DOCSLIB.ORG

Tripartite Agreement Update

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tripartite Agreement Update ZB7.11 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Management From: Lance Alexander Senior Director, Corporate Projects and Human Resources Subject: TRIPARTITE AGREEMENT UPDATE Date: 2019-10-15 SUMMARY: In 2013 Toronto City Council requested the Toronto Zoo to complete a new licence agreement among the City, the Zoo and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (the "Tripartite Agreement"). A key part of the new agreement was to redefine of the boundaries of the Toronto Zoo to reflect two major changes. Namely, the addition of lands north of Old Finch Avenue for new breeding and browse facilities and the removal of river valley lands west and south of the Zoo to facilitate transfer of same to Parks Canada for incorporation into the Rouge National Urban Park (RNUP). The end result of the redefined boundaries is that the Toronto Zoo is geographically enveloped by RNUP. Since 2013, negotiations became more complex because of two matters: objection to use of the lands north of Old Finch Avenue for browse production and a desire by Parks Canada and local stakeholders to construct an RNUP Welcome Centre on Zoo Lands east of Meadowvale Road. This report discusses the current status of the Tripartite Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that this report be received for information. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The Zoo is required to pay $300 annually in rent and is responsible for municipal property taxes estimated at approximately $1,800 annually. There will be ongoing costs for growing and harvesting browse on the site potentially including installation of a well. No structures are planned for the site. COMMENTS: The negotiation of the Tripartite Agreement has proven to be intensive, lengthy and complex. The process over time became more complex due to stakeholder involvement around specific matters such as the proposed location of browse production, the RNUP Welcome Centre, and management of the Finch-Meander. Further, during the latter part of the discussion the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) transferred its lands in the vicinity adjacent the Toronto Zoo to the Parks Canada for incorporation into the Rouge National Urban Park. This thus required subsequent negotiations with Parks Tripartite Agreement Update Page 1 of 3 Canada around specific matters related to the Tripartite Agreement. Below is a summary of the status the elements of the matters woven into the Tripartite Agreement either directly or through association. Welcome Centre In accordance with ZB6.1, adopted by the Board of Management of the Toronto Zoo on August 19, 2019, the Toronto Zoo has agreed to remove the lands known as Parking Lot 4 from the Tripartite Agreement, thereby releasing its control and right to use same. These lands have now been surveyed and the draft Plan of survey is being reviewed and will soon by registered thereby facilitating the transfer of the lands from the TRCA to Parks Canada. Finch Meander As previously required by the TRCA these lands will be transferred to Parks Canada for incorporation into the RNUP. Consequently, they will no longer be within the Zoo's control pursuant to the Tripartite Agreement. The Toronto Zoo and Parks Canada have instead agreed, through an MOU, that Parks Canada will improve these lands through creating controlled public access and design improvements that discourage “social’ trails. The MOU also contains reciprocal access rights such that Toronto Zoo may enter onto RNUP lands to implement security measures, including patrols its fenced perimeter and Parks Canada Wardens may enter onto Zoo property for security enforcement measures, provided they comply with Zoo policies. The MOU is a five (5) year term which can be continually updated by the mutual agreement of the parties. Browse Lease Parks Canada identified an alternate location to permit the Zoo to produce browse. The property is located at the south-west corner of the intersection of Passmore Avenue and Beare Road, being approximately 5 minutes northeast of the Toronto Zoo. A 30 year nominal lease has now been agreed to that allows the Toronto Zoo to produce extensive browse for animal enrichment. The Zoo will be required to create a farm plan for discussion with and approval of the RNUP Superintendent. The lease provides for development of an approved well for watering purposes and contemplates certain reciprocal environmental indemnities. Monorail/Magnovate Lands Parks Canada is not prepared to accept ownership of any lands encumbered by existing infrastructure therefore a novel solution has been proposed to deal with portion of the monorail/Magnovate structure that extends beyond the Zoo's new south-western boundary into the Rouge River valley lands which will transferred to Parks Canada. A stratified plan of survey is currently being prepared by City surveyors to provide Parks Canada with ownership and access to the Rouge River for enforcement purposes while also ensuring that TRCA retains ownership of the lands along the entire length and width of the elevated structure and the lands upon which the footings and columns are located. Once the plan is deposited at the Land Registry Office, the relevant legal descriptions will be incorporated into the Tripartite Agreement. Like all buildings, structures and facilities Tripartite Agreement Update Page 2 of 3 within the Zoo, the Monorail/Magnovate structure belongs to the City and the Zoo has responsibility for its operational control and management. Summary The Council-directed licence renewal process is now extensively complete except for completion of administrative requirements. The Tripartite Agreement can be signed by all three parties once the Monorail/Magnovate related surveying is complete, legal descriptions are finalized and the browse lease and Finch Meander MOU have been signed by Parks Canada and the Zoo. And finally, once the Zoo's boundaries have been formally redefined, the current restriction on transferring TRCA owned lands in the vicinity of the Zoo will be lifted and TRCA will be free to transfer its remaining lands to Parks Canada for inclusion in RNUP, including Parking Lot 4 for establishment of the Welcome Centre. The implementation of this complex project aligns with and promotes the concept of a conservation precinct and strengthens the Zoo’s ongoing partnership with Parks Canada. CONTACT: Lance Alexander Senior Director, Corporate Projects and Human Resources [email protected] 416-392-5911 Lance Alexander Senior Director, Corporate Projects and Human Resources Tripartite Agreement Update Page 3 of 3 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Toward City Charters in Canada
    Journal of Law and Social Policy Volume 34 Toronto v Ontario: Implications for Canadian Local Democracy Guest Editors: Alexandra Flynn & Mariana Article 8 Valverde 2021 Toward City Charters in Canada John Sewell Chartercitytoronto.ca Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/jlsp Part of the Law Commons Citation Information Sewell, John. "Toward City Charters in Canada." Journal of Law and Social Policy 34. (2021): 134-164. https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/jlsp/vol34/iss1/8 This Voices and Perspectives is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Social Policy by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Sewell: Toward City Charters in Canada Toward City Charters in Canada JOHN SEWELL FOR MORE THAN 30 YEARS, there has been discussion about how cities in Canada can gain more authority and the freedom, powers, and resources necessary to govern their own affairs. The problem goes back to the time of Confederation in 1867, when eighty per cent of Canadians lived in rural areas. Powerful provinces were needed to unite the large, sparsely populated countryside, to pool resources, and to provide good government. Toronto had already become a city in 1834 with a democratically elected government, but its 50,000 people were only around three per cent of Ontario’s 1.6 million. Confederation negotiations did not even consider the idea of conferring governmental power to Toronto or other municipalities, dividing it instead solely between the soon-to-be provinces and the new central government.
    [Show full text]
  • Renaming to the Toronto Zoo Road
    Councillor Paul Ainslie Constituency Office, Toronto City Hall Toronto City Council Scarborough Civic Centre 100 Queen Street West Scarborough East - Ward 43 150 Borough Drive Suite C52 Scarborough, Ontario M1P 4N7 Toronto, Ontario M5H 2N2 Chair, Government Management Committee Tel: 416-396-7222 Tel: 416-392-4008 Fax: 416-392-4006 Website: www.paulainslie.com Email: [email protected] Date: October 27, 2016 To: Chair, Councillor Chin Lee and Scarborough Community Council Members Re: Meadowvale Road Renaming between Highway 401 and Old Finch Road Avenue Recommendation: 1. Scarborough Community Council request the Director, Engineering Support Services & Construction Services and the Technical Services Division begin the process to review options for the renaming of Meadowvale Road between Highway 401 and Old Finch Avenue including those of a "honourary" nature. 2. Staff to report back to the February 2017 meeting The Toronto Zoo is the largest zoo in Canada attracting thousands of visitors annually becoming a landmark location in our City. Home to over 5,000 animals it is situated in a beautiful natural habitat in one of Canada's largest urban parks. Opening its doors on August 15, 1974 the Toronto Zoo has been able to adapt throughout the years developing a vision to "educate visitors on current conservation issues and help preserve the incredible biodiversity on the planet", through their work with endangered species, plans for a wildlife health centre and through their Research & Veterinary Programs. I believe it would be appropriate to introduce a honourary street name for the section of Meadowvale Road between Highway 401 and Old Finch Avenue to recognize the only public entrance to the Toronto Zoo.
    [Show full text]
  • Update on Metrolinx Transit Expansion Projects –
    June 8th, 2021 Sent via E-mail Derrick Toigo Executive Director, Transit Expansion Division Toronto City Hall 24th fl. E., 100 Queen St. W. Toronto, ON M5H 2N2 Dear Derrick, Thank you for your ongoing support and close collaboration in advancing Metrolinx transit expansion projects across the City of Toronto. The purpose of this letter is to respond to your letter dated May 13, 2021 which transmitted City Council’s decisions of April 7th and 8th, 2021, where Toronto City Council adopted the recommendations in agenda item MM31.12: Ontario Line - Getting Transit Right: Federal Environmental Assessment and Hybrid Option Review – moved by Councillor Paula Fletcher, seconded by Councilor Joe Cressy with amendments, we provide the following information. Request for Federal Environmental Assessment In response to the request made by Save Jimmie Simpson! and the Lakeshore East Community Advisory Committee in March 2021 to conduct an environmental assessment of the above- ground section of Ontario Line (the “Project”) through Riverside and Leslieville, on April 16, 2021, the Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, Federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change (the “Minister”), announced the Project does not warrant designation under the Impact Assessment Act. The Minister’s response is available at the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada website, Reference Number 81350. In making his decision, the Minister considered the potential for the Project to cause adverse effects within federal jurisdiction, adverse direct or incidental effects, public concern related to these effects, as well as adverse impacts on the Aboriginal and Treaty rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada. The Minister also considered the analysis of the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • THE FALSE PANACEA of CITY CHARTERS? a POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE on the CASE of TORONTO Andrew Sancton
    Volume 9 • Issue 3 • January 2016 THE FALSE PANACEA OF CITY CHARTERS? A POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE CASE OF TORONTO Andrew Sancton SUMMARY Toronto is unlike any other city, as its local boosters will not hesitate to point out. That was the basis, after all, of the “charter movement” that demanded special rights for a mega-city that the movement’s backers insisted was so vital that it even warranted a status similar to that of an entire province. Their efforts culminated in the province’s passage in 2006 of the City of Toronto Act, which appeared on its face to grant the metropolis the power it believed it required and merited. In reality, the Ontario government may have actually set Toronto back, leaving it more at the mercy of provincial power than other smaller municipalities. The few additional taxation powers that were granted by the ostensible Toronto “charter” — the City of Toronto Act — are, in reality, still overseen by the province, which retains the right to limit those revenue tools if it considers it “desirable in the provincial interest to do so.” But while Toronto may have been given just a small number of revenue tools, which it has used only sparingly, and the use of those tools is ultimately decided by Queen’s Park, their very existence has given the province licence to sidestep the city’s calls for more funding. The provincial Liberals have, in the past, insisted that Toronto make use of its own taxes before it demands more provincial funds. Meanwhile, the City of Toronto Act did nothing to curtail the power of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).
    [Show full text]
  • Relief Line and Yonge Subway Extension
    Relief Line and Yonge Subway Extension Leslie Woo Chief Planning Officer JUNE-26-17 RELIEF LINE AND YONGE SUBWAY EXTENSION OVERVIEWS • Both the Relief Line and the Yonge Subway Extension are priority projects included in The Big Move and will be included in the next Regional Transportation Plan • Each project makes a significant contribution to the regional transit network by: • Enhancing our ability to connect people to where they need to be • Adding capacity so that transit trips are more comfortable • Enabling more residents to choose transit for their trips • Spurring on local transit oriented development 2 A REGIONAL SYSTEM • The Relief Line and the Yonge Subway Extension are part of the regional transportation network needed to meet the GTHA’s growth to 2031 and beyond • The 7.4 km northern extension of the Yonge Subway (Line 1) from Finch Avenue into Richmond Hill will connect two provincial urban growth centres, North York Centre and Richmond Hill Centre, and significantly reduce the 2,500 daily bus trips along the busy Yonge corridor • The Relief Line is a critical infrastructure investment required to create capacity for new riders on the Yonge subway and provide a new connection into Toronto’s downtown • The Yonge Subway Extension would generate more access • The Relief Line would create more capacity • Both projects need to advance in an integrated way 3 PARTNERSHIPS Much progress is being made in bringing the parties together to work as a team to advance both projects Yonge Subway Extension • Metrolinx, City of Toronto, Toronto
    [Show full text]
  • Peer Review EA Study Design Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport BBTCA
    Imagine the result Peer Review – EA Study Design Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport (BBTCA) Runway Expansion and Introduction of Jet Aircraft Final Report August 2015 BBTCA Peer Review of EA Study Design Report ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Background 1-1 1.2 Current Assignment 1-3 2.0 PEER REVIEW APPROACH 2-1 2.1 Methodology 2-1 3.0 FINDINGS OF PEER REVIEW OF AECOM’S DRAFT STUDY DESIGN REPORT 3-1 3.1 EA Process and Legislation 3-1 3.2 Public Consultation & Stakeholder Engagement 3-1 3.3 Air Quality 3-2 3.4 Public Health 3-5 3.5 Noise 3-6 3.6 Natural Environment 3-10 3.7 Socio-Economic Conditions 3-11 3.8 Land Use & Built Form 3-14 3.9 Marine Physical Conditions and Water Quality 3-15 3.10 Transportation 3-15 3.11 Archaeology & Cultural Heritage 3-18 4.0 SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS 4-1 APPENDIX A Presentation Given to the Working Group (22 June 2015) B Presentation of Draft Phase I Peer Review Report Results (13 July 2015) i BBTCA Peer Review of EA Study Design Report ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AERMOD Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling System ARCADIS ARCADIS Canada Inc. BBTCA Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport CALPUFF Meteorological and Air Quality Monitoring System CCG Canadian Coast Guard CEAA Canadian Environmental Assessment Act CO Carbon Monoxide COPA Canadian Owners and Pilots Association dBA Decibel Values of Sounds EA Environmental Assessment EC Environment Canada GBE Government Business Enterprise GWC Greater Waterfront Coalition HEAT Habitat and Environmental Assessment Tool INM Integrated Noise Model Ldn Day-Night
    [Show full text]
  • For Information City Council Transmittals – Executive
    For Information City Council Transmittals – Executive Committee Item 3.1 Engagement with the Province on Toronto’s Transit System - Q1 2019 Status Report, Executive Committee Item 3.12 Save Our Subway – Ensuring Torontonians Know the Facts Date: April 11, 2019 To: TTC Board Summary Transmittal letters from the City Clerk confirming that City Council on March 27 and 28, 2019, considered Items EX3.1 and EX3.12 together and has forwarded a copy of City Council’s decisions to the Toronto Transit Commission Board for information. Contact Kevin Lee Head of Commission Services 416-393-3744 [email protected] City Council Transmittals – Toronto’s Transit System, Save Our Subway Page 1 of 1 2019-03-27 Committee Report - Executive Committee Page 1 of 5 Committee Report Considered by City Council on March 27, 2019 Report Item March 28, 2019 Executive Committee EX3.1 Amended Ward: All Engagement with the Province on Toronto's Transit System - First Quarter 2019 Status Report City Council Decision City Council on March 27 and 28, 2019, adopted the following: 1. City Council allocate $2,000,000 from the Capital Financing Reserve Fund XQ0011 to provide funding for additional staff and third-party advice and services required to support engagement with the Province, including one Solicitor 3 Full-Time Equivalent staff position ($134,395.81) on a one-year contract basis. 2. City Council direct the City Manager to seek full cost-recovery from the Province for third- party services, City/Toronto Transit Commission staff-time, and any other resources employed arising from the City's participation in this engagement with the Province.
    [Show full text]
  • Relief Line Update
    Relief Line Update Mathieu Goetzke, Vice-President, Planning David Phalp, Manager, Rapid Transit Planning FEBRUARY 7, 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • The Relief Line South alignment identified by the City of Toronto as preferred, has a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) above 1.0, demonstrating the project’s value; however, since it is close to 1.0, it is highly sensitive to costs, so more detailed design work and procurement method choice will be of importance to maintain or improve this initial BCR. • Forecasts suggest that Relief Line South will attract ridership to unequivocally justify subway-level service; transit-oriented development opportunities can further boost ridership. • Transit network forecasts show that Relief Line South needs to be in operation before the Yonge North Subway Extension. Relief Line North provides further crowding relief for Line 1. RELIEF LINE UPDATE 2 SUBWAY EXPANSION - PROJECT STATUS Both Relief Line North and South and the Yonge North Subway Extension are priority projects included in the 2041 Regional Transportation Plan. RELIEF LINE UPDATE 3 RELIEF LINE SOUTH: Initial Business Case Alignments Evaluated • Metrolinx is developing an Initial Business Case on Relief Line South, evaluating six alignments according to the Metrolinx Business Case Guidance and the Auditor General’s 2018 recommendations • Toronto City Council approved the advancement of alignment “A” (Pape- Queen via Carlaw & Eastern) • Statement of Completion of the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP) received October 24, 2018. RELIEF LINE UPDATE 4 RELIEF
    [Show full text]
  • Toronto City Centre Airport – Chronology and Planning Issues Summary
    1 Toronto City Centre Airport – Chronology and Planning Issues Summary Explanatory Notes: The following is a chronology of events, decisions, issues and policies related to the history of the Toronto island airport, summarized by City Planning staff. The number in brackets following each item is a cross-reference to the Bibliography. 1928 The City Board of Control asked the Harbour Board to report "on developing the West Island Sand Bar for a seaplane, flying boat, and amphibian airplane base". (8) 1937 The Harbour Commissioner agreed that “two airports should be built: a major one on the Island site and an auxiliary one at Malton”. (8) 1939 Toronto City Centre Airport opened as the Port George VI Airport. (26) 1953 A traffic control system was installed at the airport to accommodate the increase of business training flights. This was updated in 1960 when a radio control system was installed. (8) 1957 The City transferred the ownership of Malton Airport to the Federal Government, which assumed the responsibility for it in exchange for providing improvements to the Island Airport, including a new 4,000-foot (1,220 metre) runway, the installation of navigation and landing systems, and lights to assist night flying. An airport ferry to the island was also put into service. (34) 1961 The improvements referenced above were implemented. They involved extending the site by adding landfill on the east and west extremities of the island, constructing the 4,000-foot (1,220 metre) runway, and a system of paved taxiways. A new twin-bay hangar was built at the same time, and the lighting to assist night flying was added.
    [Show full text]
  • Member Motion City Council MM22.3
    Member Motion City Council Notice of Motion MM22.3 ACTION Ward: All GO Transit/Union Pearson Express-Toronto Transit Commission Discounted Fare Initiative - by Councillor Paul Ainslie, seconded by Councillor Jennifer McKelvie * Notice of this Motion has been given. * This Motion is subject to referral to the Executive Committee. A two-thirds vote is required to waive referral. Recommendations Councillor Paul Ainslie, seconded by Councillor Jennifer McKelvie, recommends that: 1. City Council request the Province of Ontario to continue the GO/Union Pearson Express- Toronto Transit Commission Discounted Fare Initiative agreement with the City of Toronto based on the terms reached and outlined in Item 2017.EX28.6, Advancing Fare Integration, adopted by City Council at its meeting on November 7, 8 and 9, 2017. Summary Fare integration between transit agencies in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area is an opportunity to increase transit ridership and improve affordability all residents. The Provincial funding of the GO Transit/Union Pearson Express-Toronto Transit Commission Discounted Fare Initiative expired on March 31, 2020. A $1.50 co-fare between GO Transit and the Toronto Transit Commission was introduced in 2018, funded by the Province of Ontario through Metrolinx. Demand for the program is evident from the over 4.5 million more rides than were budgeted for in 2019-20. Before the introduction of the co-fare, approximately 50,000 daily trips used a combination of GO Transit, Toronto Transit Commission and Union Pearson Express. The co-fare between GO Transit and the Toronto Transit Commission increases access to rapid transit. Approximately half of Toronto's Neighbourhood Improvement Areas have a GO Transit station nearby or within the area.
    [Show full text]
  • October 12, 2016 Via Email Toronto City Council Toronto
    October 12, 2016 Via email Toronto City Council Toronto City Hall 100 Queen Street West, 2nd floor Toronto Ontario M5H 2N2 Dear Toronto City Council: I would like to take this opportunity to advise you that on Saturday, October 15, 2016, PortsToronto will conduct an emergency training exercise at Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport. This routine full-scale training exercise is mandated by Transport Canada to test airport protocols, procedures, communications and planning for emergency and/or security related incidents. Exercises like this are critical to ensuring that the airport maintains a high level of emergency response preparedness and involve multiple agencies including Toronto Fire, Toronto Police Services (and related Marine Units), Toronto Paramedic Services, Nav Canada, as well as staff and officials from the various agencies, airport stakeholders and airlines that operate out of Billy Bishop Airport. The scenario that has been developed to test emergency preparedness on October 15, involves an aircraft in distress that has landed on the airfield and the evacuation of passengers. Throughout the morning those visiting or passing by the airport may witness: Emergency vehicles and personnel in and around the airport, including the Toronto Police Marine Unit and Toronto Fire boats, fire trucks and the Hazardous Material Response Team; An aircraft on one of the runways (not in use that morning) which may appear to be generating smoke, and; Volunteer actors from the Fire and Emergency Services Training Institute serving in various roles, including as passengers who appear to be in distress and are being removed, assessed and transported from an aircraft by emergency personnel.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Toronto Port Authority Report
    REVIEW OF TORONTO PORT AUTHORITY REPORT By: Roger Tassé, O.C., Q.C. Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP Barristers & Solicitors October 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................5 PART I THE EARLY DAYS.......................................................................................8 • The establishment of the Toronto Harbour Commission, 1911......8 • THC Responsibility and Corporate Structure...................................8 • Development of the Waterfront..........................................................9 • The arrival of airplanes.......................................................................9 THE 1983 TRIPARTITE AGREEMENT...................................................... 12 THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE FUTURE OF THE TORONTO WATERFRONT (CROMBIE COMMISSION)............. 13 • Its mandate and its recommendations............................................ 13 THE RESPONSE TO THE CROMBIE COMMISSION REPORT................ 15 • The City of Toronto Response......................................................... 15 • The Federal Government Response................................................ 16 TOWARDS A NATIONAL MARINE POLICY............................................. 19 • Bill C-44 – in the House of Commons ............................................. 20 • Bill C-44 – in the Senate ..................................................................
    [Show full text]