Plan Project - Stormwater Modelling Services
Computational Hydraulics
International
25,000.00 3 & 5
Don Watershed Flood Forecasting Model Computational Hydraulics Int.$35,500.00
+ 10% contingency
1
Climate Change and Carbon Footprint
Calculator Communications Campaign
Square One 11,000.00 5
Kleinburg New Forest North - Earthworks Anpro Environmental Group 22,000.00 3
596
REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION
Lowest Bid (up to $100,000)
July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested/
Complete
Bids
Received
ALBION HILLS CONSERVATION AREA
Albion Hills Beach Centre Barrier Free
Washroom Construction
Robertson Construction
Services
12,980.11
+ 10% contingency
3/3
Ultraviolet Sanitization System for Aquatic
Facility
Beta and Associates Inc.11,241.08 3/3
Laundry Equipment at Albion Hills Campground Coinamatic Commercial
Laundry Inc.
16,491.00 3/3
Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Picnic
Shelter Construction Project
Target Construction 29,610.00 4/3
Chain Link Fencing for Aquatic Facility be
awarded to at a total cost not to exceed $
Roma Fence Ltd.24,488.00
+ 10% contingency
7/3
ACQUISITION OF EQUIPMENT
Utility Vehicle Kooy Brothers 11,089.95 5/3
Snowmobile A.T.C. Corral 10,438.00 6/3
GUILD INN SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECT
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 1,000
tonnes of 4 to 6 Tonne Armour Stone
J.C. Rock Limited 35,980.00 7/3
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 1,200
Tonnes of 300mm-600mm Riprap Stone
J.C. Rock Limited 29,376.00 7/3
BOB HUNTER LANDS
Window Replacement for 7733 14th Avenue,
Town of Markham
Frontier Group of Companies
Inc.
14,800.00 8/3
Window Replacement for 7629 Reesor Road,
Town of Markham
Frontier Group of Companies
Inc.
14,650.00 8/3
Driveway and Retaining Wall Repairs for 7659
Reesor Road, Town of Markham
York Paving 10,900.00 5/4
Claireville Conservation Area Paul Flood
Building Parking Lot Construction
Robertson Construction
Services Ltd.
81,933.50
+ 10% contingency
5/4
Replacement of Septic System for 10525
Kipling Avenue, Kleinburg
Smith Excavating Grading &
Septic Services
17,450.00 4/1
Kortright Centre for Conservation Front
Entrance Sign
The Earth Rangers
Foundation
43,452.15
for TRCA's share of the
project
Earth Rangers
received the
bids by a
competitive
process
Transport Canada Lands Leung Pond
Decommissioning Project - Supply and Delivery
of 17m of 3300mm x 2080mm x 2.8 mm
Galvanized Pipe and One-60cm Arch Coupler
Atlantic Industries Limited 11,682.40 3/3
Specialized Forestry Equipment Hakmet Ltd.27,000.00 3/3
597
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested/
Complete
Bids
Received
Lake St. George Field Centre Tankless Water
Heating System Project
Waza Water Systems 24,977.40
+ 10% contingency
4/2
Tommy Thompson Park (TTP) Embayment A
Shoreline Enhancement Project - Supply and
Delivery of 400 Tonnes of 254 to 660mm
Cobblestone
Glenn Windrem Trucking 16,908.00 3/3
DOWNSVIEW OFFICE BASEMENT RENOVATIONS
Remove and Dispose of Existing Office Walls
and Construction of New Offices
HMF Construction & Electric
Ltd.
12,200.00 4/3
Steelcase office Systems Components Festival Furniture 14,662.00 4/4
Terraseeding Services for Kleinburg New Forest
North Project
Hermann's Contracting
Services Ltd.
25,000.00 3/2
Durham Region Lands Invasive Plant
Management
Urban Forest Associates 13,904.00 3/3
Albion Hills Farm Deconstruction - Waste
Disposal Services
B.F.I. Canada 17,060.00 3/3
East Don Trail/CN Rail Bala 8.8 Subdivision -
Chain Link Fencing
Roma Fence 15,000.00 3/2
BLACK CREEK PIONEER VILLAGE
Black Creek Historic Brewery - Air Conditioning
Installation
Canadian Air Technology Inc.25,900.00 3/3
Roof Replacement of the Fisherville Church
Drive Shed
Traditional Roofworks Inc.19,878.00 3/3
Surveying of the Lands - William G. Love and
Mary Anne McEvenue Property
David Horwood Limited,
Ontario Land Surveyors
10,000.00 2/2
Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project -
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 2,300
Tonnes of 300mm to 600mm Riprap Stone
Glenn Windrem Trucking 55,200.00 10/5
Heart Lake Conservation Area Front Gates North York Welding 10,590.00
+ 10% contingency
3/3
CUMMER AVENUE BRIDGE PROJECT
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 800
Tonnes of 2 to 4 Tonne Armour Stone
J.C. Rock Limited 35,832.00 8/3
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 750
Tonnes of 150mm to 300mm Gabion Stone
Nelson Aggregate Company 21,375.00 8/3
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 450
Tonnes of 150mm to 300mm Boulders
Glenn Windrem Trucking 16,326.00 8/3
Replacement Generator Switch at G. Ross Lord
Dam
Foretech Electric Inc.17,498.00 3/3
Mimico Creek Wetland Berms - Supply and
Delivery of Approximately 672 Tonnes of
225mm to 450mm Riprap
Nelson Aggregates 18,432.96
+ 10% contingency
3/3
598
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested/
Complete
Bids
Received
Don River Watershed Plan Printing Creative Path 21,373.00
+ delivery
3/3
Invasive Plant Cards Printing Warren’s Waterless Printing
Inc.
17,358.00
+ delivery
3/3
Wexford Park Bank Protection Project - Supply
and Delivery of Approximately 550 Tonnes of 2
to 4 Tonne Armour Stone
Glenn Windrem Trucking 27,368.00 5/3
Swan Lake Roof Replacement B.W. Doucette 31,720.00 5/4
NORTH COLONEL DANFORTH PARK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 1150
Tonnes of 50mm Crusher Run Limestone
James Dick Construction
Limited
21,413.00 5/3
Supply and Delivery of Approximately 550
Tonnes of 19mm Crusher Run Limestone
James Dick Construction
Limited
10,241.00 5/3
Restoration Services Centre - Supply and
Installation of Secondary Electrical Service
Bolton Electric 17,300.00
+ contingency
6/2
599
REQUESTS FOR QUOTATION
Lowest Bid Not Accepted (up to $25,000)
July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to
Exceed
($)
Plus
Applicable
Taxes
Number of Quotations
Requested/Complete
Bids Received
Canon Colour Copier Canon Canada 21,813.60 3/3
600
Attachment 3
REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL
Competitive Bid (up to $100,000)
July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
Number of
Quotations
Requested/
Complete
Bids
Received
Traffic Impact Study iTRANS Consulting Inc.32,00.00
+ 10% contingency
4/2
PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN
Eco-Efficiency Program for Food Processors Guelph Food Technology
Centre
21,000.00 2/2
Small to Medium Enterprises Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Strategy Program
Climate Smart 35,870.00 8/5
Rooftop Solar Zizzo Climate Law 20,000.00 5/5
Heart Lake Conservation Area Outdoor
Swimming Pool Development Conceptual Plan
and Budget Development
Harrington and McAvan Inc.80,690.00
+ 10% contingency
6/3
Lake St. George Field Centre Ground Source
Heating and Cooling System Project
Geo-Solar Systems 64,607.00
+ 10% contingency
9/3
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the
Claireville and G. Ross Lord Flood Control Dams
GENIVAR Ontario Inc. 97,080.00 3/3
SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS AND EROSION RISK ASSESSMENT
4 Bruce Farm Drive, City of Toronto Terraprobe Limited 8,950.00
+ 1,000.00 contingency
4/3
Immediately North of 51 Deer Valley Drive, Village
of Bolton
Terraprobe Limited 9,850.00
+ 1,000.00 contingency
4/3
Job Search Workplace Communications Training
for Professional Access and Integration
Enhancement Program
JVS 28,194.00 3/2
Upper Mimico Creek Aquatic Restoration Project -
Sithe Global/Goreway Station Partnership
Property - Geomorphological Services
Geomorphic Solution
(member of The Sernas
Group)
28,069.00 3/1
2009 Topographic Base Mapping for the
Etobicoke, Petticoat, Duffins and Carruthers
Creeks, and Humber and Rouge Rivers,
Watersheds
Northway Photomap 84,349.00 3/3
Toronto Island Marina Seawall Repair Project Halcrow Yolles 51,320.00
+ 10% contingency
10/3
Server Virtualization Upgrade Dell Canada Inc.79,476.06 6/5
Mimico Creek Barrier Mitigation Project AECOM 23,150.00
+ 5,000.00 contingency
10/3
601
REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL
Sole Source (up to $50,000)
July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009
Project Awarded Bidder Cost Not to Exceed
($)
Plus Applicable
Taxes
Sole Source
Criteria
Groundwater Model Refinements & Outputs EarthFx Inc.17,000.00 5
Ressor Wetland Plantings Friends of the Rouge
Watershed
35,545.20 3
Peer Review of Water Quality Studies Dr. Martin Auer 27,500.00 5
Mentoring Program for Internationally Trained
Professionals
Skills for Change 23,900.00 5
Electrical Upgrades at Albion Hills Field Centre Percon Construction Inc.28,095.63
+ 10% contingency
5
Website Maintenance The Jonah Group 48,000.00 5
Recovery of Taxes HMT Sales Tax Consultants Inc.Anticipated to be
25,000.00 - 30,000.00
5
Aquatic Plants Propagation Materials Acorus Restoration 42,840.51 2
Claireville Trail Connection SNC Lavalin Inc.47,350.00 5
Conservation Centre for Climate Change
Response - Consulting Services
Phil Goldsmith & Company
Architect
$20,000.00
+ disbursements
5
_________________________________________
602
RES.#A263/09 -WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by:Suzan Hall
Seconded by:Laurie Bruce
THAT Section IV item AUTH8.2.1 in regard to Partners in Project Green Minutes of
Meeting #3/09, held on October 15, 2009, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A264/09 -SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by:Ron Moeser
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Section IV item EX9.1 - Lowest Bid Not Accepted, contained in Executive Committee
Minutes #11/09, held on January 15, 2010, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
RES.#A265/09 - SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by:Bonnie Littley
Seconded by:Pamela Gough
THAT Section IV item BAAB8.1 - 2010 Preliminary Estimates, Operating and Capital,
contained in Budget/Audit Advisory Board Minutes #4/09, held on January 8, 2010, be
received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
RES.#A266/09 -APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO
REGULATION 166/06
Moved by:Paul Ainslie
Seconded by:Bonnie Littley
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items EX10.1 - EX10.54, inclusive, contained in Executive
Committee Minutes 11/09, held on January 15, 2010, be received.
CARRIED
_________________________________________
603
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:32 p.m., on Friday, January 29, 2010.
Gerri Lynn O'Connor
Chair
/ks
Brian Denney
Secretary-Treasurer