DOCSLIB.ORG

AECOM Report 1.Dot

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AECOM Report 1.Dot Environmental Assessment references References Acres Consulting Services Limited (Acres). 1983: Keating Channel Environmental Assessment, Main Report. Prepared for: Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. March, 1983. AECOM. 2010: Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Plain Protection Environmental Assessment (DMNP EA) – Traffic Analysis of Existing Condition Memorandum. March 16, 2010. Aquafor Beech. 2006: Dimensions and Water Elevation for Alternative 2, 3, 4W and 4S. Prepared for AECOM. Aquatic Habitat Toronto (AHT). 2009: Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy. http://www.aquatichabitat.ca/pdf/TWAHRS_STRATEGY.pdf, Accessed on May 6, 2010 Archaeological Services Incorporated (ASI). 1992: Report on a Background Assessment of Heritage Features of the Railway Lands West, City of Toronto. Report on file, Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto. Archaeological Services Incorporated (ASI). 2003: Archaeological Master Plan of the Central Waterfront, City of Toronto, Ontario. Report on file, Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto. Archaeological Services Incorporated (ASI). 2007a: Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment – Existing Conditions. Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project, City of Toronto, Ontario. January 2007 (Revised November 2007). Archaeological Services Incorporated (ASI). 2007b: Transitional Sports Fields in the Portlands, City of Toronto. Report on file, Heritage Preservation Services, City of Toronto Planning Department, Toronto. Archaeological Services Inc. and Historica Research Limited (ASI and HRL). 2004: Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment of the East Bayfront, West Donlands and Portlands Areas, City of Toronto, Ontario. Report on file, Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto. Baird & Associates. 2008: Sediment Core Samples in the Don Narrows. Baird & Associates. 2013: Don Mouth Naturalization EA Modelling Supplemental Technical Memorandum. November, 2013. Bird Studies Canada Website. 2006: Tommy Thompson Park Bird Research Station. 2006. http://www.bsc-eoc.org/national/ttpbrs.html. Accessed on October 17, 2006. 1 Environmental Assessment references Bonnell, J. L. 2010: Imagined Futures and Unintended Consequences: An Environmental History of Toronto’s Don River Valley. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Theory and Policy Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 2010. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 1999: Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life. Dissolved Oxygen (Freshwater). Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEA Agency). 2009: Adaptive Management Measures under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. http://www.acee.gc.ca/Content/D/A/C/DACB19EE-468E-422F-8EF6-29A6D84695FC/Adaptive_Mangt- eng.pdf. Accessed on February 9, 2010. City of Toronto. 1999: Unlocking the Port Lands: Directions for the Future. Urban Planning and Development Services. July 1999. City of Toronto. 2001a: City of Toronto Ward Profiles: Ward 28 – Toronto Centre-Rosedale. http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/city_planning/wards/files/pdf/wardprofiles_28.pdf. Accessed on February 20, 2014. City of Toronto. 2001b: City of Toronto Ward Profiles: Ward 30 – Toronto-Danforth. http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/city_planning/wards/files/pdf/wardprofiles_30.pdf. Accessed on February 20, 2014. City of Toronto. 2001c: City of Toronto Ward Profiles: Ward 32 – Beaches-East York. http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/city_planning/wards/files/pdf/wardprofiles_32.pdf. Accessed on February 20, 2014. City of Toronto. 2003a: Central Waterfront Secondary Plan, OPA 257. Adopted by By-law 346-2003 on April 16, 2003. City of Toronto. 2003b: Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan. July 2003. www.city.toronto.on.ca/wes/techservices/involved/wws/wwfmmp. Accessed on February 9, 2010. City of Toronto. 2003c: City of Toronto By-Law No. 111-2003. http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/bylaws/2003/law0111.pdf . Accessed on February 9, 2010. City of Toronto. 2008: Road Classification System. August 2008. City of Toronto. 2010: Toronto Official Plan. December 2010 Consolidation. http://www1.toronto.ca/staticfiles/city_of_toronto/city_planning/developing_toronto/files/pdf/chapters1_5_de c2010.pdf. Accessed on January 2, 2014. 2 Environmental Assessment references City of Toronto. 2011a: City of Toronto Ward Profiles: Ward 28 – Toronto Centre-Rosedale. http://www1.toronto.ca/staticfiles/city_of_toronto/city_planning/wards/files/pdf/profile-ward28-2011.pdf. Accessed on October 15, 2013. City of Toronto. 2011b: City of Toronto Ward Profiles: Ward 30 – Toronto-Danforth. http://www1.toronto.ca/staticfiles/city_of_toronto/city_planning/wards/files/pdf/profile-ward30-2011.pdf. Accessed on October 15, 2013. City of Toronto. 2011c: City of Toronto Ward Profiles: Ward 32 – Beaches-East York. http://www1.toronto.ca/staticfiles/city_of_toronto/city_planning/wards/files/pdf/profile-ward32-2011.pdf. Accessed on October 15, 2013. City of Toronto. 2012: Don River and Central Waterfront Project Municipal Class EA Environmental Study Report. August, 2012. https://www1.toronto.ca/staticfiles/city_of_toronto/toronto_water/files/pdf/don-river-and-cw-class-ea-esr- main-report-august-2012.pdf. Accessed on January 2, 2014. City of Toronto. 2013: Media: Riverdale Park East. http://www1.toronto.ca/parks/prd/facilities/complex/343/index.htm. Accessed on December 10, 2013. Christie et al. 1988: Measures of Optimal Thermal Habitat and their Relationship to Yields for Four Commercial Fish Species. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45: 301-314 Croft and Chow-Fraser. 2007: Use and Development of the Wetland Macrophyte Index to Detect Water Quality Impairment in Fish Habitat of Great Lakes Coastal Marshes. Journal of Great Lakes Research. 33(SI 3). 172-197. Dietrich, J. 2006: Lower Don River Fish Community Dynamics 1989 – 2005. Prepared for: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Don Watershed Regeneration Council. 1997: Turning the Corner: The Don Watershed Report Card. http://www.trca.on.ca/dotAsset/25862.pdf. Accessed on January 2, 2014. Don Watershed Regeneration Council. 2000: A Time for Bold Steps: The Don Watershed Report Card 2000. http://www.trca.on.ca/dotAsset/95595.pdf. Accessed on January 2, 2014. Don Watershed Regeneration Council. 2003: Breathing New Life into the Don: 2003 Don Watershed Report Card. http://www.trca.on.ca/dotAsset/25860.pdf. Accessed on January 2, 2014. 3 Environmental Assessment references Don Watershed Regeneration Council. 2006: Forging a New Deal Don: The 2006 Progress Report. http://www.trca.on.ca/dotAsset/37386.pdf. Accessed on January 2, 2014. Don Watershed Task Force. 1994: Forty Steps to a New Don. Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. May 1994. Environment Canada. 2004: How Much Habitat is Enough? A Framework for Guiding Rehabilitation in Great Lakes Areas of Concern. 2nd Edition. Federation of Ontario Naturalists. 2006: Urban Forests, an Important Part of Our Heritage, 2006. http://www.ontarionature.org/resources/ conservation_factsheets.html. Accessed on October 17, 2006. Gartner Lee Limited and SENES Consultants Limited (GLL and SENES). 2007: Step 1 and 2 Working Paper. Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project. Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder). 2002: Report on Review of Sediment Conditions in the Lower Don River/Keating Channel and the Toronto Inner Harbour. Prepared for: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, March 2002. Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder). 2005: Review of Sediment Conditions in the Lower Don River / Keating Channel and the Toronto Inner Harbour. Prepared for: Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Greater Golden Horseshoe Area Conservation Authorities (GGH Area Conservation Authorities). 2006: Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for Urban Construction. December, 2006. http://www.sustainabletechnologies.ca/Portals/_Rainbow/Documents/ESC%20Guideline%20- %20December%202006.pdf . Accessed on February 9, 2010. Historic Horizon Inc. (HHI). 1994: A Heritage Assessment of Block 37, Part of the Railway Lands, Toronto, Ontario. Report on file, Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto. Historica Research Limited (HRL). 1989: Heritage Assessment of Archaeological Features, Precincts 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, Southtown Development, Toronto. Report on file, Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto. HR&A Advisors, Inc. (HR&A). 2010: Don Mouth Naturalization Project: Economic Effects Assessment. Hudon, C., Lalonde, S. and Gagnon, P. 2000: Ranking the Effects of Site Exposure, Plant Growth Form, Water Depth, and Transparency on Aquatic Plant Biomass. Lee, H.T., W.D. Bakowsky, J. Riley, J. Bowles, M. Puddister, P. Uhlig and S. McMurray. 1998: Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and Its Application. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, South Central Science Section, Science Development and Transfer Branch. SCSS Field Guide FG-02. 4 Environmental Assessment references Limnotech. 2008: Lake Ontario Water Level Analysis. Powerpoint Presentation to MVVA Team. April 16, 2008. The Mariport Group Ltd. 1999: Evaluating the Port of Toronto: Markets and Impacts on the GTA. Prepared for: Toronto Port Authority. December, 1999. Martin-Downs, D. 1988: Don River Biological Inventory. Past, Present and Future Evaluation. Metro Toronto & Region Conservation Authority, Technical Report #16. April 1998. Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (MTRCA). 1982: Environmentally Significant Areas Study. Final Report. Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, North
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 3131 Lower Don River West Lower Don River West 4.0 DESCRIPTION
    Lower Don River West Environmental Study Report Remedial Flood Protection Project 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF LOWER DON 4.1 The Don River Watershed The Don River is one of more than sixty rivers and streams flowing south from the Oak Ridges Moraine. The River is approximately 38 km long and outlets into the Keating Channel, which then conveys the flows into Toronto Harbour and Lake Historic Watershed Ontario. The entire drainage basin of the Don urbanization of the river's headwaters in York River is 360 km2. Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2, on the Region began in the early 1980s and continues following pages, describe the existing and future today. land use conditions within the Don River Watershed. Hydrologic changes in the watershed began when settlers converted the forests to agricultural fields; For 200 years, the Don Watershed has been many streams were denuded even of bank side subject to intense pressures from human vegetation. Urban development then intensified settlement. These have fragmented the river the problems of warmer water temperatures, valley's natural branching pattern; degraded and erosion, and water pollution. Over the years often destroyed its once rich aquatic and during the three waves of urban expansion, the terrestrial wildlife habitat; and polluted its waters Don River mouth, originally an extensive delta with raw sewage, industrial/agricultural marsh, was filled in and the lower portion of the chemicals, metals and other assorted river was straightened. contaminants. Small Don River tributaries were piped and Land clearing, settlement, and urbanization have buried, wetlands were "reclaimed," and springs proceeded in three waves in the Don River were lost.
    [Show full text]
  • “Toronto Has No History!”: Indigeneity, Settler Colonialism, and Historical Memory in Canada’S Largest City
    Document généré le 2 oct. 2021 00:00 Urban History Review Revue d'histoire urbaine “Toronto Has No History!” Indigeneity, Settler Colonialism, and Historical Memory in Canada’s Largest City Victoria Freeman Encounters, Contests, and Communities: New Histories of Race and Résumé de l'article Ethnicity in the Canadian City En 1884, au cours d’une semaine complète d’événements commémorant le 50e Volume 38, numéro 2, printemps 2010 anniversaire de l’incorporation de Toronto en 1834, des dizaines de milliers de gens fêtent l’histoire de Toronto et sa relation avec le colonialisme et URI : https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/039672ar l’impérialisme britannique. Une analyse des fresques historiques du défilé de DOI : https://doi.org/10.7202/039672ar la première journée des célébrations et de discours prononcés par Daniel Wilson, président de l’University College, et par le chef de Samson Green des Mohawks de Tyendinaga dévoile de divergentes approches relatives à la Aller au sommaire du numéro commémoration comme « politique par d’autres moyens » : d’une part, le camouflage du passé indigène de la région et la célébration de son avenir européen, de l’autre, une vision idéalisée du partenariat passé entre peuples Éditeur(s) autochtones et colons qui ignore la rôle de ces derniers dans la dépossession des Indiens de Mississauga. La commémoration de 1884 marque la transition Urban History Review / Revue d'histoire urbaine entre la fondation du village en 1793 et l’incorporation de la ville en 1834 comme « moment fondateur » et symbole de la supposée « autochtonie » des ISSN colons immigrants. Le titre de propriété acquis des Mississaugas lors de l’achat 0703-0428 (imprimé) de Toronto en 1787 est jugé sans importance, tandis que la Loi d’incorporation 1918-5138 (numérique) de 1834 devient l’acte symbolique de la modernité de Toronto.
    [Show full text]
  • Disrupting Toronto's Urban Space Through the Creative (In)Terventions
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Institutional Repository of the Ibero-American Institute, Berlin Disrupting Toronto’s Urban Space through the Creative (In)terventions of Robert Houle Alterando el espacio urbano de Toronto a través de las (in)tervenciones creativas de Robert Houle Julie Nagam University of Winnipeg and Winnipeg Art Gallery, Canada [email protected] Abstract: is essay addresses the concealed geographies of Indigenous histories in the City of Toronto, Canada, through selected artworks that address history, space, and place. e research is grounded in the idea that the selected artworks narrate Indigenous stories of place to visually demonstrate an alternative cartography that challenges myths of settlement situated in the colonial narratives of archaeology and geography. Indigenous artist Robert Houle has created artworks that narrate Indigenous stories of place using the memories and wisdom of Indigenous people in areas of art, archaeology, and geography (land). is visual map is grounded in the premise that the history of the land is embodied in Indigenous knowledge of concealed geographies and oral histories. It relies upon concepts of Native space and place to demonstrate the signicance of the embodied knowledges of Indigenous people and highlights the importance of reading the land as a valuable archive of memory and history. Keywords: Indigenous; art; geographies; space; urban; Toronto; Canada; 20th-21st centuries. Resumen: Este ensayo aborda las geografías ocultas de las historias indígenas en la ciudad de Toronto, Canadá, a través de obras de arte seleccionadas que abordan la historia, el espacio y el lugar. La investigación se basa en la idea de que las obras seleccionadas narran historias de lugar indígenas para mostrar visualmente una cartografía alternativa que desafía los mitos de asentamiento situados en las narrativas coloniales de la arqueología y la geografía.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage Property Research and Evaluation Report
    ATTACHMENT NO. 10 HERITAGE PROPERTY RESEARCH AND EVALUATION REPORT WILLIAM ROBINSON BUILDING 832 YONGE STREET, TORONTO Prepared by: Heritage Preservation Services City Planning Division City of Toronto December 2015 1. DESCRIPTION Above: view of the west side of Yonge Street, north of Cumberland Street and showing the property at 832 Yonge near the south end of the block; cover: east elevation of the William Robinson Building (Heritage Preservation Services, 2014) 832 Yonge Street: William Robinson Building ADDRESS 832 Yonge Street (west side between Cumberland Street and Yorkville Avenue) WARD Ward 27 (Toronto Centre-Rosedale) LEGAL DESCRIPTION Concession C, Lot 21 NEIGHBOURHOOD/COMMUNITY Yorkville HISTORICAL NAME William Robinson Building1 CONSTRUCTION DATE 1875 (completed) ORIGINAL OWNER Sleigh Estate ORIGINAL USE Commercial CURRENT USE* Commercial * This does not refer to permitted use(s) as defined by the Zoning By-law ARCHITECT/BUILDER/DESIGNER None identified2 DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION Brick cladding with brick, stone and wood detailing ARCHITECTURAL STYLE See Section 2.iii ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS See Section 2. iii CRITERIA Design/Physical, Historical/Associative & Contextual HERITAGE STATUS Listed on City of Toronto's Heritage Register RECORDER Heritage Preservation Services: Kathryn Anderson REPORT DATE December 2015 1 The building is named for the original and long-term tenant. Archival records indicate that the property, along with the adjoining site to the south was developed by the trustees of John Sleigh's estate 2 No architect or building is identified at the time of the writing of this report. Building permits do not survive for this period and no reference to the property was found in the Globe's tender calls 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Trailside Esterbrooke Kingslake Harringay
    MILLIKEN COMMUNITY TRAIL CONTINUES TRAIL CONTINUES CENTRE INTO VAUGHAN INTO MARKHAM Roxanne Enchanted Hills Codlin Anthia Scoville P Codlin Minglehaze THACKERAY PARK Cabana English Song Meadoway Glencoyne Frank Rivers Captains Way Goldhawk Wilderness MILLIKEN PARK - CEDARBRAE Murray Ross Festival Tanjoe Ashcott Cascaden Cathy Jean Flax Gardenway Gossamer Grove Kelvin Covewood Flatwoods Holmbush Redlea Duxbury Nipigon Holmbush Provence Nipigon Forest New GOLF & COUNTRY Anthia Huntsmill New Forest Shockley Carnival Greenwin Village Ivyway Inniscross Raynes Enchanted Hills CONCESSION Goodmark Alabast Beulah Alness Inniscross Hullmar Townsend Goldenwood Saddletree Franca Rockland Janus Hollyberry Manilow Port Royal Green Bush Aspenwood Chapel Park Founders Magnetic Sandyhook Irondale Klondike Roxanne Harrington Edgar Woods Fisherville Abitibi Goldwood Mintwood Hollyberry Canongate CLUB Cabernet Turbine 400 Crispin MILLIKENMILLIKEN Breanna Eagleview Pennmarric BLACK CREEK Carpenter Grove River BLACK CREEK West North Albany Tarbert Select Lillian Signal Hill Hill Signal Highbridge Arran Markbrook Barmac Wheelwright Cherrystone Birchway Yellow Strawberry Hills Strawberry Select Steinway Rossdean Bestview Freshmeadow Belinda Eagledance BordeauxBrunello Primula Garyray G. ROSS Fontainbleau Cherrystone Ockwell Manor Chianti Cabernet Laureleaf Shenstone Torresdale Athabaska Limestone Regis Robinter Lambeth Wintermute WOODLANDS PIONEER Russfax Creekside Michigan . Husband EAST Reesor Plowshare Ian MacDonald Nevada Grenbeck ROWNTREE MILLS PARK Blacksmith
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule 4 Description of Views
    SCHEDULE 4 DESCRIPTION OF VIEWS This schedule describes the views identified on maps 7a and 7b of the Official Plan. Views described are subject to the policies set out in section 3.1.1. Described views marked with [H] are views of heritage properties and are specifically subject to the view protection policies of section 3.1.5 of the Official Plan. A. PROMINENT AND HERITAGE BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES & LANDSCAPES A1. Queens Park Legislature [H] This view has been described in a comprehensive study and is the subject of a site and area specific policy of the Official Plan. It is not described in this schedule. A2. Old City Hall [H] The view of Old City hall includes the main entrance, tower and cenotaph as viewed from the southwest and southeast corners at Temperance Street and includes the silhouette of the roofline and clock tower. This view will also be the subject of a comprehensive study. A3. Toronto City Hall [H] The view of City Hall includes the east and west towers, the council chamber and podium of City Hall and the silhouette of those features as viewed from the north side of Queen Street West along the edge of the eastern half of Nathan Phillips Square. This view will be the subject of a comprehensive study. A4. Knox College Spire [H] The view of the Knox College Spire, as it extends above the roofline of the third floor, can be viewed from the north along Spadina Avenue at the southeast corner of Bloor Street West and at Sussex Avenue. A5.
    [Show full text]
  • Toronto Has No History!’
    ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ INDIGENEITY, SETTLER COLONIALISM AND HISTORICAL MEMORY IN CANADA’S LARGEST CITY By Victoria Jane Freeman A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Toronto ©Copyright by Victoria Jane Freeman 2010 ABSTRACT ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ ABSTRACT ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ INDIGENEITY, SETTLER COLONIALISM AND HISTORICAL MEMORY IN CANADA’S LARGEST CITY Doctor of Philosophy 2010 Victoria Jane Freeman Graduate Department of History University of Toronto The Indigenous past is largely absent from settler representations of the history of the city of Toronto, Canada. Nineteenth and twentieth century historical chroniclers often downplayed the historic presence of the Mississaugas and their Indigenous predecessors by drawing on doctrines of terra nullius , ignoring the significance of the Toronto Purchase, and changing the city’s foundational story from the establishment of York in 1793 to the incorporation of the City of Toronto in 1834. These chroniclers usually assumed that “real Indians” and urban life were inimical. Often their representations implied that local Indigenous peoples had no significant history and thus the region had little or no history before the arrival of Europeans. Alternatively, narratives of ethical settler indigenization positioned the Indigenous past as the uncivilized starting point in a monological European theory of historical development. i i iii In many civic discourses, the city stood in for the nation as a symbol of its future, and national history stood in for the region’s local history. The national replaced ‘the Indigenous’ in an ideological process that peaked between the 1880s and the 1930s.
    [Show full text]
  • Welcome to the Public Forum for the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Purpose of Tonight’S Meeting
    Welcome to the Public Forum for the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project Purpose of tonight’s meeting: • Introduction to the Project • Outline the information that is available • Collect your input Vision for the Don River Mouth • TWRC - Transform entire Toronto waterfront for all Canadians, to foster growth and to significantly enhance how the City is perceived. Naturalization and flood protection along the Lower Don River is one of four priority projects. • City of Toronto - A dream of transforming and re-energizing its waterfront into one of the great waterfronts of the world. A dream of building a spectacular gateway to this city, this province and this country. • Task Force to Bring Back the Don - An urban wilderness…shared by nature’s creatures alongside offices & homes; A destination…..people go to work or to have fun, & city meets nature; A gateway….for fish & wildlife, & people to travel; A large place……with space for solitude. • TRCA - An opportunity to correct the most significant flood risk hazard in their jurisdiction and to achieve a high level of naturalization along the Don River mouth.…an opportunity to have a dream realized. Status of Class EA Project Detailed Design & Contract Administration Lower Don River West - Class EA Component 1 of LDRW Remedial Flood Protection Project 1) Developed functional design for the protection of the Spill Zone 3 1) Design Team has been selected, conceptual alternatives have floodplain area – includes West Don Lands & East Bayfront Precinct been prepared, TAC and CLC meetings have been convened, Plans; and a Public Open House is also being held this evening, in Rm.
    [Show full text]
  • AECOM Report 1.Dot
    Environmental Assessment chapter 3. description of the potentially affected environment 3. Description of the Potentially Affected Environment This chapter is divided into four different sections which describe different components of the baseline or existing environmental conditions. The first section describes the river characteristics which will influence the development of alternatives. This information has been separated from the remaining description of the natural environment such that some emphasis can be given to those aspects of the existing environment that are driving the development of alternatives for the DMNP. The second section describes the remaining components of the natural environment: fish and fish habitat, terrestrial vegetation, and wildlife. The third section addresses components related to soils and groundwater contamination. The final section describes socio-economic components: land use, air quality and noise, archaeology, aboriginal interests, and built heritage. 3.1 River Characteristics in the Project and Impact Assessment Study Areas The Don Watershed possesses a dendretic drainage pattern that flows southward for 38 kilometres (as the crow flies) from the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) to the Inner Harbour of Toronto. The Don possesses two major branches (the East and West Don), each consisting of many smaller sub-watershed systems, such as but not limited to Taylor Massey Creek, Wilket Creek, Patterson Creek and Pomona Creek. The confluence of the East and West Branches occurs approximately 6 kilometres upstream of the Impact Assessment Study Area. Downstream from the confluence, the sub-watershed is known as the Lower Don and includes all of the Don Narrows until reaching the Keating Channel. The entire watershed area or drainage basin of the Don River is approximately 360 square kilometres (Figure 3−1).
    [Show full text]
  • Humber River Watershed Plan Pathways to a Healthy Humber June 2008
    HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED PLAN PAThwAYS TO A HEALTHY HUMBER JUNE 2008 Prepared by: Toronto and Region Conservation © Toronto and Region Conservation 2008 ISBN: 978-0-9811107-1-4 www.trca.on.ca 5 Shoreham Drive, Toronto, Ontario M3N 1S4 phone: 416-661-6600 fax: 416-661-6898 HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED PLAN PATHWAYS TO A HEALTHY HUMBER JUNE 2008 Prepared by: Toronto and Region Conservation i Humber River Watershed Plan, 2008 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Humber River Watershed Plan—Pathways to a Healthy Humber—was written by Suzanne Barrett, edited by Dean Young and represents the combined effort of many participants. Appreciation and thanks are extended to Toronto and Region Conservation staff and consultants (listed in Appendix F) for their technical support and input, to government partners for their financial support and input, and to Humber Watershed Alliance members for their advice and input. INCORPORATED 1850 Humber River Watershed Plan, 2008 ii HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED PLAN PATHWAYS TO A HEALTHY HUMBER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Humber River watershed is an extraordinary resource. It spans 903 square kilometres, from the headwaters on the Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine down through fertile clay plains to the marshes and river mouth on Lake Ontario. The watershed provides many benefits to the people who live in it. It is a source of drinking water drawn from wells or from Lake Ontario. Unpaved land absorbs water from rain and snowfall to replenish groundwater and streams and reduce the negative impacts of flooding and erosion. Healthy aquatic and terrestrial habitats support diverse communities of plants and animals. Agricultural lands provide local sources of food and green spaces provide recreation opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment 1: Table of Projects Being Planned Under the ERMP in 2021
    Attachment 1: Table of projects being planned under the ERMP in 2021 Municipality Ward Project Name Portfolio 2021 Project Status City of Brampton 2 Wegneast Valley Erosion Control Project Region of Peel Erosion Control & Infrastructure Protection Construction City of Brampton 7 I-360/I-361 Region of Peel Erosion Control & Infrastructure Protection Study, Planning or Design York Region Streambank Infrastructure Erosion Control City of Markham 1 German Mills Settlers Park Sites 2-3 Sanitary Infrastructure Protection Management Program Study, Planning or Design City of Markham 4 70 Main Street South Erosion Control Project TRCA Maintenance & Other Hazards (York Region) Construction City of Mississauga 5 Brandon Gate Park - Bank Stabilization Project Region of Peel Erosion Control & Infrastructure Protection Construction City of Mississauga 5 I-700 Region of Peel Erosion Control & Infrastructure Protection Study, Planning or Design York Region Streambank Infrastructure Erosion Control City of Richmond Hill 5 Patterson Creek I-066, I-067, I-065, I-064, P-102 Management Program Post-Construction York Region Streambank Infrastructure Erosion Control City of Richmond Hill 5 Patterson Creek near North Richvale Sanitary Infrastructure Protection Management Program Construction City of Richmond Hill 5 Patterson Valley South Richvale Erosion Hazards Fee For Service Post-Construction City of Toronto 1 22-24 Bucksburn Road Erosion Control and Slope Stabilization Project Valley Erosion Hazards Study, Planning or Design City of Toronto 1 Hadrian Drive
    [Show full text]
  • Integrating Transportation and Land Use Planning at the Metropolitan Level in North America 185
    Integrating transportation and land use planning at the metropolitan level in North America: multilevel governance in Toronto and Chicago Integrando o planejamento de transporte e de uso do solo em escala metropolitana na América do Norte: governança multinível em Toronto e Chicago Fanny R. Tremblay-Racicot[a], Jean Mercier[b] Licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons DOI: 10.7213/urbe.06.002.SE04 ISSN 2175-3369 [a] Ph.D candidate in Urban Studies at Department of Geography and Urban Studies, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA - United States, e-mail: [email protected] [b] Ph.D in public administration (SU), professor at Université Laval, Québec, QC - Canada, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract This article compares the policies and processes by which transportation and land use planning are integra- ted in metropolitan Toronto, Canada, and Chicago, in the United States. Using twenty-four semi-structured interviews with key informants, it describes the array of interventions undertaken by governmental and non-governmental actors in their respective domains to shed light on how the challenge of integrating trans- portation and land use planning is addressed on both sides of the border. Evidence concerning the political dynamics in Toronto and Chicago demonstrates that the capacity of metropolitan institutions to adopt and implement plans that integrate transportation with land use fundamentally depends on the leadership of the province or the state government. Although the federal government of each nation can bypass the sub-national level and intervene in local affairs by funding transportation projects that include land use components, its capacity to promote a coherent metropolitan vision is inherently limited.
    [Show full text]