INDEX TO
AUTHORITY MEETING #4/11
Friday, April 29, 2011
MINUTES Minutes of Meeting #3/11, held on March 25, 2011 137
PRESENTATIONS Gee, Jon, Manager, Great Lakes Area of Concern, Environment Canada re: Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan 137 Farrell, Laurian, Manager, Flood Risk Management and Infrastructure, TRCA re: Flood Management Service 137 Dillane, Jim, Director, Finance and Business Services, TRCA re: 2011 Operating and Capital Budget 137
CORRESPONDENCE Kunzle, Santiage, Principal, Montgomery Sisam Architects Inc. re: Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Firm of the Year Award 137
TORONTO AND REGION REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN 141
FUTURE FORESTS Silvicultural Forest Pests Status Report 143
WEST NILE VIRUS PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT West Nile Virus Vector Mosquito Larval Monitoring and Surveillance - 2010 and Five Year Data Summary 148
REGIONAL WATERSHED MONITORING PROGRAM Annual Report of Activity 154
GLEN STEWART RAVINE MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 161
TORONTO HISTORICAL PARK Node Construction and Signage Installation 164
BOB HUNTER MEMORIAL PARK Extension of Contract with Friends of the Rouge Valley for Forest Planting 165 GREAT LAKES AND MISSISSIPPI RIVER INTERBASIN FEASIBILITY STUDY Invasive Asian Carp Species 169
ONTARIO NATURE'S 20/20 VISION 171
COMMUNITY PROGRAM FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 174
GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011-2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed Susan Punter and Christine Bell 176
GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011-2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek Watershed Hayes Line Group of Companies 177
BRUCE’S MILL CONSERVATION AREA LEASE EXTENSION Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville 178
SOUTHERN ONTARIO CUMULATIVE IMPACT RESEARCH CONSORTIUM 178
2011 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET 179
APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS 222
ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD HEARING Seaton Community Planning Applications 222
REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY-OWNED LAND South of Stegman's Mill Road, east of Islington Avenue (Rear of 134 Ravendale Court - Kleinburg) 222
WATER QUALITY LABORATORY ANALYTICAL SERVICES 222
REGIONAL WATERSHED MONITORING NETWORK Stream Gauge Monitoring and Maintenance 2010 222
SUPPLY OF RENTAL RATES FOR AN OPERATED HYDRAULC BACKHOE Award of Contract RSD11-13 222
APPOINTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT OFFICER Sharon Lingertat 222
FLOOD MANAGEMENT SERVICE 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan 223
3 OLD GEORGE PLACE 233 BLACK CREEK HISTORIC BREWERY Status Report 235
MEMBERS REMUNERATION 239
IN THE NEWS 242
WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL Minutes of Meeting #2/11, held on February 10, 2011 246 Minutes of Meeting #3/11, held on March 10, 2011 246
LOWEST BID NOT ACCEPTED 246
2010 YEAR END FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT 246
PURCHASING POLICY 246
ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06 247
MEMBERS' ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS 247 MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #4/11 April 29, 2011
The Authority Meeting #4/11, was held in Weston Room B, Black Creek Pioneer Village, on Friday, April 29, 2011. The Vice Chair Maria Augimeri, called the meeting to order at 9:34 a.m.
PRESENT At Start of Meeting in Progress At End of Meeting When Arrived Meeting Maria Augimeri Yes Yes Vice Chair Bryan Bertie Yes Yes Member Laurie Bruce Yes Yes Member Bob Callahan Yes Yes Member Gay Cowbourne Yes Yes Member Vincent Crisanti No Yes No Member Michael Di Biase Yes No Member Chris Fonseca No Yes Yes Member Pamela Gough Yes No Member Lois Griffin Yes Yes Member Jack Heath Yes No Member Colleen Jordan Yes Yes Member Chin Lee Yes Yes Member Gloria Lindsay Luby Yes Yes Member Peter Milczyn No Yes Yes Member Linda Pabst Yes Yes Member John Parker No Yes Yes Member Anthony Perruzza No Yes No Member Dave Ryan Yes Yes Member John Sprovieri Yes Yes Member Jim Tovey Yes Yes Member Richard Whitehead Yes Yes Member
ABSENT Paul Ainslie Member David Barrow Member Glenn De Baeremaeker Member Gerri Lynn O'Connor Chair Glenn Mason Member Gino Rosati Member 136 RES.#A65/11 - MINUTES
Moved by: Dave Ryan Seconded by: Laurie Bruce
THAT the Minutes of Meeting #3/11, held on March 25, 2011, be approved. CARRIED ______
PRESENTATIONS
(a) A presentation by Jon Gee, Manager, Great Lakes Area of Concern, Environment Canada, in regard to item AUTH7.1 - Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan.
(b) A presentation by Laurian Farrell, Manager, Flood Risk Management and Infrastructure, TRCA, in regard to item AUTH8.1 - Flood Management Service.
(c) A presentation by Jim Dillane, Director, Finance and Business Services, TRCA, in regard to item BAAB7.1 - 2011 Operating and Capital Budget.
RES.#A66/11 - PRESENTATIONS
Moved by: Chin Lee Seconded by: Linda Pabst
THAT above-noted presentation (a) be heard and received. CARRIED RES.#A67/11 - PRESENTATIONS
Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Vincent Crisanti
THAT above-noted presentation (c) be heard and received. CARRIED ______
CORRESPONDENCE
(a) An email dated March 25, 2011 from Santiago Kunzle, Principal, Montgomery Sisam Architects Inc., in regard to the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Firm of the Year Award.
137 RES.#A68/11 - CORRESPONDENCE
Moved by: Richard Whitehead Seconded by: Pamela Gough
THAT above-noted correspondence (a) be received. CARRIED
138 CORRESPONDENCE (A)
Santiago Kunzle
Brian:
I am very pleased to share the news that we have been selected by the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada as the firm of the year award recipient (please see below). Our work is in no small measure a reflection of our collaboration with our clients (the Restoration Services Centre being a prime example) and we feel that this award is in part also TRCA 's.
Best regards,
Santiago Kunzle Dipl. Arch. Principal, LEED Accredited Professional
Montgomery Sisam Architects Inc. 197 Spadina Avenue Suite 301 Toronto ON www.montgomerysisam.com Direct Tel 416.364.8079 Office Tel 416.364.8079 x 227 Fax 416 364 7723 [email protected]
139 ______140 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION
RES.#A69/11 - TORONTO AND REGION REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN Renewal of Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan agreements between Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Environment Canada and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, respectively.
Moved by: Gay Cowbourne Seconded by: Pamela Gough
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff continue to work with federal and provincial representatives to finalize the 2011-2012 Remedial Action Plan agreements between TRCA and Environment Canada and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, respectively;
AND FURTHER THAT staff continue to work with the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (RAP) team, federal, provincial and municipal staff, the academic community, environmental non-governmental organizations and others to implement the 2011-2012 RAP workplan and advance RAP objectives. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan was instituted in response to the 1987 designation of Toronto and Region as a Great Lakes Area of Concern (AOC). The AOC designation was one of 42 (later 43) made by the International Joint Commission. The Toronto and Region AOC consists of six watersheds stretching from the Rouge River in the east to Etobicoke Creek in the west. A presentation will be made to the Authority by Jon Gee, Senior Manager of the Great Lakes Areas of Concern section of Environment Canada, and will provide an overview of the status of Canadian AOCs around the Great Lakes.
Under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) and Canada-Ontario Agreement (COA), Environment Canada (EC) and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) share responsibility for ensuring progress on the Great Lakes AOCs. Since 2002, TRCA has led the administration of the Toronto and Region RAP under agreements with EC and the MOE. Management of the Toronto and Region RAP is undertaken by representatives from EC, MOE, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and TRCA.
On June 13, 2009, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon announced their intention to renegotiate the GLWQA. The GLWQA came into effect in 1978, and was last amended in 1987 - the time at which areas of concern and remedial action plans were introduced through GLWQA Annex 2. The renegotiation of the GLWQA is currently ongoing, and Conservation Ontario has been involved as a respondent in the associated GLWQA public consultation processes.
141 On March 31, 2010, the 2007-2010 COA expired, as did the respective 2007-2010 RAP agreements between TRCA and EC and MOE, respectively. As the GLWQA is the agreement from which COA negotiations are predicated, the federal and provincial governments have chosen to defer the renegotiation of the next COA. Instead, the governments extended the 2007-2010 COA over the 2010-2011 federal/provincial fiscal year and maintained program scope and funding at existing levels. The subsequent one-year COA extension for 2011-2012 will similarly enable agreements between TRCA and EC and MOE for the current fiscal year.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Current Remedial Action Plan Initiatives The TRCA RAP workplan for 2011-2012 was approved at the RAP Team meeting of April 12, 2011. The 2011-2012 workplan is similar to those of previous years, with the majority of resources being directed toward the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP), the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program (RWMP), the Terrestrial Natural Heritage Program (TNHP), watershed strategies, and education and outreach initiatives. These programs continue to reflect the RAP’s priorities in supporting Low Impact Development (LID), stormwater management, effective stewardship and environmental monitoring of the AOC.
Two pre-existing but expanded initiatives also figure prominently in the 2011-2012 Toronto and Region RAP workplan: the science and research advanced through Aquatic Habitat Toronto, and the RAP communications plan. Aquatic Habitat Toronto (AHT) is a multi-jurisdictional committee that includes representatives from Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment Canada, MNR, Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation, the City of Toronto and TRCA. The RAP will be supporting AHT research science-based initiatives to identify and assess existing and potential future fish habitat along the AOC waterfront, as well as investigate the responses of the fish community to habitat restoration projects.
The RAP communications plan will address three major initiatives in the coming year. The first will be the public review of the redesignation of two AOC Beneficial Use Impairments. At the completion of the RAP Stage 1 report in 1989, Toronto and Region was deemed to be “Impaired” for eight categories of environmental degradation, or Beneficial Use Impairments (BUI), as well as to require additional research on three Beneficial Use Impairments. Three Beneficial Use Impairments were deemed to be “Not Impaired”. Of the three BUIs requiring additional assessment, research and analysis have been completed for two: Fish Tumours or Other Deformities; and Bird or Animal Deformities or Reproductive Problems. The research results indicate that these Beneficial Uses are Not Impaired within the Toronto and Region AOC. Therefore, conditional on the completion of the review period, these two BUIs will be formally redesignated to Not Impaired in 2011-2012, making them the first such redesignations of the Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan.
The second major initiative addressed under the RAP communications plan is the review and update of the criteria required for the remaining Area of Concern to be considered “Impaired” or “Not Impaired”. The existing criteria were set forth in the 1994 RAP Stage 2 document Clean Waters, Clear Choices. The review of these criteria will involve a public consultation process underpinned by consultation with academic and agency technical experts. The anticipated outcome of these proceedings will be updated targets based on indicators of both environmental quality and program implementation - these targets will outline an ambitious but achievable path forward toward delisting Toronto and Region as an Area of Concern by 2020.
142 Two major projects currently in the planning approval process - the Mouth of the Don revitalization and City of Toronto Don River and Central Waterfront Project (Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan Implementation) constitute important elements of a revitalized Toronto and Region AOC.
Finally, the communications plan will continue to fund a public outreach program – Lake Ontario Evenings – initiated in 2009. Lake Ontario Evenings (LOE) is a speaker’s series that is administered by TRCA and jointly funded by RAP and Source Water Protection. The mandate of the LOE program is to provide casual public venues in which attendees can listen to, and ask questions of experts on issues currently faced by Lake Ontario. There have been five LOE events to date (on the themes of water diversion, biodiversity, the lake nearshore, environmental contaminants and the Toronto landscape), and the audience response has been sufficiently positive to continue this initiative into the coming year. Challenges for the Future As noted above, the COA extension supporting RAP in 2011-2012 is similar in scope and resources to that provided in recent years. While the review and update of AOC targets will provide realistic and achievable endpoints for the Toronto and Region RAP, it is unlikely that these targets will be met and the Toronto and Region be delisted as an Area of Concern without significant financial commitments by all levels of government.
FINANCIAL DETAILS TRCA funding for RAP initiatives in 2011-2012 will be provided by funding agreements between TRCA and EC ($250,000), and TRCA and MOE ($250,000). Project proponents from within TRCA apply to the Toronto and Region RAP team for funds, and the TRCA RAP workplan is developed on the basis of these proposals. It is anticipated that the agreement between TRCA and MOE will be for one year and expire on March 31, 2012, but that a four-year agreement with Environment Canada will be implemented following the May 2, 2011 federal election and will expire on March 31, 2015.
In addition to these dedicated RAP funds, certain TRCA projects (e.g. the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program and Rural Clean Water Program) also receive funding through municipal capital funding, MOE, MNR and federal Great Lakes Sustainability Fund which also advances RAP objectives.
Report prepared by: Stephanie Hawkins, extension 5576 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Stephanie Hawkins, extension 5576 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 7, 2011
______
RES.#A70/11 - FUTURE FORESTS Silvicultural Forest Pests Status Report. Status report on current pests that threaten southern Ontario forest resources.
143 Moved by: Pamela Gough Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff continue to work with all levels of government to monitor trends and conditions of current forest insect and invasive plant populations and to formulate appropriate strategies to manage or eliminate those threats;
AND FURTHER THAT the forest health working group continue to report back annually to the Authority regarding issues and threats, their implications and recommended responses. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/10, held on June 25, 2010, Resolution #A95/10 was approved, in part, as follows:
...THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the TRCA Forest Health Working Group (FHWG) coordinate TRCA forest health related activities and facilitate the sharing of information regarding forest health initiatives both internally and externally including an annual TRCA Forest Health Report;
THAT TRCA develop a list of priority forest health threats and that this list be shared with partner agencies;
THAT TRCA continue to collaborate with municipal, regional, provincial and federal partners to ensure the effective and efficient sharing of monitoring and forest health information, to improve regional climate change models, and to strengthen the protection of the natural heritage system within the municipal and provincial policy framework;...
The Forest Health Working Group was established January 2010 to coordinate and monitor forest health issues and to facilitate coordination and improve efficiencies between internal departments and programs.
Forest Health Defined In focusing on forest health one can look as narrowly as the current status of a variety of forest pests and diseases and as broadly as regional forest biodiversity, landscape planning and the ability of our forests to provide a variety of ecological services. The term forest health applies to both individual woodlands and forests as an integrated system. To maintain the function of the whole, the health of the majority of the component forests must be maintained. To provide general guidance to discussions and activities of the TRCA Forest Health Working Group, the following working definition of a healthy forest was accepted:
144 Ecologically a healthy forest system can be described as one able to maintain a variety of native forest communities and ecological processes, while following a natural developmental progression. Socially a healthy forest is one that has the ability to supply the needs of current and future generations for values, services and products. A forest must be able to maintain its long term ecological health in order to continue to supply the perceived social values.
The health of the forest system within TRCA's jurisdiction is dependent upon the ongoing activities of TRCA and its partners. Key activities in maintaining and enhancing the health of our forests include monitoring, restoration, management, protection and securement.
The working group has developed an initial list of forest health threats. This list has been created with three distinct types of threats being identified. The first type has been categorized as "Direct Threats from Urban Development". Included in this are three main factors: habitat loss; forest fragmentation; modification to forest hydrology.
The Second category is identified as "Systemic Threats": climate change; lack of, or ineffective management; soil quality and volume (more applicable to urban forests); encroachments; over/inappropriate use; invasive plant species (dog strangling vine, garlic mustard, European buckthorn).
The third category is identified as "Silvicultural Threats": Asian long-horned beetle; emerald ash borer; gypsy moth; beech bark disease - important to track progress of disease in TRCA jurisdiction; oak decline - not yet in TRCA jurisdiction; red pine decline - early response important to be cost effective.
The preceding is an initial list of priority forest health threats. Modifications will be made as new threats become established or as existing threats have been abated.
TRCA has been working on numerous initiatives to improve forest health within our region. This current report provides an update on the silvicultural forest health threats. These threats are more dynamic than other threats and can change significantly from year to year and therefore warrant more frequent reporting.
Staff will continue to bring reports forward to the Authority highlighting TRCA's ongoing progress toward improved forest health.
145 2010 Silvicultural Forest Health Report The silvicultural threats have been identified based on their potential for damage, the importance of early detection and the likelihood of effective control.
An internal education program has been established to allow for staff from all departments to be used for incidental monitoring of priority forest health threats. Representatives from the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR), Ministry of the Environment and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) have been invited to assist with training and information updates. By training staff to identify and monitor current forest threats, TRCA is able to collect data on species distribution and population levels that would otherwise not be possible.
OMNR, the Canadian Forest Service (CFS), and CFIA all play a role in protecting forest resources in Ontario. Under the Plant Protection Act it is the responsibility of CFIA to monitor for the possible introduction of any new or potential pests, while OMNR and CFS continue to monitor trends and population levels of established pests, both native and exotic. It is generally acknowledged that any new forest pests will likely be very opportunistic and able to establish without the threat of natural predation.
In general, 2010 was a year of maintained or decreased levels of forest insects and diseases causing concern. In TRCA's region there were no significant new developments to report related to emerald ash borer (EAB) or Asian long-horned beetle (ALHB) although EAB remains a very significant long term concern. Gypsy moth populations and defoliation levels were low in 2010 while populations of Eastern tent caterpillar remain high. Temperature extremes in early May resulted in damage to young shoots and leaves and affected seed production in several tree and shrub species.
Asian Long-horned Beetle ALHB was discovered in Vaughan in the fall of 2003. An active monitoring, regulation and control program by CFIA and its partners (including TRCA) was established soon after. Approximately 29,000 trees have been removed and destroyed to control insect spread from the regulated area since 2004. Monitoring and sampling efforts did not detect any new infected trees in 2009-2010. In fact no new finds have occurred since December 2007. Monitoring will continue until 2013 when CFIA may declare this insect as eradicated from the regulated zone.
Emerald Ash Borer EAB, an Asian species which was first detected in North America in 2002, remains a significant concern in southern Ontario and the eastern United States. Its presence was first detected in TRCA's watersheds in late 2007. In early 2010 the CFIA established an EAB regulated zone throughout the GTA - the cities of Toronto and Hamilton and regional municipalities of Halton, Peel, York, Durham and Niagara. Outside of TRCA watersheds new detections occurred in 2010 in several non-regulated areas in southern Ontario.
146 Several southern Ontario regional and municipal governments have begun to manage for EAB to spread the financial impacts over several years. These agencies are primarily attempting to limit public liability associated with the anticipated hazard potential of dead and dying ash trees. Street trees and trees located within high use public areas are of the greatest concern. TRCA's greatest level of potential liability is in areas of paid public use, including properties like Black Creek Pioneer Village, Indian Line Campground, Kortright Centre for Conservation and others. The TRCA Hazard Tree Policy dictates how hazardous trees will be managed and gives specific direction for various types of property.
To date EAB has not been detected on TRCA-owned or managed lands. The closest known infestation to TRCA property is located in the Regional Road 7 and Weston Road area.
Inventories to determine impacts have been completed at Black Creek Pioneer Village and Indian Line Campground due to their proximity to this known EAB infestation, the high level of public care associated with these facilities and the significant infrastructure investment. Tree mortality and associated costs on TRCA rural properties will be primarily restricted to the property boundaries and areas adjacent to public use, including forest trails. Individual ash tree inventories are being completed to allow for a better understanding of the potential costs associated with these areas of concern. The ash component of TRCA managed forest properties is relatively small with the anticipated financial effect on forest resources expected to be manageable. The Forest Health Working Group is developing a strategy to manage anticipated tree mortality and potential ecological impacts.
Eastern Tent and Forest Tent Caterpillar Large numbers of Eastern tent caterpillar tents were noted again in the spring of 2010. Eastern tent caterpillars tend to defoliate cherry and apple trees but may also attack other hardwoods. In general this species is of minor concern, however defoliation does stress affected trees. Large populations of forest tent caterpillar (a species that does not actually construct a tent) were observed in 2010 in many areas of southern Ontario outside of TRCA's watersheds. This is a species whose populations tend to follow an 8 to 10 year cycle and staff will be watching its populations in 2011.
Weather Damage Temperature extremes in May of this year affected some trees. Extreme temperature swings from very warm to well below freezing and back within very short time frames resulted in both frost damage and scorch of young shoots, leaves and flowers. TRCA staff noted some mortality of reforestation seedlings that was attributed to these temperature extremes. Partial defoliation of some mature trees also occurred and seed crops of several tree species were adversely affected.
Red Pine Decline TRCA staff continue to monitor red pine forest stands for signs of decline. Most notably the Peel Tract on Centreville Creek Road had a very large and several smaller decline pockets - pockets in which most or all of the overstory pine trees were dead or dying. The pine plantations in this stand were marked and thinned during 2010 to release existing hardwood tree saplings in the understory and to hopefully limit future decline of the retained pine legacy trees.
147 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE The TRCA Forest Health Working Group will provide to the Authority a report identifying any advances in policy, new partnerships established and progress made toward achieving natural heritage system objectives during the previous year. A current list of Forest Health Threats and a comprehensive strategy to deal with the impacts and cost implications of EAB will be included with that report.
The FHWG will continue to report back annually to the Authority on current and emerging issues, immediate threats and their implications and recommendations on actions to be taken.
Report prepared by: Tom Hildebrand, extension 5379 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Tom Hildebrand, extension 5379 Emails: [email protected] Date: March 08, 2011
______
RES.#A71/11 - WEST NILE VIRUS PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT West Nile Virus Vector Mosquito Larval Monitoring and Surveillance - 2010 and Five Year Data Summary. Receipt of West Nile Virus program reports: Annual Report on West Nile Virus Vector Mosquito Larval Monitoring and Surveillance - 2010; The Effect of Water Quality and Aquatic Vegetation on West Nile Virus Vector Larval Abundance in Toronto and Region Wetlands and Stormwater Management Ponds.
Moved by: Gloria Lindsay Luby Seconded by: Laurie Bruce
THAT the annual report 'West Nile Virus Vector Mosquito Larval Monitoring and Surveillance - 2010' be received;
THAT the five year data summary report 'The Effect of Water Quality and Aquatic Vegetation on West Nile Virus Vector Larval Abundance in Toronto and Region Wetlands and Stormwater Management Ponds' be received;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to circulate both the annual report and the five year data summary report to the Council committees responsible for overseeing public health and the public health units of the regional municipalities of Peel, Durham, York and the City of Toronto;
THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue to participate in the Regional West Nile Virus Advisory Committees for Peel, Durham, York and the City of Toronto;
148 AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue West Nile virus vector larval mosquito monitoring in wetlands and stormwater management ponds on TRCA-owned land during the 2011 summer season. CARRIED BACKGROUND West Nile virus (WNV) is a seasonal disease known in Canada since 2001. Two key mosquito species, Culex pipiens and Culex restuans, are the primary species or "vectors" responsible for spreading the disease to humans in Ontario. The level of WNV activity and risk of exposure depends on the number of WNV bird hosts and WNV positive pools of vector mosquitoes in a given year. It is difficult to predict the vector mosquito activity for a given year since their population dynamics change from year to year, vary across jurisdictions and are influenced by a number of environmental factors. WNV management is focused on prevention and control and is collectively undertaken by the provincial, regional and municipal health agencies in Ontario.
As a measure of due diligence and at the request of regional health units, TRCA has been monitoring larval mosquito populations in TRCA's natural wetlands and selected stormwater management ponds (SWMPs) since 2003. The objective of the monitoring is to identify preferred breeding sites of the two key mosquito species, estimate the level of risk, and prevent the risk of contracting WNV by taking appropriate measures like housekeeping activities (grading small depressions, garbage removal) and larviciding, if necessary. TRCA's WNV program activities include public education and outreach activities, collaborating with the regional health units and conducting mosquito larval surveillance on TRCA-owned lands. At Authority Meeting #2/10, held on March 26, 2010, Resolution #A22/10 was approved, in part, as follows:
THAT the Annual Report on West Nile Virus Vector Monitoring and Surveillance in Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) wetlands and stormwater management ponds in 2009 be received;...
...AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to continue West Nile Virus (WNV) vector larval mosquito monitoring in wetlands and stormwater management ponds on TRCA owned land during the 2010 summer season.
As per the Authority Resolution, the 2010 WNV surveillance and monitoring activities were implemented. Data collected on aquatic vegetation and basic water quality (WQ) parameters such as conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature and total dissolved solids (TDS) over a five year period (2005 – 2009) were also analyzed to determine the effect of these factors on the distribution, abundance and presence/absence of WNV vector larvae. The reason for this additional analysis was that although the WQ and aquatic vegetation data had been collected and summarized on an annual basis since 2005, the results were either inconclusive or not significant owing to the nature of the small datasets. Hence, a combined data analysis was carried out in 2010 with a goal to strengthen the results obtained from the annual summaries and make WNV risk prevention management recommendations for wetlands and SWMPs.
149 Summary of WNV Program Activities for 2010 TRCA’s WNV program has a three pronged approach including public education and outreach, collaboration with public health units and larval monitoring and surveillance on TRCA properties. Public education and outreach activities for 2010 focused on continued update and distribution of WNV related information and addressing public and staff enquires on WNV and standing water complaints. TRCA received a total of eight standing water complaints in 2010, of which four were concerned with TRCA properties. Of the four complaint sites, three were on lands directly managed by TRCA, and one site was under management agreement with the City of Markham. None of the complaint sites required larvicide application. In addition, TRCA also received a Health Order from the Medical Officer of Peel Regional Health under the Ontario Regulation 199/03 in March, 2010 to assist with the implementation of vector mosquito larvae control measures in the Heart Lake Wetland Complex in Brampton, when necessary (the Health Order is given to TRCA in anticipation of potential larviciding each year). Accordingly, Peel Regional Health staff had notified that larviciding was carried out at one site (between Sandalwood Pkwy and Countryside Dr.) on two occasions in the Heart Lake Wetland Complex during 2010 WNV season. Collaborations with regional heath units required TRCA staff attend various Regional Health WNV committee meetings, provide information on sensitive areas and train Regional Health staff from Halton Hamilton, and Durham in identifying vector larvae.
Summary of Results Obtained in 2010 WNV larval surveillance and monitoring was undertaken in 38 wetlands and nine SWMPs across the Toronto region from May 31st to August 20th, 2010 to identify species distribution, abundance and composition for mosquitos. Sampling yielded a record high number of larvae (9,398 in total) from both wetlands and SWMPs, of which 8,261 alone were collected from the wetlands. Of the larvae identified, 35.6% were non-vectors and 64.4% were vector larvae. Culex territans (non-vector) and Aedes vexans (vector) were the most commonly collected (34% each) mosquito species from the wetlands. Unlike the previous sampling years, the percentages of vectors collected from the wetlands were higher in 2010, and the increase was due to higher number of Aedes vexans from these areas. Aedes vexans is a floodwater species and requires frequent flooding and drying for the eggs to hatch. During exceptionally wet summers the populations of Aedes vexans can increase dramatically (due to frequent flooding), and as a result this species is usually considered the worst pest in Canada during wet summers. The preferred larval habitats for this species are open, shallow grass-filled depressions in pastures, roadside ditches and temporary woodland pools that have the tendency to get periodic flooding. The summer of 2010 was the wettest since 2005 (data compiled from TRCA rain gauges located close to WNV monitoring sites). During the 2010 monitoring season, the majority of the Aedes vexans larvae were collected from four wetland sites, of which three are temporary woodland pools that flood during heavy rainfall events.
Culex pipiens and Culex restuans, the two key species implicated with WNV, represented 19.7% and 3.8% of the larvae identified respectively, from the wetlands. This result was similar to the previous findings of low occurrences of these key vectors in wetland habitats. WNV risk ranking resulted in six sites being identified as “hotspots” for WNV vector larvae in the wetlands; only one of which was larvicided (Claireville Conservation Area: Vectobac 200G) in 2010. "Hotspots" are sites determined to have a high number of WNV vector species present during any of the sampling visits and would be ranked as a high-risk site.
150 A total of 1,137 larvae were collected from the SWMPs representing only 12% of all larvae collected during 2010. Among the identified larvae, WNV vector species comprised 88.7% while the non-vectors made up the remaining 12.3%, clearly indicating that the mosquitoes collected from SWMPs were predominantly those associated with the virus. Culex pipiens was the most abundant vector species found in SWMPs, representing 77.8% of the total number of larvae identified from the SWMPs and Culex restuans totalled only 7.7%. Culex territans, the only non-vector from the SWMPs, comprised 11.4% of the identified species. Aedes vexans, the most commonly collected vector species from the wetlands in 2010 was represented by only one single individual in the SWMPs, suggesting that SWMPs do not provide appropriate habitat to complete its life cycle. Risk ranking for the larvae collected from stormwater management ponds resulted in one site “L’Amoreaux Park North Pond” being a “hotspot” for Culex pipiens. This pond is under Management Agreement with the City of Toronto and subsequently that pond was larvicided by a licensed contractor.
Overall, the results from 2010 monitoring and surveillance have indicated that localized WNV “hotspots” continue to occur, although infrequently, and they vary from site to site and year to year in TRCA’s jurisdiction. Identifying these “hotspots” resulted in risk prevention and judicial management of high vector numbers by making environmentally sound and objective decisions.
A copy of the Annual Report: "West Nile Virus Vector Mosquito Larval Monitoring and Surveillance - 2010" will be available on the corporate website (www.trca.on.ca; key word: West Nile Virus) for reference.
Five Year Data Summary Although monitoring the abundance, distribution and management of vector species is the primary objective for TRCA’s WNV Program activities, data on aquatic vegetation and water quality parameters such as conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature and TDS were collected during every field visit to ultimately assess if any of these factors influence the vector mosquito abundance. Characterizing the waterbodies based on the factors contributing to mosquito breeding will help determine which waterbodies are more conducive for mosquito proliferation and also to determine the preventive measures for future mosquito management. In this respect, monitoring data collected from 48 wetlands and 10 SWMPs during 2005 to 2009 were analyzed with the following objectives: 1. strengthen some of the conclusions about the influence of water quality on mosquito abundance as suggested in previous reports by TRCA; 2. investigate the relationship between mosquito abundance, water quality measures and aquatic vegetation, and predict what type of waterbodies in TRCA’s jurisdiction pose a threat in terms of WNV vector breeding; and 3. make recommendations that would help prevent potential vector breeding conditions.
Below is the summary of the 2005-2009 data analyses: Overall wetlands continue to produce higher numbers of mosquito larvae than SWMPs, however wetlands support a greater species diversity and a higher percentage of non-vector species. The majority of the larvae collected from wetlands (60% of 14,917 larvae) were non-vector species. Culex territans (a non-vector) was the predominant species (59%) while the key WNV vector species Culex pipiens represented about 18% of the total identified.
151 Larval sampling in stormwater management ponds yielded primarily vector mosquito species (92% of the 4,893 larvae), the majority of which were represented by Culex pipiens (85%). Culex restuans, the species implicated in WNV along with Culex pipiens, only occurred in a small proportion (3%) in wetlands as well as the SWMPs. Analysis of rainfall data indicated that while very heavy rainfall decreased the overall larval abundance, moderate amounts of rainfall (wet years) increased the overall larval abundance in the wetlands. On the contrary, rainfall had a negative impact on the number of larvae collected from the SWMPs. Dry summers were found to have higher numbers of larvae in the stormwater ponds. Although overall differences were noticed between the wetlands and SWMPs in all the five water quality parameters examined, only the amount of dissolved oxygen was found to be significantly different in the detailed temporal analysis. Conductivity and TDS were found to be closely associated with the occurrence of vector species (Culex pipiens, Culex restuans and Culex salinarius) in the stormwater ponds but results were also not significant. Smaller sample size for the SWMPs, time and frequency of water quality data collection were suggested as possible reasons for these non-significant results. Both marginal and total emergent vegetation were significantly higher in the wetlands than the SWMPs. Higher vegetation coverage in the wetlands appears to provide good habitat for larvae. Where vegetation coverage (in total or marginal areas) was greater than 75%, there was a significantly higher probability that mosquito larvae (vector or otherwise) were present. However, vector larvae did not occur more frequently at wetland sites; the proportion of larval samples which included vector larvae was higher in SWMPs (93%) than in wetlands (75%).
In conclusion the results found include: 1. wetlands support higher numbers of mosquito larvae and a higher species diversity than stormwater management ponds, but overall the percentage of WNV vector species in wetlands was lower compared to stormwater ponds; 2. since SWMPs predominantly harbor the WNV vector species, these need to be monitored much more carefully; 3. mosquito and WNV vector management in the SWMPs should include proper maintenance and vegetation control in order to prevent mosquito breeding since denser vegetation seems to favor higher numbers of mosquito larvae in general.
A copy of the full report West Nile Virus program five year data summary: "The Effect of Water Quality and Aquatic Vegetation on West Nile Virus Vector Larval Abundance in Toronto and Region Wetlands and Stormwater Management Ponds" will be available on the corporate website (www.trca.on.ca; key word: West Nile Virus, water quality, aquatic vegetation).
152 RATIONALE The overarching rationale for undertaking vector larval monitoring is that a variety of wetland habitats on TRCA properties such as marshes, woodland pools and ponds have the potential to provide breeding habitats for mosquitoes because of the permanent availability of water. As the largest landowner in the Toronto region, TRCA has used the WNV monitoring and surveillance activities as a means of ensuring “due diligence” and to proactively manage the WNV issue on their properties. The approach taken – to identify the presence of WNV vector species has ensured that larvicide has only been applied to “hotspots” where high numbers of vector species have been found. Based on the number of sites assessed by TRCA on an annual basis, this approach has been found to be a cost effective alternative to wider scale preventative larvicide application.
Staff anticipate continued requests from the public for actions to be taken to address perceived mosquito breeding in standing water on TRCA-owned lands that are close to their property, and from the regional health departments to help determine the sensitivity of natural areas for the purpose of larviciding. TRCA’s WNV program also helps to identify vector numbers and high risk sites. The identification of isolated “hotspots” in wetlands and stormwater ponds during the summer months warrants the ongoing annual monitoring and surveillance program.
Further, the data collected through the program has been received with interest from researchers at York University who have been involved with modeling WNV occurrence with respect to various factors including climate change.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Staff will continue surveillance activities at approximately 38 sites on TRCA-owned lands and will continue to liaise with regional health units and participate in WNV advisory committees throughout the 2011 field season. Staff will continue to respond to public inquiries on WNV and reports of standing water on TRCA property, in addition to providing general information for both the public and staff on WNV. Standing water complaints will be reviewed following the revised Standing Water Complaint Procedure. Staff will continue to identify sites of concern for WNV on TRCA property in the upcoming 2011 field season through larval monitoring and advise other TRCA sections on maintenance or management duties required to reduce the number of potential breeding sites of major WNV vectors on TRCA-owned lands.
TRCA is also currently partnering with the Ministry of the Environment on a specific project to assess a broader range of habitat, water quality and design characteristics specifically within SWMPs and their relationship, if any, to WNV vector mosquitoes. The results of this study are expected by the summer of 2011.
FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for the 2011 WNV surveillance and monitoring activities is available under the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program with capital funding support from the regions of York, Peel and Durham and the City of Toronto. This funding will be sufficient to support the 2011 surveillance field work and staff support to liaise with the regional health units and to respond to complaints. However, the funding is not expected to cover costs associated with any control measures if deemed necessary. If larviciding or site remediation is required as a control measure, the associated costs will be covered through TRCA Land Management funding.
153 Report prepared by: Thilaka Krishnaraj, extension 5665 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Thilaka Krishnaraj, extension 5665; Scott Jarvie, extension 5312 Emails: [email protected]; [email protected] Date: March 8, 2011
______
RES.#A72/11 - REGIONAL WATERSHED MONITORING PROGRAM Annual Report of Activity. Update on the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program and 2010 Progress Report.
Moved by: John Sprovieri Seconded by: Chin Lee
WHEREAS the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Regional Watershed Monitoring Program collects data that directly supports and informs many of the key planning and reporting mechanisms of TRCA;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT staff be directed to continue with the implementation of monitoring activities associated with the ongoing Regional Watershed Monitoring Program, as well as to continue to pursue and foster partnerships under the Regional Watershed Monitoring Network;
THAT the 2010 Regional Watershed Monitoring Program (RWMP) progress report be received;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff be directed to circulate the progress report to the program’s funding and network partners. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Regional Watershed Monitoring Program is a science-based, long-term monitoring initiative developed by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Its purpose is to collect aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem data at the watershed and subwatershed scale, and across the region as a whole. The program provides the data and information that informs the key planning and reporting mechanisms of TRCA. Further, the program has enhanced TRCA's planning and coordination of monitoring activities, helped to standardize monitoring methods, and has helped fill several key watershed data gaps that have been identified. It also facilitates the communication of data availability and data sharing both internally and with external agencies.
The RWMP focuses on several key elements of the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem, including: Stream Water Quality - assesses a variety of basic and enhanced water chemistry. Stream Water Quantity - stream gauges and in-stream measurements monitor changes in the water levels of the region’s watercourses. Aquatic Habitat and Species - including aquatic insects, fish populations, algae, stream temperature and the physical shape of the stream.
154 Terrestrial Habitat and Species - staff and trained volunteers monitor flora and fauna species and communities through biological inventories and fixed plots. Meteorology – assesses the contribution of rain and snow to the hydrology of the region. Groundwater Quantity and Quality - assessed at a series of wells throughout the region.
The long-term annual data collected through the program has historically been shared with partner municipalities and other agencies for use in their respective planning, implementation and reporting activities, and can provide baseline data in support of “before and after” analysis related to ecosystem and infrastructure assessments. Staff has been pursuing new partnerships with academic institutions in order to further common research objectives as well as share data in support of academic study. Data collected to date illustrate the effects of urbanization on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, specifically showing a trend towards declining water quality, fish communities, quality and quantity of terrestrial habitat, and the representation of species in areas of increasing urban land use. Where restoration and recovery plans are implemented, future monitoring will help track the progress of such enhancement initiatives.
2010 Monitoring Activities The 2010 progress report provides an overview of each component of the monitoring program, presents highlights from the 2010 season, and describes the types of data available and how it has been used. It also highlights the "network approach" to data collection and how data can be collected and shared among partner agencies. Copies of the report will be available at the Authority meeting. The following table outlines the various monitoring components included in the program, the agencies involved in the network and the number of sites monitored in 2010.
155 Table 1 - Regional Watershed Monitoring Network
Monitoring Component # of Sites Agency/Partner 2010 Aquatic Habitat and Species Benthos 156 TRCA/MOE Fish/Habitat 47 TRCA/MOE Fluvial Geomorphology 50 TRCA Stream Temperature 60 TRCA West Nile Virus Monitoring 47 TRCA/MOE/Municipality Water Quality Surface Water 38 TRCA/MOE/City of Toronto Fish Biomonitoring - MOE Lake Partner Program - MOE Groundwater 21 TRCA/MOE Water Quantity Stream Flow Gauges 33 TRCA/Env. Canada Base Flow/Low Flow 160 TRCA Precipitation 31 TRCA/Municipalities Snow Course 10 TRCA/MNR Groundwater 21 TRCA/MOE Terrestrial Natural Heritage Terrestrial Fixed Plots 55 TRCA Systematic Inventories 1,560 ha TRCA Terrestrial Volunteer Network 55 TRCA/Volunteers
2010 Results and Highlights: Since the program’s inception in 2001 data has been collected, summarized and analyzed, and in this respect 2010 was no exception. However, 2010 was unique because of the development of The Living City Report Card. Extensive analysis was conducted using multiple years of data to look for spatial and temporal trends linking biological, physical, chemical and land-use data. The result has been a deeper understanding of the stressors impacting the regions natural resources. This analysis will become an ongoing initiative, building on the growing data set and the analysis conducted to date. The following highlights some of the results obtained to date:
Fish community and in-stream habitat data has been used to establish baseline aquatic conditions at monitoring sites, provide ongoing status of aquatic communities for watershed planning and reporting, and to report distribution data on fish species of interest such as redside dace, brook trout, central stoneroller and invasive species such as the round goby.
156 In 2010, data from more than 150 sites was compared across nine years of sampling. Biotic indices such as the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) and native species richness (number of native species) were calculated and compared to environmental and landscape variables such as land-use. A significant relationship was identified between IBI, native species richness and road density. Road density acts a surrogate for urbanization and incorporates many factors associated with the urban landscape. It was found that as road density increases there is a corresponding decrease in IBI score and native species richness. This relationship can be used to assess the current conditions in the watershed but can also be used to predict potential changes as a result of increased urbanization through development. For The Living City Report Card a grade was given to each watershed based on the number of native fish species found compared to the expected number of native fish species in an undeveloped system. The grades for the watersheds range from an “A” in the Rouge, to an “F” for the Mimico, Don and Highland Creek watersheds.
Stream water quality has been assessed through ongoing monthly sampling at approximately 38 sites since 2002. This work follows the Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Protocol and contributes data to a provincial dataset in addition to providing regional data on a long list of water parameters including basic water chemistry, nutrients, heavy metals and bacteria. A water quality index was used to assess the water quality conditions in each watershed and within the Toronto region as a whole for inclusion in The Living City Report Card. The overall water quality grade for the TRCA jurisdiction was “C” with the Duffins Creek watershed receiving the highest rating (A) and the Don River and Highland Creek watersheds receiving the lowest grade (D). Overall the analysis of the data indicates that water quality in our streams and rivers varies widely. Some sites are close to pristine, while others are more significantly impaired. Although there has been a decline in some contaminants like lead and phosphorous over the last three decades, significant increases in others like chloride have been observed. Overall there is a strong linkage between the amount of urbanization in a watershed and the quality of the water sampled at each monitoring site.
Benthic invertebrates are bottom dwelling aquatic insects that are considered to be sentinel species within watersheds. As a result changes in their diversity and abundance is an indicator of environmental change. Data from 2002-2008 was used to calculate several indexes to assess aquatic health. Results show that there has been a decline in the benthic community since 2002 that is likely attributed to increased urbanization and changes in water quality, particularly increases in chloride concentrations. Similar to the water quality and fish species data, there is a strong linkage to road density indicating that urbanization is a key driver of aquatic health.
157 Terrestrial habitat and species were monitored in 2010 at a number of forest, wetland and meadow plots and through 15 biological inventory sites that covered approximately 1,560 hectares within the TRCA jurisdiction. These assessments allow for detailed mapping and identification of flora/fauna for land management and planning purposes and to document changes in species abundance and distribution within the TRCA jurisdiction. One of the key components of this monitoring is the development and maintenance of a scoring and ranking system for the region's flora and fauna species. This ranking system is based on a set of criteria that focus mainly on a species' sensitivity to development impacts, and is designed to identify the conservation needs and priorities of the region's flora and fauna before they disappear. This listing of "Species of Conservation Concern" has been an important tool that has been used extensively in various planning, development application and land management decisions, and has been used to support various modeling exercises such as TRCA's Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy.
Low flow/baseflow monitoring provides an indication of amount of precipitation that is "recharged" through the ground into the groundwater system and is available as baseflow in the watercourses during the summer months. In spite of being one of the wettest summers in recent record, 2010 low flows measured at the outlets of TRCA's watersheds decreased from 4% (Rouge) to 46% (Etobicoke Creek) from 2009. This reduction is being attributed to a 42% reduction in precipitation during the winter and spring seasons. This combined with the distribution and intensity of rainfall during the summer months meant that more water was flowing quickly through the system and not being "recharged". This has direct implication to the climate change predictions of frequent and intense precipitation events, and the resulting impact on the regions groundwater and baseflow resources.
Groundwater quality and quantity monitoring has been conducted in partnership with the Ministry of Environment since 2003 under the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network (PGMN). Groundwater level measurements in PGMN wells are collected through hourly water level measurements with electronic data loggers. The data is retrieved through either installed telemetry systems or downloaded during field visits by a TRCA technician. The water level data collected indicates that groundwater level fluctuations have been typically less than one metre since 2003. These fluctuations are not considered significant and indicate stable groundwater conditions. The only exceptions are rising water levels in two PGMN wells in the Heart Lake Conservation Area in Brampton. Groundwater levels in these two wells have risen two to four metres since 2005. TRCA staff is assessing this situation with staff from the City of Brampton and the Region of Peel to determine if the rising groundwater poses a risk to local infrastructure.
Baseline groundwater quality was assessed for a broad list of parameters including general chemistry as well as a broad list of organic parameters and nutrients. In following years only selected wells were assessed for a reduced set of parameters including general chemistry and metals. In 2010, 15 of the 21 wells were assessed. Concentrations of all measured parameters have been well below the Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS) since the program began. The only potential water quality concern is the detection of nitrate at 7 mg/L in a shallow PGMN well at Milne Park, in Markham. Although this concentration is below the ODWS of 10 mg/L, the well is directly down gradient of a subdivision and is likely effected by local application of lawn fertilizers. Another well in Caledon East is likely impacted due to the same reason, but at a lower concentration of 3 mg/L.
158 West Nile virus (WNV) monitoring is undertaken in selected natural wetlands and stormwater management ponds throughout the TRCA jurisdiction. It provides a mechanism for ensuring due diligence on the part of TRCA through the identification of sites considered "high risk" for the transmission of WNV and to collect data that helps support the principles of wetland protection and enhancement. Data collected between 2005 and 2009 was summarized to look at differences between wetlands and stormwater ponds in terms of the abundance and species of mosquito larvae found, and to examine the effect of water quality and aquatic vegetation on the species of mosquitoes that are typically associated with WNV. Data shows that although wetlands support a higher diversity of mosquitoes and overall higher numbers than stormwater management ponds, the percentage of the typical WNV species in wetlands was lower compared to stormwater ponds. Further it was determined that a higher density of vegetation around the perimeter and centre of stormwater ponds increased the chances of finding WNV mosquito larvae. A detailed report on WNV is included in the agenda for this meeting.
Additional Highlights: Data collected within the last ten years of the RWMP was analysed for inclusion in The Living City Report Card. Specifically data was used to assess the Water, Land Use and Biodiversity indicators that were presented in this report. TRCA hosted a GTA Conservation Authorities Watershed Monitoring Forum designed to highlight the monitoring programs that local conservation authorities (CA) use to monitor and track their watersheds, facilitate networking among CAs and their various partners to enhance data sharing and collaboration, and highlight the benefit and “value” of long-term monitoring. Three additional historic Ministry of the Environment stations were included in monthly sampling starting in October 2010, as part of the Duffins Heights/Seaton Lands Development Project. Results obtained through the program were presented at a number of scientific conferences including the International Association of Great Lakes Research, Latornell Symposium and the American Fisheries Society Ontario Chapter Annual Meeting. TRCA staff delivered several technical training courses designed to promote standardized monitoring methods and to increase the comparability and accuracy of data collected in the Toronto region, most notably the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol Training Course and nd the 2 Annual Streamflow Monitoring Techniques Course. Data from the RWMP was instrumental in TRCA's technical assessment under the Drinking Water Source Protection Program.
2010 Products To date there have been a number of reports that describe components of the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program, along with applications of the data and information generated by the network. In the past, data from the program has been used as basis for the development of TRCA watershed report cards and plans, fisheries management plans, Remedial Action Plan progress reports and updates, water quality reports and project summaries. Data has also been contributed to several "State of the Environment" reporting exercises conducted by TRCA's regional partners.
159 In 2010 the following reports were produced using data and or analysis obtained through the RWMP: The Living City Report Card, 2011; Proposed Assessment Report: Toronto and Region Source Protection Area; Terrestrial Biological Inventory and Assessments: Maple Nature Reserve, Black Creek Pioneer Village, Beechwood Wetland and Cottonwood Flats, Bartley Smith Greenway, Teston/Pine Valley, Mimico Waterfront Park, East Duffins Headwaters, Petticoat Creek CA, West Gormley Lands and Caledon East; Ontario Power Generation: Terrestrial Long-term Monitoring Project (Year 1); Algae Bioassessment Summary Reports were completed for the following conservation authorities participating in a 2009 partnership study: Ausable Bayfield, Cataraqui River, Credit Valley, Nottawasaga Valley, Saugeen Valley. October 2010; Algae Biomonitoring Protocol developed in partnership with the Ministry of the Environment; Natural Channel Design: 5 Year Progress Report Terrestrial Biological Inventory and Assessment. November 2010; West Nile Virus Vector Mosquito Larval Monitoring and Surveillance - 2009: Annual Report; The Effect of Water Quality and Aquatic Vegetation on West Nile Virus Vector Larval Abundance in Toronto and Region Wetlands and Stormwater Management Ponds; 2009 Surface Water Quality Summary Report; Long-term Water Quality Monitoring: Trends in the Toronto and Region AOC. Poster for the IAGLR Conference May 2010.
One of the key "products" of the RWMP is the data collected on an annual basis. As such, the storage, security and retrieval of the data are extremely important. Ongoing efforts to streamline the input, quality assessment/quality control and retrieval of datasets currently stored in TRCA's relational database(s) include the development of a staff Database Working Group and enhancements to the connection between central databases and TRCA Geographic Information System software. Datasets have been shared with regional and provincial partners in order to support broader reporting functions.
DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE Planning for the 2011 field season has commenced and in some cases is well underway. Aquatic habitat and species monitoring will be started in late May and will include fish, habitat and stream temperature monitoring focused on the Don River, Highland Creek, Mimico Creek and Petticoat Creek watersheds. Ongoing monthly data collection including surface water quality monitoring, commenced in January.
A full roll-up of the data collected since 2001 is currently underway and will continue through 2011. This analysis will present the data collected in a regional context as well as benchmark each watershed in terms of performance within the regional picture.
Staff will continue to foster partnerships with community groups, academics and other agencies involved in monitoring activities through the watershed monitoring network. This will include looking for opportunities to share data and information through the publication of results and presentation at suitable conferences and workshops.
160 FINANCIAL DETAILS Funding for the 2010 Regional Watershed Monitoring Program was made available through capital grants from TRCA's regional partners and through the Remedial Action Plan. Funding for the 2011 program has been identified from similar sources/partners as follows:
Source 2010 2011 City of Toronto $300,000 $330,000 Region of Peel $315,000 $330,000 Region of York $315,000 $315,000 Region of Durham $65,000 $65,000 RAP MOU $50,100 $55,500 TOTAL $1,045,100 $1,095,500
Other partners such as the Ministry of the Environment have provided approximately $2,500 in funding annually for equipment purchase and maintenance under the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network and in-kind support of approximately $20,000 annually for the laboratory analysis of water samples collected under the PGMN and the Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network.
Report prepared by: Scott Jarvie, extension 5312 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Scott Jarvie, extension 5312 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 6, 2011
______
RES.#A73/11 - GLEN STEWART RAVINE MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Approval to enter into an Agreement with the City of Toronto to implement the Glen Stewart Ravine Master Plan on their behalf.
Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: John Parker
THAT approval be granted to enter into an agreement with the City of Toronto to implement the Glen Stewart Ravine Master Plan;
THAT the agreement be subject to availability of funding from the City of Toronto;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) officials be directed to take any action necessary to implement the agreement including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. CARRIED
161 BACKGROUND Glen Stewart Ravine is located in the City of Toronto, south of Kingston Road and west of Balsam Avenue. A small watercourse known as Ames Creek flows through the ravine which is mainly fed by groundwater.
In 1981 Glen Stewart Ravine was designated as a protected area under the City of Toronto's Ravine Protection By-law. The ravine area is owned by the City of Toronto and regulated by both the City and TRCA. The City developed a trail system through the ravine to encourage public use of the natural feature, however ongoing seepage from the ravine slopes, heavy foot and bicycle traffic off of designated trail areas, and natural weathering of existing structures (e.g., staircases, railings) has degraded the ravine, prompting the City of Toronto to develop a master plan to address these deficiencies.
The scope of implementation includes replacement of aging wooden bridges and staircases, trail surfacing, slope stabilization works, site furnishings, signs, fencing and overall site restoration.
RATIONALE Recognizing Restoration Services’ experience in erosion control and site restoration, the City of Toronto requested staff’s assistance in the implementation of the Glen Stewart Ravine Management Plan.
The scope of work to be undertaken for this project by TRCA consists of the following tasks: 1. Prepare a detailed cost estimate and Memorandum of Understanding for the implementation and overall management (i.e. project management, permits and approvals) of the approved works. 2. Prepare, issue, award and manage all contracts for equipment, materials and services related to the construction of the approved works. 3. Implement the works as per the approved design, including final site restoration. 4. Monitor the site as agreed in the Memorandum of Understanding and report findings to the City of Toronto.
FINANCIAL DETAILS The budget is estimated at $801,330.20 plus HST, plus a 10% contingency to be expended by TRCA with permission from the City of Toronto. The cost of the project is 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto under account 185-33.
Report prepared by: Moranne McDonnell, 416-392-9725 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Moranne McDonnell, 416-392-9725 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 11, 2011 Attachments: 1
162 Attachment 1
______163 RES.#A74/11 - TORONTO HISTORICAL PARK Node Construction and Signage Installation. Award of contract for the construction/completion and installation of all site furnishings and signage for the Shared Path/Sentier Partagé-Toronto Historical Park.
Moved by: Pamela Gough Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
THAT the contract for the construction/completion and installation of all site furnishings and signage for the Shared Path/Sentier Partagé-Toronto Historical Park project be awarded to Glenoaks Landscape Contractors at a total cost not to exceed $132,059.50 plus HST plus 10% contingency allowance, it being the lowest bid meeting Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Shared Path/Sentier Partagé-Toronto Historical Park project is a joint partnership between the City of Toronto, Heritage Toronto, La Société d'histoire de Toronto and TRCA, and is located in the Lower Humber valley, south of Dundas Street West to the mouth of the Humber River, in the City of Toronto. The project was initiated in spring 2008 and the anticipated completion date of Phase I will be early June 2011.
Phase I of the project includes the construction of pedestrian nodes, to be installed along the existing trailway in the Lower Humber, as resting points with landscaping and interpretative signage. The storyline of each respective node (13 in total) highlights the history and development of Canada within the Lower Humber valley from the perspectives of the three founding nations (First Nations, French and British).
RATIONALE The following seven vendors were asked to provide quotes on the construction/completion of nine nodes, the landscaping of 13 nodes, and the installation of 38 single-sided pedestal signs measuring 30" x 24" with 38 pedestal mounts, four double-sided freestanding signs measuring 68" x 48" with four posts, four single-sided freestanding signs measuring 68" x 48" with four posts, and four single-sided signs measuring 68" x 48" with four wall-mount frames at 13 nodes and other specified trailhead locations: Gateman & Milloy; Glenoaks Landscape Contractors; Griffith Property Services; Hank Deenan Landscaping; Parkland Nurseries; The Beach Gardner; Salivan Landscape Ltd.
Quotations were opened by Finance and Business Services, Watershed Management and Restoration Services staff (Jim Dillane, Gary Wilkins, Susan Robertson and Mark Lowe) on Wednesday, March 23, 2011 with the following results:
164 BIDDERS QUOTATION (Plus HST) Glenoaks Landscape Contractors $92,009 Griffith Property Services $123,022 Hank Deenan Landscaping $125,404
No other tenders were received.
Further to the issuance of the above-referenced tender, the City of Toronto requested TRCA to undertake additional work in association with this project, including the installation of a stairwell, trail and landscape enhancements at one of the nodes. Based on this request, TRCA staff requested Glenoak Landscape Contractors for a quote for the additional work. Glenoak Landscape Contractors provided a quote within staff estimates with unit costs consistent to the first quote.
Based on the bids received, staff recommends that the contract be awarded to Glenoaks Landscape Contractors for the construction/completion and installation of all site furnishings and signage for a total amount, including the additional work requested by the City of Toronto, not to exceed $132,059.50 plus HST plus 10% contingency allowance.
FINANCIAL DETAILS Funds required to complete this project, totalling $132,059.50 plus HST plus 10% contingency allowance, are available through the City of Toronto's Planning and Urban Design Civic Improvement capital program and TD Friends of the Environment held by TRCA in the Toronto Historical Park budget account 113-34.
Report prepared by: Susan Robertson, extension 5325 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Susan Robertson, extension 5325 Emails: [email protected] Date: March 29, 2011
______
RES.#A75/11 - BOB HUNTER MEMORIAL PARK Extension of Contract with Friends of the Rouge Valley for Forest Planting. Extension of contract to implement parts of phase two of the natural forest planting by non-governmental organizations in Bob Hunter Memorial Park under the Southeast Collector agreement Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has with York Region.
Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
165 THAT the contract to complete phase two of the natural forest planting be extended to Friends of the Rouge Watershed (FRW) at a total cost not to exceed an additional $86,695.65, plus HST for a total contract cost not to exceed $198,000.00 plus HST. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #3/10, held on April 30, 2010, Resolution #A49/10 was approved, in part, as follows:
...THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be directed to enter into a funding agreement with the Region of York to implement the Southeast Collector Environmental Enhancement Projects at Bob Hunter Memorial Park on TRCA lands within Rouge Park;...
At Executive Committee Meeting #2/11, held on March 4, 2011, Resolution #B35/11 was approved, in part, as follows:
THAT the Friends of the Rouge Watershed (FRW) be retained to carry out the natural forest planting of a 12.5 hectare area at the Bob Hunter Memorial Park for a total cost not to exceed $111,304.35, plus HST;...
Subsequent to that initial contract with FRW, Rouge Park staff approached Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to request that an additional seven hectares be provided to FRW in the Bob Hunter Memorial Park (BHMP) area under the same terms as the first contract. This new area is being proposed as a substitute for a similar sized area elsewhere in Rouge Park that had previously been awarded to the FRW, under the Rouge Park Alliance (RPA) project approvals process. It became unavailable because of an access permission issue with Ontario Realty Corporation. This new area in Bob Hunter Memorial Park is the only area in Rouge Park that is unencumbered by tenant leases and is large enough to substitute for the unavailable area. This new area would have a contractual value of an additional $63,000, plus HST, and the RPA will reduce their project funding to FRW accordingly.
In addition, previous negotiations with FRW for planting of a 30 metre roadside buffer similar to the design that FRW planted in 2010 in BHMP were concluded following the March 4, 2011 Executive Committee meeting. In this instance, TRCA would provide FRW with $23,695.65, plus HST to cover costs of planting material, under the same Southeast Collector Environmental Enhancement agreement that TRCA has with York Region.
RATIONALE TRCA staff recommend awarding the contract on a sole source basis as per Section 1.14.5 of the TRCA's Purchasing Policy as follows:
The required goods and services are to be supplied by a particular vendor or supplier having special knowledge, skills, expertise or experience that cannot be provided by any other supplier.
166 There are only three NGOs (Friends of the Rouge Watershed, 10,000 Trees for the Rouge Valley and Rouge Valley Naturalists) that have the capacity to undertake major plantings in the area covered by the Southeast Collector agreement. All three were approached and given the opportunity to participate and were offered areas that would suit their capacity. FRW and 10,000 Trees both accepted and selected areas, while the Rouge Valley Naturalists declined for 2011. The Rouge Park and TRCA have subsequently assigned an area of seven hectares and a 30 metre wide roadside buffer to Friends of the Rouge Watershed. Staff therefore recommends award of a contract to FRW on a sole source basis as per Section 1.14.5 of the TRCA's Purchasing Policy.
FINANCIAL DETAILS The Southeast Collector Environmental Enhancement at Bob Hunter Memorial Park is a substantial investment in Rouge Park of $6,000,000. The habitat restoration components of Phase One to Phase Three are a total of $3,600,000, and $1,200,000 in Phase Four and Phase Five. Funding is provided by the Region of York as a special project independent of regular TRCA funding and will be administered under account code 111-74.
Report prepared by: Bob Clay, extension 5783 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Ron Dewell, extension 5245 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 12, 2011 Attachments: 1
167 Attachment 1
______168 RES.#A76/11 - GREAT LAKES AND MISSISSIPPI RIVER INTERBASIN FEASIBILITY STUDY Invasive Asian Carp Species. Support for comments sent by Great Lakes United to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Feasibility Study (GLMRIS) to prevent the spread of the invasive Asian carp species between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River.
Moved by: Colleen Jordan Seconded by: John Sprovieri
WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation (TRCA) objectives for Healthy Rivers and Shorelines and Regional Biodiversity are supported by fisheries management plans that strongly recommend actions to prevent the introduction and spread of aquatic invasive species;
AND WHEREAS the Asian carp are aquatic invasive species that pose a threat to the biodiversity and nearshore habitat structure of Lake Ontario and potentially the lower reaches of relatively large river systems within the TRCA jurisdiction, such as the Humber and Rouge Rivers and Duffins Creek;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA endorse the comments contained in the letter on the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Feasibility Study (GLMRIS), dated March 31, 2011, sent by the Great Lakes United (GLU) to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to prevent the spread of Asian carp between the Great Lakes and Mississippi;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Authority with progress on GLMRIS. CARRIED BACKGROUND TRCA was approached by GLU, an international citizens coalition dedicated to protecting and restoring the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Ecosystem, and asked to consider endorse their comment letter as a means of helping to prevent the spread of Asian carp into the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. The membership of GLU spans a diverse spectrum of interests, organizations and individuals, including citizens, environmentalists, conservationists, labour unions, First Nations, hunters, anglers, academics, and progressive business and industry.
GLU is very concerned about an Asian carp invasion to the international waters of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. One of the most significant opportunities to help stop the Asian carp from spreading is the Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Feasibility Study. This study was authorized by U.S. Congress in 2007 mandating that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) determine how to prevent the two-way transfer of invasive fish species through the Chicago area waterways, as well as all the hydrological connections between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River watershed.
169 The Corps recently announced Chicago District's Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Initiate the Public Scoping Period; and host Public Scoping Meetings for the GLMRIS. GLU submitted, in the form of a letter with support from various groups (including TRCA), specific comments meant to improve the GLMRIS and ensure the ecological and economic health of these waters and basins are protected from the impacts of aquatic invasive species. The comments are summarized as: the need for the Corps to adhere to the U.S. Congressional authority to "prevent" the spread of aquatic invasive species between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River basins and not just "reduce the risk"; accelerate the timeline for completion of the GLMRIS; prioritize the Chicago Area Waterway System portion of the GLMRIS; provide for public comment as the study proceeds; and conduct a public hearing in Canada.
RATIONALE The term "Asian carp" refers to four different species of fish: Bighead, Black, Grass and Silver Carp. The Bighead and Silver Carp are the species closest to invading the Great Lakes from the Chicago area waterways. In 2005, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) introduced legislation making it illegal to posses, sell or import live Asian carp. A risk assessment study undertaken by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) in 2009 concluded that if Asian carp successfully colonized the Great Lakes there is a high probability they would spread across the Great Lakes basin. The study stresses that such an invasion would have a significant impact on the food web and trophic (community) structure of aquatic systems. Furthermore, the Ontario government has stated that if Asian carp enters the Great Lakes there will be serious adverse impacts on Ontario's recreational and commercial fisheries. Environment Canada has made a similar assessment.
The various fisheries management plans (FMP) written for watersheds within the TRCA jurisdiction all recognize that aquatic invasive species disrupt the balance of native aquatic communities and are considered one of the most serious threats to biodiversity. The most recently completed FMP, the Rouge River Watershed Fisheries Management Plan (TRCA and OMNR, 2010), recommends that priority emphasis should be placed on monitoring and preventing the spread of invasive and exotic fish species. To date, the Asian carp species of concern have not been collected by the TRCA regional or waterfront monitoring programs but field crews are alerted to the risk and know to bring such species to the attention of our partner agencies with mandates for fisheries management (i.e. OMNR and DFO).
The Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (RAP) has identified, as a first priority, the protection of existing fish habitat with a focus on coastal wetlands and nearshore physical habitat (e.g. reefs and spawning shoals). RAP states that protecting these existing habitats can be through the firm and effective enforcement of policies and guidelines, which would include legislation that speaks to preventing invasive species introductions. A secondary priority of RAP is to rehabilitate waterfront areas where habitat potential is very high (e.g. Rouge Marshes and Toronto Island wetlands), areas that are vulnerable to destruction should Asian carp enter the system. Over the recent decades, significant funding has been provided through RAP for extensive habitat rehabilitation along the Toronto waterfront with continued opportunities for future work. In this context, failing to keep Asian carp out of Lake Ontario could be a major setback to achieving RAP and TRCA priorities for fish habitat.
170 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA staff will request to be maintained on the GLU distribution list and be informed of any progress with the GLMRIS and possible public hearings or meetings held in Ontario on the subject of preventing Asian carp entering Lake Ontario and the other Great Lakes.
A copy of the GLU comment letter and list of supporters is available upon request.
Report prepared by: Christine Tu, extension 5707 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Christine Tu, extension 5707 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 11, 2011
______
RES.#A77/11 - ONTARIO NATURE'S 20/20 VISION Approval to sign the charter, developed by Ontario Nature, to prevent further loss of biodiversity.
Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: John Sprovieri
WHEREAS Regional Biodiversity is an objective of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) vision for The Living City;
AND WHEREAS regional biodiversity is a cornerstone within the framework of many TRCA natural heritage and watershed planning documents, including the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy, fisheries management plans and watershed plans;
AND WHEREAS regional biodiversity was identified as the key metric for evaluating natural heritage condition in The Living City Report Card;
AND WHEREAS regional biodiversity is an important contributor to the ecological complexities that support biodiversity and associated ecosystem services at the broader, provincial scale;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT TRCA be authorized to sign the charter titled Ontario Nature's 20/20 Vision in order to see the federal, provincial and municipal governments take specified actions to stop the further loss of Ontario's biological diversity by 2020;
AND FURTHER THAT TRCA staff report back to the Authority with progress on this initiative. CARRIED
171 BACKGROUND TRCA was contacted by Conservation Ontario (CO) and asked to consider signing Ontario Nature's biodiversity charter which was described by CO as being consistent with the draft renewal of the Ontario Biodiversity Strategy, a document that recently received input and support from various agencies, including TRCA. Ontario Nature is a charitable organization, established in 1931 as the Federation of Ontario Naturalists, which represents more than 30,000 members from diverse backgrounds and has been protecting biodiversity for close to 80 years. The core mission of Ontario Nature is to protect wild species and wild spaces through conservation, education and public engagement.
The close of 2010 marked the end of the International Year of Biodiversity but to maintain the momentum and attention generated for this important topic, Ontario Nature created its 20/20 Vision for Biodiversity in Ontario and is moving it forward with this charter-signing campaign. Ontario Nature is seeking to obtain 5,000 signatures by May 22, 2011 with the intention of urging the provincial, federal and municipal governments to take the following actions: complete a system of protected areas that fully represent the biological diversity of Ontario's land and water ecosystems; support the establishment of a network of natural areas on both public and private land across southern and eastern Ontario, by creating incentives for farmers and landowners to conserve and restore important wildlife habitats; develop and fully implement effective, science-based plans to recover endangered species and ecosystems, and adopt a proactive approach to conserving plants and animals in decline so that common species remain common; prevent the introduction and spread of non-native species by controlling high-risk entry points such as ship ballast water and plant nurseries; drastically reduce the release of contaminants harmful to biodiversity through meaningful implementation of the Toxics Reduction Act and Toxics Reduction Strategy; address habitat fragmentation and other negative impacts on the landscape caused by roads and highways by implementing the principles of smart growth and investing in public transit; allocate adequate funding, on an ongoing basis, for research, monitoring, and reporting on the state of biodiversity in Ontario; support sustainable industrial development through policies, funding, and other incentives, and ensure that government-purchased products and services come from sustainable, independently-certified producers; integrate biodiversity conservation policies into the mandates of all Government of Ontario ministries involved in land and water use and in environmental protection; develop a proactive plan for Ontario so that our landscapes can be more resilient to the anticipated impacts of climate change.
RATIONALE Ontario Nature is an organization that has a history of taking action in the name of conservation and believes the loss of biodiversity is one of the most important issues facing Ontario today and in the future. CO supports signing the charter and anticipates the charter will assist in raising the profile of biodiversity protection within the Ontario government. The majority of the actions proffered in the charter reflect TRCA policy, programs and approaches to environmentally responsible land use planning and management.
172 Establishing a network/system of natural areas (Action #2) required to protect and enhance terrestrial biodiversity is at the centre of the TRCA Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy (2007); several municipalities have also demonstrated the importance of these greenspaces by developing local natural heritage plans.
Science-based plans have been developed for much of the TRCA jurisdiction (watershed plans (WP), fisheries management plans (FMP) and species recovery planning); the implementation of these strategies (Action #3) is being delivered across the jurisdiction through wetland, stream and upland restoration projects. TRCA staff actively participates on recovery teams for species-at-risk and partners with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources to implement the Atlantic Salmon Reintroduction Program in the Duffins watershed and soon within the Humber watershed.
Preventing new introductions and controlling present invasive species (Action #4) are major management themes in TRCA WPs and FMPs. TRCA's Volunteer Monitoring Program records the location and types of vegetation at fixed plots; where this or similar surveys occur on TRCA lands, invasive plants are identified and removed as a method of reducing the risk to native plant communities.
Addressing issues of habitat fragmentation (Action #5) is a consistent and effective aspect of how TRCA staff evaluates and improves land use planning applications to help achieve ecosystem integrity. TRCA continues to be involved in furthering the science of "road ecology" aimed at preventing or reducing incidences of wildlife mortality associated with road crossings.
Ongoing monitoring and reporting on the state of biodiversity (Action #7) and general ecological conditions across our jurisdiction are at the core of the TRCA Regional Watershed Monitoring Program (RWMP). This important program afforded the data needed to evaluate regional biodiversity and provide sound management direction in The Living City Report Card (launched in February 2011). Future updates to the report card and updates to similar targets defined in WPs, will continue to be based on RWMP collected data.
Climate change planning (Action #10) has already been initiated at TRCA with a commitment to undertaking both mitigative and adaptive actions, in the short term and long term, and exemplifying leadership to support TRCA's communities and partners in dealing with the climate crisis. Examples of projects related to climate change concerns include: The Sustainability Management System, technologies to help achieve post-development water balance, developing a risk assessment tool for natural systems and biodiversity, Greenlands Acquisition Project, Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy, and partnerships with Canada Green Building Council and World Green Building Council.
173 DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE TRCA staff will provide support to Ontario Nature's 20/20 Vision by completing the on-line signature form. Staff will request to be maintained on Ontario Nature's distribution list to be kept informed of the Ontario government's response to the biodiversity charter.
Report prepared by: Christine Tu, extension 5707 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Christine Tu, extension 5707 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 12, 2011
______
RES.#A78/11 - COMMUNITY PROGRAM FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Completion of the Community Program for Stormwater Management.
Moved by: Jack Heath Seconded by: Linda Pabst
THAT Irene Jones, Chair of the Community Program for Stormwater Management Selection Committee, be thanked for chairing the Committee since the launch of the program. CARRIED BACKGROUND The City of Toronto’s Community Program for Stormwater Management (CPSWM) was initiated in 2004 to implement projects that support the City of Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Management Master Plan (WWFMMP). The goal of the WWFMMP is to reduce and ultimately eliminate the adverse effects of wet weather flow (runoff that is generated when it rains or snows).
Each year, the City funds approximately $250,000 worth of projects to not-for-profit groups, organizations and small-to-mid sized businesses. Projects within the range of $1,000 to $25,000 are considered for funding. Examples of projects that have been funded under this program in the past include naturalization, stewardship activities and public outreach (i.e. tree and shrub planting, asphalt removal, construction of raingardens and multicultural outreach). A Selection Committee was set up to assist with project selection and is comprised of staff members from City of Toronto Water, Parks Forestry and Recreation and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). The Committee Chair is Irene Jones, a former City of Toronto Councillor and current Co-Chair of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition.
Since 2004, TRCA has been responsible for administering the program on behalf of the City under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). TRCA staff responsibilities include: coordinating the Call for Proposals; coordinating the CPSWM Selection Committee; reviewing and selecting proposals; developing project workplans; preparing agreements;
174 processing invoices; reviewing project reports; conducting site visits; and administering the CPSWM website.
As presented in Table 1, to date, TRCA has administered nine funding cycles and has successfully overseen the completion of 44 projects within a seven year timeframe (2004-2011). In total, 56 community projects and $1,248,107.99 of funding dollars have been administered by TRCA. Administrative funding support for this project has been provided to TRCA based on a 10 percent per project cost formula. The total funding support that TRCA has received from the City is $107,376.91 over five years. On average, each funding cycle has taken approximately two years to complete.
Table 1: Summary of CPSWM Projects Administered by TRCA from September 2004 - September 2009:
Funding cycle /year Number of Community Total Funding Completion Date Groups Funded Awarded September 2004 4 $61,114.00 July 2006 April 2005 7 $134,423.72 February 2008 March 2006 7 $139,657.05 October 2007 November 2006 7 $80,904.00 December 2008 April 2007 6 $119,629.00 March 2009 September 2007 6 $105,500.00 March 2010 March 2008 6 $136,401.00 February 2010 October 2008 5 $89,254.00 October 2010 September 2009 8 $185,675.50 Incomplete Total 56 $1,052,558.27
CPSWM Accomplishments 2004 - 2008 Since its launch, the CPSWM has contributed to a long list of accomplishments, some of which include: approximately 19,730 trees and shrubs and 112,000 wildflowers/herbaceous plants planted; approximately 22,800 people engaged; approximately 320 community events/forums/workshops held; approximately 2,465 square metres of asphalt removed; two greenroofs constructed; total of 1,450 square metres; and two rainwater harvesting cisterns constructed, retaining a total of 3,620 gallons of water.
Current Status of CPSWM As of April, 2010, the City assumed responsibility for administering CPSWM under their current Live Green Program. Since 2010, the City has initiated two new funding cycles in November, 2010 and April, 2011. TRCA staff will remain responsible for administering all outstanding projects from the September 2009 funding cycle (six projects in total) until they are complete (Table 2). TRCA will work closely with the City and provide them with assistance in transitioning, as required. Completed CPSWM project information and records (i.e. contacts, reports, contact directory, etc.) have been transferred to the City.
175 The status and value of all outstanding projects administered by TRCA, in addition to the immediate action required for the project to be closed is summarized in the table below.
Table 2: Outstanding CPSWM Projects for September 2009:
Community Group Funding Funding Status Action Awarded Unspent (prior to final invoice being processed) Black Creek Conservation $25,000 $18,750 Complete Final invoice to be Project processed Toronto Chinese for $12,816.5 $9,612.38 Complete Final invoice to be Ecological Living 0 processed Evergreen $25,000 $4,678.46 Complete Invoice to be processed Indian Road Crescent $25,000 $25,000 Incomplete: all funding Send 25% advance Junior Public School’s including 25% advance payment once signed Greening Committee being held because project agreement signed project agreement received not received back. Citizens for a Safe $25,000 $11,948.30 Incomplete: project Final reminder to be sent Environment experiencing delays, May 2011 expected completion June, 2011 Green Here $25,000 $18,750 Complete Final invoice to be processed TOTAL $137,817 $88,739
Deadline for completion of all projects noted in Table 2 is February 12, 2011. TRCA staff to administer all outstanding projects identified in Table 2 to completion; TRCA staff to coordinate a final budget reconciliation with the City or Toronto; and TRCA staff to continue to the support the CPSWM program by participating on the CPSWM Selection Committee.
Report prepared by: Sonia Dhir, extension 5291 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Adele Freeman, extension 5238 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 12, 2011 ______
RES.#A79/11 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011-2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber River Watershed Susan Punter and Christine Bell, CFN 45481. Acquisition of a conservation easement located west of The Gore Road, north of Old Church Road, (rear of 16326 The Gore Road), Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel. (Executive Res.#B52/11) 176 Moved by: Gloria Lindsay Luby Seconded by: Jack Heath
THAT a conservation easement for the protection of the environmental features and functions containing 9.52 hectares (23.54 acres), more or less, consisting of an irregular shaped parcel of land being Part of Lot 22, Concession 3 (Albion) and designated as Parts 16 and 17 on a Draft Plan of Survey prepared by Van Harten Surveying Inc., under their Project No. 19248-10, dated February 15, 2011, Town of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, located west of The Gore Road, north of Old Church Road, (rear of 16326 The Gore Road), be purchased from Susan Punter and Christine Bell;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) acquire the conservation easement free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, 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;
AND FURTHER THAT the authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect thereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED ______
RES.#A80/11 - GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2011-2015 Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Petticoat Creek Watershed Hayes Line Group of Companies, CFN 45526. Acquisition of valleylands located at 476 Toynevale Road, northeast corner of Rosebank road and Toynevale Road, from Hayes Line Group of Companies, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham. (Executive Res.#B53/11)
Moved by: Gloria Lindsay Luby Seconded by: Jack Heath
THAT 0.3903 hectares (0.764 acres), more or less, of vacant land being Lot 118, Plan 350, and designated Part 3 on a draft plan of survey prepared by Omari Mwinyi Surveying Ltd, project no. 10-027-R1, located at 476 Toynevale Road, northeast corner of Rosebank Road and Toynevale Road, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham, be purchased from Haynes Line Group of companies;
THAT the purchase price be $2.00;
177 THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) receive conveyance of the land free from encumbrance, subject to existing service easements;
THAT the firm of Gardiner Roberts LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, 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;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take whatever action may be required to give effect hereto, including the obtaining of necessary approvals and the signing and execution of any documents. CARRIED ______
RES.#A81/11 - BRUCE’S MILL CONSERVATION AREA LEASE EXTENSION Town of Whitchurch- Stouffville, CFN 31698. Request from the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville to extend the existing lease for soccer fields located within the Bruce’s Mill Conservation Area, south of Stouffville Sideroad, east of Warden Avenue, Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, Regional Municipality of York, Rouge River watershed. (Executive Res.#B54/11)
Moved by: Gloria Lindsay Luby Seconded by: Jack Heath
WHEREAS the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville has requested an additional extension to the lease for soccer fields within the Bruce’s Mill Conservation Area, Regional Municipality of York;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the lease with the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville for soccer fields at Bruce's Mill Conservation Area be extended until December 31, 2011;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take whatever action is necessary to finalize the lease extension, including the obtaining of any approvals and signing and execution of documents. CARRIED ______
RES.#A82/11 - SOUTHERN ONTARIO CUMULATIVE IMPACT RESEARCH CONSORTIUM Support for a project to develop a collaborative monitoring and research strategy to support cumulative effects assessment in rivers. (Executive Res.#B55/11)
178 Moved by: Gloria Lindsay Luby Seconded by: Jack Heath
THAT the Authority endorse the proposal being developed for the Canadian Water Network on the establishment of a Southern Ontario Cumulative Impact Research Consortium;
THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) participate as a project collaborator and provide a letter of support that offers to annually contribute $300,000 of in-kind support through data collected under the TRCA's Regional Watershed Monitoring Program for the duration of the project which begins in 2012 and continues until 2015;
THAT TRCA identify opportunities to leverage and/or provide funding support in the amount of $20,000 - $40,000 per year for duration of the project;
THAT the nature of TRCA's on-going support will be largely in-kind as part of the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program and efforts to improve base GIS layers and routine information management;
THAT the specific financial and in-kind resources committed to the project by TRCA will be determined on an annual basis and will be based on the degree to which project deliverables are consistent with the needs of TRCA, budgetary considerations, and can be delivered more efficiently than if TRCA were to carry out the project in isolation;
AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to participate in the additional scoping and planning of the consortium if the proposal is approved. CARRIED ______
RES.#A83/11 - 2011 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET 2011 Operating and Capital Budget is recommended for approval. (Budget/Audit Res.#C5/11)
Moved by: Michael Di Biase Seconded by: Vincent Crisanti
WHEREAS the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) provides that a conservation authority, in establishing its annual levy, shall have the power to determine the proportion of total benefit of any project afforded to all participating municipalities that is afforded to each of them;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, subject to such regulations under the Conservation Authorities Act as may be approved by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council:
(i) all participating municipalities be designated as benefiting for all projects included in the 2011 Operating Budget;
179 (ii) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) share of the cost of the programs included in the 2011 Operating Budget shall be raised from all participating municipalities as part of the General Levy;
(iii) the 2011 General Levy be apportioned to the participating municipalities in the proportion that the modified current value assessment of the whole is under the jurisdiction of TRCA, unless otherwise provided in the levy or a project;
(iv) the appropriate TRCA officials be directed to advise the participating municipalities, pursuant to the Conservation Authorities Act and the regulations made thereunder, and to levy the said municipalities the amount of the Total General Levy set forth in the 2011 Operating Budget, including property tax adjustments and non-Current Value Assessment (CVA) levy, and to levy the said municipalities the amount of the Capital Levy set forth in the 2011 Capital Budget and in the approved projects of TRCA;
THAT, subject to finalization of the participating municipalities' apportioned levy amounts, the 2011 Operating and Capital Budget, and all projects therein, be adopted;
THAT staff be authorized to amend the 2011 Operating and Capital Budget to reflect actual 2011 provincial grant allocations in order to determine the amount of matching levy governed by regulation;
THAT, except where statutory or regulatory requirements provide otherwise, staff be authorized to enter into agreements with private sector organizations, non-governmental organizations or government agencies for the undertaking of projects which are of benefit to TRCA and funded by the sponsoring organization or agency;
THAT the cost of property taxes imposed by municipalities on conservation lands owned by TRCA be charged as additional levy to the respective participating municipalities;
THAT, as required by Ontario Regulations 139/96 and 231/97, this recommendation and the accompanying budget documents, including the schedule of matching and non-matching levies, be approved by recorded vote;
AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as may be necessary to implement the foregoing, including obtaining needed approvals and the signing and execution of documents.
RECORDED VOTE Maria Augimeri Yea Bryan Bertie Yea Laurie Bruce Yea Bob Callahan Yea Gay Cowbourne Yea Vincent Crisanti Yea Michael Di Biase Yea Chris Fonseca Yea
180 RECORDED VOTE Cont'd Pamela Gough Yea Lois Griffin Yea Jack Heath Yea Colleen Jordan Yea Chin Lee Yea Gloria Lindsay Luby Yea Peter Milczyn Yea Linda Pabst Yea John Parker Yea Anthony Perruzza Yea Dave Ryan Yea John Sprovieri Yea Jim Tovey Yea Richard Whitehead Yea
THE MAIN MOTION WAS CARRIED
181 SECTION 3
2011 CAPITAL AND PROJECTS BUDGET
182 Page 28 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
2011 FINAL CAPITAL AND OTHER PROJECTS BUDGET - SUMMARY
Page 2010 2010 2011 11 / 10 11 / 10 # BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % Chg. $ Chg. 2011 over 2010 Notes $ $ $
Implementation of additional monitoring activities - more fixed plotsAdditional ECOLOGY DIVSION- MONITORING AND REPORTING Page 31 1,368,000 1,262,207 1,612,000 17.8% 244,000 data analysis and reporting required in 2011 0 ECOLOGY DIVISION- WATERSHED PLANNING 0 0 Peel Water Management Page 32 474,000 229,714 587,000 23.8% 113,000 More planning / integration. York Water Management Page 33 518,000 401,801 553,000 6.8% 35,000 More Headwaters funding from other sources for additional research and monitoring. Durham Water Management Page 34 270,000 143,734 242,000 -10.4% (28,000) 2011 funding to go to continued flood mapping updates relative to regulation Water Management portion of Toronto Remedial Action Plan Project Page 34b 448,000 311,747 644,000 43.8% 196,000 Less watershed planning & more implementation like Sustainable Neighbourhoods retrofits with additional funding Water Cost Centres Page 35 408,000 337,304 899,000 120.3% 491,000 2011 start for Stormwater Temperature Study, Etobicoke implementation.2011 funding to go to continued flood mapping updates relative to regulation mapping requirements2011 aquatics will complete Rouge FMP and Don FMP.
Source Protection Planning Page 35b 2,082,000 2,424,462 2,403,000 15.4% 321,000 More Source Protection Planning workshops are anticipated to begin during this period. Floodplain Mapping Program Page 36 375,000 300,098 326,000 -13.1% (49,000) 2010 carry-forward for committed consultant projects that were delayed York/Peel/Durham/Toronto Groundwater Page 37 712,000 607,150 604,000 -15.2% (108,000) Lower carry-forward from 2010 due to work being completed. Terrestrial Natural Heritage Page 38 644,000 476,327 663,000 3.0% 19,000 Additional funding to complete deliverables for Roads and Wildlife project in 2011
RESTORATION SERVICES DIVISION -REGENERATION
Toronto Remedial Action Plan Project- Regeneration items Page 39 625,000 515,129 538,000 -13.9% (87,000) Less carry forward funds as more projects were completed on schedule in 2010 Peel Natural Heritage Project Page 40 837,000 755,193 716,000 -14.5% (121,000) Less carry forward funds than the previous year as projects were completed as scheduled York Natural Heritage Project Page 41 510,000 1,026,136 2,802,000 449.4% 2,292,000 Year 2 of South East Collector Sewer Enhancements paid by Region York (non capital levy) Durham Natural Heritage Project Page 42 760,000 452,799 499,000 -34.3% (261,000) Less Seaton Trails Project work in 2011. Regeneration Cost Centres Page 42b 3,021,000 4,260,199 4,492,000 48.7% 1,471,000 More environmental special projects (non capital levy funded) from our municipal partners City of Toronto & York Region Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects Page 43 4,042,000 4,847,113 8,250,000 104.1% 4,208,000 Increased Toronto capital funding for Meadowcliffe and Troutbrooke projects
Other Erosion Control Projects Page 44 265,000 304,715 503,000 89.8% 238,000 Continue work at the Toronto Ladies Golf Club paid by Town of Markham
City of Toronto Waterfront Project Page 45 2,783,000 1,571,451 3,370,000 21.1% 587,000 Mostly Keating Channel dreging carried forward.Increased funding from Environment Canada for Fisheries Research Acoustic Tagging & Humber Bay Marshes Region Of Durham Waterfront Project Page 46 299,000 236,097 285,000 -4.7% (14,000) Durham capital funding flatlined to 2010 level Waterfront Revitilization Corporation Projects Page 47 11,884,000 5,495,452 9,677,000 -18.6% (2,207,000) Remaining projects proceeding on schedule but no new projects yet confirmed. Humber Bay Shores Waterfront Park Page 48 100,000 738,956 100,000 0.0% - Continued mediation and expropriation costs
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT DIVISION- SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES Stewardship Community Programs Page 49 1,877,000 1,577,830 1,835,000 -2.2% (42,000) Completion of the MOE Early Actions program and the Oak Ridges Moraine Landowner program.
183 Education Programs for Schools Page 49b 280,000 325,306 332,000 18.6% 52,000 Grants received from Earth Day Canada, RBC, Sunny Days and the Town of Ajax. 2011 moved to WM from Ecology: Sustainable Technologies Page 50 1,218,000 836,686 1,293,000 6.2% 75,000 Natural channel design: no report needed for another 4 years.
PEEL CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION PROJECT Page 51 6,898,000 4,604,166 7,884,000 14.3% 986,000 Funding increased for erosion, floodworks.Funding increased for Climate Consortium, Pearson Eco-Industrial Park, Environmental Youth Corps. Page 49c 2,168,000 950,617 1,831,000 -15.5% (337,000) Private funding for new Greening Retail Guidelines / shopping mall research not received so project was put on holdTotal expenditures of energy projects will be Community Transformation Partnerships reduced by 46.17% in 2011 as there will be fewer number of projects Page 29 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
2011 FINAL CAPITAL AND OTHER PROJECTS BUDGET - SUMMARY Page 2010 2010 2011 11 / 10 11 / 10 # BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % Chg. $ Chg. 2011 over 2010 Notes $$$ ECOLOGY & WATERSHED MANAGEMENT- FLOOD PROTECTION Lower Don Page 52 1,490,000 1,284,447 622,000 -58.3% (868,000) Don Mouth Phase 1:EA submitted in Dec 2010, and year end completed, better sense of remaining costs and workLower Don Phase 2: continuing delays and Flood Control Projects Page 53 1,980,000 1,175,687 1,701,000 -14.1% (279,000) 2010 carry-forward for further work on Flood Protection projects including a strategy for Brampton. PARKS & CULTURE/ F&BS DIVISIONS- INFRASTRUCTURE Public Use Infrastructure Page 54 318,000 316,583 334,000 5.0% 16,000 No change. Other Facilities Retrofits Page 55 457,000 410,297 808,000 76.8% 351,000 Peel Campground Budget & Carryforward - Albion Hills Aquatic Facility Heart Lake & Petticoat Creek Pools Page 57 4,600,000 2,438,468 4,600,000 0.0% - Pools to be completed in 2011 Living City Centre Design/Build Page 57 1,204,000 303,004 1,217,000 1.1% 13,000 Work progresses as funding permits Nursery Relocation / Boyd Workshop Page 57 25,000 29,178 - -100.0% (25,000) Finished Pan Am Games Equestrian Facility Page 57 - - 330,260 - 330,260 New Pan-Am Games Equestrian Facility project added. Oak Ridges Moraine Corridor Park Page 59 453,000 100,215 279,000 -38.4% (174,000) Continue to implement park development plans BCPV Retrofit and Attraction Development Page 60 632,000 499,566 671,000 6.2% 39,000 More carryforward in 2011 Information Technology Project Page 61 605,000 427,850 577,000 -4.6% (28,000) Accounting system to be replaced in 2011. Major Facilities Retrofits Page 62 1,893,000 230,015 984,000 -48.0% (909,000) Carryforward $ not budgeted in 2011 pending decision on office accomodation. FINANCE & BUSINESS SERVICES- REGIONAL OPEN SPACE Waterfront Open Space Page 63 500,000 63,266 500,000 0.0% - - Acquisition - Greenspace Strategy Page 63 4,750,000 8,881,134 4,500,000 -5.3% (250,000) Land purchase projection adjusted. Natural Areas Protection Page 63 - Peel, York Land Care Projs.& ORC Repairs Page 63 2,352,000 2,084,677 2,472,000 5.1% 120,000 One time extra York Land Care funding removed. Unfinished 2010 Peel goes to 2011. Expenditure total 66,125,000 53,236,775 72,535,260 9.7% 6,410,260 - - Funding Sources: - 4,299,000 7,681,553 7,515,000 74.8% 3,216,000 Increased funding from Environment Canada for Fisheries Research Acoustic Tagging & Humber Bay MarshesSpecial non capital funded erosion work paid Program/User fees by Toronto Works & Parks will continue Reserves 1,559,000 ( 1,064,803) 1,534,000 -1.6% (25,000) - Interest Earnings - 28,140 - - - - CFGT - Flowthrough 406,000 303,109 469,000 15.5% 63,000 - Other - Municipal 4,826,000 8,594,089 4,851,000 0.5% 25,000 - Other - Provincial 5,894,000 5,858,456 5,858,400 -0.6% (35,600) Lower projection re: land Acquistion Other - Federal 3,272,000 1,560,702 2,853,600 -12.8% (418,400) Less RAP MOU funding for Stewardship Other - Donations/Fundraising 500,000 49,700 613,000 22.6% 113,000 - Non-Government Grants 17,138,000 8,017,734 13,715,000 -20.0% (3,423,000) TWRC projects winding down. Lease Revenue - 280,952 - - - - Land Sale Proceeds 850,000 3,806,025 699,000 -17.8% (151,000) - Revenue total 38,744,000 35,115,659 38,108,000 -1.6% (636,000) - - - Net Expenditures 27,381,000 18,121,116 34,427,260 25.7% 7,046,260 - - Provincial Transfer Payments - - - - Municipal Levy: - Peel 10,678,000 10,706,582 11,576,260 8.4% 898,260 New Pan-Am Games Equestrian facility. Climate Change & Land care up. York 3,278,070 3,307,846 2,940,985 -10.3% (337,085) Some one-time funding not repeated in 2011 Durham 896,387 895,955 870,762 -2.9% (25,625) Core flat-lined for fourth year Toronto 6,436,000 6,505,000 11,645,000 80.9% 5,209,000 Major new funding for Erosion backlog Adjala/Tos 303 303 253 -16.5% (50) - sub-total Current Year Approved 21,288,760 21,415,686 27,033,260 27.0% 5,744,500 - Carryforward levy -Peel 2,174,621 ( 1,265,259) 3,264,300 50.1% 1,089,679 2010 carryforward: Peel Climate Project, Floodworks,Infrastructure York 1,161,988 ( 394,149) 1,203,700 3.6% 41,712 2010 carryforward: almost entirely Floodworks & Infrastructure
184 Durham 342,541 ( 7,302) 323,700 -5.5% (18,841) 2010 carryforward: misc. small amounts Toronto 3,013,147 ( 1,008,964) 2,902,300 -3.7% (110,847) 2010 carryforward: Infrastructure, Waterfront, Erosion Adjala/Tos (57) (141) - -100.0% 57 - sub-total Carryforward 6,692,240 (2,675,815) 7,694,000 15.0% 1,001,760 - Levy Total 27,981,000 18,739,870 34,727,260 24.1% 6,746,260 ------(Surplus) / Deficit (600,000) (618,754) (300,000) -50.0% 300,000 Surplus to pay down cumulative deficit
Staffing- Full-time 115.5 140.3 21.4% 24.7 - -Non-f/t 72.5 63.9 -11.8% (8.6) - Total 188.0 204.2 8.6% 16.2 Page 30 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY APPORTIONMENT OF 2011 CAPITAL AND PROJECT LEVIES
ADJALA- TOTAL LEVIES TOTAL PROJECT TOSO- LEVY ON LEVY OTHER TOTAL RONTIO DURHAM TORONTO MONO PEEL YORK INVOICED HAND BUDGET FUNDING FUNDING $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
GREENSPACE LAND ACQ. / LAND CARE 10 3,994 87,000 11 1,859,000 442,985 2,393,000 157,000 2,550,000 5,222,000 7,772,000
WATERFRONT REGENERATION PROJECTS 145,000 1,523,000 1,668,000 933,000 2,601,000 1,054,000 3,655,000
T.W.R.C. PROJECTS 10,299,000 10,299,000
HUMBER BAY PARK 100,000 100,000
VALLEY AND SHORELINE REGENERATION / EROSION 12,000 6,250,000 140,000 130,000 6,532,000 562,000 7,094,000 1,659,000 8,753,000 PEEL CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION 5,600,000 5,600,000 1,985,000 7,585,000 299,000 7,884,000 NATURAL HERITAGE / R.A.P. 158,000 357,000 637,000 311,000 1,463,000 321,000 1,784,000 7,263,000 9,047,000
WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 162,000 367,000 284,000 338,000 1,151,000 518,000 1,669,000 3,659,000 5,328,000 STEWARDSHIP 45,000 303,000 481,000 221,000 1,050,000 341,000 1,391,000 444,000 1,835,000 EDUCATION 88,000 115,000 55,000 258,000 -4,000 254,000 78,000 332,000 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES / TECH./CTP 339,000 283,000 158,000 780,000 174,000 954,000 2,170,000 3,124,000 FLOOD WARNING / WORKS 43,000 439,000 233,000 175,000 890,000 728,000 1,618,000 83,000 1,701,000 FLOODPLAIN MAPPING 20,000 65,000 100,000 60,000 245,000 81,000 326,000 326,000
REGIONAL MONITORING 65,000 330,000 370,000 315,000 1,080,000 24,000 1,104,000 508,000 1,612,000 GROUNDWATER STRATEGIES 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 500,000 104,000 604,000 604,000
TERRESTRIAL NATURAL HERITAGE 50,000 100,000 183,000 127,000 460,000 47,000 507,000 156,000 663,000
PUBLIC USE INFRASTRUCTURE 23 8,951 198,000 26 34,000 59,000 300,000 24,000 324,000 10,000 334,000
LIVING CITY CENTRE 1,217,000 1,217,000 1,217,000
OTHER PUBLIC USE RETRO. 960,260 127,000 1,087,260 51,000 1,138,260 4,879,000 6,017,260
INFO. TECHNOLOGY ACQ. 31 11,934 263,000 35 46,000 79,000 400,000 177,000 577,000 577,000
MAJOR FACILITIES RETROFIT / OFFICE 55 20,883 461,000 62 126,000 218,000 826,000 158,000 984,000 984,000
BCPV DEVELOPMENT & RETROFIT 350,000 350,000 96,000 446,000 225,000 671,000
2011 TOTAL 119 870,762 11,645,000 134 11,576,260 2,940,985 27,033,260 7,694,000 34,727,260 38,108,000 72,835,260
2010 TOTAL 143 896,387 6,506,000 160 10,678,000 3,308,070 21,388,760 6,588,240 27,977,000 38,730,000 66,707,000 185 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 31 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Regional Monitoring Program
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Project Management 248,000 141,292 204,000 -18% (44,000) Aquatic 414,000 347,430 469,000 13% 55,000 Terrestrial 137,000 123,221 138,000 1% 1,000 Water Quality 175,000 179,513 184,000 5% 9,000 Flow & Precipitation 143,000 123,633 139,000 -3% (4,000) GIS & Database 20,000 13,390 21,000 5% 1,000 West Nile Virus Monitoring 58,000 82,915 61,000 5% 3,000 Fixed Plot Monitoring 40,000 41,200 40,000 - - - - Other related Special Projects - - - SEATON MONITORING - - - Groundwater / Well Installations 39,000 41,684 38,000 -3% (1,000) Moe West Nile Virus Monitoring 8,000 6,506 9,000 13% 1,000 SP:VOLUNTEER AQUATIC MONITORNG - - - SP:MNR - Stream Training 31,476 13,000 - 13,000 SP: MOE Bethic Algal Assessment 69,000 53,112 82,000 19% 13,000 SP: Duffins Heights Monitoring 20,944 79,000 - 79,000 SP: Nobleton Phosphorous Offset 29,000 16,074 100,000 245% 71,000 SP:WaterQ MOE Biomonitoring 18,200 25,000 - 25,000 SP: Caledon East Water Taking 21,618 10,000 - 10,000 Unspecified 2010 adjustment (12,000) - -100% 12,000 - - 1,368,000 1,262,207 1,612,000 17.84% 244,000
FUNDING SOURCES: - - - Program/User fees 2,500 127,041 113,000 4420% 110,500 Reserves - - - Interest Earnings - - - CFGT - Flowthrough 1,000 - 1,000 Other - Municipal 9,000 4,900 9,000 - Other - Provincial 164,500 78,297 233,000 42% 68,500 Other - Federal 53,000 12,198 62,000 17% 9,000 Other - Donations/Fundraising - - - Other - Non-Government Grants 61,000 (33,786) 90,000 48% 29,000 290,000 188,650 508,000 75% 218,000 - - - Capital levy - - - Peel 355,000 355,000 370,000 4% 15,000 York 315,000 315,000 315,000 - Durham 65,000 65,000 65,000 - Toronto 300,000 300,000 330,000 10% 30,000 Adjala / Mono - - - Carryforward levy-Peel 15,000 2,694 6,000 -60% (9,000) York 15,000 2,694 6,000 -60% (9,000) Durham 4,000 30,474 6,000 50% 2,000 Toronto 9,000 2,694 6,000 -33% (3,000) Adjala / Mono - - - Deficit / (Surplus) - -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 8.4 7.7 (0.1) (0.7) Non-F/T 6.4 7.8 0.2 1.3 # of Sites Monitored 645 627 645 % Completion - # of Acres/Ha Inventoried 1,000 1,047 1,000 % Completion - # of WNV Sites Monitored 45 45 45 % Completion - - -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Increased costs to staff, equipment and resources. Additional data analysis and reporting required in 2011 Implementation of additional monitoring activities - more fixed plots Som CF from 2010 to support new work loads in 2011 Increase from municipal funders for higher work load and more monitoring opportunities FTE Change: +.6 more Field staff NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Addition of new projects/partnerships with MOE ( WNV and Sportfish Contaminant Research) Some CF to support work extension into 2010 (data analysis, sample preparation and reporting activiites) Update and maintenance of monitoring equipment and to facilitate additional monitoring sites. Cost Increases for lab analysis, materials and equipment and contract services 186 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 32 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Peel Water Management
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Planning/ Integration: Project Management - Subwatersheds 81,000 73,089 107,000 32% 26,000 Surface Flow: Fluvial Geomorphology (24,000) -100% 24,000 Aquatic: Aquatic Systems Priority Planning 51,000 43,465 45,000 -12% (6,000) Clmate Change - Regulation Line mapping Update Funding 148,000 113,161 196,000 32% 48,000 2011 out of Sust Tech:Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit in Peel Region 218,000 239,000 10% 21,000 - - - 474,000 229,714 587,000 24% 113,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 121,000 - 121,000 Internal - 121,000 121,000
Capital levy - Peel 275,000 175,000 284,000 3% 9,000 York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel 199,000 54,714 182,000 -9% (17,000) York Durham Toronto - Adjala / Mono - - - Deficit / (Surplus) (0) - - - -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 1.0 - 1.0 Non-F/T - # of Reg Maps under review 132 132 132
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) More planning / integration.
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS
187 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET DIVISION: Ecology Page 33 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: York Water Management
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Clmate Change Adaptation/Research 52,000 35,460 62,000 19% 10,000 Planning/ Integration: Project Management 39,000 35,554 3,000 -92% (36,000) Groundwater Flow Model Deveolpment - Surface Flow: Regulation Lines 144,000 109,482 169,000 17% 25,000 Headwaters Drainage Study 40,000 28,565 51,000 28% 11,000 Sustainable Neighbourhood. Retrofit 194,000 150,729 223,000 15% 29,000 Sustainable Greenfields Development - Surface Water Q: Rural Water Q 13,000 -100% (13,000) Aquatic: All 36,000 42,011 45,000 25% 9,000 - - - - 518,000 401,801 553,000 7% 35,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 100,000 - 100,000 100,000 100,000
Capital levy Peel - York 368,000 368,000 338,000 -8% -30,000 Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York 150,000 33,738 115,000 -23% (35,000) Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono - - Deficit / (Surplus) 63 -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.8 1.0 0.2 0.2 Non-F/T 0.1 -1.0 -0.1 # of maps under revision TBD TBD
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) More Headwaters funding from other sources for additional research and monitoring. Additional funding from other sources for SNAP
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS The majority of the major over expenditures is offset by additional funding received during the year. Anticipated net expenditures will balance, with some CF's into 2010 for continuing deliverables. 188 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET DIVISION: Ecology Page 34 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Durham Water Management
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: - 122- - Other: Floodwarning Flood Control Capital (WAS STO122-44 15,000 10,450 5,000 -67% (10,000) Report Cards & other projects 122-45 30,000 16,526 76,000 153% 46,000 Surface Flow: Stream Gauges 122-46 40,000 41,883 42,000 5% 2,000 Aquatic: Durham Fish Plan 122-47 12,000 10,859 25,000 108% 13,000 Flood Warning Systems & Flood Control Capital 122-55 7,000 -100% (7,000) Regulation Line Mapping Update 122-56 86,000 60,921 94,000 9% 8,000 Durham Waterfront & Watershed Water Quality Studies122-59 30,000 3,095 -100% (30,000) Clmate Change 122-60 50,000 -100% (50,000) - 122- -
270,000 143,734 242,000 -10% (28,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 875 - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - 875 -
Capital levy Peel - York - Durham 162,000 157,000 162,000 Toronto - Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York - Durham 108,000 (14,141) 80,000 -26% (28,000) Toronto - Adjala / Mono
Deficit / (Surplus) -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.2 -1.0 -0.2 Non-F/T 0.2 - 0.2 # of Reg Maps under review 132 132
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) 2011 funding to go to continued flood mapping updates relative to regulation mapping requirements Funding lower than 2010 due to cancellation of project 122-60
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Funding will be CF to pay for consultant for Surface Water Funding to be spent on contracts for Surface Flow
189 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 34b GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Water Management portion of Toronto Remedial Action Plan Project
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: WMan.: Planning & Integration 113-91 14,000 13,888 -100% (14,000) Water Balance 22,000 22,000 22,000 Sust. Neighbourhoods Retrofit Plan 139,000 122,830 249,000 79% 110,000 WMan.: Water Budgets - Highland Creek Valley & Stream Greening Program 105,000 43,482 128,000 22% 23,000 - - Reg Line Mapping, Growth Management 112,000 77,321 156,000 39% 44,000 WMan.: Riparian Zone Survey/Aquatic Priorities 26,000 18,765 45,000 73% 19,000 WMan.: Climate Change 30,000 13,460 44,000 47% 14,000 - 448,000 311,747 644,000 44% 196,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 2,000 28,000 - 28,000 Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 112,000 - 112,000 - - 2,000 140,000 - 140,000 - Capital levy Peel York - Durham - Toronto 280,000 280,000 367,000 31% 87,000 Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel - York - Durham - Toronto 168,000 29,747 137,000 -18% (31,000) Adjala / Mono Deficit / (Surplus) -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.5 1.2 1.4 0.7 Non-F/T - # of Projects Initiated - SNAP 3 3 3 % Completion - # of Projects Complete - SNAP 2 2 % Completion - -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Less watershed planning & more implementation like Sustainable Neighbourhoods retrofits with additional funding
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS The majority of the major over expenditures is offset by additional funding received during the year. Anticipated net expenditures will balance.
190 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 35 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Water Cost Centres
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Watershed Plan/Integration Projects 288,500 167,814 258,400 -10% (30,100)
Growth Management Policy Projects 401,000 337,147 768,000 92% 367,000
- Flood / Groundwater Projects 340,000 286,743 369,000 9% 29,000
Aquatic Projects 155,000 143,606 287,000 85% 132,000 - Climate Change Projects 69,000 72,506 399,000 478% 330,000 - Other: Trail Plans (10,000) -100% 10,000 Other: Cultural Heritage Master Plan 52,000 49,951 52,000 - Covered from Water Funding projects (887,500) (720,465) (1,234,400) 39% (346,900) - 408,000 337,304 899,000 120% 491,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 209,500 166,668 240,000 15% 30,500 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 4,000 379 -100% (4,000) Other - Municipal 36,000 10,397 40,000 11% 4,000 Other - Provincial 65,500 60,209 268,500 310% 203,000 Other - Federal 75,000 21,357 151,500 102% 76,500 Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 18,000 23,529 195,000 983% 177,000 - - 408,000 282,540 895,000 119% 487,000 - Capital levy - Peel 5,000 - York 55,000 - Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York (4,414) 4,000 - 4,000 Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono Deficit / (Surplus) (822) -
- IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 6.1 7.5 0.2 1.4 Non-F/T 2.1 1.8 (0.1) (0.3) # of Watershed Plans Complete % Completion # of Water Management Guidelines/Studies in Progress 4 4 % Completion # of Water Management Guidelines/Studies Complete 3 % Completion NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Less Watershed Plan Integration work because nearing completion. 2011 funding to go to continued flood mapping updates relative to regulation mapping requirements 2011 aquatics will complete Rouge FMP and Don FMP. 2011 start for Stormwater Temperature Study, Etobicoke implementation. FTE Change:+.8 New SNAP Proj. AssistantFTE Change: +1 new Climate Change Proj Man., +.75 Sediment ControlFTE Change: +.3 Planner NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS 120-07 Expect to be overspent, but will offset deficit with revenue from other watershed accounts The majority of the major over expenditures is offset by additional funding received during the year. 2010 Carryforward dollars for ongoing projects into 2011 ------191 - TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 35b GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: CTC Source Water Protection Plan
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: SOURCE PROT:MNR/CO BASE FUNDS 112,000 136,414 478,000 327% 366,000 CTC - GIS Mapping 77,000 60,153 46,000 -40% (31,000) CTC Assessment Report 18,000 264,810 130,000 622% 112,000 CTC:SOURCE PROTECTION PLAN 122,000 20,585 115,000 -6% (7,000) CTC;CVC Transfer 212,000 465,590 432,000 104% 220,000 CTC:CLOCA Transfer 289,000 69,483 258,000 -11% (31,000) CTC Communications 334,000 332,694 212,000 -37% (122,000) Water Budget Peer Review 44,781 - Source Protection Committee 111,000 60,603 154,000 39% 43,000 SPP: L. Ontario Collaboration 18,000 34,774 20,000 11% 2,000 CTC Project Management 165,000 140,258 -100% (165,000) SPP:TRCA PROJ.MANGMENT 150 - CTC Technical Support 123,000 102,479 14,000 -89% (109,000) CTC Admin. Support 65,000 63,700 51,000 -22% (14,000) TRCA Admin. Support 69,000 72,810 64,000 -7% (5,000) SPP: TRAINING COSTS 733 - SWP:SW MONITORING 41 - Data Management 27,000 26,891 28,000 4% 1,000 GIS/ Mapping 46,000 61,025 46,000 SPP: Preliminary Water Budget 150,000 71,287 150,000 TRCA Project Management 121,000 172,096 185,000 53% 64,000 TRCA Technical Support 23,000 7,380 20,000 -13% (3,000) CTC:CLOCA CONTINGENCY 215,726 -
2,082,000 2,424,462 2,403,000 15% 321,000 FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 150 - Reserves Interest Earnings 20,696 - CFGT - Flowthrough Other - Municipal Other - Provincial 2,082,000 2,403,616 2,403,000 15% 321,000 Other - Federal Other - Donations/Fundraising Other - Private - 2,082,000 2,424,462 2,403,000 15% 321,000 Capital levy Peel - York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel - York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) (0) -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES Staff FTEs- Full-time 5.6 2.0 6.3 0.1 0.7 Non-F/T 0.2 4.0 0.4 1.6 0.2 # of SPC meetings101010 % Completion 1 1 1 # of Public Consulting Meetings101010 % Completion 1 1 1 # of Assessment Reports 3 3 3 % Completion 1 0 1
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excludin More Source Protection Planning workshops are anticipated to begin during this period. In previous years CVC & CLOCA portions of the budget were not accounted for within the CTC budget even though funds are processed through TRCA. +.1 more Coordinator FTE change: +.2 GIS FTE Change: +.4 more PlannerWM FTE Change: +.4 Policy manager to here NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Up due to anticipated completion of the 3 Assessment Reports and the corresponding public consultation. 192 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 36 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Floodplain Mapping Program
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Project Management - Etobicoke-Mimico Flood Plain Mapping - Mimico: Hydraulics/Floodline Update 25,000 14,224 11,000 -56% (14,000) Frenchmans B: Hydrology Update - Core Flood Plain Mapping Program 350,000 285,874 315,000 -10% (35,000) - - 375,000 300,098 326,000 -13% (49,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - -
Capital levy Peel 165,000 165,000 100,000 -39% (65,000) York 60,000 60,000 60,000 Durham 20,000 20,000 20,000 Toronto 50,000 50,000 65,000 30% 15,000 Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel 40,000 11,943 28,000 -30% (12,000) York 18,000 (2,282) 18,000 Durham 7,000 (2,282) 18,000 157% 11,000 Toronto 15,000 (2,282) 17,000 13% 2,000 Adjala / Mono Deficit / (Surplus)
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.3 0.8 2.1 0.5 Non-F/T 0.5 - 0.5 # of Flood Plain Maps Maintained 754 679 754 % Completion - # of Flood Plain Map Updates Complete 75 2 75 % Completion -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) 2010 carry-forward for committed consultant projects that were delayed 2011 will have continued Flood Plain Mapping and Staffi +.5 New Water Analayst,+.5 New Technician
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS CF needed for projects that have deliverables carrying into 2010, Updated hydrologic / hydraulic models and flood line mapping, including all supporting documentation for site specific areas within all TRCA watersheds.
193 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 37 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: York/Peel/Durham/Toronto Groundwater
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Groundwater Studies 712,000 607,150 604,000 -15% (108,000) ------712,000 607,150 604,000 -15% (108,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - -
Capital levy Peel 125,000 125,000 125,000 York 125,000 125,000 125,000 Durham 125,000 125,000 125,000 Toronto 125,000 125,000 125,000 Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel 53,000 26,788 26,000 -51% (27,000) York 53,000 26,788 26,000 -51% (27,000) Durham 53,000 26,788 26,000 -51% (27,000) Toronto 53,000 26,788 26,000 -51% (27,000) Adjala / Mono
Deficit / (Surplus) -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time - Non-F/T - # of Water Resource Management Reports 4 4 % Completion - # of Technical Papers at Conferences 2 1 2 -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Lower carry-forward from 2010 due to work being completed. All municipal funding attached to 2011 deliverables
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Caryforward to 2010 for deliverables attached to model applications and peer review
194 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 38 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Terrestrial Natural Heritage
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Terrestrial Natural Heritage Program 582,000 472,796 554,000 -5% (28,000) Pickering Terrestrial Natural Heritage - Sp:Research Aqua/Terr. Study 12,000 600 12,000 New: Roads & Wildlife Analysis 50,000 2,930 97,000 94% 47,000
644,000 476,327 663,000 3% 19,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 3,500 - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 60,000 400 60,000 Other - Municipal 40,000 23,000 -43% (17,000) Other - Provincial 28,000 13,987 21,400 -24% (6,600) Other - Federal 28,000 31,387 24,600 -12% (3,400) Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 21,000 9,600 27,000 29% 6,000 - - 177,000 58,874 156,000 -12% (21,000)
Capital levy Peel 190,000 190,000 183,000 -4% (7,000) York 127,000 127,000 127,000 Durham 50,000 50,000 50,000 Toronto 100,000 100,000 100,000 Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel (45,148) 47,000 - 47,000 York - Durham - Toronto (4,400) - Adjala / Mono
Deficit / (Surplus) - -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 3.2 7.2 124% 4.0 Non-F/T 3.0 1.8 -41% (1.2) # of Reports Completed 8 - % Completion - # of Reports in Progress 20 7 20 % Completion - # - % Completion -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Additional funding to complete deliverables for Roads and Wildlife project in 2011 NEW:+1 Green Infra Coord, +1 Water technician,.5 TNH Proj. Assistant,
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Roads and Wildlife initiative delayed.
195 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 39 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Toronto Remedial Action Plan Project- Regeneration items
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Etobicoke: Etobicoke Mimico HIP 29,000 29,000 32,000 10% 3,000 All Toronto Plant Projs 25,000 25,000 30,000 20% 5,000 Don: Don HIP Funds 66,000 65,993 55,000 -17% (11,000) Etobicoke: Reid Manor's Woodland Park 89,000 -100% (89,000) Humber: Eglinton Flats Pond 4,000 2,133 2,000 -50% (2,000) Humber: Claireville Trail TO 51,579 37,000 - 37,000 Etobicoke: South Mimico Barrier Mitigation 75,000 17,234 68,000 -9% (7,000) WF: Toronto Islands Beach Restoration Projects 7,000 2,718 4,000 -43% (3,000) Rouge Watershed Plan Implementation 43,000 81,412 47,000 9% 4,000 Project Management 21,000 -100% (21,000) Canada Goose Management 30,000 30,000 30,000 WF: Waterfront ORM Migratory Bird/Waterfowl 113-48 20,000 60,867 20,000 Waterfront: Habitat Implementation 113-51 82,000 75,550 91,000 11% 9,000
Humber: Habitat Implementation Plan 113-66 48,000 48,000 45,000 -6% (3,000) SP:T.O.HISTOR.PARK-SIGN/PLANTS 11,334 4,206 -
Etobicoke: Toronto Golf Club Barrier Mitigation 113-77 29,000 1,100 28,000 -3% (1,000) Humber: ILC/Claireville Reservoir 113-78 9,000 6,646 2,000 -78% (7,000)
ETOB-MIM:RIPARIAN RESTOR. 11382 13,000 - Humber: Lower Humber Weir Mitigation 113-83 48,000 691 47,000 -2% (1,000) -
625,000 515,129 538,000 -14% (87,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 3,956 - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 41,346 - Other - Municipal 7,000 2,718 4,000 -43% (3,000) Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 35,000 - - - - 7,000 83,020 4,000 -43% (3,000)
Capital levy Peel - York - Durham - Toronto 350,000 350,000 357,000 2% 7,000 Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel - York - Durham - Toronto 268,000 82,110 177,000 -34% (91,000) Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) (1)
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.3 Non-F/T 0.4 0.4 # of trees/shrubs planted 30,000 32,039 30,000 # of hectares wetlands restored/created 2 3 2 # of hectares riparian restoration 0.1 0.1 # of metres of stream restoration 90 100 0 10
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Less carry forward funds as more projects were completed on schedule in 2010 Less non capital funds for projects - NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS - Toronto Golf Club & Lower Humber Barrier Mitigation will have carry forwards due design & approval delays - - 196 - TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 40 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Peel Natural Heritage Project
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET CHG. CHG. $$$ %$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Regeneration: HUMBER:PEEL COMM.ENVIRO.Projects 150 Humber:Claireville Restoration 63,000 58,731 48,000 -24% (15,000) Humber: Indian Line Claireville Reservoir Naturalization 9,000 8,881 -100% (9,000) Humber: Caledon East Community Action Site 9,000 8,755 -100% (9,000) Humber: HIP Funds 79,000 90,961 71,000 -10% (8,000) Etobicoke: Pratt & Whitney Renaturalization 141 - Etobicoke: Heart Lake Naturalization 10,000 10,104 -100% (10,000) Etobicoke: Habitat Implementation Funds 86,000 65,482 78,000 -9% (8,000) Etobicoke: Snelgrove master Plan 8,000 8,972 -100% (8,000) Arsenal Lands Park Development 95,000 71,780 22,000 -77% (73,000) Etobicoke: Malton ESP 31 - Mimico: Upper Mimico Crk Habitat Restoration 70,000 69,594 70,000 Humber: Oak Ridges Moraine CPA2 156,000 160,947 156,000 Multi W:Canada Goose Mngt. 39,000 39,000 33,000 -15% (6,000) Multi W: Managing Hazard Trees - Peel 28,000 20,474 17,000 -39% (11,000) Peel All Plant Projs Funding 185,000 138,728 221,000 19% 36,000 INTRNAL:EM-COURTNEY PARK TRAIL 2,462 - - 837,000 755,193 716,000 -14.5% (121,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 1,000 1,451 -100.0% (1,000) Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 141 - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal 3,000 0 -100% (3,000) Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 2,192 - - - 4,000 3,785 -100% (4,000)
Capital levy Peel 623,000 623,000 637,000 2% 14,000 York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel 210,000 128,371 79,000 -62% (131,000) York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) 37 -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.0 0.8 125.7 0.8 Non-F/T 1.3 1.2 -0.1 -0.1 # of trees/shrubs planted 10,000 11,830 10,000 # of hectares wetlands restored/created 1 0 1 # of hectares riparian restoration 2 2 2 # of metres of shoreline restoration 200 200 200
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Less carry forward funds than the previous year as projects were completed as scheduled
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS
Hazard Trees Mngt has carry forward funds for emergency tree removals Etobicoke Mimico HIP project has carry forward to complete the work in 2011
197 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 41 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: York Natural Heritage Project
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Regeneration: Canada Goose Management Funding 14,000 14,000 10,000 -29% (4,000) Humber: Lake Wilcox CAS 17,000 23,232 10,000 -41% (7,000) Humber: Humber HIP 40,000 40,000 50,000 25% 10,000 Humber: Eaton Hall Wetland 10,000 3,955 -100% (10,000) Humber: Woodbridge Expansion Area 18,000 18,000 Don: Richmond Hill Riparian 22,000 20,007 18,000 -18% (4,000) Humber: Richmond Hill Riparian 10,686 18,000 - 18,000 Don: Don HIP 28,000 28,000 30,000 7% 2,000 16TH AVE#11:LIABILITY INSURANC 7,411 - SP: Rouge Park/Bob Clay Support 70,000 69,000 40,000 -43% (30,000) Rouge: Rouge Watershed Plan Implementation 42,000 71,282 72,000 71% 30,000 Rouge: R. Hill Riparian Plantying 26,000 12,75, 2 24,000 -8% (,(2,000) ) Reforestation/Plant Propagation 87,000 87,000 105,000 21% 18,000 Managing Hazard Trees - York 33,000 13,023 30,000 -9% (3,000) SP:SE COLLCTR#17-ARCHAEOLOGY 16,750 - Rouge: SE Collector - RP & BHP Signs 63,000 - 63,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Tenant Relocation 15,750 158,000 - 158,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Project Management 36,764 79,000 - 79,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Trail Planning & Construction 202,487 772,000 - 772,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Trails Land Securment 57,000 - 57,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Habitat Design & Wetland Planning 21,783 14,000 - 14,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Wetland Restoration 52,106 221,000 - 221,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Riparian Plantings 8,559 198,000 - 198,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Meadow Savannah 74,218 173,000 - 173,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Roadside Buffer 31,000 - 31,000 Rouge: SE Collector - NFC Site Preparation 573 116,000 - 116,000 Rouge: SE Collector - NGO Planting Support & Plant Supply 40,000 - 40,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Rouge Park Admin. & Staff Time 132,000 40,000 - 40,000 Rouge SE Collector - Trail Head Car Park, Kiosks 51,651 76,000 - 76,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Securement & Tenant Fencing 10,925 1,000 - 1,000 Rouge: SE Collector - TRCA Interim Park Mngt Fees 50,000 - 50,000 Rouge: SE Collector - Grading, Bridges, Lights 218,000 - 218,000
510,000 1,026,136 2,802,000 449% 2,292,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 44,175 2,317,000 - 2,317,000 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 5,000 4,783 -100% (5,000) Other - Municipal 97,000 38,165 96,000 -1% (1,000) Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 70,000 671,274 40,000 -43% (30,000) - - 172,000 758,396 2,453,000 1326% 2,281,000 Capital levy Peel - York 311,000 303,800 311,000 Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel - York 27,000 (11,666) 38,000 41% 11,000 Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) (24,394) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.9 1.9 1.0 1.0 Non-F/T 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 # of trees/shrubs planted 80,000 79,377 80,000 - # of hectares wetlands restored/created - # of hectares riparian restoration -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Maintained 2010 level of capital funding from the Region of York Year 2 of South East Collector Sewer Enhancements paid by Region York (non capital levy)
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS
York Region special funding approved for South East Collector Sewer Enhancements York Capital for Stouffville Greenway was reallocated & Whitchurch Stouffville funds carried forward to 2011 198 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 42 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Durham Natural Heritage Project
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Watershed Trail Planning - Watershed Trail Implementation 55,000 66,479 78,000 42% 23,000 Duffins: Fish Plan Implementation 36,000 34,286 38,000 6% 2,000 TNH Implementation 42,000 39,605 42,000 Durham - Managing Hazard Trees 20,000 20,750 20,000 Durham Goose Management 7,000 7,000 7,000 - Seaton Trail #1:Planning 22,000 26,211 -100% (22,000) Seaton - Green River Trailhead 6,000 7,875 -100% (6,000) Seaton Trail - Forestream Rd Trailhead 7,000 21,693 -100% (7,000) Seaton Trail - Whitevale Trailhead 4,000 -100% (4,000) Seaton Trail #5:Improvements 159,000 133,514 243,000 53% 84,000 Seaton Trail #6:Site Securement 30,000 4,809 17,000 -43% (13,000) Seaton Trail #7:Nat. Heritage Regeneration 225,000 4,896 25,000 -89% (200,000) Seaton Trail - Signage 17,000 13,602 8,000 -53% (9,000) Seaton Trail - Community Outreach 28,000 7 5,000 -82% (23,000) Seaton Trail #10:Proj. Management 102,000 72,072 16,000 -84% (86,000) SP:Brock N & S Restoration Planning - 760,000 452,799 499,000 -34% (261,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 2,000 8,930 -100% (2,000) Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 25,111 - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial 600,000 288,978 314,000 -48% (286,000) Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants -
602,000 323,019 314,000 -48% (288,000)
Capital levy Peel York Durham 158,000 158,000 158,000 Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel - York - Durham (28,220) 27,000 - 27,000 Toronto - Adjala / Mono Deficit / (Surplus) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development
Staff FTEs- Full-time 1.3 1.1 -0.2 -0.2 Non-F/T 2.6 2.6 # of trees/shrubs planted 7000 7552 7000 # of hectares wetlands restored/created 0.1 0.0 - 0.0 # of hectares riparian restoration 1.0 0.8 1.0 # of metres of shoreline restoration 200.0 260.0 200.0
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Less Seaton Trails Project work in 2011. FTE change:-1 Technician moved from Seaton work
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS All Durham capital projects were completed as planned. Received provincial funds for the Seaton Trails Project Received MNR and CFGT funds for Species at Risk Glen Major Project 199 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 42b GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Regeneration Cost Centres
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Habitat Implementation Projects 486,000 501,658 466,000 -4% (20,000) Reforestation/ Planting Projects 292,000 249,595 364,000 25% 72,000 Special Habitat Restoration Projects 1,118,000 843,895 1,567,000 40% 449,000 Asian Longhorn Beetle Program 333,000 215,959 327,000 -2% (6,000) Environmental Services- Other 1,571,000 3,194,863 2,589,000 65% 1,018,000
Habitat / Monitoring Internal Cost Centres 3,000 32,666 15,000 400% 12,000
Covered by other Capital projects (782,000) (778,437) (836,000) 7% (54,000) 3,021,000 4,260,199 4,492,000 49% 1,471,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 1,443,000 2,744,083 2,629,000 82% 1,186,000 Reserves 1,393 - Interest Earnings 216 - CFGT - Flowthrough 137,000 45,705 122,000 -11% (15,000) Other - Municipal 247,000 556,404 168,000 -32% (79,000) Other - Provincial 273,000 316,351 288,000 5% 15,000 Other - Federal 858,000 750,278 694,000 -19% (164,000) Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 63,000 32,681 591,000 838% 528,000 - 3,021,000 4,447,111 4,492,000 49% 1,471,000
Capital levy Peel York 7,200 Durham Toronto - Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York Durham Toronto Adjala / Mono Deficit / (Surplus) (194,113) - - -
0 NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development Staff FTEs- Full-time 17.8 16.3 -0.1 -1.5 Non-F/T 6.3 9.8 0.6 3.6 # of trees/shrubs planted REM 20,000 21,490 20,000 # of hectares of wetlands restored/created 66 6 # of hectares riparian restoration 5 5 5 # of metres of stream restoration 1,000 1,130 1,000 NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) More environmental special projects (non capital levy funded) from our municipal partners C More projects funded from environmental compensations +8.1 labourers for Regen Sp. ProjectsFTE Change: -1.9 to Stewardship projectsFTE Change: -1.6 Urban Canopy project finishedFTE change:-1 Technician moved from Seaton work NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS W. Etobicoke Crk will have carry forward funds to match City of Missisauga funds in 2010 Lower Humber Mitigation to carry forwards due to project delays in design & approvals Stouffville Greenway Trail did not proceed, new project to be developed with T of Whitch- St Many projects are multi year and funds are carried forwarded
200 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 43 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Valley and Shoreline Regeneration Projects 2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$ GROSS EXPENDITURES: Erosion : Planning & Design 115,000 105,923 94,000 -18% (21,000) Eastville Office 30,000 52,186 40,000 33% 10,000 Erosion Control Planning 40,000 21,397 59,000 48% 19,000 - Erosion Control Major Maintenance 294,000 121,439 632,000 115% 338,000 - Monitoring & Maintenance: WF 266,000 231,988 333,000 25% 67,000 EC: Troutbrook Dr. Slope Failure 79,532 1,250,000 - 1,250,000 EC: Denison Dr. Slope Stabilization 40,000 - 40,000 Highland CN Bridge Revetment 24,000 24,000 - 30-48 Royal Rouge Trail 300,000 132,862 147,000 -51% (153,000) -- Meadowcliffe Drive 508,000 331,200 3,924,000 672% 3,416,000 MEADOWCLIFFE-PROJ.MANAGEMENT 43,864 - Springbank Ave. 2,000 2,000 Toronto Islands - Gilbraltor Point 380,000 185,557 110,000 -71% (270,000) Birkdale Ravine 9,000 9,000 Toronto Parks Sites 180,000 48,154 288,000 60% 108,000 EROSION: BRUCE FARM DRIVE 10,044 - Toronto Emergency - 345 Riverview 8,000 8,000 SPECIAL T.O.EC-21 SUNNYBRAE CR 3,708 - Military Trail 21,000 2,941 1,000 -95% (20,000) T.O. Works Funded: E/C Inventory 38,724 41,000 - 41,000 Black Creek Stabilization Keelesdale Park 376,553 84,000 - 84,000 Toronto Parks Storm Damage Program 263,000 16,995 118,000 -55% (145,000) Wilket Creek Restoration 288,000 310,144 1,000 -100% (287,000) SP:Wilket Crk. Geomorphology Study 94,540 292,000 - 292,000 T.O. Storm:City-Wide Bridges 156,395 - SP:BLUFFER'S DOCK WALL REPAIR 2,961 - T.O. Storm: 9-11 Copeland Ave. 42,000 42,214 -100% (42,000) Toronto Islands Marina Seawall Repairs 593,000 641,041 1,000 -100% (592,000) Toronto Nursery Relocation 300,000 869,296 50,000 -83% (250,000) T.O.PARKS:GLEN STEWART RAVINE 30,035 - Chesteron Shores Outfall 122,000 88,265 65,000 -47% (57,000) Warden Woods Park Trails 135,777 10,000 - 10,000 Warden Woods Park Culvert Replacement 22,371 155,000 - 155,000 Rouge Beach Trail Improvements 25,000 - 25,000 Bluffers Park Dock Wall Repairs 114,000 - 114,000 ROUGE BEACH TRAIL IMPROVEMENT 55,616 - Toronto Parks - Additional Sites 238,000 15,653 272,000 14% 34,000 T.O. Parks EC#2: Brooks Park 18,000 228,077 -100% (18,000) Bluffer's Park Dredging 254,470 1,000 - 1,000 EROSION: GULLY DRIVE 61,445 - EROSION:BURNVIEW CRESCENT 7,528 - EROSION: ROYAL YORK ROAD 18,475 - 195 Hudson Drive Slope Repair 1,000 (0) -100% (1,000) 8 Lakeside Ave Slope Failure 9,740 - Eastern Beaches Shore Stabilization Study 58,000 - 58,000 - 4,042,000 4,847,113 8,250,000 104% 4,208,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 2,227,000 3,668,152 1,397,000 -37% (830,000) Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal 19,000 220 19,000 Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 63,000 27,000 -57% (36,000) - 2,309,000 3,668,373 1,443,000 -38% (866,000) Capital levy Peel - York - Durham - Toronto 1,480,000 1,480,000 6,250,000 322% 4,770,000 Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York Durham Toronto 253,000 (301,023) 557,000 120% 304,000 Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) (237) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development Staff FTEs- Full-time 14.4 15.9 0.1 1.5 Non-F/T 3.7 3.7 # of metres of erosion work under way 160 160 900 # of erosion control studies 2 tbd NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Increased Toronto capital funding for Meadowcliffe and Troutbrooke projects Special non capital funded erosion work paid by Toronto Works & Parks will continue FTE Change: +1.2 construction staff for Toronto Works/parks projs.FTE Change: +.3 Clerk time NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Additional projects funded by the City of Toronto eg Bluffers Park Dredging Major Maintenance, Meadowcliffe, Toronto Parks, Royal Rouge projects had scheduling delays. 201 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 44 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Other Erosion Control Projects
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: York Region Erosion Monitoring & Maintenance 131,000 70,160 136,000 4% 5,000 WECI09:HAYHOE AVE.SLOPE STUDY 45,767 - WECI09:MCMICHAEL EROSION STUDY 29,240 - SP: Ladies Golf Club (Markham) 24,660 216,000 - 216,000 Peel Region Erosion Monitoring & Maintenance 122,000 121,555 139,000 14% 17,000 Durham Region Erosion Monitoring & Maintenance 12,000 13,332 12,000 - - 265,000 304,715 503,000 90% 238,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 24,660 216,000 - 216,000 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial 20,000 - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - - - 44,660 216,000 - 216,000 Capital levy Peel 130,000 130,000 140,000 8% 10,000 York 130,000 130,000 130,000 Durham 12,000 12,000 12,000 Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel (8,000) (7,597) (1,000) -88% 7,000 York 1,000 (4,832) 6,000 500% 5,000 Durham - Toronto - Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) 484
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development Staff FTEs- Full-time Under T.O. Erosion Under T.O. Erosion Non-F/T Under T.O. Erosion Under T.O. Erosion # of metres of erosion control protection in York Region 100 200 100 # of erosion control studies in York Region
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Continue work at the Toronto Ladies Golf Club paid by Town of Markham Increased funding from the Regions of Peel and York
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Funding received from Town of Markham for TO Ladies Golf Club erosion control project Carry forward York funding for ongoing monitoring & maintenance of erosion sites 202 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 45 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: City of Toronto Waterfront Project
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Waterfront Administration 95,000 91,029 82,000 -14% (13,000) Eastville Office 16,000 24,286 10,000 -38% (6,000) Ashbridge's Bay Dredging 363,000 356,513 239,000 -34% (124,000) Scarborough Shoreline Protection & Public Access 51,000 8,495 141,000 176% 90,000 Long Range Waterfront Planning 174,000 189,279 164,000 -6% (10,000) Waterfront Parks Major Maintenance 90,000 - 90,000 Keating Channel Dredging 270,000 17,839 523,000 94% 253,000 Keating Channel #1 Env. Monitoring 36,000 29,064 36,000 Keating Channel #2 Auditing 5,000 780 8,000 60% 3,000 PEEL:MISSISS.WTRFRNT-PLANNING 24,575 - TTP - Cell 1 Capping 200,000 71,425 203,000 2% 3,000 Tommy Thompson - Int. Mgt. 218,000 243,222 228,000 5% 10,000 Arsenal Lands Park Development 1,078,000 92,245 1,195,000 11% 117,000 Arsenal Long Term Monitoring 20,000 10,216 20,000 East Point Park - Environmental Monitoring 207,000 208,640 217,000 5% 10,000 MNR - Fish Community Toronto AOC - Waterfront G.I.S. 25,000 25,000 25,000 SP:HABT.ALTERATION ASSESS.TOOL 12,483 - SP:BIOTIC INTEGRITY-FISHERIES 9,217 - SP:SHORELINE LAND USE SURVEY 4,361 - SP: Electro-fish Subcontracts 13,671 - SP:DFO/MOE-L.ONT LOWR FOOD WEB 19,373 - SP: DFO Sea Lamprey Control Proj. 25,000 10,350 12,000 -52% (13,000) SP:CAN.ENV.ASSES.AG.SECONDMENT 7,823 - SP:FISHERIES-ACOUSTIC TAGGING 94,007 96,000 - 96,000 SP: T.O. Island Habitat Bank 8,187 14,000 - 14,000 SP:HUMBER BAY WETLAND CREATION 60 67,000 - 67,000 Covered from Other projects (690) 2,783,000 1,571,451 3,370,000 21% 587,000 FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 25,000 173,737 51,000 104% 26,000 Reserves - Interest Earnings 1,315 - CFGT - Flowthrough 20,000 - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial 43,176 - Other - Federal 25,000 105,216 163,000 552% 138,000 Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 752,000 111,898 747,000 -1% (5,000) 802,000 455,342 961,000 20% 159,000
Capital levy Peel - York - Durham - Toronto 1,454,000 1,454,000 1,523,000 5% 69,000 Adjala/ Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York Durham Toronto 527,000 (336,857) 886,000 68% 359,000 Adjala/Tos - Deficit / (Surplus) (1,034) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development Staff FTEs- Full-time 6.8 6.1 -0.1 -0.7 Non-F/T 3.8 3.5 -0.1 -0.3 Facilities: # Buildings /Sq. footage - Keating Channel Dredging cubic metres 3,500 3,500 Ashbridges Bay Dredging cubic metres 4,250 5,750 4,250 TTP Event attendance 2,400 2,400 2,400 TTP Cleanup cubic metres 500 500 500 # of active projects 18 19 18 # of completed projects 2 2 2
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Mostly Keating Channel dreging carried forward. New - Waterfront Parks Major Maintenance funded from Toronto Capital Increased funding from Environment Canada for Fisheries Research Acoustic Tagging & Humber Bay Marshes -1.3 RSS staff shifted re: smaller 2011 projsFTE Change: +.3 New Durham Waterfront Stew Coord. NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Arsenal Lands - started design work by consultants for Marie Curtis section Keating Channel Dredging (1day only) due to breaddown of Cherry St lift bridge, carry forward funds to 2011 Tommy Thompson Park Cell 1&2 underspent but used in 2011 for continued planning, monitoring and implementation Scarborough Shoreline Protection & Access project has been delayed due to funding There were 10 special funded projects in 2010 eg Sea Lamprey work with DFO 203 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 46 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Region Of Durham Waterfront Project
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Rouge Gateway - OPG Naturalization 30,000 16,705 27,000 -10.0% (3,000) Frenchman's Bay Restoration Management Plan 10,000 5,984 14,000 40.0% 4,000 SP: MOE Algae Cldphra Analysis 24,483 15,000 - 15,000 SP: Durham Wft Study Review 5,140 16,000 - 16,000 Frenchman's Bay Rehabilitation Project 69,000 67,689 55,000 -20.3% (14,000) Pickering Harbourfront Restoration 68,000 43,507 19,000 -72.1% (49,000) Pickering Waterfront Trail Securement 77,000 20,998 97,000 26.0% 20,000 Durham Waterfront Monitoring 15,000 18,550 12,000 -20.0% (3,000) Duffins Marsh Restoration 30,000 32,107 30,000 SP:DUFF-LAMPREY BARRIER FENCE 770 - SP:AJAX ROTARY PRK:DRAINAGE 166 - 299,000 236,097 285,000 -4.7% (14,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 48,000 23,012 5,000 -89.6% (43,000) Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal 40,000 58,954 36,000 -10.0% (4,000) Other - Provincial 24,483 15,000 - 15,000 Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 40,000 16,327 37,000 -7.5% (3,000) - - 128,000 122,775 93,000 -27.3% (35,000)
Capital levy Peel - York - Durham 171,000 161,233 145,000 -15.2% (26,000) Toronto - Adjala/ Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York - Durham (47,911) 47,000 - 47,000 Toronto - Adjala/Tos - Deficit / (Surplus) -
- NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION: Staff FTEs- Full-time Under T.O. Waterfront Under T.O. Waterfront Non-F/T Under T.O. Waterfront Under T.O. Waterfront # of Waterfront monitoring sites - # of active projects 12 12 12 # of completed projects 41 4
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Durham capital funding flatlined to 2010 level FTE Change: +.3 New Durham Waterfront Stew Coord. NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Waterfront monitoring over spent due to additional completed work 204 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 47 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Waterfront Revitilization Corporation Projects
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Port Union Waterfront Improvement Project 3,111,000 2,331,710 1,589,000 -48.9% (1,522,000) Mimico Waterfront Linear Park 4,773,000 2,241,499 4,186,000 -12.3% (587,000) Tommy Thompson Park Master Plan Implementation 3,748,000 888,234 3,737,000 -0.3% (11,000) Western Beaches Watercourse Facility 96,000 34,010 55,000 -42.7% (41,000) T.O. Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration 90,000 65,000 -27.8% (25,000) CWF Monitoring 66,000 0 45,000 -31.8% (21,000)
11,884,000 5,495,452 9,677,000 -18.6% (2,207,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 11,884,000 5,495,452 9,677,000 -18.6% (2,207,000) - - 11,884,000 5,495,452 9,677,000 -18.6% (2,207,000)
Capital levy Peel - York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala/ Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel - York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala/Tos - Deficit / (Surplus) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION For 2009 to 2010 and on Staff FTEs- Full-time 12.1 13.1 0.1 1.0 Non-F/T 3.9 2.8 (0.3) (1.2) # of metres of shoreline stregthened TBD TBD # hectares of land created TBD TBD
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Remaining projects proceeding on schedule but no new projects yet confirmed. FTE Change: -.5 less staff for smaller project
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Western Beaches - Project substantially complete, only monitoring and fish compensation activities remain - Complete Mar 31, 2010 Tommy Thompson Park - Project schedule delayed - project completion now March 2011 Mimico Park - Phase 1 - Phase 2 construction is expected to begin in July 2011 Port Union - Phase 2 in progress. Variance of $2.3M for Waterfront Toronto projects is due to delays in land acquisition and reduction to the budget by TWRC. 205 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Finance and Business Development Page 48 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Humber Bay Shores Waterfront Park
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Humber Bay Shores - - Etobicoke Motel Strip Expropriation / Mediation 100,000 738,956 100,000 - - - -
- 100,000 738,956 100,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves (508,891) - Interest Earnings 2,907 - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal 50,000 (597,750) -100% (50,000) Other - Provincial 50,000 (611,766) -100% (50,000) Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - Land Sales proceeds 2,468,472 100,000 - 100,000 - 100,000 752,972 100,000
Capital levy Peel - York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala/ Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York Durham Toronto Adjala/Tos - Deficit / (Surplus) (14,016) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time - Non-F/T - # of Expropriations still pending 2 partial 2
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Continued mediation and expropriation costs
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Expropraiations not completed
206 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 49 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Stewardship Community Programs
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Regeneration:
Community Environmental Projects 337,000 407,507 594,000 76% 257,000
Community Stewardship Projects 1,064,000 1,023,014 661,000 -38% (403,000)
Internal (13,000) 1,877,000 1,577,830 1,835,000 -2% (42,000) FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 5,000 1,427 2,000 -60% (3,000) Reserves 2,250 - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 52,000 34,216 38,000 -27% (14,000) Other - Municipal 11,142 - Other - Provincial 141,500 634,144 379,000 168% 237,500 Other - Federal 508,500 17,554 14,000 -97% (494,500) Other - Donations/Fundraising - Non-Government Grants 5,000 30,064 11,000 120% 6,000 - 712,000 730,797 444,000 -38% (268,000) Capital levy Peel 507,000 507,000 481,000 -5% (26,000) York 191,000 191,000 221,000 16% 30,000 Durham 45,000 50,000 45,000 Toronto 230,000 230,000 303,000 32% 73,000 Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel 102,000 (119,218) 229,000 125% 127,000 York 15,000 (33,546) 50,000 233% 35,000 Durham 45,000 30,519 35,000 -22% (10,000) Toronto 30,000 (8,839) 27,000 -10% (3,000) Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) 117 -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION For 2009 to 2010 and on Staff FTEs- Full-time 4.9 8.0 63% 3.1 Non-F/T 7.4 5.7 -23% (1.7) # workshops hosted 23 23 250 987% 227 # volunteers involved 2,500 2,500 11,700 368% 9,200 # restoration sites 9 9 -100% (9) # brochures and advertisements 23 23 100 335% 77
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Completion of the MOE Early Actions program and the Oak Ridges Moraine Landowner program. FTE Change:+2 NEW Aquatic Plants,+1.45 Strats to Community Projs-.15 CFC vacant Proj Manager NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS
207 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION Watershed Management Page 49b GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Education Programs for Schools
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Yellow Fish Road Program (JJ) 62,000 75,624 83,000 34% 21,000
EcoSchool Water Conservation Guide (DG) 8,000 5,946 -100% (8,000) Knowing Nature, Staying Safer (DG) - Educational Exploration of the Living City (DG) 2,000 1,523 -100% (2,000)
Watershed on Wheels Program (JJ) 154,000 163,385 164,000 6% 10,000 Aquatic Plants Program (JJ) 54,000 78,829 85,000 57% 31,000 -
280,000 325,306 332,000 19% 52,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 4,661 4,000 - 4,000 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 29,605 31,000 - 31,000 Other - Municipal 3,000 - 3,000 Other - Provincial 6,500 13,735 20,000 208% 13,500 Other - Federal 8,500 16,435 20,000 135% 11,500 Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 4,000 -100% (4,000) - - 19,000 64,436 78,000 311% 59,000
Capital levy Peel 106,000 106,000 115,000 8% 9,000 York 55,000 55,000 55,000 Durham - Toronto 85,000 85,000 88,000 4% 3,000 Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel 1,000 7,060 (4,000) -500% (5,000) York 5,000 1,050 -100% (5,000) Durham - Toronto 9,000 8,202 -100% (9,000) Adjala / Mono -
Deficit / (Surplus) (1,442) - - - 0 NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION For 2009 to 2010 and on Staff FTEs- Full-time see stewardship see stewardship Non-F/T see stewardship see stewardship # workshops hosted 22 18 1,170 5317% 1,148 # students involved 32,400 27,000 31,000 -4% (1,400) # restoration sites 20 17 10 -51% (10) # brochures and advertisements 12,000 10,000 12,000 # Citizenship ceremonies hosted 2 2 2 -17% (0) # people involved in ceremonies 1,440 1,200 1,440
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Grants received from Earth Day Canada, RBC, Sunny Days and the Town of Ajax.
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS 208 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 49c GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Community Transformation Partnerships
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
Expenditures: Energy Projects 749,000 310,820 402,000 -150% (347,000) Sustainable Community Projects 157,000 57,158 182,000 -88% 25,000 Partners in Project Green Projects 1,262,000 582,639 1,247,000 -1% (15,000) Expenditure Total 2,168,000 950,617 1,831,000 -16% (337,000)
Funding Sources: Program/User fees 54,000 194,763 245,000 354% 191,000 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 14,000 3,089 26,000 86% 12,000 Other - Municipal 96,000 159,700 312,000 225% 216,000 Other - Provincial 39,000 21,435 42,000 8% 3,000 Other - Federal 136,075 3,000 - 3,000 Other - Donations/Fundraising 28,075 93,000 - 93,000 Other - Non-Government Grants 1,800,000 280,193 907,000 -50% (893,000) Revenue Total 2,003,000 823,331 1,628,000 -19% (375,000)
Capital levy - Peel 12,000 12,000 12,000 York 11,000 41,000 46,000 318% 35,000 Durham - Toronto 38,000 108,000 108,000 184% 70,000 Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel 4,000 624 3,000 -25% (1,000) Carryforward levy-York 30,000 (13,393) 13,000 -57% (17,000) Carryforward levy-Durham - Carryforward levy-T.O. 70,000 (20,945) 21,000 -70% (49,000) Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) (0) -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 4.2 5.7 36% 1.5 Non-F/T 1.4 -100% (1.4) - # of Projects in Progress 21.0 20 0 (1.0) % Completion 25.0% 10.0% -60.0% (0.2) # of Projects Complete 10 2 -80% (8.0) % Completion - GHC- # hospitals 40 0 55 0 15.0 MMC- number towns & cities 9 15 9 District Energy: # municiplaities & organizations 20 15 20 Corporate Social Responsibility: TRCA Buildings and Facilities - Major 2011 over 2010 Changes (in addition to economic factors): Private funding for new Greening Retail Guidelines / shopping mall research not received so project was put on hold Total expenditures of energy projects will be reduced by 46.17% in 2011 as there will be fewer number of projects FTE Change:+.3 KCC ManagerFTE Change: -.4 Energy staff moved NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Private funding for new Greening Retail Guidelines development was not received so project was put on hold Private funding for shopping mall research was not received thus project was put on hold
209 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 50 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: 2011 moved to WM from Ecology: Sustainable Technologies
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$ GROSS EXPENDITURES: 2011 moved to Ecology Peel Water Man:Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrof 104,701 - Living City Report Card 175,000 62,576 182,000 4% 7,000 Natural Channel Design 96,000 95,517 56,000 -42% (40,000) Black Creek Urban Farm 17,000 3,197 14,000 -18% (3,000) Urban Agriculture - Growing Local Food 50,000 43,811 165,000 230% 115,000 Spills Database Program 47,000 7,543 63,000 34% 16,000 Can. River System Publications - Humber 10th Anniversary 13,000 - 13,000 Lot Dev. Impact Cost Tool 13,145 44,000 - 44,000 Soakaway /Soil Amend. Evaluation 147,000 - 147,000 SP:INFILTRATION LITERATURE REV 16,898 Terraview Filtration 2,795 - STEP: Roof Infiltration Tank 70,000 73,333 45,000 -35.7% (25,000) S.T.E.P. Air Quality Items 163,000 106,309 119,000 -27.0% (44,000) CSO Workshop 12,872 - SUSTAINABLE COMM COSTS Permeable Pavement 90,000 117,766 93,000 3.3% 3,000 Sustainable Technology Evaluation Program-Water 351,000 41,906 186,000 -47.0% (165,000) S.T.E.P.:Rain Water Harvesting 60,000 35,567 14,000 -76.7% (46,000) Greenroof Costs 10,000 2,666 9,000 -10.0% (1,000) Education: Web Based Learning 53 - Tech:Water Man Practices Training 19,000 - 19,000 S. Tech:Bioretention Evaluation 5,759 35,000 - 35,000
SUSTNBLE COMMUNITS/TECH.SERIES Peel Sustainable Comm Funding - York Sust Tech/Community Funds 6,000 6,490 -100.0% (6,000) Toronto Sustainable Community/ Technology Funds 83,000 82,772 114,000 37.3% 31,000 Peel Funding for Sustainable Tech and extra Monitoring items - Internal Municipal 1,011 (25,000) - (25,000) 1,218,000 836,686 1,293,000 6.2% 75,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 15,000 31,650 42,000 180.0% 27,000 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 5,994 - Other - Municipal 20,000 11,988 16,000 -20.0% (4,000) Other - Provincial 42,000 59,084 50,500 20.2% 8,500 Other - Federal 116,000 90,701 148,500 28.0% 32,500 Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 349,000 5,343 285,000 -18.3% (64,000) - - 542,000 204,759 542,000 Capital levy Peel 189,000 284,000 271,000 43.4% 82,000 York 117,000 112,000 112,000 -4.3% (5,000) Durham - Toronto 223,000 223,000 231,000 3.6% 8,000 Adjala / Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel 55,000 (8,781) 70,000 27.3% 15,000 York 38,000 3,068 35,000 -7.9% (3,000) Durham - Toronto 54,000 22,998 32,000 -40.7% (22,000) Adjala / Mono Deficit / (Surplus) (4,358) -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.0 5.6 15688.4% 5.5 Non-F/T 7.4 2.0 -73.1% (5.4) # of Projects in Progress 19.0 20 20 5.3% 1 % Completion - # of Projects Complete 8 6 6 -25.0% (2) % Completion
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA)
Some projects were completed and new ones were initiated, but the total value remains similar.
Natural channel design: no report needed for another 4 years. FTE Change: -.3 KCC permeable parking lotFTE Change: +.3 more Specialists time to Report Card and Urban Agricuture NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS
There was no major variance in 2010. Most projects were completed on schedule. Installation of the last 100 foot turbine tower at the Kortright Centre has delayed implementation of the monitoring evaluation on small wind turbine technologies. 210 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: All Page 51 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Peel Climate Change Mitigation
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Ecology Division Flood / Water Management Projects 1,661,000 482,059 1,709,000 3% 48,000 Sust. Neightbourhood Retrofits (ECOL) 200,000 176,963 273,000 37% 73,000 Restoration Services Division items: Erosion Control Projects 738,000 387,210 1,171,000 59% 433,000 Natural Heritage Restoration Projects 1,171,000 1,129,053 1,286,000 10% 115,000 Watershed Management Division items: Natural Heritage Stewardship Projects 676,000 516,289 685,000 1% 9,000 Environmental Education Projects 677,000 477,739 974,000 44% 297,000 Sust.Comm: Pearson Eco-Park (WM) 350,000 425,093 450,000 29% 100,000
Community Transformation Projects 815,000 511,805 690,000 -15% (125,000) Climate Consortium 105,000 - 105,000 Parks & Culture Division items: F&BS Division items: Claireville/ Sustainable House Projects 610,000 497,955 541,000 -11% (69,000)
6,898,000 4,604,166 7,884,000 14% 986,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 64,000 69,423 95,000 48% 31,000 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 66,000 73,000 11% 7,000 Other - Municipal 43,000 4,817 28,000 -35% (15,000) Other - Provincial 11,000 20,844 -100% (11,000) Other - Federal 11,000 663 20,000 82% 9,000 Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 170,000 6,225 83,000 (87,000) - - 365,000 101,972 299,000 -18% (66,000)
Capital levy Peel 5,325,000 5,325,000 5,600,000 5% 275,000 York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala/Tos - Carryforward levy-Peel 1,208,000 (822,790) 1,985,000 64% 777,000 York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala/Tos - Deficit / (Surplus) (16) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION (2011 still under development) Staff FTEs- Full-time 16.6 18.8 13% 2.2 Non-F/T 13.0 11.1 -14% (1.9) # of trees planted # of aquatic/herbaceous planted in Peel Region 20,000 30,245 20,000 # of Flood worksunderway 2.0 2.0 # of Erosion sites underway 3 2 3 Hectares of Forest managed 300 320 300 # of public engaged 323 399 323 # metres of riparian habitat restored 3,090 600 3,090 # of private landowners given assistance on forest management 15 13 15 # of hectares wetlands restored/created 5 5 5 # of hectares riparian restoration 8 8 8
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Funding increased for erosion, floodworks. Funding increased for Climate Consortium, Pearson Eco-Industrial Park, Environmental Youth Corps. Balance of increase relates to work still in progress from 2010. FTE Change:-1.7 mostly Headwaters Small tributaryFTE Changes: +.6 net re: New Humber Stewardship CoordinatorFTE Change:+.4 mostly Natural Channel HIPFTE Change: +.4 Claireville work
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Work in progress carried forward to 2011: $1.2 million for Floodworks & Erosion, $400k for Habitat Restoration & Claireville, $300k for Eco-Schools roll-out 211 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Watershed Management Page 52 GROUP: Flood Control ACTIVITY: Lower Don
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET CHG. CHG. $$$ %$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Don Mouth: TRCA Proj. Man. -E.A. 173,000 150,025 93,000 -46% (80,000) Don Mouth:External/Public Cons. 21,000 10,575 15,000 -29% (6,000) Don Mouth:Facilitator 18,000 5,840 12,000 -33% (6,000) Don Mouth:Gartner Lee 842,000 734,251 157,000 -81% (685,000) Don Mouth:Gardiner Roberts 4,000 2,000 -50% (2,000) DON MOUTH RESTOR:VAC/HOLIDAYS 19,833 -
Lower Don Imp: Detail Design 50,000 -100% (50,000) LDRW Phase 2: TRCA Internal 63,000 40,133 94,000 49% 31,000 Lower Don Imp: ORC/FPL Coordination 41,000 14,413 -100% (41,000) LDRW PH 2:Peer Review of Flood Landform 15,000 15,877 9,000 -40% (6,000) Lower Don Imp: TWRC/Park Coordination 20,000 13,760 99,000 395% 79,000 LDRW PH 2:Gardiner Roberts 12,000 10,932 43,000 258% 31,000 LDRW PH 2:Hydro One 31,000 31,000 LDRW PH 2:Acquisition/Agreement 200,000 174,252 67,000 -67% (133,000) LOWER DON:VAC/HOLIDAY TIME 7,577 - Ashbridge's Bay TRCA PM 7,941 - Ashbridge's Bay Coastal Engineering 3,760 - Ashbridhe's Bay Vac/Holiday Time 536 - CHERRY BEACH SAND PLACEMENT 12,600 - EASTERN BCHS SHORE STAB STUDY 62,140 - 1,490,000 1,284,447 622,000 -58% (868,000)
Program/User fees 74,740 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 1,490,000 1,209,707 622,000 -58% (868,000) - 1,490,000 1,284,447 622,000 -58% (868,000)
Capital levy Peel York Durham Toronto Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel York Durham Toronto Adjala / Mono Deficit / (Surplus) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION For 2009 to 2010 and on
Staff FTEs- Full-time 1.6 1.1 -32% (0.5) Non-F/T 0.3 -100% (0.3) # public meetings hosted 212 # stakeholder/advisory meetings 50 61 50 # technical studies 949 # plans implemented 4 4 # advisory members engaged >200 > 200 >200 # of projects underway 343 # of Projects Involved with Project Partners 15 15 15 # participants at public events 150 153 150 # on distribution lists (including WT distributions) 11,000 11,000 11,000
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Don Mouth Phase 1:EA submitted in Dec 2010, and year end completed, better sense of remaining costs and wor Lower Don Phase 2: continuing delays and uncertainty with schedules to finish with HONI easements FPL/DRP FTE Change: -.5 less staff for smaller project NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS For 191-02 - Delays in final submission to address OPA and pre-submission concerns For 191-06 - Delays in final submission to address OPA and pre-submission concerns For 195-20 - (legal fees on FPL easements with ORC/City/TRCA/WT much more involved than anticipated 212 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Ecology Page 53 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Flood Control Projects
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Flood Warning Equipment & Models 317,000 226,094 291,000 -8% (26,000) Flood Protection & Remedial Capital Works 593,000 136,957 672,000 13% 79,000 Small Dams & Flood Control Facilities Capital Works 168,000 50,226 182,000 8% 14,000 Large Dams Capital Works 181,000 122,195 75,000 -59% (106,000) Black Creek Channel Maintenance 394,000 426,611 16,000 -96% (378,000) York Stormwater Management Program 100,000 9,179 190,000 90% 90,000 Claireville Dam - OMS Review 14,000 14,000 WECI09:G.RSS LORD TRNSF.SWITCH 18,533 - WECI09: OSLER DAM DSR 10,608 - WECI 09:Secord Dam DSR 55,623 - WECI09:G.RSS LORD HYDROG.STUDY 72,924 - WECI 08 - Milne Dam OMS Manual 14,000 2,453 -100% (14,000) WECI 08 - Claireville Dam Wingwall Repair - Phase 2 15,000 -100% (15,000) WECI 08 - Pickering Ajax Flood Control Dyke Repair 40,000 19,939 -100% (40,000) WECI 08 - Secord Dam Culvert Repair 4,000 -100% (4,000) WECI 08 - Stouffville Dam OMS Manual 15,000 7,981 11,000 -27% (4,000) WECI 08 - West Don Hoggs Hollow Channel Study 5,000 16,364 250,000 4900% 245,000 MNR DAM SURVEY 120,000 -100% (120,000)
1,980,000 1,175,687 1,701,000 -14% (279,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 195,000 258,046 42,000 -78% (153,000) Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial 309,000 165,176 41,000 -87% (268,000) Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - 504,000 423,222 83,000 -84% (421,000)
Capital levy Peel 225,000 225,000 233,000 4% 8,000 York 175,000 175,000 175,000 Durham 43,000 43,000 43,000 Toronto 160,000 160,000 439,000 174% 279,000 Adjala / Mono Carryforward levy-Peel 217,000 4,433 213,000 -2% (4,000) York 199,000 (4,492) 203,000 2% 4,000 Durham 66,000 24,045 48,000 -27% (18,000) Toronto 391,000 125,480 264,000 -32% (127,000) Adjala / Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) 0 -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 3.8 4.9 0.3 1.0 Non-F/T 1.6 0.6 (0.6) (1.1) # of Sudies in Progress 7.0 4.0 7.0 % Completion - # of Sutdies Complete 5.0 1.0 5.0 % Completion - # New Stream and Precipitation Gauges 1.0 2.0 1.0 % Completion # Snow Course sites monitored and maintained % Completion # Low Flood Indicator sites monitored % Completion # Flood Infrastructure sites repaired/maintained % Completion NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) 2010 carry-forward for further work on Flood Protection projects including a strategy for Brampton. Continued hydrometrics program & maintenance on small dams, flood control channels, sediment and vegitation removal at Yonge and York Mill 2011 funding lower than 2010 as carryforward will be spent on major projects FTE Change:-.9 less construction staff to hereFTE Change:+1.0 New Flood Risk Proj. Manage NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS 2010 will have completed studies and implementation of works will begin CF to cover deliverables into 2010 and new contract staff hire 213 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Parks & Culture Page 54 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Public Use Infrastructure
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Retrofits/Construction 246,000 (7,411) 262,000 7% 16,000 PUB USE: NEW SIGNAGE 8,780 - PUB USE:COMMUNICATION UPGRADES 10,285 - LAKE ST.GEORGE CFC:DAVIES HALL 75,341 - HEART LAKE:GATE HOUSE REPAIRS 8,948 - HEART LK:INFRA STIMULUS ITEMS 110,080 - BM:CHALET REPAIR/SUGAR SHACK 5,000 - ALBION H: CHALET REPAIRS 9,350 - CA Planning 62,000 63,423 62,000 SP:RICHMOND H.LAND MNGMNT.PLAN 2,403 - - - CA PLAN:BRUCE'S MILL MAN PLAN 11,524 - CA PLAN:GLEN MAJOR MNGMNT PLAN 5,815 - CA Planning- Altona Forest 10,000 13,046 10,000 Humber Arboretum - - - 318,000 316,583 334,000 5% 16,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 2,230 - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 24,193 - Other - Municipal 1,000 1,000 Other - Provincial 27 - Other - Federal (1,933) - Other - Donations/Fundraising 625 - Other - Non-Government Grants 9,000 7,766 9,000 - - 10,000 32,908 10,000
Capital levy Peel 41,000 41,000 34,000 -17% (7,000) York 59,000 59,037 59,000 - Durham 8,950 8,956 8,951 0% 1 Toronto 198,000 198,000 198,000 - Adjala/Mono 50 50 49 -2% (1) Carryforward levy-Peel (3,282) 3,300 - 3,300 York (4,726) 4,700 - 4,700 Durham (717) 700 - 700 Toronto 1,000 (15,055) 15,300 1430% 14,300 Adjala/Mono (1) -
Deficit / (Surplus) 414 - 0 IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 1.1 -1.0 (1.1) Non-F/T 0.6 - 0.6 # of Roof & Other repairs 2 2 # of Pool Projects 2 2 # of Mnagement Plans underway 55 % Completion TBD TBD - -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) No change. Pub Use:+.2 Proj. Manager, +.4 Pool staff,-1.1 no longer going to KCC retrofit NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS 214 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Parks & Culture Page 55 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Other Facilities Retrofits
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Peel Campgrounds 63,000 241,600 283.5% 178,600 Peel Campground: Albion Hills 53,695 43,400 - 43,400 Peel Washroom Upgrades 100,000 101,449 105,000 5.0% 5,000 Peel Energy Efficiency Retrofitting 100,000 62,384 113,000 13.0% 13,000 Kortright Centre Campus Development 194,000 192,768 305,000 57.2% 111,000 - - 457,000 410,297 808,000 76.8% 351,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 1,142 - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - - - 1,142 - - Capital levy Peel 600,000 600,000 630,000 5.0% 30,000 York 127,000 - 127,000 Durham - Toronto - Adjala/Mono - Carryforward levy-Peel (143,000) (188,325) 51,000 -135.7% 194,000 York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala/Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) (2,521) -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.6 - 0.6 Non-F/T 1.2 - 1.2 # of Energy retrofits underway TBD TBD - # of Washroom updrades underway TBD TBD - # of Campgound Sites TBD TBD - # of Water Play facilities TBD TBD -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA Peel Campground Budget & Carryforward - Albion Hills Aquatic Facility - - FTE Change:+1.8 staff allocated to KCC Campus - - - -
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS - -
- - - - - Next Page215 ……57 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Parks & Culture Page 57 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Other Building Projects
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Kortright Retrofit 1,204,000 269,847 1,217,000 1% 13,000 KCC RETRO#2:URBAN AGRICULTURE 184 - - KCC Sustainable House Construction 3,143 - KCC Sustainable House Landscaping 819 - KORTRIGHT ENTRANCE LANDSCAPING 430 - Petticoat Pool 3,000,000 1,759,678 3,000,000 Heart Lake Pool 1,600,000 678,790 1,600,000 Nursery Relocation RSC Construction 25,000 29,178 -100% (25,000) Boyd Centre Workshop /Storage Construction (368) - BOYD WRKSHP:NON-CONSTRN.COSTS 368 - - 5,829,000 2,770,650 6,147,260 5% 318,260
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves 1,559,000 1,534,000 -2% (25,000) Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough (1,678) - Other - Municipal 300,000 - Other - Provincial 1,533,000 1,836,041 1,533,000 Other - Federal 1,533,000 361,183 1,533,000 Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 11,700 - Lease revenue 280,952 - - 4,625,000 2,788,198 4,600,000 -1% (25,000)
Capital levy Peel 28,582 330,260 - 330,260 York 250,000 250,000 -100% (250,000) Durham 9,347 - Toronto 207,000 206,000 -100% (207,000) Adjala/Mono 50 50 -100% (50) Carryforward levy-Peel 31,000 (99) 31,000 York 379,000 (251,997) 631,000 66% 252,000 Durham 21,950 (9,446) 31,000 41% 9,050 Toronto 315,000 (208,656) 524,000 66% 209,000 Adjala/Mono (50) - Deficit / (Surplus) (41,278) -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.7 0.5 -0.3 (0.2) Non-F/T - Sq. Footage under construction TBD TBD - # of Pool projects under construction 2.0 2.0
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) New Pan-Am Games Equestrian Facility project added. FTE Change: -.2 no longer to KCC/LCC retro project
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Pool construction, Kortright Centre work carries into 2011 216Next Page ……59 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Restoration Services Page 59 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Oak Ridges Moraine Corridor Park
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Park Management Plan (GW) 3,000 3,000 Terrestrial Field Inventories (SH) - Trail Construction (ML) 21,084 10,000 - 10,000 Park Legal Fees (MF) 4,244 - Habitat Restoration (ML) 20,000 25,531 20,000 Park Reforestation (TH) 45,310 100,000 - 100,000 Developers Contribution Agreement (JD) 301,000 -100% (301,000) Park Restoration ORMF (GW) 129,000 4,046 146,000 13% 17,000 - 453,000 100,215 279,000 -38% (174,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 8,000 25,531 117,000 1363% 109,000 Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 68,000 90,000 32% 22,000 Other - Municipal 18,000 18,000 Other - Provincial - Other - Federal 20,000 20,000 Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants 339,000 101,657 34,000 -90% -305,000 - - 453,000 127,188 279,000 -38% -174,000
Capital levy Peel - York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala/Tos - Carryforward levy -Peel - York - Durham - Toronto - Adjala/Tos - Deficit / (Surplus) (26,973) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION in development Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.1 0.1 Non-F/T - # of reforestation seedlings planted 23,800 90,000 2.8 66,200 # of hectares of buffer plantings 1.0 -1.0 (1.0) # of trees/shrubs planted by Community groups 925 500 -0.5 (425)
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Carry forward funds from developer's agreement for future park development Continue to implement park development plans Continue to receive developers funds as per agreemnt
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Carry forward any unused funds from developer's agreement for future works Restoration funds in 406-06 to be deferred until agreed plans are developed, approvals granted and schedule determined 217 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Parks & Culture Page 60 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: BCPV Retrofit and Attraction
2010 2010 2,011 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$ $
GROSS EXPENDITURES: BCPV RETROF.CAP:VISITOR CENTRE 49,382 - BCPV Attraction development 4,527 - BCPV North OPA 6210 MP 225,000 186,480 225,000 BCPV Retrofit 407,000 121,391 446,000 9.58% 39,000 BCPV:DALZIEL BARN WORK 7,770 - BCPV:JAMES DALZIEL(AGNEW)WORK 12,082 - FALL FROLIC FUNDED PROJECTS 3,305 - BC RETRO: ROOF PROJECTS 12,990 - CHURCH DRIVESHED - - 09:BREWERY RETROFIT 21,317 - 09:RESTAURANT RETROFIT 449 - BURWICK#2:CONSTRUCTION - - 632,000 499,566 671,000 6% 39,000
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough 2,200 - Other - Municipal 225,000 186,480 225,000 Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - - - 225,000 188,680 225,000
Capital levy Peel York Durham Toronto 350,000 350,000 350,000 Adjala/Mono Carryforward levy-Peel - York Durham Toronto 57,000 (39,114) 96,000 Adjala/Mono - Deficit / (Surplus) - - - -
IN PROGRESS: NEW DATA / VOLUME / PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.4 1.0 0.4 Non-F/T - - Facilities: # Buildings 50.0 50.0 50 Sq. Footage 170,000 170,000 170,000 Site Hectares 31 31 31 Sq. Footage under repair TBD TBD TBD - # of items to be repalced TBD TBD TBD -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) More carryforward in 2011
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS
218 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET DIVISION: Finance and Business Development Page 61 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Information Technology Project
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: IT Project 605,000 427,850 577,000 -4.6% -28,000 ------605,000 427,850 577,000 -4.6% (28,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - - -
Capital levy Peel 46,000 46,000 46,000 York 78,716 78,716 79,000 0.4% 284 Durham 11,941 11,941 11,934 -0.1% (7) Toronto 264,000 264,000 263,000 -0.4% (1,000) Adjala/Mono 66 66 66 Carryforward levy-Peel 23,722 3,272 20,000 -15.7% (3,722) York 39,645 4,929 35,000 -11.7% (4,645) Durham 6,415 1,031 5,000 -22.1% (1,415) Toronto 134,495 17,888 117,000 -13.0% (17,495) Adjala/Mono 9 - Deficit / (Surplus) (2) -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION For 2009 to 2010 and on Staff FTEs- Full-time - Non-F/T 0.5 0.5 # of Desktop Computers 380 383 380 # of Laptop Computers 270 268 270 # of Landline phones 340 349 340 # of Cellphones 310 307 310 # of Lotus Notes Users 440 443 450 2.3% 10 # of Accounting / GIS System Servers 8?
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Accounting system to be replaced in 2011.
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Some funds held for replacing Accounting System in 2011+
219 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Finance and Business Development Page 62 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Major Facilities Retrofits
2010 2010 2011 BUDGET Actuals BUDGET % CHG. $ CHG. $$$
GROSS EXPENDITURES: Administrative Office Retrofits 700,767 35,699 700,000 -0.1% (767) 996,233 -100.0% (996,233) Relocation To Boyd CFC 13,741 - Downsview Office 18,399 - New Administrative Office Design/Build 196,000 37,764 284,000 44.9% 88,000 Swan Lake Management Costs 7,622 - Asbestos Assessments 66,554 - INDIAN LINE WATER LINE BREAK 50,236 -
1,893,000 230,015 984,000 -48.0% (909,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees - Reserves - Interest Earnings - CFGT - Flowthrough - Other - Municipal - Other - Provincial - Other - Federal - Other - Donations/Fundraising - Other - Non-Government Grants - - - -
Capital levy Peel 80,000 80,000 126,000 57.5% 46,000 York 333,754 413,478 218,000 -34.7% (115,754) Durham 20,896 20,896 20,883 -0.1% (13) Toronto 462,000 462,000 461,000 -0.2% (1,000) Adjala/Mono 117 117 117 Carryforward levy-Peel 113,899 (225,375) 158,000 38.7% 44,101 Carryforward levy-York 192,343 (115,859) -100.0% (192,343) Carryforward levy-Durham 31,176 (17,442) -100.0% (31,176) Carryforward levy-Toronto 658,652 (387,701) -100.0% (658,652) Carryforward levy-Adjala/Mono 163 (98) -100.0% (163)
Deficit / (Surplus) - -
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION For 2009 to 2010 and on Staff FTEs- Full-time 0.25 - 0.25 Non-F/T - Facilities: # Buildings 4 4 4 Sq. Footage 54,000 54,000 54,000 $ Retrofit / Sq. Footage 12.98 0.66 12.96 -0.1% -0.01
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) Carryforward $ not budgeted in 2011 pending decision on office accomodation. FTE Change: Project Manager time added
NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS Only York approves 10 funding for new Administrative Office Design/Build. Accumulating funds for new administration office 220 TORONTO AND REGION CONSERCATION AUTHORITY 2011 CAPITAL BUDGET
DIVISION: Finance and Business Development Page 63 GROUP: Capital ACTIVITY: Land Acquisition
2010 2010 2011 Budget Actuals Budget % Chg. $ Chg. $$$ GROSS EXPENDITURES:
Waterfront Open Space 500,000 63,266 500,000 Acquisition - Greenspace Strategy 4,750,000 8,881,134 4,500,000 -5.3% (250,000) Natural Areas Protection - ORC Repairs 16,000 24,297 -100.0% (16,000) Peel Land Care 1,788,000 1,654,039 2,035,000 13.8% 247,000 York Land Care 548,000 406,341 437,000 -20.3% (111,000) - - 7,602,000 11,029,077 7,472,000 -1.7% (130,000)
FUNDING SOURCES: Program/User fees 27,550 - Reserves (559,554) - Interest Earnings 3,006 - CFGT - Flowthrough 65,626 - Other - Municipal 3,878,000 7,845,955 3,853,000 -0.6% (25,000) Other - Provincial 549,000 470,639 250,000 -54.5% (299,000) Other - Federal 33,000 19,587 -100.0% (33,000) Other - Donations/Fundraising 500,000 21,000 520,000 4.0% 20,000 Other - Non-Government Grants 912 - Other - Internal - Land Sales proceeds 850,000 1,337,553 599,000 -29.5% (251,000) 5,810,000 9,232,274 5,222,000 -10.1% (588,000)
Capital levy Peel 1,684,000 1,684,000 1,859,000 10.4% 175,000 York 571,600 441,615 442,985 -22.5% (128,615) Durham 3,600 3,582 3,994 10.9% 394 Toronto 80,000 80,000 87,000 8.8% 7,000 Adjala/Mono 20 20 21 5.0% 1 Carryforward levy-Peel 53,000 (84,542) 138,000 160.4% 85,000 York (19,209) 19,000 - 19,000 Durham - Toronto - Adjala/ Mono (220) -100.0% 220 Deficit / (Surplus) (600,000) (308,662) (300,000) -50.0% 300,000
NEW DATA/PERFORMANCE MEASURES SECTION For 2009 to 2010 and on - Staff FTEs- Full-time 4.7 6.3 34.1% 1.6 Non-F/T 5.7 5.7 # Hecatares Land in ownership 41,000 41,079 41,300 0.7% 300 # Hecatares estimated to be acquired 79 221 179.7% 142 # Hecatares of Land for Peel Land Care project TBD TBD - # Hecatares of Land for York Land Care project TBD TBD -
NOTES: 2011 BUDGET CHANGE COMMENTS (excluding inflation/COLA) One time extra York Land Care funding removed. Unfinished 2010 Peel goes to 2011. Land purchase projection adjusted. Budget based on surplus land sale revenue of $300,000 to cover TRCA deficit. FTE Change: +.5 more construction staffFTE Change: +.1 proj. ManagerFTE change:+1 Land technician NOTES: 2010 VARIANCE EXPLANATIONS More acquisitions: Runnymede and Rouge Park
221 RES.#A84/11 - APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS The Conservation Authorities Act requires each conservation authority to undergo an external audit of its accounts and transactions each year. (Budget/Audit Res.#C6/11)
Moved by: Jim Tovey Seconded by: Michael Di Biase
THAT Grant Thornton LLP be appointed auditors of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) for the year 2011, in accordance with section 38 of the Conservation Authorities Act. CARRIED ______
SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
RES.#A85/11 - SECTION II - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY INFORMATION
Moved by: Linda Pabst Seconded by: Gay Cowbourne
THAT Section II items EX8.1 - EX8.6, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #3/11, held on April 8, 2011, be received. CARRIED Section II Items EX8.1 - EX8.6, Inclusive ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD HEARING (Executive Res.#B56/11) REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY-OWNED LAND (Executive Res.#B57/11) WATER QUALITY LABORATORY ANALYTICAL SERVICES (Executive Res.#B58/11) REGIONAL WATERSHED MONITORING NETWORK (Executive Res.#B59/11) SUPPLY OF RENTAL RATES FOR AN OPERATED HYDRAULC BACKHOE (Executive Res.#B60/11) APPOINTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT OFFICER (Executive Res.#B61/11)
______
222 SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
RES.#A86/11 - FLOOD MANAGEMENT SERVICE 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan. Annual update on the status of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Flood Management Service and highlights of current initiatives.
Moved by: Dave Ryan Seconded by: Chin Lee
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the presentation by Laurian Farrell, Manager, Flood Risk Management and Infrastructure, in regard to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) Flood Management Service be received;
AND FURTHER THAT the TRCA Flood Management Service 2010 annual report and the 2011 work plan be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND Several severe flood events were experienced around the globe in 2010, resulting in devastating social and environmental impacts. The tragedies experienced in Pakistan, Australia and closer to home on Canada’s east coast (during Hurricane Earl), remind us of the power of water and the need for everyone to be prepared. In Ontario, we have taken the lessons learned from 1954’s Hurricane Hazel, and implemented policies to greatly reduce the risk to life and property due to flooding. However, we are not immune to flood risk in TRCA's jurisdiction, and TRCA is taking further steps to ensure community safety and resilience to flooding.
The Flood Management Service The core function of TRCA’s Flood Management Service is to protect the public from loss of life and property due to riverine flooding. We are continually advancing the program to meet the needs of TRCA's unique urbanized jurisdiction. Currently, there are close to 8,000 structures at risk due to flooding across TRCA’s nine watersheds. This translates to over 35,000 people at risk and an estimated $3.1 billion dollars in potential flood damages, not including potential damage to public infrastructure. For the past few years, TRCA’s Flood Forecasting and Warning Program has been paying particular attention to the fact that we need to better serve the needs of our client groups, namely, our municipal partners and the public. The Flood Management Service (FMS) was created to reinforce this approach and included the Flood Forecasting and Warning Program along with several new initiatives such as public outreach and municipal outreach programs. In January 2011, the function of the FMS was strengthened by integrating all of the core flood related programs under one manager. These unique, yet interrelated programs include: Flood Risk Management, Flood Infrastructure, Hydrometrics and Data Management. The goals of each program are described below.
223 a) The Flood Risk Management Program is responsible for producing long term plans for the sustainable management of flood risk in TRCA’s jurisdiction. Reaching this goal will involve collaboration with local and provincial governments, GTA conservation authorities, private sector companies and others, to test our plans and to coordinate our response to floods in order to minimize impact due to flooding on life and property. The team is also responsible for managing the Flood Forecasting and Warning Centre which involves the coordination and training of Flood Duty Officers with a unique set of technical expertise including: hydrology, hydraulics, emergency management and crisis communications. The timely and accurate prediction of flood risk and dissemination of flood risk to our municipal partners (through planning initiatives) and the public (through public awareness initiatives) is the corner stone of the Flood Risk Management Group. Hydraulic research, modelling and forecasting can influence the planning and design of existing or redeveloping communities. The FMS works with TRCA's Planning and Development Division to relay this information to key stakeholders. Reduction of flood risk through the Flood Protection and Remedial Capital Works program is also a key priority of this group. b) The Flood Infrastructure Program is responsible for maintaining TRCA-owned flood infrastructure. These assets include large flood control dams, channels, floodwalls, berms/dykes etc. and represents millions of dollars of liability to TRCA if not maintained. As such, asset management is the main priority of this group. Asset management consists of delivering an annual program of work that involves long term planning, inspection and maintenance on the ground. All work must be carried out in an efficient, cost effective, safe and environmentally friendly manner. Another responsibility of the team is to react to non-planned and emergency asset maintenance work. The team also works with the flood management group in the planning, programming and building of future improvement schemes (flood protection and capital works projects). c) The Hydrometrics Program ensures the collection, interpretation and dissemination of water quantity, water quality and meteorological data that is vital to meet flood and watershed management needs. Affiliated with both Flood Management Services and the Regional Watershed Monitoring Program, hydrometrics staff members maintain and operate over 120 gauging stations for five flood management networks measuring stream flow, precipitation, snow pack, baseflow and climate. Water quality networks are also maintained and operated for Toronto Water and the Regional Watershed Monitoring Network. While internal and external clients rely on the program’s data collection services, they regularly utilize the monitoring expertise of hydrometrics staff for training and mentoring in many government and NGO projects. The program also manages several specialty projects including the Toronto Wet Weather Flow Study (a 25 year initiative). The information collected by the hydrometrics program is regularly used for a variety of projects including flood warning, flood infrastructure operations, water budget modelling, and various natural heritage and climate change studies.
224 d) The Data Management Program team is responsible for the management, analysis and distribution of TRCA hydrometric and flood related data. The network of meteorological and stream flow monitoring, described above, produces more than 5,000 individual measurements on a daily basis. The chief objective of the data management team is to provide staff, the public and stakeholders easy and timely access to accurate information, analysis and data. This is achieved by utilizing modern relational databases and other tools to review, store and retrieve TRCA monitoring data. The advancement of web-based technologies within the Flood Services Group is also a key objective for the data management team. The flagship of this being TRCA's Real Time Gauging and Flood Monitoring website (www.trcagauging.ca) which provides stream flow and precipitation data in near real-time for public consumption. The day to day management and optimization of this system is a key function of the data management team.
Highlights of the 2010 Program and 2011 Work Plan A summary of the 2010 Program and 2011 Workplan is provided in the attached two tables and summarized below. Table 1 provides information on 2010 achievements and 2011 goals for the Flood Management Service. Table 2 speaks specifically to the components of the Flood F orecasting and Warning program (which is a part of flood risk management) and how they meet the requirements presented in the “Provincial Flood Forecasting and Warning Implementation Guidelines”, Ministry of Natural Resources, August 2008.
In 2010, a number of significant goals were realized and are highlighted below: 1. In contrast to global events, 2010 was a quiet year in TRCA’s jurisdiction in terms of flooding. Although we experienced many rainfall events, they generally did not cause the rivers to overtop their banks and cause flooding. We issued only seven high water safety bulletins, 0 flood advisories and 0 flood warnings in 2010 - during an average year TRCA issues approximately 20 flood messages. June was a month of particular interest as we measured precipitation amounts that were 150% above climate normals. 2. The “Floods Happen: are you ready?” municipal workshop was conducted for its’ second year, following positive feedback from attendees who expressed an interest in continuing the workshop as an annual event. The workshop was geared toward presenting municipalities with information about our flood forecasting and warning program and the roles and responsibilities of various agencies. The workshop also provided a forum for feedback from municipal staff involved in “response” to flood events. 3. TRCA owns and operates flood control infrastructure, such as large and small scale dams, flood control channels and dykes. In 2010 channel inspections were conducted and a number of maintenance projects were undertaken. At G. Ross Lord Dam, dredging of both the low flow and emergency spillways was completed. The transfer switch at G. Ross Lord Dam, which is a critical component of the emergency electrical system, was also replaced. These projects were part of the ongoing maintenance of G. Ross Lord Dam, one of two major dams in TRCA’s jurisdiction. An assessment of the Yonge/York Mills Flood Control Channel was completed in 2010. The report documents the condition of the existing channel and outlines work required to restore the channel to its’ original capacity (construction will begin in 2011).
225 4. The chief objective of the data management team is to provide staff, the public and stakeholders easy and timely access to accurate information, analysis and data. In 2010, this group contributed to the surface water hydrology assessment and analysis for source water protection, modelling for Sustainable Neighbourhood Action Plan projects, and the development of data management tracking systems for various initiatives. Of note, a collaborative project with the GTA Flood Group was initiated in 2010 to develop a state of the art system for documenting flood events. 5. In addition to conducting annual maintenance and operation of our extensive gauging network, the hydrometric group increased TRCA’s ability to collect precipitation data year round through the installation of three new four-season precipitation gauges. Several other technologies were employed in 2010 to enhance our current knowledge and flood forecasting and warning capabilities, including: installation of a new real-time video camera on the lower Don River; real-time water temperature sensors at McFall Dam (Bolton); and a water quality conductivity sensor at the mouth of Lake Ontario. 6. TRCA expertise was also extended to other jurisdictions, and in 2010 TRCA assisted the Credit Valley Conservation Authority in establishing real-time gauging networks in their area (Fletcher’s Creek and Cooksville Creek). This group also reached out to the academic community and continued to provide technical assistance to Guelph University and York University with respect to their meteorological programs. 7. TRCA has one of the most advanced floodline mapping programs in Ontario. However within TRCA's jurisdiction there are many areas where there have been significant increases in flows or new information has become available, and subsequently changes to the floodlines have been identified.
Major goals for 2011 include: 1. Continued advancement of flood forecasting and warning tools, and enhancements to the flood warning operations (flood duty officer activities). 2. Implementation of TRCA's public outreach campaign with a focus on creating awareness of the flood susceptible areas within the TRCA jurisdiction and what steps can be taken by the public to minimize flood related risks. 3. Capital asset management planning for TRCA's large dams and flood control channels. 4. Completion of the baseline monitoring program (three year program) for Toronto's Wet Weather Flow Study. 5. Improve TRCA's ability to provide quality data, in a timely fashion, by advancing work on web-accessible data management systems. 6. Continued work on a comprehensive program that includes accurate identification of flood risk, communication with TRCA's municipal partners and implementation of the Flood Protection and Remedial Works Strategy.
226 The Flood Management Service and Community Development While emergency management is one of the cornerstone roles of the Flood Management Service, the program also plays an important role in community development. As we see an increasing number of infill developments within TRCA's jurisdiction, there is an increasing need to provide municipal planners with the tools and information required to make informed decisions about growth areas and to safeguard existing communities. Major goal #6, listed above, speaks to this need and essentially requires input from all FMS groups. The success of our work will require a strong communications plan - to disseminate new information about floodplains in a timely manner, and which allows for the integration of this information into municipal planning documents. The FMS group also provides critical data from our extensive gauging networks; to inform the work of MESPs and other planning initiatives (for example, targets for erosion controls may be determined based on measured values from the field). The flood vulnerable areas database, which is maintained by the FMS, is an important tool that shows where the priority risk areas are and where remedial works are required, to reduce existing risk. Flood remedial works are not small projects, and will require the coordination of many agencies along with a long term capital budget planning program that integrates multiple objectives.
The weather systems of 2010 did not present any extraordinary conditions with respect to riverine flooding within the GTA. Once again, the systems that were in place for TRCA's forecasting and warning system functioned as expected and staff was able to confidently carry out their duties during all of the severe weather events. The new Flood Management Service structure will allow for greater capacity to implement core projects and improved efficiency in program delivery and use of limited resources.
FINANCIAL DETAILS Funds have been identified in the 2011 operating budgets (account 115-60 and 108-01) for general program operations. Municipal capital funds for 2011 are identified to undertake any project activities identified in the 2011 work plan.
Report prepared by: Laurian Farrell, extension 5601 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Laurian Farrell, extension 5601 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 14, 2011 Attachments: 2
227 Attachment 1 Table 1: TRCA Flood Management Service 2010/2011
Flood Management Service TRCA’s flood management service (FMS) involves Risk Management, Data Management, Hydrometrics and Flood Infrastructure Work Completed in 2010 Work Proposed for 2011 Flood Risk Planning and Administration for TRCA’s Flood Ongoing Planning and Administration for TRCA’ Management Forecasting and Warning Program (full details s Flood Forecasting and Warning Program (full provided in separate table below) details provided in separate table below, Operation of the Flood Forecasting and Warning Section 1) Program (flood duty officers on call 24 Ongoing Operation of the Flood Forecasting hours/day,365 days per year) and Warning Program (full details provided in Ongoing updates to TRCA’s Flood Vulnerable Area separate table below, Section 2) Database Ongoing updates to TRCA’s Flood Vulnerable Initiated TRCA’s Municipal Outreach Program Area Database Completion on the Flood Protection and Remedial Capital Works Strategy Project management of flood risk reduction projects (e.g., Downtown Brampton, Pickering/Ajax Dyke, Black Creek at Alliance channel cleanout) Continue work on the Municipal Outreach Program Development of TRCA’s Public Outreach Program and corporate identity/imaging for the FMS Disseminate new regulation information (e.g., updated floodlines) to our municipal partners and the public in coordination with TRCA Development Services Staff and the Generic Regulation Public Information process Annual field inventory for all flood control facilities 10 year Strategic Plan to be developed based Flood completed on a risk assessment and asset management Infrastructure Followed all safety and operating procedures in approach accordance with Dam Operations Manuals and Procedures to be followed in accordance with Dam Safety Reviews Dam Operations Manuals and Dam Safety Final report on Pickering/Ajax Dyke complete Reviews Monitoring program for Claireville Dam Wing Wall Albion Hills Dam Safety Review to be completed installed G. Ross Lord Dam Safety Review to be Secord Dam Safety Review complete completed Tours and training conducted for G. Ross Lord Topographic/bathymetric survey for Black Dam and Claireville Dam Creek Dam to be completed Debris removed at G. Ross Lord Dam Phase I and II recommendations for Yonge York Safety booms installed at Palgrave Dam Mills Channel to be completed Milne Dam and Stouffville Dam Operations, Pickering/Ajax Channel repair design to be Maintenance, and Surveillance Manuals complete completed G. Ross Lord dam transfer switch replaced Installation of pedestrian guardrail at G. Ross G. Ross Lord Dam emergency spillway and low Lord Dam level gate outlet dredged to restore drainage function
228 Work Completed in 2010 Work Proposed for 2011 The FMS maintains and operates 5 hydrometric Continue to maintain and operate the 5 FMS Hydrometric networks including: baseflow, streamflow, hydrometric networks. Networks precipitation, meteorological and snow course. Develop a long-term strategic plan for hydrometric networks rd In 2010 the following key projects were competed: Complete the 3 year of monitoring for the Toronto Installed three new real-time precipitation gauges Wet Weather Flow Monitoring Network project (all season) in Caledon, Toronto and Vaughan (achieving a robust set of baseline data for future Installed one new precipitation gauge (not assessment of WWFMMP initiatives) real-time) in Vaughan Continue to expand and streamline TRCA’s Installed one new streamflow gauge in Toronto real-time hydrometrics networks (e.g., one real-time Incorporated a live camera feed of the lower Don streamflow gauge proposed for Spring Creek in River into the Flood Centre website Brampton, Rouge River in Markham and German Supported work of TRCA fisheries staff with the Mills Creek in Toronto) installation of two new real-time water quality Upgrade selected stations to World Meteorological sensors in Bolton and Toronto Organization (WMO) standards nd Completed the 2 year of the Toronto Wet Weather Develop web-based data portal for external clients Flow Monitoring Network project Complete documentation of Ontario Hydrometrics Provided technical expertise and support to the procedures Credit Valley Conservation through the installation of two new real-time stream gauges on Fletcher’s Creek (Brampton and Mississauga) Initiated plans to transfer Ontario Hydrometrics activities to TRCA staff in 2012 Data Develop web-based data portal for external clients Publish legacy hydrometrics data to a web-based Management Created new decision making tools for Flood Duty data portal Officers on the www.trcagauging.ca website Migrate all databases onto TRCA’s intranet service TRCA is participating in a subcommittee of the GTA to improve data management and access Flood group and in 2010 initiated a joint project to Develop a system to track Flood Control create a Flood Event Documentation Database. Infrastructure inspections and to assist in asset This database will document daily operations, flood management events, historical events, communications, and will Increase staff expertise in technical systems (e.g., have the ability to search and report on events. SQL, ASP etc) This new database is currently under development Overhaul TRCA’s Flood Centre on the main website and testing within the GTA Flood Group is Complete the development of the GTA Flood Group scheduled for 2011. FED Database
229 Attachment 2 Table 2: Flood Forecasting and Warning Program
Section 1: Planning and Administration To develop and maintain an administrative framework to facilitate and support flood forecasting and warning. MNR Implementation Work Completed in 2010 Work Proposed for 2011 Guideline Component Maintain Adequate Flood Completed Etobicoke Creek Floodline Mapping Ongoing updates to TRCA’s digital Plain Mapping in Update Floodline Mapping Program (including an Accordance with FDRP Several areas received updated digital elevation update to the Mimico Creek watershed and Technical Standards mapping to facilitate future updates to floodlines select mapsheet updates for the Humber, (including three special policy areas within the Rouge, Highland, Lower Don) Humber River watershed, and select areas of the 2-D modeling to be completed for two Mimico Creek, Don River, Highland Creek, areas (Spring Creek at Queen Street and Adams Creek and Rouge River watersheds Dixie/Dundas SPA in Mississauga) Formed a GTA Flood Group committee to Complete development of the GTA Flood Documentation develop a standardized Flood Event Group FED database Documentation database and presented results at the Provincial Flood Forecasting and Warning Conference (October 2010) Maintained and operated TRCA’s 5 hydrometric Ongoing planning, updating, maintenance Monitoring Network and networks and operation of TRCA’s 5 hydrometric Data Collection System Maintained and operated TRCA’s data networks management system Ongoing planning, updating, maintenance and operation of TRCA’s data management system Training completed by staff in 2010 (including new Annual Training Modules to be provided in Training for staff, partners staff) included: 2011 to staff as required: and clients 1. Program Overview 1. Program Overview 2. Daily Planning Cycle 2. Daily Planning Cycle 3. Dam Tours and Dam Operations 3. Dam Tours and Dam Operations 4. Major Event Operations 4. Major Event Operations 5. Safety Training 5. Safety Training 6. First Aid Training 6. First Aid Training 7. Toronto Office of Emergency Management 7. Toronto Office of Emergency Management 8. Ice Jam and River Watch Tours Courses (equivalent to Provincial Certification 9. River Watch Levels) 10. Media Training 8. River Watch 11. Security and Communications 9. Media Training 12. Watershed Response 10. Security and Communications 13. Real Time Gauging and Website Updates 11. Real Time Gauging and Website Updates In addition, an emergency operations exercise will be conducted for all Flood Warning and Essential Staff. Data collection of all hydrometrics networks was Complete Flood Event Documentation Document Historical Flow completed for all events (including 7 events Database and integrate its use into routine Events where flood messages were issued) flood warning procedures Data collection through the NexFlood Radar data Continue routine data collection (over acquisition tool was completed 5,000 measurements per day) and data management Continue data collection through the NexFlood Radar data acquisition tool
230 MNR Implementation Work Completed in 2010 Work Proposed for 2011 Guideline Component The NexFlood system (watershed response Continue use of the Daily Planning Cycle tool Develop and Maintain project) has been expanded to include the Don for forecasting purposes Flood Forecast Models watershed. The work is nearing completion, and Advance testing of the NexFlood System as a was driven during 2010 by the availability and second tool for forecasting purposes extensive nature of the data required for finer scale discretization, and continuous modeling and calibration The Daily Planning Cycle (DPC) was utilized to forecast the potential for flood events 2010 manual update completed and distributed Annual update for 2011 will be completed in Procedures to partners early 2012 Manuals/Flood Milne and Stouffville Dam Operation and Ongoing updates to the Flood Warning Contingency Operations Surveillance Manual completed Manual Prepare for Emergency Weekly Flood Forecasting and Warning meetings Monthly FDO meetings will be conducted in Operations were held in 2010 to recap the events of the week 2011 with weekly meetings if required and to alert all personnel of imminent flood An exercise will be undertaken with all TRCA events Flood Duty staff and Essential staff during Annual training of key operational components 2011 was stressed as an important factor for Continue monthly inspection of Claireville, G. emergency preparedness Ross, Milne, and Stouffville Dams New staff were trained prior to being placed in Install back-up sensor at G. Ross Lord Dam on-call rotation and shadowed seasoned staff Install remote surveillance equipment at Monthly inspections of Claireville, G. Ross, Milne, Claireville and G. Ross Lord Dam and Stouffville Dams were conducted Install remote access camera at Bayview Ave. Secord Dam Safety Review completed flood site Continue Municipal outreach program to enhance communications during emergency operations 2nd Annual “Floods Happen: are you ready?” 3rd Annual “Floods Happen: are you ready? Maintain and Improve Municipal Workshop on flood forecasting and Workshop” for municipal partners was held in Liaison with Municipalities warning was held for municipal staff in February 2011 and Local Emergency coordination with Halton Region Conservation Ongoing municipal outreach program will be Response Groups Authority (HRCA), Credit Valley Conservation extended to all interested (CVC) and Lake Simcoe Region Conservation municipalities/divisions to improve (LSRCA) in February 2010. The workshop communications and identify potential for provided our shared municipalities with partnerships information about our respective program Identify opportunities to partner with operations. The workshop format allowed for Environment Canada and the Weather discussions to determine what our municipal Network to disseminate weather related partners are interested in for 2011 information Initiated municipal outreach program to improve Continue to work with the GTA Flood communications and identify potential for Forecasting and Warning Group and the partnerships, included presentations to Toronto Provincial Flood Warning Group to deliver and Parks, Toronto Transportation Services, Toronto effective flood forecasting and warning Office of Emergency Management program Continued and improved interaction with City of Establish strong relationship with Emergency Toronto Emergency Management Office, Management Ontario Strategic Communications and Toronto Police Assist with delivery of the City of Toronto’s Service Emergency Management Office “Introduction Coordinated with TRCA Education Team to train to Emergency Management” course School Boards on protocols for disseminating information in Messages
231 Section 2: Operations To understand and quantify the response and potential impacts within watersheds to specific events MNR Implementation Work Completed in 2010 Work Proposed for 2011 Guideline Component Follow Daily Planning Ongoing on a daily basis with Ongoing on a daily basis with Cycle improvements/modifications as needed improvements/modifications as needed Define Watershed Ongoing Ongoing Conditions Communicate Flood 7 High Water Safety Bulletins, 0 Flood Advisories Ongoing Potential or Flood Status and 0 Flood Warnings were issued in 2011 Maintain an Emergency Operation of the EOC at Head Office continued Continue to operate EOC at Head Office Operations Centre with a focus on providing technologies for the and upgrade equipment as required NexFlood system and on maintaining the Metronet Radio System Ongoing as needed Ongoing as needed Staff Safety Prepare staff safety manuals (tailored to the specialized activities of our field personnel) Ongoing as needed Ongoing as needed Document Flood Events In 2010, the Flood Management Service began ongoing as needed Support Internal and the strategic planning to begin a targeted External Clients municipal and public outreach campaign. Flood Management Service began work with Planning and Development staff to coordinate the updates of the Generic Regulation Effective Communication ongoing as needed ongoing as needed (Debriefs)
Continued to follow media communications Complete the Flood Management logo and Establish Internal and protocols branding, audience profiling for both the External Communications Continued to improve relationships with local public and our municipal partners, and Protocol media resulting in consistent messaging and marketing materials (brochures, postcards, increased media coverage etc.) Provided on-going information and advice to Continue enhancements to the Flood municipal clients and CA staff Forecasting and Warning Centre pages on Continued weekly checks of the Metronet backup TRCA’s corporate website, including a radio system with Toronto Police web-based system for identifying flood Enhancement of the Flood Forecasting and susceptible areas Warning Centre pages on TRCA’s corporate Continue to provide information and advice website, was initiated in 2010 to municipal clients with targeted meetings TRCA Flood Management and Marketing staff and presentations (Municipal Outreach worked together to begin audience profiling, Program) creation of the Flood Management Service brand, Develop a protocol in cooperation with the and brainstorming of modes of delivery for Weather Network to provide automated information. Flood Messages to media outlets A coordinated effort to identify changes to the Continue to develop partnership with Generic Regulation between Flood Management Environment Canada and establish new staff and Planning and Development began in partnership with Emergency Management 2010, with a focused on Etobicoke Creek Ontario watershed. Disseminate new regulation information (e.g., updated floodlines) to our municipal partners and the public in coordination with TRCA Development Services Staff and the Generic Regulation Public Information process 232 RES.#A87/11 - 3 OLD GEORGE PLACE Reporting back to the Authority on the issues raised in the April 7, 2011 correspondence from Amber Stewart, Solicitor, Davies Howe Partners.
Moved by: Lois Griffin Seconded by: Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report dated April 20, 2011 in regard to 3 Old George Place be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Executive Meeting #3/11, held on April 8, 2011, Resolution #B66/11 was approved as follows:
THAT a permit be granted in accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06 for the application EX10.32 - 3 Old George Place, that had been scheduled on the agenda as errata applications, for which all the required information was received and finalized;
AND FURTHER THAT staff report to the Authority on the issues raised in the April 7, 2011 correspondence from Amber Stewart, Solicitor, Davies Howe Partners.
The purpose of the approved permit is to construct a second storey addition to the existing dwelling at 3 Old George Place in the City of Toronto (Toronto and East York Community Council Area). Also approved was an addition to the front of the existing dwelling towards the road. The proposed works will not extend beyond the existing limits of development and are located well away from the long-term stable top of bank, the existing top of bank and the natural heritage feature.
At Executive Meeting #3/11, held on April 8, 2011, the following two delegations were made in support of item EX10.32 - 3 Old George Place: A delegation by Ralph Giannone, Principal, Giannone Petricone Associates Inc. and Stan Makuch, Principal, Makuch & Associates. A delegation by Jan Ruby, Chair, North Rosedale Ratepayers' Association Development Committee and Chair, North Rosedale Heritage District Advisory Committee.
A third delegation was made in opposition of item EX10.32 - 3 Old George Place. A delegation by Amber Stewart, Solicitor, Davies Howe Partners, on behalf of neighbors Stephen Smith and Jane Smith the owners of 4 Old George Place.
Amber Stewart of Davies Howe Partners provided correspondence, dated April 7, 2011, which was received by the Executive Committee and included on page 112 of the Executive Committee Minutes #3/11 included with the agenda package for Authority Meeting #4/11.
The Executive Committee requested Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff to report back to the Authority in response to this correspondence which maintained the following primary arguments: 1. That TRCA inaccurately determined the top of bank feature;
233 2. That TRCA inaccurately determined the development as a “minor” versus “major” addition.
The following is TRCA staff's response to the Authority based on our review of the correspondence received by the Executive Committee:
The Regulation Limit in TRCA’s mapping which supports the implementation of Ontario Regulation 166/06 was prepared through a GIS-based exercise that delineated on aerial photography, the estimated limits of the various criteria and features of the Regulation (top of bank, long-term stable top of bank, floodplain, meander belt, etc.). The establishment of the various features (in this case, the top of bank and long-term stable top of bank) is confirmed or refined on a site by site basis as a starting point for determining a viable building envelope. This is consistent with Section 2(2) of Ontario Regulation 166/06 wherein the legal basis for defining regulated areas remains within the written text. The City of Toronto’s Conservation Overlay Mapping (By-law 1156-2010) is also based on the Regulation Limit in TRCA’s mapping.
The procedures TRCA staff follow when staking natural heritage features and/or the top-of-bank are outlined in TRCA’s Natural Feature and Top-of-Bank Staking Procedures (September 2007). The extent of the defined valley corridor and the development limit is identified through an evaluation of the staked limit of features, additional technical assessments and the characteristics of the subject property in question. A refined top of bank and long-term stable top of bank was determined at 3 Old George Place through field checking and two geotechnical studies and is entirely consistent with TRCA practice.
3 Old George Place was historically developed prior to Ontario Regulation 166/06 and is a highly modified site. TRCA policies allow for minor additions to existing development already located within the valley corridor if hazard areas are protected and/or appropriate buffers are provided to natural features. In these scenarios, TRCA's review of the applications is limited to issues pertaining to natural hazards and natural heritage, while ensuring that the tests of the Regulation are met. There are no such issues related to the proposed additions at 3 Old George Place as the addition has no impact on the five tests of the Regulation.
The two geotechnical reports prepared to the satisfaction of TRCA technical staff confirm there are no hazards of erosion and slope stability resulting from existing and approved development on the subject property. The existing and proposed development is in fact located entirely outside of the defined hazard limit.
Further to this, there are no negative impacts on existing natural heritage features resulting from the approved development as the proposed works will not extend beyond the existing limits of development towards the natural feature.
The proposed works are located well outside the refined hazard limit and is not considered ‘major’ development or ‘new development’ under TRCA’s policies.
234 The approach of assessment for this application is consistent with TRCA's standard practice in historically developed neighborhoods such as Rosedale and throughout the rest of our jurisdiction.
Report prepared by: Nicole Moxley, extension 5284 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Nicole Moxley, extension 5284 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 20, 2011
______
RES.#A88/11 - BLACK CREEK HISTORIC BREWERY Status Report. Summary report on the Black Creek Historic Brewery after completion of the second season of operation.
Moved by: Lois Griffin Seconded by: Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the report dated April 13, 2011, on the second year of operation of Black Creek Historic Brewery at Black Creek Pioneer Village (BCPV) be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND At Executive Committee Meeting #10/08, held on December 12, 2008, Resolution #B168/08 was approved, in part, as follows:
THAT a contract with Trafalgar Ales and Meads to establish and operate a pioneer brewery and museum at Black Creek Pioneer Village be approved, at a cost not to exceed $92,000 annually, plus applicable taxes and reasonable inflationary adjustments;...
The purpose of the brewery initiative is to help rejuvenate Black Creek Pioneer Village through entrepreneurial partnership, brand development for broader audience appeal, and increased revenue generation for BCPV to become more financially stable. Specifically, the brewery initiative was developed to: provide new revenue streams; appeal to previously unengaged audiences; create a visitor experience unique to Canada; leverage and strengthen the Black Creek brand; offer revenue-generating marketing outreach through the distribution and sale of Black Creek branded beer; leverage a currently underutilized income earning asset - the Half Way House Restaurant; integrate other parts of BCPV to create a rich, multifaceted visitor experience; offer opportunities to showcase self-sufficient, sustainable food production.
235 Results In its second year in operation, the Black Creek Historic Brewery (BCHB) continued to add to the Village experience while attracting a new market for Black Creek – the adult market. Visitors continued to give the brewery tours solid reviews – consistently scoring it 4 or 5 out of 5 on all comment cards. In 2010, Black Creek Pioneer Village had over 100,000 visitors, many of whom had exposure to the brewery. We offered 360 tours throughout the season and had over 1,200 people take the one hour tour which offered a taste of the past. There were also a growing number of repeat visitors to the brewery, including a group that drove in all the way from Owen Sound to attend our BrewsFest event. In short, we were becoming a destination for the purchase of historically brewed beer as this is the only place you can buy it locally.
Some key highlights for the brewery in 2010 included: BCHB was voted one of the Top 10 Craft Brewers in the GTA by www.blogto.com, an influential local blog; hosted the BrewsFest event in September along with five other craft brewers; the successful launch of Black Creek Porter Ale in the LCBO in November; and growler sales increased by 67% over 2009.
The brewery has had a positive effect on Black Creek Pioneer Village’s paid admission. In 2010, BCPV had an increase of 1,000 paying customers versus 2009. This was an increase of $25,200 in attendance revenue.
The original business plan assumed that a large portion of sales would be generated through corporate programs. After two years of operating the Brewery, BCPV has shifted the focus to on-site visits by the public and social groups as well as beer sales, as staff deem them to be a more viable and lucrative market.
Marketing and Public Relations The marketing plan for the brewery focused on media vehicles that targeted the adult market and craft beer enthusiasts. The plan included television spots on CP24, ads in the Wine and Beer Guide, Canadian History magazine website, and participation in various Ontario Craft Brewers Association promotions. The Brewery also posted frequently to our beer blog throughout 2010 and saw traffic increase to 30 unique visits per day.
Press releases, followed by pitches to journalists, were issued around the Brewery Tours (late June/early July), BrewsFest (September) and the launch of Black Creek Porter Ale in the LCBO (November).
Special Events – On-site and Outreach BCPV received a grant for $16,200 from Canadian Heritage through the Building Communities through Arts and Heritage program that enabled BCPV to run BrewsFest. BrewsFest was a celebration of craft beers, food and entertainment that took place September 28 and 29, 2010. Over 1,600 people attended over the two day period, with participation from five other local craft breweries: Railway City, Trafalgar, Cameron’s Brewing, Lake of Bays and Black Oak Brewery. The Brewery hosted three sold out specialty evenings and three corporate events.
236 BCHB also participated in a number of off-site events to help promote the Brewery. These events included the Hamilton Food and Drink Show, Queen’s Park Speaker's Invitational, Ontario Museums Day at Queen’s Park and Ontario Craft Brewer’s Week.
LCBO Sales In the year ending February 26, 2011, the LCBO’s sales of Ontario craft beer rose 46% compared with just a 4% overall increase in regular beer sales for the same period. BCHB is very well positioned in this market. Black Creek Porter, which officially launched in November 2010, has proven to be a sales success. The Porter Ale was listed in 159 LCBO “A” and “B” tier stores. “A” tier stores are the largest volume stores in each city (i.e. Yonge and Summerhill store in Toronto) and “B” tier stores (Yorkgate Mall store at Jane and Finch). But an even greater sign of the success of the beer was not just how many stores the beer was listed in, but if a second order was placed. Not only was the beer re-ordered in 90% of all the “A” and “B” stores it was listed in, it sold three times the number of cases that is considered a successful launch by the LCBO.
As a result, the LCBO has listed BCHB's Pale Ale, which launched on April 8, 2011 and has been receiving great constructive feedback on beer blogs in the GTA. The LCBO has also accepted Black Creek Stout as a seasonal offering from October 2011 to March 2012. This is in addition to the Porter Ale which will re-list from September 2011 to March 2011 as well as the Pale Ale which, if it sells well, should be accepted as a permanent listing in late summer 2011. In a span of 12 months, Black Creek Historic Brewery has been successful in getting not one but three products listed in the LCBO.
On-site Sales Growler sales were up 67% over 2009, from 833 growlers sold in 2009 to 1,392 in 2010. The reason for the significant increase in sales was due to the fact that a lot of the quality and consistency issues that were experienced in BCHB's first year were worked out. The Brewery installed an air handling system which helped to maintain a constant temperature which resulted in better quality beer. Given the growing demand for the beer brewed on-site, BCHB will be adding a second fridge so that we can brew and sell more growlers.
BCHB also brewed and sold out of a number of specialty ales in 2010. The specialty ales included: Lemon Balm Pale Ale, Oatmeal Stout, Raspberry Porter, Pumpkin Ale, Wet Hop Ale and Winter Warmer Ale.
The Brewery and Local Food Connection The opening of the BCHB has also helped BCPV to revive its on-site restaurant. The restaurant, located on the ground floor next to the BCHB, is intrinsically tied with the operation of the BCHB. When TRCA decided to move ahead with the BCHB, the restaurant was renovated and the focus of the menu changed. The focus of the restaurant is on local sustainable meals prepared fresh on-site. The result has been that the restaurant has now become a destination for the public, businesses surrounding Black Creek as well as staff and more importantly has become financially sustainable.
237 Sustainable Practices The BCHB is generating zero waste. The Brewery composting 100% of the mash in our gardens at BCPV. Staff is also using BCPV gardens to demonstrate how to grow barley and hops used in beer as well as promote local, sustainable agriculture. There was a plan to use the barley and hops to make a 1 km beer, but unfortunately the plants were damage by wildlife. This 1 km beer is in our production plan for 2011.
FINANCIAL DETAILS Funds for the operation and marketing of the Black Creek Historic Brewery were reallocated from within the 2010 operating budget.
Brewery Income Statement Year 1 Budget (2009) Year 1 Actuals (2009) Total Revenue $122,000 $74,000 Total Expenditure ($132,000) ($147,000) Net ($10,000) ($73,000)
Brewery Income Statement Year 2 Budget (2010) Year 2 Actuals (2010) Total Revenue $128,100 $71,350 Total Expenditure ($96,000) ($112,486) Net $32,000 ($41,136)
Income Statement Year 1 Year 2 (2010) Year 3 (2011) Year 4 (2012) Year 5 (2013) (2009) Total Revenue $74,000 $71,350 $134,000 $141,230 $148,291 Total Expenditure ($147,000) ($112,486) ($98,800) ($101,846) ($104,901) Operating Profit ($73,000) ($41,136) $35,625 $39,383 $43,389
In 2010, revenue for the brewery as well as BCPV and Food Services fell short of the budgeted target. The effects of the recession still lingered which had a negative effect on attendance, corporate sales and tourism.
With the launch of the beer in the LCBO, the Brewery and Black Creek Pioneer Village are being exposed to an adult audience that may not have thought of us as a destination. The beer, coupled with our other initiatives targeting the adult market, will help Black Creek Pioneer Village build new audiences in 2011 and beyond.
Report prepared by: Nick Foglia, extension 5275 Emails: [email protected] For Information contact: Nick Foglia, extension 5275 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 13, 2011
______
238 RES.#A89/11 - MEMBERS REMUNERATION Overview of policy for remuneration to Members of the Authority.
Moved by: Lois Griffin Seconded by: Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the staff report dated April 12, 2011 in regard to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Members Remuneration be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND The Members of the Authority requested that staff report on members remuneration and the options for declining payment.
Section 37 of the Conservation Authorities Act (R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 27 as amended) (CA Act) provides that the Authority has the power to determine salary, expenses and allowances for Members of the Authority subject to approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has adopted policies for remuneration of Members and secured the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board. The most recent Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) order is dated 2008 and states that the Members and Vice Chair of TRCA shall receive a per diem allowance of $86.62 and that the Chair of TRCA (and the Vice Chair when acting for the Chair) shall receive an allowance of two times the regular per diem for attendance at conservation authority meetings if an elected official, or an honorarium of $38,037 if not an elected official. Members receive 50% per diem if participating in meetings by conference call.
A Member of an Authority can choose to waive payment of all or part of remuneration. This allows for Members who are appointed by municipalities which have established policies on receipt of remuneration outside of their municipal salaries and benefits, to honour the policies of those jurisdictions without impacting those without such policies or citizen appointees. TRCA has representation from six participating municipalities: City of Toronto - 14 members; Region of Peel - 5 members; Region of York - 5 members; Region of Durham 3 members and Town of Mono/Township of Adjala-Tosorontio - 1 member. Of the current membership, six members are citizen appointees who do not receive any form of remuneration from their appointing municipality. Citizen members frequently attend meetings during their personal time, often having taken time away from their regular employment.
All 36 Conservation Authorities in Ontario pay remuneration in the form of per diems or honorariums. A summary of remuneration paid by the conservation authorities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe is outlined in Attachment 1. Hamilton Region Conservation Authority approved as part of the their board procedures that elected officials and Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) staff appointed to their Authority are not eligible to receive per diem payments or mileage. Other Members are given the option to waive or donate back all or a portion of their per diem and/or mileage.
TRCA Members are advised of the options at the start of every calendar year and are provided with a waiver and release which authorizes TRCA to cease making per diem and/or mileage payments. Members are also given the option to donate all or a portion of per diem and/or mileage received to The Conservation Foundation of Greater Toronto. It is at the Members discretion as to whether or not they accept all or part of their remuneration.
239 Also, TRCA is authorized to reimburse Members for travel to Authority meetings at the same rate as that of staff of TRCA using their personal vehicles on TRCA business. The current rate is: up to 4,000 km/calendar year - 50 cents/km; from 4,001 to 10,000 km/calendar year - 45 cents/km; and over 10,000 km/calendar year - 40 cents/km.
FINANCIAL DETAILS Section 247 (1) of the Municipal Act, R.S.O. (1990) requires municipal treasurers to submit to Council a statement of remuneration and expenses paid in the proceeding year to each member of Council with respect to his/her services as an official of the municipality on a local board or other body. TRCA staff provides this information to municipal treasurers each year and this information is made public at municipal council meetings.
The following is a summary of the number of Members eligible to receive per diem and mileage payments in 2010 who accepted all remuneration, waived all or a portion of their remuneration or donated all or a portion of their remuneration to CFGT:
Accepted Remuneration Waived All or a Portion of Donated All or a Portion of Remuneration Remuneration Per Diem Mileage Per Diem Mileage Per Diem Mileage 20 20 4 5 4 3
Total salary, per diem and mileage payments remitted to Members in 2010 was approximately $66,200. Of this total payment approximately $4,700 was donated back to the Conservation Foundation. An undetermined amount was waived as indicated above, as mileage is not tracked for members who have indicated they wish to waive it.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264; Jim Dillane, extension 6292 Emails: [email protected]; [email protected] For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264 Emails: [email protected] Date: April 12, 2011 Attachments: 1
240 Attachment 1
Conservation Honorarium Meeting Payment Additional Information Authority Toronto and Region $38,037.00 - Chair $86.62 per diem Chair receives honorarium if non-elected official and 2 times per diem if elected official ($173.24) Nottawasaga Valley $2,500 - Chair $79.62 (up to 3.5 hrs., Chair and Vice Chair $1,000 - Vice Chair then additional receive honorarium plus payment received) per diem. Niagara Peninsula $4,682 - Chair $69.09 per diem Grand River $39,891 - Chair $79.00 (committee meeting per diem) $132.00 (committee of the whole per diem) Credit Valley $11,957 - Chair $71.55 per diem Chair and Vice Chair $5,464 - Vice Chair receive honorarium plus per diem. Conservation Halton $10,000 - Chair $50.00 per diem $3,000 - Vice Chair Hamilton Region $9,000 - Chair $60.00 per diem Elected officials & MNR $1,700 - Vice Chair staff are not eligible to receive per diem. Lake Simcoe $10,000 - Chair $100.00 per diem $3,000 - Vice Chair Central Lake Ontario $1,875 - Chair $50.00 per meeting
______241 RES.#A90/11 - IN THE NEWS Overview of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority activities and news stories from January - March, 2011.
Moved by: Lois Griffin Seconded by: Laurie Bruce
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the summary of media coverage and Good News Stories from January - March, 2011 be received. CARRIED BACKGROUND As per Authority direction during 2006, a consolidated report covering highlights of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) activities and news coverage for the preceding few months is provided to the Authority every few months. The stories for January to March, 2011 are as follows:
Healthy Rivers and Shorelines Water News - Early March brings wet weather and media stories about high water safety. Media stories appeared in CTV, Toronto Sun, Brampton Guardian, CBC, InsideToronto.com and CP24. Ajax News Advertiser story reports on the TRCA and Town of Ajax clean up event along the waterfront. $15,000 in funding received from the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) for a water quality study. Partnerships - The Ministry of the Environment is providing initial funding of $50,000 for TRCA to develop a risk management catalogue for threats to drinking water quantity.
Research and Innovation - On Friday, February 25, 2011, TRCA, in collaboration with Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA), hosted a one-day workshop on headwater streams in Ottawa. A number of experts, including TRCA Ecology and Restoration Services staff presented the results of research, monitoring, policy/guidelines and restoration initiatives that they have been leading with regard to headwaters. There were over 120 participants from the public and private sectors, including representatives from seven conservation authorities, several federal, provincial and municipal agencies, and 19 consulting firms. The work was well-received, and there was a lot of good discussion around new partnerships and future directions to address headwater issues. One idea that RVCA and TRCA will pursue is to undertake a conservation authority survey to determine the potential for TRCA's Interim Headwater Guideline to be adopted/recommended by Conservation Ontario.
Regional Biodiversity Land Acquisition - Completed the transfer of the 969 acre Brock North and South properties from City of Toronto for nominal consideration of $2.00. TRCA is developing restoration and management plans for the site. Received approval from the Minister of Natural Resources to expropriate land required to allow construction of Phase 2 of the Mimico Waterfront Linear Park to proceed.
242 Terrestrial and Aquatic Plants and Wildlife – TRCA experts help Toronto Star writer in a March 20th feature story about plants and animals in High Park’s Grenadier Pond. Tommy Thompson Park (TTP) Bird Research Station has recaptured a warbling vireo a total of nine times since it was first banded at TTP in 2004. This makes him six years old, and he has survived 12 migrations to and from the tropics, clocking up to 46,000 kilometres. We hope he returns again this spring. Started hydro acoustic fish tagging in Toronto harbour which allows us to determine in a 3-D manner how fish relate to habitat and weather. Restoration - Soil placement was completed at Kleinburg New Forest North in December 3 2010. More than 300,000 m has been placed and shaped to create the landform. A small amount of fine grading and seeding is scheduled for May 2011. Staff is currently preparing a detailed site restoration plan and phasing schedule based on the approved concept plan. To date initial restoration works, including creation of ephemeral wetland/wet meadow habitat areas, installation of landscape screen plantings and implementation of drainage improvements, have been completed. Further trail development and restoration works are proposed for 2011 and beyond. In February, TRCA secured over $500,000 from York Region for habitat improvements in the Rouge Park. TRCA’s Restoration Services has reconnected the Cell 1 wetland capping project at Tommy Thompson Park back to Lake Ontario. Cell 1 is the largest wetland creation project (10.1 hectares) on the Toronto waterfront to date, and now provides fish passage to one of Toronto's most significant coastal marshes. Kortright Centre for Conservation (KCC) marsh's water level is back to its original level of five years ago which gives us buffer capacity to draw from in the summer. Growing out of TRCA's aggregate pit restoration work and partnership project in Uxbridge, we are a Collaborating Partner with Ontario Nature, Township of Uxbridge, Township of Scugog, Ministry of Natural Resources and the aggregate industry to recommend best restoration practices and policies. Infrastructure - Terrestrial natural heritage datasets (flora, fauna and ecological land classification vegetation type) have over 100,000 records. Education and Stewardship - March 23rd story in the Brampton Guardian looks for volunteers to assist with first-of-its-kind wildlife monitoring project on Heart Lake Road, organized by the Ontario Road Ecology Group (OREG) at the Toronto Zoo. TRCA supplied the equipment needed for monitoring and trained volunteers. The York Region branch of TD Friends of the Environment Foundation contributed $20,000 to our "Winged Migration" program at Kortright. Partnerships - Collaborating/in kind partner with the Toronto District School Board, Valley Park Middle School and the community in the Don watershed to establish a $1.4 million Go Green Project at Valley Park Middle School, which includes cricket pitch, downspout disconnects, stormwater management, wetland creation and naturalization.
Sustainable Communities Research and Innovation - Partners in Project Green is half way to sourcing 1% of the Pearson Eco-Business Zone's electricity needs (58,000 MWh) from Bullfrog Power through its Green Power Challenge. TRCA signed on as a founding partner in Bullfrog Power’s green natural gas supply program.
243 Infrastructure - Successfully completed public consultation for Oak Ridges Corridor Park East Management Plan. Education and Stewardship - UNESCO, recognizing TRCA's role in advancing the sustainability agenda, has asked for a chapter submission in a new book on Schooling for Sustainable Development in Canada. The chapter will illustrate the importance of non-formal education organizations supporting schools to teach the mandated curriculum. 50 people attended the Rainwater Harvesting Course, resulting in $7,500 dollars profit. TRCA signs MOU with CISEC Inc. to develop and deliver a Canadian Certified Inspector of Sediment and Erosion Control Program. $20,000 in funding raised from Ministry of the Environment, Aquatech and Groundwater Environmental Management Systems to launch the program. Partnerships - Met with Markham Sustainability Office and they are interested in launching a Markham SNAP (Sustainable Neighbourhood Action Plan). Met with Mississauga's Environmental Network team about the SNAP program and they would like development of a SNAP project in Mississauga. World Green Building Council Board agreed to keep Secretariat based at TRCA indefinitely. Development Planning - In February 22nd story “Battle Lines Drawn” in the Toronto Sun, writer discusses the communities resistance to development being proposed in the Carruthers Creek watershed in Durham Region (Highway 7, Westney Road, Concession Road 8 and Kinsale Road). In February 24th story “Fuel spill prompts call for auto wrecker to move from Rouge Park” InsideToronto.com reports on possible next steps for land affected by car recycling plant fuel spill in Rouge Park. Article includes mention of TRCA’s interest to transfer that land into TRCA ownership. In February 10th Yorkregion.com story “Emotions flare at Observatory” writer discusses a meeting that took place after the release of a Town of Markham staff report, which included comments from TRCA staff, regarding the landowner’s application and environmental plan for the David Dunlap Observatory.
Business Excellence Development Planning - In a January 25th story “Public critiques increases and Debenture” the Caledon Enterprise reports on public budget meetings including a mention of the Caledon Equestrian Park for the impending Pan Am games which sits on a mixture of Town of Caledon and TRCA lands. Education and Stewardship - TRCA is receiving a total of $200,000 over two years from The W. Garfield Weston Foundation to support the expansion of the Monarch Teacher Network of Canada. TRCA and CivicAction's Greening Greater Toronto released The Living City Report Card, a comprehensive and innovative assessment of the environmental health of the Greater Toronto Area. The media event for the launch of The Living City Report Card resulted in 23 media hits including stories in all four of the major dailies: Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, National Post and the Toronto Sun. TRCA staff has been invited to be experts and team leaders as part of the Toronto Office of Emergency Management training program.
244 Met with Vaughan Fire Department about issues of fighting fires where solar panels are present. TRCA will be conducting training workshops and will be collaborating in their province-wide fire conference. We will be sending someone to San Francisco for training on PV systems, and look at options for having a conference here. Infrastructure - Restoration Services has completed a new workshop that is partially heated by biofuels and sawdust waste. Authority approved the development of a lease agreement with City of Toronto for TRCA to operate Glen Rouge Campground and its 124 campsites. Celebrations and Events - Sugarbush Maple Syrup Festival media coverage include hits in The Weather Network, Ming Pao, Rogers Daytime York Region, Global TV, CTV News, CP24 Breakfast Show, Epoch Times, TVO Kids, Toronto Star, National Post, Metroland Papers, Globe and Mail, and York Region Living. Black Creek Pioneer Village’s (BCPV) March Break Fun received several media stories including: CJIQ FM, Global TV, CTV, CP24, North York Mirror, and South Asian Focus. Conservation Foundation (CFGT) is having events with major companies getting their employees into the field doing environmental work. By combining our greenspace, our already planned activities and our staff at TRCA and CFGT, we can offer an inspiring day or half day to groups of employees. As companies learn that employes who volunteer are their most loyal and most productive, they welcome opportunities to participate in meaningful events. Partnerships - BCPV has a new partnership with Minwax and Thompson's WaterSeal, bringing together exceptional heritage buildings and artifacts and quality wood care products that help to protect them. Financial Capacity - 30 people attended a stormwater management training course, resulting in a net profit of $3,000. BCPV has been awarded $10,000 from Small Projects Enabling Accessibility Fund from Human Resources and Skills Development Canada to install seven electronic doors in the Visitors Centre. Great year for the cross country ski program at Albion Hills Conservation Area, generating $127,000 in revenue. New on-line reservation system for TRCA campgrounds is now available at www.reservations.trca.on.ca Human Interest - 55th Annual meeting held. Gerri Lynn O'Connor and Maria Augimeri were re-elected Chair and Vice Chair, respectively. FP Infomart media tracking identified that 95 media hits in print, broadcast and online stories about TRCA and BCPV for January- March 2011. The TRCA website was visited more than 334,000 times during that period, up 11% from in the same period last year. InsideToronto.com, CTV, National Post, Toronto Sun and 24 Hours reported stories regarding TRCA’s request to the City of Toronto for a loan to build a new head office. Brampton Guardian story on March 15th reported on progress on diversion channel in downtown Brampton. In January 8 St. Catherine’s Standard “Mountain biker makes history on park board” includes mention of Albion Hills Conservation Area calling it a “mountain biking heaven”. TV Show Being Erica ran an episode that was shot at BCPV. The New York Times listed the episode details in their “What’s on Today” section.
245 With more than 4,000 views in March, Living City TV on YouTube (where we post TRCA videos) was, temporarily, the number one most viewed not-for-profit YouTube channel in Canada. TRCA staff teams won both the conservation authorities curling bonspiel and hockey tournament.
Report prepared by: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264, Rowena Calpito, extension 5632 Emails: [email protected], [email protected] For Information contact: Kathy Stranks, extension 5264, Rowena Calpito, extension 5632 Emails: [email protected], [email protected] Date: April 8, 2011
______
RES.#A91/11 - WATERSHED COMMITTEE MINUTES
Moved by: Lois Griffin Seconded by: Laurie Bruce
THAT Section IV Item AUTH8.6.1 in regard to Watershed Committee Minutes, be received. CARRIED Section IV Item AUTH8.6.1 DON WATERSHED REGENERATION COUNCIL Minutes of Meeting #2/11, held on February 10, 2011 Minutes of Meeting #3/11, held on March 10, 2011
______
RES.#A92/11 - SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by: Dave Ryan Seconded by: Gloria Lindsay Luby
THAT Section IV item EX9.1 - Lowest Bid Not Accepted, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #3/11, held on April 11, 2011, be received. CARRIED ______
RES.#A93/11 - SECTION IV - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD
Moved by: Vincent Crisanti Seconded by: Linda Pabst
246 THAT Section IV items BAAB8.1 and BAAB8.2, contained in Budget/Audit Advisory Board Minutes #1/11, held on April 11, 2011, be received. CARRIED Section IV Items BAAB8.1 & BAAB8.2 2010 YEAR END FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT (Budget/Audit Res.#C7/11) PURCHASING POLICY (Budget/Audit Res.#C8/11)
______
RES.#A94/11 - APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06
Moved by: Richard Whitehead Seconded by: Bryan Bertie
THAT Ontario Regulation 166/06 items EX10.1 - EX10.71, inclusive, contained in Executive Committee Minutes #3/11, held on April 8, 2011, be received. CARRIED ______
NEW BUSINESS RES.#A95/11 - MEMBERS' ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS
Moved by: Gloria Lindsay Luby Seconded by: John Parker
THAT Resolution #A30/11 in regard to Members' Attendance at Meetings be reopened. CARRIED
MEMBERS' ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS
Moved by: Gloria Lindsay Luby Seconded by: John Parker
THAT Resolution #A30/11 in regard to Members' Attendance at Meetings be rescinded NOT CARRIED
RES.#A96/11 - MEMBERS' ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS
Moved by: John Sprovieri Seconded by: Jim Tovey
247 THAT the current practice of recording attendance of Members at approved meetings of the Authority be amended such that arrival and departure time of Members be recorded.
RECORDED VOTE Maria Augimeri Yea Bryan Bertie Yea Laurie Bruce Yea Bob Callahan Yea Gay Cowbourne Nay Michael Di Biase Yea Chris Fonseca Yea Lois Griffin Nay Colleen Jordan Nay Chin Lee Yea Gloria Lindsay Luby Yea Peter Milczyn Yea Linda Pabst Nay John Parker Yea Dave Ryan Nay John Sprovieri Yea Jim Tovey Yea Richard Whitehead Yea
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED ______
TERMINATION
ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:45 p.m., on Friday, April 29, 2011.
Maria Augimeri Brian Denney Vice Chair Secretary-Treasurer
/ks
248