Lakeview Waterfront Connection: Environmental Assessment Public - - PDF document

Lakeview Waterfront Connection: Environmental Assessment

Public Information Centre #2 May 1, 2012

Objectives of PIC

• To review draft content for the EA Terms of Reference (ToR)
• To seek comments and suggestions on the draft ToR content
• To identify issues to be resolved as the ToR moves forward
• To discuss next steps and review of the ToR in June and July
• The ToR is a “roadmap” which describes how the EA (including consultation) will be carried
• ut
• The ToR will describe:
• Project Goal and Objectives
• Study Areas
• Project Timelines
• Problem/Opportunity Assessment
• Overview of Existing Environment (Natural and Human)
• Evaluation of “Alternatives To”
• Framework for Identifjcation and Evaluation of “Alternative Methods”
• Preliminary comparative evaluation criteria
• The consultation plan for the EA

Development Of The Terms Of Refence (ToR)

Project Goal

“To create a new natural park that will establish ecological and public linkages on the eastern Mississauga waterfront”

• Naturalization – Establish a diverse range of native terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem habitats

and ecological linkages in a degraded area of the eastern Mississauga waterfront

• Access – Create safe and accessible public linkages for access to and along the waterfront

while allowing for compatible recreational, educational and cultural heritage opportunities

• Resource Optimization – Use an innovative funding approach that seeks to maximize

public benefjt and value by reusing locally generated fjll from Regional and City capital works projects to create this new natural park

• Compatibility – Ensure that the LWC is compatible with existing infrastructure
• Coordination – Coordinate with and inform other local planning and development efforts

Project Objectives

Project Study Area

Regional Study Area

Project Timelines

• Detailed design, permit approvals, land acquisition, and construction/implementation – 4-5

years (target start date end of 2013)

• Establishment – defjned as the timeframe for monitoring and adaptive management

(approximately fjrst 15 years after construction)

• Post-Establishment Monitoring – monitoring to identify if further intervention necessary if

naturalized system is not self-maintaining (onwards from establishment)

NOTE: monitoring does not include day-to-day park operations and maintenance

Evaluation of “Alternatives To”

Within the Project Study Area there is a well-documented lack of:

• Ecological Linkages
• Binational Biodiversity Strategy for Lake Ontario
• LOISS (CVC)
• Public Linkages
• Inspiration Lakeview
• Future Directions
• City of Mississauga Waterfront Parks Strategy
• Marie Curtis Park/Arsenal Lands Master Plans

“Alternatives To”: Refers to different ways to meet the Project Goal to create ecological and public linkages. Two “Alternatives To” are proposed:

• 1. Create linkages without lakefjlling (“Do Nothing”)
• 2. Create linkages with lakefjlling

Evaluation of “alternatives to” concludes that creating linkages without lakefjlling won’t meet project objectives for the following reasons.

• WWTP activities extend to water’s edge; as such, no opportunities to create new aquatic AND

terrestrial habitat available on existing land base

• The WWTP is critical public infrastructure; public access across the property is restricted, and

therefore no opportunities to create public linkages on existing land base Recommendation: the EA will consider viable alternatives using lakefjll to create ecological and public linkages within the Project Study Area.

Evaluation of “Alternatives To” - Summary

• Creating ecological and public linkages with lakefjlling is the preferred “Alternative To” and

will be carried forward to the development of “Alternative Methods”.

• Evaluation of “Alternatives To” uses a high-level assessment of the potential for each

alternative to achieve project objectives. The summary below synthesizes the results of the more detailed analysis.

Project Objectives Linkages w/o Lake filling Linkages with Lake filling Naturalization Low Rank High Rank Access Low Rank High Rank Resource Optimization Low Rank High Rank Coordination Low Rank High Rank Compatibility High Rank High Rank Summary Low Rank High Rank Project Objectives Linkages w/o Lake filling Linkages with Lake filling Naturalization Low Rank High Rank Access Low Rank High Rank Resource Optimization Low Rank High Rank Coordination Low Rank High Rank Compatibility High Rank High Rank Summary Low Rank High Rank

Framework For Developing And Evaluating “Alternative Methods”

• Alternative methods are different confjgurations of lakefjll to achieve project objectives
• Alternative methods will be assessed as to their ability to achieve project objectives
• Anticipated that 2-3 broad alternatives will be developed with sub-options related to the

potential realignment of Serson Creek and habitat optimization options

• Alternatives will be conceptual and at a coarse level of detail that will allow for the approval of

those elements that are diffjcult to change Developing the foundation Identifying walls and roof lines Evaluating the

• ptions

Determining the details Identification of Desired Design Elements Comparative Evaluation

• f Alternatives

Confirm, Refine and Undertake Detailed Assessment of Preferred Alternative Determination of Footprint for Alternatives

The “house” analogy LWC EA Process

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4

Framework For Developing And Evaluating “Alternative Methods”

Determination of Footprint for Alternatives

• To provide a footprint for the development of habitat and recreation opportunities, we need to

establish the maximum and minimum extent of fjll

• The shape and location of the footprint will be infmuenced by coastal processes, economics

and physical constraints

• Once the gross dimensions of footprint are determined, regional water quality model will be

used to determine if footprint is likely to affect water quality

• If there are effects to water quality, footprint will be modifjed or reduced to minimize effects

Step 1: Developing the foundation

Framework For Developing And Evaluating “Alternative Methods”

Identification of Desired Design Elements

• Using the footprint, alternatives will be developed to include different:
• Balance of habitat types
• Shoreline types
• Recreational attributes
• Trail linkages and accessibility
• Alternatives will be defjned to a coarse level of detail suffjcient to choose between the

alternatives for EA purposes

Step 2: Identifying walls and roof line

Framework For Developing And Evaluating “Alternative Methods”

Comparative Evaluation of Alternatives

• Alternatives will be assessed based on evaluation criteria and indicators to measure

achievement of each project objective

• Mitigative measures will also be identifjed
• Reasoned trade-off method will be used to select the preferred alternative; each alternative

will be qualitatively scored as least, moderate or highly preferred

Step 3: Evaluating the options

Framework For Developing And Evaluating “Alternative Methods”

Confirm, Refine and Undertake Detailed Assessment of Preferred Alternative

• The preferred alternative will be developed in greater detail as necessary to determine the

phasing plan for establishment, construction techniques and mitigative measures

• The preferred alternative will be assessed based on criteria and indicators to measure the

achievement of objectives

• This will result in a summary of environmental effects and mitigative measures and an

assessment of project advantages and disadvantages

Step 4: Determining the details

Results Of Consultation Activities To Date

• First meetings held with Technical Advisory Committee, Community Liaison Committee

and the public

• General support for LWC Project:
• Overall positive support for the Project
• Public is very committed to Inspiration Lakeview
• Accessibility, Recreation and Naturalization
• Great desire for more accessibility to the waterfront and the relocation of the

waterfront trail to the water’s edge

• Desire for recreation such as bird watching, swimming, community gathering

spot

• Agreement with objectives, particularly naturalization and access
• Goals and Objectives
• Need to make language of goals and objectives simpler
• Agreement approach for meeting Project Goal – i.e., lakefjll alternative
• Other: timing concerns, quality of fjll and where it comes from, effects from traffjc,

maintaining view of water

• Consultation opportunities for the project will be provided through the following venues:
• Project Advisory Committee (EA Project Team, OPG & MNR)
• Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) – meets at least 3 times during EA
• Community Liaison Committee (CLC) – meets at least 3 times during EA
• Public Information Centres (PICs) – 3 during EA
• One of the PICs could be a design charette for development of alternatives
• Project Newsletters, Flyers and Website Updates
• First Nations and Métis Consultation
• Landowner and Local Business Notifjcations
• Newspaper Advertisements and Articles

Summary Of EA Consultation Plan

Next Steps

• Final ToR
• Submitted to MOE for formal 30 day review: early July, 2012
• ToR will be available for public review electronically on project website and will be

available in hard copy at local library branches

• Anticipated approval of ToR and Commencement of EA: October, 2012

Questions, Comments, Concerns?