Eddie Colacchio Chair

David Thomas

Vice-chair

Brian Denney Chief Executive Officer

NOTICE OF MEETING

THE ETOBICOKE-MIMICO WATERSHEDS COALITION #3/13 The Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority will be held on Thursday, December 5, 2013, beginning at 6:30 p.m. at the Black Creek Pioneer Village, located at 1000 Murray Ross Parkway, M3J 2P3. See map on next page. Light dinner will be served to members of the Coalition at 6:00 p.m. Enclosed, please find the agenda and other information which will be considered at the meeting. Kindly confirm attendance by Monday, December 2, 2013. If you have any dietary restrictions/allergies, questions or require further information regarding this agenda, please do not hesitate to contact Cindy Barr at 416-661-6600, extension 5569 or email at cbarr@trca.on.ca. If you are claiming for travelling expenses, please make note of your mileage and make sure it has been documented on the sign-in sheet which will be located at the registration table on December 5, 2013. If you require any directional assistance, or if you are running late the day of the meeting, please call 647.274.3711 (Vince D’Elia).

1

Black Creek Pioneer Village - South Theatre 1000 Murray Ross Parkway

Toronto, ON M3J 2P3 From Hwy 400 (northbound from 401) Take Steeles Avenue exit. Turn left at lights onto Steeles Avenue. Follow Steeles past Jane Street. Turn right onto Murray Ross Parkway at first light past Jane Street. Look for Black Creek Pioneer Village entrance on the right.

From Hwy. 400 (southbound) Exit at Hwy 7. Follow Hwy. 7 eastbound. Turn right (southbound) onto Jane Street. Turn left (eastbound) onto Steeles Avenue. Turn right onto Murray Ross Parkway at first light. Look for Black Creek Pioneer Village entrance on the right. From Hwy 401 Exit at Hwy 400 heading north. Follow instructions above for Hwy 400 (northbound form 401). From Hwy 404: Exit at Hwy. 7. Follow Hwy. 7 westbound to Jane Street. Turn left (south) onto Jane Street. At Steeles Avenue turn left (east) and at the first lights at Murray Ross Parkway turn right (south). Look for Black Creek Pioneer Village entrance on the right. From Hwy 407 Exit at Jane Street. Follow Jane Street southbound. Turn left (eastbound) onto Steeles Avenue. At first light past Jane Street turn right (south) onto Murray Ross Parkway. Look for Black Creek Pioneer Village entrance on the right. Parking Convenient parking is available free of charge. Toronto Transit Commission From the Finch subway station using the Steeles 60 West route, or from the Jane Station using the Jane 35 route. York Region Transit From the York University Terminal take the Route 10 (Woodbridge) bus or the Route 20 (Jane-Concord) bus to Jane Street & Steeles Avenue. From the Vaughan Mills terminal take the Route 20 (Jane-Concord) bus to Jane Street & Steeles Avenue. Walk east from Jane Street & Steeles Avenue. Turn right at Murray Ross Parkway and look for Black Creek Pioneer Village entrance sign on the right.

2

Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition

Meeting #3/13

Thursday, December 5, 2013 6:30 – 9:00 p.m.

Black Creek Pioneer Village

1000 Murray Ross Boulevard, Toronto, ON M3J 2P3

*Dinner will be served at 6:00 p.m.*

AGENDA

Page

1. Call to Order

2. Welcome and Introductions

3. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof

4 Approval of Etobicoke-Mimico Coalition Meeting Minutes #2/13, held on September 19, 2013

5. Presentations (20 minutes)

5.1 Greenbelt Trail: Etobicoke Creek Connection – Shelley Petrie, Program Director, Friends of the Green Belt Foundation

6. Items for Coalition Action (60 minutes)

6.1 Peel Region Channel Remediation Strategy – Spring Creek Pilot (10 minutes) 5

6.2 Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Program (10 min.) 8

6.3 PPG Strategy Update and Membership Campaign (10 min.) 12

6.4 Schedule of Meetings for Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition 2014 (10 min.) 19

6.5 Toronto Water Capital Funding – Water, Waste Water, Stormwater Services (10 min.) 20

6.6 Watershed Champion Recognition Award (5 min.) 22

6.7 Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival Wrap-up Report (5 min.) 25

7. Project Teams and Sub-committee Verbal Updates (15 minutes)

7.1 Brampton Etobicoke Creek Project Team

8. Items for Coalition Information (5 minutes)

8.1 Daylighting Jackson Creek - 300 Valermo Drive 27

8.2 Ontario Trail Strategy for more information visit:

3

<http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/sport/recreation/trail_strategy.shtml>

8.3 Enbridge Pipelines Inc., Line 9b Reversal And Line 9b Capacity Expansion Project 34

8.4 Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Greenland Acquisition Update 50

9. New Business and Good News Stories

10 Adjournment

4

Item 6.1

TO: Members of the Etobicoke‐Mimico Watersheds Coalition, Meeting 3/13, December 5, 2013

FROM: Christine Tu, Senior Aquatic Ecologist RE: Peel Region Channel Remediation Strategy – Spring Creek Pilot

KEY ISSUE

To update the Etobicoke‐Mimico Watersheds Coalition on the Peel Region Channel Remediation Strategy and the completion of the Spring Creek pilot project. RECOMMENDATIONS THAT the staff report on the results and recommendations of the Peel Region Channel Remediation Strategy: Spring Creek Pilot Project be endorsed with support for implementation in Spring Creek;

AND FURTHER THAT previously selected members of the Etobicoke Mimico Watersheds Coalition continue to assist TRCA Staff and provide input and direction towards the implementation of the Peel Region Channel Remediation Strategy. BACKGROUND Many sections of watercourses within the Region of Peel have been channelized with concrete lining or other hard bed and bank treatments. While this past approach was intended to improve the conveyance capacity of streams, current knowledge indicates this treatment is detrimental to the overall health of the aquatic system. The end of the design life of many of these channels is approaching with some major failures already experienced. In time, failing channels can lead to uncontrolled and extreme erosion that may place property and infrastructure at risk as well as contribute to local flooding. In anticipation of weather systems increasing in intensity within southern Ontario, the rate of deterioration may accelerate; sections of concrete that were integral in 2012 were severely damaged during the July 8, 2013 storm event. The Region of Peel and area municipalities have responsibilities for stormwater management, the condition of stream channels and/or adjacent and buried infrastructure associated with the channels. In recognition of these responsibilities, Peel Region has provided funding for Toronto and Region Conservation to develop stream remediation and implementation recommendations that are more compatible with current practice: using natural channel design principles, promoting adaptive management, linking environmental health with human well-being, forming partnerships, and achieving system resiliency at the watershed scale. The watershed vision is supported by this project through developing a stream remediation strategy that identifies and prioritizes where naturalizing channels, across the Region, can maximize benefits without additional regulatory flood risk. The first step towards creating this larger strategy is now complete: the evaluation of Spring Creek, an extensively channelized, urban subwatershed largely located in the City of Brampton. A total of nine priority stream sites were identified as having the potential for extensive

5

naturalization (see attached map). Three priority stream reaches were then determined in recognition that opportunities between the sites still need to be established (i.e, undertake a fluvial-geomorphic assessment). Part of the site prioritization process involved applying relative weights of importance to different categories of interest (identified through consultation) based on two scenarios: urban and non-urban areas. The evaluation results and recommendations for Spring Creek will be presented to and feedback requested from the Technical Advisory Committee and various stakeholders on December 10, 2013. Previously selected member representatives of the Etobicoke Mimico Coalition are scheduled to attend. RATIONALE The development of a strategic approach to naturalizing previously hardened channels will allow for appropriate budgets to be targeted and for pro‐active remediation of channels. Without the strategy, regional and area municipalities will likely have to continue responding to channel failures after major storm events. This approach will not necessarily reduce risk to infrastructure or maximize the opportunities to improve the ecosystem health, amenity or aesthetic values of the affected stream channels and valley corridors, all of which this project aims to address. Report prepared by: Christine Tu For more information: Christine Tu, ctu@trca.on.ca

416‐661‐6600, ext. 5707 Vince D’Elia, vdelia@trca.on.ca

416‐661‐6600, extension 5667

Date: November 15, 2013

Attachment: Priority Reaches and Sites – Urban Scenario, October 2013

6

ATTACHMENT 6.1

7

Item 6.2

TO: Members of the Etobicoke‐Mimico Watersheds Coalition, Meeting 3/13, December 5, 2013

FROM: Cliff Coppolino, Project Manager, Watershed Planning, Peel SNAP RE: SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBOURHOOD RETROFIT ACTION PLAN

KEY ISSUE

To update the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition on the County Court Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan (SNAP) Project. RECOMMENDATIONS THAT the Sustainable Neighbourhood Retrofit Action Plan (SNAP) update be received for information; AND THAT Coalition members residing in the cities of Mississauga and Brampton promote the program activities through their networks and participate as appropriate in the implementation of SNAP program within the Etobicoke and Mimico watersheds; AND FURTHER THAT a copy of this report be forwarded to the Brampton Etobicoke Creek Project Team for information. BACKGROUND The SNAP projects represent an innovative model for sustainable urban renewal. SNAPs are plans for measurable environmental improvement and community transformation that align with local community interests and implementation challenges. The plans address the multiple objectives of municipalities, TRCA and other partners. With this in mind, municipal departments and a wide range of community partners are involved in the planning process through a variety of forums. The pilot SNAP was initiated in 2009 in Brampton and a new SNAP was launched in 2012 in the City of Mississauga. County Court SNAP, Brampton Located in the Etobicoke-Mimico creeks watershed, this SNAP is aimed at improving the water management functions of the Upper Nine stormwater management pond and its catchment, a facility identified as a top retrofit priority by the City of Brampton. The project is engaging businesses, residents and institutions in identifying integrated retrofit solutions to achieve water management and biodiversity targets, while achieving other sustainable community objects and creating a stronger sense of place and identity in the neighbourhood.

8

The following section summarizes the County Court action plan and implementation projects currently underway. Action Plan The County Court SNAP promotes place making and suburban renewal. Action Plan recommendations include:

Retrofit of the aging Upper Nine stormwater pond to address water quality and volume and to serve as a community amenity and natural area destination;

Renewal of County Court Park to better suit recreational needs and integrate environmental education features and community gathering spaces;

The enhancement of the urban forest;

Improvement of water bioretention along the boulevards to provide stormwater filtration and other benefits;

A system of neighbourhood rainwater harvesting and storage as an irrigation option for nearby golf clubs;

Habitat restoration along the creek valley and its reaches within golf courses;

Green parking lot design at the Court House as a model for other pave spaces; and

Active promotion of green home renovation and landscape to address energy and water conservation.

Expected Outcomes The SNAP was designed to meet or exceed established municipal and watershed management targets. Highlights include:

The expansion of the urban forest (from 8 percent to 18 percent of area);

Green Home Makeover and residential retrofit program to reduce water (31 percent) and energy use (39 percent);

Rainwater harvesting for irrigation (providing 100 percent of water needs; offset municipal water use and water taking from creek);

The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (18 percent); and

Improved ecoservices which have resulted in 540 tonnes of carbon storage, 214 tonnes of carbon sequestration and 11 tonnes of pollution removal.

Current Implementation County Court Boulevard Bio-swales One of the first actions of the Implementation Team was to identify an Action Plan recommendation that could be transformed into a quick-win project with visible impact on the neighbourhood. This exercise led to the identification of the first priority project for 2014, the installation of two bio-swales on County Court Boulevard. Bio-swales are innovative stormwater facilities that reduce stormwater runoff, improve the quality of stormwater entering streams while providing habitat for birds and insects. The planned bio-swales are being planted in late summer / early fall of 2014.

9

Coffee Nights As we work towards implementing these projects over the next few years, we want to make sure the residents continue to be engaged throughout the process. Each month TRCA has held informal meetings or “coffee nights” at a local Tim Horton’s in the County Court neighbourhood. The meetings have been a great venue for neighbours to get to know each other, and has allow TRCA to provide an update on SNAP related activities while gathering feedback from residents. Green Home Makeover The Green Home Makeover is a key demonstration of the County Court SNAP. This demonstration is part of a targeted effort to promote residential participation in indoor and outdoor green home renovation. Green Home Program The next phase of the residential retrofit program has taken a more focused approach around energy. This fall TRCA rolled out a home efficiency program designed to save residents money. With help from Royal Bank of Canada and Enbridge, TRCA offered twenty free energy audits to homeowners in the County Court neighbourhood. Burnhamthorpe SNAP, Mississauga Adjacent to the main branch of the Etobicoke Creek, the Burnhamthorpe SNAP has recently completed the first of three phases. Phase 1 titled “Scoping and Characterization,” examined the neighbourhood and provided a resident profile; citizens’ sustainability concerns; baseline conditions; retrofit options and synergies; a draft sustainability framework; and community engagement / behaviour change ideas. Phase 1 Report Findings The 432 ha area was developed twenty five to forty years ago and has a population of 21,000. There are four distinct neighbourhoods within the largely residential urban region. Existing conditions for storm water management, water use, natural heritage, energy and carbon, active transportation and health and well-being were collected, and goals and potential actions were created for each. Complementary themes consist of culture and place-making and integrated waste management. Emerging retrofit themes include:

Fusion landscaping;

Downspout disconnection in low density areas;

Energy, water and stormwater retrofits for higher density residential, commercial plazas and schools;

Renewal of public spaces;

Enhancement of urban forest and natural heritage;

Promotion of active transportation, neighbourhood greenways and improved north-south active transportation routes; and

Local food sharing and urban agriculture.

10

Phase 2 objectives include:

Analysis of retrofit options;

Assessment/analysis to identify strategic projects;

Develop emerging overall SNAP concept;

Engage key implementation partners, community and other stakeholders;

Identify strategic behaviours to target;

Identify and develop demonstration/engagement project(s) Phase 3 objectives include:

Action plan and implementation plan development;

Develop final integrated SNAP Action Plan;

Engage key implementation partners, members of the community and other stakeholders;

Develop and pilot behaviour change strategy for selected behaviour(s); and

Develop and promote engagement/demonstration project(s). Current Projects Various activities to engage the residents of the Burnhamthorpe SNAP neighbourhood have occurred to date, including a fall tree planting and litter cleanup and two gardening workshops delivered by the TRCA stewardship team. TRCA is currently in the process of organizing a pilot active transportation program with two local schools in the neighbourhood. The goal of this program is to encourage families to use alternative ways for students to get to school in a way that doesn’t involve an automobile. Phase 2 report and further updates will be ready for distribution in January of 2014. Report prepared by: Clifton Coppolino, extension 5367, ccoppolino@trca.on.ca For information contact: Clifton Coppolino

Vince D’Elia, extension 5667, vdelia@trca.on.ca Or visit: www.sustainableneighbourhoods.ca. Date: November 21, 2013

11

Item 6.3 TO: Members of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition, TRCA

Meeting #3/13 – December 5, 2013 FROM: Chandra Sharma, Etobicoke-Mimico Watershed Specialist, and Watershed Management Division RE: PPG Strategy Update and Membership Campaign

KEY ISSUE To update the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition on the Partners in Project Green Strategy Update; governance committee structure; and membership recruitment campaign. RECOMMENDATIONS

THAT the Partners in Project Green Strategy Update be received as information;

THAT members of the Coalition reach out to area businesses and encourage them to become members in Partners in Project Green;

BACKGROUND Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone was developed by the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), the Region of Peel, City of Toronto, City of Brampton, City of Mississauga and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to transform the lands surrounding Toronto Pearson into an internationally recognized community of eco-friendly businesses. The Partners in Project Green Steering Committee was first established in 2008 in response to a recommendation in the approved Partners in Project Green: A Pearson Eco-Business Zone Strategy, 2008. Since then, the Steering Committee has completed two very successful terms during which members have provided exceptional support and service to the Pearson Eco-Business Zone. After the successful implementation of the Partners in Project Green strategy for almost five years, the current Partners in Project Green Executive Committee agreed that important directional and structural changes were required in order to improve the effectiveness of Partners in Project Green programming and ensure that its objectives remain aligned with the evolving needs of its stakeholders. PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN: STRATEGY UPDATE Building on the current Partners in Project Green vision, existing and emerging competencies, stakeholder consultation as well as a thorough program review and evaluation, the following three prong strategy was devised with the help of consultants at The Innovolve Group and endorsed by the Partners in Project Green Executive Committee to help ensure the program’s strengths and resources are more efficiently and effectively leveraged to meet the evolving needs of its stakeholders (Figure 1):

12

1. STRENGTHENING effectiveness of program mix in driving sustainable operational excellence and sustainable innovation by focusing resources on four main performance areas: energy performance, water stewardship, waste management, and communications & engagement.

2. STREAMLINING program delivery structure to enhance accountability and execution by evolving Partners in Project Green’s governance structure and revising its performance metrics.

3. DEVELOPING new capacity for advancing sustainability innovation and generating new revenues by exploring and developing new self-sustaining revenue streams.

To see the complete strategy document, please visit: http://www.partnersinprojectgreen.com/files/Reports/PPG_Strategy_Update_2013_FINAL.pdf

Figure 1 - Partners in Project Green Strategy Update

PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN VISION Create the Pearson Eco-Business Zone, an internationally recognized community known for its competitive, high performance and eco-friendly business climate.

13

PARTNERS IN PROJECT GREEN GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE Recognizing the need to drive a greater degree of action and accountability, the Partners in Project Green Executive Committee endorsed the implementation of a new governance structure (Figure 2) that incorporates the following major enhancements:

Executive Management Committee (Table 1) – introduction of the Executive Management Committee, as well as its roles and meeting structure in lieu of the current Executive and Steering committees.

Strategic in nature and smaller than the combined Executive and Steering committees, the Executive Management Committee will be established as a subcommittee to TRCA with the purpose of: assisting businesses in the Pearson Eco-Business Zone to improve their financial and environmental performance; retaining and attracting green investment in the Pearson Eco-Business Zone; and, acting as a catalyst for new ideas, innovation, excellence and improvement in the employment lands encompassed by the Pearson Eco-Business Zone.

Performance Committees – addition of Performance Committees, as well as their roles and meeting structure.

Reporting to two Executive Management Committee members, Performance Committees will be established as subcommittees to the Executive Management Committee and oversee more operational objectives. As such, Performance Committees will be task-oriented and formed based on Executive Management Committee priorities to: contribute to the realization of the Partners in Project Green vision and Executive Management Committee mandate; and, contribute to the successful development and implementation of new and existing Partners in Project Green programs within its four new areas of focus.

Service Centres – addition of Service Centres, as well as their roles and meeting structure.

Reporting to the Executive Management Committee, Service Centres will be established as subcommittees to the Executive Management Committee (Figure 2). As such, Service Centres will be task-oriented and formed based on Executive Management Committee priorities to: contribute to the successful development and implementation of new and existing Partners in Project Green self-sustaining revenue streams; and, contribute to the realization of the Executive Management Committee's mandate.

14

Figure 2 - Partners in Project Green's Revised Governance Structure

15

Table 1 - Current Executive Management Committee Members

Business Community1 Mike Brandt Monteco Group (ONEIA)

2 Brad Chittick Canadian Tire

3 John Coyne Unilever

4 Jonathan Davies General Electric

5 Neil Lacheur Bentall Kennedy

6 Toby Lennox GTAA

7 Trevor Lui International Centre

8 Sean Brady Ontario Power Authority

Municipal Representation9 Councillor Shelley Carroll City of Toronto

10 Councillor Bonnie Crombie Region of Peel

11 Councillor Chris Fonseca City of Mississauga

12 Councillor John Sanderson City of Brampton

13 Learie Miller Region of Peel

Conservation Authorities14 Brian Denney TRCA

15 John Kinkead CVC

NEW MEMBERSHIP PROGRAM

A 4-month 2014 membership recruitment campaign aiming to increase the number of active Partners in Project Green members was officially launched on November 5, 2013 The new membership program has four levels: Participant, Member, Ambassador and Eco-Solution Provider (Figure 3). Each level includes specific program benefits, commitments, and associated fees (Figure 4). Benefits include: preferential pricing on programs and events, access to member only tools and resources, and facilitated access to other businesses in the network. To see all benefits associated with each level, please visit www.partnersinprojectgreen.com/membership. The introduction and enforcement of slightly higher membership fees was driven by the need to increase business engagement. Although low membership fees may have helped to grow the Partners in Project Green community in the early stages of the program, it may also have diluted the perceived value of the membership over time. In other words, current members may be more compelled to extract value in the associations for which they pay considerable fees because of the financial motivation to obtain a return on their investment. By charging fair value and enhancing member benefits and responsibilities, Partners in Project Green will take significant steps towards the achievement of its performance objectives.

16

Figure 3- New Partners in Project Green Membership Levels

17

Figure 4 - New Partners in Project Green Member Benefits & Responsibilities

Report prepared by: Alex Dumesle For information contact: Alex Dumesle, 416-661-6600 ext. 5316 Date: November 22, 2013

18

Item 6.4 TO: Members of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition, TRCA

Meeting #3/13 – December 5, 2013 FROM: Chandra Sharma, Etobicoke-Mimico Watershed Specialist, and Watershed Management Division RE: COALITION MEETING SCHEDULE 2014

KEY ISSUE A schedule of meeting dates is proposed for the Etobicoke-Mimico Watershed Coalition. RECOMMENDATIONS THAT the meeting dates for the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on the following dates be approved; AND FURTHER THAT the meetings be held at the Black Creek Pioneer Village, unless otherwise noted. 2014 DATES #1/14 Thursday, March 20, 2014 #2/14 Thursday, June 19, 2014 #3/14 Thursday, September 18, 2014 #4/14 Thursday, December 4, 2014 RATIONALE A schedule of meetings is proposed to assist the Coalition. TRCA staff did an examination of the dates of municipality meetings to avoid conflict with council meetings within the Etobicoke and Mimico Creek Watersheds. Meeting will be held on the third Thursday of the month quarterly. TRCA will provide meeting space to the Coalition on a regular basis at the Black Creek Pioneer Village. This location is central to the watershed and easily accessible. However, the Coalition is encouraged to have meetings at various locations throughout the watershed. Suggestions for other meeting locations are welcome. Subcommittee meetings will be hosted locally within the Project Team areas. Report prepared by: Cindy Barr, 416.661.6600, extension 5569, cbarr@trca.on.ca For information contact: Cindy Barr Date: November 4, 2013

19

Item 6.5 TO: Members of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition, TRCA

Meeting #3/13 – December 5, 2013 FROM: Chandra Sharma, Etobicoke-Mimico Watershed Specialist, and Watershed Management Division RE: FUTURE OPTIONS FOR TORONTO WATER CAPITAL FUNDING – WATER,

WASTEWATER, STORMWATER, INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES

KEY ISSUE

To update the Etobicoke‐Mimico Watersheds Coalition on the City of Toronto Water financing. RECOMMENDATIONS THAT a brief overview on the City of Toronto Water financing be received for information; AND FURTHER THAT the Planning and Policy Team collaborate with other TRCA watershed groups to provide input to the City of Toronto on the next round of public consultation on stormwater financing. Background Every day, Toronto Water provides safe drinking water for 3.4 million residents and businesses in Toronto and portions of York; safely treats wastewater from 2.8 million residents and businesses in Toronto and a portion of Peel; and provides stormwater management to protect private property and the environment. In addition to these services, Toronto Water also manages several capital projects related to wet weather flow management including addressing issues related to combined sewer overflow. Toronto Water has indicated that, due to falling water usage, its capital budget faces a projected $1.1 billion funding gap thru 2021. As a result, capital projects are at risk unless certain actions are taken. If Toronto Water is to address these capital projects as priorities, then additional funding must be identified. The current capital funding strategy of 9% rate increases ends after 2014 and, without amending the existing financing strategy, these unfunded projects will not be accommodated within the current 10-year projected funding envelope. The alternatives are to: (1) re-prioritize projects, with the result that funded projects would be deferred in order to accommodate the unfunded projects; or, (2) increase revenues so that priorities can be addressed. Next Steps Toronto staff will undertake detailed studies and stakeholder consultation on the funding options during 2014. The consultation will include meetings with stakeholders, open houses, and information sessions with the public. The results of the consultation and analysis will be reported to Council as part of Toronto Water's 2015 Capital and Operating Budget submission with recommendations on the preferred option(s) or combination of options, along with an implementation plan for the recommended option(s).

20

Background report for more information can be found online at: Future Options and Public Attitudes for Paying for Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Infrastructure and Services, City of Toronto, October 16, 2013 http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/bu/bgrd/backgroundfile-50009.pdf Toronto Water Capital Program Funding Pressures and Financing Options, City of Toronto, September 10, 2012 http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/bu/bgrd/backgroundfile-50009.pdf

Report prepared by: Vince D’Elia, 416.661.6600, extension 5667, vdelia@trca.on.ca For information contact: Vince D’Elia Date: November 4, 2013

ATTACHMENT: Toronto Water Funding, Don Watershed Regeneration Council, October 5, 2012 https://www.dropbox.com/s/rz3gp4xyeanpwtt/Toronto%20Water%20Funding%20-%20DWRC%20Review%20%202012-10-05.pdf

21

Item 6.6 TO: Members of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition, TRCA

Meeting #3/13 – December 5, 2013 FROM: Vince D’Elia, Project Manager, Etobicoke-Mimico Watershed RE: WATERSHED CHAMPION RECOGNITION

KEY ISSUE To recognize the work of Etobicoke-Mimico Watershed Coalition and Project Team members. RECOMMENDATIONS THAT that staff report on Watershed Champion Recognition for Etobicoke-Mimico Watershed Coalition 2013-2015 term be received; THAT Bob Noble be recognized as the 2013 Watershed Champion for his contribution to Coalition work within the City of Brampton and specifically on the Heart Lake Road Ecology Monitoring Project; AND FURTHER THAT Coalition members nominate candidates from the Coalition and Project Teams who have significantly contributed to the mandate of the Etobicoke-Mimico Coalition. BACKGROUND TRCA has a Service Recognition Award Program that recognizes annually Authority members, CFGT members, members of TRCA’s watershed councils, TRCA staff and volunteers, based on years of service.

The Watershed Champion Recognition has been instituted by the Etobicoke-Mimico staff to laud the efforts of Coalition members on a regular basis. CRITERIA Nominated individual has gone above and beyond their expected volunteer commitments to

contribute to the objectives of Coalition;

The nominated individual has provided exceptional leadership on the Coalition or a Project Team and is a positive role model for others;

The individual is a good ambassador for the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition and Project Teams;

The individual is innovative in getting the word out about the Etobicoke-Mimico Creeks watershed; and

The individual champions sound ideas which could positively impact the watersheds and TRCA Living City objectives.

22

PROCEDURE If you would like to nominate someone for the Watershed Champion Recognition, please do so one month before the Coalition meeting. Nominations should be emailed to Cindy Barr (cbarr@trca.on.ca) and will be reviewed by the Chair’s Committee and staff. The nomination should include a short biography (60 – 100 words) of the person’s contribution. Report prepared by: Vince D’Elia, 416.661.6600, extension 5237 vdelia@trca.on.ca For information contact: Vince D’Elia Date: November 19, 2013 Attachment: Bob Noble - December 5, 2013

23

Watershed Champion Recognition 2013

Bob Noble

Bob Noble, a resident of Brampton and an avid birder, has been a Coalition member for seven years. Bob also sits on Brampton Etobicoke Creek Project Team. In addition to his membership in these groups, he has volunteered his time and participated in several events and projects within the watershed. Recently, Bob has contributed extensive time and expertise to the Heart Lake Road Ecology Monitoring Project. This study commenced in 2011 with volunteers collecting data of wildlife fatalities along Heart Lake Road between Sandalwood Parkway and Mayfield Road where it bisects a Provincially Significant Wetland. Phase II of the study began in March 2013, and as well as field monitoring, Bob managed the project’s data and thousands of images associated with project data. Bob’s ongoing volunteer efforts in his community have contributed greatly to success in TRCA’s goal to educate and encourage stewardship participation throughout its jurisdiction.

Date of Award

December 5, 2013

24

Item 6.7

TO: Members of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition Meeting #3/13 – December 5, 2013 FROM: Joanna Parsons, Coordinator, Public Programs, Etobicoke-Mimico RE: Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival Wrap Up Report KEY ISSUE Provide an event wrap-up for the Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival. RECOMMENDATIONS THAT staff report on the 2013 Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival be received for Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition information; THAT the organizing committee for the 2013 Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival be thanked for hosting a successful event; AND FURTHER THAT members of the Coalition be encouraged to participate on the planning committee for the 2014 Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival. BACKGROUND On Saturday, September 14, 2013 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), with the help of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition members, hosted the inaugural Heart Lake Dragon Boat Festival. The inaugural event had five teams – SNC Lavalin, Pratt and Whitney, Dillon Pinto Re/Max Champions Realty Inc., TRCA Fire Breathers and TRCA Team Boyd. Each team was required to pay $750 as a registration fee and encouraged to do additional fund raising. Approximately $3500 was raised. The top fundraising team was SNC Lavalin. The top three individual fundraisers were Jeffrey Pang (Pratt and Whitney), Ange Brooks (SNC Lavalin) and Eddie Colacchio (TRCA Fire Breathers). Funds raised through the event are dedicated to restoration projects in the headwaters of the Etobicoke and Mimico Creek Watersheds. Great White North Dragon Boat provided each team with additional training which is typically not possible at events with greater numbers of competitors. In addition, a “fun” race was included where interested teams had to paddle backwards for a short distance. All of this added to the atmosphere camaraderie and enjoyment of the day. Teams were assigned race times and then based on times were placed in two divisions. The winners of the Consolation Division and the Championship Division were given medals during a ceremony at the end of the day. The teams that won were Pratt and Whitney (consolation) and TRCA Team Boyd (championship).

25

In October, members of the planning team and TRCA staff met to debrief the event. The feedback will be helpful in planning the 2014 event. NEXT STEPS

Get details about the event out as early as possible in order to secure teams for the event.

Improving marketing and communications to ensure the success of this event. A Request for Proposal (RFP) was sent out November 19, 2013 to contract a dragon boat provider for a period of three years at which point the Coalition and TRCA will re-evaluate the event’s success. Report prepared by: Joanna Parsons For more information: Joanna Parsons, jparsons@trca.on.ca 416-661-6600, extension 5575 Date: November 14, 2013

26

P a g e | 1

Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca

October 15, 2013 VIA EMAIL councillor_crisanti@toronto.ca, HARD COPY TO FOLLOW Vincent Crisanti Councillor, Ward 1, Etobicoke North Toronto City Hall 100 Queen Street West, Suite C48 Toronto, ON M5H 2N2 Dear Councillor Crisanti: Re: EY28.6 - Preliminary Report - 300 Valermo Drive - Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision Applications We are writing on behalf of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition (Coalition). The Coalition is a watershed stakeholder group that works with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to achieve the vision of revitalized creeks and watersheds in our communities. We understand that there is a current application to the City of Toronto for the redevelopment of a former school site (Alderwood Collegiate Institute) located at 300 Valermo in Alderwood, Etobicoke. We are aware that a historic watercourse called Jackson Creek flows (intermittently) through the western part of the property and would like to ensure that this opportunity is used to restore this historic watercourse and retain it within public ownership. Historically, Jackson Creek flowed south of the QEW (now Gardiner Expressway) through Douglas Park, across the Alderwood Collegiate property (it appears to have been shunted to the western boundary of the lot when the school was built) and then south to Lake Ontario. Much of the creek has been buried underground, but a few portions still remain aboveground. Detailed documentation of historic alignment and current conditions of Jackson creek has been provided in the document “Lost Creeks of South Etobicoke” (http://lostcreeksofsouthetobicoke.blogspot.com) and a short summary is enclosed with this letter (please refer to Attachment 1). TRCA began concerted restoration activities in the Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks watersheds in 1998 when it published the State of the Watershed Report. More recently, in 2011,TRCA published a Technical Update that includes strategic policies and management directions to improve the health of the Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks watersheds, including the lands that drain to Lake Ontario (an executive summary can be found at: http://www.trca.on.ca/protect/watersheds/etobicoke-mimico-creek/resources.dot).

27

P a g e | 2

Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca

Day-lighting and restoring creeks that have been buried or degraded is one of our strategic directions, as illustrated on the enclosed map (Lake Ontario Drainage Regeneration Plan). These actions will help to restore environmental quality in our urban neighbourhoods by increasing greenspace, improving the management of water quantity and quality, and enhancing the availability and connection of wildlife habitats and migration corridors. In November 2011 the Etobicoke-Mimico Watesheds Coalition wrote to the local councillor Mark Grimes copying Toronto Planning Staff (please refer to Attachment 2) requesting:

that the City of Toronto, through the planning process, acquire a Parkland contribution of the old Jackson Creek property on the west side of Alderwood Collegiate Site;

that the Jackson Creek watercourse is acknowledged and enhanced by restoring and daylighting the portions of the creek and that the developer provide funding to assist with the restoration of the creek;

that on-site stormwater management measures are incorporated into the new development to reduce impacts of development and paved surfaces; and

that opportunities for environmental education are considered through proposed restoration of historic Jackson Creek watercourse.

It would also satisfy polices in the City of Toronto Official Plan under “The Natural Environment” (Section 3.4) that speak to:

“protecting, restoring and enhancing the health and integrity of the natural ecosystem, supporting bio-diversity in the City and targeting ecological improvements, paying particular attention” to “habit for native flora and fauna and aquatic species”, “water and sediment quality”, “landforms” “watercourses”, and “natural linkages between the natural heritage system and other green spaces”;

“reducing the adverse effects of stormwater and snow melt based on a hierarchy of watershed-based wet weather flow practices which recognize that wet weather flow is most effectively managed where it falls, supplemented by conveyance, then end-of-pipe solutions”;

“New development will include stormwater management in accordance with best management practices. This should include source control and on-site facilities to manage stormwater where rain and snow fall, and to ensure it does not produce a net increase in stormwater flows or degrade stormwater quality.

We thank the City of Toronto for its continued investment in our river valleys and greenspace and we kindly ask that you consider our request as part of the review for this proposed development. As you know, we do not want to miss this opportunity to improve the health of the watershed and allow for public access to much needed green space. Yours sincerely, Eddie Colacchio David Thomas, Chair, Vice Chair, Etobicoke_Mimico Watersheds Coalition Etobicoke_Mimico Watersheds Coalition

28

P a g e | 3

Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca

/Encl. cc: Chair and Members, Etobicoke-York Community Council Mark Grimes, Councillor, Ward 6, City of Toronto Chandra Sharma, Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Specialist, Toronto and Region Conservation Rosemary Mackenzie, Committee Secretary, Etobicoke-York Community Council

29

P a g e | 4

Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca

Attachment 1: Excerpt from ‘Lost Creeks of South Etobicoke: The History and Restoration of the Lost Creeks of South Etobicoke(Present Day City of Toronto)’ Blog http://lostcreeksofsouthetobicoke.blogspot.com/

This map shows the lost creeks of south Etobicoke (present day City of Toronto) as they existed in 1811 superimposed over the street grid of today, courtesy of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. I first began the study of these creeks in 1996 when I researched and wrote Toward the Ecological Restoration of South Etobicoke. At the time, I was the President of the Citizens Concerned About the Future Of The Etobicoke Waterfront (CCFEW), a not-for-profit group dedicated to the protection and restoration of the waterfront in south Etobicoke. The report documented the environmental history of the area, and proposed a number of restoration projects. Since that date many of the restoration projects have been accomplished in partnership with the Toronto & Region Conservation Authority and the City of Toronto, while some are still under consideration. Copies of the report are in the circulating collection of the Toronto Public Library. I took up the research again in 2008 when I was asked to write a chapter on the lost creeks for HTO Toronto's Water from Lake Iroquois to Lost Rivers to Low-flow Toilets, published by Coach House Press in 2008. At the time of my original research I was only concerned with the area south of the Gardiner Expressway as it is a natural northern boundary for south Etobicoke. Remnants of these creeks still existed in certain locations in south Etobicoke. I had thought that all the post WWII development north of the Gardiner Expressway would have obliterated any trace of these historic creeks long ago. How wrong I was! I was surprised to discover that Jackson Creek still flows above ground for a considerable distance to the north.

30

P a g e | 5

Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca

This is the story of the lost creeks of south Etobicoke. The 1811 patent map that lists the original landowners in what is now south Etobicoke provides an excellent view of the creeks that existed at that time, including North, Jackson, Superior and Bonar Creeks. The lives of these watercourses were inextricably linked to the use of the land within their watersheds. Originally covered by thick forests, these watersheds evolved over thousands of years to become a finely tuned and balanced system that produced a steady flow of cool, clear and pristine water abounding in sensitive coldwater fish species such as salmon. While most creeks and streams in the old City of Toronto were buried in sewer lines long ago, many of the original creeks and streams of south Etobicoke survived into the mid 20th century - and some significant portions still exist today! It took some considerable good luck and fortune that they lasted as long as they did. A considerable distance west of Simcoe’s new capital of York, the progression of south Etobicoke from forest to agricultural fields, and finally urban development was slower than areas closer to Toronto. However you can still catch glimpses of many of these creeks and streams if you know where to look. I can be contacted at lostcreeksofetobicoke at hotmail.com.

31

P a g e | 6

Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca

Attachment 2:

32

P a g e | 7

Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca

33

Item AUTH7.2

Item 8.3

TO: Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #8/13, October 25, 2013

FROM: Carolyn Woodland, Director, Planning and Development RE: ENBRIDGE PIPELINES INC., LINE 9B REVERSAL AND LINE 9B CAPACITY

EXPANSION PROJECT ____________________________________________________________________________ KEY ISSUE Update on Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's written argument submitted to the National Energy Board regarding the Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project. RECOMMENDATION THAT the written argument Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff submitted to the National Energy Board (NEB) on October 3, 2013, regarding the Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project, be received; AND FURTHER THAT staff be directed to report back to the Authority regarding the National Energy Board future decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the project. BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #2/13, held on March 22, 2013, amended Resolution #A27/13 was approved as follows: WHEREAS concerns of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) related to the Enbridge Pipelines Incorporated (Enbridge) Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project (Project)are focused on its role as watershed managers, landowners and through its obligations under Ontario Regulation 166/06; AND WHEREAS TRCA has submitted a letter to the National Energy Board (NEB) commenting on the List of Issues that will be addressed by the board; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT staff continue to consult with affected municipalities and agencies on common issues and concerns; THAT staff initiate a dialogue with Enbridge to review issues of concern to TRCA and determine if an agreement can be reached with Enbridge to address TRCA interests in the Project; THAT staff file an application to participate in the NEB Hearing on or before the April 11, 2013 deadline to participate as an Intervenor, thus ensuring that if an agreement with Enbridge cannot be reached, TRCA can advance its interests through the NEB; THAT TRCA staff be directed to concurrently negotiate with Enbridge and participate in the NEB hearing; THAT if TRCA’s interests are addressed by written agreement with Enbridge, that TRCA staff report back to the Authority;

34

THAT staff continue to work with Enbridge in the implementation of its Integrity Dig Program to ensure TRCA regulatory requirements are met; AND FURTHER THAT TRCA request that Enbridge release publicly the most up-to-date data on the integrity of Line 9 Pipeline prior to June 1, 2013. Intervenor Status TRCA was granted intervenor status in the NEB process. This status allowed TRCA to ask Enbridge for information related to its expressed concerns, and for Enbridge to respond. Through this process, TRCA could have submitted written evidence, or appeared at a hearing with an oral presentation. TRCA worked within the process set forth by the NEB, and chose to prepare a written argument. Throughout the process, TRCA continued to work with municipalities, other conservation authorities and Enbridge itself, to discuss concerns and solutions. TRCA Information Requests to Enbridge Part of the NEB hearing process allows for the intervenors to request information of Enbridge, for Enbridge to respond, and then for the intervenors to ask for additional information based on the response to both themselves, and the response to others. TRCA information requests related to Enbridge's reactive response to spills or leaks, pipeline integrity, in stream and valley monitoring, emergency shut off valves, travel time modelling and an ecosystem based compensation protocol in the event of a spill. RATIONALE As per Authority direction of March 22, 2013, staff initiated a dialogue with Enbridge regarding the review of TRCA issues and concerns. Based on the legal advice from both TRCA and Enbridge representatives, it was agreed that TRCA and Enbridge should manage their discussions within the framework of the NEB process, and not seek an agreement that would be outside of the process. TRCA staff prepared written evidence, met with Enbridge, and prepared its written argument as per the NEB process. Throughout this process, the open dialogue with Enbridge was maintained. Staff has also maintained an open dialogue with other conservation authorities and municipalities regarding issues of common concern, primarily including spills response and management, and pipeline integrity. Enbridge has advised that for security reasons, it does not publicize the precise location of the integrity digs, however this information is communicated to the affected landowners and municipalities when the digs are initiated. Permits are required from TRCA if the digs are located within regulated areas. To date, four permits have been issued by TRCA, three applications are currently under review, and three applications have been screened with confirmation that they are outside TRCA's regulated area. All permits issued to date have been by staff through the routine infrastructure permitting process, and then brought to the Executive Committee for their information. Additionally, TRCA has issued a permission to enter into the Greenwood Conservation Area to undertake an integrity dig. This area was screened by planning staff who determined no permit was required. TRCA Written Evidence to the NEB On August 2, 2013, TRCA filed written evidence with the NEB. The TRCA's evidence focused on:

1. Reducing the environmental impact of malfunctions or accidents. 2. Pipeline monitoring strategies and spills prevention. 3. Spill response and emergency planning, including timelines for response. 4. Maintaining ecosystem integrity.

35

TRCA based its concerns on its roles as a watershed manager, landowner and regulator. Specific reference was made to TRCA's authority and responsibilities under the Conservation Authorities Act , Ontario Regulation 166/06, the Clean Water Act , and in terms of its level 3 agreement with Fisheries and Ocean Canada for review under the Fisheries Act. Specifically, TRCA's concerns relate to:

1. The risk of a spill as related to exposure or failure in valleys, streams or wetlands, and how the risk of a spill will be mitigated, or in the worst case, how the terrestrial, aquatic and open space systems will be protected, rehabilitated and/or restored.

2. Spills prevention. 3. Collection and analysis of baseline information in advance of any spill that is related to

proactive pipeline exposure and failure risk assessment, spills response planning, and rehabilitation and restoration planning.

Staff recommended that Enbridge consider its Interim Technical Guidelines for the Development of Environmental Management Plans for Underground Infrastructure (Revised July 2013) available on the TRCA website http://trca.on.ca/dotAsset/167180.pdf. The guidelines were developed by staff over a number of years through working with proponents of sewer, gas and oil pipeline infrastructure under emergency situations. Enbridge can use these guidelines to develop a proactive approach to managing potential failures or fractures of pipelines in valley and stream corridors and wetland areas, and as a means of ensuring the protection, mitigation and restoration of TRCA's terrestrial, aquatic and open space systems. TRCA’s evidence included information on the nine major watersheds within TRCA’s jurisdiction. This evidence comprised general environmental information; potential impacts of a crude oil release on the terrestrial and aquatic environments; TRCA's existing monitoring infrastructure; requirement for a proactive approach to pipeline failure; and a case study of the Rouge River watershed. A copy of the full report can be found on the NEB's website at: http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/fetch.asp?language=E&ID=A53263. Case Study - Morningside Creek, Rouge River Watershed The Rouge River watershed south of Line 9B, with its numerous environmentally significant areas and wetlands, is a significant component of TRCA’s Natural Heritage System. South of the Line 9B pipeline, most of the Rouge River watershed is protected through its ownership by TRCA and its designation as Rouge Park. Like all watersheds in TRCAs jurisdiction, Ontario Regulation 166/06 permits are required for proponent's works in a regulated area. Throughout information provided by Enbridge to TRCA and others, it has been consistently stated that Enbridge will have sufficient time and means to mitigate a spill from the Line 9B pipeline, there will be little impact downstream, and that the spill will not reach Lake Ontario. TRCA has expressed concern with these assumptions for a number of reasons:

a) Mitigation provided by Enbridge appears to be under base flows conditions; there is no modelling under storm conditions (high flow conditions).

b) Mitigation assumes responders will know where and how to access the downstream spill location; modelling has not been completed and access points have not been mapped.

c) Mitigation assumes that all spill impacts can be restored or rehabilitated; baseline information as to existing conditions is not known.

d) Mitigation assumes that all impacts will be riverine based, not lake based. As such a spills action plan is not provided for lake-based cleanup.

36

In the Rouge watershed, TRCA has completed modelling for Morningside Creek, a tributary of the Rouge River. Through this modelling, TRCA illustrated why it is imperative that Enbridge complete a detailed modelling program for all crossings of TRCA watersheds in order to determine potential spill impacts, and to inform riverine and lake-based mitigation planning, including access. It should be noted that through the Drinking Water Source Protection Program, modelling for large releases of contaminants was completed from the river mouths to the drinking water intakes. The modelling considered travel through the lake and was based on actual weather events. Riverine and lake-based modelling should be used together by Enbridge to inform their spills response planning initiatives. Enbridge has stated that its spill response time can vary between 1.5 to 4 hours depending on factors such as weather and traffic conditions, time of day, day of the week and location of the release site, and the time to detect a spill can take up to two hours. The time to respond to a spill in TRCA's watersheds could be upwards of 6 hours in a worst case situation. The plume travel time is critical for Enbridge to determine the approximate downstream area of spill and to determine whether the spill would reach Lake Ontario by the time responders arrive at the spill site. The distance the spill will travel will vary depending on the velocity in the rivers during base flow and high flow conditions. Staff completed a modeling analysis for both the Morningside Tributary and a portion of the Lower Main Rouge, downstream of its confluence with Morningside Tributary during both baseflow and storm flow conditions. The results showed the time of travel for a spill in the Morningside Tributary to reach Lake Ontario as follows:

a) baseflow conditions: 27.4 hours; b) 2-year storm event: 14 hours; c) 100-year storm event: 6.1 hours.

While a spill in Morningside Creek under baseflow conditions may be managed near its source, under storm flow conditions it is apparent that the time of travel from the pipeline to Lake Ontario increases significantly depending on the storm event. Due to factors including climate change, in TRCAs jurisdiction we are seeing more occurrences of high intensity storm events, such as the August 2005 and July 2013 storms both of which exceeded the 100 year storm event. With increased flow, the rates of in-stream and valley erosion also increase. As a result, in the opinion of TRCA, storm events also pose increased risk of pipeline fracture, for if the pipeline becomes exposed, there is risk that debris may fracture the exposed pipeline. As such, TRCA submitted to the NEB that based on the evidence and TRCA’s vast experience in dealing with underground utility structures, for each of TRCA’s nine watersheds Enbridge must take a proactive approach to address pipeline exposure and failure through geohazard risk assessments; spills response planning through modelling scenarios that include dry and wet weather conditions; and the collection of baseline information to inform any future rehabilitation or restoration planning. Discussions between TRCA and Enbridge Pipelines Inc. As directed by the Authority, on August 22, 2013 TRCA staff met with Enbridge representatives to review the Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project in relation to TRCA's interests and concerns that were documented in the written evidence submitted to the NEB on August 2, 2013. Enbridge staff present at the meeting included the Director, Eastern Region Operations, Senior Manager, Environment (Projects) Canada, Senior Manager, Environment (Operations) Canada, Senior Manager, Pipeline Asset Integrity, Manager, Risk Management Modelling, and Supervisor, Area Operations. Discussion items included:

37

1. An overview of TRCA concerns as outlined in its written evidence, including proactive pipeline exposure and failure risk assessment, spills response planning, and rehabilitation and restoration planning. Discussions also included an overview of the TRCA Regional Watersheds Monitoring Program and the TRCA Erosion Control Monitoring Program.

2. Discussions included TRCA's information request, including detailed presentations by Enbridge regarding responses to leeks or spills, pipeline integrity, in stream and valley land monitoring programs, pipeline shut-off valves, travel time modelling, environmental monitoring and an ecosystem compensation protocol.

3. A detailed review and discussion of TRCA's Interim Technical Guidelines for the Development of Environmental Management Plans for Underground Infrastructure.

4. A detailed discussion of geohazard risk assessments; spills response planning and modelling; and rehabilitation and restoration planning that was based on the Case Study example of Morningside Creek in the Rouge River watershed.

At that meeting Enbridge confirmed that it has completed tactical response plans for the Don River watershed, and would be completing plans for the Humber watershed in the near future. Since that time, TRCA and Enbridge have continued to liaise through email and phone conversations. CONCLUSION As an intervenor, TRCA was afforded the opportunity to provide a final argument to the NEB based on its original application, as well as its written evidence and responses from Enbridge. TRCA chose to prepare a written argument. The TRCA written argument was referenced and supported in the oral argument of the City of Toronto. TRCA Written Argument to the NEB On October 3, 2013, TRCA filed its final written argument with the NEB. In its argument, TRCA advised that TRCA does not oppose Enbridge’s application provided its concerns through conditions of approval to be instituted by the NEB. TRCA conditions include addressing pipeline integrity, understanding environmental conditions of potentially affected landscapes in case of a spill, and establishing detailed spill response plans. TRCA understands it will play a supporting role in any spills action plan as an environmental agency and as a landowner, but that the lead response agencies will be Enbridge, the adjacent pipeline operators of Trans-Northern and Sun Canadian, Ministry of the Environment and municipal emergency services. A synopsis of the TRCA proposed conditions to the NEB is provided below: TRCA PROPOSED CONDITION NO. 1

1. Enbridge shall work with TRCA to develop and undertake a comprehensive geohazard risk assessment and monitoring program that includes:

a. Survey and analysis of geomorphic conditions (including the horizontal distance of the pipe from the edge of the watercourse to the side of the pipe)

b. Survey and analysis of valley erosion (including the horizontal distance of the pipe from the edge of the valley wall to the side of the pipe)

c. Review and analysis of hydraulic data and changes to the hydraulic regime through updates to hydraulic modelling (available from TRCA)

d. Incorporate the potential impacts of climate change as related to precipitation distribution and volume, as it is recognized that such changes could alter the hydrologic conditions and the hydraulic regime in TRCA’s watersheds

38

e. Meet with TRCA to discuss development of a monitoring program that is consistent with TRCA’s Erosion Control Monitoring Program

f. Update its in-stream and valleyland monitoring procedures and protocols to a level consistent with conservation authority standard

2. Enbridge shall provide TRCA with regular updates on results of comprehensive geohazard risk assessment and monitoring program, updates to the Pipeline Integrity Dig Program, and confirmation of any short-term, long term or emergency permitting requirements in accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06, together with approvals under the Fisheries Act.

TRCA PROPOSED CONDITION NO. 2

1. Enbridge shall work with TRCA to develop a baseline conditions report that will include an evaluation of:

a. Geomorphic conditions, including depth of cover survey at all crossings and stream geomorphic conditions

b. Valley slope conditions c. Lake Ontario shoreline conditions d. Areas of natural significance e. Terrestrial and aquatic habitat and species f. Hydraulic or hydrologic conditions g. Precipitation data h. Sources of drinking water i. Public open spaces, including TRCA lands j. Storm sewer catch basin and outfall location evaluations

TRCA PROPOSED CONDITION NO. 3

1. Enbridge shall undertake spill response modelling scenarios that include: a. Dry and wet weather conditions a. Detailed watershed response plans b. Access for containment and cleanup in valley and stream corridors, wetlands and

Lake Ontario c. A rehabilitation and restoration strategy d. A compensation strategy

2. Enbridge shall establish a Greater Toronto Area based spill response team as an immediate requirement.

3. Enbridge shall undertake emergency response exercises detailed in NEB Condition 23, and to include lake-based, dry weather and wet weather scenarios for each of TRCA’s watersheds and Lake Ontario.

TRCA's written evidence, including the detailed conditions, is attached as Attachment 1 to this report. NEXT STEPS

1. In the past, the NEB had indicated they expected to have a decision in January 2014. The most recent timetable however indicates the date for the decision is “to be determined.”

2. The NEB has significant amounts of information to review and synthesize, including: a. Enbridge Application materials, Information Requests from NEB and Intervenors

and Responses, Additional Evidence and Reply Evidence.

39

b. Intervenors submissions – there are 60 Intervenors. Not all have submitted written evidence and/or final written arguments however, 10 Intervenors submitted Written Final Arguments and 39 Intervenors are presenting Oral Final Arguments either in Montreal or Toronto.

c. Letters of Comment - there 111 letters of comment, 43 from municipalities/organizations and 68 from individuals.

4. As advised by TRCA lawyers, it is expected that the NEB will approve Enbridge’s application with conditions and timing requirements. Pursuant to the NEB Act, the NEB may impose conditions and timing on those conditions.

5. Any of the NEB’s orders may be enforced like an order of the Federal or Superior Court pursuant to section 17 of the Act, and the NEB is able to create offenses, and specifically offenses for failing to comply with an order or a decision, pursuant to the Act.

6. Enbridge will have to report to the NEB on any of the conditions that may be imposed as we saw in the potential draft conditions that the NEB produced last week for review and comment.

7. TRCA staff will report back to the Authority upon the completion of the NEB hearing, to advise of the Board's resolution.

8. If the NEB approves the project with conditions, staff shall compare the requirements of the Board to TRCA's proposed conditions as submitted in its written evidence.

Report prepared by: Beth Williston, extension 5217 and Don Ford, extension 5369.

Emails: bwilliston@trca.on.ca and dford@trca.on.ca

For Information contact: Beth Williston, extension 5217 and Don Ford, extension 5369.

Emails: bwilliston@trca.on.ca and dford@trca.on.ca

Date: October 17, 2013

Attachments: 1

40

Attachment 1 Enbridge Pipelines Inc.

Line 9B Reversal and Line 9 Capacity Expansion Project Application under section 58 and Part IV (“Application”)

of the National Energy Board Act OH-002-2013 File: OF-Fac-Oil-E101-2012-10 02

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Written Final Argument

I. OVERVIEW

1. Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (“Enbridge”) has applied to the National Energy Board (“NEB”) for approval to reverse the flow of Line 9B between North Westover and Montreal, to expand the capacity of Line 9 between Sarnia and Montreal and a revision to the Line 9 Rules and Regulations Tariff to allow the transport of heavy crude. Line 9B is an existing pipeline.

2. Approximately 65 kilometres of the pipeline is within Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (“TRCA”) jurisdiction. TRCA’s jurisdiction includes nine watersheds, the shoreline of Lake Ontario and five drinking water inlets. The pipeline crosses all nine watersheds and in the event of a spill, has the potential to impact naturally sensitive areas, endangered species and drinking water quality. Four of these watersheds are of national or provincial significance. Details on each of these watersheds are set out in TRCA’s Written Evidence.

3. TRCA objectives are to ensure that:

a. any malfunctions, accidents and spills are minimized, and b. in the event of a malfunction, accident or spill, damage to the environment

(including terrestrial and aquatic habitat and species, valley and stream corridors, the Lake Ontario shoreline, public open spaces, including TRCA lands, and drinking water sources) is minimized.

4. TRCA’s submissions focus on NEB Issues 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9.

5. TRCA submits that TRCA’s objectives can be accomplished if Enbridge takes a proactive approach, outlined in detail in Section III and IV below and described in TRCA’s Written Evidence.

6. In summary, Enbridge must take a proactive approach to

a. monitor pipeline integrity b. understand environmental concerns (including geomorphic conditions, valley

slope conditions, areas of natural significance, terrestrial and aquatic species and habitats, sources of drinking water and hydrology), and

c. establish detailed spills response plans that include hydraulic conditions during base and high flow, (flow rates, velocities, and flood plain extent), environmental concerns, baseline conditions and timely access to spill location and staging locations (including a Toronto based spills response team), and mitigation.

7. TRCA comments on NEB’s Draft Potential Conditions (“NEB Potential Conditions”) and provides additional conditions that address TRCA’s concerns in Section IV below. TRCA submits these conditions should be included in any approval issued by the NEB prior to approving Enbridge’s application.

41

8. Provided that TRCA’s concerns and conditions regarding the proactive mitigation of potential adverse effects to the environment are satisfied as detailed in Sections III and IV, TRCA does not oppose Enbridge’s application.

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

9. The NEB, in Hearing Order OH-002-2013 issued February 19, 2013, defined the scope of Enbridge’s application as the reversal of the Line 9B pipeline from North Westover to Montreal, the expansion of the capacity of Line 9 between Sarnia and Montreal and a revision to the Line 9 Rules and Regulations Tariff to allow the transport of heavy crude.

10. The Project is limited to the existing pipeline. TRCA understands that no new pipelines will be constructed.

III. PROACTIVE APPROACH TO UNDERSTANDING ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS AND MITIGATING POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS

11. On August 27, 2013, Enbridge met with TRCA staff to discuss mitigation strategies for pipeline integrity, emergency response strategies, improvements to emergency preparedness, incident command structure and on-going dialogue between TRCA and Enbridge.

12. TRCA believes the meeting with Enbridge is a positive first step towards a proactive approach and demonstrates Enbridge’s acceptance of the need to understand the environmental and hydraulic conditions and incorporate these conditions into proactive pipeline integrity monitoring and emergency response plans.

A. Monitoring Pipeline Integrity

13. Enbridge must monitor pipeline exposures and long term in-stream and valley

erosion. Mitigation and monitoring prior to pipeline exposure, or in the worst case of a breach, is imperative to ensure pipeline issues are corrected before there is a failure or leak.

14. TRCA’s concerns with pipeline infrastructure on or near valley lands, streams and wetlands include: a. the in-stream depth of cover over the pipeline

i. when downcutting of the watercourse occurs, there must be sufficient overburden cover to ensure the integrity of the pipeline is protected during high flow conditions

ii. the watersheds in TRCA's jurisdiction are largely urban systems, where downcutting is at a higher rate than in rural scenarios due to increased rates of flow, and where discharges are frequent, flashy and of a significant velocity. Changes to the hydraulic regime must be accounted for on an ongoing basis through updates to hydraulic modeling, including valley erosion and geomorphic survey and analysis, and precipitation and hydraulic data analysis, and

iii. the impacts of climate change could affect precipitation distribution and volume that could alter the hydrologic conditions and the hydraulic regime in TRCA's watersheds. The frequency of modeling, survey and analysis

42

may need to be adjusted to account for hydrologic and hydraulic regime changes.

b. the horizontal distance of the pipe from the edge of the watercourse to the side of the pipe. When streambank erosion occurs, there must be sufficient riparian cover to ensure the integrity of the pipeline is protected

c. the horizontal distance of the pipe from the edge of the valley wall to the side of the pipe. When valley wall erosion occurs, there must be sufficient cover to ensure the integrity of the pipe is protected

d. during the meeting between TRCA and Enbridge, it was noted that, if unmitigated, an oil leak from a pipeline break on the tableland may travel overland, pass through the street level catch basin, through the storm sewer system and then discharge directly to the river or wetland. All potential storm sewers that have direct connections to wetlands, rivers or valleylands must be assessed, and included in the detailed response plans.

15. TRCA notes from the review of information submitted by Enbridge that there have been limited or no surveys or evaluations of the following: a. depth of cover survey at all crossings b. stream geomorphic conditions c. valley slope conditions d. areas of natural significance e. terrestrial and aquatic habitat and species f. hydraulic or hydrologic conditions g. sources of drinking water h. public open spaces, including TRCA lands i. storm sewer catch basin and outfall location evaluations, and j. procedure for pipeline repair or securement. Note: Under Ontario Regulation

166/06 regular or emergency works permits may be required, together with approvals under the Fisheries Act .

16. A proactive and scientific approach to understanding the depth of cover, both in stream and on the valley slopes is fundamental in assessing, evaluating and preventing issues related to exposure. As part of specific project agreements or on a priority basis, TRCA implements TRCA’s Erosion Control Monitoring Program , to monitor erosion and instability-prone areas, evaluate results and implement stabilization works on a priority basis.

17. TRCA has developed standardized protocols and procedures to identify, assess, track and prioritize erosion hazards using a relational web-based database that allow sites to be added and modified in real-time as new hazards are identified and priorities re-evaluated. These monitoring sites include erosion hazards on private property, existing public erosion control structures, and select municipal infrastructure (sanitary sewer crossings, retaining walls, park trails, etc.). At TRCA’s meeting with Enbridge on August 27, 2013, Enbridge expressed interest in reviewing TRCA’s Erosion Control Monitoring Program and the associated monitoring parameters. TRCA and Enbridge will continue to engage in discussions in this regard.

18. Over the past three years, TRCA has responded to three emergency situations

related to the Enbridge Line 9B pipeline. The pipeline was not broken or breached in any of these circumstances. However, if proper study had been undertaken by

43

Enbridge, it is TRCA’s opinion that the depth of cover, or lack thereof, could have been determined in advance of the visual inspection that discovered the exposure, and the declaration by Enbridge of an emergency situation related to the pipeline.

19. To reduce or eliminate these emergency situations, TRCA submits that Enbridge

should be required to carry out monitoring consistent with TRCA’s Erosion Control Monitoring Program and update in-stream and valleyland monitoring procedures.

20. The number and placement of automated shut off valves is a concern for TRCA

given the significance of the watersheds, urban populations and infrastructure, including drinking water intakes under TRCA’s jurisdiction. At the August 27, 2013 meeting between Enbridge and TRCA, Enbridge confirmed that Enbridge is investigating the number and placement of automated shut off valves.

21. Enbridge’s updated response to NEB Information Request 4.7 outlines the addition

of two shut off valves along the pipeline within TRCA’s jurisdiction at KP 3080.61 (MP 1914.2) and KP 3083.50 (MP 1916). Enbridge must continue to assess shut off valve locations as Enbridge obtains additional information about TRCA’s watersheds.

B. Understanding Environmental Conditions 22. Environmental information that will be useful to Enbridge in the development of a

proactive spills response plan for Line 9B are available from TRCA for TRCA’s nine watersheds. At the meeting between TRCA and Enbridge on August 27, 2013, Enbridge expressed interest in working with TRCA to obtain relevant environmental information.

23. Spill response, clean-up, restoration and compensation are not possible without first

establishing and understanding baseline information about the watersheds in advance of any spill.

24. TRCA has environmental information including: a. regional Watershed Monitoring Program b. flood plain mapping and flood modeling c. stream flow and precipitation data d. terrestrial Natural Heritage Management Program e. erosion Management Program f. watershed-based Habitat Restoration Program

25. TRCA submits that this information is crucial to Enbridge understanding the

environmental conditions of each watershed, planning a detailed spills response plan and providing ecosystem compensation and restoration following a spill. Enbridge should be required to obtain this information and incorporate it into watershed specific spill response plans.

C. Establishing Detailed Spills Response Plans

26. TRCA’s experience shows that preparation of an Environmental Management Plan (“EMP”) using the TRCA Technical Guidelines for the Development of Environmental Management Plans for Underground Infrastructure, Revised July 2013 , would result in a proactive approach to managing potential failures or fractures of the Line 9B pipeline in valley and stream corridors and wetland areas, and provide a means of ensuring the

44

protection, mitigation and restoration including terrestrial and aquatic habitat and species, valley and stream corridors, the Lake Ontario shoreline, and public open spaces, including TRCA lands. TRCA has expertise and data available to Enbridge and should be consulted prior to Enbridge initiating work on an EMP.

27. The conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources in each of TRCA’s nine watersheds as well as the nearshore of Lake Ontario, may be impacted by malfunctions or accidents on Line 9B. Depending upon stream flow conditions, homes and businesses in flood plain areas, the source water protection areas and the Lake Ontario drinking water intakes in the City of Ajax, the City of Toronto and the City of Mississauga may also be impacted.

28. When Enbridge discovers a spill, Enbridge must have already established a detailed

mitigation plan for each of the TRCA watersheds to reduce response times, eliminate unnecessary delays caused by establishing response and mitigation plans at the time of the spill and ensure that impacts are minimized.

29. Enbridge’s materials advise that once a spill is detected, it could take an additional 1.5 to

4 hours to respond once a spill has been detected. The time for Enbridge to respond to a spill could be upwards of six hours.

30. TRCA’s modelling for a spill at the Morningside Creek, a tributary of the Rouge River,

revealed that in low flow conditions, a spill from Line 9B could spread to Lake Ontario in 14 hours. Under high flow conditions, this travel time may be dramatically reduced to as little as six hours or less. It is expected that for each crossing location, the times of travel to Lake Ontario could vary significantly based on the river or creek’s specific hydraulic and flow conditions. The most critical time for spills management is during high flow events.

31. The EMP must include:

a. scenario modelling under a variety of hydraulic conditions, including dry weather and a variety of storm frequencies and seasonal changes, the extent of the flood plain, velocity of storm flows to determine spill containment methods, available access areas, and travel times

b. location of storage and staging areas c. timely notification of regulating agencies d. timely containment of the spill including:

i. control plan for a breach in the pipe, and ii. control plan for the oil flow, including access to containment areas

e. disaster scenario training during base and high flow, and seasonal (summer/winter) conditions

f. methods for identifying aquatic and terrestrial species and habitats impacted by the spill, and

g. methods for establishing a rehabilitation and restoration strategy in the event of a spill, including baseline conditions and a method for determining if there is adequate restoration and compensation.

32. In the meeting between TRCA and Enbridge on August 27, 2013, Enbridge recognized

that watershed based EMPs should be completed on a priority basis.

45

33. TRCA’s top priority watersheds for emergence response and mitigation planning are the Don River, Humber River, Rouge River and Duffins Creek watersheds.

34. The remaining TRCA watersheds of the Etobicoke Creek, Mimico Creek, Petticoat

Creek, Carruthers Creek and Highland Creek should also be assessed and prioritized against all watersheds along the pipeline as time and funding permit.

35. A Spills Response Team located in the Greater Toronto Area would reduce the travel

time required for a response team to reach a spill in TRCA’s jurisdiction and initiate emergency response protocols and mitigation. This could result in fewer impacts to the environment and drinking water. The spills response team must be equipped to deal with oil in Lake Ontario.

IV. COMMENTS ON NEB’S DRAFT POTENTIAL CONDITIONS 36. TRCA has reviewed the NEB Potential Conditions. Below are TRCA’s comments on the

NEB Potential Conditions and proposed language for additional conditions. A. Conditions to Monitor Pipeline Integrity 37. TRCA recognizes that NEB Condition 15 addresses the number and placement of

automatic shut off valves. However, TRCA considers the review and implementation of the automatic shutoff valves as an immediate and ongoing requirement as Enbridge undertakes the Watercourse Crossing Management Plan in Condition 22, the EMP and the baseline environmental condition report.

38. TRCA appreciates that the NEB recognizes in NEB Condition 16 that a comprehensive

geohazard risk assessment and monitoring program is required and sets some details in NEB Conditions 17 and 22. However, TRCA is concerned that the geohazard risk assessment and monitoring program is not sufficiently robust to address TRCA’s concerns.

39. TRCA proposes the following language to address the additional information required for the geohazard risk assessment:

TRCA PROPOSED CONDITION NO. 1 Enbridge shall

a. Work with TRCA to develop and undertake a comprehensive geohazard risk assessment and monitoring program that includes:

i. survey and analysis of geomorphic conditions – the horizontal distance of the pipe from the edge of the watercourse to the side of the pipe

ii. survey and analysis of valley erosion – the horizontal distance of the pipe from the edge of the valley wall to the side of the pipe

iii. review and analysis of hydraulic data and changes to the hydraulic regime through updates to hydraulic modeling (available from TRCA)

iv. incorporate the potential impacts of climate change in terms of precipitation distribution and volume, recognizing that such changes could alter the hydrologic conditions and the hydraulic regime in TRCA’s watersheds; adjust the frequency of modeling, survey and analysis of the above factors

46

v. meet with TRCA to discuss development of a monitoring program that is consistent with TRCA’s Erosion Control Monitoring Program

vi. update its in-stream and valleyland monitoring procedures and protocols to a level consistent with conservation authority standard

b. provide TRCA with regular updates on results of comprehensive geohazard risk assessment and monitoring program, updates to the Pipeline Integrity Dig Program, and confirmation of any short-term, long term or emergency permitting requirements in accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06, together with approvals under the Fisheries Act .

B. Conditions to Understand Environmental Conditions 40. The NEB Potential Conditions do not require Enbridge to understand and plan for

existing environmental conditions. 41. TRCA proposes the following conditions to develop a baseline environmental condition

report:

TRCA PROPOSED CONDITION NO. 2 Enbridge shall

a. Work with TRCA to develop a baseline conditions report that will include an evaluation of:

i. Geomorphic conditions, including depth of cover survey at all crossings and stream geomorphic conditions

ii. Valley slope conditions iii. Lake Ontario shoreline conditions iv. Areas of natural significance v. Terrestrial and aquatic habitat and species vi. Hydraulic or hydrologic conditions vii. Precipitation data viii. Sources of drinking water ix. Public open spaces, including TRCA lands x. Storm sewer catch basin and outfall location evaluations

C. Conditions to Establish Detailed Spills Response Plans 42. TRCA respectfully submits that the NEB Conditions do not adequately address proactive

spill response planning.

43. Spill response modelling scenarios must include: a. dry and wet weather conditions b. detailed watershed response plans c. access for containment and cleanup in valley and stream corridors, wetlands and

Lake Ontario d. a rehabilitation and restoration strategy, and e. a compensation strategy.

44. TRCA considers establishment of a Great Toronto Area based spills response team as

an immediate requirement.

47

45. Emergency response exercises detailed in NEB Condition 23 need to include lake based, dry weather and wet weather scenarios for each of TRCA’s watersheds and Lake Ontario.

46. To address TRCA’s concerns about the need for detailed spill response plans, TRCA

proposes the following conditions: TRCA PROPOSED CONDITION NO. 3 Enbridge shall:

a. use the TRCA Technical Guidelines for the Development of Environmental Management Plans(EMP) for Underground Infrastructure, Revised July 2013 , to inform the development of watershed based spills response plans

b. the EMP must include: i. scenario modelling under a variety of hydraulic conditions, including dry weather and

a variety of storm frequencies and seasonal changes, the extent of the flood plain, velocity of storm flows to determine spill containment methods, available access areas, and travel times

iii. location of storage and staging areas iv. timely notification of responding and regulating agencies v. timely containment of the spill including control plan for a breach in the pipe and

control plan for the oil flow, including access to containment areas vi. disaster scenario training during base and high flow, and seasonal (summer/winter)

conditions, as well as in Lake Ontario vii. methods for identifying aquatic and terrestrial species and habitats impacted by the

spill, and viii. methods for establishing a rehabilitation and restoration strategy in the event of a

spill, including baseline conditions and a method for determining if there is adequate restoration and compensation.

c. prioritize the development of watershed-based EMPs in TRCA’s jurisdiction for the Don River, Humber River, Rouge River and Duffins Creek Watersheds

d. prioritize the remaining TRCA watersheds: Etobicoke Creek, Mimico Creek, Petticoat Creek, Highland Creek and Carruthers Creek.

e. ensure the EMP includes a review and assessment of all storm sewers that have direct connections to wetlands, rivers or valley lands, and

f. provide a Spills Response Team based in the Greater Toronto Area that is equipped to deal with an oil spill in Lake Ontario. Ensure there are clear roles for responders and a coordinated response for notification of all agencies.

V. CONCLUSION 47. Provided that TRCA’s concerns are satisfied, including revisions to the NEB Conditions

to address pipeline integrity, understanding environmental conditions and establishing detailed spills repose plans, TRCA does not oppose Enbridge’s application.

48. TRCA looks forward to ongoing cooperation between Enbridge and TRCA to create

EMPs that will respond to and manage potential failures or fractures along the pipeline and ensure protection, mitigation and restoration of t terrestrial and aquatic habitat and species, valley and stream corridors, the Lake Ontario shoreline, public open spaces, including TRCA lands under TRCA’s jurisdiction, in the event of a malfunction, accident or spill.

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THIS 3rd day of October, 2013

48

Jacquelyn Stevens / Joanna Vince Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP Counsel to Toronto and Region Conservation Authority

** References cited in original Written Final Argument

49

Item 8.4

TO: Members of the Etobicoke and Mimico Watersheds Coalition Meeting #3/13 – December 5, 2013 FROM: Chandra Sharma, Etobicoke-Mimico Watershed Specialist RE: Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks Watersheds Greenland Acquisition Update

KEY ISSUE To inform members of the Etobicoke-Mimico Watersheds Coalition of recent Greenland acquisition. BACKGROUND The purpose of the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2011-2015 (GAP) is to provide background about and implementation tools for the acquisition of greenlands by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). TRCA acquired 880 hectares of greenlands between 2006 and 2009, exceeding the target of 600 hectares established in the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010 by almost 300 hectares in just four years. This GAP builds on the Greenlands Acquisition Project for 2006-2010 and previous TRCA land acquisition projects. It continues on the course of those projects with new knowledge and refined direction provided by TRCA’s integrated watershed plans and provincial plans for drinking water source protection and land use. Acquisitions made under the GAP are based primarily on identifying and assessing land opportunities which may arise in the real estate market. Therefore, the project is limited by the unpredictable nature of this market. This document discusses the need for securing greenlands into public ownership and the role of acquisition in relation to other forms of securement. It relates the GAP to the broader context of TRCA’s vision for The Living City and to the United Nations’ Earth Charter. Details of TRCA’s legislated mandate for land acquisition are also provided. Recent support for greenlands acquisition is provided by plans and strategies. These include TRCA’s integrated watershed and waterfront plans that combine the latest science including the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy, provincial plans for drinking water source protection and provincial land use plans. TRCA’s history of acquisition began with purchases in the late 1940’s and involved numerous projects that made these purchases possible. The GAP reviews the types of ownership and the tools used by TRCA to acquire greenlands. TRCA evaluates greenlands against the criteria and factors for acquisition established in the GAP. Finally the project details the financial strategy including potential funding partners. The GAP identifies funding partners and estimated financial contributions over its five year duration. By making a projection based on experience in recent years, it is estimated that TRCA could acquire approximately 1,000 hectares (2,500 acres) over the five year duration of the GAP, at a projected purchase expense of $27.5 million.

50

Recent land acquisitions in the Etobicoke-Mimico watersheds include:

Date Location Total Land Size

August 9, 2013 36 Park Lawn Road, Toronto, ON 0.148 hectares September 13, 2013 Highway 10, south of Old School Road, Town of

Caledon 8.88 hectares

Report prepared by: Cindy Barr, extension 5569

For information contact: Chandra Sharma, extension 5237, csharma@trca.on.ca

Date: November 13, 2013

51