Photo by Lou Wise, 2004

Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

2008

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• The population of the Humber watershed grew by 37% between 1995 and 2001 and municipal and provincial forecasts for watershed municipalities indicate that their populations will continue to grow in the next twenty years.

• Approximately 40% of the watershed is in agricultural use, 27% is used for urban settlements, and natural cover makes up 32%, with the remaining 1% being watercourses and other water bodies. Significant areas of land are protected from urban growth under the Niagara Escarpment Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan.

• The majority of urban growth in the watershed over the next ten to twenty years will occur in the West Humber, East Humber and lower reaches of the Main Humber subwatershed. Valley slopes and watercourses that are not well defined are common in these areas which makes them less likely to be perceived as natural features warranting protection, despite being integral to the health of the watershed.

• New municipal environmental policies are more progressive than those of the past with respect to requiring buffers and accommodating the natural form and function of watercourses, resulting in benefits to the natural areas abutting new and redeveloping sites.

• Most urban growth is occurring on former agricultural lands, thereby diminishing the availability of large contiguous parcels for large scale crop production.

• Public transit options are limited for the urbanizing area of the watershed, so that commuters rely heavily on private automobile usage. Expansion and increase in connections to the GO Transit, TTC and “905” community transit services are helpful, but this in combination with designing transit friendly urban development, would constitute a more comprehensive approach to diminishing reliance on automobiles and associated fossil fuel usage.

• Municipalities are endeavouring to address unsustainable rates of water use as evidenced by their ongoing programs to increase efficiency.

• In order to reduce the negative impacts of waste disposal in landfills, watershed municipalities are attempting to increase the amount of waste diverted from landfill sites through reuse, recycling, and composting of waste materials.

• Due to a growing base of accepted scientific knowledge and updated, corresponding policies, new development and redevelopment is beginning to take place in a more sustainable way.

• Examples of sustainable communities have been designed and implemented in jurisdictions around the world, and they are beginning to be employed locally, using new technologies for water and sewer infrastructure, stormwater management, and energy use that are all less resource consumptive. Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 WATERSHED LOCATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS ...... 2 3.0 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ...... 6 3.1 Flood Vulnerable and Special Policy Areas ...... 9 4.0 CURRENT CONDITIONS, EMERGING TRENDS AND KEY ISSUES ...... 12 4.1 Land Use...... 12 4.2 Transportation...... 23 4.3 Water...... 28 4.4 Solid Waste...... 31 4.5 Energy...... 33 5.0 MOVING TOWARD SUSTAINABLE LAND AND RESOURCE USE ...... 35 5.1 Development Limits ...... 36 5.2 Development Design ...... 36 5.3 Green Building Design ...... 37 5.4 Infrastructure...... 38 5.5 Stormwater Management ...... 39 6.0 SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS...... 46 7.0 OBJECTIVES FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND AND RESOURCE USE AND REPORT CARD RATINGS ...... 51 8.0 REFERENCES ...... 57

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Municipalities in the Humber River Watershed ...... 2 Figure 2: General Land Use in the Humber River Watershed, 2002...... 3 Figure 3: Special Land Use Policy Areas in the Humber River Watershed ...... 11 Figure 4: Humber River Watershed General Land Use...... 12 Figure 5: Approved Official Plan Land Use...... 15 Figure 6: Existing and Proposed Rapid Transit Network ...... 27 Figure 7: Stormwater Management Controlled Areas...... 44

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Distribution of Population and Employment for Humber Watershed Upper- and Single-tier Municipalities, 2001-2031…………………………………………………….8 Table 2: Policy Documents Affecting Land and Resource Use in the Humber Watershed.....9 Table 3: General Land Use/Cover in the Humber River Watershed, 2002...... 13 Table 4: Detailed Land Use/Cover in the Humber River Watershed, 2002 ...... 13 Table 5: Number of Transit Passenger Trips per Person 2001-2006...... 53

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc i Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Table 6: Mode of Transportation to Work Based on Statistics Canada 2001 Census of Population Data...... 53 Table 7: Residential Solid Waste Diversion Rates 2001-2006 in Humber Watershed ...... 56

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc ii Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In 1997, the Humber Watershed Task Force released the Humber River Watershed Strategy, Legacy: A Strategy For A Healthy Humber (MTRCA, 1997), which provided thirty objectives for a healthy, sustainable watershed, and a set of actions necessary to achieve them. It also provided an overview of the state of the Humber River watershed at that time. Since the release of the watershed strategy, a significant amount of new information has become available through monitoring, special studies and the experiences of watershed partners.

In 2004, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), in partnership with watershed municipalities and the Humber Watershed Alliance initiated a study to develop an integrated watershed management plan for the Humber River. This study was initiated to fulfill the watershed planning requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan , 2002, and to update the strategies and recommendations of Legacy, in light of new information, a stronger scientific foundation and better understanding of the effects of human actions on natural ecosystems. The watershed plan is intended to inform and guide municipalities, provincial and federal governments, TRCA, non-governmental organizations and private landowners regarding management actions needed to maintain and improve watershed health.

This State of the Watershed Report provides updated information on current conditions, emerging trends and identifies key watershed management issues and opportunities in the Humber pertaining to land and resource use. Indicators of watershed health and associated targets are used to rate current conditions. Ratings for a full suite of indicators of watershed health are summarized in, Listen to Your River: A Report Card on the Health of the Humber River Watershed (TRCA, 2007).

This State of the Watershed report also provides an overview of current management strategies and introduces some innovative approaches to address key issues, which will be considered for inclusion in the Humber River Watershed Plan . It begins with an overview of factors that influence watershed conditions and the indicators being used to track current conditions and evaluate watershed health.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 1 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

2.0 WATERSHED LOCATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS

The Humber River watershed is the largest watershed in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) and in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s (TRCA) jurisdiction. It is only one of nine watersheds under TRCA’s purview, yet it constitutes approximately one quarter of the jurisdiction. Traversing portions of ten GTA municipalities, the Humber’s 902.5 square kilometres span from the Oak Ridges Moraine in the north and west, to the Lake Ontario shoreline in the south (see Figures 1 and 2).

Figure 1: Municipalities in the Humber River Watershed

Municipal Share of the Humber River Watershed (Percentage of Total Area)

Adjala- Tosorontio Aurora 2% Brampton Vaughan <1% 8% 20%

Toronto

15% Caledon 35% Richmond Hill

2% Mono

2% King Mississauga 16% <1%

The Humber watershed’s total resident population in 2001 was estimated to be approximately 670,000 (TRCA, 2006a). In comparison to other GTA watersheds, it is second in population only to the Don River, which had approximately 1,150,000 people in 2001 (TRCA, 2006a). The Humber’s 2001 population represented a 37% increase from 1995, when it was approximately 488,000 (Marchi, 1995). This reflects the rapid pace of growth in the GTA over the last ten years. Indeed, the Region of York, comprising the northeast portion of the Humber watershed, has one of the highest population growth rates in all of Canada, having grown by approximately 40,000 people annually over the past several years. York Region’s population has more than quadrupled since it was first formed in 1971, rising from 169,000 to 772,000 people in 2001 (Cansult Ltd., Marshall Macklin Monaghan Ltd., et al. , York Region Transportation Master Plan, 2002). The Region’s population was last reported to be 950,674 in 1996. The Humber watershed portion of York Region includes the City of Vaughan, Town of Richmond Hill, Township of King, and Town of Aurora. As will be discussed in the following sections of this report, much of York’s population growth, and associated urban expansion, has occurred in the City of Vaughan, and the Town of Richmond Hill.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 2 Figure 2: General Land Use in the Humber River Watershed, 2002 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Vaughan's residential communities also quadrupled over the past twenty years. Between 1996 and 2006, the population of the City of Vaughan experienced a 60% increase, from 132,120 to 215,651 (City of Vaughan, 2006). Likewise, the Town of Richmond Hill grew by 58% between 1996, when its population was 101,725, and 2005 when it was 160,000 (Town of Richmond Hill, 2006a; Town of Richmond Hill, 2006b).

Similar population growth rates have occurred in the Region of Peel, located in the northwest portion of the Humber watershed (consisting of the Cities of Mississauga and Brampton, and the Town of Caledon). Since 2001, Peel Region has grown by approximately 34,000 people annually over the past several years. In both 2003 and 2004, the Region issued building permits for the greatest number of residential units, and had the highest total estimated value of construction of any municipality in the GTA (Peel Region, 2006a). Peel's total was 15% greater than that of the City of Toronto, 55% greater than that of York Region, 2.5 times greater than that of Halton Region and 2.9 times that of Durham Region. Of the 14,390 building permits issued in Peel in 2004, 8,939 (approximately 62%) of the permits were issued for single family residential homes; of these, 7,359 (more than 82%) were issued in the City of Brampton which was greater than any other municipality within the GTA as a whole (Peel Region, 2006b).

Within Peel Region, the population of the City of Brampton increased by over 38% between 1991 and 2001(Peel Region, 2006c). Since 2001, a similar level of growth has continued in Brampton and is expected to persist up to 2012 (Peel Region, 2006d). Meanwhile, the Town of Caledon’s 1996 population of 39,893 grew by 26% to 50,595 in 2001 (Peel Region, 2006c). Caledon’s largest “Rural Service Centre”, the Village of Bolton, hosted most of the growth, burgeoning by 22% in just four years, (from 21,563 in 2001 to 26,435 in 2005, Town of Caledon, 2006a; Town of Caledon, 2006b). Under the current population projections, Caledon is expecting its brisk growth to continue, but also to shift from Bolton to the newer Rural Service Centre of Mayfield West in the Etobicoke Creek watershed (Town of Caledon, 2006c).

King Township, in York Region, has experienced more moderate population growth since 1996. The population of King was estimated to be 20,000 in 2001, up only 6% from 1996 when it was 18,800 (Township of King, 2006). However, because of recent servicing changes in King, the Township expects to grow more rapidly over the next 10 years. King’s website forecasts a 2006 population of 22,000, and a 2011 population of 25,000. The majority of King’s future population growth is anticipated to occur in the communities of King City and Nobleton, which are both within the Humber watershed.

Meanwhile, in the Town of Richmond Hill, the 1996 population was 101,725 rising to 132,030 by 2001 (Town of Richmond Hill, 2006a), an increase of approximately 30%. The Town is expecting to experience a similar climb in population between 2005 and 2021; the 2005 population was approximately 160,000 and the projected population for 2021 is 212,000, representing a predicted increase of approximately 33% (Town of Richmond Hill, 2006b).

The City of Toronto comprises the majority of the southern portion of the Humber watershed, with a small portion consisting of part of the City of Mississauga. According to census statistics, the population of the City of Toronto in 2001 was 2,481,494, up 4% from 1996 when it was 2,385,421 (City of Toronto, 2006b). This five year change represents much slower population growth than in that of Toronto’s counterpart “905” municipalities. Even with the new

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 4 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use provincial requirements for intensification, the City’s growth rates are forecast to remain similar to those of the past (see Table 1).

Census data from 2001 reveals that the Humber watershed’s population reflects a diversity of ethnicities and age groups (TRCA, 2006b). People of Italian origin represent the largest ethnic group in the watershed at nearly 20% of the resident population. They are followed by Canadian (11%), English (9%), East Indian (7%), Scottish (5%), Irish (5%), Jamaican (4%), Portuguese (4%), Chinese (3%), and a long list of other groups representing lesser proportions. Recent immigrants to Canada, (those who have immigrated to Canada between 1996 and 2001), make up about 7% of the total population of the watershed. Among them, significant numbers were born in India (17%), Jamaica (6%), Pakistan (6%) and Guyana (5%).

In terms of age groups in 2001, approximately 27% of residents were under the age of 20, indicating that a considerable number of young people reside in the watershed (TRCA, 2006b). Meanwhile, approximately 60% of residents were between the ages of 20 and 64 (in their working years), and 12% were 65 or older (in their retirement years).

Overall, the population of GTA municipalities is forecast to continue its swift upward trend, as depicted in the Ontario Government’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (OMPIR, 2006) . The plan includes growth forecasts for up to the year 2031. The forecasts for municipalities within the Humber watershed are listed in Table 1, as follows.

Table 1: Distribution of Population and Employment for Humber Watershed Upper- and Single-tier Municipalities, 2001-2031

Distribution of Population and Employment for Humber Watershed Upper-and Single-tier Municipalities, 2001-2031 (figures in 000s)

Population Employment

2001 2011 2021 2031 2001 2011 2021 2031

City of Toronto 2,590 2,760 2,930 3,080 1,440 1,540 1,600 1,640

Region of Peel 1,030 1,320 1,490 1,640 530 730 820 870

Region of York 760 1,060 1,300 1,500 390 590 700 780 Source: Hemson Consulting Ltd., “The Growth Outlook for the Greater Golden Horseshoe”, January 2005

The Growth Plan was introduced partly in response to the forecast for 3.7 million more people in the Greater Golden Horseshoe by 2031. The Humber watershed will undoubtedly receive a substantial portion of the urban development required to accommodate the rising population.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 5 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

3.0 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT

In the Province of Ontario, the federal, provincial and municipal governments are all involved in land use planning. The federal government has limited involvement, but where federal legislation does apply, it is binding on provincial and municipal governments. The primary piece of legislation governing land use planning in Ontario is the provincial government’s Planning Act . A brief description of the Planning Act and the other main policy documents affecting land and resource use in the Humber watershed, is outlined in Table 2. Figure 3 illustrates special land use policy area designations in the Humber watershed according to the Niagara Escarpment Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Greenbelt Plan, and the Provincial Policy Statement.

Table 2: Policy Documents Affecting Land and Resource Use in the Humber Watershed Policy Document Primary Purpose Administrator/TRCA Role Federal Fisheries Act To protect Canadian Fisheries Waters; Fisheries and Oceans to prohibit the Harmful Alteration, Canada (DFO); TRCA, for Disruption or Destruction of fish habitat sub-section 35(1), in (HADD) accordance with Level III agreement with DFO Navigable Waters To protect Canadian Navigable Waters Transport Canada; TRCA Protection Act from interference with navigation directs proponent to Transport Canada Migratory Bird To implement a convention for the Environment Canada; TRCA Convention Act protection of migratory birds in Canada staff provide advice that the and the U.S.A.; main prohibition is the removal or pruning of trees destruction of wildlife habitat during should take place outside of nesting season the nesting season, however, it is the responsibility of the proponent to ensure compliance with the Act Species at Risk Act To protect wildlife species at risk in Environment Canada; TRCA Canada directs proponent to Environment Canada Canadian To establish a federal environmental Canadian Environmental Environmental assessment process; applies to Assessment Agency; TRCA Assessment Act projects for which the federal provides technical clearance government holds decision-making authority, as proponent, land administrator, a source of funding, or regulator Provincial The Planning Act To provide for a land use planning Municipalities are approval system led by provincial policy authorities; TRCA is a commenting agency under the Act

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 6 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Policy Document Primary Purpose Administrator/TRCA Role The Provincial Policy Municipal land use planning decisions Municipalities; TRCA Statement (PPS) must be consistent with matters of provides technical clearance Provincial interests outlined in the PPS; on Natural Heritage and defines Natural Heritage, Natural Natural Hazard components Hazards and SPAs (see below) of the PPS Ontario To provide for the protection, Ontario Ministry of the Environmental conservation and wise management of Environment; TRCA provides Assessment Act the environment; applies to public technical clearance sector projects and major private sector projects Greenbelt Act and To designate a Greenbelt Area and Municipalities; TRCA Plan establish a Greenbelt Plan; to protect provides technical clearance about 1.8 million acres of environmentally sensitive and agricultural land in the Golden Horseshoe from urban development and sprawl. It includes about 800,000 acres of land within the NEC and ORM Plan Areas and additional lands designated as “Protected Countryside” Oak Ridges Moraine To provide land use and resource Municipalities; TRCA Conservation Act management planning direction to provides technical clearance and Plan decision makers, landowners and other stakeholders on how to protect the Moraine’s ecological and hydrological features and functions Lakes and Rivers To the management, protection, CAs, on behalf of Ontario Improvement Act preservation and use of the waters of Ministry of Natural the lakes and rivers of Ontario and the Resources, except for works land under them. involving a dam Niagara Escarpment To provide for the maintenance of the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Niagara Escarpment and land in its Development Commission; Development Act vicinity substantially as a continuous TRCA provides technical and Plan natural environment and to ensure only clearance such development occurs as is compatible with that natural environment Places to Grow Act To enable decisions about growth to be Municipalities; CAs to and Plan made in ways that sustain a robust provide technical advice economy, build strong communities, where applicable promote a healthy environment and a culture of conservation; Ontario Water To provide for the conservation, Ministry of the Environment; Resources Act – protection and wise use and TRCA provides technical Section 34 Permits management of Ontario’s waters; an clearance to Take Water MOE Permit is required for water – Section 53 takings (ground and/or surface) of over

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 7 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Policy Document Primary Purpose Administrator/TRCA Role Certificates of 50,000 litres per day; an MOE Approval for SWM Certificate of Approval is required for facilities stormwater management facilities Clean Water Act To protect existing and future sources Ontario Ministry of the of drinking water Environment; Municipalities; and Conservation Authorities Municipal Regional and To allow for the orderly development of Regional Municipalities; Municipal Official a municipality, while incorporating and Local Municipalities; TRCA Plans, Zoning By- implementing Provincial planning comments on applications laws (requirements direction (PPS, ORM Act, Greenbelt, that propose amendments of Planning Act ) etc.) to these plans or by-laws Growth Management & Sustainability Plans Conservation Authorities Conservation The objects of an authority are to Conservation Authorities Authorities Act establish and undertake, in the area over which it has jurisdiction, a program designed to further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources other than gas, oil, coal and minerals TRCA Ontario Regulation To prevent or restrict development in TRCA 166/06 areas where the control of flooding, (Development, dynamic beaches, pollution, or the Interference with conservation of land may be affected Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses) Valley and Stream To prevent new development that TRCA Corridor poses risk to life and property Management associated with flooding, erosion and Program (VSCMP) slope instability, or development that is not compatible with the protection of these areas in their natural state. Environmentally Identifies areas of environmental TRCA Significant Areas significance based on specific criteria Study and suggests direction for their management; where an ESA is contiguous to a valley or stream corridor, all of it should comprise a public open space block

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 8 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Policy Document Primary Purpose Administrator/TRCA Role Terrestrial Natural To identify the natural heritage system TRCA Heritage System and to set targets for increasing natural Strategy cover within TRCA’s jurisdiction

The Humber River also has a heritage designation; due to its outstanding human heritage and recreational values, and the contribution it has made to the development of Canada, the Humber River was officially designated a Canadian Heritage River in Toronto on September 24, 1999. The federal and provincial levels of government established The Canadian Heritage Rivers System in 1984, to conserve and protect the best examples of Canada’s river heritage, to give them national recognition, and to encourage the public to enjoy and appreciate rivers. All protective actions on Canadian Heritage Rivers depend on existing laws and regulations (Canadian Heritage Rivers System, 2006).

3.1 Flood Vulnerable and Special Policy Areas

Flood risk management is achieved through various means including planning and development legislation. Under the Planning Act , municipalities must be consistent in their land use decisions with the Natural Hazards policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) to ensure that any new development is directed away from areas where there is an unacceptable risk to public health, safety or property damage. Throughout the Humber watershed, and complementary to the PPS, is the administration of the TRCA’s “Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation”, Ontario Regulation 166/06, under the Conservation Authorities Act and TRCA’s Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program (TRCA, 1994).

Prior to the implementation of a Provincial flood hazard policy, communities historically developed around water (and hence, flood vulnerable areas), for transportation, power or commercial purposes. Under the provisions of the PPS, the Ministers of Natural Resources (MNR) and Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) may designate an area within a community that has historically existed in the flood plain, as a Special Policy Area (SPA). SPAs address the significant social and economic hardships to the community that would result from the strict adherence to provincial policies concerning development. The intent of the SPA designation is to provide for the continued viability of existing uses to sustain these communities provided that flood hazard management measures are taken, such as flood-proofing, flood remediation and risk reduction. Any change within an SPA, above and beyond what has already been approved by the province, must be supported by both the MMAH and MNR. In this regard, a comprehensive risk assessment plan would be required to define how additional risk to both life and property that is created through land use changes can be managed by the municipality. In the absence of a risk management plan, changes in land use and intensification potentially increase the liability for all public bodies. Through the development review process, TRCA ensures that the specific technical requirements of SPAs are satisfied prior to approval by municipalities and/or the province.

There are currently five provincially designated SPAs within the Humber watershed (see Figure 3): portions of the villages of Woodbridge (Vaughan) and Bolton (Caledon), Lake Wilcox area

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 9 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

(Richmond Hill), Jane Street/Wilson Avenue area- Black Creek (City of Toronto), and Rockcliffe Park -Weston Road and Black Creek Drive area – Black Creek (City of Toronto).

Intensification of historic communities in the flood plain through the province’s Places to Grow initiative presents a potential conflict with the avoidance of development in flood prone areas. The Vaughan Corporate Centre, located around the intersection of Jane Street and Highway 7, is designated an Urban Growth Centre in the province’s Growth Plan, and is within the flood plain of Black Creek. This area is not designated as an SPA. The TRCA will need to work with the Province, municipalities and developers to reconcile this conflict, through flood studies, flood remediation and flood proofing measures, and seeking opportunities for intensification outside the flood plain.

Similarly, existing residential neighbourhoods, commercial and industrial areas that are within flood vulnerable areas will be subject to the pressures of intensification and redevelopment as part of the growth management exercise. The challenge that exists will be to balance the need to accommodate an increasing population in a sustainable way, and to do so in a way that manages the risks that relate to flooding. A sustainable community will also need to be a disaster resilient community.

Tied to the municipal growth management exercise, is the need to evaluate the effects of development beyond the existing official plan designations and the potential to increase the frequency and severity of flooding within existing flood vulnerable areas. Regular review of flood plain modelling assumptions that trigger new updates is required to ensure flood hazards are accounted for and to confirm appropriate stormwater management controls are implemented as growth proceeds.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 10 Figure 3: Special Land Use Policy Areas in the Humber River Watershed Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

4.0 CURRENT CONDITIONS, EMERGING TRENDS AND KEY ISSUES

4.1 Land Use

In 2002, land use within the Humber River watershed was approximately 27% urban 1 and 40% rural 2 with 32% under natural cover 3 (see Figure 4 and Table 3 for summary of general land use information). Table 4 summarizes detailed 2002 land use and land cover information by Humber River subwatersheds. Generally, from south to north, the Humber watershed’s pattern of land use moves from urban (established mix of development types), to urbanizing (ongoing conversion of agricultural land to urban development), to rural (predominantly agricultural land) (see Figure 2). The Urbanizing Area contains pockets of Urban Area such as the long-established communities of Woodbridge and Bolton. Still, the majority of this portion of the watershed is undergoing rapid land use change. Similarly, the Rural Area includes segments of Urbanizing Area because of small communities designated for future development, such as Caledon East and Nobleton.

Figure 4: Humber River Watershed General Land Use, 2002

Open Water, 0.6%

Natural, 32.2% Rural, 40.2%

Urban, 26.9%

1 “ Urban” land use includes lands used for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, major transportation route, parkland, and golf course purposes and vacant land (lands under construction). 2 “Rural” land use includes lands used for crop and livestock production, tree nurseries, aggregate extraction and individual residences and farm structures that are located outside of village or town centres. 3 “Natural” land cover includes forest, wetland, successional (immature forest) and meadow vegetation communities.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 12 Table 3: General Land Use/Cover in the Humber River Watershed, 2002

WATERSHED GENERAL LAND BLACK CREEK EAST HUMBER LOWER HUMBER MAIN HUMBER WEST HUMBER TOTAL USE/COVER Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % CLASS (ha.) subw. (ha.) subw. (ha.) subw. (ha.) subw. (ha.) subw. (ha.) wshd. Rural 26.86 0.4% 9130.03 45.9% 0.04 0.0% 14569.03 40.8% 12559.05 61.5% 36285.01 40.2% Urban 5457.14 84.5% 3362.12 16.9% 6521.02 83.4% 4304.90 12.1% 3963.39 19.4% 23608.56 26.2% Natural 802.13 12.4% 7062.38 35.5% 1210.63 15.5% 16525.70 46.3% 3492.99 17.1% 29093.83 32.2% Open Water 1.14 0.0% 190.32 1.0% 89.25 1.1% 185.71 0.5% 95.47 0.5% 561.89 0.6% Vacant 171.01 2.6% 133.20 0.7% 2.00 0.0% 92.08 0.3% 308.05 1.5% 706.34 0.8% TOTAL AREA 6458.28 100.0 19878.06 100.0 7822.94 100.0 35677.42 100.0 20418.94 100.0 90255.63 100.0

Table 4: Detailed Land Use/Cover in the Humber River Watershed, 2002

DETAILED LAND BLACK CREEK EAST HUMBER LOWER HUMBER MAIN HUMBER WEST HUMBER WATERSHEDTOTAL USE/COVER Area % Area % Area % Area % Area % Area CLASS (ha.) subw. (ha.) subw. (ha.) subw. (ha.) subw (ha.) subw. (ha.) % wshd. Agriculture 26.86 0.4 9130.03 45.9 0.04 0.0 14569.03 40.8 12559.05 61.5 36285.01 40.2% Cemetary 82.19 1.3 5.70 0.0 46.00 0.6 25.12 0.1 28.91 0.1 187.92 0.2% Commercial 206.40 3.2 40.95 0.2 146.02 1.9 29.80 0.1 104.95 0.5 528.11 0.6% Estate Residential 0.00 0.0 643.86 3.2 13.43 0.2 1009.00 2.8 714.58 3.5 2380.88 2.6% Golf Course 99.79 1.5 356.41 1.8 176.26 2.3 425.58 1.2 254.44 1.2 1312.48 1.5% High Density Residential 229.40 3.6 0.00 0.0 322.11 4.1 0.74 0.0 49.54 0.2 601.79 0.7% Highway 129.93 2.0 41.37 0.2 118.70 1.5 20.55 0.1 66.79 0.3 377.34 0.4% Industrial 1480.52 22.9 56.24 0.3 1981.33 25.3 549.52 1.5 992.15 4.9 5059.76 5.6% Institutional 332.94 5.2 179.17 0.9 281.63 3.6 112.42 0.3 152.87 0.7 1059.04 1.2% Low/Med Density Residential 2664.87 41.3 1870.94 9.4 3119.78 39.9 1964.87 5.5 1377.85 6.7 10998.32 12.2% Open Water 1.14 0.0 190.32 1.0 89.25 1.1 185.71 0.5 95.47 0.5 561.89 0.6% Recreational 66.53 1.0 45.44 0.2 40.95 0.5 29.64 0.1 81.83 0.4 264.39 0.3% Urban Open Space 164.57 2.5 122.03 0.6 274.80 3.5 137.65 0.4 139.48 0.7 838.54 0.9% Vacant 171.01 2.6 133.20 0.7 2.00 0.0 92.08 0.3 308.05 1.5 706.34 0.8% Beach/Bluff 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.47 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.47 0.0% Forest 300.48 4.7 4095.40 20.6 599.31 7.7 10057.67 28.2 1471.16 7.2 16524.02 18.3% Meadow 476.12 7.4 2126.25 10.7 540.07 6.9 4762.31 13.3 1699.10 8.3 9603.84 10.6% Successional 13.80 0.2 349.34 1.8 57.23 0.7 925.01 2.6 218.32 1.1 1563.70 1.7% Wetland 11.73 0.2 491.39 2.5 14.03 0.2 780.24 2.2 104.41 0.5 1401.81 1.6% TOTAL AREA 6458.28 100.0 19878.06 100.0 7822.94 100.0 35677.42 100.0 20418.94 100.0 90255.63 100.0 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

A change in land use patterns in the Humber watershed occurs roughly around the municipal boundary between the City of Toronto and City of Vaughan, and between the City of Mississauga and City of Brampton. Moving north from Steeles Avenue, the pattern changes from largely urban to “urbanizing”. Figure 5 illustrates the distribution of detailed land use and natural cover classes in the Humber watershed, as of 2002. It also illustrates where urban growth is anticipated to occur between 2002 and 2021 in accordance with approved municipal official plan land use schedules (approved as of January 1, 2005), and the land use classes that are planned to occur in these “Urbanizing Areas”.

Urban Area

The general pattern of land use in the City of Toronto portion of the Humber watershed is urban. South from Steeles Avenue, to the river mouth at Lake Ontario, watercourses in the Urban Area tend to be situated in well-incised valleys that can be heavily vegetated, greatly eroded, or channelized with concrete banks. Numerous stormwater outfalls dot the watershed, often located at the edge of watercourses, discharging directly to these streams. Within broad valley or stream corridors in the Urban Area, some historical development exists, adjacent to, or within the flood plain of these watercourses.

The full spectrum of urban development characterizes this densely populated portion of the watershed, including low, medium and high density residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses. Further, a limited number of vacant “greenfield” land parcels available for new development exist in the Urban Area. Accordingly, land use change is relatively gradual and largely restricted to redevelopment of “brownfield” and “greyfield” parcels and infill projects. There are several instances where development pressure has lead to employment lands being converted to residential or mixed use in the Urban Area, or existing, obsolete sites, such as commercial and retail complexes, being expanded and refurbished.

Where old land uses (i.e., those pre-dating TRCA’s Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program) in the Urban Area abut valley and stream corridors, the majority are developed to top of bank, or encroach into the valley. It is common to find land uses in the Urban Area with natural valley landforms substantially altered to accommodate structures and parking, through historical cutting, filling, and retaining walls. Moreover, the presence of non-native plant species is prevalent in the landscaping component of these land uses, so that they predominate over native plants and trees in much of the Urban Area’s natural cover. This has lead to a degradation of natural spaces through diminished size, shape, connectivity, and quality of natural cover. Problems of flooding, erosion and poor water quality have also been exacerbated by manipulating and hardening valley and stream corridors in favour of development.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 14 Figure 5: Approved Official Plan Land Use

NB: Urbanizing areas are based on consolidation of municipal official plan land use schedules approved as of August 1, 2007. Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

In the current context of land use planning, where a new land use change is proposed under the City of Toronto Official Plan (City of Toronto, 2006a), it is required that much larger consideration be given to the natural environment than in the past. The City’s OP recognizes that, “strong communities and a competitive economy need a healthy natural environment.” To this end, the OP requires development to be setback from natural heritage and natural hazard areas, a minimum of 10 metres or more if warranted. Further, land use change must be based on “protecting, restoring and enhancing the health and integrity of the natural ecosystem” (City of Toronto, Toronto Official Plan, 2006a, 3.4 The Natural Environment). For an infill project, this could mean providing buffers or setbacks from the adjacent natural area, in combination with restoration plans to any degraded area. For a redevelopment project, it could mean rehabilitation of degraded areas through restoration planting techniques, natural channel design, natural erosion protection works, and best practices in stormwater management.

TRCA was a partner in the City of Toronto’s Natural Heritage Study that identified the natural heritage system for the City’s OP. The OP does not generally permit development in the natural heritage system. Where an underlying land use designation provides for development in, or near, the natural heritage system, development must minimize adverse impacts, and when possible, restore and enhance the natural heritage system (Policy 10b), City of Toronto Official Plan, 2006a).

Overall, the emerging trend is to recognize natural areas as a critical component in the development process, so that redeveloping a site with a new use and new structures, can occur in tandem with restoring and enhancing the natural areas of the site. For an indication of where most redevelopment will take place within the Urban Area of the Humber watershed, Toronto’s OP states that it guides future growth to areas that are well served by public transit, the existing road network, and have a number of properties with redevelopment potential. The OP defines three types of areas that are slated to accommodate growth: Centres, Avenues, and Employment Districts.

Centres are defined as places with excellent transit accessibility and where jobs, housing and services will be concentrated in dynamic mixed use settings with different levels of activity and intensity. Also meant to be focal points for surface transit routes, Centres should draw people from across the city and from outlying suburbs to either jobs within the centres, or to rapid transit connections. There are no proposed Centres in the City of Toronto portion of the Humber watershed.

Avenues, in the OP, are important corridors along major streets where redevelopment can create new housing and jobs, while improving the urban design, shopping opportunities and public transit service for community residents. Growth along Avenues will be guided by Avenue Studies that may, or may not, include intensified uses. Avenues in the Humber watershed include: Weston Road/Finch Avenue, Jane Street/Finch Avenue, Jane Street/Wilson Avenue, Keele Street in the area of Wilson Avenue and Sheppard Avenue, Jane Street/Weston Road, Eglinton Avenue, Bloor Street West, and portions of Dundas Street West, The Queensway, and Lakeshore Boulevard.

The OP’s Employment districts are large districts comprised exclusively of lands that can accommodate substantial growth in jobs. Most of these districts are characterized by manufacturing, warehousing and product assembly activities, while some are exclusively commercial office parks.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 16 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

A substantial portion of the Humber watershed in the City of Toronto is designated as Employment District, including large blocks of land in the areas of Albion Road/Highway 427, Highway 400, Keele Street/Dufferin Road, and Rexdale Boulevard/Highway 401.

Also demonstrating a new approach to more sustainable planning in the Urban Area, the City of Vaughan and the Region of York have recently approved the Steeles Corridor-Jane to Keele- Secondary Plan, Official Plan Amendment 620 (OPA 620), expected to develop over the next 15 years. OPA 620 proposes to create a live-work community consisting of mixed use higher density building in a compact pedestrian-friendly urban form. The area is bounded by Steeles Avenue on the south and the CN Rail York Subdivision on the north, and by Jane Street on the west and Keele Street on the east. The proposed land uses, densities, and built form will be in response to, and supportive of, the higher order transit infrastructure plans, including the Spadina Subway extension, a commuter parking lot and a bus terminal.

Key Issues in the Urban Area

The natural heritage system traverses many of the Toronto’s designated Avenues and Employment Districts. Therefore, these designations, along with the OP’s environmental policies, provide opportunities for revitalization of the natural system, as well as the City’s Avenues and Employment Districts. But while designation of these areas will create a positive trend, other aspects of the OP may create issues. For example, the Jane Street/Wilson Avenue corridor that is proposed for urban intensification is located within the flood plain of the Black Creek. Although the area is designated as a Special Policy Area (SPA), the PPS states that SPAs are not intended to allow for new or intensified development or site alteration, if a community has feasible opportunities for development outside the flood plain. In this case, the Avenue Study to be completed for the Jane Street/Wilson Avenue area will need to consider flooding hazards and flood reduction or remediation measures when evaluating redevelopment options. Further upstream in the City of Vaughan, an urban pocket known as the Vaughan Corporate Centre is designated for intensification and is within the flood plain of Black Creek. The Vaughan Corporate Centre, located around the intersection of Jane Street and Highway 7, is listed as an “Urban Growth Centre” in Ontario’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe . It is not a designated Special Policy Area.

The older system of storm and sanitary sewers in the City of Toronto also carries with it an issue for watershed health. As mentioned, many watercourses in Toronto contain concrete storm sewer outfalls that outlet directly to the water with no opportunity for filtering pollutants or diffusing high velocity flows. It is hoped that where redevelopment proposals include a habitat regeneration plan, they can also incorporate some type of upgrade to the site’s stormwater management scheme (e.g., Installation of an oil-grit separator; establishment of a planted outfall channel). Moreover, some areas of Toronto are serviced by combined storm and sanitary sewers, so that during heavy rainfall, sanitary sewage and stormwater runoff together into the receiving watercourse and eventually Lake Ontario. A municipal retrofit plan, known as the Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan, was introduced by the City to improve water quality, control volumes of runoff and sewage effluent where applicable. This management plan is described in more detail in Section 5.5 of this document, which discusses strategies and tools for sustainable land and resource use.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 17 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Similarly, older stormwater management ponds found in Toronto and southern portions of the Urbanizing Area, were designed for stormwater quantity but not quality. For instance, OPA 620 in the City of Vaughan as described previously, is located in the Black Creek sub-watershed and is currently underserviced for quantity and quality stormwater management controls. A comprehensive master environmental servicing plan (MESP) is a requirement of OPA 620, prior to any development approvals. The MESP will include a comprehensive stormwater management strategy to address the development -related storage requirements and locations, including innovative, sustainable water management practices.

Urbanizing Area

The general pattern of land use in the middle portion of the Humber watershed is best described as urbanizing. This area extends northwest from Steeles Avenue, to the upper portions of the Cities of Vaughan and Brampton, northeast to the Towns of Richmond Hill and Aurora, and contains pockets of the Town of Caledon and Township of King. Watercourses in the Urbanizing Area tend to be less manipulated than those downstream in the Urban Area, and located in wider valleys (with the exception of the Main and East Humber branches). While the older, established communities of the Urbanizing Area, such as Woodbridge and Bolton, contain some channelized, waters’-edge stormwater outfalls, they are not as common as in downstream Toronto. The primary Humber River subwatersheds in the Urbanizing Area are the West Humber, Black Creek, and the Lower Humber (see Figure 3). The lower and middle reaches of the East Humber subwatershed and lower reaches of the West Humber and Main Humber subwatersheds are currently experiencing the most land use change, from rural to urban.

Over the last two decades, the Urbanizing Area has been subject to extremely high rates of population growth. While a wide spectrum of uses has cropped up to accommodate this growth, the overriding land use form in the Urbanizing Area is single family residential dwellings built at low densities. It should also be noted that two of the largest municipalities in the Humber watershed, Vaughan and Brampton, have the most sizable inventories of industrial/commercial land in the GTA.

In the City of Vaughan portion of the Humber watershed, the area designated for development is generally located south of Teston Road (Vaughan’s community of Kleinburg is partly situated north of Teston Road but is designated for urban expansion). The majority of the City’s blocks, below Teston Road, have been built out with residential subdivisions, or are in the process of being built. Those few blocks remaining vacant, are in the midst of the planning process, also vying for approval of mainly residential subdivisions with some proposed retail uses to service the new residents. The Highway 400 corridor has traditionally been the focus of industrial development in Vaughan; the newer industrial area of the municipality is to the west, along Highway 50. The blocks north of Teston Road, within the Highway 400 corridor are currently under consideration for expansion of employment lands (industrial and commercial land uses).

Municipal OP land use designations in the Humber watershed portion of the City of Brampton are predominantly residential with some industrial and commercial areas. Large blocks of low density estate residential areas exist between Castlemore Road and Mayfield Road. Moreover, significant new low to medium density residential developments have been occurring over the past ten years between Queen Street (Highway 7) and Countryside Drive.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 18 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

New industrial and commercial developments are generally taking place in the concession blocks along Highway 50, Airport Road south of Castlemore Road, and along The Gore Road area around Queen Street. In addition, Brampton’s OP designates commercial development along the Queen Street business corridor and industrial development in the northeast portion of the City. All lands within the City of Brampton portion of the Humber watershed are projected to be approved for development by the year 2021. Between the year 2002 and 2021, it is expected that approximately 12,000 acres (4,800 hectares) of this land will be developed.

The northwest portion of the Town of Richmond Hill falls within the Humber watershed. Within this portion of the Town, is the North Urban Development Area, designated for a mixture of residential and commercial uses under OPA 129. Urban development prior to the 1990's was small scale and centered around the community of Oak Ridges on the east and west sides of Yonge Street. With the approval of OPA 129 by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) in 1995, the area saw rapid urbanization through several large scale, low density residential developments. In addition, numerous infill projects substantially redeveloped what was historically a cottage community on the north shore of Lake Wilcox.

At this time, most of the areas designated for development by OPA 129 have been urbanized. South of OPA 129 was a band of undesignated, rural land extending to the designated lands known as the South Urban Development Area of Richmond Hill. The undesignated rural corridor represented the remaining linkage of the Oak Ridges Moraine between its east and west portions on either side of Richmond Hill. By the late 1990's several privately-initiated applications were made by landowners to develop these remaining lands for urban uses.

These applications ultimately led to an OMB hearing in 2000. Public interest in this hearing, due to its significance to the future east-west linkage of the Oak Ridges Moraine, precipitated the provincial Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and Plan. The effect of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan was to permit new urban development on the east and west sides of Yonge Street, but also the establishment of a 430-hectare natural corridor from Bathurst Street to Leslie Street, between Stouffville Road and south of King Road, known as the Oak Ridges Corridor Park. The corridor was transferred by private land owners to the Province of Ontario as part of the Pickering Land Exchange Agreement reached in 2004. All of the existing vegetated areas within the corridor will be fully protected, while the agricultural lands will be restored to expand natural cover. By agreeing to the land exchange, the Province and the land owners ensured the long term protection of a natural link between the east and west portions of the Moraine at its “pinch point” in Richmond Hill.

The small portion of the south west quadrant of the Town of Aurora that is within the Humber watershed, is currently developing with single family residential subdivisions with largely single family residential units.

Bolton and Caledon East in the Town of Caledon, and Nobleton and King City in the Township of King, are considered Urbanizing Area in the context of the watershed plan. These areas are designated for substantial urban expansion.

Caledon East is mainly a residential community that also provides commercial services for the surrounding hamlets and rural areas. The 2005 population of Caledon East was estimated at approximately 2,500 residents; Caledon’s Official Plan forecasts a 2021 population of 8,400 residents.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 19 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Completion of a study to expand the municipal water supply is required to support the planned urban growth in this village. The population of the village of Bolton is expected to grow by 4,937, between 2005 and 2021 (Town of Caledon, 2006c); this is in contrast to Mayfield West in Caledon, which is forecast to grow by 10,562 people by 2021; Mayfield West is Caledon’s newest growth centre and is located near the western boundary of the West Humber subwatershed, in the Etobicoke Creek watershed.

Approved plans for urban growth in Nobleton will increase the population from 3,085 to approximately 6,500 within the next ten years. The construction of a stand alone sewage treatment plant is required, as well as the completion of an Environmental Assessment for expanding the municipal water supply, prior to final approval of the residential development proposals. Similarly, the current population of King City is approximately 5,000 people, with an estimated total population of 12,000 when the community is fully developed in ten to fifteen years. This growth will occur in the form of low density single family units, with some townhouses at medium density. Servicing will be fully municipally supplied, as King City will be connected to the “Big Pipe” water and waste water system based on Lake Ontario.

Recognizing the need to cope with their unprecedented levels of growth, some municipalities are focusing on growth management. For instance, since 2004, the City of Brampton has been implementing a growth management strategy that limits the number of building permits to be approved in a given year. Essentially, this is a development cap that allows for the allocation of building permits to a maximum of 5,500 units per year. The purpose of the strategy is to provide the City with a simple mechanism to better control development in terms of planning, growth management and sustainability. The City’s growth strategy also makes provisions for a greater emphasis on intensification and infill development, as well as emphasizes the block planning process to provide for a more comprehensive approach to community planning and sustainable development.

Key Issues in the Urbanizing Area

Lands in the Urbanizing Area have had a long history of agricultural use. As this area was settled in the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries, large scale clearing of natural features occurred. As a result, the quantity of natural cover remaining in the Urbanizing Area is relatively low, and is generally restricted to valley and stream corridors, where soils were too wet for farming, or where woodlots were preserved as sources of wood. Valley slopes and watercourses that are not well defined are common in the upper part of the watershed, towards the Rural Area, where many headwater streams are located. A large number of these streams have been altered and stripped of natural vegetation, or drained, as a result of past agricultural practices. This makes them less likely to be perceived as natural features warranting protection, despite being integral to the health of the watershed. Therefore, their protection and enhancement has become a considerable challenge in the face of development pressure.

It is evident that the overriding form of development that is offered to accommodate the GTA’s population boom, is single family low density residential. This form of development has resulted in subdivision designs and population densities that cannot easily support public transit. Residents in these communities rely on automobiles as their primary means of transportation. This contributes to traffic congestion, poor air quality, and the proliferation of impervious surfaces associated with roads, driveways and parking areas.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 20 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

New development on large “greenfield” sites is common in the Urbanizing Area and is preceded by site preparation works that invariably entail stripping topsoil. Often, stripping is completed long before construction commences on a number of large parcels assembled within a newly approved “block”, leaving a substantial amount of land vulnerable to the effects of wind and rain that carry sediment to adjacent watercourses and other natural features. Frequently, sediment accumulates beyond the capacity of typical erosion and sediment controls (ESCs), leaving them in a state of disrepair. Shortening the duration between top soil stripping and construction, combined with the proper maintenance and repair of ESCs, would help curtail this cycle of impacts. At present, while ESCs are a requirement of municipalities and TRCA, both parties have limited ability to oblige contractors to begin construction immediately after top soil stripping.

The more recent development that has taken place in the watershed’s Urbanizing Area has had the benefit of more progressive environmental policies than existed in the past. Thus, there are fewer instances of developments encroaching into valleylands, and of channelized, hardened watercourses in the Urbanizing Area, than in the downstream Urban Area (although a good deal of the latter can be found in the older areas of Woodbridge and Bolton, along small streams). More than in the past, the OP requirements of Urbanizing Area municipalities, ask proponents to consider the impacts of their development proposals on surface water, groundwater, and terrestrial and fish habitats. Therefore, new development typically employs comprehensive stormwater management schemes and, at times, naturally vegetated buffers. Indeed, comprehensive stormwater management plans are now a typical municipal requirement for new development. Vegetated buffers between new developments and valleyland are less typically required by municipal OPs and zoning by-laws, and for the most part only promote or encourage buffers. As a result, the majority of new development abutting Humber watershed valley and stream corridors in the Urbanizing Area, has either narrow (1 to 4 metres) buffers or no buffers. This has lead to degradation of the valley edge adjacent to residential and industrial subdivisions.

This is beginning to change, however; starting in 2004, all new major developments or redevelopments within the City of Brampton incorporated some buffer space when located adjacent to valley and stream features. These buffers generally range from 2.5 metres to 10 metres in width, with 10 metres being the standard for new development applications. In fact, the City’s newly adopted OP requires that new developments abutting natural heritage features provide a minimum 10-metre buffer from the limit of the feature. Similarly, the City of Vaughan passed a council resolution in February 2006, stating that all future OP amendment applications require a minimum ten (10) metre buffer outside of the development block adjoining a valley and stream corridor. In the case of Brampton and Vaughan, proponents commonly dedicate these natural heritage blocks, consisting of natural features and buffers, into public ownership.

While these new policies are a positive trend for natural heritage protection, it should be noted that much of Vaughan and Brampton’s designated urban areas are already either “built out”, or are approved for development. In this way, the natural features affected by this development will not benefit from the new municipal standards. Further, while a 10-metre buffer contributes to ecological health, a natural heritage system that defines buffers based on site-specific ecological criteria, is a more ecologically sound method for protecting and enhancing natural features.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 21 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

The Urbanizing Area is, and will continue to be, the focus of rapid urban growth in the Humber watershed. The majority of urban growth in the Humber watershed over the next ten to twenty years will occur in the West Humber and East Humber subwatersheds, with significant growth also occurring in the lower reaches of the Main Humber subwatershed. Consequently, it is these portions of the watershed that are at greatest risk of degradation from development. In turn, these areas are in greatest need of a more robust natural heritage system to help mitigate negative influences of urban growth on watershed health.

Rural Area

The Rural Area of the Humber watershed begins at the northern edge of the Cities of Brampton and Vaughan, encompasses the southern portion of the Township of King, the eastern portion of the Town of Caledon, and small parts of the Town of Mono and the Township of Adjala- Tosorontio. While the general land use pattern here is rural, this excludes King City, Nobleton, Bolton, and Caledon East, which are Urbanizing. The Rural Area is generally located in the northernmost, headwater areas of the Main, West and East Humber subwatersheds (see Figure 2). In comparison to downstream reaches in the Urban and Urbanizing Areas, the natural landscape of the Rural Area is generally characterized by headwater streams, wider, shallower valley corridors, and more wetlands.

The Rural Area contains agricultural land uses, rural towns and villages, low density, estate residential areas and large tracts of natural land cover (mature and immature forest, meadows, and wetlands). The vast majority of natural land cover that remains in the Humber watershed is located in the Rural Area (see Figure 2). Indeed, the Rural Area includes the majority of lands within the Humber watershed that fall within the Niagara Escarpment Plan, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, and Greenbelt Plan areas. Here, provincial policies restrict the types of land use changes that can occur (see Figure 3 and Table 2). Outside of these areas, the types of development permitted to occur in the Rural Area are governed by municipal OPs, which generally seek to restrict development within rural and agricultural areas, and focus growth into rural service centres, and existing communities.

Agriculture is the predominant land use in the Rural Area. At present, approximately 40% of the total area of the Humber watershed is classified as agricultural land use, where much of the lands are used for raising livestock (dairy, beef, poultry and horse farms) and crop production (fruit, vegetable, grain, sod, tree nursery and greenhouse products). Also, within King Township and in the Town of Caledon, there are several large horse farm operations. A limited number of aggregate extraction operations are also located in this area, within the Town of Caledon.

Key Issues in the Rural Area

Many privately owned lands are currently designated for long term agricultural uses under the ORM Conservation Plan or Greenbelt Plan. However there are ongoing concerns about the economic viability of these near-urban farm businesses. Much of the new urban development within the Urbanizing Area is occurring on former agricultural lands, thereby diminishing the availability of large contiguous parcels of land for large scale crop production. In the Rural Area, many farmers are under pressure to sell their land to speculators. Consequently, the viability of remaining agricultural operations within these areas is being challenged.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 22 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

It has been suggested that a potentially more viable direction for agricultural operations within the GTA would be to cease production of crops that are land intensive, in favour of specialty crops that can be produced on smaller blocks of land, and sold for greater profits to specialty GTA markets (Regional Planning Commissioners of Ontario, GTA Agricultural Action Plan, 2005).

Because it is a local source of food, and considering its value to the economy, it is important to protect the GTA’s remaining farmland. The York Region OP states that there are approximately 4,300 jobs in the agricultural industry in York, and the annual product value totals $152 million. Within Peel Region, there are approximately 5,400 jobs in agriculture and resource-based industries (Statistics Canada, Census of Agriculture, 2001). The success of agriculture in the GTA would be more solidified if the demand from local markets was expanded. Currently, much of the GTA’s food service industry (grocery stores, catering companies, restaurants) stocks imported farm grown products. The more locally grown food is in demand by the local market, the more successful agriculture will be as an enterprise. In turn, if farming were to be a more profitable endeavour, farmers would less likely be enticed to sell their land to speculators and perpetuate urban sprawl.

Another valuable natural resource in the Rural Area is aggregates. It is important that aggregate resource areas be protected to allow future use of the resource. Studies within the Town of Caledon’s High Potential Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas identified ten Resource Areas in Caledon and one in Brampton (Planning and Engineering Initiatives Ltd., Caledon Community Resources Study, 1999), of which, some are located in the Humber watershed. The Town of Caledon’s Official Plan Amendment 161 contains policies for the management of aggregate resources in the Town. OPA 161 ensures that aggregates are extracted in an environmentally sensitive way, and that exhausted pits and quarries are rehabilitated to uses compatible with agriculture, rural or greenspace areas (Town of Caledon, Official Plan Amendment 161, August 2002).

As development within the Urbanizing Area progresses northwards, the southern boundaries of the Town of Caledon and Township of King are where abrupt transitions between low density residential developments and rural land uses are beginning to occur. The southern portions of the Rural Area are likely to be considered for urban expansion by municipalities looking to accommodate population growth sometime in the future. This adds pressure for anticipated land use change and has contributed to land speculation. Should urbanization creep into the Rural Area, in order to maintain and enhance its proportion of natural cover, opportunities for restoration of abandoned agricultural and aggregate extraction sites should be seized. Therefore, municipal policies to facilitate restoration would work towards bolstering the natural systems in the Rural Area in the long term.

4.2 Transportation

Roads and Highways

Given a burgeoning population, it is not surprising that the GTA’s plans for upgrading and expanding its road network are ongoing. Several major highways traverse the Humber watershed, including Highways 400, 401, 407, and 427.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 23 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Pressure exists for new and expanded highways and roads to relieve traffic congestion. Options for natural areas to avoid being dissected by new transportation routes are limited, given that even environmental protection legislation permits public access roads and highways through natural heritage features (e.g., Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan , the Greenbelt Plan ).

Within the Humber watershed, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is undertaking an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the extension of Highway 427 to address the immediate area within the City of Vaughan that will be serviced by this highway. Thus far, there are no plans to continue the EA for the Highway 427 corridor beyond Vaughan. Prior to this, York Region was carrying out an EA for the extension and expansion of Pine Valley Drive north of Langstaff Road in Vaughan. Although this was envisioned several years prior in York Region transportation plans, this component of York’s EA was eventually cancelled by the Provincial Government, given the risk it posed for damage to an Environmentally Sensitive Area. The Pine Valley Drive EA is now termed the Western Vaughan Individual EA (IEA) and has an expanded study area between Highway 407, Highway 50, Teston Road, and Highway 400; so far, the IEA has found that the only roadway that can provide significant additional capacity is the Highway 427 extension. To this end, York Region has recommended that MTO consider the terminus of the 427 extension to at least Major Mackenzie Drive, or beyond in the vicinity of Mayfield Road (York Region report of the Highway 50/Highway 427 Extension Area Arterial Network Study, 2006).

Another EA in the Humber watershed that is proceeding is the Bolton Arterial Roads Stage 2 Class EA under which Peel Region is proposing a by-pass road around the Village of Bolton in Caledon. TRCA is working with Peel Region and their consultants to ensure protection of the natural areas affected by the proposed road alignments for this project.

Key Issues for Roads and Highways

While crossings of valley and stream corridors and other natural areas are highly disruptive to their ecosystems, safe road access between communities is a necessity in an urbanizing region. In order to maximize natural heritage protection while meeting transportation needs, options for alternative routes to crossing watercourses should be explored, and where a crossing is deemed to be the only option, impacts of crossings should be mitigated as much as possible. Further, instead of considering impacts of each new crossing in isolation, ideally, municipalities, the Province, and other agencies involved in the EA process and growth management, should consider the cumulative impacts that each new crossing, together with existing crossings, create for the GTA’s natural heritage system.

Numerous new watercourse crossings that have not required an EA have been constructed in the Humber watershed in the last ten years, since many road projects are part of new subdivision development. Traditionally, the studies required by proponents to construct these crossings did not adequately consider the natural environment. As a result, crossing structures were often designed and constructed with narrow openings that generally did not accommodate regional storm flood flows, pedestrian passage, wildlife passage, or the natural meander belt of the subject stream. Over time, this frequently resulted in impacts to crossing structures due to flooding and erosion. In turn, hardening of stream bed and banks was necessary to prevent crossing structures from being further undermined, which in turn, created further physical and ecological impacts.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 24 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

This scenario is especially common in the Urban Area of the watershed, where considerable cost has been borne by the City of Toronto for repair to undersized culverts and bridges and the erosion protection works along adjacent streambanks; in the older, built up areas of the Urbanizing Area the situation is similar.

More recently, crossing structures are being designed to accommodate the natural form and function of the watercourses they cross. This is accomplished by installing larger spans that do not intrude into the bed and banks of a stream; moreover, best efforts are made to find a crossing location where streambank erosion and meanders are least problematic. In this way, monies are spent in the short term by developers for larger crossings/open-footed culverts/bridges, avoiding the costs incurred by municipalities for repair and maintenance for erosion impacts, and the residual damage to aquatic and terrestrial functions.

Public Transit

A sophisticated public transit system exists in the City of Toronto portion of the Humber River watershed, provided by the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) and GO Transit. In Toronto, transit boasts a substantial portion of the auto-transit modal split. The City is planning for even further increases in transit use given the intensification envisioned by the City’s OP and in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe . Coupled with the expected growth in travel from the population, and employment forecasts from the City’s OP, TTC ridership could reach 500 million riders per year by 2011. In order to improve public transit, the TTC has adopted a Ridership Growth Strategy. The recommended strategy is expected to increase system-wide ridership by 10 percent, or 40 million additional passengers on the system annually, once fully implemented. The strategy features a substantial reinvestment in increased service levels on existing routes (City of Toronto, TTC Ridership Growth Strategy , 2003).

There are plans for further expansion of the public transit network in the Humber watershed. Figure 6 shows the existing and proposed rapid transit networks. EAs will be required for these major projects, which include a subway extension of the University-Spadina line from Downsview station to York University and an extension of GO Train service on the Georgetown line, from Union Station to Pearson International Airport.

The Regional Municipality of York approved its first Transportation Master Plan (TMP) in 2002, which anticipated that the performance of the road system will degrade to unacceptable levels without policies and plans to significantly improve transit modal split and develop more sustainable land use development plans. The emphasis of the plan was to support the four designated Regional centres (Markham, Richmond Hill, Vaughan City Centre, and Newmarket) which are located along the major transit corridors of Yonge Street and Highway 7. York Region asserts that an update to the TMP is needed to ensure that continuing transportation decisions for an integrated network can be made within the context of recent development trends and legislative changes. For example, the province’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe designates York's four regional centres as Urban Growth Centres. The goal of the TMP update is to ensure that the future transportation network can support growth in a sustainable manner while ensuring consistency with the policies of the Green Belt Act and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan for new infrastructure.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 25 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

A number of the programs recommended in the original 2002 TMP had the financial support of the provincial and federal governments. Introduced in 2005, the Viva rapid transit network is the most notable project funded by both senior levels of government. This rapid transit system services areas along Yonge Street and provides connection between Aurora, Newmarket, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Markham and Toronto; Viva links York Region with the City of Toronto, GO Transit, and the transit systems of Peel and Durham Regions. Predictions were that 7 million riders would use this system in the first year, moving 7,000 car trips a day off arterial roads. Early reports reveal that York Region Transit and Viva Rapid Transit ridership increased 10.8 per cent through the end of July 2006. More than 9.6 million riders used the transit services between January and July compared to 8.6 million in 2005.

York Region has also endorsed guidelines for a regional transit-oriented development strategy. The guidelines outline planning and design principles that promote transit supportive development. This includes improving streetscapes and connectivity for cyclists and pedestrians between commercial and residential areas to encourage transit and pedestrian activity.

Rural bus routes exist between the communities of King City, Nobleton and Richmond Hill. Transit users in Aurora, Richmond Hill and King Township can also use the York Region’s Viva transit service. There is limited connection of GO Transit service between the rural and urban communities. Presently, GO bus services are offered to Bolton and Nobleton from Brampton, and to Maple and King City in King Township.

Recent Region of Peel transportation statistics indicate that the proportion of single occupant vehicles crossing Peel boundaries has increased from 82 percent in 1995 to 88 percent in 2004, while average auto occupancy has decreased from 1.22 to 1.14 over the same time period (Peel Region, 2006e).

While no regional transit service currently exists within Peel Region, annual transit ridership has increased significantly in Brampton. Levels have increased by approximately 70%, or 3.5 million riders between 1995 and 2004 (Marshall, Macklin, Monaghan and Entra Consultants Ltd., 2004). Transportation statistics published through the 1996 Transportation Tomorrow Survey indicate that new suburbs have achieved a transit modal share of approximately 5-6%. A transportation study completed in Brampton in the mid 1990’s indicated that even if all Brampton roads were built to planned capacity, that a transit modal share of 25% would be required to avoid significant congestion (CH2MHILL, Best Practice Guide, 2002). The City of Brampton is planning to enhance transit services within downtown and high demand areas with their proposed “AcceleRide” program. The Acceleride initiative will connect to major destinations including the Vaughan Corporate Centre, York University, GO Transit in Mississauga and York Region’s VIVA (City of Brampton, 2006b).

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 26 Figure 6: Existing and Proposed Rapid Transit Network Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Key Issues for Public Transit

Public transit options are limited for the Urbanizing Area of the watershed, so that commuters rely heavily on private automobile usage. Many, if not most of the communities in the Urbanizing Area have been developed with population densities that can support only the lowest forms and service levels of public transit. Moreover, the Area’s street design and alignment often make the logistics of developing high order transit corridors (dedicated transit right-of-ways) a challenge. Where public transit service does exist, the considerable distance that residents must walk to access it can be a deterrent to its use.

The expansion of the GO Transit system and Peel and York Regions’ transit systems is a positive initiative that will make public transit more attractive to commuters. However, this in combination with initiatives to plan and develop more “transit friendly” communities would constitute a more comprehensive solution to the problem of overuse of automobiles.

4.3 Water

Significant upgrades to water and wastewater systems in the Humber watershed have been necessary to meet the demands of the GTA’s growing population. As urbanization progresses, more of the watershed is serviced by municipal water supply, while less is relying on private systems.

Drinking Water

The City of Toronto provides treated drinking water from Lake Ontario to the residents and businesses of Toronto as well as the urbanized areas of Markham, Vaughan, and Richmond Hill. Toronto’s water supply system consists of four water filtration plants, eighteen pumping stations, ten major underground storage reservoirs, four elevated storage tanks, about 510 km of trunk watermain and 5,015 km of distribution watermain. The City runs four water treatment plants; three are located on the Lake Ontario shoreline and the fourth is on Centre Island. On average, Toronto distributes 1.43 billion litres of water daily (City of Toronto, 2006c).

In 2005, Peel Region also began contributing water to communities in York Region. The provincial government and Peel Region entered into agreements with York Region whereby the water supply to Vaughan, Markham, Richmond Hill and Aurora is drawn from Lake Ontario through Peel Region and Toronto filtration plants (York Region, 2006b). Water supply for the City of Mississauga, City of Brampton and the Village of Bolton is also provided by the South Peel Water System. The South Peel Water System draws water from Lake Ontario and filters and treats it at two water treatment facilities operated by the Region of Peel.

Within the Humber watershed portion of the Region of Peel, the source of water supply for Caledon East and Palgrave is groundwater drawn from Peel Region’s municipal wells located in each community. Similarly, within the Humber watershed portion of York Region, the Region’s municipal wells, each located in Kleinburg, Nobleton and King City, draw groundwater to supply these communities with drinking water. The remaining rural areas rely on groundwater from private wells.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 28 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

York Region is currently conducting an environmental assessment (EA) study to address the need for expansions to existing water supply systems servicing the communities of Kleinburg, Nobleton and King City. In Kleinburg and Nobleton, suitable locations for additional groundwater wells are being considered. Peel Region is also conducting an EA to address the need for expansion to the existing water supply system servicing Caledon East.

In 2004, York Region completed an update to its Long Term Water Project Master Plan (United Utilities Canada Limited, 2004). The Master Plan’s preferred solution to service an anticipated 1.3 million people by 2026 is planned long-term investment in infrastructure of more than $470 million, to increase external and internal supply capacity and water treatment capacity, and expand pumping and transmission facilities.

Wastewater

The City of Toronto treats 1.3 billion litres of wastewater daily, at four wastewater treatment plants. In Peel Region, wastewater from the City of Mississauga, City of Brampton, and the communities of Caledon East and Bolton, is treated by two sewage treatment plants operated by Peel Region located on the shore of Lake Ontario in Mississauga. The sewage is treated and released back into Lake Ontario. Most of York Region’s wastewater is collected and transported via the York Durham Sewage System (YDSS) to the Duffins Creek Treatment Plant in Pickering. Construction of the YDSS began in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s after the Province declared that no additional sewage treatment plants should be built on the Humber, Don and Rouge Rivers. In the Humber River watershed, YDSS serves the urban areas of Richmond Hill, Vaughan, and Aurora, among other GTA municipalities. York Region is currently expanding the YDSS to accommodate growth, in accordance with its YDSS Master Plan Study .

In the community of Kleinburg in Vaughan, wastewater is collected by sanitary sewers and treated at a sewage treatment plant on the main channel of the Humber River. York Region is currently conducting an EA to address the need for an expansion to the sewage treatment plant servicing Kleinburg. To accommodate King City’s new urban growth, it will be connected to the YDSS and no longer be treated by private septic systems. The community of Nobleton, in the Township of King, has an approved EA for a stand alone sewage treatment system to be constructed to service its new urban development. This system will outlet to the East Humber River and will provide treatment for a population of up to 6,500, approximately double the existing population in Nobleton. Since it is being constructed as part of newly approved development, the treatment system will initially only service new development; connection of the existing neighbourhoods will happen sometime in the future.

Within the remaining rural portions of the Regions of York and Peel, private sewage systems (septic tile bed systems) are operated by individual landowners.

Key Issues for Water and Wastewater

Like infrastructure for transportation, water and sewer infrastructure is permitted within natural areas by environmental legislation. The Environmental Assessment Act functions to help avoid and/or mitigate the harmful effects of infrastructure projects to the environment. The EA required for recent expansions to the YDSS in the Rouge River watershed demonstrated the wide ranging impacts that major infrastructure projects can have on the environment.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 29 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Current plans to extend the YDSS and to increase groundwater withdrawals to accommodate new urban development in Kleinburg, Caledon East, Nobleton and King City, are now using a more informed approach about how to avoid and/or mitigate environmental impacts to the host watershed.

At the subdivision level, a significant amount of dewatering can be required in order to install underground servicing for the new development. In addition, the introduction of impervious surfaces in a greenfield development substantially increases the amount of runoff to receiving watercourses. When reviewing development applications, TRCA staff work with developers and their consultants to achieve a post-development water balance that matches as closely as possible the pre-development water balance conditions. Often, lot level stormwater controls are used to achieve this including directing clean run-off from rooftops to pervious areas (e.g., yards), and underground perforated pipes and grass swales that convey and help to infiltrate run-off. This requires flexibility in municipal standards given that such stormwater controls are not typical features of subdivision lots. However, implementing these types of controls is necessary if the host municipality desires to see the health of the watersheds maintained within their jurisdiction.

In order to minimize the need for indefinite expansion of the water and wastewater system into natural areas, sustainable use of water resources is critical. Municipalities are endeavouring to address unsustainable rates of use within their jurisdictions, as evidenced by ongoing programs and studies to increase efficiency and educate residents. Indeed, in response to controversy over its major infrastructure projects, York Region formed a multi-stakeholder group to provide advice on a sustainable development strategy for growth management, infrastructure planning and environmental protection, including water budgeting. One of the themes that the Region’s Stakeholder Advisory Group asserted would inform York Region Infrastructure Master Plan updates, was to consider land-use/infrastructure system alternatives that minimize impact on the natural environment; and, to identify “zones of exclusion” that represent high priority environmental areas (York Region, 2006e, Towards Sustainability in York Region Advisory Group – Final Report, April 4, 2006).

The City of Toronto has prepared a comprehensive Water Efficiency Plan (City of Toronto Works and Emergency Services, 2002). The Plan outlines the current water system and demand for water, forecasts future water demand, evaluates water efficiency measures, analyses the costs and benefits of water efficiency, and presents implementation and monitoring information. The goal of the plan is to reduce water demand by 15% (220 ML/day) by 2011. As part of its Water Efficiency Program, Toronto Water is implementing a variety of water conservation programs, including residential and business rebate programs (e.g., for toilets, washing machines, industrial/commercial/institutional capacity “buy back” program) and educational programming. From 2001 to 2006, Toronto has realized reductions in its actual peak day water demand and annual average day water demand of 273 ML/d and 79 ML/day, respectively (City of Toronto, 2006c).

York Region has been implementing its Water for Tomorrow program, delivered in partnership with its lower tier municipalities and other local stakeholders since 1998. The goal of the program is to save more than 19 million L (4 million gallons) of water each day (MacViro Consultants Incorporated and United Utilities Canada Limited, 2004). Key elements of the program include a leak detection and repair program, water use audit and retrofit programs for households and businesses, and educational programming.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 30 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

By September of 2003, the Water for Tomorrow program had resulted in a savings of 15.1 million litres of water per day. The residential/commercial retrofit program resulted in installation of over 99,000 low-flow showerheads and over 231,000 early closing toilet flappers. The industrial/institutional audit program led to a potential savings of over 1.4 million litres of water per day, and the leakage reduction program saved over 2.39 million litres of water per day. York Region’s Water Efficiency Master Plan Update (RSMi, 2007) reports an overall sustained savings of 20.33 ML of water per average day, which surpasses the original program goal. The Water Efficiency Master Plan Update recommends new and/or updated programs for public education and water conservation measures. New goals for education and water conservation measures will be set once the program implementation plan is completed and approved by council.

Peel Region developed their Water Efficiency Plan in 2004 in response to ever-growing demands on the water supply and wastewater treatment system (Veritec Consulting Inc., 2004). Implementing the water efficiency measures recommended in the plan will reduce the necessary capital costs for both water supply and wastewater treatment infrastructure expansion over the long-term as the population and economy of Peel Region continues to grow. The WEP establishes savings targets, to be achieved by 2015, of a reduction in peak day demand of 81.7 million litres per day, a reduction in average annual day demand of 53.8 million litres per day, and a reduction in wastewater flow of 39.4 million litres per day (Veritec Consulting Inc., 2004). Water efficiency measures selected for implementation include system leak detection, indoor and outdoor water audits, and replacement of toilets and clothes washers with more water-efficient models. Information about these measures, incentive programs and other best practices that help to achieve the objectives and targets of the WEP is provided through the Water Smart Peel program. Through the program, Peel Region hopes to reduce individual daily water consumption by 10% by 2015.

While these municipal programs are largely intended to decrease long-term costs associated with water supply and wastewater treatment infrastructure expansion, the end result of such strategies can produce both financial and environmental benefits. Indeed, a portion of revenue from municipal water bills is contributed to TRCA, on a regular basis, for protecting and enhancing its watersheds.

4.4 Solid Waste

Since closure of the Keele Valley Landfill site in the Don River watershed, waste from the City of Toronto and York Region is exported to Michigan in the United States. The introduction of various waste diversion programs such as blue box programs, organic waste collection, and access to transfer stations, has helped reduce quantities of waste going to landfills in recent years. Waste not diverted from landfill is exported to Michigan. The City of Toronto has also initiated an individual EA to address management of the 360,000-400,000 metric tonnes of solid waste that is expected to remain each year after recycling and composting programs are fully instituted.

In September 2006, the City of Toronto announced that it would be sending its waste to Green Lane Landfill, located in Southwold Township in the County of Elgin, southwest of the City of London, Ontario. Toronto City Council approved a major component of the City’s long-term strategy for managing Toronto’s waste through the approval of a letter of intent to purchase the Green Lane Landfill.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 31 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

With an aggressive diversion plan, the purchase provides Toronto with new disposal capacity for a minimum of 15 years. The City’s contract for waste disposal in Michigan will continue until the end of 2010. Toronto claims that this purchase in no way reduces its commitment to waste diversion efforts and that the EA process will continue to determine a comprehensive long-term strategic waste management plan (City of Toronto, 2006d).

The City of Toronto is also seeking a location for a facility that treats organic materials from the “Green Bin” program. Thus far, a City study identified ten possible locations within TRCA’s jurisdiction, seven of which are within the City of Toronto and three are in Durham Region; one of the Toronto sites is located in the Humber watershed (Ingram Transfer Station). Although this project does not require an EA, City staff are endeavouring to conduct the site selection process in an open and publicly accountable manner, which includes an evaluation of environmental, social and economic criteria; staff have also committed to address sustainability in the design of the facility.

York and Durham regions are jointly undertaking an EA to consider their disposal options termed, Residual Waste Planning Study. The terms of reference for the study were approved in the spring of 2006. After an evaluation of alternatives, the preferred approach for dealing with wastes was found to be 60-75% diversion of wastes coupled with thermal treatment (i.e., incineration) of residual wastes with recovery of materials from the ash (Durham/York Residual Waste Study, 2006).

In 2004, approximately 45% of waste produced in Peel was diverted into recycling, reuse, composting, or similar facilities. The remaining waste that is not diverted from the system is incinerated at the KMS Peel Energy-from-Waste facility located in Brampton, or received at the Caledon Sanitary Landfill. Residues and excess waste are exported to Michigan for landfill (Peel Region, 2003).

In terms of waste generation, per capita generation by residents in the City of Toronto in 2003, was estimated to be 247 kilograms (Toronto Community Foundation, 2004, Toronto’s Vital Signs 2004); for the Region of Peel in 2003, it was estimated to be 390 kilograms (Peel Region, Long Term Waste Resource Management Strategy - 2003 Update, 2003). In 2005, York Region generated 340 kilograms of waste per capita (York Region, 2006f, Joint Waste Diversion Strategy).

Key Issues for Solid Waste

Generation of waste materials, and the way in which they are disposed, can have a direct impact on ecological, economic, and human health. Waste disposal has the potential to negatively impact watershed health in a number of ways, including contamination of surface and groundwater, production of greenhouse gases, and loss of greenspace and natural habitat, due to the land-consumptive nature of landfill sites.

According to the Ontario Ministry of Environment statistics, there are about 29 abandoned landfills in the Humber River watershed, ten in the Lower Humber, eight in the Main Humber, six in the East Humber, two in the West Humber and three in Black Creek (OMOE, 1991). For more information, consult the State of the Watershed Technical Reports on Surface Water Quality and Geology and Groundwater Resources.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 32 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

All of these landfills were active prior to the establishment of Ministry of the Environment regulations on the design of landfills to protect surface and groundwater resources. Hence, liners or leachate collection systems were likely not installed. Because abandoned landfills are essentially vacant land parcels in need of remediation, they present an opportunity similar to abandoned aggregate sites for potential restoration to a natural state.

In order to reduce dependency on landfills, municipalities within the Humber watershed are attempting to increase the amount of waste diverted from landfill sites through reuse, recycling, and composting of waste materials.

The City of Toronto has a number of residential waste diversion programs, including blue box recycling and a green bin (i.e., organics) collection program. In 2005, the City diverted more than 346,000 tonnes or 40% of residential waste from landfill, up from 36% in 2004 (City of Toronto, 2005). In 2001, the City of Toronto created the Waste Diversion Task Force 2010. The Task Force was asked to consult with the people of Toronto and design a solution for meeting the following targets: 30% diversion of household waste from landfill by 2003; 60% waste diversion by 2006; and, 100% waste diversion by 2010. Toronto has exceeded its target, achieving a rate of 32% waste diversion from landfill in 2003 and a rate of 36% waste diversion in 2004. In 2004, the City implemented its “green bin” organic waste collection program that is currently being expanded city-wide.

The Region of Peel has set a goal of diverting 70% of waste produced within Peel by 2016. In November of 2005, Region of Peel Council endorsed the creation of a new “Alternative Fuel from Waste” facility to be located at the Caledon Sanitary Landfill. This facility, once operational, will convert waste into an “EnviroFuel” that can be used to replace more traditional fuels in industrial applications. This new facility, combined with new recycling and composting initiatives will allow for greater waste diversion from landfill sites, and help the Region attain its 2016 waste diversion target (Peel Region, 2006f).

York Region has programs in place for source separation and diversion of “Blue Box” recyclables and household organics (green bin program). Moreover, the Region’s preparation of a long term waste management strategy will emphasize waste diversion, examine waste disposal alternatives and explore waste as a potential resource. Also under the strategy, York Region will become the first major Canadian municipality to operate a state-of-the-art single stream integrated material recovery facility. York Region’s waste diversion rate, from recycling and an organics separation program, rose from 24% between July and September 2004, to 35% in the same period in 2005 (York Region, 2006f).

4.5 Energy

Ontario’s electricity supply comes from a number of different sources that include nuclear energy, renewable power, coal and natural gas. In 2005 it was estimated that 34% of Ontario’s electricity supply was generated from fossil fuel burning power plants (coal and natural gas), while 41% was generated by nuclear power plants, and 23% through renewable sources including hydro, solar, wind and biomass burning (OME, 2007). According to the Ontario Ministry of Energy the province has 30,000 megawatts of electricity generating capacity, but many existing power facilities are aging, and 80 per cent will need to be refurbished or replaced over the next 20 years.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 33 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

The government has brought online 3,000 megawatts of new supply and plans to bring an additional 10,000 megawatts online by 2010; this will result in more new generation capacity than any other jurisdiction in North America (OME, 2007). However, the Ontario Power Authority estimates that demand will begin to exceed available supply by 2014. By 2025, they estimate the energy gap will be about 10,000 megawatts. Alternative forms of energy must then be explored in order to fill this gap in a sustainable way.

Examples of alternative energy forms currently in use include Ontario Power Generation‘s nuclear plant in Pickering (3,104 megawatt capacity) and the Pickering Wind Generation Station (1.8 megawatt capacity). There are also at least two biogas plants in the GTA, including one at the old Keele Valley landfill site and one at the Beare Road landfill site in the Rouge River watershed. Toronto Hydro operates a wind turbine (750 kilowatts) at Exhibition Place and a pilot solar power plant (36 kilowatts) on Commissioners Street in the City of Toronto. In 2006, the Ontario government set a goal of having 34% of its electricity supply from renewable power generation sources by 2025 (OMOE, 2007). City of Toronto targets 25% renewable sources of power for its own facilities as well as a 15% reduction in energy demand. York Region’s preferred alternative for dealing with garbage in the future incorporates incineration of wastes, which is anticipated to result in net energy generation of 86,180 megawatts per hour. In this way, local wastes could be converted to a local, renewable fuel source. York Region has also conducted energy audits of many of its regional facilities, resulting in a savings of $251,000 in 2004.

Key Issues for Energy

Despite growing awareness of the relationship between energy use and poor air quality and global climate change, energy consumption continues to climb. In 2005, total electricity consumption for Toronto was 26,372,168 megawatt hours (MWh), with a total electricity peak demand of 4,936 MW (IndEco Strategic Consulting Inc., 2006). Rotating blackouts have been predicted for the City by 2008, unless energy conservation is maximized and 500 MW of new generation capacity is built by 2010.

Current community design does not facilitate local renewable energy generation or distribution, although the installation of “Energy Star” appliances in new residential subdivision developments is becoming more common in the GTA. In particular, Markham Centre is an example of how energy efficiencies can be considered more fully at the community design scale by planning for district energy and setting targets for energy efficiency. Markham Centre aims for a 30% reduction in energy demand overall, in comparison with a typical urban development.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 34 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

5.0 MOVING TOWARD SUSTAINABLE LAND AND RESOURCE USE

Integral to the sustainable use of the Humber watershed’s land and resources is the triple bottom line (TBL) concept. TBL asks how the decisions we make today affect the prospects for environmental health, social well-being and economic prosperity in the long term. The interdependence of these three spheres is evident when one considers the environmental degradation, economic losses and diminished quality of life derived from previous unsustainable land and resource use decisions. Recognizing this interdependence was not a requirement for development approval in the past. A lack of comprehensive scientific research, the presence of a booming economy, and a rapidly growing population, lead to acceptance and permission to manipulate the environment in favour of economic growth and development. We continue to “learn from the mistakes of the past”, citing degraded natural features as empirical evidence that urbanization that disregards the need for protection of natural system features and functions is unsustainable.

Due to a growing base of accepted scientific knowledge and updated, corresponding policies, new development and redevelopment is beginning to take place in a more sustainable way. Now, in order to avoid the ramifications of short-sighted land and resource use planning decisions , more time is being invested in the initial stages of the planning process on identifying and protecting important natural system features and functions. The emergence of this new planning regime currently has momentum Evidence of this shift in planning at both provincial and municipal levels of government can be found in the following recently introduced policies and documents:

• Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and Plan (2001) • Provincial Policy Statement (2005) • Greenbelt Act and Plan (2005) • Generic Regulation under the Conservation Authorities Act (2006) • Places to Grow Act and Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006) • Clean Water Protection Act (2006) • A series of municipal initiatives, such as ravine and tree cutting by-laws, growth management plans, environmental servicing plan requirements, stormwater retrofit programs, energy, water and waste conservation programs, investments in public transit, and sustainability plans.

In addition, ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) is a membership association of local governments and national and regional local government associations that have made a unique commitment to sustainable development. More than 475 local governments, representing nearly 300 million people worldwide, make up ICLEI; within TRCA’s jurisdiction, Caledon, Mississauga, Toronto and York Region have become members of ICLEI; all of these municipalities contain portions of the Humber watershed.

In order to continue this momentum, it is vital to examine any further limitations to sustainable land and resource use. The following is a discussion of how development limits, development design, green building design, efficient use of infrastructure, and stormwater management can work towards making more sustainable land and resource use decisions.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 35 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

5.1 Development Limits

The limits of the natural heritage system within a development or redevelopment project should be delineated at the outset of the planning process, and should incorporate the following:

• areas in which development cannot occur due to natural hazards (flooding and erosion); • current natural areas warranting protection (including small and/or isolated and/or degraded features) and target areas (i.e., areas where no natural features currently exist but where securement and restoration would most improve the function of the natural system and increase resilience to future stresses) • where new development impinges on the boundary of the natural heritage system, a net environmental gain should be provided; • an open space system that allows for active and/or passive recreation, that is integrated into both the built and natural system components; • where the system cannot be dedicated into public ownership as part of the planning approval process, the alternative of acquisition by a public body should be explored.

5.2 Development Design

Models of development design, referred to as sustainable community models, have emerged over the last two decades in response to urban sprawl. Sustainable community models include eco-villages, transit-oriented compact communities, co-housing, and new urbanism. Sustainable communities are considered to be more liveable than models of sprawl, are thought to foster a more social- and civic-minded environment, and to use natural resources more wisely (CMHC, 2006).

The integration of the features commonly associated with sustainable communities means that many of them reinforce each other. This is often referred to as a "solution multiplier", whereby one feature strengthens the effectiveness of another. For example, higher density development is more supportive of public transit, and this in turn helps to conserve green space and reduce auto related environmental and human health impacts.

Examples of sustainable communities have been designed and implemented in jurisdictions around the world, and they are beginning to be employed locally.

Regent Park, a 28-hectare community that is being redeveloped over the next 10-12 years in the City of Toronto’s Don River watershed, has strong environmental, social and economic goals. Specific targets are set for the reduction of energy use (75%), for water use conservation (35%), solid waste diversion (60%), and an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

In the Rouge watershed, the Town of Markham is planning a 160-hectare development, Markham Centre, that is being guided by a set of performance measures to deliver their vision of a downtown core for Markham. It will be a higher density development with a distinctly urban character and streetscapes complemented by ample greenspace.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 36 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

A waterfront community development in Malmo, Sweden has received international attention for being on the forefront of sustainable design. It is designed to run on 100 percent renewable resources, and recycles water locally.

The Eco-Village in Ithaca, New York is a co-housing project in a rural setting, which incorporates community-supported agriculture into the 70-hectare property. Innovative energy- efficient features include district heating. Renewable energy projects include photovoltaics in a portion of the houses.

Finally, within the Humber watershed, the recently adopted City of Brampton Official Plan encourages conservation of the natural heritage system using mechanisms such as cost sharing agreements, density bonusing and density transfers.

These examples provide guidance on innovative approaches to designing residential developments with respect to built urban form and densities, stormwater management, energy and waste management, infrastructure standards, and environmental protection that could be used for both greenfield and redevelopment scenarios. Most importantly, these case studies demonstrate that new approaches are being employed, often with great success.

5.3 Green Building Design

With respect to multi-residential, industrial, and commercial buildings, green building design is currently being explored by some public bodies. For example, the City of Toronto has introduced the Toronto Green Development Standard, which they define as a set of features of site and building design that promote better environmental sustainability of development. The Standard integrates existing municipal guidelines and targets with standards from private rating systems such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and Green Globes. It is to be applied to new City-owned and affiliated projects but is also meant to encourage green development among the private sector, where it is to be a voluntary program in the initial year of implementation. Meanwhile, the City will be conducting further study and stakeholder consultation. So far, Toronto has learned that other jurisdictions in North America and abroad have employed the following various measures to implement green building design:

• Incentives – including cash, expedited approvals, or zoning variances such as increased densities • Education – including permanent information centres, online resources, help lines, and seminars • Public Sector Leadership – including mandatory green requirements for all public buildings or publicly funded green demonstration projects • Mandatory Requirements – including modified building code and by-law requirements and mandatory green development standards

Within the Humber watershed portion of the City of Toronto, examples of new building technology that implemented green building design are the York University computer science building and the Humber Arboretum Ecology Centre at Humber College.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 37 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

In York Region, any new regional facility construction must be to LEED standards. The Region has also developed an Energy and Environmental Management System (EEMS), a web-based software that captures energy consumption and expenses of buildings, street lights and other facilities. EEMS has the capability to track electricity, natural gas, water and waste water accounts, and other fuel usage (gasoline, propane, etc.), as well as provide analyses on utility performance. It is hoped that users of EEMS can make intelligent decisions on energy procurement and evaluate the effectiveness of energy saving measures (www.york.ca/Departments/corporate+services/eems.htm).

5.4 Infrastructure

The environmental impact of underground servicing tends to be coincident with the rate of development, given that every new land use requires access to water, sewers, gas, electricity, telecommunication and roads. Planning and installing infrastructure in a more sustainable way begins with the efficient use of urban services. The expansion and upgrade of existing servicing tends to create less environmental impact than installing new servicing where none was located previously. Making efficient use of existing infrastructure is possible through redevelopment and intensification. Further, the water efficiency plans that municipalities are producing are also a positive contribution to sustainable use of resources given that if less water is required for the population, less infrastructure will be needed in order to supply water to that population. Finally, installing infrastructure while limiting environmental impacts means choosing installation routes in the least sensitive areas, keeping dewatering to a minimum, designing lots and structures that return as much water to the ground as possible, and being diligent about sediment and erosion control.

New technologies for non-traditional forms of water and sewer infrastructure, which are less land and resource consumptive, are being tested in the hope that traditional forms of servicing will eventually be eliminated. Such technology is currently being developed at TRCA’s Kortright Centre for Conservation, where a fully self-sustainable house is being constructed. With the eventual perfection of these technologies at the local level, it is anticipated that they can be expanded to the subdivision, community and region wide scales.

The energy efficiency that the Kortright house project is exploring has already been applied at the subdivision level within “Block 39” in Vaughan (at Rutherford Road and Pine Valley Drive). This initiative was a joint effort of TRCA, City of Vaughan, Power Stream, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and a group of developers within Block 39. Eight developers building subdivisions within the northwest portion of Block 39 agreed to design and build all of the units within their respective parcels to “Energy Star” standards. Energy Star houses are built in compliance with energy efficiency standards developed and administered by Natural Resources Canada, which make houses 40% more efficient than those built to current minimum Ontario building code standards.

A developer made a similar commitment to energy conservation for the recently approved “Noble Ridge” community in Nobleton in cooperation with the Township of King and TRCA. Prospective purchasers of a house in Noble Ridge will have the option of building energy saving devices into their homes, such as solar power, heat pumps, cisterns for rain collection and irrigation; this is in addition to these units’ standard energy saving toilets and faucets. The energy saving options will be offered to home buyers at cost, without the mark-ups normally applied to builder upgrades.

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 38 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

5.5 Stormwater Management

The evolving technologies in stormwater management have been ongoing for several decades now. Initial efforts in the 1970s and 1980s focussed on flood control, followed by water quality, aquatic life and streambank erosion concerns in the 1990s. At present time, approximately 15% of existing urban areas have stormwater controls with quantity and quality treatment and 6% have only quantity treatment. The remaining 79% of urban areas consist of older developments in Toronto, Vaughan, Brampton, Richmond Hill, King Township and the Town of Caledon which have no controls for treatment of stormwater (Figure 7).

Most recently, comprehensive studies in SWM are examining watershed response with respect to urbanization’s impact on the complete water balance cycle, geomorphology, and natural heritage. The basic premise of this work is that the amount of stormwater runoff to receiving watercourses increases substantially with the introduction of impervious surfaces in greenfield development. When reviewing development applications, TRCA staff are beginning to work with developers and their consultants to achieve a post-development water balance that matches the water balance at pre-development to the extent possible. Lot level controls are used in an attempt to accomplish a “post to pre-water balance”, including underground perforated pipes, directing clean run-off from rooftops to pervious areas (e.g., yards), and grass swales that all convey and help to infiltrate run-off. This requires flexibility in municipal standards given that such mechanisms are not typical features of subdivision lots. However, these best management practices (BMPs) are necessary if the host municipality desires to see the health of the watersheds maintained within their jurisdiction.

A suite of BMPs in stormwater management constitutes the “treatment train” approach. This approach entails capturing stormwater at the source (lot-level), conveying stormwater to increase infiltration (e.g., perforated pipes and ditches), and treating stormwater at end-of-pipe (e.g., stormwater management ponds). The treatment train approach attempts to replicate a natural cycling of water by encouraging infiltration, reducing runoff volumes and velocities, and filtering out pollutants carried in stormwater. It is anticipated that this will help reduce downstream erosion, replenish ground water supplies, and moderate the temperature of water to receiving streams.

Other measures that work toward maintaining a natural water balance are listed here: • porous paving • tree and shrub • bio-retention basins • shallow marshes plantings • vegetated filter strips • backyard ponds • infiltration trenches • grass swales • green roofs • soak-away pits • Retain or construct • rain gardens • re-establish forests drainage ditches or • thicker topsoil layer and riparian infiltration trenches to • downspout vegetation convey stormwater as disconnections • underground storage an alternative to • foundation drain and cisterns building curbs on disconnection • constructed wetlands roadways • rain barrels • stormwater filtering • perforated pipes systems

Humber_Land_Resource_Use_FINAL_101007F.doc 39 Figure 7: Stormwater Management Controlled Areas Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Most of these concepts can be easily employed in the grading and construction of both residential and industrial/commercial developments. Two of above concepts are discussed here; the first is more suited to residential subdivision development, while the latter is more feasible for multi-residential, industrial, or commercial projects.

Thicker Topsoil: Most of the topsoil removed from greenfield parcels being developed as new subdivisions, is often hauled off-site and used for fill in other projects. Establishing on- site topsoil storage areas and using all of the soil at the final grading stage of construction results in a thicker topsoil layer able to store more water, increasing infiltration and evapotranspiration, and better suited for planting deep-rooting vegetation (i.e., trees and shrubs). This in turn would benefit new home owners as their yards would require less fertilizer and watering.

Green Roofs: This involves layering soil and planting gardens on flat roofs. Green roofs absorb rain water and carbon dioxide and reduce off-site flows; in this way, they work against the greenhouse effect and conserve energy for the building below. They can be made into flower gardens or food gardens. The green roof industry in Canada is new, representing potential for new employment and economic growth.

All of these techniques are increasingly being used in new developments, but could also benefit areas of existing development. However, stormwater management retrofits are a challenge for municipalities because of lack of available land and the costs associated. In the Humber watershed, the municipalities of Toronto, Vaughan, Brampton and Richmond Hill all have some level of a stormwater pond maintenance/retrofit program. In particular, the City of Toronto has a major stormwater retrofit program known as the Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan (WWFMMP). Built largely before modern stormwater management measures were required, the City has recognized the need to address problems of flooding, erosion, and pollution that have resulted.

The WWFMMP establishes a method to manage rainfall events on a watershed basis in a manner that recognizes stormwater as a resource to be utilized to improve the health of Toronto’s watercourses and enhance the natural environment. The Plan aims to improve water quality and control the volumes of runoff from existing developed areas and control sewage effluent where applicable (XCG Consultants Ltd., 2003). Thirteen objectives have been set which fall into four categories: water quality; water quantity; natural areas and wildlife; and sewer system. Initiatives to help meet the objectives are being implemented by the City of Toronto in conjunction with TRCA , who work with and jointly recognize the vast environmental, social and economic benefits of the WWFMMP with City of Toronto staff. The City is now in the process of developing a strategy to implement the WWFMMP which will include the introduction of by-laws, policies, projects, programs, a monitoring plan, an implementation plan, and funding mechanisms.

45 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

6.0 SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

This section summarizes the key issues that were derived from a discussion of current conditions and emerging trends in Section 4. Following a brief reiteration of each issue, a management direction is presented to address each issue. The management directions are guided by discussion on sustainable land and resource use from Section 5. Ultimately, these directions will be considered for inclusion in the integrated watershed management plan for the Humber River.

Key Issue: Intensification Planned for Flood Prone Areas

The Province’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe requires municipal official plans to be amended to intensify development in already built up areas in order to accommodate growth without encouraging urban sprawl. Some of the Urban Growth Centres designated under the growth plan, and centres already slated for redevelopment and intensification in municipal OPs, are also areas within TRCA’s Regulatory Flood Plain (i.e., areas prone to flooding under the Regional Storm (Hurricane Hazel). Notably, sub- section 14 (4) of the Places to Grow Act states that, “if there is a conflict between a direction in the Plan and a direction in a plan or policy (issued under Section 3 of the Provincial Policy Statement – Natural Hazards) with respect to a matter relating to the natural environment or human health, the direction that provides more protection to the natural environment or human health, prevails.” Management Direction: in accordance with sub-section 14 (4) of the Places to Grow Act , TRCA should work with municipalities, the province, and developers, to reconcile the conflict inherent in intensifying development in flood prone centres, through appropriate flood studies, flood remediation and flood proofing measures, and seeking out opportunities for intensification outside of the flood plain.

Key Issue: Outdated Stormwater Management System in Need of Retrofit

Many watercourses in Toronto contain concrete storm sewer outfalls that outlet directly to watercourses with no opportunity for filtering pollutants or diffusing high velocity flows. Moreover, some areas of Toronto are serviced by combined storm and sanitary sewers, so that during heavy rainfall, sewage and stormwater runoff mix together and are outlet directly into the receiving watercourse and eventually Lake Ontario. Management Direction: Municipalities and TRCA should work together to develop and implement stormwater management retrofit plans such as the City of Toronto’s Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan. Further, when reviewing applications for new development or redevelopment, staff should work with developers and municipalities to incorporate upgrades or retrofits to any existing stormwater management scheme (e.g., installation of an oil-grit separator; installation of lot level and conveyance stormwater controls, establishment of a planted outfall channel).

46 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Key Issue: Loss of Headwater Drainage Features

Valley slopes and watercourses that are not well defined are common in the upper part of the watershed, towards the Rural Area, where many headwater streams are located. A large number of these headwater drainage features have been altered and stripped of natural vegetation, or drained, as a result of past agricultural practices. This makes them less likely to be perceived as natural features warranting special consideration, despite the important hydrologic and aquatic habitat functions they may provide. Management Direction: TRCA should develop and implement a headwater drainage feature assessment protocol to help identify features that provide important functions and to improve consistency in decision-making regarding their treatment through development planning study processes.

Key Issue: Non-Transit-Supportive Development

The substantial proportion of single family low density residential developments in the Humber watershed has resulted in subdivision designs and population densities that cannot easily support public transit. This contributes to traffic congestion, poor air quality, and the proliferation of impervious surfaces associated with roads, driveways and parking areas. Management Direction: TRCA and municipal partners should support transit-supportive development design through commenting positively on development applications that include: densities and road patterns supportive of effective transit services, the potential for future higher-order transit connections and regional transit connections; short walking distances to transit stops; proximity of a mix of land uses.

Key Issue: Defining the Boundary of the Natural Heritage System

In the past, municipal OPs tended to promote or encourage vegetated buffers between new developments and valleyland, but rarely required buffers. As a result, the majority of new development abutting Humber watershed valley and stream corridors has either narrow buffers (1 to 4 metres) or no buffers. This is beginning to change, with most municipal OPs affecting the Humber watershed, beginning to require a 10 metre buffer from the limit of natural features to form a public open space block along with the natural feature. While a 10-metre buffer contributes to ecological health, a natural heritage system that defines buffers based on site- specific ecological criteria, is a more ecologically sound method for protecting and enhancing natural features. Management Direction: TRCA staff should promote the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy and the Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program that demonstrate a systems-based approach to natural heritage protection and restoration and the importance of buffers to mitigate the impacts of development on the natural system. Further, staff should support municipal policies that require public buffers with 10 metres as a minimum target for buffer width, but also require further study to determine the most appropriate width for protection and restoration/enhancement (i.e., more than 10 metres). In addition, where new development impinges on the boundary of the natural heritage system, a net environmental gain should be provided.

47 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Key Issue: Top Soil Stripping Exacerbating Erosion and Runoff

New development on large “greenfield” sites is common in the Urbanizing Area and is preceded by site preparation works that invariably entail stripping top soil. Often, stripping is completed long before construction commences, leaving land vulnerable to the effects of wind and rain that carry sediment to adjacent watercourses and other natural features. Management Direction: TRCA should stage permits under its regulation to: minimize the area disturbed at any given time and the duration of time that an area is in a disturbed state; ensure erosion and sediment control plans are implemented at the start of construction (i.e., stage 1) and maintain and repair them as required, until construction is complete; where compliance is lacking, promote amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act that would enable TRCA Enforcement Officers to oblige compliance; also, promote the “best practice” of reversing soil compaction after construction and thick topsoil applications to increase infiltration and evaporation and decrease runoff.

Key Issue: Diminishing Amount of Large Parcels of Agricultural Land

Much of the new urban development within the Urbanizing Area is occurring on former agricultural lands, thereby diminishing the availability of large contiguous parcels of land for large scale crop production. Management Direction: TRCA should support emerging policies at Provincial and municipal levels to accommodate future population growth in existing urban areas through redevelopment and urban intensification, thereby reducing pressure to convert remaining prime agricultural lands to urban uses; and to support policies that permit agricultural land uses near urban areas to evolve according to changing market demands (e.g,, potential future shift in production to more speciality crops, establishing more greenhouse operations and establishing more local farmers markets).

Key Issue: Exhausting Aggregate Resources; Use of Abandoned Aggregate Sites for Increasing Natural Cover

A valuable natural resource in the Rural Area of the Humber watershed is aggregates. It is important that aggregate resource areas be protected to allow future use of the resource. The southern portions of the Rural Area are likely to be considered for urban expansion by municipalities looking to accommodate population growth sometime in the future. Should urbanization creep into the Rural Area, in order to maintain and enhance its proportion of natural cover, opportunities for restoration of abandoned aggregate extraction sites should be seized. Management Direction: TRCA should support municipal aggregate resource management plans that contain policies to facilitate restoration of abandoned aggregate sites to a natural state, which would in turn, bolster the natural systems in the watershed.

48 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Key Issue: Watercourse Crossings with Roads that Hinder Natural Form and Function and Prevent Wildlife/Pedestrian Passage.

Traditionally, crossing structures were designed and constructed with narrow openings that did not accommodate regional storm flood flows, pedestrian passage, wildlife passage, or the natural meander belt of the subject stream. Over time, this frequently resulted in the impacts to crossing structures due to flooding and erosion. In turn, hardening of stream bed and banks was necessary to prevent crossing structures from being further undermined. More recently, crossing structures are being designed to accommodate the natural form and function of the watercourses they cross. This is accomplished by installing larger spans that do not intrude into the bed and banks of a stream; moreover, best efforts are made to find a crossing location where streambank erosion and meanders are least problematic. Although this new approach is beginning to be used more frequently, it is not a strict requirement for approval of a crossing. Management Direction: TRCA should strengthen its policy to require the design and location of all new watercourse crossing structures to accommodate the natural physical form and ecological function of a watercourse.

Key Issue: New Development Achieving a “Post to Pre-Water Balance”

When reviewing development applications, TRCA staff work with developers and their consultants to achieve a post-development water balance that matches as closely as possible the pre-development water balance conditions. Often, lot level stormwater controls are used to achieve this including directing clean run-off from rooftops to pervious areas (e.g., yards), and underground perforated pipes and grass swales that convey and help to infiltrate run-off. This requires flexibility in municipal standards given that such stormwater controls are not typical features of subdivision lots. Management Direction: TRCA should strengthen its policy to require all new development to achieve post-to-pre water balance and encourage municipalities to permit lot level stormwater controls in order to facilitate achieving this.

Key Issue: Continual Expansion of Water, Sewer and Transportation Infrastructure

Infrastructure for transportation, water and sewers is permitted within natural areas by environmental legislation. The EA Act functions to help avoid and/or mitigate the harmful effects of infrastructure projects to the environment. In order to minimize the need for indefinite expansion of the water and wastewater system into natural areas, sustainable use of water resources is critical. Municipalities are endeavouring to address unsustainable rates of use within their jurisdictions, as evidenced by ongoing plans and studies to increase efficiency and educate residents. Management Direction: TRCA should strengthen its policy to direct infrastructure outside of natural areas for new development and encourage opportunities to remove existing infrastructure from natural areas when redevelopment occurs. Futher, TRCA should strengthen its policy to minimize impervious surfaces associated with infrastructure (i.e., roads and parking) and maximize green infrastructure (natural areas). Also, require stricter minimum levels of water and energy efficiency to be met in new building designs as a condition for approval of new development. Finally, integrate incentive programs for implementing green building technologies into the development approvals process or municipal tax assessments.

49 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Key Issue: Waste Disposal is Land Consumptive, Poses Risks for Surface and Groundwater Contamination, and Production of Greenhouse Gases.

Waste disposal has the potential to negatively impact watershed health in a number of ways, including contamination of surface and groundwater, production of greenhouse gases, and loss of greenspace and natural habitat, due to the land-consumptive nature of landfill sites. Management Direction: TRCA should support municipal policies that would facilitate restoration of abandoned landfills to a natural state, which would in turn, bolster the natural systems of the watershed; staff should also support opportunities sought by the public or private sector that would explore waste as a potential energy source, but maintain that recycling and waste diversion programs should be the first choice strategy for addressing solid waste issues.

50 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

7.0 OBJECTIVES FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND AND RESOURCE USE AND REPORT CARD RATINGS

The objectives for sustainable land and resource use in the Humber River watershed are to:

• Protect the form and function of landforms such as Niagara Escarpment, Oak Ridges Moraine and South Slope; • Improve sustainability in urban form at community and building site scales; • Protect and enhance the integrity and economic viability of agricultural areas; and, • Practice sustainable resource use by individuals, households, businesses, institutions and governments.

The indicators, measures, targets and overall ratings of current conditions in the watershed are presented below. Current conditions were rated regarding the extent to which each objective is being achieved, as indicated by the level of achievement of the associated targets. The letter grade rating system can be further described as follows:

A = Very good B = Good C = Fair D = Poor F = Fail (very poor)

Objective: Protect the form and function of landforms such as the Overall Rating Niagara Escarpment, Oak Ridges Moraine and South Slope A Indicator Measure Target

Significant landforms Amount of development No additional land on the Oak permitted on Oak Ridges Ridges Moraine and Niagara Moraine and Niagara Escarpment Escarpment is developed beyond what has been committed as of 2005.

The rating of “A” for this objective reflects the greatly improved level of protection that significant landforms now receive through provincial policies such as the Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act and Plan (1994), Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and Plan (2001), the Greenbelt Act and Plan (2005), and the new generic regulation for conservation authorities (Ontario Regulation 97/04, 2006). Only 4,787 hectares of the Oak Ridges Moraine and 257 hectares of the Niagara Escarpment within the Humber watershed is developed or committed for development (total of 5,044 hectares or 16% of the total). The Greenbelt Plan protects 13,889 hectares of the South Slope in the watershed, which is the headwaters for many reaches of the East and West branches of the Humber. The new generic regulation for conservation authorities now applies to an additional 12,000 hectares of stream corridors, shorelines and wetlands in the Humber, where construction of buildings, placement of fill and alteration is prohibited.

51 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Objective: Improve sustainability in urban form at community and Overall Rating building site scales C Indicator Measure Target Community design To be determined To be determined

Transportation Number of transit trips per Increase the annual # of transit person, per year trips per person

Mode of transportation to work Decrease the % of trips made by “car, truck, van as driver” (% of trips made by: car, truck, van as driver; car, truck, van as passenger; public transit; walk/bicycle; other) Green buildings % of new or retrofit public 100% of new or renovated buildings designed to achieve public buildings achieve green green building certification (e.g., building certification LEED, Green Globe)

This objective was rated “C” overall, based on the rating given to the transportation indicator, which was the only indicator rated at this time.

Community Design

A technically defensible measure for evaluating and tracking the sustainability of community design has yet to be developed. A measure relating to a forthcoming “LEED for Neighbourhoods” certification may be developed in the future. At this time, the measure, target, and overall rating for the community design indicator is “To be determined”.

Transportation

The trends in transit trips taken per person between 2001 and 2006 are presented in Table 5. Between 2001 and 2006, the number of transit trips taken per person annually has increased by 47% in York Region (York Region, 2006) and dropped by 1 % in the City of Toronto (City of Toronto, 2005). The increase in York Region is a factor of expanded service areas and hours due to VIVA, as well as population growth and the assumption of GO Bus routes. In Toronto, transit use declined in 2002-2003 due to the economic slowdown after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, SARS, and the hydro blackout, but the number of transit trips has been increasing from 2003 to 2005 (4%).

52 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Table 5: Number of Transit Passenger Trips per Person 2001-2006. Municipality Number of transit passenger trips per person in the service area in a year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 York Region 11.18 10.52 12.18 15.53 16.51 18.0 City of Brampton N/A N/A N/A N/A 22.5 24.5 City of Toronto 161.9 158.6 153.2 156.5 159.8 N/A Sources: City of Toronto, 2005; City of Brampton, 2006a; York Region, 2006a.

Reliance on private vehicle use in Humber watershed municipalities remains high. The mode of transportation to work data for the City of Toronto and York Region is presented in Table 6. In 2001, 52% of Toronto residents traveled to work as a driver of a car, truck, or van (below the provincial average of 73%), in Peel Region the figure was 77% and in York Region it was 80%. This data, based on the Statistics Canada 2001 Census of Population, serves as 2001 baseline conditions for this measure. A rating for this indicator could be assigned when the baseline conditions are compared with data from future Censuses.

Table 6: Mode of Transportation to Work Based on Statistics Canada 2001 Census of Population Data. Mode of % of Population Transportation City of Toronto Peel Region York Region Ontario Car, truck, van as 52.2 77.2 80.4 72.6 driver Car truck van, as 5.4 7.3 7.1 7.1 passenger Public transit 33.8 12.1 9.4 12.8 Walked or 7.7 2.7 2.4 6.6 bicycled Other method 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.9

The overall rating for the transportation indicator is “C”. Recent improvements in transit service and ridership are balanced by the heavy reliance on private automobiles.

Green Buildings

Green building certifications, such as LEED, have only been in existence for about six years, therefore only a few LEED certified buildings have been built to date. For example, there are about 15 LEED certified commercial (public and private) buildings in the Greater Toronto Area (CAGBC, 2007). However, there are about 50 prospective LEED commercial buildings in the final design and construction stage and another 128 buildings registered with the Canada Green Building Council (CAGBC) for design and construction in the Greater Toronto Area. Due to the newness of green building certification, a rating has not been assigned to this indicator at this time.

53 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Objective: Protect and enhance the integrity and economic viability Overall Rating of agricultural areas C Indicator Measure Target Local food purchasing Interim: Purchasing policy Public facilities, including commitment to local food source schools, meet 20% of their food needs with production from Ontario farms and community gardens. Agricultural industry Change in average net farm Maintain or increase net farm vitality income by Regional municipality. income (baseline is 2001 census)

A rating of “C” has been assigned in consideration of the presence of known farm markets in the watershed, which facilitate local food purchasing, and literature based reports of concern over agricultural industry vitality (see section 4.1.3). A mechanism for tracking local food purchasing policies and practices will need to be developed to support future reports.

Objective: Practice sustainable resource use by individuals, Overall Rating households, businesses, institutions and governments C Indicator Measure Target

Water demand Peak and average day water use Meet municipal targets for (ML/day) reduction in water demand: Reduce peak and average day demand by at least 10% of projected levels 1 Solid waste diversion Per cent of residential solid waste Meet municipal targets for diverted from landfill residential waste diversion:

- 60-75% diversion of household wastes in York Region 2 - 70% diversion of household waste in Peel Region by 2016 3 - 100% diversion of household wastes in City of Toronto by 2010 4

54 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Objective: Practice sustainable resource use by individuals, Overall Rating households, businesses, institutions and governments C Energy sources and Per cent of total demand from Meet Province of Ontario target demand renewable sources of 34% of electricity supply from renewable sources by 2025 (where drawn from grid) 5. Percent change in per capita energy demand Reduce energy demand by 15% per capita per year.

References/Notes: 1. City of Toronto, 2002; Veritec Consulting Inc. 2004; Resource Management Strategies Inc., 2007 2. MacViro Consultants and Jacques Whitford Limited, 2006. 3. Veritec Consulting Inc., 2004. 4. City of Toronto, 2001. 5. Ontario Ministry of Energy, 2007.

This objective was rated “C” overall, based on an average of ratings for each of the three indicators discussed below.

Water Demand

A rating of “B” has been assigned to the water demand indicator, in recognition of the water savings achieved over the past six or more years through implementation of the City of Toronto, Region of Peel and York Region Water Efficiency Programs (see Section 4.3). However, given that the average residential water demand in the City of Toronto (252 litres per capita per day-lpc/d), Region of Peel (283 lpc/d) and York Region (241 lpc/d) are still markedly higher than European rates (e.g., United Kingdom – 150 lpc/d), there is room for improvement in local water conservation practices (RMSi, 2007).

Solid Waste Diversion

Both York Region and the City of Toronto have increased the percent of residential solid waste they are diverting from landfill and/or incineration through recycling and organics collection programs (Table 7). Over the most recent four years of recorded data, York Region has increased its diversion rate by almost 17% to 41% (2003-2006), Peel Region has maintained an impressive rate of 45% diversion, while Toronto has increased its rate by 12% to 40% (2002- 2005). The rating for the solid waste diversion indicator is “B”, reflecting the considerable improvements municipalities have made over the last few years.

55 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Table 7: Residential Solid Waste Diversion Rates 2001-2006 in Humber Watershed Municipalities. Municipality Percentage of residential solid waste diverted from landfills and/or incinerators 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Peel Region N/A N/A 45.2 45.2 45.2 N/A York Region N/A N/A 23.9 24.9 31.9 40.8 City of 27 28 32 36 40 N/A Toronto Sources: City of Toronto, 2005; York Region, 2006a; Peel Region, 2005b .

Energy Sources and Demand

Given the increasing trend in energy demand and the current reliance on fossil fuel sources, a rating of “D” was assigned to the energy sources and demand indicator. This rating is expected to improve in future reporting cycles considering the number of recent local and provincial renewable energy development projects; the initiatives of local municipalities to develop energy efficiency plans and actions for their own facilities; and participation in a variety of energy conservation programs (e.g., Mayor’s Megawatt Challenge, private retail promotion of compact fluorescent bulbs and other energy saving technologies, etc.).

56 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

8.0 REFERENCES

Canadian Green Building Council 2007, LEED Canada – Certified Projects, http://www.cagbc.org/leed/certified_buildings/index.htm , accessed January 4, 2007.

Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 2006, Sustainable Community Planning, www.cmhc.ca , August 2006.

Cansult Ltd., Marshall Macklin Monaghan Ltd., et al. , York Region Transportation Master Plan – Final Report, York Region, Newmarket, Ontario, June 2002.

CH2M Hill Consulting Ltd., Best Practice Guide, City of Brampton, Brampton, Ontario, 2002.

City of Brampton 2006a, Municipal Performance Measurement Program Report – 2006.

City of Brampton, 2006b, The Official Website of the City of Brampton, http://www.brampton.ca/city_dept/plan_build/ttmp/home.tml , accessed December 6, 2006.

City of Toronto, 2001, Waste Diversion Task Force 2010.

City of Toronto, 2002, Water Efficiency Plan, Toronto Works and Emergency Services, Toronto, Ontario, December 2002.

City of Toronto, 2003, TTC Ridership Growth Strategy , Toronto, Ontario, March 2003.

City of Toronto, 2005, Municipal Performance Measurement Program Report – 2005.

City of Toronto, 2006a, Toronto Official Plan, Toronto, Ontario, June 2006.

City of Toronto, 2006b, City of Toronto Economic Development – Population and Dwelling Counts, http://www.toronto.ca/economic_profile/pop_dwell.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

City of Toronto, 2006c, City of Toronto: Toronto Water – At a glance, http://www.toronto.ca/water/glance.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

City of Toronto, 2006d, Toronto approves landfill purchase as part of solid waste management plan, http://wx.toronto.ca/inter/it/newsrel.nsf/7017df2f20edbe2885256619004e428e/ac349ca5b0663c 42852571ef004be55f?OpenDocument , accessed December 6, 2006.

City of Vaughan, 2006, Population Growth and Statistics, http://www.city.vaughan.on.ca/business/stats/population/index.cfm , accessed December 6, 2006.

Durham/York Residual Waste Study, 2006, Durham/York Residual Waste Study, http://www.durhamyorkwaste.ca/documents.php , accessed December 6, 2006.

57 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Hemson Consulting Ltd., 2005, The Growth Outlook for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Toronto, Ontario, January 2005.

Humber Watershed Task Force, 1997, Legacy: A Strategy For A Healthy Humber, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Downsview, Ontario, May 1997.

Humber Watershed Task Force, 1997, A Call To Action – Implementing Legacy: A Strategy For A Healthy Humber, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Downsview, Ontario, May 1997.

MacViro Consultants and Jacques Whitford Limited. 2006. Residual Waste Disposal Planning Study. Proposed Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference. February 2006. Prepared for the Regions of York and Durham.

Marchi, S., 1995, Demographic Estimates of Current and Projected Populations Within the Humber River Watershed, York University, Toronto, Ontario.

Marshall, Macklin, Monaghan and Entra Consultants Ltd., 2004, Brampton Transportation and Transit Master Plan, City of Brampton, Brampton, Ontario, June 2004.

Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. 1997. Legacy: A Strategy for a Healthy Humber. Prepared for the Humber Watershed Task Force.

Niagara Escarpment Commission, 2003, The Niagara Escarpment Plan (1994), Georgetown, Ontario, July 2003.

Ontario Ministry of Energy, 2007a, Ontario Ministry of Energy News – Backgrounder: Ontario’s Electricity Supply Mix, http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/index.cfm?fuseaction=english.news&back=yes&news_id=134& backgrounder_id=105 , accessed October 11, 2007.

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2002, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Toronto, Ontario, April 2002.

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2005, Greenbelt Plan, Toronto, Ontario, February 2005.

Ontario Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, 2006, Places To Grow – Better Choices, Brighter Future: Growth Plan For The Greater Golden Horseshoe, Toronto, Ontario, June 2006.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, 1991, Waste Disposal Site Inventory, Queen’s Printer, Toronto, Ontario, 1991.

Peel Region, 2003, Long Term Waste Resource Management Strategy – 2003 Update, Peel Region, Brampton, Ontario, December 2003.

Peel Region, 2005, Long Range Transportation Plan – Final Report, Peel Region, Brampton, Ontario, September 2005.

58 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Peel Region, 2005b, Municipal Performance Measurement Program Report – 2005.

Peel Region, 2006a, Building Permits Data – Peel Data Centre, http://www.peelregion.ca/planning/pdc/data/economic-activity/building-permits-2002-2003.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

Peel Region, 2006b, Building Permits Data – Peel Data Centre, http://www.peelregion.ca/planning/pdc/data/economic-activity/building-permits-2004.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

Peel Region, 2006c, Region of Peel – Data Centre, http://www.peelregion.ca/planning/pdc/data/census/population-1971-2001.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

Peel Region, 2006d, Region of Peel – Data Centre, http://www.peelregion.ca/planning/pdc/data/forecasts/population-2001-2031.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

Peel Region, 2006e, Region of Peel Transportation Planning: Cordon Count Program, http://www.peelregion.ca/planning/transportation/cordon_count.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

Peel Region, 2006f, Region of Peel Council Endorses New Facility to Produce Alternative Fuel From Waste, http://www.peelregion.ca/news/archiveitem.asp?year=2005&month=10&day=17&file=200510 16a.xml , accessed December 6, 2006.

Planning and Engineering Initiatives Ltd., 1999, Caledon Community Resources Study, Town of Caledon, May 1999.

Regional Planning Commissioners of Ontario, 2005, GTA Agricultural Action Plan, February 2005.

Resource Management Strategies Inc., 2007, Regional Municipality of York Water Efficiency Master Plan Update Final Report, York Region, April 27, 2007.

Statistics Canada, 2001, Census of Agriculture, 2001.

The Canadian Heritage Rivers System, 2006, CHRS – Humber River, http://www.chrs.ca/Rivers/Humber/Humber_e.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, 1994, Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program, Downsview, Ontario, October 1994.

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, 2006a, unpublished data, population estimates for TRCA watersheds based on Statistics Canada 2001 census tract data.

59 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, 2006b, unpublished data, summary of ethnic origin, recent immigrants by country of birth, and population by age group statistics for TRCA watersheds based on Statistics Canada 2001 census tract data.

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. 2007. Listen to Your River – A Report Card on the Health of the Humber River Watershed . Prepared for the Humber Watershed Alliance.

Toronto Community Foundation, 2005, Toronto’s Vital Signs 2004, Toronto, Ontario, 2004.

Town of Caledon, 2002, Official Plan Amendment 161, Caledon East, Ontario, August 2002.

Town of Caledon, 2006a, Caledon Population Distribution – December 31, 2001, http://www.caledon.ca/townhall/statistics/distribution-2001.asp , accessed December 6, 2006.

Town of Caledon, 2006b, Caledon Population Distribution – December 31, 2005, http://www.caledon.ca/contentc/townhall/statistics/Caledon_Population_Distribution_31DEC05. pdf , accessed December 6, 2006.

Town of Caledon, 2006c, Caledon’s Population Allocations, http://www.caledon.ca/townhall/statistics/allocations.asp , accessed December 6, 2006.

Township of King, 2006, Township of King - Demographics, http://www.king.ca/public/demographics.cfm?page=Forecasts , accessed December 6, 2006.

Town of Richmond Hil, 2006a, Town of Richmond Hill Demographic Profile, http://www.richmondhill.ca/documents/demo_profile_richmondhill.pdf , accessed December 6, 2006.

Town of Richmond Hill, 2006b, Town of Richmond Hill Council Highlights – November 14, 2005 Meeting, http://www.richmondhill.ca/subpage.asp?pageid=news_councilhighlights_11_14_2005 , accessed December 6, 2006.

Transportation Tommorrow Survey, http://www.transportationtomorrow.on.ca/ , accessed December 6, 2006.

United Utilities Canada Ltd., 2004, Long Term Water Project Master Plan Update, York Region, Newmarket, Ontario, April 2004.

Veritec Consulting Inc., 2004, Regional Municipality of Peel Water Efficiency Plan, Peel Region, Brampton, Ontario, May 2004.

XCG Consultants Ltd., 2003. Toronto Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan – Study Area 3: Humber River, City of Toronto, Toronto Water, 2003.

York Region 2006a, Municipal Performance Measurement Program Report – 2006.

60 Humber River State of the Watershed Report – Land and Resource Use

York Region, 2006b, York Region – Water Supply, http://www.york.ca/Services/Water/Water+Supply/default_Water_Supply_New.htm , accessed December 6, 2006.

York Region, 2006c, report of the Highway 50/Highway 427 Extension Area Arterial Network Study.

York Region, 2006d, York Region Transit, http://www.york.ca/Departments/Transportation+and+Works/Transit/default+Public+Transit.h tm , accessed December 6, 2006.

York Region, 2006e, Towards Sustainability in York Region - Advisory Group Final Report, York Region, Newmarket, Ontario, April 4, 2006.

York Region, 2006f ,York Region Joint Waste Diversion Strategy, 2006.

York Region, 2006g, 2005 Annual Report - Transportation and Works Committee, http://www.region.york.on.ca/nr/ykregion/extpg/finance/AnnualReport2005/Transportation.asp , accessed December 6, 2006.

York Region Water For Tommorow, 2006, Water For Tommorrow Program, http://www.water4tomorrow.com/ , accessed December 6, 2006.

61