Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

stands up to 15 metres above the surrounding lands. Young trees and shrubs cover parts of the hill, but most of these 3. Existing Conditions appear to have been planted. A sign on the west part of the site indicates that at least part of the site was planted by Metro Works and Boy Scouts in 1995. This corresponds well with the size of many of the trees and shrubs. The study The following sub-sections provide a description of the existing conditions on the site, and where appropriate, the site is composed of young, culturally influenced vegetation communities, including: meadows, thickets, and deciduous surrounding lands. This section has been divided into the follow factors: plantations. Most of the site lies within a fenced in area that restricts access by the general public.

Natural Environment The vegetation community names and codes have been adapted from the Ecological Land Classification (ELC) system Social Environment (Lee et al. 1998). While ELC is the standard method for describing vegetation in Ontario, it is not inclusive enough to Traffic and Transportation include all vegetation types, particularly culturally influenced ones such as those present in the subject site. The trees and shrubs are essentially all planted and therefore vegetation has not developed naturally. The site has not been The information documented in this section is also available in the following technical reports: mowed for the past several years, consequently grasses and forbs grown in adventively and most of the site is meadow. The vegetation types are mapped Figure 3-1 (Existing Vegetation Features Figure) and described below. Tree Inventory and Assessment Report (Arborist Report), February 2010; Subsurface Investigations TTC LRV Maintenance & Storage Facility: Lake Shore Boulevard East and CUM1 – Cultural Meadow Leslie Street, October 2009; Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Contaminated Sites Screening Report, February 2010; The site is mostly covered with graminoid (grass-dominated) meadow vegetation that is largely co-dominated by Quack Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, March 2010; Grass (Agropyron repens), Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa pratensis), Red Fescue (Festuca rubra) and Smooth Brome Grass Cultural Heritage Resources Assessment, October 2009 (revised April and July 2010); (Bromus inermis). A variety of broad-leaved forbs are represented. The most abundant species include Canada Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment Report, October 2009 (revised July 2010); Thistle (Cirsium arvense), Cow Vetch (Vicia cracca), Chicory (Cichorium intybus), Birdsfoot Trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), Traffic Impact Study, September 2010; Heath Aster (Aster ericoides) and Wild Carrot (Daucus carota). Noise & Vibration Environmental Assessment Report, September 2010; Stormwater Management Report, August 2010; CUP1-4 – Carolina Poplar Deciduous Plantation Air Quality Assessment Report, February 2010; and Natural Heritage Impact Study, August 2010. Three rows of Carolina Poplar (Populus X canadense) have been planted along the western portion of the site, parallel to Leslie Street and just east of the pedestrian sidewalk. The trees are 8 to 10 metres tall with a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 10-15 centimetres. A few Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvannica) and Bur Oak (Quercus macrocarpa) are mixed in 3.1 Natural Environment among the poplars. Additional ornamental street trees have been planted along Lake Shore Boulevard including Ginkgo (Ginkgo biloba), Green Ash, Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum) and Kentucky Coffee-tree (Gymnocarpus dioica) 3.1.1 Terrestrial and Wildlife Natural Heritage

CUP1-4a – Eastern Cottonwood Deciduous Plantation 3.1.1.1 Methodology

Several sources were used to assess both the significant species and the natural heritage features within the study Stands of young Eastern Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) approximately 12 metres tall are situated on the north and area, as well areas 2 to 5 kilometres away from the specific site. These sources included: south edges of the flat-topped hill. The trees range from 10-25 centimetres dbh. Occasional Staghorn Sumacs and Manitoba Maple saplings occur below the canopy, while ground layer is dominated by Late Goldenrod (Solidago Topographic mapping of the site; altissima) and Smooth Brome. Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources for species risk information and vegetation communities rankings; CUS1 – Exotic Cultural Savannah Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources wetlands, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI‟s), fisheries and aquatic habitat information; Planted ornamental trees are present in two groups: along the south part, just north of the treatment plant parking lot, Natural Resources Values Information System (NRVIS) layer data; and and outside of the fence in the northeast corner. The trees are now mostly in the range of 3 to 8 metres tall and occupy A Tree Inventory and Assessment made using accepted standard arboriculture techniques as outlined in about 25% cover simulating savannah structure of meadow among scattered trees. Tree cover in the south portion the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th Edition (2000). include mainly: Norway Maple (Acer platanoides) and Austrian Pine (Pinus nigra), but a number of other species are also present including Honey Locust (Gleditsia triacanthos), Catalpa (Catalpa sp.), Horse-chestnut (Aesculus A site investigation was conducted on October 20, 2009 to document existing conditions such as terrain and vegetation. hippocastanum) and White Spruce (Picea glauca). Tree makeup in the northeast area is largely Norway Maple, Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum), Black Alder (Alnus glutinosa) and Japanese Tree Lilac (Syrica reticulata). Meadow Vegetation Conditions vegetation as described in CUM1 (above) surrounds the trees.

The proposed project site consists of abandoned industrial land located in a heavily industrialized area of Toronto. As CUT1-1 – Staghorn Sumac Cultural Thicket such, it has a history of intensive land use and therefore is very disturbed. Most of the site lies within a fenced-in area that restricts access by the general public. The subject property has a long history of soil importation and filling and therefore it Staghorn Sumac (Rhus typhina) forms a linear thicket along the western crest of the flat-topped hill. These were likely is very disturbed. A considerable amount of fill has been brought to the site, and graded to form a low flat topped hill that planted but are spreading outward. Some Manitoba Maple saplings are growing among the thicket.

19 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

CUT1-A – Sandbar Willow Cultural Thicket

A dense thicket of mostly Sandbar Willow (Salix exigua) 2-3 metres tall occurs on the eastern upper portion of the berm. A number of Manitoba Maple (Acer negundo) saplings up to 6 metres tall are scattered among this thicket.

MAS2-1 Cattail Mineral Shallow Marsh

A small unit of marsh containing both Broad-leaved Cattail (Typha latifolia) and Narrow-leaved Cattails (Typha angustifolia) occurs in a ditch between two patches of Common Reed marsh. Some Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) and Spike-rush (Eleocharis erythropoda) is also present.

MAM1-12 – Common Reed Mineral Meadow Marsh

A ditch lies along the northern fringe of the site. Common Reed (Phragmites communis) forms two robust patches of marsh along the ditch,). Common Reed is a highly invasive grass that spreads by both seed and rhizomes. It is expanding beyond the confines of the ditch.

In summary the site contains disturbed and imported soils that have regenerated to field vegetation. The majority of the trees and shrubs which occur on site appear to have been planted, with some natural regeneration of Manitoba Maple and American Elm (Ulmus americana). Consequently the vegetation on site cannot be considered natural. Few of the plant species found on site are locally indigenous. The field species are also predominantly non-native.

None of the identified communities are listed as “Rare” within Ontario according to the provincial Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC).

In addition, a Tree Inventory and Assessment was conducted for the proposed Ashbridges Bay Fleet LRV maintenance and storage facility site. The report documented 238 trees or groups of trees on the site, their size and condition (excellent, fair or poor). The total number of individual trees is estimated to be near 370. Of these trees, seven were found to have a diameter breast height (dbh) measurement of 30 centimetres or higher. The tree inventory list is contained in Drawing No. TI-1 of Technical Report # 1 – Tree Inventory and Assessment Report, February 2010.

Flora

Apart from planted species trees and shrubs, a total of 87 plant species were identified in the study site through field investigations of which 71 species are non-native, representing 81.6 % of the total. The complete list of plant species in contained in Technical Report # 11 – Natural Heritage Impact Study, July 2010. This is an exceptionally high percentage and reflects the early successional nature of the site, the highly disturbed fill soils (lacking any native parent soils) and the seed source from surrounding disturbed urban lands. Any site where the floral component is more than one third is considered disturbed. By percentage cover wise, the majority of vegetation is non-native. In addition, 23 species of trees and shrubs have been planted of which nine are native and the rest is non-native.

None of the plant species found within the study area are defined as Species at Risk or Provincially Rare, nor are any significant at the regional or local level. Provincially rare species were those ranked as S1-S3 by NHIC (Oldham and Brinker 2009). Regional and local significance was based on rarity rankings assigned by Varga et al. (2000).

Overall, the study site is highly disturbed, forming cultural vegetation communities, with non-indigenous invasive species being the dominant flora in many locations. It is interesting to note that three of the most serious invasive species in the Greater Toronto Area: Dog Strangling Vine (Cynanchum rossicum), Common Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) and Garlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata) occur on site but are very localized at present. This is likely to change

however as these species usually dominate sites soon after they colonize. Figure 3-1 Existing Vegetation Features

20 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

Wildlife Table 3-1 Significant Natural Areas within Five Kilometres of the Site

Breeding Birds Name Feature Size Distance from Site

North Shore Park Shoreline park with restored vegetation 10 ha 1.5 km southwest Nineteen bird species were recorded during the breeding bird survey. Almost all of these are breeding species, while a Leslie Street Spit Man-made peninsula with shoreline vegetation, important 57 ha 0.6 km south few breed nearby and feed on the property. The complete list of bird species in contained in Technical Report # 11 – migratory and breeding habitat for birds. Natural Heritage Impact Study, July 2010. The most abundant species were Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius Toronto Brickyards Earth Science ANSI with geological exposures 2 ha 4 km northwest phoeniceus) which appeared to have ten territories, and Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia) with nine. Both are very East Ward Island Dune ridge and open woodland 7 ha 3.5 km southwest common in southern Ontario in a variety of open areas, as well as marshes. Most other species observed are Glen Stewart Ravine Mature oak forest 10 ha 3.5 km northeast characteristic of open semi-disturbed habitats such as the meadow and thickets that occur on the property. Some species require trees, but are not forest dependent species per se (e.g., Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus, Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus, American Robin Turdus migratorius). All species recorded are common in the GTA. Northern 3.1.1.3 Species at Risk Mockingbird Mimus polyglottus was singing vigorously in the southeast area of the property. Several Barn Swallow There are historical records of the rare species listed in Table 3-2 from the Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) (Hirundo rustica), and a Bank Swallow (Riparia riparia) were actively foraging for insects over the meadows of the database that have been reported within 2 km of the site: property. There is no habitat for them to breed on site since Barn Swallow breeds in buildings and the Bank swallow breeds colonially in exposed sand banks. Other species were observed flying over the property including Ring-billed Table 3-2 Rare Species Reported within Two Kilometres of the Site Gull (Larus delawarensis), Rock Pigeon (Columba livia) and Chimney Swift (Chaetura pelagica). Chimney Swift is recognized as Threatened both nationally by the Committee on Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC 2010) and Common Name Scientific Name Srank MNR COSEWIC Date provincially by COSSARO (OMNR 2010) because of precipitous population declines. It breeds almost exclusively in Sullivant’s Milkweed Asclepias sullivantii S3 1927 chimneys, consequently there is no breeding habitat available on site and the birds were merely flying over. None of Redside Dace Clinostomus elongatus S2 END END 1926 the other species observed are Species at Risk (either nationally or provincially). Thus, there is a moderate diversity of Blanding’s Turtle Emydoidea blandingii S3 THR THR 1989 breeding bird species, mainly adapted to urban, field or thicket landscapes. Blanding’s Turtle Emydoidea blandingii S3 THR THR 1988 Saltmarsh Sandspurry Spergularia salina SH 1978 In addition the site is likely used to some extent for feeding and resting by migratory birds during spring and autumn migration, because of its proximity to the Lake Ontario shore and the Leslie Street Spit, and since it currently forms an The records include the Endangered Redside Dace and Threatened Blanding‟s Turtle. Redside Dace is a small fish „island of green‟ among surrounding industrial lands. Several migrant birds were observed during the October site visit that occurred in the Don River but is unlikely to still occur in lower portions of the watershed. Sullivant‟s Milkweed and including American Kestrel (Falco sparverius), Eastern Phoebe (Sayornis phoebe) and White-throated Sparrow Saltmarsh Sandspurry are historic records that are likely now extirpated in the Toronto area. Blanding‟s Turtle records (Zonotrichia albicollis). are more recent (about 20 years ago). It occurs in marshes, swamps and ponds. There is no suitable habitat on site or on immediately adjacent lands for any of those species, therefore it is highly unlikely that they are present on site. Other Fauna As mentioned, the provincially Threatened Chimney Swift was observed flying over the site. There is no nesting habitat Evidence of one mammal species was observed on site. Several lined rodent nests believed to be from either White- on the property since it primarily nests in chimneys. footed or Deer Mouse (Peromyscus sp.) were observed under several pieces of metal laying in long grass. A single adult Eastern Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis) was observed on the upper eastern portion of the berm. A few other Landscape Connectivity common urban adapted mammal species are expected to occur on the property, such as Raccoon (Procyon lotor), Meadow Vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) and Gray Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis). The only aquatic habitat is in the Landscape connectivity has become recognized as an important part of natural heritage planning. Although scientific shallow ditch along Lake Shore Boulevard. The standing water is too shallow and probably ephemeral to be able to support for corridors is still under debate, it is generally accepted that a wide range of benefits may be attributed to the support any breeding amphibians. MNR has no rare species records for the property. maintenance or re-connection of the natural landscape. These benefits include: increased local species richness and biodiversity, more immigration and movement opportunities for individuals among core natural areas, and greater likelihood of seed dispersal and exchange of other genetic material between populations. 3.1.1.2 Significant Areas in the Site Vicinity

The background review using GIS NRVIS data found that there are no Environmentally Significant/Sensitive Areas In the fragmented landscape of southern Ontario, connectivity functions are subjectively described. A poorly connected (ESAs) on or immediately adjacent to the site. Significant natural areas within 5 kilometres of the site are identified in landscape is one where there are relatively small quantities of natural habitat separated by larger amounts of Table 3-1. The nearest ESA is the Leslie Street Spit or Tommy Thompson Park, which is located approximately agricultural lands, urban areas and or roads. A highly connected landscape is one where the landscape is mostly 0.6 kilometres south of the site at its closest point. The Leslie Street Spit is a 5 m long man-made peninsula that natural habitat, with minimum quantities of agriculture or development breaking up the landscape and where the roads extends into Lake Ontario. Although human-created, it has become an important area for bird migration, nesting are not major highways or commuter roads. colonial waterbirds and shoreline vegetation (MTRCA 1982). North Shore Park ESA occurs 1.5 kilometres west of the site. The provincially significant Toronto Brickyard Earth Science Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) contains The subject property contains mainly meadows and early successional communities in a location that is linked to a a range of Ordovician and post glacial landform features. The features are described by Varga and Mewa (1998). In narrow strip of similar habitat that extends approximately 500 metres to Ashbridges Bay where habitat continues no addition, the East Ward‟s Island ESA, along the eastern end of the Toronto Islands, contains dune ridge and open further. At its narrowest point, it is only 60 metres in width. It therefore is not an important link to other habitats to the woodland vegetation communities.

21 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

east, and the adjacent lands in that direction add some additional poor quality habitat. Tommy Thompson Park (Leslie described in the subsurface investigation - completed by Terraprobe in October of 2009. The most recent water level Street Spit) exists about 600 metres to the south. This site is a large block of natural habitat in various successional data are documented in the AMEC Phase II ESA. Groundwater levels were measured by AMEC for all exiting on-site stages along the Lake Ontario shoreline. There may be some movement of wildlife between the site and Tommy monitoring wells on March 9, 2001. Thompson Park, particularly birds as there is a strip of vacant meadow to the south of the site and along the west side of the Ashbridges Bay Water Treatment Plant. 3.1.2.2 Findings

Lake Shore Boulevard which borders the site, is an extremely busy wide road and therefore there is no landscape Physiography connection northward. Similarly Leslie Street and various commercial and industrial lands occur to the west and there is no connectivity in that direction. The wider study area is located within the Iroquois Plain physiographic region, which is characterized by a prominent ridge located near Eglinton Avenue, north of the study site. The ridge represents the former Lake Iroquois shoreline.

Soils to the south of the paleo-shoreline are generally comprised of fine silts and sands and dip gently southwards Summary of Terrestrial and Wildlife Natural Heritage towards Lake Ontario. Till soils can often be found at surface in upland areas; however, within our study area, Lake Iroquois shoreline sediments would be expected normally at surface. No Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSW), Areas of Natural or Scientific Interest (ANSI) or Environmentally Significant

Areas (ESA) occur within the subject property. Neither does it contain significant valleylands nor significant woodland. Geology A Threatened Species was observed flying over but the site does not provide any potential breeding habitat or special foraging habitat and therefore it does not constitute habitat of an Endangered or Threatened Species. According to surficial geological mapping in Urban Geology of Canadian Cities, deposits of Lake Iroquois shoreline deposits are expected to be present at surface over most of the study area. These deposits consist of sand and silty The designation of Significant Wildlife Habitat is the responsibility of the planning authority and the site is not so sand that are generally well drained. Geological mapping also shows that deposits of silty clay to clayey silt till of the designated. Various criteria are used to assess if significant wildlife habitat is present as identified by OMNR (2000) Sunnybrook Formation may be present on site at surface. However, it is most likely to be found beneath the Iroquois which include: a) seasonal concentrations of animals, b) rare vegetation communities, c) specialized habitats for Shoreline deposits according to cross-sections generated by Karrow and White. Interbedded shale and siltstone of the wildlife, d) habitat for species of conservation concern (other than endangered or threatened species), and e) animal Georgian Bay Formation lie beneath the Sunnybrook till. This geologic sequence is confirmed by MOE water well movement corridors. There are no seasonal wildlife concentrations. The site is young and entirely on fill and consisting records collected within a one kilometre radius of the study area. mostly of non-native flora, therefore no rare vegetation communities are present. Similarly, there are no specialized habitats for wildlife and no species of conservation concern are present. There may be some movement of wildlife Geotechnical and environmental subsurface investigations completed within the proposed maintenance and storage between the site and the Leslie Spit or the small area of habitat immediately to the east, but the linkage dead ends, and facility area, and documented by Terraprobe in October 2009 and AMEC in 2010, show the site is underlain by four it does not link between core areas of habitat. In summary, the site does not contain significant wildlife habitat. major soil deposits; a Surficial Fill Deposit, an Organic Silt to Organic Clay, a Sand and Silty Sand Deposit, and a Silty Clay Till Deposit. This sequence of granular materials is all underlain by shale bedrock.

3.1.2 Hydrogeology and Groundwater The results of intrusive assessment work indicates that the fill materials are highly variable, being composed of soil containing varying amounts of clay, silt sand and gravel along with various amounts of debris including (but not limited 3.1.2.1 Methodology to); brick, concrete, concrete footings, steel, organic material, wood, glass, wire, tires, rubber, fabric, cardboard, ash, Desktop Study cinder and plastic. Below the fill, borehole logs from the field investigations are generally consistent with the stratigraphic sequence described by Karrow and White, and MOE water well records within one kilometre of the site. The Desktop Study for the hydrogeologic assessment of the LRV maintenance and storage facility is based upon Drilling investigations were completed along the Leslie Street corridor by AMEC in 2010. Soil stratigraphy along the information from the following sources: Leslie Street corridor is generally consistent with that observed on the site. Furthermore, MOE water well records within one kilometre of the corridor indicate a similar, if not identical, geologic sequence beneath this alignment. Subsurface investigation, TTC LRV Maintenance and Storage Facilities Lake Shore Boulevard East and

Leslie Street by the Terraprobe Limited; Further investigation completed by AMEC between January 4 and February 19, 2010 determined that beneath the surficial Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, LFLRV Maintenance and Storage Facilities Fleet Replacement fill deposits there is a layer of peat and organic silty clay to clayey silt with discontinuous silty sand, sand and peat layers Project, Lake Shore Boulevard East and Leslie Street, Toronto, Ontario by AMEC Earth and Environmental ranging in thickness from 1.6 to 8.2 metres (AMEC, 2010). These organic deposits are underlain by a layer of sandy silt to (DRAFT); silt sand, which is believed to be a part of the Scarborough Aquifer Complex. These sandy silt deposits ranged in thickness from 2.97 to 5.79 metres across the site (AMEC, 2010). A layer of silty clay till, which is believed to be the Chapman and Putnam 1984. Physiography of Southern Ontario, 3rd Edition. Ontario Geological Survey, Sunnybrook Till, was encountered below the sandy silt to silt sand. This till unit was found to be approximately 6.5 metres Special Vol. 2; thick in the northern portion of the property becoming thin to the south where it eventually pinches out (AMEC, 2010). P.F. Karrow and O.L. White, 1998. Urban Geology of Canadian Cities, Geological Association of Canada Below the till, deposits of interbedded shale and siltstone of the Georgian Bay Formation were encountered. Special Paper 42; and

Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Water Well Records Database. Hydrogeology

Field Work and Data Collection Groundwater Flow

The field work and data collection undertaken for the study area included a site visit on October 15, 2009 to assess Groundwater elevations measured in the shallow and deep monitoring wells by AMEC in 2010 indicated that the hydrogeologic conditions within the site boundaries and water level measurements to confirm groundwater elevations shallow water table and deeper potentiometric surface lie within the surficial fill materials. Due to the presence of

22 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

perched groundwater within the fill mound, the shallow groundwater flow direction(s) at the site are expected to be Exceedances of Table 3 Site Condition Standards were found in groundwater samples collected by variable. Based on the groundwater elevations measured in the shallow monitoring wells on March 9, 2010, shallow Terraprobe and AMEC for parameters including sodium, chloride, vinyl chloride, 1,2-dichloroethane, groundwater flows across the site in a northwesterly to northeasterly direction through the surficial fill. Based on ethylbenzene, xylenes, PHCs F1 to F4, several PAHs and PCBs and measurable free phase liquid regional drainage patterns, the horizontal groundwater flow direction in the deeper Sand and Silty Sand aquifer is petroleum hydrocarbons were noted at BHD. expected to be generally southeast towards Lake Ontario. These groundwater exceedances and the presence of free phase liquid petroleum hydrocarbons may be of The hydrostratigraphy of the site is inferred to consist of two main water bearing units; a shallow water table aquifer concern if the depth of construction activities intersects the water table, and the need for dewatering during located within the surficial fill materials; and a deeper, semi-confined Sand and Silty Sand aquifer with an construction arises. intervening Organic Silt and Organic Clay leaky confining layer. The deeper Sand and Silty Sand aquifer is underlain and bounded to the north by the lower permeability Clayey Silt Till deposit in the northern portion of the It is recommended that protective mitigation measures to control potential discharge of this adversely impacted property and in the southern portion of the site, where the Clayey Silt Till Deposit is not present, the Sand and Silty groundwater be incorporated into a dewatering discharge water management plan associated with a PTTW (Permit to Sand Deposit lies directly on shale bedrock. Groundwater elevations measured in March 2010 ranged from: 75.05 Take Water). mASL to 79.21 mASL in shallow monitoring wells screened within the surficial fill materials; 75.13 mASL to 76.79 mASL in intermediate monitoring wells screened within the deeper portions of the fill materials; and, 74.42 mASL to 3.1.3 Contaminated Soils 74.80 mASL in the deep monitoring wells screened either within the Sand and Silty Sand Deposit or the Silty Clay Till Deposit. 3.1.3.1 Methodology Groundwater Quality In order assess the environmental conditions of the site, a review of historical records was completed for the proposed Groundwater quality samples were collected from all existing on-site monitoring wells (with the exception of BHD) project site, as well as along Leslie Street from the North Service Road to Queen Street East, and Queen Street East by AMEC in February 2010 and analyzed for metals and inorganics, petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs) F1 to F4, from Curzon Street to Hastings Avenue. The following research was conducted or initiated: volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polyaromatic cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). In addition, groundwater samples were collected for cresols by Terraprobe in August 2009. The Ministry of the Environment database searches; results of these analyses were compared to O. Reg. 153/04 Table 3 Site Condition Standards, and can be found in Waste Disposal Site Inventory, June 1991; Technical Report # 4 - Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, March 2010. Inventory of Coal Gasification Plant Waste Sites in Ontario, February 1989; PCB Site Inventory System 2000, July 2000; O. Reg. 153 – Table 3 Guidelines Hazardous Information Waste Network, as of June 2009; Environmental Brownfields Environmental Site Registry; Groundwater exceeded the Table 3 Standards for sodium, chloride, several VOCs (vinyl chloride, 1,2-dichloroethane, Ministry of the Environment Freedom of Information Request (Property only); ethylbenzene and xylenes), PHCs F1 to F4, several PAHs and PCBs. The primary source of groundwater impacts Municipal Freedom of Information Request with the City of Toronto (Property only); appeared to be related to the quality of the fill materials. Aerial Photograph review for the years 1939, 1946 (limited), 1959, 1963, 1965 (Property only), 1974, 1978, Free phase liquid petroleum hydrocarbons were noted at BHD in March 2010. As of March 2010, no measurable free 1986, 1999, 2003 (Property only); phase hydrocarbons had been detected in the adjacent monitoring wells, BH29 to BH33. Site Topography and Geology Maps; Fire Insurance Maps from City of Toronto Archives for years: 1890, 1912-13, 1923-24; Potential issues may result from these exceedances and the presence of hydrocarbon-impacted groundwater if the City Directory Search at City of Toronto Archives for years: 1900, 1920, 1940, 1961, 1980, 1995; proposed depth of construction (i.e., depth of Stormwater Management Pond, removal of fill material prior to Technical Standards and Safety Authority (TSSA) records search (Property only); construction, and/or dewatering for construction purposes) intersects the observed groundwater table. EcoLog ERIS custom report review; Documentation review (subsurface investigations, Ashbridges Bay Treatment Plant Historical Overview presentation) (Property only); 3.1.2.3 Summary of Hydrogeology and Groundwater Existing Conditions and Recommendations Interview with knowledgeable personnel (Property only); and Overall, this site is not considered a significant source of groundwater recharge or discharge. Surficial soils at the site Site visit to Property and study area overview from public right-of-ways. consist of a Surficial Fill Deposit, an Organic Silt to Organic Clay, a Silty Sand Deposit, and a Silty Clay Till Deposit which overlyshale bedrock. Drilling investigations completed along the Leslie Street corridor indicate a similar soil The records were reviewed, summarized and interpreted in Technical Report # 3: Phase I Environmental Site stratigraphy. In summary: Assessment and Contaminated Sites Screening Report and Technical Report # 4: Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, March 2010. The shallow water table and deeper potentiometric surface lie within the surficial fill materials. Due to the presence of perched groundwater within the fill mound, the shallow groundwater flow direction(s) at the site 3.1.3.2 Site Findings during Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments are expected to be variable. Prior to the development of the Ashbridges Bay Treatment Plant (ABTP) in the early 1900s, the proposed Ashbridges Regional groundwater flow is interpreted be to the southeast towards Lake Ontario. Bay LRV maintenance and storage facility site was part of Lake Ontario, namely Ashbridges Bay. The site and Groundwater elevations ranged from: 75.05 mASL to 79.21 mASL in shallow monitoring wells screened surrounding area were slowly in-filled with various materials, likely including soil and fill, slag, sludge and ash, some of within the surficial fill materials; and, 74.42 mASL to 74.80 mASL in the deep monitoring wells screened which were by-products of the ABTP operations. By 1965, a Gardiner Expressway on-ramp was built on the northwest either within the Sand and Silty Sand Deposit or the Silty Clay Till Deposit.

23 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

portion of the site, which was dismantled in 2002. Construction debris and fill, both from the Ashbridges Bay Treatment Methane gas is found in localized pockets in the Toronto area and more specifically the area south of Lake Shore Plant and other construction projects in the area, including earth from excavations at the RC Harris Filtration Plant at Boulevard East in the vicinity of the site as the subsurface conditions typically include organic deposits from the old lake the southwest corner of the Ashbridges Bay Treatment Plant facility, were occasionally placed at the site. The site was bottom. gradually built-up into a large berm / mound with construction fill material. A topographical survey indicated that the peak of the mound is approximately 15 to 16 metres above the street grades. Potential effects from surrounding land uses are influenced by the type of land use, soil composition and groundwater flow direction. The regional groundwater flow direction is anticipated to be in a southeasterly direction towards Lake Results of the soil sampling and laboratory analytical testing program indicate that the soil samples that are Ontario. As the ABTP is located down-gradient of the site, the potential for the migration of contamination (if present) representative of the fill materials are impacted with the following: from the ABTP to the proposed Ashbridges Bay LRV maintenance and storage facility site is anticipated to be low.

Metal and inorganics Apart from residential dwellings along the south side of Eastern Avenue, the lands to the north of the proposed Ashbridges Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Bay LRV maintenance and storage facility site - north of Lake Shore Boulevard East - were not developed until the City of Petroleum hydrocarbons Toronto‟s Central Maintenance Garage was constructed around 1960, followed by the Canada Post Distribution Centre Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) around 1970. Aerial photography from 1963 (see Figure 3-2) indicates the presence of an exterior storage facility of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) automotive or similar materials on several of the residential properties to the north of Lake Shore Boulevard East; however, the majority of the storage and activity appeared to be concentrated along Eastern Avenue. Based on these These effects have been identified in samples of the fill material across most of the site. observations, the surrounding land uses up-gradient of the site are not considered environmental concerns.

Results of the laboratory analysis of deeper soil samples collected from the native soils underlying the fill were generally within the Site Conditions Standards in accordance with Table 3 of Ontario Regulation 153/04 – Records for Site Condition, Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act (EPA). Exceedances of the Table 3 Standards in the native soil were generally observed in samples collected from just below the fill material. These results indicate that the soil impacts at the site are primarily limited to the imported fill materials or the native soils lying directly below the fill material and generally do not extend into the underlying native soils.

The effects that are present within the fill materials at the site may in part be related to the historical industrial activities that have occurred on the adjacent lands; however, the primary source of the environmental effects appear to be related to the quality of the fill materials that were initially used to infill the former Ashbridges Bay marsh in the early 1900s, as well as the fill materials that were later imported onto the site and placed in the fill mound starting sometime after 1965.

Poor fill quality observed at the site is consistent with fill quality at adjacent properties where infilling of the Ashbridges Bay marsh was also conducted. Based on soil sampling completed by Trow Associates Inc. at the Ashbridges Treatment Plant (Soil and Groundwater Investigation, Ashbridges Treatment Plant, 9 Leslie Street, Toronto, Ontario, March 2008) soil exceeded the Table 3 Site Condition Standards at several locations across the plant for parameters including metals/inorganics, petroleum hydrocarbons and PAHs. In addition, Shaheen and Peaker, Limited completed soil and groundwater sampling in support of a risk assessment during the dismantling of the Gardiner Expressway (Report for Submission to Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy, Site-Specific Risk Assessment, Gardiner Expressway Dismantling and Lake Shore Boulevard East Reconstruction at Leslie Street, Toronto, Ontario, May 2002). The study area included the northern boulevard of Lake Shore Boulevard East between the Toronto Film Studio to Leslie Street and the southeast corner of the intersection of Leslie Street and Lake Shore Boulevard East (including a portion of the site). Soil analytical results indicated metal impacted soil across the study area and PAH, hydrocarbon, benzene, toluene and xylene impacts across much of the study area.

Methane gas monitoring was conducted as part of the assessment, which indicated that elevated concentration of methane were measured in the subsurface at the gas probe locations and in a number of monitoring wells. Methane concentrations ranged from 1.0 to 85.6 % by volume which exceeds the generally applicable threshold that has been established by O. Reg 232/998 for on-site buildings, and areas immediately outside the foundations of buildings or structure that are either accessible to people, contain electrical equipment or other potential sources of ignition.

Figure 3-2 Ashbridges Bay - 1963 Aerial View

24 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

Several potential environmental issues were identified in the study area. Historical records indicated that several service The local 1,000-metre impact study area for the air quality inventory was surveyed for potential sources of dust, odour, stations, auto body garages, scrap yards, dry cleaners and other land uses with potentially negative environmental effects fine particulate, VOCs and other criteria air contaminants that have the potential to impact air quality. were present along Leslie Street, Queen Street East and in the adjacent area since 1900. The potential for contamination 3.1.4.2 Findings along Leslie Street and Queen Street East from those land uses depend on the groundwater flow direction and geological conditions of the soil. For example, while a scrap yard has occupied 854 Eastern Avenue since at least 1940, the Desktop Review Findings groundwater is expected to flow in a southeasterly direction; thus, the scrap metal operations are unlikely to have affected Leslie Street. Table 3-3 identifies those land uses in the study area identified with potential contamination. The air quality data for PM2.5 and NOx from the Toronto Downtown and Toronto East stations are summarized in Table 3-4 by providing the cumulative percentage of time that measured concentrations of contaminants meet Air Table 3-3 Potential Areas of Contamination Quality Indices (AQI) as defined by the MOE. These AQI values range from “Very Good” to “Very Poor”.

Site Address Land Use Location Potential Contamination Table 3-4 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary 810 Eastern Avenue Historic: Service Station Northeast corner of Leslie Street and PHC, VOC

Current: Auto Garage Eastern Avenue Cumulative Frequency PM2.5 Cumulative Frequency NO2 Year 818 Eastern Avenue Current: Dry Cleaner Northeast corner of Leslie Street and Chlorinated Solvents Very Good Good Moderate Very Good Good Eastern Avenue Downtown 2004 81% 94% 99.7% 98% 100.0% 1183 Queen Street East Historic: Service Station Southeast corner of Queen Street East PHC, VOC Current: Service Station and Rushbrooke Avenue 2005 77% 90% 98.9% 98% 100.0% 1200 Queen Street East Historic: Service Station, auto garage Northeast corner of Queen Street East PHC, VOC 2006 81% 94% 99.7% 99% 100.0% Current: Service Station, auto garage and Curzon Street 2007 82% 94% 99.6% 99% 100.0% 1212 Queen Street East Historic: Dry Cleaner North side of Queen Street East, mid-way Chlorinated Solvents 2008 84% 96% 100.0% 99% 100.0% Current: Dry Cleaner between Leslie Street and Curzon Street Average 81% 94% 99.6% 98% 100.0% 1249/1251 Queen Street East Historic: Service Station, auto garage South of Queen Street East, just west of PHC, VOC East Toronto 2004 80% 93% 99.6% 98% 100.0% Current: Auto garage Hastings Avenue 2005 76% 90% 99.0% 97% 100.0% 2006 80% 94% 99.7% 99% 100.0% 3.1.4 Air Quality 2007 80% 93% 99.4% 99% 100.0% 2008 83% 96% 100.0% 99% 100.0% The air quality inventory of existing conditions addresses both local air quality, as monitored by the Ministry of the Average 80% 93% 99.5% 98% 100.0% Environment (MOE), and local air emission sources within 1,000 metres of the proposed project site. For PM2.5 the AQI for both stations was “Very Good” at least 76% of the time; “Good” at least 90% of the time; and Air quality data was assessed based on monitored data from the two MOE stations that best represent the study area: “Moderate” at least 99.4% of the time. The worst annual Index rating for PM2.5 recorded by either station for any year the Downtown Air Quality Station at Bay Street and Wellesley Street, and the Toronto East Air Quality Station at was “Poor” and occurred less than 0.5% of the time. Kennedy Road and Lawrence Avenue East. The AQI for NOx was “Very Good” at least 97% of the time and “Good” 100% of the time for both stations. The 1,000-metre local air quality area was selected based on requirements in the MOE Land Use Compatibility Guidelines. These guidelines define industrial classes based on their air quality impact potential and recommend Based on the air quality monitoring information, the air quality within the study area is good to very good at least 76% of potential impact influence areas. The recommended potential influence area for the industrial class with the most the time but is occasionally moderate to poor. potential to impact air quality is 1,000 metres. The minimum separation distance for these industries is 300 metres. Local Impact Area Survey Findings

3.1.4.1 Methodology The local impact study area within 1,000 metres of the site consists of Lake Ontario to the south and a mix of small The air quality inventory considered both regional air quality data as well as individual local sources of air emissions industrial and residential land uses to the west, north and east. Facilities catalogued during the survey of the study that have the potential to impact air quality. area are detailed below.

Regional air quality data from two MOE Air Quality monitoring stations that best represent the study area were used to Significant Industrial Facilities establish existing regional air quality. The Canroof Corporation Inc. (“Canroof”) roofing and shingle facility is 400 metres west of the proposed project site,

extending north from Commissioners Street to Lake Shore Boulevard East. This facility was issued a control order for The MOE currently operates four instrumented air quality monitoring stations across the City of Toronto. The Toronto preventative dust and odour measures in 1995. Since then, the facility has applied for and received several Certificates Downtown station is located approximately five kilometres west of the proposed project site, and the Toronto East of Approval (Air) and currently has a pending application for a Basic Comprehensive Certificate of Approval for self- station is located nearly 10 kilometres northeast from the proposed project site. The other sites are further away and administering its emissions. Canroof recently appealed a Provincial Officers Order to undertake certain steps to are not considered representative of the study area. Historical data for two parameters that are typically related to eliminate odour discharges. The outside storage is for completed product only and is not expected to add to the odour human health effects, fine particulate (PM2.5) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx reported as NO2), were assessed for the or dust potential of the facility. period from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2008 for both AQ stations.

25 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

The Port Lands Energy Centre is a natural-gas fired 550 Megawatt generating station, located 900 metres southwest of The remaining facilities in the area are considered to have no significant air quality issues associated with them. These the proposed project site. It is a potential source of criteria air contaminants such as NOx, but has recently been issued include several facilities operated by Toronto Film Studios; several print shops; film processing facilities; one small an Air Certificate of Approval based on meeting all emission and ambient air quality standards. electroplating operation and the Toronto Fire Services Academy.

A number of concrete and aggregate storage facilities are located southwest of the proposed project site, along 3.1.4.3 Summary of Existing Air Quality Conditions and Recommendations Commissioners Street west of Leslie Street that comprise the Concrete Works Campus. All of these facilities are - or will become - new or refurbished facilities with state-of-the-art emissions control systems. In summary, there are a number of facilities within 1,000 metres of the proposed facility with some potential to emit air contaminants - but none that should constrain the proposed development as there are no significant air quality issues McAsphalt Industries Limited manufactures asphalt products at its terminal on Basin Street, located about 1 km to the associated with these facilities. west of the proposed project site. The facility is considered a potential source of dust and odour; however, the facility has controls installed on the equipment and was issued a Certificate of Approval (Air) in 2001, amended in 2004. 3.2 Social Environment City of Toronto Facilities 3.2.1 Land Use Environment The Ashbridges Bay Waste Treatment Plant and two related pumping stations are located directly southeast and northeast of the site. This facility has had a history of odour issues, but has been consistently working on amelioration 3.2.1.1 Methodology processes and is active in consultation with a Neighbourhood Liaison Committee. Because of the facility‟s history of Primary source documentation was used to evaluate the conformity of the proposed site with the Official Plan and odour complaints, the Waste Treatment Plant has been considered a significant source of odours. Toronto Water is compliance with the Zoning By-law. Additional discussions were held with the City of Toronto‟s Building Division to planning to but is be expected to have reduced potential for odour in the future as Toronto Water is undertaking confirm the proposed facility as a permitted use of the project site under the Zoning By-law. upgrades to some of its facilities which are expected to significantly reduce odours.

The Commissioners Street Waste Transfer Facility is located about one kilometre west of the proposed development 3.2.1.2 Findings site. The facility is used for the consolidation and short term storage of materials collected as part of the Toronto Land use planning for the proposed project site is subject to the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan and the recycling initiative and has some potential for odour and dust. regulations of the former City of Toronto Zoning By-law 438-86, as amended. These policies and regulations establish the types of uses that are permitted on the project site and performance standards for its development. The City of Toronto Fleet Management Operations has facilities located on Eastern Avenue, Booth Avenue, Commissioners Street and Leslie Street, including a facility for maintenance of waste collection vehicles (Booth Toronto Official Plan Avenue) and a facility for snow removal vehicles and equipment (Leslie Street). These facilities are potential sources of vehicle emissions and dust. The Toronto Official Plan designates the project site as Employment Area and Parks and Open Space (see Figure 3-3). The majority of the project site is designated Employment, and strips of land fronting on Leslie Street and Lake Shore Vehicle Maintenance/Storage Facilities Boulevard East are designated Parks and Other Open Space.

The Canada Post South Central Sorting Station is a large facility located 100 metres northeast of the proposed project The Employment Areas are “places of businesses and economic activity”, and is the primary designation for industrial- site that includes significant freight service. It is a potential source of vehicle tailpipe emissions and dust. type land uses, such as is proposed for the project site and related supporting uses. The proposed use of the project site is a permitted use within the Employment Area designation, and supports the Development Criteria policies for the The TTC Russell Carhouse and yard is located 350 metres northeast of the facility and provides maintenance and designation: cleaning for the TTC streetcar division. No air quality issues are identified with this facility. Supporting the economic function of the Employment Area and the amenity of adjacent areas; There are a number of small auto-body and garage facilities, some equipped with paint spray booths (i.e., Blue Sky Providing adequate parking and loading on-site; Auto Body, Michael and Michael Auto Body) within the study area. There is a potential for odour and VOC emissions Sharing the driveway access point where possible; from the paint spray booths, but no other air quality issues were identified for these sites. Mitigating the effects of noise, vibration, dust, odours, or particulate matter; Providing landscaping on the front and flanking yard to create an attractive streetscape; and Other Facilities Ensuring that outside storage and outside processing is limited in extent and is well screened by landscaping and fencing where viewed from adjacent streets. Gensco Equipment Inc. is located 800 metres to the west of the proposed project site. The Gensco facility produces industrial equipment for materials and scrap handling. It appears to be an assembly facility with no painting and some The Parks and Other Open Space designations permit a variety of public uses, including public transit where supported welding on site. The facility is, therefore, considered a potential source of dust although no dust emissions were by appropriate assessment. observed.

China Lily has a condiment factory located at the corner of Leslie Street and Queen Street East, 160 metres north of the proposed project site. No air quality issues are expected from with this facility.

26 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

Lake Shore Boulevard East is designated a Major Street with a right-of-way of at least 45 metres. Leslie Street, from Commissioner Street to Queen Street East, is identified as a future higher-order transit corridor expansion element.

Land use designations within the study area are comprised of Regeneration Area to the west (within the Central Waterfront Area); Employment Area, Mixed Use Area, Neighbourhood, and Parks and Open Space to the north; and Employment Area to the east and south. There are no adjoining properties that are designated for residential development. The areas to the north designated Neighbourhood (i.e., residential) are separated from the proposed project site by areas of existing developed non-residential land uses and land use designations. The site is located outside of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority floodplain.

Zoning By-law

The proposed project site is placed in the I3.D2 (Industrial-3) zone by the former City of Toronto Zoning By-law 438-86, as amended (see Figure 3-4). The I3 zone is generally described as one of the “heavier” industrial zones, in terms the range of permitted uses.

Figure 3-3 Toronto Official Plan (2007), Land Use Plan Map 21

Figure 3-4 Toronto Zoning By-law 483-96, Maps 53G-311 and 53G- 321

27 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

The I3 zone permits the development of public transit uses, as well as a range of industrial uses, including city works yard, motor vehicle repair shop, and railway (including service and repair yard). The by-law applicable to the project site contains a permissive exception which allows “public service” uses by the former Corporation of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, which includes the TTC. As such, the proposed use of the project site is a permitted use of the property under the I3 zoning.

Zoning within the study area is generally a mix of industrial between Lake Shore Boulevard East and Eastern Avenue (north of the project site), mixed-use commercial along Queen Street East, and residential between Eastern Avenue and Queen Street East. Existing industrially zoned properties, developed with a mix of commercial and industrial land uses, are located between the proposed project site and the residentially zoned and developed properties to the north.

Draft New Zoning By-law

The City of Toronto is currently preparing a new Zoning By-law that will be applicable to land within the “amalgamated” city limits. The May 2009 draft places the project site in the E 2.0 (Employment - General) zone. The project site is proposed to maintain the existing 2x density limit. New regulations are proposed to be introduced, including minimum building setbacks, landscape buffers, and frontages. While these new regulations are subject to change before being adopted in the final new zoning by-law, the proposed development would comply with the regulations as provided in the May 2009 draft. Public consultation on the new zoning by-law is ongoing.

3.2.1.3 Summary The proposed development of the project site conforms to the policies of the City of Toronto Official Plan and will not require an Official Plan Amendment.

The I3 zoning provides regulations to limit density to a maximum of two times the lot area. The proposed development will consist of two buildings (the streetcar facility will be primarily one storey in height, but with a partial second storey for offices, and the substation building will be one storey in height) within the 2x density limit. All other regulations in the I3 zone are satisfied in the concept site plan for the property. As such, the proposed development of the project site as provided on the September 25, 2009 concept site plan will not require a Zoning By-law amendment or minor variance.

3.2.2 Community Features

3.2.2.1 Methodology Secondary Source Information Collection and Review

Available secondary sources of information were collected and reviewed by the project team to identify existing community features. The following sources of secondary information were collected and reviewed:

City of Toronto Website; City of Toronto Official Plan and Mapping; Statistics Canada Ward Profiles, 2001; City of Toronto Neighbourhood Profiles, 2006; and Tourism Toronto.

Field Work and Data Collection Undertaken

The project team conducted a site visit on September 30, 2009 to obtain more detailed information on the community features that exist in the study area. Figure 3-5 below depicts the community features identified within and adjacent to the study area. Figure 3-5 Community Features

28 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

Schools, Libraries and Religious Institutions 3.2.2.2 Findings Community Context The study area encompasses no schools, libraries or religious institutions. There are two schools in the vicinity of the project study area: The study area borders the Leslieville (Ward 30) and the Beaches-East-York (Ward 32) neighbourhoods in the City of Toronto. Collectively, the two communities comprise 106,645 residents and 31,114 employees. (City of Toronto, 2006) St. Joseph Catholic School is located in the Leslieville community on Leslie Street, north of Queen Street East; and Parks and Recreation Facilities The Duke of Connaught Public School is located in the Beaches-East-York community near Queen Street East and Woodfield Road. The study area comprises one park – Maple Leaf Forever Park located near Leslie Street and Memory Lane. Additional parks located in the vicinity of the study area include: There is one church in the vicinity of the project study area – St. Joseph Catholic Church, located adjacent to St. Joseph Catholic School. The Jones Branch of the Toronto Public Library is located on Jones Avenue North of Leslie Grove Park (located near Queen Street East and Jones Avenue); Queen Street East. Jonathan Ashbridge Park (located near Eastern Avenue and Woodfield Road); and Greenwood Park located north of Dundas Street East at Alton Avenue. Employment Areas

The employment character of the study area is predominantly industrial and commercial. The sales and service The entrance to Toronto‟s Tommy Thompson Park is located in the southernmost portion of Leslie Street near the study industries are the leading employers in the area, with modest levels of employment in business and finance, art, culture, area. The park is located on the Leslie Street Spit, which extends five kilometres into Lake Ontario and is over recreation and sport and social science, education and government. 500 hectares in size. The park represents some of the largest existing natural habitat on the Toronto waterfront.

Wildflower meadows, cottonwood forests, coastal marshes, cobble beaches and sand dunes are just some of the Hospitals, Nursing Homes and Emergency Care Facilities habitats at Tommy Thompson Park. Wildlife flourishes at the park, which provides one of the best nature viewing areas in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Other recreational opportunities include hiking, cycling, rollerblading and fishing. The study area comprises no major hospitals or emergency care facilities. The City of Toronto EMS Training Centre is located within the study area at the southwest corner of the Knox Avenue and Eastern Avenue intersection. The Martin Goodman Trail stretches along the northern portion of the proposed project site along Lake Shore Boulevard East. The Martin Goodman Trail is one of the most heavily-used recreational and commuter trails in The Avondale Retirement Residence and Physiotherapy Clinic is located within the study area at the corner of Leslie Toronto, and serves as the primary Street and Queen Street East. Avondale Retirement Residence is part of the Allegro network, one of the country‟s east-west cycling and pedestrian largest groups of high-end autonomous and semi-autonomous retirement residences. route across the City‟s waterfront. Extending across the length of the The Heritage Nursing Home is located within the study area, on the south side of Queen Street East between Jones Port Lands, the Martin Goodman Avenue and Leslie Street. The Heritage Nursing Home is a 201-bed long term care facility and provides standard, semi- Trail is used for walking, cycling and private and private accommodations and in house clinic services. rollerblading. It connects to other waterfront trails and recreational Tourism areas, including Tommy Thompson Park. The Leslieville neighbourhood offers a vibrant restaurant scene and nightlife. Historically, Leslieville is home to the Film District, and as such, it is populated by quaint shops, including a number of vintage stores. The Beaches-East-York Toronto Bikeway #4 is primarily an neighbourhood has two main attractions: the Beach and Queen Street East- with its diverse mix of shops, sidewalk cafés, pubs and restaurants. east-west trail located on the north side of Lake Shore Boulevard East. Ashbridge Estate is an historic home located adjacent to the study area at Queen Street East and Woodfield Road The trail extends between Don between the Leslieville and Beaches-East-York communities. The Ashbridge Estate was once the home of the Roadway (west) and Woodbine Park Ashbridge family, one of the founding families of Toronto, who immigrated from to Toronto from Pennsylvania in 1793. (east). The trail provides a direct link The Ashbridge Estate includes two homes and several gardens. to several other trails leading downtown and to the waterfront. Residential Areas Figure 3-6 View of Martin Goodman Trail along the site Residential neighbourhoods within the study area are located along Leslie Street north of Lake Shore Boulevard East. There are no recreational facilities and/or community centres in the immediate study area. The nearest community centre is the S.H. Armstrong Community Recreation Centre, located near Queen Street East and Woodfield Road, The nearest homes exist at the corner of Leslie Street and Mosley Street, approximately 300 metres from the proposed approximately 1.7 kilometres from the proposed site. LRV maintenance and storage facility. In total, Leslie Street comprises 48 single family units and 53 multi-family residential properties between Queen Street East and Lake Shore Boulevard East. South of Lake Shore Boulevard East, the area is primarily industrial and commercial.

29 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

3.2.2.3 Summary of Existing Community Features and Recommendations The study area contains a diverse mix of residential, industrial and commercial uses. Single family and multi-family residential uses exist on both sides of Leslie Street between Eastern Avenue and Queen Street East. Two cycling trails traverse the study area – located opposite to one another along Lake Shore Boulevard East. A retirement home and nursing home are located near the Queen Street East / Leslie Street intersection.

3.2.3 Cultural Heritage Resources

3.2.3.1 Methodology An inventory of existing Cultural Heritage Resources for the proposed Ashbridges Bay LRV Fleet Maintenance and Storage Facility study area was conducted in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act (2005), the Environmental Assessment Act (2006), the Ontario Planning Act (2005) and related Provincial Policy Statement (2005). The goals of the Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment are:

To present a built heritage and cultural landscape inventory of cultural heritage resources in the study area; and To provide mitigation recommendations with respect to potential disruptions and displacements of heritage resources identified during data collection and/or field review.

3.2.3.2 Findings The Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment determined that, one cultural heritage resource in the study area was previously identified and listed on the City of Toronto‟s Inventory of Heritage Properties. Further, a field review in combination with a review of historic mapping resulted in the identification of seven additional cultural heritage resources. No properties located within the study area have been designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The eight identified cultural heritage resources are located along the northern portion of the study area, along Leslie Street between Queen Street East and Lake Shore Boulevard East (see Figure 3-7). The identified resources represent early twentieth century land use and development in this part of the City of Toronto. Six of these are built heritage resources, which include two commercial structures and four industrial structures. One of the commercial structures is listed on the City of Toronto‟s heritage inventory. The other two resources identified are cultural heritage landscapes, both of which are residential streetscapes. There are no features located in the study area which are designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.

3.2.3.3 Summary of Existing Cultural Heritage Resources and Recommendations A total of eight cultural heritage resources are located along Leslie Street between Lake Shore Boulevard East and Queen Street East. There are no features located in the study area which are designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.

Based on the results of the field inventory and identification of potential effects, the following mitigation measures are recommended:

Construction activities should be planned so as to ensure that associated vibration effects do not adversely affect resources set in close proximity to road right-of-ways; and Where any identified, above ground, cultural heritage resources are to be affected by loss or displacement, further research should be undertaken to identify the specific heritage significance of the affected cultural heritage resource and appropriate mitigation measures should be adopted.

The complete Cultural Heritage Assessment Report is provided in Technical Report # 5 - Cultural and Heritage

Assessment Report: Built Heritage Resources and Cultural Heritage Landscapes October 2009 (revised April and July 2010). Figure 3-7 Cultural Heritage Resources in the Vicinity of the Selected Site

30 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

3.2.4 Archaeology The Stage 1 archaeological assessment report was submitted to the Ministry of Culture in July, 2010 to ensure that any concerns may be addressed prior to the design phase. On September 13, 2010 the Ministry of Culture accepted the 3.2.4.1 Methodology recommendations of the Stage 1 archaeological assessment report. The Stage 1 archaeological assessment of the proposed LRV maintenance and storage facility study area was conducted in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act (2005) and the Ontario Ministry of Culture‟s (MCL) Draft Standards and 3.2.5 Noise and Vibration Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (2009). The goals of the Stage 1 archaeological assessment are: 3.2.5.1 Methodology To provide information about the geography, history, previous archaeological field work and current land condition of the study area; Identification of Sources and Receivers To evaluate in detail the archaeological potential of the study area which can be used, if necessary, to support recommendations for Stage 2 survey for all or parts of the proposed Ashbridges Bay LRV A review of the site and surrounding land uses was completed using a combination of on-site observations as well as maintenance and storage facility; and aerial photography. The dominant source of noise and vibration in the area was observed to be vehicular traffic from To recommend appropriate strategies for Stage 2 survey, if necessary. Leslie Street and Lake Shore Boulevard East. The following were determined to be the closest noise and vibration receptors to the proposed site. A one kilometre buffer was used around the study area to collect background data. Residences along Leslie Street (R1); Residences along Eastern Avenue (R2); and 3.2.4.2 Findings The marina along Ashbridges Bay Park Road (R3). The Stage 1 archaeological assessment determined that no archaeological sites have been registered within or immediately adjacent to the study area. However, the Ashbridges site (AjGt-1), known as the Ashbridge Estate, was Although the MOE does not consider a park as a noise sensitive receptor, Tommy Thompson Park (CR4) was analyzed identified as being located within one kilometre of the study area. A review of the geography, as well as local to identify potential noise and vibration effects at that location. Figure 3-8 illustrates the location of the noise sensitive knowledge of the study area‟s nineteenth century land use, suggested that the potential for the recovery of Aboriginal or receptors and monitor locations. For this analysis, Tommy Thompson Park was identified as a day-time receptor only, early Euro-Canadian cultural material within the proposed project site is low. since it is not a campground with regular overnight uses. The analysis was completed at the park entrance on Leslie Street, the closest point to the proposed TTC facility. The MCL‟s Draft Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists list characteristics that indicate where archaeological resources are most likely to be found (2009: 5-6). Archaeological potential is confirmed when one or more feature of archaeological potential is present.

Per Section 1.3.1 of the MCL standards and guidelines, the proposed new LRV fleet maintenance and storage facility does not meet the criteria used for determining archaeological potential. The corridor for the connecting tracks to Queen Street East, however, meets three of the criteria used for determining archaeological potential:

Water sources: primary water source, secondary water source, or a past water source (i.e., Lake Ontario); Areas of early Euro-Canadian settlement (i.e., Leslieville); and Early historical transportation routes (i.e., Leslie Street, Queen Street East).

These criteria characterize the corridor for the connecting tracks to Queen Street East as having the potential to identify both Aboriginal and Euro-Canadian archaeological sites. However, based on the results of the site inspection, it was determined that the both the proposed LRV maintenance and storage facility and the connecting tracks to Queen Street East have been previously disturbed, negating archaeological potential.

The complete Stage 1 Background Study and Property Inspection is provided in Technical Report # 6 - Stage 1: Background Study and Property Inspection (revised July 2010).

3.2.4.3 Summary of Archaeology and Recommendations The Stage 1 archaeological assessment determined that no archaeological sites have been registered within or immediately adjacent to the study area. The Ashbridges site (AjGt-1), known as the Ashbridge Estate, was identified as being located within 1 kilometre of the study area. Based on the results of property inspection, it has been determined that both the proposed LRV maintenance and storage facility site and the Leslie Street connecting track route have been previously disturbed, negating archaeological potential. As a result, the Ashbridges Bay LRV maintenance and storage facility site and connecting track route did not require additional archaeological assessment. Figure 3-8 Location of Noise Sensitive Receptors and Monitoring Locations

31 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

The noise and vibration effect from transportation sources on receptor R2, R3, and CR4 is not considered significant as February 10, 2010. The location of monitor M1 was selected to accurately measure traffic sound from Lake Shore the new LRVs will not pass in close proximity to these locations; an effects assessment has been performed at these Boulevard East. The location of monitor M2 was selected to have a setback from Leslie Street similar to the property receptors for stationary sources only. The sensitive points of reception have been classified as shown in Table 3-5 line of residences backing onto Leslie Street. Monitor M3 was selected to have a setback from Eastern Avenue similar below. to the property line of residences fronting onto Eastern Avenue.

Table 3-5 Receptor Acoustical Classification The recorded minimum background One Hour Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ), measured by the noise monitors is shown in Table 3-7. Receptor ID Description Classification NPC-205/232 MOE Class R1 Residences along Leslie Street Stationary & Transportation 1 –Urban Table 3-7 Ambient Monitor Measurement Summary R2 Residences along Eastern Avenue Stationary 2 - Suburban R3 Ashbridges Bay Marina Stationary 2 - Suburban Time Period Minimum Leq (dBA) CR4 Tommy Thompson Park Stationary 2 - Suburban Monitor Location M1 M2 M3 Daytime (07:00-19:00) 58* 59* 61 Evening (19:00-23:00) 57* 62* 62 3.2.5.2 Sound Level Limits for Stationary Sources Night-time (23:00-07:00) 50* 55* 58

MOE Publication NPC-205/232 Sound Level limit Note: * Sound level monitors at locations M1 and M2 were placed adjacent to hard reflecting surfaces. As a result, the values presented are 3dB less than Stationary noise sources at the streetcar facility are required to comply with MOE publication NPC-205/232. Stationary actual measured values. noise sources located at the facility include streetcars while on TTC property, mechanical equipment associated with any building located on-site, PA systems or any other non-emergency noise-generating activity that may be associated The measured levels in Table 3-7 represent hourly time-weighted averages. Instantaneous sound levels can be higher with the streetcar facility. (for example, as a wave of traffic passes) and lower (for example, where there is a large gap in traffic), but these average out to the values recorded. The values reported also represent sound levels for the hour with the lowest levels

The noise assessment includes only activity from moving streetcars throughout the track. Secondary noise sources of background sound. The vast majority of the hourly measurements recorded are above the values shown in Table 3- such as mechanical equipment related to the building structures, PA systems or any other sources are required to be in 7, but these are the recorded minimal. compliance with the MOE publication NPC- 205 as well. The combined impact of moving streetcars and other equipment located on-site should be determined as part of the detailed design of the project. 3.2.5.3 Sound Level Limits for Stationary Sources

Lake Shore Boulevard East road traffic dominates the ambient sound levels at monitor location M1, whereas Leslie The MOE guidelines state that the hourly equivalent sound level (LEQ) limit at a receptor is the greater of the current Street and Eastern Avenue road traffic dominate the ambient sound levels at monitor locations M2, and M3, ambient background sound level or the minimum sound level limit applicable to the receptor‟s acoustical class. The respectively. The results indicate that receptor R1 and R2 can support higher sound level limits than the MOE MOE minimum sound level limits for Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 receptors given in MOE Publication NPC-205 are minimum. Receptor R3 is located more than 150 metres away from Lake Shore Boulevard East, and receptor CR4 is shown in Table 3-6. also located away from a major road. As such, the baseline MOE sound level limits were used for R3 and CR4.

Table 3-6 MOE Sound Level Limits for Stationary Source The resulting stationary source sound level limits for all receptors during any time of day and night are presented in Sound Level Limit (dBA) Table 3-8. The noise impact of the proposed TTC facility on these receptors is required to meet the applicable MOE MOE Classification Daytime (07:00-19:00) Evening (19:00-23:00) Night-time (23:00-07:00) sound level limits listed, with the exception of the receptor CR4 (Tommy Thompson Park). Class 1 – Urban 50 47 45 Class 2 – Suburban 50 45 45 Table 3-8 Sound Level Limits for Stationary Source at Each Receptor Class 3 – Rural 45 40 40 Sound Level Limit (dBA) Time Period If it is found through long term community ambient sound monitoring or by predicted sound levels due to road traffic, R1 R2 R3 R4 that an area has an ambient sound level higher than that mentioned in Table 3-6, then the lowest recorded Leq1hr level Daytime (07:00-19:00) 59 61 50 50 from the measurement period, or lowest predicted sound level from road traffic becomes the applicable sound level limit Evening (19:00-23:00) 62 62 45 N/A Night-time (23:00-07:00) 55 58 45 N/A in the area. This can typically occur in downtown major population centres or where residential receptors are located near a busy road. 3.2.5.4 Sound Level Limits for Transportation Sources Community Ambient Sound Monitoring The MOEE/TTC Protocol for Noise and Vibration Assessment for the Proposed Waterfront West Light Rail Transit Line, dated November 11, 1993 (provided by MOE in October, 2009), was used as guideline criteria for transportation sound Three community ambient sound monitors, identified as M1, M2, and M3, were configured to measure energy-averaged sources. The criterion outlined in the protocol is that the sound level limit at a point of reception during daytime hourly equivalent sound levels. M1 and M2 measured for nine days were installed at locations M1 and M2 between operation is the higher of 55dBA or the 16-hour Leq (Leq16). For night-time, the protocol criterion is that the sound level September 30 and October 24, 2009. Monitor M3 performed measurements for 6 days between February 4th, and limit at a point of reception is the higher of 50dBA or the eight-hour Leq (Leq8).

32 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

Based on ambient monitoring data collected at monitor location M2, the Leq16 and Leq8 are greater than the 55dBA Commercial access to Eastern Avenue – mix of no stopping and no parking during weekday peak traffic and 50dBA minimum, respectively. The transportation source sound level limits at Leslie Street receptors (R1) are periods (i.e., 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.); and shown in Table 3-9. Eastern Avenue to Queen Street East – no parking during weekday peak direction traffic periods (i.e., southbound 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and northbound 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.). Table 3-9 Sound Level Limits for Transportation Sources

Sound Level Limit (dBA) Additionally, there are standard “no parking” or “no Time Period R1 standing” restrictions adjacent to intersections and Daytime (07:00-23:00) 63 TTC bus stops. Night-time (23:00-7:00) 59 Lake Shore Boulevard East 3.2.5.5 Stationary and Transportation Source Vibration Criteria Lake Shore Boulevard East functions as an east- All vibration sources at the LRV maintenance and storage facility, as well as the new LRVs operating on Leslie Street west arterial roadway with six through lanes and a should comply with ISO 2631-2, Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration – Part 2: Continuous and posted speed limit of 60 kilometres/hour. At the shock-induced vibration in buildings. This publication sets a maximum RMS velocity limit of 0.14 mm/s or 83dB (re signalized intersection of Lake Shore Boulevard East 10nm/s) at frequencies between 10 and 100 Hz within residential buildings during night time. This limit corresponds to and Leslie Street, there are auxiliary left turn lanes 1.4 times the threshold of human perception for vibration. Typically, streetcar vibration does not produce vibration levels for both the eastbound and westbound approaches. below 10 Hz. This criterion applies to all receptors. Figure 3-9 Existing traffic at the Leslie Street and Queen Street East Lake Shore Boulevard intersection

3.3 Traffic and Transportation Queen Street East functions as an east-west arterial roadway with four through lanes (no auxiliary left or right turn lanes), a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres/hour, on-street parking, and a TTC streetcar route. The intersections 3.3.1 Existing Road and Traffic Queen Street East / Carlaw Avenue and Queen Street East / Leslie Street are signalized and have shared left- turn/through and shared through/right-turn lane configurations on all approaches. 3.3.1.1 Existing Roads Eastern Avenue Existing roads within the study area include:

Eastern Avenue functions as an east-west arterial roadway with four through lanes at signalized intersections (no auxiliary Leslie Street – north-south arterial roadway with four through lanes from Queen Street East to left or right turn lanes, with the exception of a westbound auxiliary left), a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres/hour, on- Commissioners Street street parking, and a TTC express bus route. The intersections Eastern Avenue / Carlaw Avenue and Eastern Avenue / Lake Shore Boulevard East – east-west arterial roadway with six through lanes Leslie Street are signalized and provide shared left-turn/through and right-turn/through lanes on all approaches. Queen Street East – east-west arterial roadway with four through lanes

Eastern Avenue – east-west arterial roadway with two through lanes Commissioners Street Commissioners Street – east–west, low volume collector A more detailed description of area roads and their functions are provided below. Commissioners Street functions as an east-west, collector road that provides access to adjacent properties and other

sites in the Port Lands. It has two through lanes and a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres/hour. Commissioners Street Leslie Street forms a T-intersection at Leslie Street (signalized); however, there is also a gated access driveway on the opposite side of Leslie Street. Auxiliary left and right turn lanes are provided on the Commissioners Street approach to Leslie Street, Leslie Street functions as a north-south arterial roadway with four basic lanes from Queen Street East to Lake Shore and an auxiliary right turn lane is provided on the Leslie Street southbound approach (provides the lane drop for the two Boulevard, South of Commissioners Street, Leslie Street functions as a collector road with two basic lanes to its basic lanes south of Commissioners Street). southern terminus. It has a posted speed limit of 50 kilometres/hour. Leslie Street intersects with the other arterial roads, including Queen Street East, Eastern Avenue and Lake Shore Boulevard East, as well as a collector road – Commissioners Street. All intersections are signalized. Auxiliary left turn lanes are provided on both approaches to 3.3.1.2 Base-Year Traffic Volumes Lake Shore Boulevard East, and an auxiliary right turn lane is provided on the northbound approach. A signalized In accordance with the accepted methodology for the traffic assessment of TTC initiatives, the existing traffic volumes intersection is also provided at the Loblaw/Price Chopper access located between the Leslie Street intersections with represent the horizon year condition for forecasting. Since turning movement traffic counts are not typically collected in Eastern Avenue and Lake Shore Boulevard East. low traffic volume periods, such as the early morning departure time for LRVs leaving the maintenance facility, traffic

volumes for some of the peak hour periods had to be estimated. The provision and restriction of on-street parking along Leslie Street between Commissioners Street and Queen Street includes: The City of Toronto provided Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) counts of 24 hour traffic volumes on Leslie Street between

Queen Street East and Eastern Avenue, and between Lake Shore Boulevard East and Commissioners Street. The hourly Commissioners Street to Lake Shore Boulevard East – no stopping at any time; breakdown of traffic over the 24 hour period, and specifically the percentage relationships between off peak and peak Lake Shore Boulevard East to commercial access – no parking at any time; hours, was used to provide estimation factors for the peak hours that were not captured in actual traffic counts. The percentage factors used, and the known peak hour that the factors were applied are shown in Table 3-10 below.

33 Ashbridges Bay Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Maintenance and Storage Facility – Transit Project Assessment – Environmental Project Report

Table 3-10 Percentage Factors for Estimating Base Year Traffic for Non-Standard Peak Hours9 For the 3:00 to 4:00 p.m. period, the Leslie Street/Lake Shore Boulevard intersection operates at an overall poor level of service with the capacity of critical movements exceeded under existing conditions. For future Queen Street East / Leslie Street & Eastern Lake Shore Boulevard East / Leslie Street Peak Hour Avenue / Leslie Street & Commissioners Street / Leslie Street conditions, this situation would be exacerbated by the addition of employee shift 1 and shift 2 traffic, and 5:00 a.m. – 6:00 a.m. 16% of a.m. peak hour 12% of a.m. peak hour the westbound left turn movement from Lake Shore Boulevard to Leslie Street would be problematic. It 6:00 a.m. – 7:00 a.m. 31% of a.m. peak hour 30% of a.m. peak hour should be pointed out that the poor operations at the Leslie Street/Lake Shore Boulevard intersection is an 7:00 a.m. – 8:00 a.m. 60% of a.m. peak hour 69% of a.m. peak hour existing problem that is not caused by the introduction of light rail vehicles. 8:15 a.m. – 9:15 a.m. 100% of a.m. peak hour 100% of a.m. peak hour The key intersections at each end of the service line segment, i.e., Leslie Street/Commissioners Street to 9:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. 91% of a.m. peak hour 90% of a.m. peak hour 2:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. 68% of p.m. peak hour 86% of p.m. peak hour the south and Leslie Street/Queen Street to the north, are shown to operate at high levels of service (A and 3:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. 73% of p.m. peak hour 96% of p.m. peak hour B) and with volumes well within capacity for all selected peak periods. As previously noted, these results 4:30 p.m. – 5:30 p.m. 100 % of p.m. peak hour 100 % of p.m. peak hour incorporate the improvement to the Leslie Street/Commissioners Street intersection of adding an exclusive 7:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. 79% of p.m. peak hour 61% of p.m. peak hour southbound left turn lane. 11:00 p.m. – 12:00 a.m. 57% of a.m. peak hour 32% of a.m. peak hour 1: 00 a.m. – 2:00 a.m. 23% of a.m. peak hour 9% of a.m. peak hour The high level of service noted for the Leslie Street/Commissioners Street intersection will allow flexibility for incorporating the LRV movements to/from the maintenance facility, and specifically, the southbound to Overall, traffic generally operates well along Leslie Street; however, higher volumes exist near the Leslie Street / Lake eastbound left turn and westbound to northbound right turn movements. It is recognized that the latter Shore Boulevard intersection – especially during the evening rush hour. Table 3-11 depicts existing traffic volumes movements cross the Martin Goodman Trail and represent a potential conflict point with pedestrians and along Leslie Street at various hours of the day. cyclists using the trail, and that mitigation measures should be considered to reduce the associated risk of collisions. Table 3-11 Existing Traffic Volumes along Leslie Street Technical Report # 7 details the Traffic Impact Study completed for this analysis. Analysis Periods (northbound/southbound) Section 6:00-7:00 am 7:00-8:00 am 8:15-9:15 am 3:00-4:00 pm 4:30-5:30 pm 7:00-8:00 pm 11:00-12:00 am North of Queen Street East 31/0 62/0 103/0 170/0 234/0 185/0 82/0 (one-way – northbound only) 3.4 Existing Transit Queen Street East to Eastern Ave 62/80 122/159 203/262 361/190 494/260 392/207 170/152 Eastern Avenue to Plaza Entrance/ 95/179 202/384 312/587 565/306 661/357 438/248 232/181 The area south of Lake Shore Boulevard East is currently served by TTC bus route 83 - Jones, which travels along Loblaw Entrance Leslie Street and Commissioners Road. This bus route connects with the TTC streetcar route 501 - Queen, 502 – Plaza Entrances to Lake Shore 108/244 244/556 353/803 713/399 742/415 453/276 201/106 Downtowner (limited service) and 503 – Kingston Road. Tripper (limited service) that run east-west along Queen Street Boulevard East Lake Shore Boulevard to East. A Limited service (TTC bus route 31B - Greenwood) operates along Eastern Avenue. 66/99 151/226 217/326 321/208 334/216 204/132 101/101 Commissioners Street

The quality of intersection traffic operations is typically measured in terms of level of service (LOS). The LOS is assigned on the basis of average delay per vehicle and includes deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. For signalized intersections, LOS ranges from “A” for 10 seconds or less average delay to LOS “F” for delays greater than 80 seconds.

Similar to LOS, the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio is calculated for the intersection as a whole, and for individual movements at an intersection. The v/c ratio provides a measure of traffic volume demand to the available capacity, with a capacity condition represented by a v/c ratio of 1.0 (i.e., volume demand equals capacity).

To assess existing and future conditions during peak periods, a level of service analysis was undertaken for the key intersections along Leslie Street using Synchro 7.0 Software, which implements the methods of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. In addition, Synchro was used to assess queue lengths for left turn movements at the Leslie Street/ Lake Shore Boulevard East intersection, and for through movements along Leslie Street north of Lake Shore Boulevard where there are closely spaced signalized intersections. Highlights of the analysis include:

With the exception of the Leslie Street/Lake Shore Boulevard intersection, there are no operational deficiencies or “problem locations”. The Leslie Street/Lake Shore Boulevard intersection operates at an overall poor level of service with the capacity of critical movements exceeded under existing and future conditions during both the a.m. (8:15 to 9:15) and p.m. (4:30 to 5:30) peak hours of street traffic when there would minimal traffic generated by the proposed maintenance facility.

Figure 3-10 Existing TTC Streetcar Service at the Leslie Street and Queen Street Intersection 9. Actual traffic counted at Commercial Access/Leslie Street used for all periods except 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m.

34