Authority Meeting #6/16 Was Held at TRCA Head Office, on Friday, July 22, 2016. the Chair Maria Augimeri, Called the Meeting to Order at 9:30 A.M

Authority Meeting #6/16 was held at TRCA Head Office, on Friday, July 22, 2016. The Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m.

PRESENT Maria Augimeri Chair David Barrow Member Ronald Chopowick Member Vincent Crisanti Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Michael Di Biase Vice Chair Jennifer Drake Member Jack Heath Member Jennifer Innis Member Colleen Jordan Member Matt Mahoney Member Giorgio Mammoliti Member Mike Mattos Member Jennifer McKelvie Member Frances Nunziata Member Linda Pabst Member Anthony Perruzza Member Gino Rosati Member John Sprovieri Member Jim Tovey Member

ABSENT Paul Ainslie Member Kevin Ashe Member Jack Ballinger Member Justin Di Ciano Member Chris Fonseca Member Maria Kelleher Member Glenn Mason Member Ron Moeser Member

RES.#A107/16 - MINUTES

Moved by: Linda Pabst Seconded by: Jim Tovey

THAT the Minutes of Meeting #5/16, held on June 24, 2016, be approved. CARRIED ______

325 PRESENTATIONS

5.1 A presentation by Scott Bryk, Executive Director, Trees for Life, in regard to The Highway of Heroes Living Tribute.

RES.#A108/16 - PRESENTATION

Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Mike Mattos

THAT above-noted presentation 5.1 be referred to staff. CARRIED ______

326 Section I – Items for Authority Action

RES.#A109/16 - NATIONAL DISASTER MITIGATION PROGRAM Approval to pursue further funding for flood risk mitigation projects through the National Disaster Mitigation Program.

Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick

WHEREAS the Government of Canada has established the National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP), allocating funding toward initiatives aimed at reducing the impacts of flooding;

AND WHEREAS the NDMP provides an excellent opportunity to address funding gaps for flood and hazard mitigation and to accelerate flood mitigation initiatives across Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s (TRCA) jurisdiction to support TRCA’s partner municipalities;

AND WHEREAS some matching funding for NDMP projects is available through TRCA’s capital budget for Water Risk Management;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff, in partnership with TRCA’s municipal partners, continue to pursue National Disaster Mitigation Program funding to accelerate flood risk mitigation projects;

THAT TRCA staff be directed to work with municipal staff to share information from NDMP projects and where applicable, request financial support for special projects outside of TRCA’s capital budget process;

AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority in 2018 and 2020 to provide a summary of the work that has been completed with funding from the NDMP. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 2015, the federal government established the National Disaster Mitigation Program, allocating $200 million over five years toward initiatives aimed at reducing the impacts of natural disasters, specifically flooding.

The objectives of the federal program are to: a) focus investments on significant, recurring flood risk and costs; and b) advance work to facilitate private residential insurance for overland flooding.

Of the earmarked funds, $183.8 million has been allocated as contribution funds to be cost- shared with provinces and territories. Although provincial and territorial governments are the eligible recipients of the funds, they may collaborate with, and redistribute funding to, other eligible entities, which include municipal or local governments and other public sector entities, including conservation authorities. As the holders of delegated responsibility for flood management at a watershed scale, conservation authorities are ideally-positioned project partners in this endeavor.

327 Funds are allocated to approved projects on a cost-sharing basis; the project proponents must contribute 50% of the project costs from existing or confirmed funding. Projects are selected for funding through a competitive, merit-based process at the federal level, and are also prioritized at the provincial level by the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Projects must fall within one of the four eligible streams to receive funding from the NDMP: 1) Risk Assessment; 2) Flood Mapping; 3) Flood Mitigation Planning; 4) Investments in non-structural and small-scale structural mitigation projects.

The above streams are defined by the NDMP guidelines, which also detail eligible and ineligible expenses.

TRCA can thus utilize NDMP funding to accelerate applicable flood mitigation initiatives funded from TRCA’s capital budget for Water Risk Management. For the initial call for funding in 2015- 2016, TRCA was successful in securing $305,000 in NDMP funding for projects in the Risk Assessment and Flood Mapping streams.

This funding is supporting the following projects, to be completed by March 2018:  A comprehensive update to TRCA’s Flood Vulnerable Areas database, creating a new geospatial tool to support mitigation analysis, emergency planning, public communication, and the prioritization of future risk reduction projects.  Two-dimensional hydraulic modelling for high-risk areas, including for the Rockcliffe Special Policy Area (SPA) (Black Creek) and Pickering/Ajax SPAs (Duffins Creek).  A key component of this funding will be devoted to the acquisition of LiDAR base mapping for improved accuracy and utility.

It is important to note that information generated through an approved NDMP project is required to be shared with the Government of Canada. The information that arises out of an approved NDMP project may be copied and made available to Canada’s government institutions, any province, foreign state, international organization or any other entity to promote a better understanding of disaster mitigation in Canada and support their emergency management activities

Public Safety Canada has already informed proponents that the next call for proposals will be in September 2016 and it is anticipated that call for proposals will continue to be announced 1-2 times per year.

RATIONALE TRCA is mandated with responsibilities to reduce risk to life and property damage caused by riverine flooding in the Greater Toronto Area. TRCA has implemented a variety of measures to address flood risks in their watersheds, including:  regulation of land development in floodplains;  interfacing with municipal land use planners to solve urban redevelopment constraints and infrastructure upgrading for resilient communities;  development of floodplain mapping and hydrologic modelling;  development of flood risk and mitigation plans;  operation of a “Flood Forecasting and Warning” program, which includes the issuance of flood warning messages;

328  monitoring of watershed conditions (including streamflow, precipitation, snowpack and meteorological data);  operation of flood control structures; and  providing technical support and advice to assist municipalities in the development of emergency management plans to minimize flood risks.

Funding from the federal government through the NDMP complements TRCA’s existing mandate, as outlined in the table below, and provides an opportunity to fill funding gaps to address outstanding needs.

NDMP Project Stream TRCA Flood Risk Management Activities 1. Risk Assessment Estimated floodline mapping, Flood Vulnerable Area database updates 2. Flood Mapping Regulatory floodplain maps, updated hydrology studies, updated 1D and 2D hydraulic models 3. Flood Mitigation Planning Flood remediation environmental assessments, feasibility studies, etc. 4. Investment in non-structural and small- Emergency plans, flood risk education scale structural mitigation projects workshops, real-time gauging improvements, berms, channels, and other small-scale flood infrastructure

In order to ensure eligibility and also strategically address the criteria against which projects will be weighed at the provincial and federal level, TRCA proposes to continue applying for funding from the NDMP, using the following criteria to determine whether or not a project should be included in the NDMP funding request: 1) Availability of matching funds: the project must have a funding source within TRCA’s budget process, or source matching funds through a partner municipality, in order to meet the 50% cost-sharing criteria. 2) The project must meet the NDMP Project Stream definition and provide a benefit that is directly relatable to reducing flood risk – i.e.: the main purpose of the project must be the reduction of flood risk. 3) The project location (where applicable) must represent a high degree of flood risk. 4) Projects must continue to demonstrate that TRCA is working with our municipal partners to address priority areas.

Project funding applications will be developed over the next four years based on the above- noted criteria. At the provincial and federal level, projects are only assessed against others within the same stream. TRCA’s Engineering Services staff will identify projects of similar nature and scope and will further group them together as a program under each funding application. Where projects are site-specific, the benefitting area must represent both a high degree of flood risk, and an alignment with municipal priorities. The degree of risk for site specific projects will be informed by the updated Flood Vulnerable Areas database, as well as previously identified priority areas in the Flood Protection and Remedial Capital Works Strategy. Examples of projects that may be pursued include:  updates to hydrology and hydraulic models using LiDAR information;  two-dimensional hydraulic modeling studies for high risk areas;  floodplain mapping updates and extension studies to utilize best available technology and account for future extreme weather events;

329  increasing the density of the real-time gauging network;  improved real-time flood forecasting tools;  feasibility studies or environmental assessments for flood mitigation measures;  improved risk communication tools and channels.

FINANCIAL DETAILS Eligible expenses relating to TRCA’s proposed projects include, but are not limited to:  Flood mapping and forecasting.  Purchase of equipment used to undertake mitigation or support the implementation of permanent structural mitigation measures.  Consultant fees.  Risk and vulnerability assessments.  Disaster mitigation planning.  Public flood risk awareness programs.  Planning and feasibility activities for structural mitigation.  Small-scale structural mitigation.  Improvement or modernization of existing permanent structural measures.

Certain costs are ineligible for NDMP funding, such as:  Costs relating to events and equipment which are considered to be the routine responsibility of provincial ministries or first responder agencies such as police, fire and ambulance.  Ongoing operation and maintenance cost for NDMP initiatives following completion of the project.  Administrative costs which are not directly related to a specific NDMP project.  Hospitality costs.  Mitigation projects that would yield only temporary measures (ie: sandbags).  Mitigation projects that would create an ongoing need for funds from the federal government or its recipient that cannot be absorbed in their current budget process.  Projects that address needs that are not related to prevention/mitigation.

The following table outlines the anticipated funding intended to be allocated as matching funds to the NDMP program over the next four years from TRCA’s capital budget for Water Risk Management (accounts 127-90 Floodline Mapping and 107-02 flood protection and remedial studies).

Municipality Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Durham $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Peel $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Toronto $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 York $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Total $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000

330 In addition, if priority projects are identified through this process, for which matching funds are not available from TRCA’s capital budget, TRCA staff intend to approach interested municipal partners to request additional funding outside the capital budget process, as required, to support special projects applicable to the National Disaster Mitigation Program.

Report prepared by: Rehana Rajabali, extension 5220 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Rehana Rajabali, extension 5220, Sameer Dhalla, extension 5350 Emails: [email protected], [email protected] Date: July 5, 2016

______

331 RES.#A110/16 - ONTARIO’S CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION PLAN Summary Update. Update on provincial climate change action plan as it relates to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and partner municipalities.

Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jennifer McKelvie

THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff continue to follow changes in provincial climate policy and program implementation, engage as appropriate with the Province of Ontario and provide future updates to the Authority as implications to TRCA and partner municipality operations and activities become clearer. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #2/16, held on April 1, 2016, Resolution #A14/16 directed staff to continue to monitor and report back on milestone developments concerning provincial climate change policy and program implementation.

In May 2016 the Climate Change Mitigation and Low-carbon Economy Act, 2016 passed through the Provincial Legislature and entered into legislation. The Act establishes Ontario’s greenhouse gas reduction targets in law, and sets out the policy framework for achieving them:  15% below 1990 levels by 2020  37% below 1990 levels by 2030  80% below 1990 levels by 2050

The Act also provides a framework for reviewing and increasing emission reduction targets, as well as establishing additional interim targets (e.g. 2025; 2035, etc).

A central component of the policy framework to 2020 and beyond is the implementation of a cap-and-trade program in collaboration with California and Quebec. Ontario’s cap-and-trade program would regulate more than 80 per cent of the Province’s total emissions by requiring industry, fossil fuel electricity generators, and distributors of transportation and heating fuels to hold emissions credits equal to their total annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Emissions outside of the cap-and-trade program, such as those in agriculture, forestry and other land use, are proposed to be covered indirectly by an offset system which the Province has yet to release details on.

While large industrial and institutional emitters are set to receive credits free of charge on an interim basis, distributors of heating and transportation fuels, as well as electricity generators would be obligated to purchase permits via provincially-administered quarterly auctions starting January 1 2017, the costs of which will be passed-through to consumers of these fuels. This means that Enbridge and Union Gas will be the largest auction participants at the outset. Funds raised through these quarterly auctions will be deposited into the new Greenhouse Gas Reduction Account (GGRA), which fund GHG reduction initiatives included in the Climate Change Action Plan.

332 Ontario Climate Change Action Plan – Key Highlights The Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) released its Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) in early June 2016. The CCAP details how cap-and-trade proceeds, deposited in the GGRA, will be spent on initiatives related to: energy use, land use and buildings, infrastructure, transportation, industry, agriculture and forestry, waste management, education and training, and research and innovation. The Act requires the Province to provide annual progress reports for achieving mitigation targets and to update the CCAP every five years.

Green Bank ($875 million -$1.1 billion) One of the key announcements to emerge out of the 2016 CCAP is the creation of a new Green Bank for homeowners and businesses. Capitalized by revenues from the cap-and-trade program, the Green Bank would boost investment in clean-technology and accelerate the deployment of renewable energy and other low carbon technologies.

The Green Bank would help homeowners and businesses (particularly small and medium-sized enterprises) understand the scope of available grants and incentives for low carbon retrofits, and access low interest financing. The Green Bank would work with the financial sector to aggregate small projects to reduce risks for third-party financiers. Up to $1 billion has been set aside from GGRA to help fund the industry side of the Green Bank.

In developing a provincial Green Bank, the Province is following the lead of international jurisdictions including the United Kingdom, Australia and a number of US states including New York, Vermont and Connecticut. The “delivery model” for the Green Bank will be finalized in 2016 through further analysis of Green Banks in other jurisdictions, and in consultation with existing natural gas and electricity utilities.

Transportation ($1.1-$1.75 billion) Within the transportation sector it is noteworthy that the Province opted not to develop a zero-emissions vehicle mandate, which is an approach used in California that requires automakers to produce a certain percentage of zero emissions vehicles for sale. The Province instead opted for an incentive-based approach to encourage consumers to purchase electric vehicles ($140-$160 million), install charging stations ($80 million) and for fuel distributions to increase use of biofuels ($100-$155 million). The 2016 CCAP also commits investment to support active transportation infrastructure ($150-$225 million), and for the freight transportation sector to purchase low carbon vehicles ($125-$170 million) and build out a low carbon fueling network ($75-$100 million).

Given Ontario’s position as a major auto production centre, the Province has committed to investing in the creation of a new Global Centre for Low Carbon Mobility ($100-$140 million), to be based at an unnamed post-secondary institution in Ontario. Also noteworthy is the commitment of GGRA investment to accelerate the deployment of Metrolinx’s Regional Express Rail program ($355-$675 million).

Buildings and Homes ($2.1-$3 billion) There is a strong focus on multi-unit residential buildings, with social housing ($300-$500 million) and apartment ($300-$400 million) retrofits a major priority. There is also significant capital for retrofitting public institutions such as schools, post-secondary institutions and hospitals ($400-$800 million). There is additional capital available for homeowner retrofits ($500-$600 million) as well as for the construction of net-zero homes ($180-$220 million), which CCAP states will become mandatory for all new residential home construction by 2030. It is unclear whether the Green Bank referred to above will be the delivery model for these investments.

333

The 2016 CCAP also provides funding for energy audits of pre-sale homes (both new and existing), with the resulting energy rating now required to be included in real estate listings ($200-$250 million). Related to this is a new requirement for energy reporting and benchmarking for large multi-unit residential and commercial buildings. Finally, the Province will create a new low carbon content requirement for natural gas, which should stimulate a market for renewable natural gas from the waste and agriculture sectors.

Land-Use Planning ($280-$350 million) The initiatives laid out in the 2016 CCAP around land use planning include legislative changes to empower municipalities to set Green Development standards in areas other than building construction. The Province also intends to consult and propose amendments to the Planning Act to make climate change a provincial interest, and make climate change mitigation and adaptation mandatory in official plans Complementing this intended requirement, CCAP includes a commitment to develop guidance for consideration of climate change in municipal policies and programs.

Initiatives also include the creation of a Challenge Fund to support emission reduction projects proposed by municipalities that already have community energy plans and GHG inventories in place. Projects will get matching funding, with a total of $250-$300 million set aside for this new program starting in 2017/2018. In addition to this Challenge Fund is a Climate Change Partnerships Fund ($7 million) to support partnerships with community organizations, institutions, and the private sector to design and deliver low carbon initiatives.

Community energy planning is a prominent focus of this section, with funding for the development of plans and training/guidance to help communities access energy use data for their planning and energy use mapping. There is also support for collaborative data driven approaches to carbon reduction such as: district wide mapping of gas, electricity, heating/cooling, water, and transport to enable district-wide decisions.

Government ($165-$175 million) The 2016 CCAP establishes a new GHG reduction target for the Ontario Public Service (OPS) of 50% below 2006 levels by 2030, with a commitment to developing a long-term strategy to move toward carbon neutrality in the long-term. To achieve this ambitious target, CCAP includes commitments to increase opportunities for telecommuting by OPS staff, as well as scale-up the greening of the provincial government’s vehicle fleet and other procurement. The Province opted not to extend this requirement to the broader public sector but will arguably be setting the example for other government sectors and potentially influence wider-spread adoption of carbon neutral operations across other levels of government.

Agriculture, Forests and Lands ($55-$65 million) The 2016 CCAP commits to developing a land use carbon inventory to assess the potential of agriculture, forestry and other land uses to sequester carbon, as well as a Forest Carbon Policy Framework to support the development of a carbon offset market to work in conjunction with the cap-and-trade program. This section of CCAP also reiterates the Province’s commitment to expanding the Greenbelt, protecting grasslands, and supporting tree planting efforts (with specific and substantial increases in urban areas, as well as to disseminate guidance on how to consider climate change in environmental assessments.

334 Potential Implications for TRCA and Partner Municipalities There is considerable consultation to come on initiatives such as the Green Bank, the carbon offset system, and on cap-and-trade program details post 2020, before the final details and implications are known. However, it is clear that the broad scope of initiatives across major emitting sectors, backed by reinvestment of revenues from the cap-and-trade program, makes CCAP the most ambitious climate change policy document seen to date in Ontario.

This 2016 CCAP is clearly directed at the urban and suburban climate challenge in the Greater Golden Horseshoe with large investments focused on the major sources of emissions: personal transportation and the building sector. The Province will be under considerable pressure to roll-out the large number of initiatives and consultation processes in an efficient manner over the next several years, and will be looking to develop and engage in partnerships with local government to support implementation. TRCA and partner municipalities are well-positioned to provide implementation support and help channel investment flowing from the GGRA to transform built infrastructure and increase green infrastructure across the region. For example, much of the investment committed for electric vehicle and active transportation infrastructure should flow directly through municipal government authorities, as should dollars allocated to transform social housing stock. Funding for urban tree planting is also an area where municipal governments and conservation authorities will need to take a leading role. Existing TRCA programs such as the Ontario Climate Consortium, Partners in Project Green, Sustainable Neighbourhoods Action Plan, Community Transformations and Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program can help partner municipalities leverage provincial investment by supporting partnerships, research and innovation, generating actionable evidence, and supporting identification of effective GHG reduction actions and priority projects for collective impact.

Municipalities that already have corporate/community energy plans or climate change policies with GHG emission inventories in place will be able to access the Climate Change Challenge Fund ($250-$300 million) and secure matching funding for their initiatives. The 2016 CCAP also commits funds to support municipalities with development of community energy and GHG inventories.

Beyond the financial opportunities, the 2016 CCAP also commits to the development of a range of tools which should help municipalities drive down emissions while also supporting other economic and social objectives such as reducing air pollution and traffic congestion. For example, proposed amendments to the Municipal Act and City of Toronto Act would enable municipalities to require electric vehicle charging stations in surface parking lots as well as set Green Development Standards beyond new building construction. CCAP would also provide tools to support the pilot implementation of congestion management plans and “low emissions zones” such as those in place in London, UK and Stockholm, Sweden.

For TRCA, other conservation authorities (CAs) and municipalities across the Province, there may be opportunities to engage as part of the development of policy to support the provincial carbon offset system. CCAP commits to the development of a Land Use Carbon Inventory as well as a Forest Carbon Policy Framework. The role of CA and municipally-owned lands in sequestering carbon is not mentioned in the context of the future carbon offset system, however policy advocacy in this regard should be a priority initiative for CA’s and partner municipalities, particularly if funding to increase tree planting efforts is accessed and applied to CA and municipal lands.

335 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE There is an opportunity for TRCA and partner municipalities to proactively engage with MOECC to better understand some of the municipally-oriented initiatives announced under the 2016 CCAP such as the Climate Change Challenge Fund and the Climate Partnerships Fund. There is also a need to engage with the Province on the development of the Forest Carbon Policy Framework so that the value of CA and municipally-owned lands are recognized from a carbon sequestration standpoint.

Staff will continue to monitor policy developments, engage directly with MOECC staff to seek further information and guidance around the aforementioned initiatives relating to municipal government implementation, and report back to the Authority when further details and analysis are available.

Report prepared by: Ian McVey, 416-451-1420 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Ian McVey, 416-451-1420 Emails: [email protected] Date: July 22, 2016

______

RES.#A111/16 - TRCA WETLAND BALANCE MONITORING PROTOCOL Authority approval of TRCA’s Wetland Water Balance Monitoring Protocol, a technical guideline developed to support Appendix D: Water Balance for Protection of Natural Features of TRCA’s Stormwater Management (SWM) Criteria document (2012) and The Living City Policies for Planning and Development in the Watersheds of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.

Moved by: Jennifer Innis Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick

THAT item 7.3 – TRCA Wetland Balance Monitoring Protocol be deferred to Authority Meeting #7/16, scheduled to be held on September 23, 2016. CARRIED ______

336 RES.#A112/16 - INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCE EVALUATION TOOL A Partnership with Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation and Ryerson University. Research partnership with Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation and Ryerson University to support the development of an Integrated Water Resource Evaluation Tool

Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: John Sprovieri

WHEREAS Ryerson University has an Urban Water research centre focused on advancing the science around urban water issues and has proposed a research project with a theme around integrated water management systems in partnership with Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (Waterfront Toronto);

AND WHEREAS Waterfront Toronto, a longstanding partner with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), has agreed to fund phase 1 of this research and requested TRCA to participate as an in-kind partner;

AND WHEREAS TRCA is generally seeking to advance our state of knowledge and practice in the proposed research theme;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA establish formal partnerships with Waterfront Toronto and Ryerson University specifically to enable the development of an Integrated Water Resource Evaluation Tool and maximize applicability across the TRCA jurisdiction;

AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority with outcomes of Year 1 and project approach determined for Year 2. CARRIED BACKGROUND In early 2015, the Urban Water Institute at Ryerson University presented a proposal to Waterfront Toronto on the theme of integrated urban water management strategies that might have application to areas subject to revitalization along the waterfront. In early 2016, Waterfront Toronto confirmed their interest in funding the initial phase of the research and then engaged TRCA to also participate as an in-kind project partner. Discussions were also had with the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC), who confirmed interest as a stakeholder, and with Toronto Water who confirmed support by way of in-kind contribution and may be prepared to increase its support for later stages of the project.

The project seeks to develop an Integrated Water Resource Evaluation Tool (the Tool) that would primarily assist municipal planners and engineers, and other interested stakeholders, to evaluate and refine the design of water management systems that could integrate multiple options such as innovative water technology options, low impact development (LID) tools and water reuse. The Tool is essentially a decision-making support framework that captures and considers the complex interrelationships and interactions of integrated urban water management strategies and determines if a given design approach will achieve a desired benefit(s), and at what cost. With innovation as a central theme to this research, the Tool will enable the consideration of decentralized water services and identify potential benefits such as:  recovering energy and nutrients;  reducing energy consumption;  increasing resiliency to climate change.

337

The preferred design options will be selected based on a set of evaluation criteria developed in consultation with project stakeholders and informed by subject matter expertise together with a comprehensive literature review of global best practices. Preliminary work on the literature review has already started but official project initiation is anticipated for August or September 2016. The anticipated overall project timeline is two years, with the following deliverables:

Year 1 (a) literature review; (b) stakeholder workshop and summary reports; (c) finalization of evaluation criteria; and (d) decision-making support system framework.

Year 2 (a) the Tool; (b) application of the Tool to Villiers Island, Toronto as a case study; (c) final report, with technical manual; and (d) final presentation.

The project partners for Year 1 include Waterfront Toronto, Ryerson University and TRCA. The stakeholder group includes the project partners, MOECC, Toronto Water as well as other invited municipalities and conservation authorities.

The project partners for Year 2 are proposed as Toronto Water and Ryerson University, with Waterfront Toronto and TRCA only retaining their roles as stakeholders; all other stakeholders would remain the same.

All project partners agree that the Tool would be transferable, with no license fee, to other Waterfront Toronto precincts and to other parts of the City of Toronto, TRCA jurisdiction and other areas of Ontario, serving the objective of market transformation.

RATIONALE With the urgent challenge that climate change poses to all of us and our growing cities, there is a collective need to better understand and rigorously consider municipal servicing designs which take advantage of multiple benefits that work to save energy and increase system resilience to climate change and extreme weather. This partnership represents the opportunity to deepen that knowledge and commit to a collaborative process that accesses leading-edge research, strengthens coordination amongst municipal partners, and delivers a consistent approach in identifying and evaluating the suite of common opportunities and barriers – from policy to operations - associated with integrated urban water management.

TRCA’s Living City Policies, Key Principle 7 asserts TRCA’s priority interest around “incorporating innovative city design to optimize long term economic, social, cultural, human health and environmental benefits.” This project is consistent with and directly helps implement TRCA’s policy. Further, with TRCA participating as a project partner, staff can best ensure internal expertise and experience is appropriately translated, and connection to municipal stakeholders is comprehensive such that intentions for future knowledge mobilization and transfer are optimized.

338 Finally, planned investigations led by TRCA’s Research and Climate Programs section already involve quantitatively examining more holistic and integrated approaches to water management that can be implemented to reduce flood, erosion and water quality issues under different land use and climate change scenarios. This direction of priority research, currently focused in Peel Region, is expected to benefit from insights gained through this proposed partnership and research outcomes.

FINANCIAL DETAILS The project budget is divided into two parts: Year 1 ($74,550) and Year 2 ($66,000). Waterfront Toronto will be providing full funding for Year 1 through a transfer of payment to TRCA. TRCA will then administer these funds as a grant directly to Ryerson University. Having TRCA undertake the role of fund administrator to Ryerson University was the preferred arrangement by Waterfront Toronto as it took advantage of TRCA’s extensive experience in partnering with academic institutions. TRCA will receive a 5% administrative fee as cost recovery and provide in-kind support as a steering committee stakeholder and facilitate the broader stakeholder engagement. All of these tasks are not considered major investments of staff time.

No funding commitment is in place for Year 2; however, it is the intent of Waterfront Toronto and Toronto Water to pursue a grant from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Green Municipal Fund under their “feasibility study” category. If the grant application is not successful, other funding options will be considered by partners to complete Year 2 deliverables (delivery of the tool, case study and final report). Year 2 of the project will be re-scoped or not proceed until such time as funding is secured. Therefore, there is no financial commitment by TRCA for Year 2, however staff would participate in discussions and apply reasonable effort to identify a scenario that allows this research to be completed in the desired timeframe.

DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE In recognition of the benefits outlined above related to assessing innovative and integrated urban water designs, it is recommended that staff be directed to enter into partnerships with Waterfront Toronto and Ryerson Urban Water, coordinate the necessary agreements to ensure Year 1 research activities and deliverables can be completed, and report back to the Authority with outcomes of Year 1 and project approach determined for Year 2.

Report prepared by: Fabio Tonto, extension 5613 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Fabio Tonto or Christine Tu Emails: [email protected]; [email protected] Date: July 22, 2016

______

339 RES.#A113/16 - GREATER TORONTO AIRPORTS AUTHORITY Agreement for Collaboration on Electric Vehicle Charging Station Installations. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, through Partners in Project Green: A Person Eco-Business Zone program, has received a request from the Greater Toronto Airports Authority to collaborate on the installation of 32 electric vehicle charging stations on Airport lands, using grant funding provided through the Ministry of Transportation’s Electric Vehicle Chargers Ontario program.

Moved by: Ronald Chopowick Seconded by: Mike Mattos

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation (TRCA) and the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) have successfully collaborated for over two decades to advance the protection and restoration of natural resources in TRCA watersheds including the development of “Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone”, an initiative to develop North America's largest eco-business zone on the industrial lands surrounding Toronto Pearson International Airport;

AND WHEREAS TRCA is in receipt of a request from the GTAA to enter into an agreement to facilitate the procurement and installation of electric vehicle charging stations with funding made available from the Ministry of Transportation (MTO);

AND WHEREAS GTAA’s initiative complements Partners in Project Green’s Open EV Network original goal of installing 100 charging stations and influencing the largest rollout of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSA) in the GTA;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a transfer payment agreement (TPA) with MTO to receive and use $2.685 million, made available through the Electric Vehicle Chargers Ontario (EVCO) program, to fund the installation and operation (for a five-year term) of 32 electric vehicle charging stations at four locations on GTAA lands by March 31, 2017;

THAT TRCA enter into an agreement with the GTAA to facilitate the procurement and installation of electric vehicle charging stations with funding made available from MTO;

THAT TRCA’s agreement with GTAA be subject to the following terms and conditions: (i) that the term of the agreement shall be for five years; (ii) that TRCA and GTAA shall collaboratively procure and install the electric vehicle charging stations subject to TRCA’s procurement policies; (iii) that GTAA shall be solely responsible for maintaining and operating all electric vehicle charging stations and related assets and services; (iv) that GTAA shall be responsible for any permitting approvals required for the construction and operation of the electric vehicle charging stations; (v) that GTAA shall be accountable for and prepare all information required for reporting back to MTO; (vi) that GTAA shall be responsible for any costs incurred in excess of the TPA funding amount;

340 (vii) that GTAA shall brand charging station installations with TRCA program logos, include them as part of TRCA’s Open EV Network of existing charging stations in the Greater Toronto Area, and provide TRCA access to station use data; and (viii) that the final terms and conditions of the agreement be satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors;

AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction, including obtaining necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND Electric Vehicle Chargers Ontario Program In accordance with objectives laid out in Ontario’s Climate Change Strategy, the Province of Ontario is investing $20 million from the Green Investment Fund to support the build-out of a network of public electric vehicle charging stations.

This expansion in charging infrastructure across the Province will help address "range anxiety," a common concern of consumers regarding the distance electric vehicles can travel compared to traditional vehicles. By building a more robust network of public chargers across Ontario, electric vehicle owners can now plan longer trips with more confidence that a charging station is as readily available as a gas station is. A shift to low- and zero-emission vehicles is vital to the fight against climate change and achieving Ontario's greenhouse gas pollution reduction target of 80 per cent below 1990 levels by 2050.

From December 2015 to February 2016, the EVCO grant program, administered through the Ministry of Transportation, solicited public and private sector partners to submit funding applications and strategies to develop a network of fast-charging stations in cities, along highways and at workplaces, condominiums, and public places across Ontario. Twenty-seven successful applicants were notified regarding their funding eligibility in April 2016 and are expected to install 280 Level 2 charging stations (2-7 hour charge) and 213 Level 3 charging stations (20-30 minute charge) by March 31, 2017.

Partners in Project Green’s Open EV Network Since 2008, the GTAA and TRCA have been collaborating through Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone program, a joint initiative to build the largest eco-business community in the world.

In 2014, Partners in Project Green’s energy performance team undertook a collective project to boost the adoption of electric vehicles via the installation of networked Level 2 charging stations across the GTA. To date, TRCA’s Partners in Project Green staff has currently overseen the successful installation of 84 networked Level 2 charging ports, working with 15 organizations and six service providers.

Greater Toronto Airports Authority The GTAA has always been proactive in taking a systems approach to tackling climate change. They have halved their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions since 2006 and are aiming to achieve an 80 per cent reduction by 2050. Toronto Pearson Airport already has 90 Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations installed at various locations on their lands, and a fleet of electric cars to facilitate low emission mobility for their passengers and employees.

341 Recognizing TRCA’s experience with electric vehicle charging station procurement and installation, our aligned objectives to facilitate the adoption of low emission transportation, and our 20-year long-standing relationship, the GTAA reached out to TRCA with a request for partnership on this landmark project. The project is anticipated to cost $4.3 million and the GTAA has budgeted $1.7 million of their own funds to carry out these charging station installations.

GTAA was successful in their grant application to MTO’s Electric Vehicle Chargers Ontario Program, and obtained $2,685,000 to subsidize the installation for 22 Level 2 and 10 Level 3 charging stations at the GTAA locations noted in the table below. Upon entering into an agreement with the GTAA, TRCA will receive and manage these funds and provide valuable support to procure the charging station infrastructure and associated services.

Location ID Location Level 2 EVSE Level 3 EVSE GTA 1 8 Network Road, Mississauga 0 5 GTA 2 3111 Convair Drive, Mississauga 2 5 GTA 3 6301 Silver Dart Drive, Mississauga (T3) 10 0 GTA 4 6301 Silver Dart Drive, Mississauga (T1) 10 0 TOTAL 22 10

RATIONALE The Open EV Network project has resulted in TRCA’s Partners in Project Green staff developing a vast amount of electric vehicle supply equipment expertise and resources, which would be invaluable if made available to the GTAA to optimize their infrastructure selection and procurement process and ensure successful achievement of their project objectives.

The original goal of the Open EV Network project was to install 100 charging ports. Currently at 84, the addition of 32 branded and networked charging stations would allow Partners in Project Green to meet this milestone achievement and be recognized as influencing the largest rollout of EVSE in the GTA.

DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Upon TRCA approval, the necessary other approvals required to bring this agreement into effect will be pursued.

FINANCIAL DETAILS The execution of this agreement will not have any ongoing financial impact to TRCA.

Report prepared by: Adam Vaiya, 416-275-8377 Email: [email protected] For Information Contact: Adam Vaiya, 416-275-8377 Email: [email protected] Date: July 5, 2016

______

342 RES.#A114/16 - KOBEN SYSTEMS INCORPORATED Proposal to Install and Operation Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Regional Municipalities of Peel, York and Durham, City of Toronto. Receipt of a request from Koben Systems Incorporated to enter into an agreement to install and operate 21 electric vehicle charging stations at 14 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority-owned or leased sites using funding awarded to Koben Systems Incorporated through the Ministry of Transportation’s Electric Vehicle Chargers Ontario program.

Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jennifer McKelvie

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from Koben Systems Incorporated (KSI) to enter into an agreement to install and operate 21 electric vehicle charging stations at 14 TRCA-owned or leased sites using funding awarded to KSI through the Ministry of Transportation’s Electric Vehicle Chargers Ontario program;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into an agreement with KSI for the installation and operation of 21 electric vehicle charging stations at 14 TRCA-owned or leased sites;

THAT the agreement with KSI be subject to the following terms and conditions: (i) that the term of the agreement shall be for five years; (ii) that TRCA shall have the option to purchase the assets for nominal consideration upon the completion of the agreement; (iii) that KSI shall be responsible for any permitting approvals required for the construction and operation of the electric vehicle charging stations; (iv) that KSI shall be responsible for any costs associated with the construction and installation of the electric vehicle charging stations and related infrastructure; (v) that the final terms and conditions of the agreement be satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors;

AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the agreement, including obtaining necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND Electric Vehicle Chargers Ontario Program In accordance with objectives laid out in Ontario’s Climate Change Strategy, the Province of Ontario is investing $20 million from the Green Investment Fund to support the build-out of a network of public electric vehicle charging stations.

343 From December 2015 to February 2016, the Electric Vehicle Chargers Ontario (EVCO) grant program, administered through the Ministry of Transportation, solicited public and private sector partners to submit funding applications and strategies to develop a network of fast-charging stations in cities, along highways and at workplaces, condominiums, and public places across Ontario. Twenty-seven successful applicants were notified regarding their funding eligibility in April 2016 and are expected to install 280 Level 2 charging stations (2-7 hour charge) and 213 Level 3 charging stations (20-30 minute charge) by March 31, 2017.

Koben Systems Incorporated Koben Systems Incorporated is a market leader in electric vehicle (EV) products, services and upstream infrastructure. They have been working with TRCA’s Partners in Project Green program since 2014 as one of six service providers providing turn-key EV charging solutions for participants in the Open EV Network collective project. This project has resulted in the successful installation of 84 networked Level 2 charging ports with 15 organizations.

KSI was awarded $11.4 million of the $20 million, or 57 per cent, of the total EVCO funding allocated to roll-out the network of public electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) across Ontario. By March 31, 2017, KSI is expected to install 193 Level 2 and 144 Level 3 charging stations. TRCA was one of many organizations included in KSI’s grant funding application to MTO’s EVCO program, alongside food service companies like McDonalds and Tim Hortons, and property managers like Triovest.

Electric Vehicles and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority TRCA has recently purchased their third plug-in electric vehicle, and charges it on one of four EV charging ports at 101 Exchange Avenue, Vaughan. Since these EV charging ports have been installed, it is estimated that TRCA has conserved more than 2,700 litres of gasoline and 5.3 tonnes of equivalent carbon dioxide (t eCO2).

Electrifying fleet vehicles can play a significant role in meeting TRCA’s Corporate Sustainability Targets, such as becoming carbon neutral by 2025 and having 50% of the vehicle fleet using alternative fuels by 2020. Ontario currently produces the vast majority of its electricity from sources which emit little to no greenhouse gases (GHG), such as nuclear, hydro, wind, etc. Therefore, a carbon footprint reduction of over 90% can be achieved by driving an EV as opposed to a gas powered vehicle. TRCA is also looking to source an increasing amount of electricity from renewable sources, thereby increasing the GHG emissions reduction associated with using electric fleet vehicles.

Driving an electric vehicle has significant cost avoidances over gasoline powered vehicles. While savings are dependent on the fuel economy of the vehicles being compared, TRCA can expect 60 to 70 per cent in cost avoidances on fuel. In addition EVs use less lubricants and moving parts resulting in additional maintenance savings over gas powered vehicles.

With the currently limited range of EVs and frequently required long distance commutes between TRCA conservation areas and education centres, electric vehicle charging infrastructure would be a valuable asset across TRCA’s property portfolio of owned and leased facilities to enable longer commutes using EVs and alleviate range anxiety amongst employees using electric fleet vehicles.

344 Finally, the proposed EV charging stations shall be networked making them visible on mobile devices used by all EV drivers. As these stations will be installed at the majority of TRCA’s conservation areas and education centres they will help drive more community members across TRCA’s watersheds to a TRCA location allowing them to immerse themselves in the natural foundation of healthy rivers and shorelines, greenspace and biodiversity, and sustainable communities that is The Living City. The 14 TRCA sites where the charging stations will be installed are outline in Attachment 1.

RATIONALE Entering into a lease agreement with KSI to install 21 EV charging stations at 14 TRCA-owned or leased locations will result in the following benefits to the organization:  installation of EV charging station infrastructure valued at approximately $515,000;  ability to accommodate longer distance electric fleet vehicle commuting;  progress toward Corporate Sustainability Targets;  increased conservation area and education site visibility on charging station network platforms;  achievement of Partners in Project Green’s 100 EV Charging Port target;  demonstrate progress on the following objectives in TRCA’s Building The Living City: 10-year Strategic Plan:  Green the Toronto region’s economy;  Accelerate innovation;  Facilitate a region-wide approach to sustainability;  Build partnerships and new business models;  Gather and share the best urban sustainability knowledge; and  Measure performance.

DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Upon Authority approval, the necessary other approvals required to bring the lease into effect will be pursued.

FINANCIAL DETAILS KSI shall be responsible for any costs associated with the construction and installation of the electric vehicle charging stations and related infrastructure. The execution of this agreement is not expected to have any significant financial impact on TRCA.

Report prepared by: Adam Vaiya, 416-275-8377, Jae R. Truesdell, 416-305-2690 Email: [email protected], [email protected] For information contact: Adam Vaiya, 416-275-8377, Jae R. Truesdell, 416-305-2690 Email: [email protected], [email protected] Date: July 6, 2016 Attachments: 1

345 Attachment 1

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Equipment Site Name Address L3 L2 Albion Hills Conservation Area – 0 1 Chalet 1 16500 Regional Road 50, Caledon Albion Hills Conservation Area – 0 1 Beach Parking Lot 2 Head Office 101 Exchange Avenue, Vaughan 1 2 3 Black Creek Pioneer Village 1000 Murray Ross Parkway, Downsview 1 2 4 Bruce’s Mill Conservation Area 3291 Stouffville Road, Stouffville 0 1 5 Boyd Conservation Area 8739 Islington Avenue, Woodbridge 0 1 6 Glen Haffy Conservation Area 19245 Airport Road, Caledon 0 1 7 Heart Lake Conservation Area 10818 Heart Lake Road, Brampton 0 1 8 Petticoat Creek Conservation Area 1100 Whites Road, Pickering 1 1 9 Indian Line Campground 7625 Finch Avenue, Brampton 0 1 10 Glen Rouge Campground 7450 Kingston Road, Scarborough 0 1 11 Claireville Conservation Area 8180 Regional Road 50, Brampton 0 1 12 Kortright Centre for Conservation 9550 Pine Valley Drive, Woodbridge 0 2 13 Claremont Field Centre 4290 Westney Road N., Goodwood 0 1 Swan Lake Centre for Conservation 1229 Bethesda Side Road, Richmond Hill 0 1 14 and Innovation Total 3 18

______

346 RES.#A115/16 - L’AMOREAUX AND LOWER DUCK SWMP CLEAN-OUT AND RESTORATION PROJECT City of Toronto Stormwater Management Ponds Partnership and Award of Contracts Related to Stormwater Management Pond Sediment Dredging. Award of contracts for the supply and delivery of solidification reagent, and for the disposal of stockpiled sediments as L’Amoreaux and Lower Duck stormwater management ponds.

Moved by: David Barrow Seconded by: Giorgio Mammoliti

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) received approval in 2013 to form a partnership with City of Toronto for the clean out of seven stormwater management ponds (SWMPs);

AND WHEREAS TRCA has successfully cleaned out five SWMPs under this partnership;

AND WHEREAS two SWMPs remain to be cleaned out, L’Amoreaux and Lower Duck SWMPs;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT Contract #10001800 for the disposal of industrial/commercial SWMP dredgeate for L’Amoreaux and Lower Duck SWMPs, in the City of Toronto, be awarded to Ground Force Environmental Inc. for a total cost not to exceed $1,324,566.90, plus HST, it being the lowest bid meeting TRCA specifications;

THAT Contract #10001801 for the supply and delivery of solidification reagent for L’Amoreaux and Lower Duck SWMPs, in the City of Toronto, be awarded to Diversity Technologies Corporation (Di-Corp), at a total cost not to exceed $412,753.00, plus HST, it being the lowest bid meeting TRCA specifications;

THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 25% of the total cost of both contracts as a contingency allowance, if deemed necessary;

AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA staff be directed to take the action necessary to implement the contracts including obtaining any approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND In 2013, the City of Toronto’s Toronto Water Division approached TRCA to seek opportunities to assist with the management of the City's SWMPs. At Authority Meeting #7/13, held on September 27, 2013, Resolution #A141/13 approved the TRCA partnership with City of Toronto for the clean-out of the seven identified SWMPs. Thus far, five SWMPs have been completed with the last two, L'Amoreaux and Lower Duck SWMPs, to be cleaned out this summer.

TRCA has over 35 years of experience in the planning, design, construction, maintenance and monitoring of SWMP projects. TRCA is ideally suited to carry out SWMP maintenance for municipal partners because of the full range of services offered internally: design, approvals, survey, public consultation, implementation and site restoration. Both of these SWMPs are within sensitive greenspace, and L’Amoreaux is an online pond with potential effects on downstream habitat. TRCA has the unique expertise to manage the challenges and environmental considerations of SWMP maintenance under these conditions.

347

The L’Amoreaux SWMP is located northwest of Kennedy Road and McNicoll Avenue in Scarborough and is approximately 0.2 ha in size. Located within High Park, northwest of Parkside Drive and The Queensway, Lower Duck SWMP is approximately 0.81 ha in size.

Contract #10001800 The City’s Toronto Water division currently manages, operates and maintains dozens of SWMPs including wet ponds, wetlands and dry ponds. These SWMPs are accumulating sediment and deteriorating, thus requiring maintenance and sediment removal (clean-out) in order to be restored to their design specifications. The performance of these ponds is a function of sediment accumulation and storage, which are critical to the holding and treating of stormwater, protecting the surrounding areas from localized flooding and improving downstream water quality.

As part of the scope of work for this project, the sediment accumulated in each pond will be dredged, stockpiled and mixed with the polymer. Once the character of the sediment becomes like that of wet-cement, it is loaded into tri-axles for off-site hauling to an appropriate disposal facility.

TRCA estimates that there is an accumulation of up to 1,248 m3 of sediment to be removed in order to restore the L’Amoreaux SWMP to its original specifications. Based on field assessments, approximately 11,100 m3 of sediment needs to be removed from Lower Duck SWMP.

Contract #10001801 A solidification reagent is a powdered, inorganic mineral formula used for the solidification and stabilization of high aqueous wastes. It is typically composed of a clay based mineral infused with a food grade polymer. Solidification reagents are used to solidify high aqueous materials to meet slump requirements allowing for transportation as a solid. The polymer is needed in SWMP clean-out projects as a solidifying agent for the saturated sediment of drained ponds. The polymer alters the consistency of the sediment to a more solid form, making it possible to excavate and load into a tri-axle for disposal to a certified facility. These types of polymers are highly specialized products often used in other types of industries (drilling, mining, etc.). This polymer brand (Earth Pro Mud Terminator) was vetted through TRCA's Sustainable Technologies group to verify its impact on aquatic ecosystems. The Earth Pro Mud Terminator polymer was evaluated to be safe (based on the available information) and was successfully used for the clean-out and restoration of the Annie Crescent SWMP in Ajax.

Approximately 16.5 tonnes (36,400 lbs) of polymer is needed for the clean out of the L’Amoreaux SWMP and 140.5 tonnes (310,800 lbs) is needed for the clean-out of Lower Duck SWMP.

RATIONALE Contract #10001800 The Request for Quotation (RFQ) #10001800 was publically advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo.com on June 6, 2016 for the haulage and disposal of sediment material from the L’Amoreaux and Lower Duck SWMPs. The document was downloaded for review by 20 vendors. One addendum was issued on June 16, 2016.

As a condition of the RFQ, only bidders that operate under a Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) and attended the mandatory site meeting were considered to undertake the disposal of the sediment.

348 The Quotations were received on June 24, 2016 and formally opened by TRCA staff (Jane Veit, Judith Reda and Natalie Racette) on the same day with the following results:

Contract #10001800 L’Amoreaux & Lower Duck SWMP Clean-Out and Restoration Project Disposal of Stockpiled Sediment Dredgeate

TOTAL BIDDER Bid Score (Plus HST) Ground Force Environmental Inc. $1,324,566.90 95% Sierra Excavating Enterprises Inc. $1,375,350.50 82% WM. Petrie and Sons Contracting Ltd. $1,215,755.00 Disqualified

The three bids received were evaluated and scored based on the bidder’s price (50% of score), relevant work experience (30%), and a check of the bidder’s references (20%). In addition, bidders were required to provide a valid MOECC license for their proposed disposal facility.

The bidder WM. Petrie was disqualified because their relevant work experience and bidder references did not provide adequate assurance of their ability to undertake the scope of work. In addition, their proposed disposal facility did not have a Certificate of Approval or Environmental Compliance Approval registered with the MOECC’s directory. As such, WM. Petrie’s bid did not meet TRCA’s specifications.

TRCA reviewed the remaining two bids against its own cost estimate and has determined that the next lowest bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements and deliverables as outlined on the contract documents. Ground Force Environmental Inc. is capable of undertaking the scope of work. Based on the bids received, staff recommends that Ground Force Environmental Inc. be awarded Contract #10001800 for the disposal of SWMP dredgeate at the L’Amoreaux and Lower Duck SWMPs for a total cost not to exceed $1,324,566.90, plus 25% contingency of $311,141.73 to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus HST, it being the lowest bid meeting TRCA specifications.

Contract #10001801 The Request for Quotation (RFQ) #10001801 was publically advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo.com on June 6, 2016 for the supply and delivery of solidification reagent for the L’Amoreaux and Lower Duck SWMP clean-out projects. The document was downloaded for review by 11 vendors.

The Quotations were received on June 17, 2016 and formally opened by TRCA staff (Jane Veit, Judith Reda and Natalie Racette) on the same day with the following results:

349 Contract #10001801 L’Amoreaux & Lower Duck SWMP Clean-Out and Restoration Project Supply and Delivery of Solidification Reagent

TOTAL BIDDER (Plus HST) Diversity Technologies Corp $412,753.00 MORS Refining Systems Inc. $434,008.68 Ground Force Environmental Inc. $458,304.00

TRCA reviewed the bids received against its own cost estimate and has determined that the lowest bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements and deliverables as outlined on the contract documents. Diversity Technologies Corp. is capable of supplying and delivering the product as required.

Based on the bids received, staff recommends that Diversity Technologies Corp. be awarded Contract #10001801 for the supply and delivery of the solidification reagent for a total cost not to exceed $412,753.00, plus 25% contingency of $103,188.25 to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus HST.

FINANCIAL DETAILS The costs for both Contract #10001801 and Contract #10001800 are 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto, within accounts 113-26 (L’Amoreaux SWMP) and 113-27 (Lower Duck SWMP).

DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Both the SWMPs will be dredged mechanically and restored upon completion. Only contractors operating under an MOECC Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) are eligible to undertake the disposal of the sediment.

TRCA will execute the contract, including: management of the awarded disposal contractor on site, certification of each load leaving the site, issuance of bills of lading to each truck, verification of the disposal site’s MOECC ECA, and random checks to follow trucks from dredging site to disposal site. These activities ensure the chain of custody of the dredged sediment from the SWMP to the licensed disposal site operating under an MOECC ECA.

Dredging is tentatively scheduled to commence in August at L’Amoreaux SWMP and in October at Lower Duck, upon receipt of all approvals and the availability of resources. Each pond will be de-watered during the dredging, and will be managed to ensure the pond is providing stormwater management function during this time period.

Report prepared by: Lauren MacNeil, extension 5383 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Ralph Toninger, extension 5366; John DiRocco, extension 5231 Emails: [email protected], [email protected] Date: June 30, 2016

______

350 RES.#A116/16 - CITY OF MISSISSAUGA Conveyance of Land and the Small Arms Inspection Building for Community Facility Purposes, 1352 Lakeshore Road East, City of Mississauga, Regional Municipality of Peel, Lake Ontario Waterfront, CFN 56232. Conveyance of lands and Small Arms Inspection Building to the City of Mississauga for the development of a community facility located at 1352 Lakeshore Road East, City of Mississauga, Regional Municipality of Peel, Lake Ontario waterfront.

Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Jennifer Drake

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a proposal from City of Mississauga for the conveyance of land improved with the Small Arms Inspection Building for development of a community facility at 1352 Lakeshore Road East, City of Mississauga, Regional Municipality of Peel, Lake Ontario waterfront;

AND WHEREAS it is the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interest of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with the City of Mississauga in this instance;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT a parcel of TRCA-owned land containing 4.04 hectares (10 acres), more or less, required for the development of a community facility, said land being part of Part Lot 5, Concession 3 SDS, located at 1352 Lakeshore Road East, City of Mississauga, Regional Municipality of Peel, be conveyed to the City of Mississauga;

THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00;

THAT the approximately $2.6 million in contributions from the Regional Municipality of Peel, the Government of Canada and the balance of funds remaining from the original purchase and rehabilitation of the site be transferred to the City of Mississauga for rehabilitation of the building subject to the approval of the Regional Municipality of Peel and Government of Canada;

THAT the City of Mississauga is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or costs of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, from this conveyance or the carrying out of construction;

THAT the said conveyance be subject to any other terms and conditions deemed appropriate by TRCA staff or solicitor;

THAT said conveyance be subject to the approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required;

AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #12/15, held on January 29, 2016, Resolution #A268/15 was approved as follows:

351 WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) acquired the culturally significant Small Arms Inspection Building in 1992, as part of a larger strategy to create a regional waterfront park;

AND WHEREAS the Small Arms Inspection Building was designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, by City of Mississauga Council on May 13, 2009;

AND WHEREAS the designation under the Ontario Heritage Act places responsibility on TRCA as the building owner, to protect the building and the structure’s key heritage attributes;

AND WHEREAS TRCA has secured a total of approximately $2.5 million from contributions from the Region of Peel, the Government of Canada and the balance of funds remaining from the original purchase and rehabilitation of the site, towards a total estimated cost of phase one of the building restoration of $5.0 million;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA staff be directed to submit a formal request to the City of Mississauga for support of a partnership project between the Government of Canada, Region of Peel and TRCA, that will include a City funding commitment of $2.5 million to support partial rehabilitation of the Small Arms Inspection Building and up to $1 million over five years, towards the ongoing operation of the building;

THAT staff enter into discussions with City of Mississauga staff to negotiate the terms and conditions of the support, which may consider the option of transferring legal ownership of the building from TRCA to the City;

AND FURTHER THAT staff report back at Authority Meeting #4/16, scheduled to be held on April 22, 2016, to confirm the City of Mississauga’s response to TRCA’s request for support.

The subject lands form part of a 16 hectare (39 acre) parcel of land which was acquired from Canada Post Corporation in 1992. The property is located on the south side of Lakeshore Road East at the border of the City of Mississauga and the City of Toronto. The property has frontage of approximately 440m (1,444 ft.) on Lakeshore Road East and bounded on the eastern and southern borders by Marie Curtis Park, which is owned by TRCA and managed by the City of Toronto. Further to the southwest of the site are the Lakeview Water Pollution Control Plant and the former Lakeview Generating Station. The site contained a number of buildings at the time of acquisition and all of the buildings have since been demolished with the exception of the Small Arms Inspection Building and the existing water tower. These are the last remaining structures of the larger Small Arms Limited munitions plant built in 1940 to provide support to Allied Forces during World War II.

Since the time of the original purchase of the site in 1992, plans have been developed and approved for the major new Lakeview Waterfront Connection Project which is now under construction adjacent to the site, through an effort of Credit Valley Conservation and TRCA as supported by the Region of Peel.

352 The Small Arms Inspection Building is situated on the northwest corner of the property at the foot of Dixie Road. The building includes over 4,000 m2 (43,000 ft2) with three distinct components: a two- storey front former administration wing, a bridging section with one-storey and two-storey components, and a rear one-storey former inspection plant. The front bridging sections of the building are constructed of a load-bearing clay tile structure with a flat roof and clad in red brick veneer. The rear portion of the building is one-storey, with high ceilings, a flat-roof with skylights supported by timber post and beam system, double brick masonry and bands of steel-framed windows. The Small Arms Inspection Building was designed by Allward and Gouinlock Architects to provide inspection and administrative purposes to the larger Small Arms Limited munitions plant. In 2009, City of Mississauga designated the building as being of cultural heritage value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The Region of Peel currently holds an easement over the frontage of the Small Arms Inspection Building for the purpose of constructing and maintaining the Hanlan Feedermain. The Region also has a temporary working easement east of the Small Arms Inspection Building for staging and construction. The work on the feedermain is scheduled for completion by end of 2016.

The City of Mississauga’s proposal is for the conveyance of approximately 1.62 hectares (4 acres) of land surrounding the Small Arms Inspection Building for the development of a community facility. Initially the building will be managed as a satellite location to the Carmen Corbasson Community Centre, with the aim of building the capacity of a local organization and/or locating an existing group to manage and operate the facility within five years. The City of Mississauga plans to renovate and upgrade the existing Small Arms Inspection Building in two phases: Phase 1 would include the southern portion of the building and Phase 2 includes the northern portion of the building. In addition to the Small Arms Inspection Building, the City of Mississauga is requesting conveyance of an addition parcel of land (2.43 hectares [6 acres], more or less) for parking and for a use that would offset the restoration, maintenance and operating costs of the Small Arms Inspection Building. The City will include the building and additional parcel of land in their proposed Inspiration Lakeview Innovation Corridor Feasibility Study to inform their long term vision and Phase 2 of the building.

Proposed Uses The proposed uses for the 4.04 hectare (10 acre) parcel would be consistent with the existing Lakeview Local Area Plan and the Arsenals Lands Master Plan which continues to be developed as a collaborative project by City of Mississauga and TRCA. These uses include:  commercial schools (This would include non-commercial school programming, with the understanding that such use would require the necessary planning amendments);  community facilities, including art studios and art galleries;  conference centre;  restaurants; and  secondary offices. Uses should educate citizens and/or support environmental stewardship, conservation and passive/active recreational activities and address other community needs as they emerge through further discussions and potential partnerships.

Additional reports will be provided for the information of the Board in the future as City of Mississauga’s plans for the site are finalized.

On May 26, 2016 City of Mississauga Council adopted resolution GC-0459-2016 as follows:

353 1. That staff from Realty Services Section of the Corporate Services Department be authorized to negotiate the conveyance of the Small Arms Inspection Building municipally known as 1352 Lakeshore Road East and a potential development block (5 acres) from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (“TRCA”) to the City of Mississauga as outlined in the Corporate Report dated May 26, 2016 from the Commissioner of Community Services.

2. That a by-law be enacted authorizing the Commissioner of Community Services and the City Clerk to execute an Agreement of Purchase and Sale, and all documents ancillary thereto, between the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (“TRCA”), as Vendor and the Corporation of the City of Mississauga (“Mississauga”), as Purchaser, for the acquisition of 1352 Lakeshore Road East and a 5 acre development block for a nominal ($2.00) consideration and on terms acceptable and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

RATIONALE The use of the Building does not directly align with TRCA’s facility needs or long term office accommodation strategy. Given the historical and community significance of the Small Arms Inspection Building and associated lands, TRCA and the City of Mississauga agree that a conveyance to the City of Mississauga would provide a greater opportunity for restoration, programming and operation of a community facility. The preliminary vision for the facility includes a combination of office, studio and community space that promotes arts, culture, heritage, scientific research, idea exchange and small business opportunities which more accurately align with City of Mississauga programing requirements.

These include:  Building and sites alignment to the City of Mississauga proposed Inspiration Lakeview Innovation Corridor;  Potential to satisfy cultural space needs as identified through the Cultural Infrastructure and Creative Spaces Strategy; and  Permitted uses under the existing City of Mississauga Official Plan, and the Lakeview Local Area Plan (Policy 13.1.9.4): commercial schools; community facilities, including art studios and art galleries; a conference centre; restaurants; and secondary offices.

FINANCIAL DETAILS TRCA and the City of Mississauga have collaborated for the last number of years with the aim of obtaining federal, provincial and community funding and other support for the restoration and development of a community facility on the subject lands and housed within the existing building. To date, approximately $2.6 million dollars has been committed toward the capital restoration of the building and grounds, with up to $1 million being supplied through the federal government’s ‘Canada 150 Community Infrastructure Program’. A contribution of at least $1 million by the City of Mississauga is necessary to secure the federal contribution. In addition, TRCA has approximately $1.1 million dollars in funds received from the Region of Peel for the securement of the building along with approximately $500,000 remaining from the original purchase for rehabilitation of the site. City of Mississauga has requested that the $2.6 million dollars currently held by TRCA be transferred to the City of Mississauga in order to support the project. The transfer of the funding is subject to the approval of the Region of Peel and federal government.

For Information contact: Brandon Hester, extension 5767; Jae R. Truesdell, extension 5247 Emails: [email protected]; [email protected] Date: July 14, 2016 Attachments: 1

354 Attachment 1

E t o b i c o k e C re e k

DIXIE RD

Subject Property

LAKESHORE RD E

Legend DURHAM SubjectProperty YORK Watercourses PEEL !!!!!! Floodline Regulation LimitRegulation F TORONTO TRCAProperty Lake Ontario Parcel Assessment Parcel 0 50 100 200 SITE Meters ^ KeyMap © Queen’s Printer for Ontario and its licensors. [2005] May Not[2005] ReproducedbeNOT THIS ISPLANA without OFlicensors. SURVEY.Permission. and Ontario its for ©Queen’sPrinter 355 RES.#A117/16 - PROVINCIAL REVIEW OF THE CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT Phase Two of Three. Update on the Province of Ontario’s Phase Two of the Conservation Authorities Act review and summary of preliminary messages and priorities to be included in TRCA comments for submission to the Province by September 9, 2016.

Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Jennifer Drake

WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has released Phase Two of its three-phase review of the Conservation Authorities Act by putting forward a set of proposed priorities and actions for public comment on the Environmental Registry (EBR#012-7583);

AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff are participating in the provincial consultation process for providing a response to the proposed priorities and actions;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the following report providing an overview of the Phase Two review and staff’s preliminary messages and priorities to be included in TRCA’s response be received;

THAT this report be circulated to TRCA’s municipal partners, neighbouring conservation authorities and Conservation Ontario for their information in formulating their own responses to the EBR posting, due September 9, 2016;

THAT Authority Members be requested to reach out to their own networks of stakeholders to gather support for provincial recognition of conservation authorities’ integral role in assisting its partners in building sustainable communities;

AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority in September 2016 on TRCA’s final EBR submission. CARRIED BACKGROUND Conservation Authorities Act Review – Phase One In 2015, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) initiated a review of the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) to ensure that the Act is meeting the needs of Ontarians in a modern context. The Province’s stated objective for the review was to identify opportunities to improve the legislative, regulatory and policy framework that currently governs the creation, operation and activities of conservation authorities that may be required in the face of a constantly changing environment. As the first phase in the Ministry’s review process, a discussion paper was posted on the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry (EBR). The discussion paper focused stakeholder feedback on the governance, funding mechanisms and the roles and responsibilities of conservation authorities (CAs) and included a series of questions to solicit comments on each of the three theme areas.

At Authority Meeting #8/15, held on September 25, 2015, Resolution #A168/15 approved TRCA’s submission to the Province. A copy of TRCA comments was also circulated to partner municipalities.

TRCA comments were submitted to the EBR on October 19, 2015. The main recommendations from the TRCA submission on Phase One of the Act’s review were the following:

356  Establish a provincial directive or memorandum of understanding to clarify roles and responsibilities of CAs and recognize their important contribution to meeting provincial and municipal objectives.  Establish a new multi-agency liaison body for stronger collaboration among CAs, provincial ministries and municipalities.  Maintain MNRF’s oversight of appealed s.28 permit decisions separate from the OMB.  Amend section 28 to strengthen the ability of CAs to enforce their regulation.  Review the list of eligible expenditures recognizing activities contributing to multiple ministries’ objectives.  Provide specific language to clarify and modernize the levy provisions in the Act

Conservation Authorities Act Review – Phase Two As per the normal EBR process, the Province does not respond directly to comment submissions. However, as part of Province’s Phase Two of the review, on May 12, 2016, they released “Conserving Our Future: Proposed Priorities for Renewal” on the EBR comprising a proposed set of priorities and actions based on the feedback received from stakeholders in Phase One. The Province’s proposed priorities are as follows:

PRIORITY #1: Strengthening Oversight and Accountability PRIORITY #2: Increasing Clarity and Consistency PRIORITY #3: Improving Collaboration and Engagement PRIORITY #4: Modernizing Funding Mechanisms PRIORITY #5: Enhancing Flexibility for the Province

For each priority, the Province has also issued a series of proposed actions to be taken by the Ministry to address their priorities. There are four to five actions per priority listed in the provincial document: Conserving our Future: Proposed Priorities for Renewal.

Shortly after the release of the priorities and actions, the Province issued invitations to Conservation Ontario and to the CEO/CAOs of southern Ontario CAs for stakeholder engagement sessions. TRCA staff attended these sessions; they were well attended by neighbouring CA staff, Conservation Ontario, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, some representatives of aboriginal communities, the agricultural sector and the building and land development industry. The main messages voiced at these sessions were that the Province’s priorities were to maintain the broad mandate of CAs but to be clear on the mandate, to increase funding to CAs but to keep service standards and accountability high, to facilitate greater collaboration and coordination among CAs and provincial and municipal partners, and to recognize that CAs work with a number of different ministries aside from MNRF.

Conservation Ontario (CO) has been engaged with the Province through Phase Two and through the previous phase of the Act’s review. As well as attending the engagement sessions, CO has produced an array of correspondence for all CAs meant to assist them in responding to the proposed priorities and actions. Over the past few months, TRCA’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO) has been participating in CA Act working group discussions and sessions with CO staff and other CA general managers to formulate a collective response to the provincial priorities and actions.

357 In addition, the Province established a stakeholder advisory group to provide initial feedback to the proposed priorities. TRCA’s CEO and four other general managers from the CA Act working group were selected to participate on the Province’s stakeholder advisory group. Along with several other stakeholder agencies, they met on May 16 and 17, 2016 with MNRF staff and former parliamentary assistant, Eleanor McMahon. CO reported that during this meeting, the CA members encouraged the discussion to focus less on the details of CA regulations and more on the critical state of our natural resources and opportunities for creating increased capacity for resilience of natural resources.

In July 2016, CO distributed to all CAs its draft response to the Province’s priorities and actions with a request for comments in time for their next CO Council meeting. Once the CO response is finalized and endorsed by their Council, it will constitute their submission to MNRF through the EBR.

Summary of TRCA’s Preliminary Comments for Submission to the Province To date, TRCA staff have formulated the following draft, preliminary comments to inform our EBR submission in response to the Province’s suggested priorities and actions. The preliminary comments are premised on staff’s opinion that the Province’s Phase Two proposed priorities and actions do not speak entirely to TRCA’s previous comments in Phase One. As a result, the preliminary comments are aligned with many of the same messages that were included in TRCA comments on the first phase of the review.  Maintain the broad mandate of CAs as outlined in the Act;  Recognize, validate and strengthen the important and diverse role CAs play as local implementation agents helping to achieve a number of provincial and municipal objectives;  Establish a collaborative approach that recognizes the important partnerships CAs have with numerous provincial, municipal and local stakeholders;  Establish a sustainable and equitable funding model;  Ensure the Act and its administration allow CAs to support emerging natural resource management issues including the directions of the proposed amendments in the Four-Plan Provincial review;  Facilitate CA service excellence.

Staff have also drafted some preliminary recommendations that could address these priorities as follows:  The Act’s section 20 and 21 object and powers of a CA remain relevant and effective and do not require modification. TRCA suggests that the Act remain broad and that additional direction or interpretation occur within a policy directive.  Acknowledge that the Act enables CAs to work collaboratively with the Province, municipalities and other watershed stakeholders in the delivery of programs and services to achieve healthy watersheds and to anticipate and respond to local and emerging sustainable community needs or issues.  Establish an inter-agency liaison body for stronger collaboration among CAs, multiple provincial ministries and municipalities that encourages partnership and innovation in building sustainable communities resilient to the effects of urbanization and climate change. This body could serve to further a dialogue on mutual areas of interest in natural resources and growth management; for example, nature-based recreation and education, aboriginal engagement and cultural heritage.

358  For the inter-agency liaison body to guide the development of a provincial directive, policy or memorandum of understanding that would affirm CAs’ valuable roles in managing natural hazards, natural heritage and other sustainability measures and to continue to grow healthy, resilient urban and rural communities. Looking forward, the broad range of local expertise that CAs possess will be needed to address emerging sustainability issues at watershed and regional scales.  Amend the current funding formula for CAs to increase financial contributions from the Province by drawing on funds from multiple ministries that are either partnering with, or are serviced by CAs. This new point of funding would augment current municipal funding for CAs.  In consultation with the Province and municipalities, create a new toolkit for funding mechanisms (in addition to current municipal funding) to support areas of mutual interest such as trail planning, natural heritage protection, adaptive re-use, open space maintenance, stormwater management and other needs of highly urbanized jurisdictions.  Amend Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act to update and enhance compliance mechanisms in order to allow CAs to effectively uphold their regulatory responsibilities and to support the provincial interest in natural hazard management.  Undertake minor amendments to the Act for modernizing administrative processes to better reflect current best practices and align with other more current legislation.

In addition to adding to and refining these draft comments, TRCA staff are also reaching out to various TRCA partners and the public to engage them in the review and gather support for TRCA’s comments. This is being accomplished in conjunction with TRCA Communications staff to publish a summary of TRCA’s preliminary comments on the TRCA website and distributing the summary to TRCA partners where opportunities arise.

DETAILS OF THE WORK TO BE DONE Staff will continue to work on TRCA’s submission for the Phase Two EBR posting and report back to the Authority in September with the final submission.

The release of the Priorities and Proposed Actions represents the second phase in the MNRF’s three-phase review of the Conservation Authorities Act. Comments collected will be used by the Ministry to inform the development of specific changes to the existing legislative, regulatory and policy framework. Once recommendations for these specific changes are completed by the Province, the third and final phase of the CA Act review will begin through further public consultation.

Through TRA’s website and by reporting back to the Authority in September 2016, TRCA will keep members and watershed stakeholders informed on the status and process of this initiative and TRCA’s responses. Additionally, TRCA will continue to participate on the Conservation Ontario CA Act Review Working Group.

Report prepared by: Mary-Ann Burns, extension 5763, Noah Gaetz, extension 5348 Emails: [email protected], [email protected] For Information contact: Brian Denney, 416-667-6290 Emails: [email protected] Date: July 22, 2016

______

359 RES.#A118/16 - PROVINCIAL FOUR-PLAN REVIEW Summary of Proposed Amendments. Providing a summary and initial staff observations of the proposed amendments to the four provincial plans, as released by the Province of Ontario for comments.

Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jack Heath

THAT the staff report on the Provincial Four-Plan Review be received.

AMENDMENT RES.#A119/16

Moved by: Jennifer Innis Seconded by: Jack Heath

THAT the following be inserted after the main motion:

THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to extend the commenting period.

THE AMENDMENT WAS CARRIED

THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS CARRIED

THE RESULTANT MOTION READS AS FOLLOWS:

THAT the staff report on the Provincial Four-Plan Review be received;

THAT the Province of Ontario be requested to extend the commenting period.

BACKGROUND On February 27, 2015, the Province initiated a coordinated review of four provincial land use plans - Greenbelt Plan (GBP), Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP), Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP) and Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan). An Advisory Panel led by David Crombie was appointed to coordinate this review and recommend necessary plan amendments. TRCA submitted formal comments to the Province on May 28, 2015, as approved at Authority Meeting #6/15 by Resolution #A99/15 on June 26, 2015. Following this submission, staff continued to engage with Advisory Panel members and provincial staff to promote and expand upon TRCA’s comments.

With input from 17 town hall meetings and over 19,000 written submissions from various stakeholders, the Advisory Panel provided recommendations to the Province on December 7, 2015 through a 180 page report entitled, “Planning for Health, Prosperity and Growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe: 2015-2041”. Six strategic directions encompassing the inter-related ideas that work together to achieve the objectives of the four plans were identified: 1. Building complete communities; 2. Supporting agriculture; 3. Protecting natural and cultural heritage assets; 4. Providing infrastructure; 5. Mainstreaming climate change; and, 6. Implementing the plans.

360

TRCA staff reported on the recommendations from the Advisory Panel at Authority Meeting #11/15, as approved by Resolution #A245/15 on January 8, 2016. Staff summarized the key elements of particular interest to TRCA for each of the six strategic directions and highlighted potential issues, areas of concern and recommendations regarding needed improvements. These recommendations can be found in the left column of the chart in Attachment 1.

Current Status of the Four Plan Review Provincial staff assessed the Advisory Panel’s report and formulated proposed amendments to the four plans, which were released on May 10, 2016, for a further round of public and agency consultation. Of the Advisory Panel’s 87 total recommendations, all 56 of the core recommendations were incorporated into each of the four revised plans, to varying degrees. The Province has set a September 30, 2016 deadline for providing feedback to the proposed plan amendments.

In addition to holding public open houses across the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) from May until July, 2016, the Province is guiding public consultations for the revised plans through an overarching document entitled, “Shaping Land Use in the Greater Golden Horseshoe – a Guide to the Proposed Changes”. Much like the Advisory Panel’s report, this guide articulates the principal changes through key themes and illustrates how the plans have been synthesized into a cohesive regional land-use planning framework.

Because the four plans work together to help build complete communities, manage growth, curtail sprawl, support economic development and protect the natural environment, they have been harmonized to the extent possible to have consistent policies and terminology. TRCA staff has summarized below the eight key themes of the four plans, as identified by the Province, and highlighted changes of particular relevance to TRCA, in accordance with each corresponding theme.

Building Complete Communities The amended plans seek to build “complete communities” by increasing intensification within built-up areas, particularly around transit and urban growth centres, while also providing greater protection for agricultural land and natural heritage features. Key changes aimed at achieving these objectives include: • Increasing minimum intensification targets for new residential development occurring annually in existing Built-up Areas to 60% (up from 40%); • Increasing minimum density targets for Designated Greenfield Areas from 50 to 80 residents and jobs per hectare (density calculations exclude natural heritage features, floodplains, certain types of infrastructure); • New specific minimum density targets within Major Transit Station Areas and policies for Priority Transit Corridors; • Stronger environmental and planning criteria needed when assessing the feasibility of Settlement Area boundary expansion, including requiring master plans for water/wastewater and stormwater management (SWM) plans to be informed by watershed planning.

Supporting Agriculture The revised plans emphasize the importance of the agricultural system as a key contributor to the quality of life and economic well-being of the GGH. The plans seek to protect and enhance the agricultural sector and land base more effectively through the following changes:  Requiring the Province to work with municipalities to identify and map an Agricultural System;  Requiring municipalities to minimize impacts on the Agricultural System;

361  Clarifying the types of uses permitted in prime agricultural areas to align with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), 2014 (e.g., on-farm diversified uses such as home industries and agri-tourism);  Exempting structures associated with certain agricultural and related uses from undertaking natural heritage or hydrologic evaluations, while ensuring ecological impacts are minimized.

Protecting Natural Heritage and Water Under the proposed changes, natural heritage, hydrologic and landform features and systems would be further protected, maintained and improved, particularly within areas not currently governed by the Greenbelt by:  Requiring municipalities, partnering with conservation authorities (CAs), to undertake integrated watershed planning to protect, improve or restore water quality and quantity within watersheds;  Requiring municipalities to identify and protect Key Hydrologic Areas (KHAs) in their official plans;  Providing Greenbelt-level protection for Natural Heritage Systems (NHS), Key Natural Heritage Features (KNHFs), Key Hydrologic Features (KHFs) and KHAs outside Settlement Areas;  Directing municipalities to avoid Settlement Area expansion into natural features/systems with important water features, where possible;  Encouraging municipalities to develop fill/soil re-use strategies and sustainably manage excess soil/fill through planning approvals;  Requiring the Province to collaborate with municipalities to map a NHS for rural lands outside the Greenbelt and municipal Settlement Areas.

Growing the Greenbelt New policies in the Greenbelt Plan describe ways in which the Greenbelt can be expanded by:  Including 21 major river valleys and seven associated coastal wetlands as designated Urban River Valleys (URVs). Within TRCA’s jurisdiction, this includes Duffins and Carruthers creeks (including their coastal wetlands), as well as additional Rouge tributaries, Don and Humber rivers and Etobicoke Creek;  Exploring additional opportunities to grow the Greenbelt and considering requests from municipalities to increase the Greenbelt within Protected Countryside and/or Urban River Valleys.

Addressing Climate Change The revised plans recognize the importance of addressing climate change and have included new policy directions aimed at more effectively responding to and mitigating its effects by:  Requiring municipalities to implement climate change policies in their Official Plans;  Requiring municipalities to undertake more comprehensive SWM planning in Settlement Areas and for Major Development to assess impacts of climate change on infrastructure;  Encourage municipalities to increase infrastructure resiliency and use green infrastructure and low impact development techniques to reduce risks and costs associated with extreme weather events.

Integrating Infrastructure The proposed changes seek to better integrate infrastructure and land use planning by:  Requiring Infrastructure corridors to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts on KNHFs, KHFs and KHAs;

362  Requiring water and wastewater master plans to demonstrate no negative impact on water quality and quantity and assimilative capacity when expanding water and wastewater services;  Requiring comprehensive SWM studies before expanding settlement boundaries or permitting major development;  Encourage infrastructure vulnerability risk assessments, asset management plans and climate change adaptation strategies as useful tools to help mitigate the impacts of climate change.

Improving Plan Implementation The plans were established at various times, apply to different geographic areas and contain distinct but complementary objectives. The Province proposes to integrate and align the plans with the local and provincial planning frameworks (e.g., PPS, source water protection, Big Move, etc.) by making policies consistent, using cross-pollinating terminology, harmonizing themes and synchronizing municipal implementation timelines. In support of this objective, the following changes are also proposed:  New guidance materials and supplementary direction will be produced by the Province to help map the natural heritage and agricultural systems and implement watershed planning, SWM, and the creation of greenhouse gas inventories;  Clarification that intensification and density targets would not require or enable growth beyond what is permitted under the PPS for special policy areas and other "hazardous lands".

Measuring Performance, Promoting Awareness and Increasing Engagement Accurate data, reliable information and widespread feedback are essential to ensuring provincial policy objectives are implemented effectively and intended goals can be achieved. To promote awareness of the proposed changes, measure their ongoing performance and increase engagement from stakeholders, the Province proposes to do the following:  Establish a comprehensive monitoring program to measure the effectiveness of the plans;  Require municipalities and CAs to provide data for monitoring and performance indicators;  Ensure all Plan Schedules are reviewed (and potentially updated) every five years after plans take effect.

ANALYSIS By virtue of the proposed plan amendments, the Province has demonstrated a coordinated effort to harmonize land use policies, synchronize language and terminology, and align the plans within Ontario’s broader policy framework. The enriched policy direction correlates directly with TRCA’s land use planning, watershed management and Regulatory roles and aligns well with TRCA’s The Living City Policies document (as approved by the Authority in November, 2014).

To help assess the degree to which TRCA’s previous key recommendations were incorporated into the proposed plans, staff undertook a preliminary evaluation of the significant changes (right column of Attachment 1). Many of the proposed key changes (evident in the eight themes summarized above) are consistent with topics of interest identified in TRCA’s previous comments to the Province. These areas include: climate change, green infrastructure, low impact development, SWM plans/retrofits, integrated watershed planning, and excess fill/ soil re-use. TRCA has and continues to demonstrate expertise and exhibit leadership in these areas, ideally situating TRCA to assist partnering municipalities and stakeholders to interpret and implement the amended plans.

363 TRCA’s foremost recommendations appear to have been considered and implemented to varying degrees by the Province. Watershed planning is identified as an essential component of land use planning and growth management, and policies requiring watershed planning have been strengthened; the Greenbelt is to be expanded to include URVs as a component of the NHS and further expansion of the Greenbelt will be considered; natural heritage and water systems are recognized as critical elements of climate change mitigation; increased flexibility has been provided for agricultural uses while attempting to ensure environmental impacts are minimized; and, some provincial direction is provided to help ensure excess soil/fill is managed sustainably.

Upon initial review, TRCA staff has identified areas of the four plans where additional analysis is required prior to the issuance of TRCA’s formal comments to the Province. These areas include, but are not limited to, the following:  Integration of Natural Heritage Systems in Watershed Planning: The NHS does not appear to be acknowledged as a component of watershed planning. Integration should be considered and consistent terminology (i.e. “watershed plan”, “watershed planning”) is needed. Clarity is required for how NHS identification and mapping (to be done by the Province) will be integrated, if it is to be done as a separate task outside of the watershed planning process (watershed planning to be done by municipalities, in partnership with CAs);  Defining Complete Communities: While achieving “Complete Communities” is a focal objective in the four plans, the formal definition that is provided is very narrow in scope. Broadening of the definition of Complete Communities should be considered to describe all aspects of healthy and sustainable communities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, such as clean water, clean air, functioning natural systems and green infrastructure, access to greenspace, walkability and transit access, low carbon lifestyles, and others.  Large Scale Fill: Given the potential negative impacts on natural systems and hazards that may result from large-scale fill, policy language could be strengthened to require best practices to sustainably manage excess fill and/or include a clearer legislative provision requiring compliance. Additional technical direction from the Province should demonstrate how municipalities and industry can manage fill more effectively. This should include a clearer definition of what constitutes “large scale fill” relative to “adverse effects” on the “natural environment”;  ORMCP – “Grandfathered” Applications: The transition provisions of the ORMC Plan and Act need to be reviewed. Applications submitted under the Planning Act prior to the promulgation of the ORMCP (2001) where no decision has been made should no longer be exempt from complying with the full suite of policies in the ORMCP. More importantly, the ORMC Act should also be amended to require that approvals issued prior to the ORMCP coming into effect and not yet acted upon, be revised and subject to the full Plan, or at minimum the section 48 prescribed provisions. Examples continue to arise across the ORM of subdivisions approved in the 1970s, ‘80s and ‘90s that permit these developments in wetlands and other significant environmental features.  Agricultural Exemptions for Natural Heritage Evaluations (NHEs): Further analysis is needed to assess if the criteria for “ensuring ecological impacts are minimized” provides sufficient environmental protection in lieu of an NHE, when considering certain structures on agricultural lands; the policy is also potentially confusing as compliance with the criteria to demonstrate that an NHE is not needed, would seem to require an NHE to support the demonstration.

364  Climate Change: The stand-alone section in the Growth Plan titled ‘Climate Change’ (4.2.1.0) seems too brief and vague. Although it requires municipal Official Plans to contain climate change policy, it only encourages implementation of those policies. This section needs to be strengthened and tied back to other climate change policies in the remainder of the Plan.  Recognizing Role of CAs: As numerous amendments will impact the operational roles and Regulation of CAs, and CA expertise and information will be increasingly relied upon to implement the plans (i.e., watershed planning, mapping, NHS, SWM), the role of CAs should be more directly acknowledged throughout the plans;  Implementation: As enhanced policy direction is to be implemented by municipalities (partnering with CAs) through a “municipal comprehensive review”, supplementary provincial support for effective implementation is needed as soon as possible. Engagement with stakeholders in the development of guidance documents is critical for effective implementation.  Complementary Recommendations: These types of recommendations from the Advisory Panel report are ones that, due to their nature, must be addressed outside of the Plans themselves. These include establishing a Provincial Secretariat to coordinate and facilitate implementation, creating an oversight forum to monitor and report on implementation, and/or developing additional provincial programs, technical guidelines, stakeholder involvement and funding mechanisms. Additionally, municipal Official Plan conformity amendments should be shielded from Ontario Municipal Board appeals to reduce the time and cost burden placed on municipalities to defend provincial policies. Many of these issues have not yet been addressed, or if addressed, not in sufficient detail.

FINANCIAL DETAILS Staff is engaged in this policy analysis work as per the normal course of their duties. No additional funding is proposed.

DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE  Attend technical workshops and open houses offered by the Province on the four revised plans (ongoing);  Continue to coordinate internal consultations with senior management, planning and technical staff to assess the integration of previous comments, identify key changes and formulate new strategic recommendations (ongoing);  Provide preliminary feedback to Conservation Ontario to coordinate CA comments to the Province (July 12);  Meet with Region of Peel and provincial staff to discuss NHS mapping, protection and consideration of a provincial approach to addressing site-specific “take-out” requests (July 14);  Provide the Authority with a detailed report of TRCA’s comments to the Province (September 23);  Submit formal comments to the Province, in accordance with their deadline (September 30).

Report prepared by: Jeff Thompson, extension 5386 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: David Burnett, extension 5361 Emails: [email protected] Date: July 5, 2016 Attachments: 1

365

Attachment 1

4-Plan Review July 22, 2016 Key Issue Themes Previously Identified by TRCA Proposed Positive Improvements Related to TRCA Comments The Growth Plan should require the completion of Municipalities, partnering with Conservation Authorities (CAs), are now comprehensive integrated studies assessing the cumulative required to undertake integrated watershed planning to protect, improve or impacts of long-term development on flood risk, erosion and restore water quality and quantity and inform decisions on new/expanded water quality at watershed and subwatershed scales and  infrastructure (3.2.1, 3.2.6.2; 3.2.7.1, 4.2.1.1, 4.2.1.3, 4.2.4.5); Settlement identify mitigation targets and actions for implementation at Area expansion and Major Development now require feasibility assessments subsequent stages of the development process. informed by watershed planning and stormwater management (SWM) to assess flood risk vulnerability (2.2.8.2, 3.2.7.2, 4.2.1.3). The Growth Plan should acknowledge that growth planning The Growth Plan acknowledges that growth must align with the needs to be based on the capacity of the watershed to hydrological capacity of watersheds to maintain ecological integrity; maintain its ecological integrity while accounting for the Settlement Area expansion must now be informed by watershed planning changing hydrologic conditions caused by development (i.e., and SWM to ensure the assimilative capacity of receiving water bodies is acknowledging that flood remedial plans and flood remediation not exceeded and flood risk vulnerability is addressed (2.2.1.5, 2.2.8.1); infrastructure may be necessary in order to allow for  New and expanded infrastructure now requires water/wastewater master intensification to occur). plans and SWM to be informed by watershed planning (3.2.1, 3.2.6.2; 3.2.7.1, 4.2.1.1, 4.2.1.3, 4.2.4.5); Areas serviced by inland lakes, rivers, or groundwater now require an EA to ensure expanded capacity is not exceeded (2.2.8.2). The plans should include tools to support their day-to-day The Province has committed to issuing guidance material and technical implementation, including: permits under the Conservation guidelines to assist planning authorities and decision-makers with Authorities Act and municipal by-laws under the Municipal Act implementing the policies of the four plans, beginning in 2018 (Growth Plan (i.e., tree cutting, fill, and erosion and sediment controls); ~ 4.1, ORMCP – Implementation). Municipalities are now encouraged to increased funding for land acquisition, private land stewardship develop fill/soil re-use strategies and sustainably manage excess soil/fill activities and Environmental Farm Plans. through planning approvals (Growth Plan 4.2.9.2, 4.2.9.3). The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) and Although the term "Conservation Projects" is still used throughout the Greenbelt Plan (GBP) should allow for existing CA facilities to ORMCP, a definition is not provided. A definition from TRCA’s Living City provide environment-based recreation, education and tourism Policies Document could be incorporated. opportunities. CAs require flexibility to offer public uses complementary to organizational objectives to generate revenues and achieve financial sustainability while  maintaining/upgrading facilities to ensure they operate at the highest standards and are accessible to all. A definition for "Conservation Projects" should be added to support and confirm CA land uses and provide additional flexibility. The ORMCP and GBP should provide increased flexibility and To encourage economic opportunities on agricultural lands and support economic opportunities to agriculture and rural livelihoods viable rural economies, additional uses are now permitted in prime (i.e., bed and breakfast establishments, home businesses, agricultural areas (e.g., "on-farm diversified" uses such as home industries dwellings for farm workers, nature-based tourism and value  and agri-tourism); Municipalities are now required to map (with the added agriculture), as long as the uses were subject to meeting Province) and protect an Agricultural System and Agricultural Support the environmental policies and tests of the plans. Network (Greenbelt Plan 1.2.2.1, 3.1, 3.2; ORMCP Part III - 22,23,26; Growth Plan 4.2.6.1, 5.2.2.2). The policy requirements for transportation, infrastructure and The terminology of the ORMCP has been changed from "transportation, utility development activities in the ORMCP should have clearer infrastructure and utilities" to "Infrastructure"; Further direction has not direction on how to "demonstrate the need" for infrastructure been provided on how to "demonstrate the need" for an assessment of "no projects and assessment and there is "no reasonable real alternatives"; No policy requirements have been added regarding alternative", a key test to allowing infrastructure in the Natural enhancement and ecological compensation when Key Natural Core and Linkage Area designations. An increasing number of Heritage/Hydrologic Features or cultural heritage is negatively impacted by Environmental Assessments for large infrastructure projects infrastructure planning and siting; The ORMCP has been revised to clarify (major highways, pipelines) potentially cut across natural that Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Evaluations apply to Infrastructure, as features. These projects need to be thoroughly assessed for ~ described in s.41; New policy has been added requiring infrastructure and need, location and alternatives to minimize environmental upgrades/extensions to be supported by appropriate studies (e.g., impacts and reduce sprawl into the outer ring of the Growth infrastructure master plans, watershed planning) that demonstrate SWM, Plan. Additionally, policy requirements should be added to the water supply and assimilative capacity, and long-term financial feasibility plans to provide enhancement and ecological compensation (11.3.4, 12.3.4, 22.2.3, 32.3, 41). when Key Natural Heritage/Hydrologic Features are negatively impacted by infrastructure planning/siting.

366 RES.#A120/16 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2016-2020 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Duffins Creek Watershed 2143087 Ontario Limited, CFN 53934. Acquisition of property located east of Brock Road and north of Finch Avenue, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, under the "Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2016-2020," Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Duffins Creek watershed. (Executive Res.#B50/16)

Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Michael Di Biase

THAT 3.737 hectares (9.234 acres), more or less, of vacant land, located east of Brock Road and north of Finch Avenue, said land being Part of Lot 18, Concession 2, designated as Part 12 on Plan 40R-28897, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, be purchased from 2143087 Ontario Limited;

THAT the purchase price be $2.00;

THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;

THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, be instructed to complete the transaction at the earliest possible date. All reasonable expenses incurred incidental to the closing for land transfer tax, legal costs, and disbursements are to be paid;

RES.#A121/16 - RENEWAL OF LEASE WITH EMPIRE COMMUNITIES (2183 LAKESHORE BOULEVARD) LTD. Marina Parade Drive, City of Toronto, CFN 49033. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto and Empire Communities (2183 Lakeshore Boulevard) Ltd. for renewal of an existing lease for a condominium sales office on Marine Parade Drive at Lakeshore Boulevard West, City of Toronto. (Executive Res.#B51/16)

Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Michael Di Biase

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is the owner of lands being Part of the bed of Lake Ontario in front of Lot D, Range D, City of Toronto (TRCA Lands);

AND WHEREAS the TRCA-owned lands have been turned over to the City of Toronto for management, in accordance with the terms of an agreement dated October 11, 1972;

367

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA concur with the City of Toronto renewing the lease of TRCA-owned lands with Empire Communities (2183 Lakeshore Boulevard) Ltd. for a term of three years;

AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may be required to implement the lease, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED ______

RES.#A122/16 - DONALDA GOLF CLUB - EXTENSION OF LEASE City of Toronto, Don River Watershed, CFN 24456. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto to extend an existing lease with Donalda Golf Club on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority owned lands, for the operation of a golf course located adjacent to York Mills Road and east of Don Mills Road, in the City of Toronto, Don River watershed. (Executive Res.#B52/16)

Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Michael Di Biase

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is the owner of Part of Lot 7, Concession 3 and Part of Block A, Plan 6098, being Parts 1 to 16, Plan RS-1247; Part 14, Plan 64R-7900 and Parts 1 to 7, Plan 64R-1699, in the City of Toronto (TRCA Lands);

AND WHEREAS the TRCA Lands have been previously turned over to the City of Toronto for management purposes, in accordance with the terms of an agreement dated June 14, 1961;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA concur with the City of Toronto extending the lease of TRCA Lands with the Donalda Golf Club for a term of 25 years commencing on January 1, 2036 and ending on December 31, 2060, for the purpose of operating a golf course;

THAT said lease be subject to any requirements of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.13, as amended;

THAT said lease be subject to an Official Plan amendment;

THAT said lease be subject to the approval of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required;

AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED ______

368

RES.#A123/16 - HOSPICE VAUGHAN - PROPOSAL TO LEASE TRCA-OWNED LAND City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River Watershed , CFN 52745. Receipt of a request from Hospice Vaughan to enter into a lease of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) owned land for up to 50 years less a day, required for the construction and operation of a hospice located on Islington Avenue, north of Rutherford Road, in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res.#B53/16)

Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Michael Di Biase

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from Hospice Vaughan to enter into a lease agreement to construct and operate a hospice facility located on Islington Avenue, north of Rutherford Road, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed;

AND WHEREAS it is in the best interests of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act to enter into a lease with Hospice Vaughan in this instance;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a lease with Hospice Vaughan for the use of 1.1 hectares (2.8 acres), more or less, said land being Part of Lots 16 and 17, Concession 7, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York;

THAT the lease with Hospice Vaughan be subject to the following terms and conditions: a) that the term of the lease be for up to 50 years less a day; b) that consideration be the nominal sum of $12.00 per annum plus HST; c) that the lease be subject to any necessary Planning Act approvals; d) that the final terms and conditions of the agreement be satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitors;

THAT an archaeological investigation be completed with any mitigative measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff at the expense of Hospice Vaughan;

369 RES.#A124/16 - REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK Request for Conveyance of Land for the Expansion/Extension of Major Mackenzie Drive West, East and West of Regional Road 27, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River Watershed, CFN 55690. Receipt of a request from the Regional Municipality of York for conveyance of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority-owned lands required for the expansion and extension of Major Mackenzie Drive West, east and west of Regional Road 27, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res.#B54/16)

Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Michael Di Biase

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from the Regional Municipality of York for conveyance of land for the expansion and extension of Major Mackenzie Drive West, east and west of Regional Road 27, in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT two parcels of TRCA-owned land containing 2.08 hectares (5.14 acres), more or less, required for the expansion/extension of Major Mackenzie Drive West, east and west of Regional Road 27, being part of Block 68, Plan 65M-3738, designated as Part 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 on Plan 65R-35522 as well as part of Lot 19, Concession 8, designated as Part 3, 4, 5, and 8 on Plan 65R-35529, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, be sold to the Regional Municipality of York;

THAT consideration be the nominal sum of $2.00, in addition to all legal, survey, and other cost be paid by the Regional Municipality of York;

THAT the Regional Municipality of York is to fully indemnify TRCA from any and all claims from injuries, damages or cost of any nature resulting in any way, either directly or indirectly, form this conveyance or the carrying out of construction;

THAT an archaeological investigation be completed, with any mitigating measures being carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff, at the expense of the Regional Municipality of York;

THAT a landscape plan be prepared for TRCA staff review and approval, in accordance with existing TRCA landscaping guidelines;

THAT a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, be obtained by the Regional Municipality of York prior to commencement of construction;

THAT said conveyance be subject to approval of the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry in accordance with Section 21(2) of the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.27, as amended, if required;

370 AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction including obtaining any necessary approval and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED ______

RES.#A125/16 - CITY OF TORONTO Request for License Agreement, City of Toronto, Humber River Watershed, CFN 56071. Receipt of a request from the City of Toronto on behalf of Angas Farm and Nursery Limited to concur with a license agreement required for the erection of a directional sign on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority lands managed by the City of Toronto, located east of Albion Road and north of Wilson Avenue, in the City of Toronto, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res.#B55/16)

Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Michael Di Biase

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is the owner of Parcel 1- 2, Section M527 Part of Lots 1 and 2, Plan M527, being Part 1 on Plan 66R-6895, located east of Albion Road and north of Wilson Avenue, in the City of Toronto (TRCA Lands);

AND WHEREAS TRCA is in receipt of a request from the City of Toronto on behalf of Angas Farm and Nursery Limited (Angas Farm) to enter into a license agreement in order to erect a sign on TRCA-owned lands;

AND WHEREAS the TRCA lands have been previously turned over to the City of Toronto for management purposes, in accordance with the terms of an agreement dated June 14, 1961;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA concur with the City of Toronto entering into a License Agreement with Angas Farm to place a sign on TRCA-owned lands for a period of three years, commencing July 1, 2016 until June 30, 2019.

371 RES.#A126/16 - OUTFRONT MEDIA CANADA L.P. - PROPOSAL TO LEASE TRCA- OWNED LAND 7060 Jane Street, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River Watershed, CFN 56093. Receipt of a request from Outfront Media L.P. to lease Toronto and Region Conservation Authority-owned land required for the construction and operation of two electronic advertising signs located at 7060 Jane Street, in the City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed. (Executive Res.#B56/16 & Res.#B57/16)

Moved by: Giorgio Mammoliti Seconded by: Michael Di Biase

WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is in receipt of a request from Outfront Media Canada L.P. (Outfront Media) to enter into a lease agreement to construct and operate two electronic advertising signs located at 7060 Jane Street (Black Creek Pioneer Village North), City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York, Humber River watershed;

WHEREAS it is in the opinion of TRCA that it is in the best interests of TRCA in furthering its objectives, as set out in Section 20 of the Conservation Authorities Act, to cooperate with Outfront Media in this instance;

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA enter into a lease with Outfront Media for the use of approximately 50 square feet, more or less, said land being Part of Lot 1 Concession 5, City of Vaughan, Regional Municipality of York;

THAT the lease with Outfront Media be subject to the following terms and conditions:

(i) that the term of the lease be for five years, with three further renewal options of five years each, at TRCA’s sole option; (ii) that consideration be the greater of: (a) $60,000.00 per annum plus HST, or (b) 35% of annual gross revenues plus HST; (iii) that Outfront Media shall be responsible for any permitting approvals required for the construction and operation of the electronic advertising signs; (iv) that Outfront Media shall be responsible for any costs associated with the construction and operation of the electronic advertising signs and associated equipment; (v) that TRCA receive up to 5% of the available advertising time at no cost to TRCA; (vi) that the final terms and conditions of the agreement be satisfactory to TRCA staff and solicitor; (vi) that the sign not be illuminated between 11 pm and 7 am.

THAT an archaeological review be completed with any mitigative measures be carried out to the satisfaction of TRCA staff at the expense of Outfront Media;

THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take the necessary action to finalize the transaction, including obtaining necessary approvals and signing and execution of documents;

372

THAT revenue generated by the sign located at 7060 Jane Street be allocated to a TRCA “send a kid to camp” account and those funds be used to help subsidize students from high priority neighbourhoods attend educational programs and day camps at Black Creek Pioneer Village;

AND FURTHER THAT future revenues from other sign locations also be allocated to the “send a kid to camp” account to send students from high priority neighbourhoods to TRCA facilities, and/or to be used for other community benefits projects supported by TRCA and local Councillors. CARRIED ______

Section II – Items for Authority Information RES.#A127/16 - SECTION II – ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION

Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Mike Mattos

THAT Section II item 8.1 – Lidar Data, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #5/16, held on July 8, 2016, be received. CARRIED ______

373 Section III – Items for the Information of the Board

RES.#A128/16 - CARRUTHERS CREEK WATERSHED PLAN Update on Activities in Year 1 of the Watershed Planning Process. Update on activities in Year 1 to develop the watershed plan for Carruthers Creek in partnership with the Regional Municipality of Durham.

Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: Jack Heath

THAT the update on activities in Year 1 to develop the Carruthers Creek Watershed Plan be received;

AND FURTHER THAT a copy of the staff report be provided to the Region of Durham, the Town of Ajax and the City of Pickering. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #6/15, held on June 26, 2015, Resolution #A106/15 was approved, which authorized staff to enter into a service agreement with the Region of Durham to complete a watershed plan for Carruthers Creek. Staff was directed to report to the Authority annually, and at the end of Phase 1, or more frequently as need arises, as well as at the completion of the watershed plan.

Phase 1, scheduled for 2015 and 2016, consists of field work to characterise the watershed's flora and fauna, hydrology, hydrogeology and headwater drainage features. The technical work to characterise Carruthers Creek and adjacent lands to date will provide new insights into the features and functions of this small watershed. Phase 2 (2017 and 2018), will focus on scenario modelling, watershed plan development and community engagement. This report covers an update on year one activities of the watershed plan development process, which was completed between July 2015 and June 2016.

Update on 2015-2016 Activities The watershed plan is proceeding on time and on budget. TRCA reports on a monthly basis to the Region, in addition to ongoing discussion with Planning staff at Durham Region for updates and project administration.

Key activities include:  A project kick-off meeting with municipal stakeholders, including three staff from the Region of Durham, three staff from the Town of Ajax, and one staff from the City of Pickering;  Over 80% of the watershed has been surveyed for terrestrial plant and animal species;  In order to better understand flow levels in the creek, two new stream gauges were installed, for a total of three gauges;  A significant population of redside dace, a small fish listed as a species at risk in Ontario was found in the middle reaches of the creek;  GIS data consolidation and management began, and will continue throughout the watershed plan process, so the most current information is available and accessible;  Baseline hydrogeological data was gathered by consolidating information from various sources;

374  Two watershed tours were conducted, one with the City of Pickering and the other with the Town of Ajax.

In early 2016 a peer review panel was convened to comment on the field work approach used in 2015, and the planned approach to the second season of field work in 2016. The peer review exercise confirmed TRCA’s methodology, and assured staff that the technical work has no major gaps. The review panel had positive feedback on the approach, and helpful suggestions of additional academic collaboration for TRCA to consider, which could inform TRCA’s field work planning. Advice was also offered on lessons learned when completing the recent watershed plan for neighbouring Lynde Creek.

As a result of reviewing the first year’s work, technical staff identified an additional component to include in the watershed plan, within the existing budget. A fluvial geomorphology study will be completed in order to understand the processes at work in the stream system. This study will assist TRCA in developing guidelines to ensure existing geomorphic processes are not impacted by potential future development. If urban development were to occur, watershed and stream reach level influences and the overarching recommendations would be refined.

Field observations have shown that Carruthers Creek withstood the high flow events resulting from a major storm in 2015, however water levels fluctuate significantly in the middle and lower reaches. There are lands and natural heritage features in the watershed which are healthy, and even a few rare species making their home in and around Carruthers Creek. As expected, there are also areas of the watershed where the natural heritage features are not as robust and resilient.

Data collection for the second field season is now underway. Data review and interpretation will be completed in late 2016. Following the completion of the Phase 1 work in 2016, TRCA and Durham Region staff will provide a summary of the report of the findings to their respective board and committee, as well as re-engage with key stakeholders, including TRCA’s municipal partners at Ajax and Pickering.

Alignment with Emerging Provincial Planning Framework Durham Region’s investment in the development of Carruthers Creek watershed plan is timely and will be of great benefit to the Region given the Province of Ontarios’s proposed updates to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Greenbelt Plan which were released in May 2016. Proposed policy amendments in these two provincial plans are designed to better protect natural heritage and water, including a requirement for watershed planning across the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

The Greenbelt Plan stipulates that:

Watershed plans shall include, but are not limited to, the following components: a) A water budget and conservation plan; b) Land and water use and management strategies; c) A framework for implementation; d) An environmental monitoring plan; e) Requirements for the use of environmental management practices and programs; f) Criteria for evaluating the protection of water quality and quantity, and key hydrologic features and functions; and g) Targets on a watershed or sub-watershed basis for the protection and restoration of riparian areas and the establishment of natural self-sustaining vegetation.

375

The 2016 proposed Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe outlines the major components of watershed plans as follows:

Watershed planning typically includes:  a water budget and conservation plan;  nutrient loading assessments;  consideration of climate change impacts and severe weather events;  land and water use management strategies;  an environmental monitoring plan;  requirements for the use of environmental management practices and programs;  criteria for evaluating the protection of quality and quantity of water;  the identification and protection of hydrologic features, areas and functions and the inter-relationships between or among them; and  targets for the protection and restoration of riparian areas.

Given TRCA’s extensive experience in watershed planning, staff will ensure that Carruthers Creek watershed plan will meet or exceed the provincial requirements for watershed planning outlined in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Greenbelt Plan.

RATIONALE The Region of Durham and TRCA recognise the preparation and implementation of watershed plans as an effective tool in the protection of the Region’s natural heritage and water resources. The Region requested TRCA to complete a watershed plan for Carruthers Creek (Durham Region Report #2015-P-16). The Carruthers Creek watershed plan is being developed through a four year process, which commenced in 2015.

FINANCIAL DETAILS This is a multi-year planning process with a budget of $299,397 in 2015; $299,731 in 2016; $275,176 in 2017; and $215,127 in 2018. The total of $1,089,431, will be funded by the Region of Durham through a service agreement with TRCA, through account 120-80.

DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff continue the characterisation work of Phase 1 in 2016. The current state characterisation consists of a terrestrial biological inventory, monitoring stream gauges and analysing data, stormwater management studies, hydrologic modelling, hydrogeology monitoring and modelling, a headwater drainage features inventory, and GIS data coordination. Planning and development review and analysis, project management, and ongoing coordination with Durham Region staff will occur throughout both phases of the watershed planning process. Stakeholders will be consulted, and broader community engagement will occur in 2017 and 2018. Long-term environmental monitoring of the watershed will continue after the plan is completed.

Report prepared by: Maryam Nassar, extension 5937 Emails: [email protected] For information contact: Maryam Nassar, extension 5937 Emails: [email protected] Date: July 4, 2016

______

376 RES.#A129/16 - WAUKESHA WATER DIVERSION APPLICATION Update on the Great Lakes Compact Council Decision of June 21, 2016. To provide an update on the Waukesha water diversion application.

Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Ronald Chopowick

THAT this update on the Waukesha water diversion application be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Executive Committee Meeting #1/16, held on March 11, 2016, Resolution B9/16 was approved, in part, as follows:

…THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT due to the potential significant negative impacts to Great Lakes Basin, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) does not support the Waukesha Water Diversion Application in its current form and requests that the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River Water Resources Regional Body and the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River Water Resources Compact Council further investigate future implications of this application through transparent and full public engagement;…

The City of Waukesha, located in southeast Wisconsin 17 miles west of Lake Michigan, seeks an exception from the prohibition of diversions under the Great Lakes–St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact and Great Lakes–St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources Agreement. The Compact and Agreement prohibit diversions of Great Lakes water, with limited exceptions. One exception allows a “community within a straddling county,” such as Waukesha, to apply for a diversion of Great Lakes water. On January 7, 2016, and under the guidelines of the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Water Basin Resources Compact, the State of Wisconsin presented the City of Waukesha Diversion Application to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WNDR). In the application the State of Wisconsin proposed the annual diversion of 38.2 million litres of water per day from Lake Michigan. After reviewing the application, the WDNR Resources recommended approving the application and forwarded its recommendation to the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River Water Resources Regional Body (comprised of the Great Lakes governors and Canadian premiers).

Regional Body Recommendations On May 18th, 2016, after significant deliberation, the Regional Body representing the Great Lakes Compact Council agreed that the City of Waukesha's water diversion application could win approval if certain conditions in the interstate agreement are met. The Regional Body found that the Originating Party has the authority to manage the Applicant’s Diversion of Basin water, and the Originating Party will manage and regulate the Diversion pursuant to the requirements in Agreement Article 201 ¶ 3.c and Compact § 4.9.3.c, including all conditions of this Declaration of Finding, including without limitation, the following specific Conditions on the Diversion:

A. The Applicant will implement the Diversion in accordance with the overarching principles of the Agreement and Compact.

377 B. The Applicant must continue to implement and enforce all elements of its current water conservation and efficiency plan (and any future revisions) in the Recommended Diversion Area, in order to meet or exceed if possible the 10% demand reduction due to the implementation of the water conservation and efficiency plan. This plan must be updated at a minimum of once every ten years.

C. Some existing deep aquifer groundwater wells may be maintained by the Applicant to be used only under emergency conditions, but only for the duration of the emergency. These wells shall not be used as part of the Applicant’s regular water supply under any circumstances. The Applicant will meet all water quality discharge standards in accordance with state and federal law, including during those periods when the deep aquifer wells are used for emergency purposes.

D. The Recommended Diversion Area shall be as described in Section II.5 and depicted in Attachment 1, and the amount of water diverted from the Basin by the Applicant shall not exceed the Recommended Diversion Amount. No part of the Diversion of water from the Basin authorized as the Recommended Diversion Amount may be used by the Originating Party or the Applicant for any territory outside of the Recommended Diversion Area.

E. The Application, the Originating Party’s Technical Review and other comments submitted during the Regional Review process identified adverse consequences that would be caused by increased use of shallow or deep groundwater to meet the Applicant’s water supply needs as part of the basis for concluding that no other reasonable water supply alternatives were acceptable, thereby justifying the Recommended Diversion Amount for the Recommended Diversion Area. These adverse consequences included: (i) impacts to certain surface water resources and wetlands, (ii) continued extraction and dispersion of radium into the environment, and (iii) withdrawal of groundwater from the Lake Michigan watershed and discharge into the Mississippi River Basin (MRB) without return flow. As a condition of the recommendation of the Diversion, WDNR should use all of its available legal authority to prevent the same or substantially similar consequences from any other groundwater withdrawals within the Recommended Diversion Area.

F. The Application, the Originating Party’s Technical Review and other comments submitted during the Regional Review process identified that the Recommended Diversion Amount for the Recommended Diversion Area with return flow will produce net benefits within the Lake Michigan watershed due to the hydrological connection between the MRB and the Lake Michigan watershed. As a condition of recommendation of the Diversion, WDNR should use all of its available legal authority to prevent any other groundwater withdrawals that would reverse this benefit. G. The Applicant must implement a comprehensive pharmaceutical and personal care products recycling program and continually use the best available methods to encourage the further reduction of such products into the wastewater as recommended by the Originating Party.

H. For a minimum of 10 years from the beginning of return flow to the Basin, the Applicant must implement a scientifically sound plan to monitor the mainstem of the Root River to determine changes that may have resulted from return flow (such as volumes, water temperatures, water quality and periodicity of discharge) in order to adapt future return flow to minimize potential adverse impacts or maximize potential benefits to water dependent resources of the Basin source watershed (i.e., Lake Michigan).

378 I. The Applicant must complete an annual report that documents the daily, monthly and annual amounts of water diverted and returned to the Lake Michigan watershed over the previous calendar year (“Annual Report”). An Annual Report must be submitted by the Originating Party to the Regional Body by the due date established by the Regional Body for the Annual Water Use Reporting to the Great Lakes water use repository, and include a section on the implementation and effectiveness of the water conservation and efficiency program. The Annual Report must also be made available to the public on the Applicant’s webpage.

J. The Applicant must return to the Root River, a Lake Michigan tributary, a daily quantity of treated wastewater equivalent to or in excess of the previous calendar year’s average daily Diversion. On any days when the total quantity of treated wastewater is insufficient to meet this target, all treated wastewater must be returned to the Root River.

K. The Applicant must obtain, and be in compliance with, all necessary federal and state permits and approvals from the Originating Party and other relevant governmental agencies before beginning the Diversion, and all of the above conditions imposing obligations upon the Applicant must be incorporated into the state permit or approval as legally enforceable provisions under the Originating Party’s state law.

Compact Council Approval The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Council (Compact Council) approved, with conditions, the City of Waukesha’s Great Lakes diversion application on June 21, 2016. The Compact Council is composed of the Governors of each of the eight Great Lakes States. Conditions of approval include: a reduced water supply volume of 8.2 million gallons per day and a smaller diversion area that includes only the area currently served by the Waukesha Water Utility. Other conditions include monitoring wastewater impacts to the Root River, and annual reporting to the Great Lakes states and provinces on the diversion.

The City of Waukesha may now begin to obtain all required federal, state and local permits and approvals for diverting Lake Michigan water. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources will issue a final diversion approval once all required permits are issued. The final diversion approval will include all conditions of the approval required by the Compact Council. The City plans to divert Lake Michigan water from the Oak Creek Water Utility and discharge treated wastewater to the Root River.

With the Compact Council approval, the City would be able to start applications for permits and approvals, including, but not limited to:  determination of Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act (WEPA) compliance with a final Environmental Impact Statement;  the Wisconsin Public Service Commission’s Construction Authorization for construction required to implement the diversion;  Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) Permit for wastewater discharge to the Root River;  Wisconsin Chapter 30 permits for pipeline stream crossings and Root River outfall;  Water Supply Service Area plan approval; and  WDNR public water systems construction plan approval.

379 The WDNR expects that, barring unforeseen delays, once the City has submitted all necessary application materials, the timeline to issue all WDNR permits and approvals could be six months to a year.

Implications and next steps for TRCA and partners Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative has released a statement stating that they are extremely disappointed in this decision. In their opinion it sets a dangerous precedent that leads to more and more cities and counties all around the basin in the U.S. and Canada qualifying for Great Lakes and St. Lawrence water. The Cities Initiative firmly believes the application does not meet the terms of the Compact. Waukesha will provide water to areas outside the City, will likely damage the Root River with the return flow, and has a reasonable alternative to treat their groundwater as many other communities in Wisconsin and neighboring states are doing. The Cities Initiative is exploring its options to maintain the utmost protection of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River.

TRCA staff will continue to monitor how the City of Waukesha and the State of Wisconsin honour the terms of the agreement. It is anticipated that the Province of Ontario and its representatives will also be closely monitoring this precedent setting decision in context of Ontario’s Great Lakes objectives.

Report prepared by: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Nancy Gaffney, extension 5313 Emails: [email protected] Date: July 12, 2016

______

Section IV – Ontario Regulation 166/06, As Amended

RES.#A130/16 - ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED

Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Linda Pabst

THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, item 10.3, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #5/16, held on July 8, 2016, be received. CARRIED ______

380 TERMINATION

ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 11:01 a.m., on Friday, July 22, 2016.

Maria Augimeri Brian Denney Chair Secretary-Treasurer

/ks

381