DOCSLIB.ORG

Responding Record from the City of Vaughan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Responding Record from the City of Vaughan OMB File No.: PL111184 ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD IN THE MATTER OF section 43 of the Ontario Municipal Board Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.28 Requestors: Alpa Roof Trusses Inc. and Argo Lumber Inc. Subject: Request for Review Municipality: City of Vaughan OMB Case No.: PL111184 OMB File No.: PL111184 RESPONDING RECORD OF THE CITY OF VAUGHAN TO SECTION 43 REQUEST FOR REVIEW July 14, 2016 BORDEN LADNER GERVAIS LLP Scotia Plaza 40 King Street West Toronto, Ontario M5H 3Y4 Rick F. Coburn Tel.: 416-367-6038 Fax: 416-361-2437 Email: [email protected] Isaac Tang Tel.: 416-367-6143 Fax: 416-361-2740 Email: [email protected] Counsel for the City of Vaughan TO: ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD 655 Bay Street, Suite 1500 Toronto, Ontario M5G 1E5 Mary Ann Hunwicks, Board Secretary Tel: 416-326- 5378 Fax: 416-326-5370 Email: [email protected] AND TO: FASKEN MARTINEAU DuMOULIN LLP 333 Bay Street, Suite 2400 Bay Adelaide Centre Toronto, Ontario M5H 2T6 W. Thomas Barlow/Sarah J. Turney Tel.: 416-868-3403 Fax: 416-364-7813 Email: [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Argo Lumber Inc. and Alpa Roof Trusses Inc. AND TO: BORDEN LADNER GERVAIS LLP Scotia Plaza 40 King Street West Toronto, Ontario M5H 3Y4 Pitman Patterson Tel.: 416-367-6109 Fax: 416-361-2459 Email: [email protected] THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK Legal Services Branch 17250 Yonge Street Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 6Z1 Frank Santaguida Tel: 905-830-4444 Fax: 905-895-3768 Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Regional Municipality of York AND TO: LOOPSTRA NIXON LLP 135 Queens Plate Drive, Suite 600 Toronto, Ontario M9W 6V7 Quinto M. Annibale and Steven Ferri Tel.: 416-746-4710 Fax: 416-746-8319 Email: [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for CRH Canada Group Inc., 2203012 Ontario Limited and Blair Building Materials Inc. OMB File No.: PL111184 ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD IN THE MATTER OF section 43 of the Ontario Municipal Board Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.28 Requestors: Alpa Roof Trusses Inc. and Argo Lumber Inc. Subject: Request for Review Municipality: City of Vaughan OMB Case No.: PL111184 OMB File No.: PL111184 INDEX TAB DESCRIPTION 1. Responding Submissions of the City of Vaughan 2. Affidavit of Steven Dixon, sworn April 21, 2016 TOR01: 6403817: v1 TAB 1 PL111184 ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD IN THE MATTER OF section 43 of the Ontario Municipal Board Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.28 Requestors: Alpa Roof Trusses Inc. and Argo Lumber Inc. Subject: Request for Review Municipality: City of Vaughan OMB Case No.: PL111184 OMB File No.: PL111184 RESPONDING SUBMISSIONS OF THE CITY OF VAUGHAN FOR REQUEST FOR REVIEW UNDER SECTION 43 OVERVIEW OF THE CITY’S RESPONSE 1. Argo Lumber Inc. and Alpa Roof Trusses Inc. (collectively, the “Requestor”) have requested as primary relief that the Chair, pursuant to Section 43 of the Ontario Municipal Board Act, rescind that part of the Decision and Order of the Board dated August 8, 2013 in Case No. PL111184 (the “Partial Approval Order”) that reads as follows: AND THE BOARD FURTHER ORDERS that in respect of Appeals 118, 129, 130 and 131, no land budget argument including, without limitation, s. 2.1.3.2(b), will be raised by any current or future appellant, party or participant, the City or the Region to preclude a change in the proposed residential designation of the lands that are the subject of those appeals (the “Scoping Provision”). 2. The Requestor seeks, in the alternative, an Order of the Board directing that a motion be heard to review the Board’s decision with respect to the Scoping Provision. 3. The Requestor has not requested that the Board order a rehearing with respect to the Board’s decision (although presumably such an order may be requested if the request for a motion to review is granted). 4. The City of Vaughan (the “City”) respectfully requests that the Board deny the relief sought by the Requestor as set out above. 5. The City submits that the Requestor has failed to meet the relevant tests under Rules 115 and 115.01 of the Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure for obtaining an order granting a motion for review of the Board’s decision respecting the Scoping Provision. Accordingly, the request must be dismissed. 6. The City further submits that the primary relief requested by the Requestor cannot be granted under Rule 115 and 115.01. Such relief may only be granted under Rule 118, if and when a rehearing is granted, and if the Board Member or panel conducting the rehearing deems such relief appropriate. 7. In sum, the City requests that the Chair refuse to exercise his discretion to grant the relief sought and dismiss the Request for Review. BACKGROUND Background of the VOP 2010 and the Appeals 8. The Vaughan Official Plan, 2010 (“VOP 2010”) was adopted by City Council on September 7, 2010. It contains policies that direct when, where and how land use changes can occur to 2031. The VOP 2010 is the result of an extensive three-year public consultation and review process in respect of the City’s Growth Management Strategy that began in 2008. The VOP 2010 also represents the City’s response to the five year official plan review and provincial plan conformity exercise under the Planning Act (the “Act”). Affidavit of Steven Dixon sworn April 21, 2016 (“Dixon Affidavit”) at para 4, Responding Record of the City of Vaughan (“City’s Responding Record”), Tab 2. 9. Over 157 appeals to date have been filed against the VOP 2010. Given the large number of appeals, the City has expended significant public resources to manage and address the appeals, in accordance with the Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure and directions. The steps taken by the City include: (a) reviewing the appeal letters to understand the concerns raised by the appellants; (b) organizing the appeals by common interests; (c) meeting with appellants to try to resolve and/or scope their issues without a hearing; (d) attending six mediation sessions; (e) attending over 19 pre-hearing conferences; and (f) responding to or attending numerous motions and hearings at the Board. Dixon Affidavit at paras 6-7, City’s Responding Record, Tab 2. Note that certain numbers have been updated since the Dixon Affidavit was sworn (April 28, 2016) as a matter of public record. 10. The above efforts have been made increasingly difficult by the growing number of appeals filed to the VOP 2010, the most recent appeal having been filed on June 16, 2016. Dixon Affidavit at para 8, City’s Responding Record, Tab 2. Note that the date of the latest appeal filed has been updated since the Dixon Affidavit was sworn (April 28, 2016) as a matter of public record. 2 11. Holcim (Canada) Inc. (now CRH Canada Group Inc.), 2203012 Ontario Limited and Blair Building Materials Inc. (collectively, the “Appellants”) own lands in a triangular- shaped area located north of McNaughton Road, east of Keele Street, south of Teston Road, and west of the former Keele Valley Landfill Site in the City of Vaughan (the “Triangle Lands”). The Requestor’s lands are located immediately south of the lands owned by the Appellants and are also within the Triangle Lands. Affidavit of Debra Kakaria, sworn November 17, 2015 (“Kakaria Affidavit”) at para 7 and Exhibit ‘D’, Appellants’ Responding Record. 12. The VOP 2010, as adopted by City Council, proposed to convert the Triangle Lands from employment to residential uses. The Appellants appealed the VOP 2010 to retain the employment designation of the Triangle Lands. The Appellants’ appeals are identified as Appeal Nos. 129, 130 and 131 (the “Appeals”). The Appeals were filed by the Appellants on or about July 19, 2013. The Appeals challenged, among other things, the City’s growth management policies and key land use schedules on a City-wide basis. Dixon Affidavit at paras 12-14, City’s Responding Record, Tab 2. 13. The Requestor did not appeal the VOP 2010. Approximately 7 weeks after the filing of the Appeals (and after the issuance of the Partial Approval Order containing the Scoping Provision), on or about September 10, 2013 (Order issued October 3, 2013), the Requestor requested and obtained party status in connection with the Appeals. Dixon Affidavit at para 6, City’s Responding Record, Tab 2. The City’s Process of Scoping Appeals Leading to the Partial Approval Order Containing the Scoping Provision 14. The VOP 2010 hearing is a Growth Plan hearing. These hearings typically involve multiple parties, numerous issues and changes to official plan policies that may affect pending planning applications. The Board has issued practice directions for such hearings, recognizing that the nature of these hearings demands a fair, cost-effective and efficient process to ensure that appeals are resolved in a timely manner. Ontario Municipal Board Practice Directions for Growth Plan Hearings, Joint Brief of Authorities of the Region and the City (“Joint Brief of Authorities”), Tab 5. 15. The first pre-hearing conference was held with respect to the VOP 2010 in November 2012. Since that date, the City has continued to meet, discuss and correspond with parties in an attempt to scope the appeals to specific policies and/or to specific sites in the City. This ongoing process allowed the City to identify parts of the VOP 2010 that were no longer being challenged on a City-wide basis. Dixon Affidavit at paras 9-10, City’s Responding Record, Tab 2. 16. After lengthy consultations with numerous parties to identify parts of the VOP 2010 that were no longer at issue, the City brought a motion for partial approval returnable on July 23, 2013.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From the Past to the Future of Landfill Engineering Through Case Histories
    Missouri University of Science and Technology Scholars' Mine International Conference on Case Histories in (1998) - Fourth International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering 08 Mar 1998 - 15 Mar 1998 From the Past to the Future of Landfill Engineering Through Case Histories R. Kerry Rowe University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge Part of the Geotechnical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Rowe, R. Kerry, "From the Past to the Future of Landfill Engineering Through Case Histories" (1998). International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 4. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge/4icchge/4icchge-session00/4 This Article - Conference proceedings is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars' Mine. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering by an authorized administrator of Scholars' Mine. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 145 Proceedings: Fourth International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering~ St. Louis, Missouri, March 9-12, 1998. FROM THE PAST TO THE FUTURE OF LANDFILL ENGINEERING THROUGH CASE HISTORIES R. Kerry Rowe Paper No. SOA-9 Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5B9 AIISTRACT The advances in landfill engineering are outlined based on a number of case histories illustrating past problems, hydraulic performance of clay liners, diffusive transport through liners, hydraulic containment and clogging of leachate collection systems.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Landfill Leachate Treatment by Microalgae: Current
    processes Review A Review of Landfill Leachate Treatment by Microalgae: Current Status and Future Directions Tabish Nawaz 1,2, Ashiqur Rahman 3,4 , Shanglei Pan 1,5, Kyleigh Dixon 5, Burgandy Petri 5 and Thinesh Selvaratnam 1,3,5,* 1 Center for Advances in Water & Air Quality, Lamar University, 4400 S M L King Jr Pkwy, Beaumont, TX 77705, USA; [email protected] (T.N.); [email protected] (S.P.) 2 Environmental Science and Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400076, India 3 Center for Midstream Management and Science, Lamar University, 4400 S M L King Jr Pkwy, Beaumont, TX 77705, USA; [email protected] 4 Department of Chemical Engineering, Lamar University, 4400 S M L King Jr Pkwy, Beaumont, TX 77705, USA 5 Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Lamar University, 4400 S M L King Jr Pkwy, Beaumont, TX 77705, USA; [email protected] (K.D.); [email protected] (B.P.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-409-880-8712 Received: 28 February 2020; Accepted: 19 March 2020; Published: 26 March 2020 Abstract: Solid waste generation has been projected to increase worldwide. Presently, the most applied methodology to dispose of solid waste is landfilling. However, these landfill sites, over time release a significant quantity of leachate, which can pose serious environmental issues, including contamination of water resources. There exist many physicochemical and biological landfill leachate treatment schemes with varying degrees of success. With an increasing focus on sustainability, there has been a demand for developing eco-friendly, green treatment schemes for landfill leachates with viable resource recovery and minimum environmental footprints.
    [Show full text]
  • Compliance Boundary at the Keele Valley Landfill Site
    Compliance Boundary at the Keele Valley Landfill Site (City Council on August 1, 2, 3 and 4, 2000, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The Policy and Finance Committee and the Works Committee jointly recommend the adoption of the following report (June 27, 2000) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services: Purpose: To obtain the approval of City Council to request the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) to move the compliance boundary of the Keele Valley Landfill Site from the edge of the secondary buffer lands south of the City-owned lands northwards to the south end of a modified primary buffer, to take place upon the completion of landfilling operations at Keele Valley. Financial Implications and Impact Statement: If the recommendation is approved, subject to the conditions suggested, there are no financial implications to the City of Toronto. Recommendations: It is recommended that: (1) the City of Toronto request the Ministry of the Environment to amend the Certificate of Approval applicable to the Keele Valley Landfill Site to move the compliance boundary of the landfill from the south end of the secondary buffer lands at Major Mackenzie Drive to the south of the primary buffer lands as redefined as set out in this report; (2) Recommendation No. (1) be subject to the following conditions: (a) York Major Holdings, the owner of the lands comprising the secondary buffer, enter into an agreement with the City of Toronto incorporating the following provisions: (i) any new land use on the lands that are currently part of
    [Show full text]
  • (I) CITY of VAUGHAN COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 23, 2003 Table Of
    CITY OF VAUGHAN COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 23, 2003 Table of Contents Minute No. Page No. 138. PRESENTATION..........................................................................................................................118 139. VERBAL REPORT WITH RESPECT TO THE SMOG SUMMIT .................................................118 140. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA....................................................................................................119 141. DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST .....................................................................................................120 142. ADOPTION OR CORRECTION OF MINUTES............................................................................120 143. DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION.....................................120 144. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION ....................................121 145. WILLIAM GRANGER GREENWAY – BARTLEY SMITH GREENWAY (Supplementary Report No. 3)......................................................................................................123 146. ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT FILE Z.01.008 DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION FILE 19T-01V02 MATTHEW GABRIELE & MICHELA TONIETTO REPORT #P.2001.20 (Supplementary Report No. 4) .................................................................................125 147. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION ....................................130 148. KEELE VALLEY SMALL VEHICLE TRANSFER STATION AND HHW DEPOT (Addendum No. 3) ........................................................................................................................130
    [Show full text]
  • Long Range Solid Waste Management Plan Environmental Assessment
    Long Range Solid Waste Management Plan Environmental Assessment Appendix H – Design and Operations Report August 2007 Long Range Solid Waste Management Plan Environmental Assessment Appendix H – Design and Operations Report - August 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. H-1 1.1 Purpose and Scope ............................................................................... H-1 1.2 Regulatory Requirements ...................................................................... H-1 1.3 Background.......................................................................................... H-10 1.4 Description of the Undertaking............................................................. H-11 2.0 LANDFILL EXPANSION SITE DESCRIPTION.............................................. H-13 2.1 Site Location ........................................................................................ H-13 2.2 Site Boundaries ................................................................................... H-13 2.3 Land Use ............................................................................................. H-13 2.4 Topography.......................................................................................... H-13 2.5 Hydrology............................................................................................. H-14 2.6 Hydrogeology....................................................................................... H-14 2.7 Archaeology........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment 1
    Attachment 1 City of Vaughan 2019 City-Wide Development Charges Reserve Fund Statement As at December 31, 2019 (in '000s) Community Engineering Fire & Rescue General Library Services Public Works Total Services Services Services Government Balance as of January 1, 2019 $ 162,825 $ 290,454 $ 7,253 $ 1,499 $ 12,365 $ 9,888 $ 484,284 Revenues Development Charge Revenues $ 772 $ 3,297 $ 161 $ 167 $ 81 $ 169 4,646 Development Charge Credits - - - - - - - Transfer from Capital - - - - - - - Interest Earned $ 3,676 $ 6,538 $ 122 $ 26 $ 280 $ 222 10,864 Other - - - - - - - Total Revenues $ 4,448 $ 9,835 $ 283 $ 193 $ 360 $ 390 $ 15,510 Expenditures Transfer to Capital $ (5,114) $ (14,695) $ (4,413) $ (1,092) $ (226) $ (932) (26,473) Development Charge Refunds - - - - - - - Interest Expense - - - - - - - Other - - - - - - - Total Expenditures $ (5,114) $ (14,695) $ (4,413) $ (1,092) $ (226) $ (932) $ (26,473) Balance as of December 31, 2019 $ 162,158 $ 285,595 $ 3,123 $ 600 $ 12,499 $ 9,346 $ 473,321 City of Vaughan 2019 Area Specific Development Charges Reserve Fund Statement As at December 31, 2019 D8 - Rainbow D15 - West D18 - West D19 - East PD D20 - D23 - Dufferin D24 - Ansley Creek Woodbridge Major Mack Rutherford Watermain W. Teston Grove Balance as of January 1, 2019 $ 3,788 $ (244) $ (249) $ 802 $ 2,618 $ 89 $ 224 Revenues Development Charge Revenues 13 37 - - - - - Transfer from Capital - - - - - - - Interest Earned 86 10 (1) 4 59 2 5 Other - - - - - - - Total Revenues $ 99 $ 47 $ (1) $ 4 $ 59 $ 2 $ 5 Expenditures Transfer to Capital - 757 258 (756) - - - Development Charge Refunds - - - - - - - Interest Expense - - - - - - - Other - - - - - - - Total Expenditures $ - $ 757 $ 258 $ (756) $ - $ - $ - Balance as of December 31, 2019 $ 3,887 $ 559 $ 8 $ 50 $ 2,677 $ 91 $ 229 D33 - D25 - Zenway D27 - Black Creek Black Creek Woodbridge Total Fogel Huntington Map 2 Map 3 Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • 2 Exchange of Interests in Land Portions of the Keele Valley Landfill
    CITY CLERK Clause embodied in Report No. 17 of the Administration Committee, as adopted by the Council of the City of Toronto at its meeting held on December 4, 5 and 6, 2001. 2 Exchange of Interests in Land Portions of the Keele Valley Landfill Site (Vaughan) (City Council on December 4, 5 and 6, 2001, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following: “It is further recommended that the joint report dated November 29, 2001, from the Commissioner of Corporate Services and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, embodying the following recommendations, be adopted: ‘It is recommended that: (1) authority be granted for the City to enter into an agreement with York Major Holdings Inc. (“York Major”) to effect an exchange of interests in land at the Keele Valley Landfill site on the terms outlined in the body of this report; (2) the City Solicitor be authorized to complete the transaction on behalf of the City, including payment of any necessary expenses; (3) Recommendation No. (2)(b)(i) of Clause No. 2 of Joint Policy and Finance and Works Committee Report No. 2, as adopted by Council at its meeting held on August 1, 2, 3 and 4, 2000, be amended to require the City of Vaughan to first enact a temporary Zoning By-law to permit composting at the Avondale Facility to continue until December 31, 2003, instead of until May 31, 2004; and (4) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take necessary action to give effect thereto.’ ”) (City Council on November 6, 7 and 8, 2001, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of City Council scheduled to be held on December 4, 2001.) Toronto City Council 2 Administration Committee December 4, 5 and 6, 2001 Report No.
    [Show full text]
  • North Maple Regional Park Phase 2 Development Update January 2021
    Committee of the Whole (1) Report DATE: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 WARD(S): ALL TITLE: NORTH MAPLE REGIONAL PARK PHASE 2 DEVELOPMENT UPDATE JANUARY 2021 FROM: Nick Spensieri, Deputy City Manager, Infrastructure Development ACTION: FOR INFORMATION Purpose To provide an update on Phase 2 park development at North Maple Regional Park (NMRP) including progress by the Technical Advisor consultant team on completion of 30% design and technical studies. Report Highlights The first part of Phase 2 park development involves preparing a large area of undeveloped parkland with major site grading, servicing (water, sanitary, electrical, storm water) and restoration of the pond and wetland areas which are provincially significant. In August 2020 the Technical Advisor consultant team contract was awarded to Stantec Consulting Ltd. and the project was initiated in September 2020 Progress on Phase 2 design and technical studies to date includes completion of initial stakeholder meetings, site investigations, draft design submissions and reports. A procurement process for the Design-Build portion of Phase 2 site preparation, grading and servicing is currently planned and on-schedule to commence in Q2 2021. Recommendations 1. That this report be received for information. Item 7 Page 1 of 6 Background In April 2018, Council endorsed the 900-acre vision for NMRP to create a nationally significant public sports, recreation and cultural venue as a legacy project for Vaughan residents and visitors. In September 2018, Phase 1A park development (artificial turf fields, driveway, parking and pathways) was completed and the park officially opened for use. Phase 1B park development (washrooms, changerooms, shade shelters and event preparations) was completed in 2019 with the first Canada Day event held at NMRP on July 1, 2019 with over 18,000 visitors attending.
    [Show full text]
  • Update – Eastern Power Royalties
    CITY OF VAUGHAN EXTRACT FROM COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 Item 10, Report No. 9, of the Finance, Administration and Audit Committee, which was adopted without amendment by the Council of the City of Vaughan on September 20, 2016. 10 UPDATE – EASTERN POWER ROYALTIES The Finance, Administration and Audit Committee recommends approval of the recommendation contained in the following report of the Chief Financial Officer/City Treasurer and the Director of Financial Planning and Development Finance, dated September 6, 2016: Recommendation The Chief Financial Officer/City Treasurer and the Director of Financial Planning and Development Finance recommend: 1. That this report be received for information purposes. Contribution to Sustainability The Keele Valley Landfill reserve holds funds from the royalties paid by the City of Toronto in accordance with the agreement between the the two Cities. The royalties Keele Valley Landfill Reserve is a funding source for beautification efforts in the Maple community. Economic Impact The City has received notification from the City of Toronto that Eastern Power Ltd. has ceased power production at the Keele Valley Landfill site as of December 2015, as per the terms of the original contract with the Metropolitan Corporation (City of Toronto). Cessation of operations has resulted in the termination of royalty revenues received by the City of Toronto. In turn, this has resulted in the termination of the receipt of ten percent of these revenues by the City of Vaughan. Communications Plan The report is available publicly on the Agenda, Minutes & Extract page of the City’s website (www.vaughan.ca). Purpose To provide an update to Council on the status of electricity production by Eastern Power Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Baseflow and Water Use Assessment – Report on Current Conditions
    Don River Watershed Plan Baseflow and Water Use Assessment – Report on Current Conditions 2009 Prepared by: Toronto and Region Conservation Don River Watershed Plan: Baseflow and Water Use Assessment – Report on Current Conditions Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................ 2 List of Tables................................................................................................................................... 3 List of Figures.................................................................................................................................. 3 1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 Understanding Groundwater Recharge and Discharge .......................................................... 4 2.1 Don River Watershed Water Budget Modeling .................................................................... 5 2.2 Regional Groundwater Modeling.......................................................................................... 5 2.3 TRCA Role/Interest in Low Flow ........................................................................................... 5 3.0 Data Sources and Methods...................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Baseflow Data Collection .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Solid Waste Management Services Telephone Directory
    1 Solid Waste Management Services Solid Waste Management Services Infrastructure and Development Services Solid Waste Management Services is responsible for collecting, transporting, processing, composting and disposing of municipal and some private sector solid waste, including garbage, recyclables, organics, yard waste, electronics and household hazardous waste. The Division manages four collections yards, one maintenance yard, seven transfer stations, six household hazardous waste depots, two organics processing facilities, Green Lane Landfill and 160 former landfills. The Division’s customers include: • Approximately 870,000 homes and non-residential establishments o 462,000 single family residential (includes 11,000 residential units above commercial) o 400,000 multi-residential units o 7,500 non-residential establishments (includes small businesses, charities, institutions and religious organizations) • Schools, City Divisions, Agencies and Corporations • Approximately 10,000 street litter/recycling bins • 10,000 garbage and recycling bins in City parks • 1,000 Special Events per year • Private Industrial, Commercial and Institutional waste accepted at Drop-off Depots and landfill Toronto City Hall People Services Consultant (Acting) 25th Fl. E., 100 Queen St. W Workforce Planning Toronto ON M5H 2N2 Cavelle Landeau ............................. 392-5792 People Services Associate (Acting) Workforce Planning Facsimile ............................................... 392-4754 Lawrence Davidson ........................ 392-7449 Chief
    [Show full text]
  • 2 New Artificial Soccer Turfs Could Be on Way for Vaughan
    2 new artificial soccer turfs could be on way for Vaughan Feb 11, 2015 | Vote 0 0 2 new artificial soccer turfs could be on way for Vaughan Vaughan Citizen By Adam Martin-Robbins A capacity crowd packed the council chamber at city hall Monday night. And the vast majority of them were players, coaches and parents from the Vaughan Soccer Club who came for one very specific reason. They were there to let the city’s budget committee know they want two artificial turf soccer fields, not just one, built at North Maple Regional Park and they want work to begin on both this year. “Approving the first phase, with the two turf fields and walking trail, is a long awaited start for this community,” Lucille Abate, past president of the York Region Soccer Association, said. “We stand before you this evening, filling your stands, to urge the city to expedite this process as soon as possible. This park will provide the core services for over 70,000 residents who live in north-east Vaughan.” Abate noted the soccer club has agreed to contribute $150,000 toward the project, which expected to cost about $5.4 million and take 15 to 18 months to complete. A representative of Vaughan C.A.R.E.S (Committee of Associations to Restore Environmental Safety) also spoke in favour of the project. City staff, who have been struggling to get the property tax increase down to at least 3 per cent as directed by council, considered going ahead with one field instead of two this year.
    [Show full text]