Regional Municipality of Waterloo

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT TERMS OF REFERENCE

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

FEBRUARY 28, 2005 February 28, 2005

EA Project Coordination Section Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch Ministry of Environment 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, ON M4V 1L5

Attention: Catherine McLennon, Project Officer

Dear Ms. McLennon:

RE: Draft Terms of Reference and Commencement of Pre-Submission Review Period Rapid Transit Initiative Environmental Assessment (EA) Regional Municipality of Waterloo

Our previous correspondence to external government agency representatives dated November 29, 2004 provided notice that as the proponent, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo would be preparing an Individual EA Terms of Reference to develop a rapid transit initiative. Since then, the Draft Terms of Reference have been prepared and enclosed for review and comment as either an agency already on record as requesting further information, or one that may have comments about the Terms of Reference.

IBI Group was retained by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to prepare the Terms of Reference for this higher order transit service extending from Waterloo to Cambridge. The enclosed document is intended to fulfil the requirements of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, as well as the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

Development of the Draft Terms of Reference included an initial public consultation session held on December 8, 2004 in Kitchener, with the results summarized in the attached document. A second public consultation session will now be held on March 8, 2005 as described on the attached public notice to solicit and collect public input on the Draft Terms of Reference.

Please provide any comments and responses to this Draft Terms of Reference over the pre-submission review period closing on April 1, 2005 to either of the following project contacts. Also, if you have any questions regarding the project undertaking, rationale and process, also contact either:

Mr. Graham Vincent, P. Eng. Mr. Don Drackley, MCIP Director, Transportation Planning Senior Associate Regional Municipality of Waterloo IBI Group 150 Frederick Street 31-130 Cedar Street, Suite 107 Kitchener, ON N2G 4J3 Cambridge, ON N1S 5A5 Phone: 575-4489 Phone: 620-8898 Fax: 575-4449 Fax: 622-3621 e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected]

5th Floor, 230 Richmond Street West, Toronto, ON, M5V 1V6, Canada (416) 596-1930, FAX (416) 596-0644 IBI is a group of companies providing professional services and is affiliated with IBI Group Architects. EA Project Coordination Section Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch Ministry of Environment 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, ON M4V 1L5

- 2 - March 1, 2005

Yours truly.

IBI Group

Don Drackley, MCIP Senior Associate cc: Graham Vincent, Region of Waterloo David Durant, Region of Waterloo Mike Stone, MNR, Guelph Mitch Wilson, MNR, Guelph John MacDonald, Ministry of Culture, London Jennifer Graham Harkness, MTO, London Greg Tokarz, MTO, Downsview Tom Broen, MPIR, Toronto Meredith Beresford, MMAH, Toronto Rob Dobos, Environment Canada Eric Advokaat, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Mark Wright, Transport Canada Referrals Coordinator, DFO Mark Yeates, Parks Canada Regional Manager, Environmental Affairs, Ontario Region, Transport Canada TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1: BACKGROUND...... 1 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Purpose of the Terms of Reference...... 1 1.2 Organization of the Terms of Reference Document...... 2 1.3 Federal/Provincial Environmental Assessment Coordination ...... 2 1.3.1 Federal/Provincial EA Coordination...... 2 1.3.2 Coordinated EA Process ...... 2 1.3.3 Application of the Coordinated EA Process to the Proposed Project...... 2 1.4 Submission Statement...... 2 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE UNDERTAKING, ITS PURPOSE AND STATEMENT OF ITS RATIONALE...... 3 2.1 Description of the Undertaking...... 3 2.2 Description of the Purpose of the Undertaking...... 3 2.3 Statement of the Rationale for the Undertaking...... 3 2.3.1 Provincial Policy Statement ...... 4 2.3.2 Regional Official Policies Plan ...... 5 2.3.3 Regional Growth Management Strategy ...... 5 2.3.4 Provincial Growth Plan...... 7 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA FOR THE ASSESSMENT ...... 7 3.1 Study Area Delineation...... 7 3.2 Description of Existing Built Environment...... 10 3.2.1 Uptown Waterloo North ...... 11 3.2.2 Uptown Waterloo to Downtown Kitchener ...... 12 3.2.3 Downtown Kitchener to South Kitchener (Fairview Park Mall) ...... 13 3.2.4 South Kitchener to Cambridge (Preston) ...... 13 3.2.5 Preston Towne Centre to “The Delta” ...... 15 3.2.6 Hespeler Road Area ...... 17 3.2.7 The “Delta” to South Cambridge...... 17 3.3 Description of Existing Natural Environment...... 18 3.3.1 Provincially Designated Environmental Features ...... 19 3.3.2 Regionally Designated Natural Habitat Network ...... 19 3.3.3 Watercourse Crossings ...... 19 3.4 Potential Environmental Effects ...... 19 3.5 Consultation During Preparation of the Terms of Reference...... 20 3.6 Consultation Framework for EA Preparation...... 20 3.7 Pre-Submission Review of the Draft EA Report...... 22

February 28, 2005 Page i. TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT’D)

PART 2: THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS...... 23 4. PHASE 1: ASSESSMENT OF THE UNDERTAKING AND ALTERNATIVES TO THE UNDERTAKING ...... 23 4.1 Identifying Alternatives to the Undertaking...... 24 4.2 Criteria for Assessing Alternatives to the Undertaking ...... 24 4.3 Selecting the Preferred Alternative...... 25 4.4 Next Steps...... 25 5. PHASE 2: ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF CARRYING OUT THE UNDERTAKI NG ...... 26 5.1 Step 1: Screening Process for Alternative Technologies and Route Designs...... 27 5.1.1 Identification of Alternative Technologies ...... 27 5.1.2 Identification of Alternative Route Designs ...... 27 5.1.3 Approach to Screen Alternative Methods ...... 28 5.1.4 Next Steps ...... 28 5.2 Step 2: Evaluation and Ranking of Reasonable Route Section Alternatives...... 29 5.2.1 Approach to Detailed Assessment and Ranking ...... 29 5.2.2 Evaluation and Ranking Criteria ...... 29 5.2.3 Next Steps ...... 30 5.3 Step 3: Evaluation of Reasonable System Alternatives to Identify a Preferred System...... 30 5.3.1 Approach to Detailed Assessment of Reasonable System Alternatives ...... 30 5.3.2 Evaluation Criteria ...... 31 5.3.3 Next Steps ...... 31 6. PHASE 3: ASSESSMENT OF THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE UNDERTAKING...... 31 6.1 Identification of Initial Preliminary Design for the System...... 31 6.2 Consultation on the Initial Preliminary Design...... 32 6.3 Finalization of the Preliminary Design...... 32

PART 3: OTHER REQUIREMENTS...... 33 7. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED ...... 33 7.1 Regional Approval ...... 33 7.2 Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA)...... 34 8. COMPLIANCE MONITORING ...... 34 9. TERMS OF REFERENCE FLEXIBILITY...... 35

February 28, 2005 Page ii. TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT’D)

List of Exhibits 1. Regional Growth Management Strategy 6 2. Environmental Assessment Study Area 8 3. Study Area Sections 10 4. Uptown Waterloo North Section 11 5. Uptown Waterloo to Downtown Kitchener Section 12 6. Downtown Kitchener to South Kitchener (Fairview Park Mall) Section 14 7. South Kitchener to Preston Section 15 8. Preston Towne Centre to Delta/Hespeler Road Area Section 16 9. The Delta to South Kitchener Section 18 10. Goals and Criteria for Assessing Alternatives to the Undertaking 24 11. Alternative Route Designs 27 12. Criteria for Screening Alternative Methods 28 13. Criteria for Evaluating & Ranking Short-Listed Alternative Methods 29 14. Criteria for Evaluating Alternative Systems 31

Appendices

1. Advice to Proponents at the Terms of Reference Stage for a Coordinated Federal/Provincial Environmental Assessment Process

2. Results of Pre-Submission Public Consultation

3. Results of Pre-Submission Agency Contacts

February 28, 2005 Page iii. Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

PART 1: BACKGROUND

1. INTRODUCTION

The Regional Municipality of Waterloo (the “Region”) is seeking to develop a new rapid transit system within the primary urbanization area 1 identified in its Regional Growth Management Strategy. This area links the major urban centres of the City of Cambridge, City of Kitchener and City of Waterloo. This system is intended to address the Region’s future growth from a population approaching 500,000 today, to over 700,000 over the next 25 years 2.

The Region believes this new transit system offers major public benefits to urban life and the natural environment.

The new rapid transit system is a key component of the Region’s new Regional Growth Management Strategy. Work on this strategy began in early 2001 and has involved extensive public consultation. As part of this strategy, planning studies concluded that road expansions were not a realistic option, and advised the Region to make aggressive efforts to pursue land use and transportation policies that would promote public transit and re-urbanization. The Strategy and its key components enjoy strong public support within the Region.

The system is also intended to provide one part of a planned inter-regional transit system linking the Region to the Greater Toronto Area through the City of Guelph to the east and the Cities of Brantford and Hamilton to the south. The provincial importance of this planned system may be seen in the newly released Draft Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (February 2005).

The Region must obtain approval under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act for this kind of major undertaking. Individual Environment Assessment approval is required, and this requirement begins with Terms of Reference approved by the Minister. 1.1 Purpose of the Terms of Reference

The purpose of the Terms of Reference is to provide the project proponent with binding approval on what must be addressed in its Environmental Assessment. To ensure that such approval meets the requirements of the Act, the Terms of Reference phase includes a process to obtain approval. This process begins with the proponent developing a draft Terms of Reference. This draft must then be made available to the Ministry of the Environment for the Ministry and other interested public agencies. The draft must also be made available to the public for review and comment. Following this opportunity for government and public review of the draft Terms of Reference, a proponent may then modify the Terms of Reference for final submission to the Minister. Upon receipt of final submissions, the Minister will review the proposed Terms of Reference and received comments, and approve or refuse the Terms of Reference.

1 Throughout this Terms of Reference, the area defined by the primary reurbanization area is meant to refer to the area covered in orange in the June 23, 2003 Regional Growth Management Strategy Report as shown on Exhibit 1 in this Terms of Reference, and expanded by an additional 500 metre width. The Region is presently locating the precise boundary of this area on a GIS basis, which will be part of the final submitted Terms of Reference document to the Minister.. 2 See Growth Outlook for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (January 2005), p.37 as referenced in the Ontario Government’s Draft Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (February 2005), p.13

February 28, 2005 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

1.2 Organization of the Terms of Reference Document

The present Terms of Reference document has three parts.

Part 1 provides background on the proposed undertaking and the Region’s policies, studies and consultations leading to this proposal.

Part 2 describes the assessment process which the Region proposes to follow to obtain approval for this proposed undertaking.

Part 3 describes other approvals that may be required or associated with this proposed undertaking. 1.3 Federal/Provincial Environmental Assessment Coordination

1.3.1 FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL EA COORDINATION

The proponent’s undertaking is subject to the requirements of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. The requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) may also apply. The proponent intends to work in a coordinated way with provincial and federal governments, both governments having informally agreed to coordinate their respective EA processes established by the applicable environmental assessment legislation.

1.3.2 COORDINATED EA PROCESS

The proponent will be guided by the federal/provincial coordination process chart outlined in the supporting documentation in Appendix 1 of this Terms of Reference document. This proposed approach is designed to address the information requirements of both federal and provincial Environmental Assessment Acts.

1.3.3 APPLICATION OF THE COORDINATED EA PROCESS TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

It is recognized by both the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (on behalf of the federal authorities), and the proponent that ongoing dialogue on the information requirements is required throughout the Environmental Assessment process as more is learned about the specifics of the undertaking. As such, it may be necessary for the proponent to provide additional or more detailed information as the Environmental Assessment process proceeds. The intent is to produce a single Environmental Assessment body of documentation on environmental effects to meet all of the information needs of both the federal and provincial governments. To the extent practical, federal/provincial information requirements regarding potential factors to be assessed in the context of this study have been integrated. General information requirements under CEAA can be found in Appendix 1 of this Terms of Reference in a Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency paper entitled Advice to Proponents at the Terms of Reference Stage for a Coordinated Federal/Provincial EA Process. 1.4 Submission Statement

The Regional Municipality of Waterloo is the proponent for this Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference that have been prepared in accordance with Section 6(2)(a) of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act.

February 28, 2005 Page 2 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE UNDERTAKING, ITS PURPOSE AND STATEMENT OF ITS RATIONALE

The Act includes requirements to describe an undertaking and its purpose and to also state the rationale for the undertaking. At this stage of the environmental assessment, the Region seeks to address these requirements in general or conceptual terms, leaving fuller articulation of these topics to the assessment itself. 2.1 Description of the Undertaking

In general, the Region is proposing to develop a rapid transit system within the primary re- urbanization area identified in the Regional Growth Management Strategy. The full conceptual description of this undertaking is set out below:

Definition of the “undertaking”

For this Environmental Assessment and Terms of Reference, the undertaking may be described and defined as:

- a proposed rapid transit system,

- that is located within the primary re-urbanization area identified in the Regional Growth Management Strategy

and includes

- one or more proposed rapid transit technologies,

- one or more proposed rapid transit routes,

- several proposed rapid transit stations, and

- one or more proposed facilities to connect rapid transit with other transportation modes. 2.2 Description of the Purpose of the Undertaking

The proposed undertaking has a two-fold purpose. It is intended to provide greater transportation choice to the Region’s residents, businesses and institutions moving within and among the Region’s major urban areas. It is also intended to foster urban intensification and redevelopment within the Region’s primary re-urbanization area, and thereby avoid, delay or minimize the expansion of urban areas into the Region’s valuable agricultural, environmental and rural areas. 2.3 Statement of the Rationale for the Undertaking

The Region believes that this proposed undertaking has multiple rationales. At this preliminary stage, the Region offers two major rationales. The first rationale is that the provision of greater transportation choice to the Region’s residents, businesses and institutions will have a broad range of anticipated benefits including improved air quality, improved public health, a more balanced and integrated transportation system, urban revitalization and intensification and protection of the rural countryside against urban population and expansion pressures.

February 28, 2005 Page 3 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

A second rationale for this undertaking is its consistency with and furtherance of various Provincial and Regional policies. Four of the most important are set out next.

2.3.1 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT

At this time, the leading provincial policy document to guide this environmental assessment is the newly released Provincial Policy Statement. Part IV of this document provides a new vision of Ontario’s land use planning system that is intended to provide the context for “applying” the Provincial Policy Statement. It includes the following:

“The Provincial Policy Statement focuses growth within settlement areas and away from significant or sensitive resources and areas which may pose a risk to public health and safety…Land use must be carefully managed to accommodate appropriate development to meet the full range of current and future needs, while achieving efficient development patterns.”

“Efficient development patterns optimize the use of land, resources and public investment in infrastructure and public service facilities. These land use patterns promote a mix of housing, employment, parks and open spaces, and transportation choices that facilitate pedestrian mobility and other modes of travel. They also support the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term, and minimize the undesirable effects of development, including impacts on air, water and other resources.”

“Strong communities, a clean and healthy environment and a strong economy are inextricably linked. Long-term prosperity, environmental health and social well-being should take precedence over short-term considerations.”

Part V of this document provides the policies to implement the legal requirements of the Strong Communities Act, 2004, amending the Planning Act. Section 1.0 of this Statement is entitled “Building Strong Communities” and provides numerous policies which directly and indirectly seek and support stronger municipal transit public systems. Public transit is explicitly mentioned in three policies and additional policies dealing with infrastructure and transportation systems also explicitly include transit in the definition of these terms. These policies include:

1.2.2 Where planning is conducted by an upper-tier municipality, the upper-tier municipality in consultation with lower-tier municipalities shall:

…

b) identify areas where growth will be directed, including the defi nition of nodes and the corridors linking these nodes;

…

d) where transit corridors exist or are to be developed, identify density targets for areas adjacent or in proximity to these corridors, …

1.4.3 Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range of housing types and densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area by:

…

February 28, 2005 Page 4 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

(d) promoting densities for new housing which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities, and support the use of alternative transportation modes and public transit in areas where it exists or is to be developed;

1.6.5.4 A land use pattern, density and mix of uses should be promoted that minimize the length and number of vehicle trips and support the development of viable choices and plans for public transit and other alternative transportation modes, including commuter rail and bus.

1.6.6.1 Planning authorities shall plan for and protect corridors and rights-of-way for transportation, transit and infrastructure facilities to meet current and projected needs.

1.8.1 Planning authorities shall support energy efficiency and improved air quality through land use and development patterns which:

a) promote compact form and a structure of nodes and corridors;

b) promote the use of public transit and other alternative transportation modes in and between residential, employment (including commercial, industrial and institutional uses) and other areas where these exist or are to be developed;

c) focus major employment, commercial and other travel-intensive land uses on sites which are well served by public transit where this exists or is to be developed, or designing these facilities to facilitate the establishment of public transit in the future;

The Region believes that the proposed rapid transit undertaking can be implemented in ways which are not only consistent with this Provincial Vision, but which actively promote this Vision.

2.3.2 REGIONAL OFFICIAL POLICIES PLAN

The Region first identified the need for a central transit corridor over 25 years ago. Ever since, the Region has identified a potential central transit corridor in its Official Plans, and now the Regional Official Policies Plan (ROPP). Under the current ROPP, there is a map showing the potential location of the corridor “symbolically”, as well as a brief policy statement on the potential corridor which makes specific provision for the use of abandoned rail corridors (ROPP Section 11.2.1).

2.3.3 REGIONAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

Since its formation in 1973, Waterloo Region has consistently ranked as one of the fastest growing communities in Canada. In the last five years alone, the Region’s population has increased by about 8%, or over 6,300 people per year. With a current population approaching 500,000, the Region is now the 11th largest urban area in Canada and the 5th largest in Ontario. Present forecasts anticipate 729,000 residents and 366,000 jobs by 2031 3.

Given this tremendous growth and the challenges it will create, in 2003 Waterloo Region developed a new Regional Growth Management Strategy entitled Planning Our Future. The Strategy identifies where, when and how the additional residents and jobs should best occur. Consistent with the Province’s “Smart Growth” principles, the strategy focused on the growth of urban and rural

3 Ibid

February 28, 2005 Page 5 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

communities in ways that would preserve and enhance the high quality of life now enjoyed in these communities. It has six goals: • Enhancing Our Natural Environment • Building Vibrant Urban Places • Providing Greater Transportation Choice • Protecting Our Countryside • Fostering a Strong Economy • Ensuring Overall Coordination and Cooperation

To achieve these goals, the Region will be adopting new approaches to re-urbanization and intensification in the main urban area formed by the Cities of Cambridge, Kitchener and Waterloo. Reshaping this urban environment will require the Region to consider its changing demographics towards an aging population, increased ethnic mix, increasing density forms and an increased number of people who do not or cannot travel by private automobile. Some of the benefits to this reshaped urban environment will be reduced air pollution, improved public health, reduced dependence on fossil fuels, long-term protection of ecological systems and precious rural lands and agricultural resources.

The Region considers the establishment of a rapid transit system in the Region’s primary re- urbanization area to be a main catalyst to achieving the goals set out in the Regional Growth Management Strategy. The primary re-urbanization area and symbolic potential central transit corridor are shown on Exhibit 1.

Exhibit 1 – Regional Growth Management Strategy

February 28, 2005 Page 6 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

The 30 kilometre corridor extends from immediately north of Waterloo, south through the Kitchener core area to the Galt City Centre core in Cambridge. A system planning approach seeks to integrate rapid transit with other public transit services such as municipal buses, intercity bus services, VIA Rail service and future GO Transit in the corridor. Additionally, the system approach calls for integration of rapid transit with other transportation options such as pedestrian travel and cycling.

The Region anticipates that, over time, its pursuit of new approaches to re-urbanization and intensification will support increased use of the proposed rapid transit system and conventional transit services.

The purpose of the Rapid Transit Initiative undertaking is to provide residents of Waterloo Region with greater transportation choice through the introduction of rapid transit service within the Region’s primary re-urbanization area set out in its Growth Management Strategy. This area includes the entire area of the potential central transit corridor symbolically represented in the Regional Official Policies Plan. Furthermore, the rationale for the undertaking is to provide a broad range of benefits, including improved air quality, improved public health, a more balanced and integrated transportation system, urban revitalization and intensification and protection of the rural countryside against urban population and expansion pressures.

2.3.4 PROVINCIAL GROWTH PLAN

The Province’s newly released Draft Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (February 2005) has designated Uptown Waterloo, Downtown Kitchener and Downtown Cambridge as “Urban Growth Centres”. According to the Draft Plan:

“Urban Growth Centres are areas designated as a focus for accommodating future growth and intensification. They are typically core metropolitan areas and economic hubs that serve as destinations with a regional focus. Urban growth centres have or are planned to have high and medium-density residential areas, mixed-use areas, office areas, retail areas, and regeneration areas. They typically exclude single-purpose employment lands and established residential neighbourhoods. They perform a regional services function, and as such have good inter-regional transportation connections (transit and/or automobile).”

The Draft Growth Plan also proposes that “Priority will be given to provincial infrastructure investments that support growth in the Growth Plan concept as set out in Schedule 2”. Schedule 2 identifies the proposed rapid transit system as part of “Proposed Higher Order Transit to 2031”. Also, the Draft Growth Plan proposes that the annual infrastructure planning process support development of an integrated regional transportation network for the movement of people and goods within and between sub-areas, as set out in Schedules 5 and 6. The proposed rapid transit system is identified on Schedule 5. 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA FOR THE ASSESSMENT 3.1 Study Area Delineation

The study area for this environmental assessment is located entirely within the “City Urban Areas” designation, and also includes the Mercedes Industrial/Commercial Area designation from the Regional Official Policies Plan. It extends from immediately north of Waterloo, through the Kitchener core area and south to the Galt City Centre core in Cambridge as illustrated on Exhibit 2.

February 28, 2005 Page 7 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Exhibit 2 – Environmental Assessment Study Area (Study Area Boundary )

February 28, 2005 Page 8 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Identification of the study area serves two purposes within an Environmental Assessment. First, it defines the outer limits of the undertaking and any alternative means of carrying out the undertaking. Secondly, it defines the extent of the environment that will be affected by the proposed undertaking. Both of these purposes merit elaboration.

Definition of the outer limits of the undertaking serves the purpose of advising all interested persons of the available range of alternative rapid transit system alignments to be considered by this environmental assessment. Put another way, the Region will not be considering any alignment that is outside this study area.

The second purpose of describing this study area is to define the limits of the environment that may be directly affected by the undertaking. An important feature of this study area is its location within designated urban areas of the Region. The location of transit within urban areas has support in provincial policy

In particular, as cited above, the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act provides numerous policies supportive of public transit. Additional policies which support the location of transit in urban areas include:

1.1.3.2 Land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on: a) densities and a mix of land uses which: 1. efficiently use land and resources; 2. are appropriate for, and efficiently use, the infrastructure and public service facilities which are planned or available… 3. minimize negative impacts to air quality and climate change, and promote energy efficiency in accordance with policy 1.8; and b) a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment in accordance with the criteria in policy 1.1.3.3.

1.1.3.3 Planning authorities shall identify and promote opportunities for intensification and redevelopment where this can be accommodated taking into account existing building stock or areas, including brownfield sites, and the availability of suitable existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate projected needs.

Additional policy support for this urban location comes from the Province’s Draft Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH). This draft Plan has designated uptown Waterloo, Downtown Kitchener and Downtown Cambridge as “Urban Growth Centres” (UGCs). According to the Draft Plan, a higher-order transit system such as rapid transit will:

“serve to assist in shaping the urban and urbanizing parts of the GGH, encourage compact mixed-use development in UGCs and help to discourage sprawl.”

A further rationale for this urban location is that virtually all urban uses support and benefit from rapid transit. In general terms, the diverse range of existing land uses within this study area that support rapid transit includes four downtowns (Waterloo, Kitchener, Preston Towne Centre, Galt City Centre), three regional shopping centres, three power centres, seventeen other commercial areas, two universities, eight secondary schools, four hospitals, many significant recreation areas, five kilometres of “mixed use corridor”, seventeen residential density clusters, and thirteen industrial/business park clusters. This urban area also includes a variety of public services and

February 28, 2005 Page 9 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

affordable housing projects. These urban uses are expected to benefit from proximity to a future rapid transit system.

The urban character of the study area has the further benefit of limiting the nature and extent of adverse effects on rural areas and natural features making up the Region’s natural heritage. Thus, the undertaking, regardless of alignment, will not be intruding upon lands now designated for agriculture. Nor is it anticipated to intrude upon designated natural heritage features such as provincial significant wetlands or regional environmentally sensitive policy areas.

Within this study area, the undertaking to introduce rapid transit service will involve consideration of road, rail and other alignment opportunities. These opportunities will be described and evaluated in the Environmental Assessment process in order to identify a preferred location. The Environmental Assessment will also describe and evaluate the location of associated infrastructure and services such as rapid transit stations and parking lots. This work will be carried out in fulfillment of requirements to assess alternative methods of carrying out the rapid transit undertaking.

The Region anticipates that while the benefits of rapid transit service will extend well beyond the ultimate alignment of the future rapid transit system, there will be quite a narrow range of potential adverse impacts, particularly once mitigation has been considered. 3.2 Description of Existing Built Environment

Having regard for the relatively large scale of this study area, the Region believes it appropriate to provide greater detail on what exists through consideration of smaller units or sections. The following description profiles seven sections making up the primary re-urbanization areas identified in the Regional Growth Management Strategy. Each section also contains the symbolic potential central transit corridor set out in the Regional Official Policies Plan. These seven sections are shown on Exhibit 3. A more detailed discussion of each section of the urban environment follows.

Exhibit 3 – Study Area Sections

February 28, 2005 Page 10 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

3.2.1 UPTOWN WATERLOO NORTH

Extending south from north Waterloo to the Uptown Waterloo core, this section of the primary re- urbanization area includes a large employment, residential and academic area with a number of important transportation destinations as shown on Exhibit 44, including the King/Northfield intersection and Conestoga Regional Mall, the Weber Street Business Park area; the North Campus Research and Technology Park, the University of Waterloo/ University Avenue/Waterloo Park, the King/Weber intersection, Wilfrid Laurier University at the King/University Avenue intersection and Uptown Waterloo.

Exhibit 4 – Uptown Waterloo North Section

Wilfrid Laurier University

4 Exhibits of the CTC sections were prepared by MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Planning Ltd. for use in the Needs & Opportunities Interim Report: Feasibility Study for the Central Transit Corridor, IBI Group, January 10, 2003

February 28, 2005 Page 11 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

3.2.2 UPTOWN WATERLOO TO DOWNTOWN KITCHENER

This section of the primary re-urbanization area shown on Exhibit 5 extends from Uptown Waterloo to the south end of downtown Kitchener, and includes two major regional employers at Grand River Hospital and the Sunlife/Clarica headquarters. The Hospital has completed major redevelopment and expansion to now include a state-of-the-art regional cancer centre, new emergency department and other new health care facilities. For example, the outpatient caseload at the Hospital is forecast to double from 62,300/year in 2002, to almost 120,000/year by 2010.

Exhibit 5 – Uptown Waterloo to Downtown Kitchener Section

The downtown core of the City of Kitchener is designated as a Community Core Area in the Regional Official Policies Plan, and includes approximately 1 million square feet of retail space and 2 million square feet of office space. Significant multi-residential development has also taken place in Kitchener’s downtown neighbourhoods. The northwest area of the downtown described as the Warehouse District is characterized by warehouse buildings slated for office conversion. Downtown amenities include numerous restaurants and nearby Victoria Park. The northeast

February 28, 2005 Page 12 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

projection of the downtown is the Civic Centre District with a number of major civic uses such as the Centre in the Square theatre, an art gallery, the main branch of the Kitchener Library, the Provincial and County courthouse buildings, Registry office and Region of Waterloo headquarters. The south end of the downtown is the Market District with the new Farmers Market and significant redevelopment potential. Downtown Kitchener also includes an intercity bus station, transit terminal and VIA passenger rail station.

The City has designated Mixed Use Corridors along arterial roads surrounding the downtown to allow for intensification of arterial corridors while providing stability to the interior residential neighbourhoods. Mixed Use Corridor designations with redevelopment potential are situated along Queen, Margaret, Weber and Victoria Streets.

3.2.3 DOWNTOWN KITCHENER TO SOUTH KITCHENER (FAIRVIEW PARK MALL)

The King Street to Conestoga Expressway (Highway 7/8) section of the study area in Kitchener extends southward along King Street from the Farmers’ Market in the downtown to the Expressway. Both sides of King Street are designated as a Mixed Use Corridor as shown next on Exhibit 6, providing for intensification opportunities in the form of office, commercial and residential uses. Cameron Heights Secondary School is located on Charles Street, and Eastwood Collegiate Secondary School on Weber Street. There is potential for an intensified node at the King Street and Ottawa Street intersection given Ottawa Street functions as an east-west arterial.

The 1.7-kilometre segment of Highway 8 running from the Conestoga Expressway to the Fairway Road off ramp is a mix of apartments, commercial uses, a large food store, and some industrial uses. On Fairway Road, Fairview Park Mall is designated as a Regional Shopping Centre, and is currently undergoing expansion plans by the owner. The Mall includes a transit centre, functioning as a transfer and destination point. Other uses in the vicinity of the Mall include a significant area of high density residential to the north, varying forms of retail and service commercial uses along Fairway Road and an approved Hidden Valley Industrial Secondary Plan for business park development, and the Hidden Valley Residential Community Plan for further estate residential development on the south side of Fairway Road. A number of hotels and large restaurants are also located at the King Street/Fairway Road intersection in the Arterial Commercial District.

3.2.4 SOUTH KITCHENER TO CAMBRIDGE (PRESTON)

The City of Kitchener Official Plan designates the Sportsworld part of this urban area shown on Exhibit 7 as a Planned Commercial Campus. This designation accommodates large retail uses consisting of buildings or plazas in a power centre format. Existing uses in south Kitchener include large format retail stores such as the Brick, Costco, Future Shop, Sears Furniture & Appliances, and Home Depot, and numerous service commercial uses on a regional and inter-regional scale. Major entertainment venues such as Famous Players Silver City Cinemas, Chapters Bookstore, Sportsworld and restaurants offer variety and diversity to this commercial node. Sites such as the empty Lulu’s Plaza are candidates for redevelopment.

This section is also located immediately west of the Cambridge Business Park in the City of Cambridge, with major employers including Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada Inc. (3,000 employees), Automated Tooling Systems, and the Regional Police headquarters and Regional Operations Centre.

February 28, 2005 Page 13 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Exhibit 6 – Downtown Kitchener to South Kitchener (Fairview Park Mall) Section

February 28, 2005 Page 14 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Exhibit 7 – South Kitchener to Preston Section

3.2.5 PRESTON TOWNE CENTRE TO “THE DELTA”

The Preston Towne Centre shown next on Exhibit 8 fronts on King Street, and is designated as a Community Core Area in the ROPP. The Towne Centre is a linear concentration of low-rise mixed use retail, commercial and residential buildings. This traditional downtown has a Business Improvement Area program in place that encourages infilling and redevelopment. Uses in the neighbourhood include the Preston High School, Linear Park and Riverside Park along the Speed River, the Preston Memorial Auditorium and Preston Library. Eagle Street provides a road connection from the Preston To wne Centre to the Bridgecam Power Centre at Hespeler Road and Pinebush Drive, with a new 12 storey condominium built near the Eagle/King Street intersection.

February 28, 2005 Page 15 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Exhibit 8 – Preston Towne Centre to Delta – Hespeler Road Area Section

Generally, the neighbourhood surrounding the Preston Towne Centre is stable, with the potential for some redevelopment along Eagle Street to the north of the core. To the southeast along Coronation Boulevard is a mix of stable fronting residential lots that transition into institutional, recreational, open space and commercial uses including the Cambridge Memorial Hospital, the Galt Country

February 28, 2005 Page 16 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Club and the Dumfries Conservation Area. The Hospital medical area also contains a grouping of medical clinics and professional offices, as well as service commercial uses. The Riverbend Residential Care Facility directly adjacent to the south of the hospital functions both as a retirement home and long term care centre.

3.2.6 HESPELER ROAD AREA

The 3.5 kilometre Hespeler Road segment, also shown on Exhibit 8, is located between Highway 401 to the north and “The Delta” (Hespeler Rd/Dundas St intersection) to the south. Central to this “strip” is the 725,000 square foot Cambridge Centre Mall Regional Shopping Centre. To the west and east of the Hespeler Road commercial strip is the Eagle Industrial Park and the L.G. Lovell Industrial Park. Both are major employment destinations that could benefit from further business intensification. Other uses within the area include the Regional Police headquarters at Hespeler Road and Munch Avenue, Conestoga College Academic Upgrading Campus and the Greyhound Bus Terminal on Langs Drive. Large parcels of undeveloped land to the east and south of the Cambridge Centre offer opportunities for intensification. Potential infilling and intensification opportunities exist within numerous parts of this corridor section.

At the north end of this section, the Bridgecam Power Centre is situated at Hespeler Road and Pinebush Road. The Centre includes large format freestanding retail (Rona, Canadian Tire and Wal-Mart) and retail outlets in plaza formats (i.e. Roots, Old Navy, Staples, Bouclair, and Michael’s. A large Home Depot outlet is located on the south side of Pinebush Road. Industrial lands adjacent to the power centre have redevelopment opportunities that can provide future employment.

3.2.7 THE “DELTA” TO SOUTH CAMBRIDGE

The Delta area is the roadway junction between Galt City Centre, Preston Towne Centre and the Hespeler Road commercial corridor. Current uses in The Delta area include a mix of operating and vacant factories, automotive repair facilities and single detached dwellings. The Delta corner is designated a Neighbourhood Shopping Centre as per Special Policy No. 24 of the Official Plan, and has recently developed in part to provide service commercial uses to service the travelling public. Further south on Water Street is the Galt Collegiate Institute Secondary School shown on Exhibit 9.

The Galt City Centre of Cambridge extends south from Samuelson Street approximately two kilometres, situated on both sides of the Grand River. It is designated as a Community Core Area in the Regional Plan, with a mix of retail/office commercial, industrial, community and civic uses. Features within the downtown include the year-round farmer’s market, a linear park along the picturesque Grand River, the University of Waterloo’s School of Architecture, the Cambridge Centre for the Arts and David Durward Centre, and many historical churches and stone buildings. The Galt City Centre is also the location of the City of Cambridge municipal offices and Council chambers. The main transit centre for Cambridge is located in the heart of the Galt City Centre.

Existing warehouse buildings provide opportunities for redevelopment to office, retail and residential uses. Successful redevelopment projects in the core already include the Southworks outlet mall on Grand Avenue west of the Grand River, which is a major tourist attraction.

February 28, 2005 Page 17 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Exhibit 9 – The “Delta” to South Cambridge Section

3.3 Description of Existing Natural Environment

The proposed rapid transit undertaking is expected to have positive effects upon the natural environment. It is expected to reduce vehicle usage, thereby reducing pressures for more roads and more land displacement of natural features. It should also have positive effects on the overall emissions of greenhouse gases and contaminants causing air pollution.

February 28, 2005 Page 18 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Additionally, since the study area for this undertaking involves a designated and largely built up urban environment, the natural environment features or systems which are affected by the undertaking are modest. In particular, the Region anticipates no displacement of the whole or any part of a provincially significant environmental feature or regional environmentally sensitive policy area. The only new intrusions upon the natural environment anticipated by the Region are future watercourse crossings. Details are provided next.

3.3.1 PROVINCIALLY DESIGNATED ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES

The Environmental Assessment study area includes two small portions of provincially designated environmental features. The first is part of a provincially significant wetland located along the Speed River in the vicinity of Highway 401. The second is a small portion of the provincially significant wetland in the ESPA 27 Hidden Valley area on the west side of Highway 8 in the South Kitchener to Preston section. The Region intends to avoid any impact on these wetland features.

3.3.2 REGIONALLY DESIGNATED NATURAL HABITAT NETWORK

The Environmental Assessment study area includes small portions of two Environmentally Sensitive Policy Areas (ESPA). Each is designated for protection in the ROPP:

• ESPA 27 – the Hidden Valley area south of Fairway Road and west of Highway 8 in the South Kitchener to Preston section; and

• ESPA 73 – Grandview Woods on the south side of the Grand River, south of ESPA 29 and west of Highway 8; and

The Region intends to avoid any impact on any provincially or regionally significant natural features and areas.

3.3.3 WATERCOURSE CROSSINGS

The Region anticipates that, regardless of alignment, the future rapid transit system will need to cross two major watercourses:

• The Grand River in the Freeport area of South Kitchener where King Street and the CPR rail line currently cross on existing, abutting structures. The Grand River is a designated Heritage River, navigable waterway and fish habitat; and

• The Speed River through the Preston area of the CTC is managed as an urban fishery, with a diverse warmwater fish community dominated by top predators (e.g. smallmouth bass and pike).

For each crossing, the Region intends to consider alternative designs to determine what is feasible and reasonable to avoid or minimize adverse environmental impacts on these watercourses. 3.4 Potential Environmental Effects

The Act requires that an Environmental Assessment describe and evaluate the effects of the undertaking and alternatives upon the environment

Considering this specific undertaking, the Region believes that this proposed rapid transit system will create major benefits to its urban environment, and avoid major impacts on its rural and natural

February 28, 2005 Page 19 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

environment. For this reason, the Region intends to carry out an Environmental Assessment that provides broad consideration of potential benefits and not just adverse effects. This approach is intended to allow the Region to consider which options maximize these benefits and avoid or minimize adverse effects. This approach is reflected in the evaluation criteria recommended for use in the Environmental Assessment, which are set out below.

As with other aspects of the assessment process, the description and evaluation of positive and negative effects will increase in detail as the assessment advances towards identifying a preferred undertaking, a preferred method to carry out the undertaking and a preferred preliminary design. 3.5 Consultation During Preparation of the Terms of Reference

Public consultation is a required aspect of the Environmental Assessment process, including preparation of a Terms of Reference. For this Terms of Reference, the Region proposes to conduct a total of three public consultation events as follows:

1. December 8, 2004 – Public Meeting #1 on Project Introduction and Scoping: This introductory Public Meeting explained the Environmental Assessment process and Terms of Reference purpose, and scope the issues and opportunities that will be incorporated into the Terms of Reference, such as the various Alternatives Undertakings and Alternative Methods to be included in the planning process. The 35 attendees were also asked to provide input on transportation and related issues that should be considered in the EA, and addressed through the Terms of Reference. A summary of the attendees responses are included in Appendix 2 of this Terms of Reference. A list of government agencies contact during this Terms of Reference preparation, and those that responded is included in Appendix 3;

2. Pre-Submission Review: A 30-day pre-submission review was conducted from March 2, 2005 to April 1, 2005 to provide agencies, stakeholders and the public an opportunity to review the draft Terms of Reference. Input received as a result of this review period is included in Appendix 2 of this Terms of Reference; and

3. March 8, 2005- Public Meeting #2 on Pre-Submission Review: Public, stakeholder and agency input pending and will be included in Appendix 2 of this Terms of Reference. 3.6 Consultation Framework for EA Preparation

For this environmental assessment, the Region expects to carry out public consultation during each of the three main phases of the environmental assessment process described below in Sections 4 to 6. Additionally, at the conclusion of the environmental assessment, the Act requires that the public be notified of the submission of the Environmental Assessment to the Minister and of the resulting government review of the Environmental Assessment. These occasions also include opportunities for public comment.

In general, the Region considers public consultation to provide regular contact with the involved agencies, stakeholders and public. The Region looks forward to these consultation activities for their ability to provide opportunities for input, information and communications with affected and interested members of the public. Consultation activities will also allow the Region to receive input on important environmental issues throughout the Environmental Assessment process.

Overall, consultation undertaken during the Environmental Assessment process will accord with the approach set out in this Terms of Reference, the requirements of the OEAA and, where

February 28, 2005 Page 20 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

applicable, the CEAA. Subject to these points, the Region’s Environmental Assessment consultation process will be based on five consultation principles:

1. The Region will make all reasonable efforts to provide potentially affected or interested parties with the opportunity to participate in the Environmental Assessment process.

2. The Region will ensure that each of the three Phases of the environmental assessment process will include structured opportunities for public information and input from stakeholders (i.e. ratepayer groups, special interest groups, companies) and the general public.

3. The Region will seek to address all input received during the consultation process constructively and objectively.

4. The Region will make every reasonable effort to resolve concerns and issues brought forward through the consultation process.

5. Throughout the Environmental Assessment process, the Region will be open to receiving new ideas on improving this proposed undertaking, particularly measures that may enhance its benefits and/or avoid or mitigate its adverse effects, with Phase 3 preliminary design work being specifically focused on these topics.

In carrying out consultation during the Environmental Assessment process, Region efforts will include:

• Providing Notices of Study Commencement, Study Public Meetings and Study Completion/Minister Submission in the local Waterloo Region media;

• Identifying direct phone, fax or e-mail contacts with key project team staff, including Region staff and consulting team members;

• Establishing and maintaining a project website offering information updates on the Environmental Assessment preparation, and opportunities to submit comments to the project team;

• Convening Public Consultation Centres at key stages in the Environmental Assessment preparation to allow the public to see study results to date, exchange information and ask one- to-one questions of the project team. The Centres will also provide an opportunity for the project team to ask questions of the public to assist in guiding the decision-making process;

• Arranging individual meetings and presentations, either by the project team or the audience, with organized stakeholder groups to allow for informal discussions of any serious issues identified though the Environmental Assessment preparation, or simply to provide updated information. Examples of stakeholder groups involved in such meetings include Chambers of Commerce, Business Improvement Associations and environmental and cultural advisory committees;

• Creating and organizing, where warranted, special Community Advisory or Municipal Technical Advisory Groups; and

• Making presentations to Region of Waterloo and the Cities of Cambridge, Kitchener and Waterloo councils and/or committees by the project team on an “as-requested” basis or as deemed necessary by Waterloo Region in consultation with the involved municipal staff.

February 28, 2005 Page 21 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

3.7 Pre-Submission Review of the Draft EA Report

As set out below, the Region is proposing to carry out a 3-phase environmental assessment. At the conclusion of each of the three phases of the Environmental Assessment process, the Region will prepare a Draft Environmental Assessment Report on that phase of the Environmental Assessment.

The Draft Environmental Assessment Report will be made available for municipal, regulatory agency and public review and comment for a five-week review period. During this period, the Draft Report will be available for public review at government offices, public libraries and on the project website.

After this review period, the Region will decide on any modifications and additions based on comments received.

At the conclusion of the Phase 3 of the Environmental Assessment process, the Region will prepare and submit a Final Environmental Assessment to the Minister of the Environment for review and approval. MOE will then undertake a formal public and agency review of the Environmental Assessment Report leading to the Minister’s decision to approve, deny, refer to a hearing or refer to mediation.

February 28, 2005 Page 22 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

PART 2: THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The Region of Waterloo is proposing to carry out a three-phase Environmental Assessment:

Phase 1: assessment of the undertaking and alternatives to the undertaking;

Phase 2: assessment of alternative methods of carrying out the undertaking; and

Phase 3: assessment of the preliminary design of the undertaking and the preferred method for carrying it out.

Within each phase of the assessment, the Region will address the Act’s requirements to:

• describe and state the rationale for the undertaking and considered alternatives;

• describe the environment within the study area likely to be affected by the undertaking and considered alternatives;

• describe the likely environmental effects of the undertaking and considered alternatives;

• describe the measures taken to enhance beneficial effects or avoid or reduce adverse effects of the undertaking and considered alternatives;

• evaluate the advantages and disadvantages to the environment of the undertaking and considered alternatives; and

• consult the public.

For all requirements to describe various matters, the phased process will increase in detail with each phase, such that the descriptions provided in Phase 1 are general, whereas the descriptions in Phases 2 and 3 are more detailed, with the greatest detail provided in Phase 3.

4. PHASE 1: ASSESSMENT OF THE UNDERTAKING AND ALTERNATIVES TO THE UNDERTAKING

The Ontario Environmental Assessment Act requires consideration of alternatives to an undertaking. In general terms, this serves two purposes. First, it requires a proponent to consider a proposed undertaking against the “do nothing” alternative. This requires that the proponent have a reasonable rationale for proceeding with its undertaking. Second, it requires a proponent to consider a proposed undertaking against other alternatives that may address similar needs, in order to determine whether the undertaking provides greater benefits or lesser adverse effects than alternatives.

In the case of this Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference, and as noted previously in Section 2, the proposed undertaking is to introduce rapid transit service within the Region’s primary re-urbanization area to provide additional transportation capacity and choice, and stimulate re-urbanization. This proposed undertaking is intended to address future transportation system needs, and provide greater transportation choice as one goal of the RGMS. Alternatives to the undertaking are functionally different ways of approaching the Region’s future transportation system objectives.

February 28, 2005 Page 23 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Alternatives to the undertaking, also referred to as Transportation Planning Alternatives, are intended to be “reasonable” ways of addressing the stated opportunity and transportation problem, and to meet the purpose of the undertaking as described in Section 2.2 of this Terms of Reference. In addition to the Baseline (or Do Nothing) alternative required for consideration in the Environmental Assessment process, alternatives that address transportation system opportunities and needs usually include ways to increase or enhance system capacity, manage or reduce transportation demand or a combination of these approaches.

Alternatives to the undertaking will be subject to an assessment and evaluation in the Environmental Assessment, as described in Section 4.2 of this Terms of Reference. 4.1 Identifying Alternatives to the Undertaking

The Environmental Assessment will assess and evaluate the proposed rapid transit undertaking set out above against the following alternatives to the undertaking:

• The Baseline (or Do Nothing) alternative has Waterloo Region implementing transportation system improvements and Transportation Demand Management measures (e.g. Express Bus, bikeways), but with no introduction of any further transportation improvements or services within the primary re-urbanization areas centred around the central transit corridor;

• The Improved Conventional Transit alternative has Waterloo Region providing increased bus service within the existing transportation system, and/or accommodating new transit service with new infrastructure (i.e. Express Bus) within the primary re-urbanization areas centred on the central transit corridor, without including rapid transit. Roadway capacity and operation enhancements, and Transportation Demand Management measures are also part of this alternative; and

• The Road Improvement/Expansion alternative has Waterloo Region implementing roadway capacity and operation enhancements, plus other roadway improvement/expansion projects required to meet long term travel demands over the next 30 years. Transportation Demand Management measures are also part of this alternative, including conventional public transit and transit priority, as well as facilities and measures to serve cycling and walking, increase auto occupancy and alter regional travel characteristics that contribute to the anticipated system problems. 4.2 Criteria for Assessing Alternatives to the Undertaking

The Region will assess the undertaking and each of the alternatives to the undertaking based on their capacity to meet a broad range of goals. These goals have a variety of sources, but most were recently articulated by the Region in its extensive public process to create the Regional Growth Management Strategy. The specific goals and related criteria are described in Exhibit 10:

Exhibit 10 – Goals & Criteria for Assessing Alternatives to the Undertaking

RGMS Goal Environmental Assessment Evaluation Criteria Enhance Our 1. Relative amount of land consumed Environment 2. Relative impact on air quality 3. Relative impact of emissions generated that contribute to climate change

February 28, 2005 Page 24 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Build Vibrant 4. Relative contribution to Region re-urbanization objectives Urban Places 5. Relative contribution to innovative urban design 6. Relative contribution to public health Provide Greater 7. Relative contribution to increased transportation choice Transportation 8. Relative contribution to increased Region transit ridership Choice 9. Relative affordability of personal transportation cost 10. Relative flexibility to changes in operation Protect Our 11. Relative contribution to the Region’s countryside protection goal Countryside Foster a Strong 12. Relative contribution to downtown revitalization Economy 13. Relative capital cost to the Region Ensure Overall 14. Degree of compatibility with other Regional plans and strategies Coordination & 15. Degree of compatibility with provincial and federal plans and strategies.5 Cooperation

For each of these criteria, the Region will apply specific quantitative and/or qualitative evaluation measures in an objective and traceable manner. 4.3 Selecting the Preferred Alternative

With the alternatives to the undertaking identified, as well as the evaluation criteria, the evaluation framework will include the following essential steps for each alternative to the undertaking:

• required data collection and analysis;

• evaluation of alternatives to the undertaking;

• selection of “draft” preferred alternative to the undertaking by proponent;

• public consultation on “draft” preferred alternative to the undertaking; and

• finalized selection of preferred alternative undertaking based on consideration of public input.

A “Reasoned Argument” approach will be used to describe the advantages and disadvantages of each Planning Alternative using the criteria listed on Exhibit 10, and will provide the rationale on why the preferred alternative is selected. The evaluation findings and selection rationale will be documented in the EA report. 4.4 Next Steps

The Region’s next steps after selecting the preferred Planning Alternative will depend on the specific preference identified in this Phase of the Environmental Assessment process, as follows:

5 Includes Places to Grow Strategy for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Area: Compatible with Federal/Provincial/Municipal goals such as Promoting Economic Competitiveness, Protecting the Environment, Social Cohesiveness & Healthier Lifestyles, Rural Land Protection, Managing Growth, Intermodal Interconnectivity and Preventing Gridlock

February 28, 2005 Page 25 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

1. If the preferred Planning Alternative is the proposed rapid transit undertaking, the Region will continue the EA process by proceeding to the Alternative Methods staged as described in Section 5 of this Terms of Reference;

2. If the Baseline Alternative (Do Nothing) is selected, the EA process is complete and no further study will be initiated; or

3. If the preferred Planning Alternative is an alternative to the undertaking other than the Baseline Alternative, the Region will re-assess its priorities and, if necessary, file an amended Terms of Reference with the Minister to reflect the different undertaking and approach to alternative methods.

5. PHASE 2: ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF CARRYING OUT THE UNDERTAKING

Once the preferred undertaking has been identified, the next step in the Environmental Assessment study will be to commence the process of describing, evaluating, ranking and selecting the preferred alternative method(s) to be used to carry out the undertaking in the Region. For the purposes of this Terms of Reference, an alternative method involves a rapid transit section or system that is formed by combining a specific rapid transit technology or technologies with a specific route within the study area (i.e. the primary re-urbanization area set out in the Regional Growth Management Strategy).

In Phase 2 of the Environmental Assessment process, the Region wishes to ensure that each alternative method of carrying out rapid transit meets its overall objectives. For this reason, the Region will begin the Phase 2 Assessment of Alternative Methods with a screening process to screen out alternatives which do not meet its objectives. The Region proposes to follow up this screening step with two distinct evaluation steps. The following summarizes the proposed three- step process:

Step 1: Screening Process for Alternative Technologies and Route Designs – As there exists a very broad range of alternative rapid transit technologies and route designs, the Region will be applying a screening process to screen out from further consideration those rapid transit technologies and route designs that do not meet the Region’s objectives. The initial list of technologies and route designs is set out in Exhibit 11. The proposed screening methodology is described in Section 5.1.3 of this Terms of Reference.

Step 2: Evaluation and Ranking of Reasonable Route Section Alternatives - All alternatives technologies and route designs remaining after the screening process will be considered the “shortlist” of alternative rapid transit methods. These alternatives will then be considered in the context of specific alternative route locations within the study area. Using the seven study area sections set out on see Exhibit 3, the Region will carry out a detailed evaluation and assessment of each reasonable route option and the short list technology and route design options. The relative advantages and disadvantages of each such option will be compared using the evaluation criteria described in Exhibit 13, leading to the identification of a ranking of each reasonable rapid transit method (i.e., route design, technology and route) within each study area section.

Step 3: Evaluation of Reasonable System Alternatives to Identify a Preferred System – The Region proposes to establish a rapid transit system. Therefore, following the identification of the rankings for each reasonable alternative method within each study area section, the Region will carry out an evaluation of the reasonable system options available to it. Each such system option

February 28, 2005 Page 26 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

will involve a rapid transit route that links up each of the three urban areas forming the study area. The purpose of this third step is to determine which system is, overall, preferred by the Region. A major consideration for this Step will be the section rankings from Step 2. However, the Region also proposes to include additional considerations and their respective advantages and disadvantages: (1) the number and location of required transfer points in relation to the number of users; (2) the overall system capital, operations and maintenance costs; and (3) the overall system economic benefits to the Region of the various system options. The evaluation methodology for this Step 3 is set out in Exhibit 14.

The result of this Phase of the Environmental Assessment will be the identification of a preferred rapid transit system, including the preferred technology or technologies, route design or designs and route linking the urban areas of Waterloo, Kitchener and Cambridge. 5.1 Step 1: Screening Process for Alternative Technologies and Route Designs

5.1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF AL TERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES

The Region has identified a wide range of existing rapid transit technologies. For this Environmental Assessment, the list of rapid transit technologies under consideration includes: • Aerobus; • Automated Guideway Transit (AGT); • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT); • Commuter Rail; • Light Rail Transit (LRT); • Magnetic Levitation (Maglev); • Monorail; • Personal Rapid Transit System (PRT); • Rail Diesel Multiple Units (DMU); and • Subway or Metro (heavy rail);

5.1.2 IDENTIFICATION OF AL TERNATIVE ROUTE DESIGNS

In considering which of the rapid transit technologies set out has potential application to the present rapid transit initiative, the Region has sought to identify the kinds of route design options that exist for each technology. It has identified five (5) different kinds of route design for rapid transit service within Waterloo Region’s primary re-urbanization area. These five route design options are set out below in Exhibit 11. Exhibit 11 – Alternative Route Designs

Alternative Route Designs Basic Route Characteristics Potential Technology 1. Shared Use Route Rapid Transit operating at-grade Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) within the road right-of-way which Light Rail Transit (BRT) it shares with other vehicular traffic along entire route length.

February 28, 2005 Page 27 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

2. Dedicated On-Road Rapid Transit operating at-grade Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route within the road right-of-way in a Light Rail Transit (LRT) dedicated lane or lanes along entire route length. 3. Dedicated Off-Road Rapid Transit operating within an Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route at-grade right-of-way that is Commuter Rail separate from the road network along entire route length. Light Rail Transit (LRT) Rail Multiple Units (DMU) 4. Mix of On/Off Road Route Rapid Transit that is compatible Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) operating at-grade in shared or Light Rail Transit (LRT) dedicated on-road conditions, and dedicated off-road conditions along entire route length. 5. Grade-Separated Route Rapid Transit that operates within Aerobus a dedicated right-of-way Automated Guideway Transit (AGT) separated above or below street level other than bridges or tunnels Magnetic Levitation (Maglev) for crossing purposes. Monorail Personal Rapid Transit System (PRT) Subway

5.1.3 APPROACH TO SCREEN ALTERNATIVE METHODS

As set out above, the screening process is intended to determine which “alternative methods” meet the Region’s rapid transit system objectives and are therefore reasonable for purposes of meriting detailed consideration by the Region.

The screening criteria listed in Exhibit 12 will be applied to each of the route design alternatives using a Pass/Fail decision-making process to determine which route designs will be screened out from further consideration in the Environmental Assessment.

Exhibit 12 – Criteria for Screening Alternative Methods

Screening Criteria Pass/Fail Questions

RGMS Re-urbanization Is the route design consistent with municipal intensification and redevelopment objectives?

Service Quality Are there proven applications of the method in comparable settings?

System Performance Does the route design improve transit travel time?

5.1.4 NEXT STEPS

Following the above screening process, the Region will have identified those route design options which meet its objectives. As each route design option also includes the range of technologies

February 28, 2005 Page 28 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

which may work with that option, the screening process will also identify those rapid transit technologies which meet the Region’s objectives. 5.2 Step 2: Evaluation and Ranking of Reasonable Route Section Alternatives

5.2.1 APPROACH TO DETAILED ASSESSMENT AND RANKING

In this step of the Environmental Assessment process, the Region will combine the alternative route designs which passed the screening test with specific route location alternatives. Each route location alternative will be consistent with the study area and thus be located entirely within the primary re-urbanization area set out in the Regional Growth Management Strategy. Equally, for this step, each route location alternative will be located within one of the seven sections (see Exhibit 3).

Through this combination of route designs and locations, the Region will create a list of reasonable alternative rapid transit methods for each section of the ultimate system.

5.2.2 EVALUATION AND RANKING CRITERIA

The purpose of the following criteria is to provi de a basis to rank different alternative methods for providing rapid transit within each of the seven sections identified earlier (Exhibit 3). The purpose of this evaluation is thus not to eliminate alternatives, but rather to determine relative rankings of alternatives within each section.

The factors and criteria proposed by the Region for this assessment and ranking are as follows:

Exhibit 13 – Criteria for Evaluating and Ranking Short-Listed Alternative Methods

Criteria Groups/ Criteria Indicator Transportation Ridership Potential Ridership forecast and % share of total transportation trips System Reliability On-time performance of alternative technologies System Performance Average travel time and vehicle-kilometres of travel within the study area Right of Way requirements Hectares of land needing to be purchased x estimated cost per hectare Travel time competitiveness with auto Estimated future travel times and trip length for transit vs. auto Social Environment Ability to serve residential uses Number of residents within 800 m of all proposed stations along the route; Number of affordable housing units within 800 m of all proposed stations along the route Ability to serve institutional uses Number of institutional uses and projected users within (secondary, post secondary student 800m of all proposed stations along the route populations, major government buildings, hospitals)

February 28, 2005 Page 29 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Vibration Number of buildings within 50 metres of the route centerline Noise Number and length of locations along route where ambient noise levels will increase by more than 5 dBA Contribution to cultural environment Total number of cultural uses within 800m of all proposed stations along the route Contribution to recreational Total number of recreational uses within 800m of all environment proposed stations along the route Contribution to public health Average percentage of total transit user trips taken by cycling or walking to transit stations; Number of auto trips converted to transit trips Contribution to built heritage Total number of designated heritage properties and buildings within 800 m of all proposed stations along the route Natural Environment Ecological impact Total displacement of terrestrial and aquatic features (ha) plus Total disruption of terrestrial and aquatic habitat (ha of habitat adjacent to system which will receive increased daily noise, lights, vibration) Surface water quality Linear km of new hard surfaces Economic Impact Ability to serve concentrations of Number of employment opportunities within 800m of all employment proposed stations along the route Ability to serve retailers Square footage of retail space and projected customers within 800 m of all proposed stations along the route Cost Estimated capital cost, and operations and maintenance cost associated with the method

5.2.3 NEXT STEPS

The result of this step will be a series of ranked alternatives for each of the seven sections of the proposed rapid transit route. As the Region considers it possible that the various sections may identify preferences for different technologies and route designs, the Region requires a third step to consider the preferred means of combining these ranked sections into a single system. This system work will be carried out in Step 3 of the process. 5.3 Step 3: Evaluation of Reasonable System Alternatives to Identify a Preferred System

5.3.1 APPROACH TO DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF REASONABLE SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES

The result of the Step 2 assessment will be a series of rankings for each reasonable alternative within each of the seven sections making up the overall rapid transit route. The purpose of Step 3 in this process is to, first, identify combinations of these sections that create reasonable system alternatives and, second, to evaluate the most reasonable alternatives to identify a preferred

February 28, 2005 Page 30 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

system which covers the entire route. The Region anticipates that this evaluation will include comparing between two and five reasonable system alternatives.

5.3.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

The criteria listed in Exhibit 14 will be applied to each of the reasonable system design alternatives identified from the Step 2 rankings. Alternative systems will be developed based on a mixture of different rapid transit technologies and/or route designs in different sections along the proposed route, and evaluated with criteria that will consider: (1) the Step 2 ranking, (2) the number and location of required transfer points in relation to the number of users; (3) the overall system costs; and (4) the overall system economic benefits to the Region.

Exhibit 14 – Criteria for Evaluating Alternative Systems

Evaluation Criteria Indicators

1. Section Route Comparison of system alternative based on rankings of each section Rankings (Step 2) making up the alternative

2. System Number and location of required transfer points in relation to number of Performance anticipated users

3. Overall System Quantitative estimate of the total capital, operations and maintenance Economic Costs costs for the system alternative

4. Overall System Quantitative estimate of the total economic benefit potential resulting Economic Benefits from the operations of an alternative system

5.3.3 NEXT STEPS

The result of this second Phase of the Environmental Assessment is the identification of a preferred rapid transit system, including preferred transportation technologies, routes and station locations.

6. PHASE 3: ASSESSMENT OF THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE UNDERTAKING

With the undertaking and the preferred method for carrying it out identified in the two previous Phases, the focus of Phase 3 will be upon the identification and evaluation of measures to further enhance benefits and avoid or reduce adverse effects.

This work will focus on the development and improvement of a preliminary design of the undertaking. 6.1 Identification of Initial Preliminary Design for the System

The starting point for this design will be the application of standard engineering practices suited to the selected technology, service locations, and associated facilities and features associated with the preferred method (i.e. parking lots, passenger stations).

February 28, 2005 Page 31 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

The focus of Phase 3 will be upon design measures which may further improve the benefits of the undertaking or which avoid or reduce its adverse effects. The Region anticipates a process that has this range of outcomes because of the many benefits associated with this undertaking. For example, since rapid transit is intended to stimulate development within the primary re-urbanization area, the means by which specific stations can be designed to enhance access to existing and new urban uses in an area will merit specific attention.

On the other hand, the Phase 3 work will also involve the identification of any negative effects and the avoidance or reduction. In this work, the Region expects to develop mitigation measures in the context of relevant review agency guidelines. Since the impact assessment process will be iterative, opportunities to avoid or minimize any negative impacts will be integrated wherever possible.

Appropriate technical and economically feasible mitigation measures will be developed for specific types of environmental impacts and their related degree of importance (Provincial, Regional, Local). Such measures may include:

• Avoidance measures such as design options to minimize impacts caused by rapid transit construction and operation (i.e. noise, vibration);

• Protection of water quality and quantity through appropriate facility routing and drainage design; and

• Identification of the recommended construction timing schedules to avoid sensitive periods of the year. 6.2 Consultation on the Initial Preliminary Design

The Region anticipates that the process of generating and finalizing its preliminary design will include focused consultation with the most affected and interested stakeholders. The Region anticipates using a variety of methods to focus this consultation.

Throughout this period and consistent with the statements set out above regarding the anticipated consultation, the Region will be open to receiving new ideas on improvi ng this proposed undertaking, particularly measures that may enhance its benefits and/or avoid or mitigate its adverse effects. 6.3 Finalization of the Preliminary Design

Following these steps in this third Phase of the assessment process, the Region will finalize its preliminary design for submission to Regional Council. Consistent with any Region direction on this topic, Region staff would file its environmental assessment documents, including the finalized preliminary design, with the Minister of the Environment for approval under the OEAA.

February 28, 2005 Page 32 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

PART 3: OTHER REQUIREMENTS

7. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED

It may not be possible to address all approval requirements at the time of seeking OEAA approval. A number of subsequent approvals may require more detailed design and information not available within the scope of the OEEA approval.

These approvals include:

• Amendments to Regional and local Official Plans and local zoning bylaws if required;

• Crossing of navigable waters (Transport Canada under the Navigable Waters Protection Act, MOE, MNR);

• Crossing of fish habitat (Grand River Conservation Authority), including GRCA approvals (Fill, Construction, Alteration of Waterways permit and DFO authorization);

• Permit to take water (MOE);

• Sewage and water approvals under the Ontario Water Resources Act for rapid transit stations and maintenance facilities;

• Environmental Assessment Act approvals for wastes generated at stations and maintenance facilities;

• Municipal noise bylaw amendments/exemptions if required during construction;

• Detailed building and site plan approvals for rapid transit stations and maintenance facilities;

• MNR approvals under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act;

• MTO approvals to cross provincial highways (Highway 401, Highway 7/8, Highway 85);

• CEAA approvals (see Section 6.2); and

• Canadian Transportation Agency approval regarding railway use.

Agreements with railway companies may also be required, and the railway companies may in turn need to obtain approvals from the Canadian Transportation Agency. 7.1 Regional Approval

The Environmental Assessment findings, conclusions and recommendations, including the results of the public consultation process, will be submitted to Waterloo Regional Council as an Environmental Assessment Report for approval. During the Environmental Assessment preparation, interim progress reports will be submitted for information to the Planning and Works Committee at the Region of Waterloo.

February 28, 2005 Page 33 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

7.2 Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA)

Under subsection 5(1) of the CEAA Act, a federal environmental assessment may be required when, in respect of a project, a federal authority:

• Is the proponent;

• Makes or authorizes payment or any other form of financial assistance to the proponent;

• Sells, leases or otherwise disposed of federal lands; or

• Issues a permit or license or other form of approval pursuant to a statutory or regulatory provision referred to in the Law List Regulations.

If a federal Environmental Assessment is required, Waterloo Region will work with the CEAA Agency and other involved federal agencies to prepare the assessment in accordance with the “Federal /Provincial Coordination process for Individual EAs/Screenings“ attached as Figure 1 in Appendix 1 to this Terms of Reference.

8. COMPLIANCE MONITORING

During the Environmental Assessment preparation, Waterloo Region will commit to developing a compliance strategy and schedule to monitor the implementation of any recommended undertaking. This will include measuring potential impacts such as noise, water quality and air quality effects associated with the construction of the undertaking. The monitoring strategy will be developed in consultation with the Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch of MOE. The proponent must comply with the terms and conditions of the monitoring strategy and the commitments identified in the Environmental Assessment, and report to MOE on how the compliance has been achieved.

A monitoring program is required to identify any potential or actual non-conformance with environmental design and protection requirements during construction of the undertaking, and to initiate corrective measures to bring the work into compliance with environmental requirements committed to through the Environmental Assessment process and documented in the Environmental Assessment Report.

The framework for the monitoring strategy may include, but not be limited to, the following elements:

• compliance monitoring and effects monitoring;

• an implementation plan for mitigation and contingency measures;

• long-term post construction monitoring and contingency measures and agreed upon triggers for using contingency plans;

• provisions for monitoring water quality and quantity, air quality and soil condition;

• provisions to ensure compliance with Environmental Assessment commitments (i.e. use of independent inspectors, technical experts, contract specifications) to ensure that all environmental standards and commitments for constructing and operating the undertaking are met; and

February 28, 2005 Page 34 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

• details on monitoring and reporting protocols.

The duration of the monitoring beyond the construction phase will vary depending on what is being monitored, and on the conditions of permits and approvals granted by regulatory agencies (i.e. MOE, GRCA, MNR, DFO, Transport Canada).

9. TERMS OF REFERENCE FLEXIBILITY

The OEAA does not provide for the amendment of an Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference once approved by the Minister of the Environment. Thus, an approved Terms of Reference provides binding conditions on the proponent seeking to prepare an environmental assessment.

On the other hand, an approved Terms of Reference does not present every detail of every activity that will take place during preparation of the Environmental Assessment. Rather, the Terms of Reference establish the “basic” requirements which must be followed by the Region as it prepares the Environmental Assessment.

Where a matter is not specifically addressed in these Terms of Reference, there is an opportunity for the Region to consider additional assessment, analysis and/or agency, stakeholder and public input. Such matters include the following:

• evaluation methodologies to be used to select the preferred planning alternative and/or alternative method;

• additional or expanded technical studies to ensure that the nature and magnitude of potential impacts (i.e. natural, socio-cultural, economic) are accurately identified and mitigated; and

• enhancements to the public consultation program.

J:\2089\10.0 Reports\Draft ToR\TTR ToR FINAL 2005-03-01 w exhibits.doc\2005-03-01\SD

February 28, 2005 Page 35 Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Appendix 1 Advice to Proponents at the Terms of Reference Stage for a Coordinated Federal/Provincial Environmental Assessment Process

February 28, 2005 Page 36 Advice to Proponents at the Terms of Reference Stage for a Coordinated Federal/Provincial Environmental Assessment Process

Federal Screening under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and Individual Environmental Assessment under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ontario Region January 2005 1.0 Purpose of Document

The purpose of this document is to provide information with respect to environmental assessment (EA) requirements under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). It describes when the CEAA may apply to a project and to some extent the nature of federal interests. This information is intended to assist proponents in the development of a Terms of Reference for an individual EA under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act (OEAA). The Terms of Reference will outline the process to be followed during the environmental assessment and the content of that EA.

In order to facilitate coordination of provincial and federal EA processes, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) will provide general advice on CEAA and federal involvement in the individual EA. More detailed information on federal interests and information needs will be provided as more specific project information becomes available and federal authorities have enough information to formally initiate their environmental assessment under CEAA.

This document is organized into four subsequent sections.

Definitions: Provides some key definitions that are useful in assisting in understanding CEAA requirements and assisting in the review of this document.

CEAA Requirements: Provides background on the requirements of CEAA as well as direction on coordination with the provincial EA.

Federal Authority (FA) Interests: Provides preliminary policy level advice on FA interests in an EA.

Next Steps: Outlines the next steps that are envisioned for the federal authorities’ participation in the EA process.

In addition, two attachments are provided that offer suggested wording to include in the body of the Terms of Reference and supplemental information to the Terms of Reference.

Appendix “A”: Provides suggested wording on the coordinated federal/provincial EA process to be included in the body of the Terms of Reference.

Appendix “B”: Provides general information on the EA requirements under CEAA to be included as supplemental information to the Terms of Reference.

2 2.0 Definitions

The following definitions are drawn from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. When these terms are used in this document their meaning is as defined here.

"Environment" means the components of the Earth, and includes: a) land, water and air, including all layers of the atmosphere; b) all organic and inorganic matter and living organisms; and c) the interacting natural systems that include components referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b).

"Environmental effect" means, in respect of a project:

a) any change that the project may cause in the environment, including any change it may cause to a listed wildlife species, its critical habitat or the residences of individuals of that species, as those terms are defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act, b) any effect of any such change referred to in paragraph (a) on (i) health and socioeconomic conditions, (ii) physical and cultural heritage, (iii) the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons, or (iv) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance, or c) any change to the project that may be caused by the environment, whether any such change or effect occurs within or outside Canada;

"Project" means: a) in relation to a physical work, any proposed construction, operation, modification, decommissioning, abandonment or other undertaking in relation to that physical work, or, b) any proposed physical activity not relating to a physical work that is prescribed or is within a class of physical activities that is prescribed pursuant to regulations made under the Inclusion List Regulation of CEAA.

3 “Federal Authority” means: a) a Minister of the Crown in right of Canada, b) an agency or other body of the federal government ultimately accountable to Parliament through a federal Minister of the Crown c) any department or departmental corporation set out in Schedule I or II of the Financial Administration Act, and d) any other body that is prescribed pursuant to regulation under CEAA.

“Responsible Authority” (RA) means: in relation to a project, a federal authority that is required to ensure that an environmental assessment of the project is conducted.

“Expert Federal Authority” means: a federal authority that has specialist or expert information or knowledge with respect to a project that can be provided to a Responsible Authority, mediator or panel during the conduct of an environmental assessment, including expertise to the implementation of mitigation measures and any follow-up program.

3.0 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) Requirements

3.1 When CEAA Applies

Under subsection 5(1) of the CEAA, a federal environmental assessment may be required when, in respect of a project, a federal authority:

x Is the proponent; x Makes or authorizes payment or any other form of financial assistance to the proponent; x Sells, leases or otherwise disposes of lands; or x Issues a permit, or license or other form of approval pursuant to a statutory or regulatory provision referred to in the Law List Regulations.

These planned actions of federal authorities are commonly called “triggers.”

In order for the CEAA to apply, there must be a project, there must be a federal authority and there must be a trigger under section 5(1) of the Act.

4 Table 1 provides information on potential CEAA triggers. This table is not inclusive, and proponents are encouraged to refer to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and associated regulations to identify all possible triggers for their project.

Table 1 Selected Potential CEAA triggers for Projects1

Potential Project Provisions of Responsible Comments Trigger Act Authority A CEAA SCREENING IS LIKELY TRIGGERED IF THE PROJECT: x Is being funded with CEAA s.s. 5(1)b The funding x Act is triggered where federal money federal money department is being provided (e.g., Transport Canada Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program) x Is on federal land CEAA s.s.5(1)c Federal x this would affect projects crossing department federal lands such as national parks responsible for the (Heritage Canada), Indian reserves implicated lands (Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development) or national defence bases (Department of National Defence) x Is likely to affect a National Energy National Energy x Act is triggered by application by a facility regulated by Board Act, s. 52, Board regulated-company to the NEB the NEB (e.g. oil or 58 and 74 under sections of the NEB Act that gas pipeline) are Law List triggers x Is likely to affect the Canadian Transport Canada, x generally will apply to projects where operation of a railway Transportation Act Canadian a rail line crossing is contemplated company or property Transportation Agency x Involves the Explosives Act, Natural Resources x projects which involve blasting and temporary storage of par. 7(1)a Canada will store the explosives on-site explosives on-site require a permit under the Explosives Act x Is likely to harmfully Fisheries Act, s.s. Fisheries and x applies to any work in or near water affect fish or fish 22(1), 22(2), Oceans Canada x provision of sufficient water flow habitat 22(3), 32, 35(2) x passage of fish around barriers and 37(2) x screening of water intakes x destruction of fish by means other than fishing (e.g., blasting) x authorization is required to harmfully alter, disrupt or destroy fish habitat

1 This table is not inclusive, and proponents are encouraged to refer to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and associated regulations to identify all possible triggers for their project.

5 Table 1 (Continued) Selected Potential CEAA triggers for Projects2

Potential Project Provisions of Responsible Comments Trigger Act Authority A CEAA SCREENING IS LIKELY TRIGGERED IF THE PROJECT: x Is likely to Navigable Waters Transport Canada x applies to any work in, on, over, substantially interfere Protection Act, under, through or across navigable with the public right s.s. 5(1)(a), 6(4), water to navigation 16 and 20 x approval is required for a new bridge, boom, dam or causeway (incl. culverts) x other works that cause changes to flows, water levels or navigation clearances may require approval x Is likely to take place I.A. and N.D. Heritage Canada – x potentially triggered by projects in, involve dredge Canal Land Parks Canada crossing the Trent Severn Waterway and fill operations, Regulations and Rideau Canal. The Canal Land draw water from or Public Lands Regulations and Public Lands discharge to a Licensing Order Licensing Order address drainage historic canal Heritage Canal into a canal (e.g., stormwater drains) operated by Parks Regulations and the Heritage Canal Regulations Canada address dredge and fill activities (e.g., construction of bridge piers) x Is likely to affect Indian Act, s.s. Department of x would only apply to projects that are Indian reserve lands 28(2), 35(1), 35(2) Indian Affairs and located on, or require access and 39 Northern through, Indian reserves Development

If a project does not involve any of the “triggers” to the CEAA, an EA could still be required. Where, in the opinion of the federal Minister of the Environment, a project may cause significant adverse environmental effects which cross a boundary, the Minister has the authority to refer the project to a mediator or a review panel for an assessment of its environmental effects. The word "boundary" in this case may refer to a provincial boundary, an international boundary, or the boundary of federal lands, including for example, reserve lands and national parks. This authority only exists for projects where there is no other trigger. Normally, the process of considering whether to make a referral based on the transboundary provisions is initiated when the Minister receives a petition or request from a person or a government with an interest in lands potentially affected by the project.

2 This table is not inclusive, and proponents are encouraged to refer to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and associated regulations to identify all possible triggers for their project.

6 3.2 Coordination of CEAA with Provincial EA

It is possible that a project undergoing a provincial EA may trigger an EA under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). The proponent is encouraged to work in a coordinated way with provincial and federal governments, both governments having formally agreed to coordinate their respective EA processes. Formal agreement on environmental assessment cooperation between the governments of Canada and Ontario has been approved.3 The Canada-Ontario Agreement on Environmental Assessment Cooperation (Agreement) establishes administrative mechanisms and guide federal-provincial cooperation for the environmental assessment of projects subject to both the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. The Agreement proposes a single point of contact for projects. It will also set up a more effective and consistent process in which each level of government can fulfill its environmental assessment responsibilities in a timely manner, while contributing to environmental protection. A Federal Environmental Assessment Coordinator (FEAC) will be established for each environmental assessment conducted. The FEAC will be the principal point of contact for federal authorities during the assessment process. The FEAC will: x Bring together all federal authorities that may need to be involved in the EA; x Consolidate information requirements for the assessment; x Coordinate the actions of federal authorities with those of provincial governments in the case of joint assessments, and with other bodies (e.g., band councils) that may be conducting assessments under the CEAA, to prevent overlap and duplication x Coordinate federal authorities' obligations for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry x Establish and chair project committees that include representatives of all potential responsible authorities and interested federal authorities x Establish timelines for environmental assessments, after consulting with potential responsible authorities and federal authorities x Determine, in consultation with responsible authorities, the timing of any public participation required by the Act or proposed by a responsible authority These measures are intended to reduce costly delays in project planning and improve the consistency of information requirements and timing of project decisions. In the case of a provincial individual EA and federal screening, the Agency will act as the FEAC.

3 Please refer to the Agency web site for more detail http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/013/agreements_e.htm#1

7 For the Agency, coordination has four key goals:

x to identify how the proposal affects the interest of all relevant federal and provincial agencies and to ensure those are addressed; x to identify, early in the planning process, all the tasks the proponent might be required to carry out in order to provide agencies with what they need to meet their requirements; x to enable federal and provincial agencies to reach their EA conclusions within roughly the same time frame; and x to aim towards information on environmental effects being contained within a single body of documentation.

The first of these goals identifies how the proposed undertaking may affect federal and provincial interests. The second contributes to the quality and efficiency of EAs. The third relates to the timeliness of carrying out the EAs and the fourth contributes to the accessibility of information to the public, proponent and agencies.

Draft coordination procedures are in use in Ontario for projects that trigger both the provincial and federal EA legislation. The purpose of the procedures is to outline general steps in a process whereby a single EA is done for the project. This proposed approach is designed to address the information requirements of both federal and provincial environmental assessment Acts. Figure 1 outlines coordination procedures which are likely to be carried out in relation to this project and should be included as part of the supplemental information to the Terms of Reference.

Federal authorities require information about the proposed project to determine whether they may or are likely to have a power, duty or function which would trigger the requirement for an EA under CEAA, pursuant to s.5(1). For example, the federal authorities need to know if federal funding or federal land is being sought to enable the project to proceed or if they have a regulatory duty in respect of the project. Furthermore the FAs will need to know at a conceptual level the proposed construction methods and the location of the works in order to determine whether they will need to exercise their regulatory responsibilities. Typically such information is not available at the Terms of Reference stage.

The submission of a project description4 is an important first step in the initiation of a federal EA. The project description can be embedded in the Terms of Reference document or it can be provided separately. The provision of a project description by the proponent initiates a process whereby federal departments can evaluate their interests and potential participation in the project. Where the project information is at a very conceptual stage, the development of a federal project description may have to wait

4 refer to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Operational Policy Statement on Preparing Project Descriptions under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act http://www.ceaa- acee.gc.ca/013/0002/ops_ppd_e.htm

8 until later in the provincial EA process. As indicated in Figure 1, the proponent will be expected to submit a project description to the Agency as soon as more detail on the undertaking becomes available and in particular when enough information is available to select a preferred “alternative to” and a study area is known. The project description will then be circulated by the Agency to federal authorities who may potentially have a trigger under CEAA or provide expert advice.

Should a federal authority determine that it will have a trigger for the proposed project and a CEAA environmental assessment is required, formal commencement of the process will be signaled by an entry on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry at the appropriate time, and communicated to the proponent.

Federal authorities recognize the value of identifying information needs early in the environmental assessment process. However, the conceptual level of project information at the Terms of Reference stage limits their ability to do so. As such, the federal information requirements will be refined and further clarified as the EA process proceeds with the intent of producing a single EA body of documentation on environmental effects to meet all of the information needs of both the federal and provincial governments. To further reduce uncertainty, the Agency recommends that the proponent validate any assumptions being made about information needs on a regular basis through discussions with federal authorities as they become engaged in the process. The Agency would be pleased to facilitate such discussions.

Once an RA has determined it has a trigger under CEAA, the RAs, in consultation with the expert FAs, will determine the scope of the project, factors to be considered and the scope of those factors for the federal environmental assessment to meet requirements pursuant to sections 15 and 16 of CEAA.

In the case of a coordinated EA, these formal determinations will likely reiterate many of the information requirements already identified in the Terms of Reference.

The above information is intended to assist the proponent in understanding how a federal EA can be coordinated with the provincial EA. Not all this information need be included in the Terms of Reference. Appendix “A” provides suggested wording on federal/provincial coordination to be included in the body of the Terms of Reference.

3.3 Environmental Assessment Requirements Under CEAA

In the administration of the CEAA, federal authorities shall exercise their powers in a manner that protects the environment and human health and applies the precautionary principle. Under CEAA, the Responsible Authority is required to consider factors specified in section 16, keeping in mind the definitions of environment, environmental effect and project, prior to making a decision about whether to take action (e.g. provide funding, issue Fisheries Act authorization) in support of the project. Please refer to Appendix B for greater detail.

9 Normally, the information required will pertain to the preferred method5 or the portions of it in relation to which FA(s) are triggering CEAA. Not all alternative methods will necessarily form part of the project under CEAA.

Once a preferred method has been determined, it may be necessary for the proponent to provide additional or more detailed information to enable RA(s) to make a judgment about the likelihood of significant adverse environmental effects after mitigation. The identification of factors to be considered and the scope of those factors to be considered for the preferred method (or portion thereof) will be determined by the RA(s). It may be that many of the factors and associated environmental effects were assessed during the evaluation of the alternative methods, however, additional information particular to the federal EA process may be required for the preferred method.

The general information needs under CEAA to be provided in an environmental assessment can be found in Appendix “B” and should be included as part of the supplemental information to the Terms of Reference.

4.0 Federal Authority Interests

A number of federal authorities may have an interest in the proposed undertaking. Their interests will become clearer as more is known about the preferred “alternative to”. A general listing of potential FA areas of expertise is provided in Table 2. A preliminary list of environmental components against which project effects may be assessed is provided in Table 3.

5 “Preferred method” refers to a phase in the EA process as required for an Individual EA under the provincial EA legislation.

10 Table 2 Identifying Expert Federal Authorities

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EXPERT FEDERAL AUTHORITY

Environmental Effects Changes in the environment: general Environment Canada air Environment Canada land Environment Canada Natural Resources Canada wildlife Environment Canada fish and fish habitat Fisheries and Oceans Canada soil Agriculture Canada forest resources Natural Resources Canada humans Health Canada water Environment Canada Fisheries and Oceans Canada Natural Resources Canada Related changes in: sustainable use Environment Canada human health conditions Health Canada socio-economic conditions Agriculture Canada Environment Canada Fisheries and Oceans Canada Health Canada Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Industry, Science and Technology Canada Natural Resources Canada cultural resources Canadian Heritage Indian and Northern Affairs Canada aboriginal land and resource use Indian and Northern Affairs Canada historical, archaeological, paleontological and Canadian Heritage architectural resources Natural Resources Canada Public Works Canada management of protected areas – national parks, Canadian Heritage national historic sites, historic rivers and heritage canals CEAA Process and Procedures Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Environment Canada International Environmental Issues Foreign Affairs Canada Canadian International Development Agency International Crossings and Projects Canada Border Services Agency Citizenship and Immigration Canada Foreign Affairs Canada

11 Table 3 Preliminary List of Valued Ecosystem Components Components Attributes Water Groundwater groundwater quality groundwater quantity groundwater flow drinking water Surface water surface water quality surface water quantity surface water flow patterns sediment quality Atmosphere Air quality Noise Vibration Land Soil conditions, including contaminated areas Geology Geomorphology Landscape Species and Populations Terrestrial terrestrial vegetation wetlands ecologically important areas, (ANSI’s, ESA’s, PSW’s) birds other terrestrial wildlife wildlife at risk (terrestrial) including species listed under the Species at Risk Act Aquatic aquatic vegetation & sediments fish (finfish, crustaceans, shellfish) invertebrates amphibians and reptiles wildlife at risk (aquatic) including species listed under the Species at Risk Act Habitats and Communities Terrestrial habitat Terrestrial communities Aquatic habitat Aquatic communities Human Health & Safety Health risks and effects on health Safety risks Social & Economic Existing and anticipated future land uses Local economy Transportation & navigation Quality of life Economical/commercial opportunities Employment Recreational opportunities or amenities Physical and cultural heritage Archaeological resources Paleontological resources Architectural resources Cultural resources Aesthetic Adjacent land uses Aboriginal Reserve lands Current use of land and resources for traditional purposes

12 5.0 Next Steps

The information contained in this Advice to the Proponent will assist in the preparation of the Terms of Reference and in coordinating the provincial and potential federal EA.

It is expected that the Agency will review the Terms of Reference during the formal Ontario Ministry of the Environment review process to:

x see how federal interests have been reflected; and x provide comments if appropriate.

As more detail on the undertaking becomes available and in particular when enough information is available to select a preferred “alternative to” and a study area is known, it should be possible to develop a project description that can be circulated by the Agency to federal authorities who may potentially have a trigger under CEAA or provide expert advice.

It is recognized that ongoing dialogue on the information requirements is needed throughout the EA process as more is learned about the specifics of the project. The federal information requirements will be refined and further clarified as the EA process proceeds. As soon as the RA(s) believe they are in a position to do so, CEAA will be triggered.

13 APPENDIX “A”

SUGGESTED WORDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE TERMS OF REFERENCE ON A COORDINATED FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL EA PROCESS

Coordinated Federal/Provincial EA Process

Federal/Provincial EA Coordination

The proponent’s undertaking is subject to the requirements of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. The requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) may also apply. The proponent intends to work in a coordinated way with provincial and federal governments, both governments having formally agreed to coordinate their respective EA processes established by the applicable environmental assessment legislation.

Coordinated EA Process

The proponent will be guided by the federal/provincial coordination process chart outlined in the supporting documentation of this terms of reference document. This proposed approach is designed to address the information requirements of both federal and provincial environmental assessment Acts.

Application of the Coordinated EA Process to the Proposed Project

It is recognized by both the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (on behalf of the federal authorities), and the proponent, that ongoing dialogue on the information requirements is required throughout the EA process as more is learned about the specifics of the undertaking. As such, it may be necessary for the proponent to provide additional or more detailed information as the EA process proceeds. The intent is to produce a single EA body of documentation on environmental effects to meet all of the information needs of both the federal and provincial governments. To the extent practical, federal/provincial information requirements regarding potential factors to be assessed in the context of this study have been integrated. General information requirements under CEAA can be found in the supporting documentation of this terms of reference document.

14 APPENDIX “B”

INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ACT (CEAA)

Under CEAA, the following information needs to be provided in an environmental assessment conducted as a screening (paraphrasing): x a description of the existing environment; x any change the project may cause in the environment including: land, water, air, organic and inorganic matter, living organisms, and the interaction of natural systems; x any effects that the project may cause to a listed wildlife species, its critical habitat or residences of individuals of that species, as those terms are defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act; x the effects of a project-related environmental change on: health and socio-economic conditions; physical and cultural heritage; the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons; and any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archeological, paleontological or architectural significance; x any such project change or effect occurring both within or outside Canada; x all environmental effects that may result from the various phases of the project (construction, operation, modification, abandonment and decommissioning); x the environmental effects of accidents and malfunctions; x the effects of the environment on the project (including effects due to climate change); x the cumulative environmental effects of this project that are likely to result from the project in combination with other projects or activities that have been or will be carried out6; x the likelihood of significant adverse environmental effects; x the need for and requirements of a follow-up program; x comments from the public obtained in accordance with CEAA; x any measures to be taken that would mitigate identified environmental effects; x any other matter that the responsible authority deems to be necessary including those required for a comprehensive study, mediation or panel.

Additional factors to be considered for a comprehensive study, mediation or panel include: x the purpose of the project; x alternatives means of carrying out the project; x design of a follow up program;

6 For more information on cumulative effects assessment please refer to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s operational policy statement on cumulative effects, http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/013/0002/cea_ops_e.htm

15 x the capacity of renewable resources affected by the project to meet the needs of the present and those of the future.

If the decommissioning and abandonment phases are not currently part of the proposed project, the proponent may explain this in its EA document, and the responsible authority under CEAA may decide not to require further analysis on these phases of the project as part of the current assessment.

Nothing in this document will limit the prerogative of federal authorities to seek additional information as more is learned about the specifics of the projects and its potential effects. Responsible authorities will be making a judgment about the likelihood of significant adverse environmental effects after mitigation, and they have the discretion to determine what information they require before making such a judgment.

16 Figure 1: Federal / Provincial Coordination Process for Individual EAs / Screenings – Key Steps

EA TERMS OF REFERENCE INDIVIDUAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STAGE STAGE

PREFERRED METHOD ToR Approval “ALTERNATIVES TO” ALTERNATIVE METHODS (undertaking/project) EA Decision

Proponent to: Selection of Preferred Selection of Preferred “Alternative To” Method Contact MOE and Agency regarding initiation of EA ToR Proponent to: Proponent to: MOE to: Provide a preliminary schedule for the submission of ToR and Provide study area Provide additional information Minister makes decision on EA commencement of EA Provide Project Description as required by RA(s) Provide draft EA for review Provide a copy of draft ToR Provide final EA RA(s) to: CEA Agency to: Make decision on likelihood of MOE to: MOE to: Distribute project description significant adverse environmental effects Provide ToR guidance to the to likely RA(s) and expert Act as lead coordinator for Make decision on follow-up proponent FA(s) formal comments Liaise with the CEA Agency Establish federal project Carry out technical review of committee Establish Government Review EA CEA Agency and MOE to: Team Coordinate involvement of RA(s) and FA(s) Act as lead coordinator for formal Coordinate timing of decision- CEA Agency to: comments (assumes MOE is lead making and form of party for fed/prov EA announcement coordination) Coordinate federal review of RA(s) to: the draft and final EAs Provide guidance on: CEA Agency to: Intention on scope (where possible) RA(s) to: Act as FEAC Information they may require Provide advice to proponent to assess environmental Formally trigger CEAA through MOE effects Provide scope of project and Contact FA(s) with likely interest scope of assessment Liaise with MOE Review and comment on draft and final EA

Federal authorities actively engaged Consultation with federal authorities to ensure information requirements satisfactorily addressed

Public and agency consultation as required Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Appendix 2: Results of Pre-Submission Public Consultation

February 28, 2005 Page 37 Project Commencement Central Transit Corridor Individual Environmental Assessment (EA) Terms of Reference

The Regional Municipality of Waterloo, in consultation with the Cities of Cambridge, Kitchener and Waterloo, is beginning preparation of an Envi ronmental Assessment (EA) Terms of Reference for the development of a higher order transit corridor extending from Waterloo to Cambridge.

The Regional Transportation Master Plan was adopted in 1999 and identified the need to develop policies to protect a Central Transit Corridor. The Regional Growth Management Strategy adopted by Regional Council on June 25, 2003 affirmed the need for a higher order transit service in the Central Transit Corridor. The Corridor is intended to act as one of the key catalysts to influence urban form, support downtown core revitalization and control urban sprawl in the Region.

THE PROCESS

This project will fulfil the requirements of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act (OEAA) as well as the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). For a Provincial Individual EA, the EA Act requires that a proponent first prepare a Terms of Reference to define the framework of the proposed EA project. The Terms of Reference must then be approved by the Ontario Minister of Environment. In preparing the Terms of Reference and the subsequent EA project, public input and comment will be invited. If the Terms of Reference are approved by the Ontario Minister of Environment, the EA project will then involve the final selection of Central Transit Corridor routes, facilities, transit technologies and preliminary design, all to be completed as part of an Individual EA. Public consultation and provision of project information will continue through the Individual EA process.

The first opportunity for formal public input into the preparation of the EA Terms of Reference will take place at the following public meeting, where the public will be provided further information on the Individual EA process and continuing opportunities for public input, and will be asked to provide suggestions on higher order transit issues that they feel should be addressed in the subsequent EA:

Date: Wednesday, December 8, 2004 Place: Cafeteria, Eastwood Collegiate Institute 760 Weber Street E, Kitchener (parking off Jackson Avenue, Clifford Road and Montgomery Road – GRT Route 7B) Time: Regional Presentation: 6:30 – 7:30 pm Group Discussions: 7:30 – 9:00 pm

This public meeting will be an opportunity for interested members of the public, and representatives of local stakeholder groups and involved agencies to begin their participation in the Central Transit Corridor EA process. If, at the completion of the EA process, you feel that serious issues remain unresolved, you have the right to ask the Minister of Environment to refer the project to a hearing.

PROVIDING COMMENTS

All comments and information from the public, stakeholder groups and agencies regarding the EA project are being collected to assist the Region in meeting the requirements of OEAA and CEAA. This material will be kept in the project file, and may be included in project documentation in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. With the exception of personal information, all comments will become part of the public record.

If you wish to be added to the project mailing list or would like further information on the project and upcoming public meeting, please contact either:

Mr. Graham Vincent, P. Eng. Mr. Don Drackley, MCIP Director, Transportation Planning Senior Associate Regional Municipality of Waterloo IBI Group 150 Frederick Street 31-130 Cedar Street, Suite 107 Kitchener, ON N2G 4J3 Cambridge, ON N1S 5A5 Phone: 575-4489 Phone: 620-8898 Fax: 575-4449 Fax: 622-3621 e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] Waterloo Region Rapid Transit Initiative Individual Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference Preparation

Input Public Meeting held on Wednesday, December 8, 2004 Eastwood Collegiate Institute

REPORT CONTEXT The Regional Municipality of Waterloo intends to prepare a full Individual Environmental Assessment (EA) for development of Rapid Transit service linking Waterloo, through Kitchener to Cambridge. The need for a Rapid Transit service was identified in the Regional Growth Management Strategy adopted by Regional Council on June 25, 2003. The corridor is intended to act as one of the key catalysts to influence urban form, support downtown core revitalization and control urban sprawl in the Region. It will also serve future travel needs in the Region.

This project will fulfil the requirements of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act (OEAA) as well as the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). For a Provincial EA, the EA Act requires that the proponent (Region of Waterloo) first prepare a Terms of Reference to define the framework of the proposed EA project. The Terms of Reference must then be approved by the Ontario Minister of the Environment. In preparing the Terms of Reference and subsequent EA Project, public input and comment will be invited. The first opportunity for formal public input to the preparation of the EA Terms of Reference took place on December 8th, at a public information session held from 6:30 to 9:00 p.m. at Eastwood Collegiate Institute.

The December 8th public meeting provided an opportunity for interested members of the public to hear a presentation on key elements of the Growth Management Strategy, opportunities for the Rapid Transit corridor and to learn about the process for preparing the Terms of Reference and subsequent EA study. The formal part of the meeting began at 7:00 p.m. with presentations by Graham Vincent, P. Eng. Director, Transportation Planning, Region of Waterloo and Don Drackley, MCIP, Senior Associate, IBI Group. Following the presentation, two discussion groups were formed to address the following:

Issues and concerns that the public would like to see addressed through the Terms of Reference and subsequent EA Study Ways to consult with the public during the EA Study Ways to be informed about the Terms of Reference Preparation.

There were a number of questions on the presentation as follows:

Page 1 Q/ What happens if the Ministry doesn’t like the Terms of Reference? Response: MOE could raise some issues, which, the Region would respond to and make revisions as need be.

Q/ Who are the affected parties in the Region? Response: All of the residents and business interests in all three municipalities.

Q/ What other areas have done this? Response: City of Ottawa, City of Toronto York Region.

The Public Consultation Facilitator, Sue Cumming of Cumming and Company, has prepared this summary report which synthesizes the discussion points from the two breakout groups. It is not intended as a verbatim account of the discussion. Included in Appendix A is the summary from the comment forms received subsequent to the meeting.

ISSUES AND CONCERNS TO BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE STUDY The first part of the discussion identified issues or concerns that people would like to see addressed through the Individual Environmental Assessment and that should be included in the Terms of Reference. The following points were noted to be included in the Terms of Reference. These are listed in random order:

Maintain bike trails with connections to the future transit system. Use already established rights of ways where possible – highway, hydro corridor, railway corridors. Evaluate technology to ensure that it can meet goals. Look at how to enhance various forms of transit and development of seamless system. Examine how to provide interconnections with a feeder system – how people connect to transit system should be addressed. Examine impacts beyond corridor should be studies. The EA could be too limited to corridor – need to consider impacts for example of feeder bus network and increased development along these areas – the impacts needs to be acknowledged and quantified – for example - will it affect existing employment areas? Look at impacts to social environment and effect on people in the corridor. Address walk-ability and pedestrian connections. Look at impact on sensitive areas – older houses and stable neighbourhoods, heritage buildings, land acquisition or shutting down certain streets Undertake structural assessment for whatever corridor is looked at. Noise and vibration for structures along King Street in particular and residential homes is important. Ensure accessibility for handicapped is addressed. Determine ways to appeal to discretionary riders. Evaluate options based on ability to improve transit share (measured) Analyze new riders – how many cars can be reduced? Page 2 Examine ways to promote increased ridership - Rider acceptance and use could cut down air pollution. Fare integration, smart pricing, free days to get people to try it. Priority transit – x lanes, queue jumping. Cost of transit – fares, feasible to leave car at home, branches on transit are important connections. Look at strategy for employment areas and universities. For example Pinebush – Franklin service lacking – large employers. Review how the age cohort (i.e. seniors) affect future travel needs? How can transit better serve this market? Assess how the longer distance market could be better served by transit? Express service is a first start. Look at GO and movements to Toronto urban market. Connect higher order transit with other rail modes. Look at opportunities for public education is needed to change travel preferences - Why do people have to use their cars? Evaluate different alternatives on how they will contribute to and achieve planning goals and role as catalyst for urban form changes. The various alternatives must have a proven ability to anchor land use intensification – way to move people and rejuvenate cores. Compliance / non-compliance with municipal policy – will it promote growth for economic value. Where the stations are located could be a catalyst for change. Undertake an economic analysis of infrastructure and choices. Evaluate net improvement in air quality, reduction in carbon emissions per person over entire region by rider and energy use per passenger could be key indicators. Assess Salt reduction strategy and benefits of transit. When looking at costs be realistic – we have already sunk capital costs in roads – may need to subsidize transit. Focus on redeeming outcomes of transit – mitigating impacts and benefits – less pollution. Address seasonal impacts of various modes of transit and connections.

METHODS FOR CONSULTING THE PUBLIC DURING THE EA. Public consultation is very important in the Environmental Assessment process. The break-out groups discussed what methods of consulting with the public they would like to see considered in the Terms of Reference, and used in the Environmental Assessment. The following points were noted. These are listed in random order.

Notification for public meetings through the newspaper, through Rogers Cable, through special flyers distributed at schools, libraries in the Region, through write-ups in the student and community newspapers and through direct mailing to people in the corridor. Use of the Region of Waterloo and area municipal web-sites to provide information about the study and opportunities for public input Engage existing community neighbourhood associations along the corridor. Page 3 Letters to community associations advising of the study and web-site link. Radio announcements at key study intervals and prior to public meetings Public meetings / workshop sessions with displays and handouts and presentation with opportunity to provide comments at microphone. Opportunity to learn others perspectives balanced with not having to rehash things. Hold meetings in convenient locations. Depending on what kind of input, look at what kind of opportunity. Shopping Center kiosks may be appropriate when modes or routes are being looked at.

When participants at the meeting were asked how they would like to be kept informed about the progress of the Terms of Reference preparation.

Email Canada Post Web site Newspaper ads Radio advertising / TV Shopping centres Flyers and information posted at the Regional HQ building Transit talk

The meeting concluded at 9:00 p.m.

Page 4 Appendix A – Summary of Input Received from Comment Sheets Following the meeting, five comment sheets were completed and forwarded to the Region. The following captures the key points noted. Question 1. What issues and concerns would you like to see addressed through the Rapid Transit Initiative Individual Environmental Assessment, and that should be included in the Terms of Reference? One of the principal environmental factors in your project is the present movement and modes of people and yet after three public meetings, I have the impression that, other than ridership, nothing much has been done. To attract a market to new types and routes of transit requires assessment of existing actual vs. potential as well as but use markets for the expanded system. I may be naïve but I feel strongly about origin/destination surveys especially in major parking lots and along arterial routes such as Fisher Hallman, Bridgeport, Erb, Weber, Westmount, Ottawa, Frederick, etc. These are vital to the outcomes of your project. This would not be as difficult or time consuming as previously analysis through camera – captured license plate numbers and postal codes as is already done by 407ETR, photo radar, and intersection monitoring already demonstrates this technique. Net improvement in air quality Use of already established rights of way for final routing – i.e. highway, hydro and rail easements Non-use of elevated system due to negative visual impact The higher order transit, whatever form it takes needs to have its fares subsidized in order to keep fares low and increase ridership. Lower fares = increased ridership. Perhaps free fares could be considered on certain special occasions (i.e. Oktoberfest, etc) to encourage people who never take transit to give it a try. It could be enough to tempt them in the future. Subsidized fares leading to increased ridership will reduce costs in a) health care due to air pollution, b) cost of gridlock, c) missed work days due to asthma etc, d) cost of accidents and fatalities and e) cost of lost work hours due to b, c, and d. Proven track record of anchoring land-use intensification Ability to attract the discretionary rider Low or zero curbside emissions Ability to use green power Efficient passenger km/kilowatt-hour ratio which considers passenger occupancy levels and mechanical efficiencies Does not contribute to increased salt intrusion into the aquifers If we are to get people to move to public transportation – reduce pollution, conserve energy, and keep Canada self-sufficient with regard to transportation – we must have an efficient intermodal system. Develop a strategy for commuters to include efficient, convenient, financially feasible intermodal system with a passenger train system as a part of this goal.

Question 2. Public Consultation is very important in the Environmental Assessment process. What methods of consulting with the public would you like to see considered in the Terms of Reference, and used in the Environmental Assessment preparation? Public meetings Regional updates by mail or email Newspaper reports Video reports – use of Rogers TV Station Flyers in Natural Gas, Water and or Hydro billings Weekday evening public meetings along corridor route Website for postings and PDF Question 3.How would you like to be kept informed about the progress of the Terms of Reference preparation? Email and regional mailings How did you find out about the meeting: Kitchener Waterloo Record advertisement (2 people),friend told me.

Page 5 Notice of Draft Terms of Reference and Public Meeting #2 Rapid Transit Initiative Environmental Assessment (EA)

The Study

The Regional Municipality of Waterloo has prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) Terms of Reference for the development of rapid transit service extending from Waterloo, through Kitchener to Cambridge.

The Regional Growth Management Strategy adopted by Regional Council on June 25, 2003 affirmed the need for rapid transit service linking these three urban areas in the Region. Rapid transit is intended to act as one of the key catalysts to influence urban form, support downtown core revitalization and control urban sprawl in the Region. It will also serve future travel needs in the Region.

The Draft Terms of Reference provide a framework for completing an Individual EA study that will assess all reasonable rapid transit technologies and alignments and recommend a preferred rapid transit system.

The Process

Prior to preparing an Individual EA, the Environmental Assessment Act requires that a proponent prepare a Terms of Reference (ToR). The Minister of the Environment (MOE) has the authority to approve the ToR. The Individual EA is then prepared in accordance with the approved ToR.

The Draft ToR is being provided to facilitate consultation with interested stakeholders and members of the public. Copies of the Draft ToR are available on the project web site at www.region.waterloo.on.ca/transitEA. In addition, starting Wednesday, March 2, 2005, the Draft ToR can be viewed at all public libraries and main municipal offices in the Cities of Cambridge, Kitchener and Waterloo, and at the Regional Headquarters.

Public Meeting #2 will also provide the public with an opportunity to meet the Project Team to review comments, questions and issues related to the Draft ToR. This Public Meeting will be held as follows:

Date: Tuesday, March 8, 2005 Time: Presentation 7:00 - 7:30 PM Group Discussion 7:30 – 9: 00 PM Place: Cameron Heights Secondary School 301 Charles Street East Parking at rear, served by GRT Routes 3, 7, 8 11 and 22

Comments and information regarding this project are being collected to assist the Region of Waterloo in meeting the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act. This material will be maintained on file for use during the project and may be included in project documentation. Information collected will be used in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. With the exception of personal information, all comments become part of the public record.

Comments on the Draft ToR will be collected until April 1, 2005.

If you have any questions regarding this project or wish to provide comment on the Draft ToR document, please contact either:

Mr. Graham Vincent, P. Eng. Mr. Don Drackley, MCIP Director, Transportation Planning Senior Associate Regional Municipality of Waterloo IBI Group 150 Frederick Street 31-130 Cedar Street, Suite 107 Kitchener, ON N2G 4J3 Cambridge, ON N1S 5A5 Phone: 575-4489 Phone: 620-8898 Fax: 575-4449 Fax: 622-3621 e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] Draft Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference

RAPID TRANSIT INITIATIVE

Appendix 3: Results of Pre-Submission Agency Contacts

February 28, 2005 Page 38 MEMO

To: File Date: January 12, 2005

From: Don Drackley Steno: d cc: Graham Vincent, Region of Waterloo File No: TO-2089

Subject: Primary Agency Contacts With Interest in the EA ToR Preparation: Rapid Transit Initiative EA, Region of Waterloo

FEDERAL AGENCIES:

1. Eric Advokaat Senior Program Manager Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Ontario Region Office 55 St. Clair Avenue West, Room 907 Toronto, ON M4T 1M2 phone: 416-952-1585 fax: 416-952-1573 [email protected] 2. Mark Wright Inspection Officer Transport Canada Marine Navigable Waters Protection 201 Front Street N, Suite 703 Sarnia, ON N7T 8B1 phone: 519-383-1866 fax: 519-383-1989

PROVINCE OF ONTARIO AGENCIES:

3. James O’Mara Director Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch Ministry of Environment 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, ON M4V 1L5

4. Piero Amodeo Supervisor Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch Ministry of Environment 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, ON M4V 1L5 phone: 416-314-7765 [email protected] File - 2 - February 25, 2005

5. Catherine McLennon Project Officer EA Project Coordination Section Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch Ministry of Environment 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, ON M4V 1L5 phone: 416-314-7222 [email protected]

6. Andrea Doherty Grand River Conservation Authority c/o [email protected]

7. John MacDonald Ministry of Culture 900 Highbury Avenue London, ON N5Y 1A4

“MAJOR” STAKEHOLDERS (to date):

8. David Lukianow, P. Eng. Manager Public Works Canadian Pacific Railway 1290 Central Parkway West, Suite 600 Mississauga, ON L5C 4R3 phone: 905-803-5971 Fax: 905-803-3322 [email protected]

9. Don Heron Director Passenger Rail Canadian Pacific Railway 401-9th Avenue SW Suite 500 Calgary, Alta T2P 4Z4

10. Paul Kerry Canadian Pacific Railway 1290 Central Parkway West, Suite 800 Mississauga, ON L5C 4R3

11. Paul Dockrill Real Estate Services Hydro One Networks Inc. P.O. Box 4300 Markham, ON L3R 5Z5 phone: 905-946-6248 fax: 905-946-6242 [email protected] VERSION 5 – December 19, 2004

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Eric Advokaat Environment Canada Senior Program Officer Rob Dobos, Head Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Environmental Assessment Section Ontario Regional office 867 Lakeshore Road, Box 5050 55 St. Clair Avenue West, Room 907 Burlington, Ontario Toronto, Ontario L7R 4A6 M4T 1M2

Mark Wright Referrals Coordinator Inspection Officer, Coast Guard Department of Fisheries and Oceans Central & Arctic Region, Navigable Waters Protection Fisheries & Habitat Management 201 North Front Street 867 Lakeshore Road Suite 703 Box 5050 Sarnia, Ontario Burlington, Ontario N7T 8B1 L7R 4A6

Regional Manager Environmental Affairs Canadian Heritage, Parks Canada Ontario Region Mark Yeates, Environmental Assessment Specialist Transport Canada 111 Water Street East th 4900 Yonge Street, 4 Floor Cornwall, Ontario Toronto, Ontario K6H 6S3 M2N 6A5 VERSION 5 – December 19, 2004

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Catherine McLennon Project Officer Jennifer Moulton, EA Coordinator EA Project Coordination Section Ministry of the Environment Environmental Assessment & Approvals Branch 119 King Street West, 12th Floor Ministry of the Environment Hamilton, Ontario 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A L8P 4Y7 Toronto, Ontario M4V 1L5

Ed Griffin, District Manager Ken Cornelisse Ministry of the Environment Ministry of Natural Resources Guelph District Office Guelph District Office 1 Stone Road West, 4th Floor 1 Stone Road West Guelph, Ontario Guelph, Ontario N1G 4Y2 N1G 4Y2

Piero Amodeo Supervisor Environmental Assessment & Approvals Branch Ministry of the Environment 2 St.Clair Avenue West, Floor 12 A Toronto, Ontario M4V 1L5 VERSION 5 – December 19, 2004

Mitch Wilson Area Supervisor John MacDonald, Heritage Planner Ministry of Natural Resources Ministry of Culture Guelph District Office 900 Highbury Avenue 1 Stone Road West London, Ontario Guelph, Ontario N5Y 1A4 N1G 4Y2

Mike Stone A/District Planner Ministry of Natural Resources Guelph District 1 Stone Road West Guelph, Ontario N1G 4Y2

Ministry of Transportation Ms. Meredith Beresford Jennifer Graham Harkness, Head Director, Provincial Planning Services Branch Planning and Design Section Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing 659 Exeter Road 777 Bay Street, 14th Floor London, Ontario Toronto, Ontario N6E 1L3 M5G 2 E 5

Matt Ferguson Planner Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing nd OTHER AGENCIES 659 Exeter Road, 2 Floor London, ON N6E 1L3 VERSION 5 – December 19, 2004

Grand River Conservation Authority Paul Dockrill Beth Brown, Resource Planner Real Estate Services Planning and Resources Coordination Section Hydro One Networks Inc. 400 Clyde Road P.O. Box 4300 P.O. Box 729 Markham, Ontario Cambridge, Ontario L3R 5Z5 N1R 5W6

Waterloo Regional Police Service Emergency Medical Services Staff Sergeant Scott Diefenbaker John Prno, Director Traffic Services Branch Regional Municipality of Waterloo 200 Maple Grove Road 99 Regina Street South P.O. Box 3070 Waterloo, Ontario Cambridge, Ontario N2J 4V3 N3H 5M1

Waterloo Region District School Board Waterloo Catholic District School Board Chris Smith Dave Bennett, Planner Manager of Transportation 91 Moore Avenue 51 Ardelt Avenue, Planning Building 2-1 Kitchener, Ontario Kitchener, Ontario N2H 3S4 N2C 2R5

D.M. Lukianow, P. Eng. John MacTaggart Manager Public Works Public Works Engineer Canadian Pacific Railways Canadian National Railway 1290 Central Parkway West, Suite 600 277 Front Street West, Suite 702 Mississauga, Ontario Toronto, Ontario L5C 4R3 M5V 2X7 VERSION 5 – December 19, 2004

Paul Kerry Don Heron Canadian Pacific Railway Canadian Pacific Railways th 1290 Central Parkway West 133-9 Avenue S.W. Suite 800 Calgary, Alta Mississauga, ON T2P 2M3 L5C 3P2