DOCSLIB.ORG

Brampton Heritage Board Item E1 for June 18, 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

E 1-1 Request for Delegation Attention: City Clerk's Office, City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West, Brampton ON L6Y 4R2 Email: [email protected] www.brampton.ca Phone: (905) 874-2100 Fax: (905) 874-2119 Meeting: □ City Council □ Planning, Design and Development Committee □ Committee of Council □ Other:__________________________________ Meeting Date Requested: Agenda Item (if applicable):_________________ Name of Individual(s): Position/Title: Organization/Person being Represented: Full Address for Contact: Email/ Telephone No. Fax No. Subject Matter to be Discussed Action Requested Attach additional page if required I am submitting a formal presentation to accompany my delegation: □ Yes □ No I will require the following audio-visual equipment/software for my presentation: □ Computer Notebook □ DVD Player □ PowerPoint □ Other - please specify_________________ Note: Delegates are requested to provide to the City Clerk's Office well in advance of the meeting date: (i) 30 copies of all background material and/or presentations for publication with the meeting agenda and/or distribution at the meeting, and (ii) for PowerPoint and other visual presentations, an electronic copy of the presentation (e.g., DVD, CD, .ppt file) to ensure compatibility with corporate equipment. Once the above information is received by the City Clerk's Office, you will be contacted by a Legislative Coordinator to confirm your placement on the appropriate agenda. Personal information on this form is collected under authority of the Municipal Act, SO 2001, c.25 and/or the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13 and will be used in the preparation of the applicable council/committee agenda and will be attached to that agenda. Questions about the collection of personal information should be directed to the Deputy City Clerk, Council and Administrative Services, 2 Wellington Street West, Brampton, Ontario, L6Y 4R2, tel. 905-874-2115. E 1-2 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT 8712 CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION ROAD (LOT 5, CONCESSION 8 ND, GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF TORONTO GORE) CITY OF BRAMPTON, ONTARIO July 2009 Prepared for: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Prepared by: E 1-3 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT 8712 CLAIREVILLE CONSERVATION ROAD (LOT 5, CONCESSION 8 ND, GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF TORONTO GORE) CITY OF BRAMPTON, ONTARIO July 2009 Prepared for: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, Ontario, M3N 1S4 Tel: 416-661-6600 Prepared by: Unterman McPhail Associates Heritage Resource Management Consultants 540 Runnymede Road Toronto, Ontario, M6S 2Z7 Tel: 416-766-7333 Fax: 416-763-4082 Email: [email protected] E 1-4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose 2 1.2 City of Brampton Heritage Impact Assessment Requirements 2 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND ITS CONTEXT 4 2.1 Location 4 2.2 Area Character and Physiography 4 2.3 Site Context 5 3.0 HISTORICAL SUMMARY 7 3.1 Toronto Gore Township 7 3.2 Lot 5, Concession 8 ND, Toronto Gore Township 11 4.0 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION 14 4.1 Design/Physical Value 15 4.2 Historical and Associative Value 17 4.3 Contextual Value 17 4.4 Summary of Cultural Heritage Values 18 4.5 Heritage Status of Adjacent Properties and Landscape Elements 18 5.0 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 19 6.0 HERITAGE POLICIES 20 6.1 The Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement (2005) 20 6.2 Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) 22 6.3 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) 22 6.4 City of Brampton Official Plan 24 7.0 HERITAGE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT & MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS 25 7.1 Introduction 25 7.2 City of Brampton Mitigation Protocols for Heritage Impact Assessments 25 7.3 Mitigation Recommendations 26 SOURCES CONSULTED Appendix A: Photographs Cultural Heritage Landscape Appendix B: Photographs Residence Appendix C: Historical Maps Appendix D: Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 E 1-5 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1.1 Location of subject property, City of Brampton [Source: Microsoft Virtual Earth 2009]. 1 Figure 2.1 Location of 8712 Claireville Conservation Road in the City of Brampton [Source: Microsoft Virtual Earth 2009]. 4 Figure 2.2 Aerial of site and buildings [Source: Microsoft Virtual Earth 2009]. 6 Figure 3.1 John Bland Property, Lot 5, Concession 8 ND, Toronto Gore Township [Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Peel, 1877]. 12 Figure 4.1 East (front) elevation of residence at 8712 Claireville Conservation Road. 15 Heritage Impact Assessment Report E 1-6 Page 1 8712 Claireville Conservation Road (Lot 5, Concession 8 ND Geographic Township of Toronto Gore) City of Brampton 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has requested the preparation of a heritage impact assessment (HIA) for the property located at 8712 Claireville Conservation Road in response to the requirements of the City of Brampton. The study area contains the undeveloped lands largely within the west half of Lot 5, Concession 8 ND, geographic area of Toronto Gore Township, and now part of the City of Brampton. The subject property is located within lands owned by the TRCA. The TRCA is exploring the possible removal of the residence located at 8712 Claireville Conservation Road. An HIA determines the significant of a cultural heritage resource, and how proposed land use development, demolition or site alterations may affect a resource. A property does not have to be designated or listed on a heritage register to be subject to the HIA process. Any property that may exhibit cultural heritage value or 'heritage potential' will be subject to an appropriate level of heritage due diligence guided through the HIA process. Figure 1.1. Location of subject property, City of Brampton [Source: Microsoft Virtual Earth 2009]. Unterman McPhail Associates July 2009 Heritage Resource Management Consultants Heritage Impact Assessment Report E 1-7 Page 2 8712 Claireville Conservation Road (Lot 5, Concession 8 ND Geographic Township of Toronto Gore) City of Brampton 1.1 City of Brampton Heritage Impact Assessment Requirements The City of Brampton defines an HIA as a study to determine how significant a cultural heritage resource might be and how a proposed land use development, demolition or site alterations may impact that resource. The report should recommend and outline a range of mitigative measures or alternative development approaches that should be applied, based on a range of decision making factors such as: significance, rarity and integrity of the cultural heritage resource, structural condition, location, contextual and environmental considerations, municipal policy objectives, proposed land uses, business plan of the subject landowner and other factors. An HIA can also be used to determine if and when demolition, relocation, salvage or other potentially negative impacts may be permissible. For example, in certain, rare instances demolition might be permissible if a heritage building is confirmed as structurally unsound, is heavily damaged or otherwise compromised to such a degree that rehabilitation and restoration is unfeasible. In such instances a clear and well-articulated rationale is required to justify such impacts. An HIA must also be framed within the broader context of provincial planning policies, national and international standards, best practices, professional standards, charters and conventions relating to cultural heritage. Consultants shall assess cultural heritage value or interest in accordance with Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06: Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. With regard to listed and designated heritage properties, or other previously un-assessed properties that may hold cultural heritage value or interest, the objectives of the HIA are to: o Assess and determine the cultural heritage value of the subject property as a whole, noting all heritage attributes and other character defining elements as found; o Identify and assess any other unique attributes of the site and surrounding area that may contribute to the cultural heritage value of the subject property, such as cultural heritage landscapes, natural heritage features, archaeological potential, integration with a streetscape or area and the like; o Determine physical condition, structural integrity of standing structures and other heritage attributes as found on the subject property and confirm if conservation, rehabilitation and/or restoration is feasible; o Outline a rationale of any proposals that might impact heritage resources (e.g., demolition, relocation, road widening, etc.) being put forward by a landowner or other party; o Outline and recommend appropriate mitigation to loss, destruction, removal, encroachments or others proposed actions that may impact heritage resources found on the subject property, as applicable; o Identify required short-term site conservation, site security and building stabilization measures as required to protect a significant resource during an interim period of vacancy or limited use; Unterman McPhail Associates July 2009 Heritage Resource Management Consultants Heritage Impact Assessment Report E 1-8 Page 3 8712 Claireville Conservation Road (Lot 5, Concession 8 ND Geographic Township of Toronto Gore) City of Brampton o Outline long-term conservation or rehabilitation measures and adaptive reuse options as applicable; and, o Recommend site planning and landscaping measures that may be adopted to help ensure significant heritage resources are effectively protected or enhanced on lands subject to redevelopment. The HIA report should
Recommended publications

  • Hurricane Turns Aurora and District Into a Lake

    FEATURING A SPECIAL GUEST SPEAKER WineWine FROM DineDineBERINGER VINEYARDS & R.S.V.P. & 905-773-9329 as space is limited PRICE $65.00 Aurora’s Community Newspaper PRICE $65.00 PER PERSON + TAX & GRATUITY OCTOBER 28TH 7 pm sharp 49 North Lake Road Oak Ridges Vol. 3 No. 1 Week of October 15, 2002 905-727-3300 Renaming policy sacked by council in a recorded vote The controversial Public on July 11 the committee Facilities Renaming Policy pre- approved the draft policy and it pared by the Leisure Services was presented to council for Advisory Committee was back adoption. before Aurora Council last week A week later, the issue was but this time it was defeated on a deferred to the September 17 4-3 recorded vote. general committee meeting and Two councillors who had indicat- staff were directed to obtain public ed earlier support of the proposal opinion regarding the draft policy. were absent when the vote was Eight replies were received from taken. citizens with the majority opposed The issue was brought about to a renaming policy. some time ago when a request There was a controversial debate was received to change the name at the September 17th general of Willow Creek Park to Elizabeth committee meeting and a motion Hader Park, as a tribute to a by Councillor John West to, in young Aurora girl who lost her life effect, leave things alone was in a horseback riding tragedy. defeated. Her death brought about A follow-up motion by Councillor changes in legislation requiring Evelina MacEachern and second- stricter controls for riding stables ed by Councillor David Griffith (the in hopes that such action would two absent from last week's meet- prevent similar-type accidents.
  • Rouge River Rouge River

    Rouge River Rouge River

    Rouge River State of the Watershed Report Surface Water Quantity Goal: Surface waters of a quantity, volume and naturally variable rate of flow to: $ protect aquatic and terrestrial life and ecological functions; $ protect human life and property from risks due to flooding; $ contribute to the protection of Lake Ontario as a domestic drinking water source; $ support sustainable agricultural, industrial, and commercial water supply needs; $ support swimming, fishing and the opportunity to safely consume fish; and $ contribute to the removal of Toronto from the Great Lakes list of Areas of Concern. Surface Water Quantity Key Findings: The Main Rouge subwatershed has been subject to significant urbanization with an approximate total impervious cover of 18% as of 2002. Several studies suggest that the maximum impervious cover that a watershed can withstand before experiencing severe hydrologic changes and consequent geomorphic and ecological impacts is approximately 10%. There has been significantly less urbanization in the Little Rouge subwatershed and impervious surfaces make up only 2% of the subwatershed area. As a result, hydrologic impacts and related effects are much less severe than on the Main Rouge River. Average annual flows in the Main Rouge River show a long-term increasing trend of over 1.3% per year in the past 40 years. This rate of increase is significantly greater than that on the Little Rouge River or nearby rural watersheds and is indicative of the effect of urbanization on the hydrologic cycle. The Rouge River has become flashy and now generates high flows in response to rainfall events that caused almost no response in the river prior to widespread development.
  • 3131 Lower Don River West Lower Don River West 4.0 DESCRIPTION

    3131 Lower Don River West Lower Don River West 4.0 DESCRIPTION

    Lower Don River West Environmental Study Report Remedial Flood Protection Project 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF LOWER DON 4.1 The Don River Watershed The Don River is one of more than sixty rivers and streams flowing south from the Oak Ridges Moraine. The River is approximately 38 km long and outlets into the Keating Channel, which then conveys the flows into Toronto Harbour and Lake Historic Watershed Ontario. The entire drainage basin of the Don urbanization of the river's headwaters in York River is 360 km2. Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2, on the Region began in the early 1980s and continues following pages, describe the existing and future today. land use conditions within the Don River Watershed. Hydrologic changes in the watershed began when settlers converted the forests to agricultural fields; For 200 years, the Don Watershed has been many streams were denuded even of bank side subject to intense pressures from human vegetation. Urban development then intensified settlement. These have fragmented the river the problems of warmer water temperatures, valley's natural branching pattern; degraded and erosion, and water pollution. Over the years often destroyed its once rich aquatic and during the three waves of urban expansion, the terrestrial wildlife habitat; and polluted its waters Don River mouth, originally an extensive delta with raw sewage, industrial/agricultural marsh, was filled in and the lower portion of the chemicals, metals and other assorted river was straightened. contaminants. Small Don River tributaries were piped and Land clearing, settlement, and urbanization have buried, wetlands were "reclaimed," and springs proceeded in three waves in the Don River were lost.
  • Dodging the 'Perfect Storm'

    Dodging the 'Perfect Storm'

    Dodging the ‘Perfect Storm’ Conservation Ontario’s Business Case for Strategic Reinvestment in Ontario’s Flood Management Programs, Services, and Structures September 2013 Introduction Flooding in Calgary, Alberta and more recently in Toronto, Ontario reminds us just how vulnerable we are when it comes to extreme weather events. The loss of life, devastation, long term social and economic disruption and the staggering cleanup costs in the aftermath of these floods clearly demonstrates how essential it is to have actionable guidelines, policies and programs in place to manage these events. Flooding in downtown Calgary (2013). Source: CTV News Flooding on the Don Valley Parkway, Toronto (2013). Source: CTV News 1 Dodging the ‘Perfect Storm’ – Conservation Ontario’s Business Case for Strategic Reinvestment in Ontario’s Flood Management Programs and Services, and Structures (2013) In Ontario, flooding is the leading cause of public emergency.1 To date, Ontario’s programs to manage floods and regulate floodplains have proven extremely effective and, indeed, the Ontario government has been a leading jurisdiction in Canada for flood planning and management. While much has been accomplished, several factors, if not addressed directly and quickly, will significantly jeopardize the ability of Conservation Authorities and all levels of governments to maintain and improve on this level of management and protection. Flood management is a shared responsibility in Ontario and Conservation Authorities are on the front lines of the Provincial Flood Forecasting and Warning program. In addition, Conservation Authorities bring added protection and benefits through watershed planning, watershed stewardship/natural heritage system management, monitoring and many other programs they deliver.
  • Download Community Based Adaptation in Brampton Through the Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan

    Download Community Based Adaptation in Brampton Through the Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan

    Community Based Adaptation in Brampton Through the Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan Acknowledgements Executive Director: Eva Ligeti, Clean Air Partnership Authors: Erin Tito, Ryerson University Beata Palka, Ryerson University Caroline Rodgers, Clean Air Partnership Advisors, Reviewers & Editors: Caroline Rodgers, Clean Air Partnership Kevin Behan, Clean Air Partnership Eva Ligeti, Clean Air Partnership Clean Air Partnership gratefully acknowledges the financial support of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment. We also wish to thank the representatives from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Region of Peel, and City of Brampton who provided input to this report, and the staff who initiated and played a lead role in the development of this project. Clean Air Partnership, 2011. All rights reserved. For more information, contact: Clean Air Partnership 75 Elizabeth Street Toronto, Ontario. M5G 1P4, Canada 416-392-6672 www.cleanairpartnership.org About the Clean Air Partnership Clean Air Partnership (CAP) is a registered charity that works in partnership to promote and coordinate actions to improve local air quality and reduce greenhouse gases for healthy communities. Our applied research on municipal policies strives to broaden and improve access to public policy debate on air pollution and climate change issues. Our social marketing programs focus on energy conservation activities that motivate individuals, government, schools, utilities, businesses and communities to take action to clean the air. We would like to acknowledge the hard work of the SNAP Project Team members who gave us generous access to their presentations, documents, and reports. Without their cooperation, kindness, and extensive knowledge this case study would not have been possible.
  • Integrating Transportation and Land Use Planning at the Metropolitan Level in North America 185

    Integrating Transportation and Land Use Planning at the Metropolitan Level in North America 185

    Integrating transportation and land use planning at the metropolitan level in North America: multilevel governance in Toronto and Chicago Integrando o planejamento de transporte e de uso do solo em escala metropolitana na América do Norte: governança multinível em Toronto e Chicago Fanny R. Tremblay-Racicot[a], Jean Mercier[b] Licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons DOI: 10.7213/urbe.06.002.SE04 ISSN 2175-3369 [a] Ph.D candidate in Urban Studies at Department of Geography and Urban Studies, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA - United States, e-mail: [email protected] [b] Ph.D in public administration (SU), professor at Université Laval, Québec, QC - Canada, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract This article compares the policies and processes by which transportation and land use planning are integra- ted in metropolitan Toronto, Canada, and Chicago, in the United States. Using twenty-four semi-structured interviews with key informants, it describes the array of interventions undertaken by governmental and non-governmental actors in their respective domains to shed light on how the challenge of integrating trans- portation and land use planning is addressed on both sides of the border. Evidence concerning the political dynamics in Toronto and Chicago demonstrates that the capacity of metropolitan institutions to adopt and implement plans that integrate transportation with land use fundamentally depends on the leadership of the province or the state government. Although the federal government of each nation can bypass the sub-national level and intervene in local affairs by funding transportation projects that include land use components, its capacity to promote a coherent metropolitan vision is inherently limited.
  • Toronto Police Service Community Consultation and Volunteer Manual

    Toronto Police Service Community Consultation and Volunteer Manual

    1 November 2019 2 Volunteers and Community Policing The Toronto Police Service (Service) recognizes that volunteers are an integral and vital component of community policing. Service volunteers are welcomed and valued in every community, and their service to the organization is invaluable. Our volunteers serve as the first point of contact between the community and the Service. They make an impact and strengthen ties in our communities, they serve to enhance the delivery of police services, and assist in numerous community engagement initiatives and programs. The Mission Statement of the Toronto Police Service Volunteer Program is; “To create meaningful partnerships through trust, understanding, shared knowledge, effective community engagement and to maintain safety and security in our communities.” Connected by Commitment Revised November 2020 2 3 MESSAGE FROM THE TORONTO POLICE SERVICES BOARD On behalf of the Toronto Police Services Board, I would like to extend our deep and sincere appreciation to all of our volunteers for giving your time, energy, and dedication to the Toronto Police Service and to all of the communities that make up the City of Toronto. The Toronto Police Service is recognized as outstanding model in the policing community in the way in which it consults with its communities. The Board is extremely proud of this achievement and is committed to continuously working to ensure that we remain a progressive leader in this vital area. Strong and meaningful partnership with the community is an essential component of the Board’s emphasis on community policing. Indeed, The Way Forward, the Transformational Task Force’s action plan report, charts an approach to policing that is founded on embracing partnerships to create safe communities.
  • Richmond, VA Hurricanes

    Richmond, VA Hurricanes

    Hurricanes Influencing the Richmond Area Why should residents of the Middle Atlantic states be concerned about hurricanes during the coming hurricane season, which officially begins on June 1 and ends November 30? After all, the big ones don't seem to affect the region anymore. Consider the following: The last Category 2 hurricane to make landfall along the U.S. East Coast, north of Florida, was Isabel in 2003. The last Category 3 was Fran in 1996, and the last Category 4 was Hugo in 1989. Meanwhile, ten Category 2 or stronger storms have made landfall along the Gulf Coast between 2004 and 2008. Hurricane history suggests that the Mid-Atlantic's seeming immunity will change as soon as 2009. Hurricane Alley shifts. Past active hurricane cycles, typically lasting 25 to 30 years, have brought many destructive storms to the region, particularly to shore areas. Never before have so many people and so much property been at risk. Extensive coastal development and a rising sea make for increased vulnerability. A storm like the Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944, a powerful Category 3, would savage shorelines from North Carolina to New England. History suggests that such an event is due. Hurricane Hazel in 1954 came ashore in North Carolina as a Category 4 to directly slam the Mid-Atlantic region. It swirled hurricane-force winds along an interior track of 700 miles, through the Northeast and into Canada. More than 100 people died. Hazel-type wind events occur about every 50 years. Areas north of Florida are particularly susceptible to wind damage.
  • Rapid Transit in Toronto Levyrapidtransit.Ca TABLE of CONTENTS

    Rapid Transit in Toronto Levyrapidtransit.Ca TABLE of CONTENTS

    The Neptis Foundation has collaborated with Edward J. Levy to publish this history of rapid transit proposals for the City of Toronto. Given Neptis’s focus on regional issues, we have supported Levy’s work because it demon- strates clearly that regional rapid transit cannot function eff ectively without a well-designed network at the core of the region. Toronto does not yet have such a network, as you will discover through the maps and historical photographs in this interactive web-book. We hope the material will contribute to ongoing debates on the need to create such a network. This web-book would not been produced without the vital eff orts of Philippa Campsie and Brent Gilliard, who have worked with Mr. Levy over two years to organize, edit, and present the volumes of text and illustrations. 1 Rapid Transit in Toronto levyrapidtransit.ca TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 INTRODUCTION 7 About this Book 9 Edward J. Levy 11 A Note from the Neptis Foundation 13 Author’s Note 16 Author’s Guiding Principle: The Need for a Network 18 Executive Summary 24 PART ONE: EARLY PLANNING FOR RAPID TRANSIT 1909 – 1945 CHAPTER 1: THE BEGINNING OF RAPID TRANSIT PLANNING IN TORONTO 25 1.0 Summary 26 1.1 The Story Begins 29 1.2 The First Subway Proposal 32 1.3 The Jacobs & Davies Report: Prescient but Premature 34 1.4 Putting the Proposal in Context CHAPTER 2: “The Rapid Transit System of the Future” and a Look Ahead, 1911 – 1913 36 2.0 Summary 37 2.1 The Evolving Vision, 1911 40 2.2 The Arnold Report: The Subway Alternative, 1912 44 2.3 Crossing the Valley CHAPTER 3: R.C.
  • 'Service Assessment': Hurricane Isabel September 18-19, 2003

    'Service Assessment': Hurricane Isabel September 18-19, 2003

    Service Assessment Hurricane Isabel September 18-19, 2003 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service Silver Spring, Maryland Cover: Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Rapid Response Team imagery, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, 1555 UTC September 18, 2003. Service Assessment Hurricane Isabel September 18-19, 2003 May 2004 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Donald L. Evans, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., U.S. Navy (retired), Administrator National Weather Service Brigadier General David L. Johnson, U.S. Air Force (Retired), Assistant Administrator Preface The hurricane is one of the most potentially devastating natural forces. The potential for disaster increases as more people move to coastlines and barrier islands. To meet the mission of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Weather Service (NWS) - provide weather, hydrologic, and climatic forecasts and warnings for the protection of life and property, enhancement of the national economy, and provide a national weather information database - the NWS has implemented an aggressive hurricane preparedness program. Hurricane Isabel made landfall in eastern North Carolina around midday Thursday, September 18, 2003, as a Category 2 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale (Appendix A). Although damage estimates are still being tabulated as of this writing, Isabel is considered one of the most significant tropical cyclones to affect northeast North Carolina, east central Virginia, and the Chesapeake and Potomac regions since Hurricane Hazel in 1954 and the Chesapeake-Potomac Hurricane of 1933. Hurricane Isabel will be remembered not for its intensity, but for its size and the impact it had on the residents of one of the most populated regions of the United States.
  • History of Flood Control in the TRCA

    History of Flood Control in the TRCA

    The History of Flood Control in the TRCA The need for authorities In the 1940's development increased in previously unurbanized areas. As a result, natural resources, including water, were becoming commodities which needed to be regulated and controlled. In 1944 a decision was made to find a new approach to water resource conservation in Ontario and a conference, in London was organized to discuss what needed to be done1. From this conference a conservation branch in the provincial government was born2. Its first task was to prepare a bill which would become the Conservation Authorities Act3. In 1946 the act was passed4 . In the Toronto area several Conservation Authorities, including the Etobicoke Conservation Authority, were created to deal with pressing flood control issues5. In total four conservation authorities were created. They comprised of the Etobicoke- Mimico Creek C.A., the Humber River C.A., the Don River C.A., and the Rouge-Duffins- Highland-Petticoat C.A. These four Conservation Authorities mainly dealt with local flooding issues and reforestation within their watersheds. In 1957 the four Conservation Authorities were amalgamated into the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA). Flooding in the region The first written account of a flood in the Toronto region was in 17976. Records since that time have shown that flooding has been a problem in the region throughout the area’s history. The first severe flood, in recorded history, to hit the Toronto region was in 18787 when five inches of rain fell in less than seven and a half hours8. Downtown Brampton was flooded, bridges were washed out, stores and houses were flooded, and almost every mill and mill dam in the area was badly damaged or destroyed9.
  • STAFF REPORT ACTION REQUIRED Rail Siding and Cost Sharing

    STAFF REPORT ACTION REQUIRED Rail Siding and Cost Sharing

    STAFF REPORT ACTION REQUIRED Rail Siding and Cost Sharing Agreement: City of Toronto and Toronto Port Lands Company Date: April 24, 2013 To: Public Works and Infrastructure Committee From: General Manager, Toronto Water Wards: All Reference P:\2013\Cluster B\TW\pw13010 Number: SUMMARY Toronto Water is seeking approval to enter into a ten (10) year rail siding use and cost sharing agreement between the City and the Toronto Port Lands Company (TPLC) for the use of a rail siding owned by the TPLC which services the Ashbridges Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant (ABTP). The rail siding is used by Toronto Water to deliver goods including process chemicals to the ABTP for daily use in its operations. Toronto Water will continue, as per past practice, to be responsible for operating and maintaining the rail line within the boundary of the ABTP site. Under this agreement, Toronto Water will pay one third of the costs reasonably incurred by TPLC to maintain in a state of good repair the rail line on TPLC land to the west of the ABTP. RECOMMENDATIONS The General Manager of Toronto Water recommends that: 1. City Council authorize the General Manager of Toronto Water to negotiate, enter into and execute a rail siding use and cost sharing agreement, including any renewals, extensions, amendments, revisions or assignments of such agreement, with City of Toronto Economic Development Corporation (c.o.b. Toronto Port Lands Company) or any of its successors or assigns on such terms and conditions as may be acceptable to the General Manager, Toronto Water, and all in a form acceptable to the City Solicitor.