Authority MeetingRevised Agenda 

 #4/17

May 19, 20179:30 A.M.

HEAD OFFICE, 101 EXCHANGE AVENUE, VAUGHANPages

1. MINUTES OF MEETING #3/17, HELD ON APRIL 21, 2017Link to Minutes

2. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

4. DELEGATIONS

4.1 A delegation by Jim Robb, General Manager, Friends of the Rouge Watershed,in regard to item 7.3 - Toronto Wildlife Centre.

4.2 A delegation by Nathalie Karvonen, Executive Director, Toronto Wildlife Centre,in regard to item 7.3 - Toronto Wildlife Centre.

5. PRESENTATIONS

6. CORRESPONDENCE

6.1 An email dated May 16, 2017 from Jim Robb, General Manager, Friends of theRouge Watershed, in regard to item 7.3 - Toronto Wildlife Centre.

4

6.2 A letter dated May 16, 2017 from David Michael Bastoli, resident, 1185Vanrose Street, Mississauga, in regard to item 7.3 - Toronto Wildlife Centre.

12

7. SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION

7.1 HIGHLAND CREEK AT UTSC (AREA C) BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT,CITY OF TORONTO

13

Award of Contract #10003762

7.2 NEWBOLD-BEATON RAVINE TRAIL PROJECT 17Design Build Services for the Construction of a 20m Steel Boardwalk

7.3 TORONTO WILDLIFE CENTRE 20Development of wildlife rescue, rehabilitation and education centre serving theGreater Toronto AreaCFN 32060

7.4 PROJECT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICEBUILDING FOR TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY

26

Request for Proposal #10004404

8. SECTION III - ITEMS FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE BOARD

9. MATERIAL FROM BUDGET/AUDIT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING

10. MATERIAL FROM EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGLink to Minutes

10.1 SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION

10.1.1 REQUEST FOR DISPOSAL OF TORONTO AND REGIONCONSERVATION AUTHORITY-OWNED LANDAdjacent to 40 Grovetree Road, City of Toronto, Humber RiverWatershedCFN 56447Page 156

10.1.2 GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2016-2020Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber RiverWatershed2097500 Ontario LimitedCFN 57618Page 160

10.1.3 GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2016-2020Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber RiverWatershedMosaik Pinewest Inc.CFN 57615Page 163

10.1.4 GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2016-2020Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber RiverWatershedPrima Vista Estates Inc. and 840999 Ontario LimitedCFN 57617Page 166

2

10.1.5 GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2016-2020Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber RiverWatershedRoybridge Holdings Limited, 1387700 Ontario Limited and LindvestProperties LimitedCFN 57616Page 169

10.1.6 GREENLANDS ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR 2016-2020Flood Plain and Conservation Component, Humber RiverWatershedSquire Ridge Investments LimitedCFN 57650Page 172

10.1.7 THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEELRequest for a Permanent Easement Required for MonitoringTown of Caledon, Regional Municipality of Peel, Humber RiverWatershedCFN 23159Page 175

10.1.8 CITY OF TORONTORequest for a Permanent Easement Required for Replacement ofan Existing Storm SewerCity of Toronto, Humber River WatershedCFN 57739Page 178

10.2 SECTION II - ITEMS FOR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ACTION

10.2.1 CANADA GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL AND ITS GREATERTORONTO CHAPTERContinuation of Partnership AgreementPage 181

10.3 SECTION IV - ONTARIO REGULATION 166/06, AS AMENDED Receipt of Ontario Regulation 166/06, as amended, applications 10.1 - 10.6,which were approved at Executive Committee meeting #2/17, held on April 7,2017Page 184

11. NEW BUSINESS

NEXT MEETING OF THE AUTHORITY #5/17, TO BE HELD ON JUNE 23,2017 AT 9:30 A.M. AT HEAD OFFICE, 101 EXCHANGE AVENUE, VAUGHAN

Brian Denney, Chief Executive Officer

/jr

3

4

Plan  policies during the creation, management and administration of the National Rouge Park;3) ‐ Create a real or perceived conflict of interest, since TRCA is essentially acting like a co‐proponent, when it is also has responsibilities as a public regulator and public property manager;4) ‐ Be premature since the federal Rouge NU Park legislation is being amended to prioritize ecological integrity and the national park management plan has not been finalized;5) ‐ Have negative implications for wildlife habitat connectivity (i.e. 10 foot fencing) and species at risk within the Greenbelt Natural Heritage System, contrary to Greenbelt and Rouge Park policies;6) ‐ Have possible negative implications for the known aboriginal burial site on the property and perhaps other undetected human remains; 7) ‐ Conflict with Toronto OP s. 4.3 " Natural Areas are to be maintained primarily in a natural state"; 8) ‐ Involve the relocation of an intermittent stream with likely impacts on hydrological features and functions  contrary to Greenbelt and Rouge Park policies;9) ‐ Have a development area of approximately 57% of the developable area, contrary to the Greenbelt Plan's upper limit of 25%, if the area to be enclosed by 10 foot wooden fences and wire pens is included;10) ‐ Conflict with the "natural state" objectives of Toronto OP and Rouge Park plans due to the proposed obstruction of the landscape with 1000+ metres of 3+metre (10 foot) tall wooden slat fencing. Site Context: The TRCA purchased the property in 2010 for "Rouge Park purposes".  The proposed 35,000 square foot Building is located at 6461 Steeles Ave East just east of the Rouge Valley.  The site is surrounded by:

the Cedarbrae Golf Course within the Rouge Valley to the west;

an agricultural area within Rouge Park and the Greenbelt to the east and southeast;

Cedarbrae Woods ESA; an ecological restoration area; and the Rouge Valley to the south;

the future Steeles Avenue / Markham bypass intersection to the northwest;

privately-owned non-Greenbelt development lands on the north side of Steeles Avenue.

The site contains an aboriginal burial site; two intermittent streams; a pond used by snapping, painted and map turtles (SAR); barn swallows (SAR) nesting in the existing barn; and habitat restoration sites done by FRW for the Rouge Park / TRCA.  According to the proponent's reports, these features and buffers comprise some 10 hectares of the 27 hectare site. The proponent's report omits a new habitat strip north of Passmore Road. Greenbelt Plan  The Ontario Greenbelt Plan designates all of the subject Lot 11, Con 5 as "Protected Countryside" with a Natural Heritage System overlay.    Section 4.2.2 of the Greenbelt Plan states: 

"New or expanded partial servicing, where site conditions are suitable for the long‐term provision of such services, is only permitted in the following circumstances:

5

a.       Where such servicing is necessary to address failed individual on‐site sewage or water services           serving existing development; orb.       To allow for infilling and intensification within settlement areas served by partial services... ." 

Section 4.1.2 of the Greenbelt Plan states that: "Proposals for non‐agricultural uses must demonstrate that:

a) the use is appropriate for location in a rural area;b) the type of water and sewer servicing proposed is appropriate for the type of use;c) there are no negative impacts on key natural features and or key hydrologic features or their functions;d) there are no negative impacts on the biodiversity or connectivity of the Natural Heritage System.”

 Toronto's Official Plan Land Use Plan  Map 22 designates the subject property as “Natural Areas”, and the western part of the property is identified as part of the Natural Heritage System (Map 9).  Section 4.3 of the Toronto OP states that Natural Areas are to be maintained primarily in a natural state.  OPA Section 3.4 states that development is generally not permitted in the natural heritage system. National Rouge Park Legislation The proposed TWC building site is located within the proposed National Rouge Park.  The legislation for the National Park is being updated to state:

 6 (1) Maintenance or restoration of ecological integrity, through the protection of natural resources and natural processes, must be the first priority of the Minister when considering all aspects of the management of the Park. 

Ecological integrity has two key elements:  1) the protection and restoration of native biodiversity and natural processes; and 2) the minimization of unnatural stressors.  The construction and operation of this large TWC building, parking area, and fenced enclosures near the Rouge Valley, would create unnatural stressors which would interfere with the protection and restoration of native biodiversity and natural processes.   

SpamPhish/FraudNot spamForget previous vote

6

35,000 ft2 Toronto Wildlife Centre Building Proposal Beside Rouge Valley in the Greenbelt in Rouge Park

Input by Friends of the Rouge Watershed (FRW)

As a Rouge Park and Greenbelt guardian, FRW tests the appropriateness of developments, even when they have a commendable purpose, like the TWC. The TWC's planning reports indicate that the proposal involves:

building a 35,000 square foot (football field size) two story building just east of the Rouge Valley;

building a parking area for 50 vehicles and two buses just east of the Rouge Valley;

a building area, parking area, driveway, surfaced areas and septic field occupying 430,500 ft2 (4 ha);

partial servicing - private water pipeline ($1 million?) under Steeles Road allowance and septic field;

creating several large compounds (645,800 ft2, 6 ha) surrounded by "ten foot tall wooden slat" fences;

creating, within the compounds, dozens of outdoor wildlife housing structures, serviced by utilities and small vehicle paths, for rehabilitating racoons, skunks, squirrels and other sick or injured wildlife.

FRW Conclusion: Rouge Park serves as a nationally important refuge for wildlife, including many rare and at-risk species. Building a large building and parking lot in a nationally significant wildlife refuge would be a sad example of the habitat fragmentation and displacement which puts wildlife at so much risk near urban areas. Sites near valley and stream corridors, like this one, are particularly important for restoring habitat connectivity and biodiversity. The proposed construction of a 35,000 square foot building with a septic field and municipal water connection (partial servicing), parking for 50 vehicles, and 10 foot fencing around 60,000 m2 of the site, would clearly:

1) Conflict with Greenbelt Plan section 4.2.2 which does not permit the extension of partial servicing for new developments within the Greenbelt Natural Heritage System;

2) Contravene the January 26, 2013, Provincial and Federal Agreement to "meet or exceed" Greenbelt Plan policies during the creation, management and administration of the National Rouge Park;

3) - Create a real or perceived conflict of interest, since TRCA is essentially acting like a co-proponent, when it is also has responsibilities as a Regulator and public property manager;

4) - Be premature since the federal Rouge NU Park legislation is being amended to prioritize ecological integrity and the national park management plan has not been finalized;

5) - Have negative implications for wildlife habitat connectivity (i.e. 10 foot fencing) and species at risk within the Greenbelt Natural Heritage System, contrary to Greenbelt and Rouge Park policies;

6) - Have possible negative implications for the known aboriginal burial site on the property;

7) - Conflict with Toronto OP s. 4.3 " Natural Areas are to be maintained primarily in a natural state";

8) - Involve the relocation of an intermittent stream with likely impacts on hydrological features and functions contrary to Greenbelt and Rouge Park policies;

9) - Have a development area of approximately 57% of the developable area, contrary to the Greenbelt Plan's upper limit of 25%, if the area to be enclosed by 10 foot wooden fences and wire pens is included;

10) - Conflict with the "natural state" objectives of Toronto OP and Rouge Park plans due to the proposed obstruction of the landscape with 1000+ metres of 3+metre (10 foot) tall wooden slat fencing.

7

Site Context and Policy Framework: The TRCA purchased the property in 2010 for "Rouge Park purposes". The proposed 35,000 square foot Building is located at 6461 Steeles Ave East just east of the Rouge Valley. The site is surrounded by:

the Cedarbrae Golf Course within the Rouge Valley to the west;

an agricultural area within Rouge Park and the Greenbelt to the east and southeast;

Cedarbrae Woods ESA; an ecological restoration area; and the Rouge Valley to the south;

the future Steeles Avenue / Markham bypass intersection to the northwest;

privately-owned non-Greenbelt development lands on the north side of Steeles Avenue.

The site contains an aboriginal burial site; two intermittent streams; a pond used by snapping, painted and map turtles (SAR); barn swallows (SAR) nesting in the existing barn; and habitat restoration sites done by FRW for the Rouge Park / TRCA. According to the proponent's reports, these features and buffers comprise some 10 hectares of the 27 hectare site. The proponent's report omits a new habitat strip north of Passmore Road.

Greenbelt Plan The Ontario Greenbelt Plan designates all of the subject Lot 11, Con 5 as "Protected Countryside" with a Natural Heritage System overlay. Section 4.2.2 of the Greenbelt Plan states:

"New or expanded partial servicing, where site conditions are suitable for the long-term provision of such services, is only permitted in the following circumstances: a. Where such servicing is necessary to address failed individual on-site sewage or water services serving existing development; or b. To allow for infilling and intensification within settlement areas served by partial services... ."

Section 4.1.2 of the Greenbelt Plan states that: "Proposals for non-agricultural uses must demonstrate that: a) the use is appropriate for location in a rural area; b) the type of water and sewer servicing proposed is appropriate for the type of use; c) there are no negative impacts on key natural features and or key hydrologic features or their functions; d) there are no negative impacts on the biodiversity or connectivity of the Natural Heritage System.”

Toronto's Official Plan Land Use Plan Map 22 designates the subject property as “Natural Areas”, and the western part of the property is identified as part of the Natural Heritage System (Map 9). Section 4.3 of the Toronto OP states that Natural Areas are to be maintained primarily in a natural state. OPA Section 3.4 states that development is generally not permitted in the natural heritage system. National Rouge Park Legislation The proposed TWC building site is located within the proposed National Rouge Park. The legislation for the National Park is being updated to state:

6 (1) Maintenance or restoration of ecological integrity, through the protection of natural resources and natural processes, must be the first priority of the Minister when considering all aspects of the management of the Park.

Ecological integrity has two key elements: 1) the protection and restoration of native biodiversity and natural processes; and 2) the minimization of unnatural stressors. The construction and operation of the proposed TWC building would be an unnatural stressor which would interfere with the protection and restoration of native biodiversity and natural processes.

8

9

10

11

David Michael Bastoli 1185 Vanrose Street, Apartment 203

Mississauga, Ontario L5V 1W7

May 16, 2017

Board of DirectorsToronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)5 Shoreham DriveDownsview, ON  M3N 1S4

Re: Toronto Wildlife Centre – Meeting #4/17 – Agenda Item 7.3

Dear Board Members,

I am writing in support of the recommendation that TRCA re-confirm its backing of the Toronto Wildlife Centre (TWC), specifically their proposal to build a wildlife rescue and education centre in the Rouge National Urban Park, as well as the related recommendations.

As an individual who values the abundance of wildlife in the Toronto region, I am confident that this new facility will represent a major step forward in providing care and rehabilitation to injured animals and educating the public on wildlife issues.

The growing presence of wildlife in urban environments is a pressing issue for cities in Canada and worldwide. This past Saturday we woke up to the news that a wild black bear had entered a Scarborough neighbourhood overnight, and was subsequently killed by police, for no reason other than the lack of resources to immobilize and relocate.

Sadly this type of ‘resolution’ to real or perceived wildlife threats is not limited to unusual species like bears. Last summer, Toronto police shot and injured an already sick coyote. Results like these are inhumane and disturbing. More education is clearly needed at all levels. The proposed centre could aid greatly in this.

Our area is privileged to have TWC with its excellent track record. With proper funding, their proposed new centre would make the Toronto area a world leader on these issues. I encourage you to please help make it happen.

Sincerely,

David Michael Bastoli

via e-mail to the attention ofKathy Stranks, kstranks@trca.on.ca

Correspondence 6.2

12

Item 7.1

Section I – Items for Authority Action TO: Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #04/17, Friday, May 19, 2017 FROM: Nick Saccone, Senior Director, Restoration and Infrastructure RE: HIGHLAND CREEK AT UTSC (AREA C) BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT,

CITY OF TORONTO Award of Contract #10003762 ____________________________________________________________________________ KEY ISSUE Award of Contract #10003762 for the supply of all labour, equipment, and materials necessary for the construction of a vegetated rock buttress and removal of existing dilapidated sheet pile structures for the Highland Creek at UTSC (Area C) Bank Stabilization Project, in the City of Toronto. RECOMMENDATION THAT Contract #10003762 for the supply of all labour, equipment, and materials necessary for the construction of a vegetated rock buttress and removal of existing dilapidated sheet piling for the Highland Creek at UTSC (Area C) Bank Stabilization Project, in the City of Toronto be awarded to McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. at a total cost of $298,830.00, plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 20% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to achieve an acceptable contract with the awarded contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractors that submitted quotations, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as is necessary to implement the contract, including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. BACKGROUND TRCA has been undertaking erosion control works along Highland Creek between Morningside Avenue and Old Kingston Road since the late 1980s. In 2013-2014, TRCA completed bank restoration works along the east bank of Highland Creek approximately 120 metres downstream of the Morningside Avenue Bridge to protect a trail (Area A). In December 2015, TRCA completed a trail realignment project along another section of trail that was eroding known as Area B to address public safety concerns. Due to sensitive terrestrial habitat, TRCA installed a raised trail supported on helical piles to minimize disturbance in this area. TRCA is currently undertaking a design to stabilize the bank along Area B in order mitigate long term erosion concerns.

13

Item 7.1

The area being addressed under Contract#10003762, known as Area C was identified to TRCA during the planning stages of this project back in 2014 however, planning and design was deferred to subsequent funding years while TRCA helped the City of Toronto tackle higher priority erosion sites elsewhere in the Highland Creek Watershed. A map has been appended to this report showing the location of Areas A, B and C in relation to one another. Within Area C, a sheet pile weir and retaining wall that initially prevented erosion at a sharp meander were installed sometime between 1967 and 1977. Aerial imagery shows that this structure was outflanked between December 2005 and April 2007 compromising the structural integrity of the weir and retaining walls. The structure is now accelerating erosion locally by directing flows towards the unprotected south bank. Continued erosion will threaten an existing asphalt pedestrian path that is approximately 6 metres from the eroding bank. The proposed bank stabilization works will tie into an existing concrete retaining wall immediately downstream of the scour to provide long-term protection through this area. The scope of work includes removal of dilapidated sheet pile infrastructure, regrading of the existing bank, and construction of a densely planted vegetated rock buttress. Site restoration works will include native tree plantings, asphalt repaving, and the installation of a cedar post & paddle fence to ensure public safety. Implementation for this contract is tentatively scheduled to commence July 3, 2017 and the substantial completion date is August 31, 2017. RATIONALE A Request for Pre-Qualification (RFPQ) for Contract #10003762 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http://www.biddingo.com) on Tuesday, January 31, 2017 with 28 contractors being registered as full document takers. TRCA received pre-qualification packages from 16 contractors by the RFPQ closing date of Friday, February 10, 2017. Following TRCA staff’s review of pre-qualification packages and internal and external reference checks, a total of 13 contractors were pre-qualified. The Request for Tender (RFT) documents were then issued to the pre-qualified bidders on Monday, April 10, 2017 and a mandatory site information meeting was held on Tuesday, April 18, 2017. The mandatory site information meeting was attended by the following pre-qualified contractors:

Bronte Construction Ltd.

Clearwater Structures Inc.

CSL Group Ltd.

Dynex Construction Inc.

Galcon Marine Ltd.

Ground Force Environmental Inc.

Hawkins Contracting Services Ltd.

McPherson-Andrew Contracting Ltd.

R&M Construction

The Ontario Construction Company Ltd.

Trisan Construction

The Tender closed on April 25, 2017 at 12:00 PM and the Procurement Opening Committee opened the Tenders that same day at 12:15 PM with the following results:

14

Item 7.1

CONTRACT #10003762 TENDER RESULTS

BIDDERS TOTAL CONTRACT

AMOUNT (excl. HST)

McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. $298,830.00

R&M Construction $329,201.00

Dynex Construction Inc. $343,242.00

Bronte Construction Ltd. $395,744.90

Hawkins Contracting Services Ltd. $424,076.30

Ground Force Environmental Inc. $446,710.14

The Ontario Construction Company Ltd. $474,925.00

CSL Group Ltd. $516,566.50

Restoration and Infrastructure Division staff reviewed the bid received from McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. against its own cost estimate and has determined that the bid is of reasonable value and also meets the requirements as outlined in the contract documents. TRCA has worked with McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. on similar projects which resulted in positive feedback and confidence that McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. is capable of undertaking the scope of work. TRCA staff recommends that Contract #10003762 be awarded to McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. for a total cost not to exceed $298,830.00, plus a 20% contract contingency, plus HST as they are the lowest bidder meeting TRCA’s specifications. TRCA staff recommends a 20% contract contingency in the event of soft or wet ground conditions during backfilling operations which may require installation of 50mm clear stone rather than the prescribed backfill material which consists of compacted Granular B (Type 1), and for additional paving that may be required along the access route. Under TRCA’s 10-Year Strategic Plan (2013-2022), this project is aligned with Leadership Strategy #2 “Manage our Regional Water Resources for Current and Future Generations”, as the proposed works will contribute to maximizing the resilience of our water systems in preparation for predicted changes in climate change by locally increasing the channel’s flow capacity while mitigating risks to public safety by stabilizing the bank and providing long term protection for the recreational trail. Additionally, this project aligns with Enabling Strategy #7 “Build Partnerships and New Business Models.” TRCA has completed similar work on behalf of the City of Toronto multiple times allowing us to demonstrate TRCA’s expertise and capability in performing this critical maintenance thereby increasing TRCA’s financial resilience. FINANCIAL DETAILS The cost of this project is 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto within Account #186-28. Report prepared by: Chris Scholz, 416-642-7518 Emails: chris.scholz@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Ashour Rehana, 647-808-6542 Emails: ashour.rehana@trca.on.ca Date: April 26, 2017 Attachments: 1

15

16

Item 7.2

Section I – Items for Authority Action TO: Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #4/17, Friday, May 19, 2017 FROM: Nick Saccone, Senior Director, Restoration and Infrastructure RE: NEWBOLD-BEATON RAVINE TRAIL PROJECT Design Build Services for the Construction of a 20m Steel Boardwalk ____________________________________________________________________________ KEY ISSUE Award of Contract #10004322 for engineering and construction services of a 20 metre steel boardwalk at Newbold-Beaton Ravine Trail, in the City of Toronto RECOMMENDATION THAT Contract #10004322 for engineering and construction services of a 20 metre steel boardwalk at Newbold-Beaton Ravine Trail, in the City of Toronto be awarded to McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. at a total cost not to exceed $223,829.00 , plus HST, as they are the lowest bidder that best meets Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) specifications; THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 10% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to execute an acceptable contract with the awarded contractor, staff be authorized to enter into and conclude contract negotiations with the other contractors that submitted tenders, beginning with the next lowest bidder meeting TRCA specifications; AND FURTHER THAT authorized TRCA officials be directed to take such action as is necessary to implement the contract, including obtaining any required approvals and the signing and execution of documents. BACKGROUND TRCA is working on behalf of City of Toronto. These works are expected to increase public safety and provide improved public access along the trail from Newbold to Beaton Avenues. In accordance with Parks, Forestry and Recreation (PF&R) Policies and Service Plans, we have coordinated with various Division, Agencies and Utilities as project stakeholders. Urban Forestry Ravine and Natural Features Protection have been included in the process since project initiation and have provided feedback and comments on the conceptual and detailed drawings. As a result, this PF&R project has been designed to: • minimize the number of trees impacted; • minimize the number of trees to be removed; • provide full restoration of all areas of disturbance (trees, shrubs & seeding); and • provide compensation plantings for tree removals and injuries. The final design solution is consistent with City of Toronto Official Plan and Strategic Plan policies, Regulations and Bylaws; including the Ravine and Natural Features Bylaw (RNFP).

17

Item 7.2

As a part of the final design and expected construction implementation, it has been determined that it will be necessary to remove 12 trees greater than 10 cm, 44 trees less than 10cm, and injure an additional 54 trees. Note that only 1 of the larger trees to be removed is a native species, and all are of low protection priority. Based on RNFP guidelines and correspondence with RNFP staff, a 3:1 re-planting ratio is to be provided for those trees greater 10 cm to be removed, a 1:1 ratio for trees less than 10 cm to be removed, and a 1:1 ratio for tree injuries. In addition, all areas of disturbance are to be restored with native seeding, plus additional tree and shrub planting wherever appropriate. RATIONALE Design-Build Request for Proposals (RFP) for general contractors for Contract #10004322 was publicly advertised on the electronic procurement website Biddingo (http://www.biddingo.com/) on Monday, March 27th, 2017. The submissions were evaluated on a weighted scoring system consisting of 70% technical criteria and the remaining 30% on the fee proposal. The evaluation criteria included the following:

Experience, qualifications, and availability of Consultant and its employees proposed for the Services;

Consultant’s understanding of the Services, Project and Scope of Work;

Experience with similar projects;

Proposed approach and methodology for the coordination of services including an assessment of any anticipated difficulties and the proposed approach to overcome them; and

Reasonableness of cost. Request for Proposal documents were received by the following Eight (8) general contractors:

Hobden Construction;

TPI International;

CSL Group;

Green Space Landscaping;

Algonquin Bridge;

TBG Environmental;

Landtar Construction; and

McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. Proposals closed on April 24, 2017 at 12:00pm and were opened by the Procurement Opening Committee on April 24, 2017 at 1:00pm. Members of the Selection Committee, consisting of TRCA staff (Chris Ulcar, Michelle Guy and

James Dickie) reviewed the submitted proposals and evaluated them based on the

aforementioned criteria. The results of the evaluation are as follows:

18

Item 7.2

BIDDERS Technical 70%

Financial 30%

TOTAL TENDER AMOUNT (Plus HST)

Overall Ranking

McPherson-Andrews Contracting 1 1 $223,819.00 1

CSL Group 3 2 $224,950.00 2

Landtar Construction 2 3 $281,460.00 3

TBG Environmental 4 4 $424,375.65 4

Based on the evaluation of the received proposals, it was determined that the combined technical and fee proposal valued at $223,819.00, submitted by McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. offered the best service for value among the general contractors whose technical capacity matched the project needs. Therefore staff recommends that McPherson-Andrews Contracting Ltd. be awarded Contract #10004322 at a total amount not to exceed $223,819.00, to be expended as authorized by TRCA staff, plus a 10% contingency, plus HST; it being the highest ranked proposal. FINANCIAL DETAILS The cost of the project is 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto within Account #117-62 Report prepared by: Michelle Guy, extension 5905 Emails: mguy@trca.on.ca For Information contact: James Dickie, extension 5906 Emails: jdickie@trca.on.ca Date: May 5, 2017

19

Item 7.3

Section I – Items for Authority Action TO: Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #4/17, May 19, 2017 FROM: Mike Fenning, Associate Director, Property and Risk Management RE: TORONTO WILDLIFE CENTRE Development of wildlife rescue, rehabilitation and education centre serving the

Greater Toronto Area CFN 32060 ____________________________________________________________________________ KEY ISSUE Receipt of request from the City of Toronto to assist in the development of a wildlife rescue, rehabilitation and education centre serving the Greater Toronto Area with the Toronto Wildlife Centre. RECOMMENDATION THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority re-confirm its support of the proposal by Toronto Wildlife Centre (TWC) for a wildlife rescue, rehabilitation and education centre (Centre) for the Greater Toronto Area in the Rouge National Urban Park; THAT staff approach the City of Toronto and the Regions of Durham, Peel and York to explore new funding support for the construction of the Centre based upon the design developed by Stanford Downey Architects Inc.; THAT staff work with the TWC to explore funding for the Centre from the federal and provincial governments, and other potential partners; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Executive Committee at a future date on funding support for the Centre. BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #8/12, held on October 26, 2012, Resolution #A206/12 was approved as follows:

THAT the proposal by Toronto Wildlife Centre for a 20,000 square foot wildlife hospital and rehabilitation/training/public education centre be supported; THAT a 20 year $1 per year lease for approximately 20 acres of land on the 6461 and/or 6545 Steeles Avenue East, Toronto, be approved, subject to submission of a site plan and business plan to the satisfaction of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s Chief Administrative Officer and solicitors; THAT TRCA create a steering committee to address future wildlife rehabilitation needs in the Greater Toronto Area; AND FURTHER THAT staff report back to the Executive Committee at a future date.

20

Item 7.3

At City of Toronto Council Meeting No. 25, held on February 15, 2017, Item EX22.2 - 2017 Capital and Operating Budgets (All Wards), was approved in part, as follows:

97. City Council request the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, in cooperation with its member municipalities, the Toronto Wildlife Centre, the Provincial and Federal Governments and other potential partners, to develop a project under the Conservation Authorities Act to establish a Toronto Region Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre, and to include in the Toronto and Region Conservation Authorities' 2018 Budget submission, the necessary funds to continue work on the project.

The Board of Directors of Toronto Wildlife Centre at its meeting held on April 17, 2017, adopted the following resolution:

The Board of Directors of Toronto Wildlife Centre agrees in principle to enter into a further partnership agreement with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), as per the Feb. 15, 2017 City of Toronto Motion. It is our understanding that the proposed agreement is for TRCA, in cooperation with its member municipalities, to include in its 2018 budget submission $15M in capital funding towards establishing a Toronto Region Wildlife Rescue, Rehabilitation and Education Centre; a project under the Conservation Authorities Act. It is our understanding that these funds are to be matching funds, and that Toronto Wildlife Centre, a partner in this project, is expected in turn to raise a minimum of $10M cash and $5M in-kind (donated goods and services) as its contribution; the $10M to form an endowment fund for the operating costs of the new facility. It is our understanding that other partners may include the Provincial and Federal Governments and other potential partners. It is also our understanding that TWC will be able to maintain naming and recognition opportunities at the new facility in order to help secure community support for this project.

Toronto Wildlife Centre (TWC) is a registered charity founded in 1992 by a small group of volunteers, who were concerned that there was no help for sick, injured or orphaned wildlife in the Toronto area. Led by TWC Executive Director Nathalie Karvonen, the group spent their first year running a basic wildlife hotline from a rented phone, and gathering resources to open a wildlife centre where wild animals could be admitted for rehabilitation. On March 28, 1993, the TWC opened its doors for the first time, and they have remained open ever since, 365 days a year.

Today, TWC is composed of an extremely diverse and experienced team of wildlife veterinarians, wildlife rehabilitators, animal rescue staff, wildlife hotline experts, and approximately 500 volunteers working in all areas of the centre, from wildlife care to carpentry to administration.

It is the only veterinary hospital and rehabilitation facility for sick, injured and orphaned wild animals in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) and the busiest wildlife centre in Canada. Admitting approximately 5,000 patients each year representing over 270 unique species (including many species at risk) and helping tens of thousands more via an internationally admired wildlife emergency hotline and a myriad of public education initiatives, TWC is a leader in the field of wildlife rehabilitation.

21

Item 7.3

TWC’s main centre of operations is currently a 14,000 square foot facility located in Parc Downsview Park in Toronto. This facility is home to TWC’s Wildlife Hotline office, a veterinary hospital, a variety of indoor wildlife rehabilitation enclosures, fundraising offices, oiled wildlife washing facilities, and outdoor caging. The lease currently expires in January, 2018. These premises are in poor condition and scheduled for demolition at the end of the lease. TWC also currently maintains a small outdoor rehabilitation and acclimatization facility in the Rouge National Urban Park.

The original proposal from TWC in 2012 was for the construction of a new 20,000 square foot facility. Since that time, Stanford Downey Architects Inc. has undertaken a review of TWC’s operation during the design phase for the new facility and has determined, to meet the long term requirements of TWC, the new facility would include the following components: a proposed new two storey building and rescue workshop of approximate 4,853 square meters (52,235 square feet); renovation of the existing barn of approximate 517 square meters (5,565 square feet); renovation of the existing residential house of approximately 518 square meters (5,571 square feet); construction of a new 2 storey bulk storage shed of approximate152 square meters (1,633 square feet); and construction of new outdoor animal enclosures. Since approval of the resolution in 2012, TRCA staff has been assisting TWC in obtaining the necessary approvals to establish its new permanent location at 6461 Steeles Avenue East, within the Rouge National Urban Park. The main outstanding issue related to the approvals is the water supply to the facility. The existing residential house is services by a well, however, it doesn’t appear to have the capacity to service the entire new facility. The closest City of Toronto watermain is located approximately 1 kilometre to the west. Extending the watermain to the site will be a significant cost and there are issues around the maintenance and operation of the system. Staff is currently working with City of Toronto and TWC to develop potential shorter term solutions for the water supply issue such as well(s) and reservoir(s) and longer term solution such as connection to municipal water either the City of Toronto or Regional Municipality of York. TRCA lands located at 6461 Steels Avenue, Toronto, consists of 67.91 acres of land, improved with a residential dwelling and outbuildings were acquired from Runnymede Development Corporation Limited in 2010. This parcel of land is included in the “Memorandum of Agreement Respecting the Assembly of Land for the Proposed Rouge National Urban Park” and in scheduled to be transferred to Parks Canada. TWC has been using the residential dwelling for an intern residence since 2015. RATIONALE Naturalization efforts by TRCA and our partners have enhanced the quality and quantity of open space and valley lands in proximity to development, which has re-introduced a number of species to these urban and urbanizing areas. With this increase in development in proximity to open space, there has been a corresponding increase in conflicts between humans and wildlife. Supporting and assisting TWC with the development of a wildlife rescue, rehabilitation and education centre will allow for the mitigation of conflicts between humans and wildlife. Since, TWC is a charitable organization and their operations are currently only supported by donations and in-kind gifts which will not be sufficient to support the capital requirement needed to move forward with the development of this permanent facility necessary to service the GTA, there is a need for Government funding support to assist TWC with their new facility.

22

Item 7.3

FINANCIAL DETAILS Based on the current design as proposed by TWC, the costs including base building, design, and contingency would be in the $20 million range. Not included in this estimate are consultants’ fees; project and construction management; furniture and equipment; permits, development charges, approvals and legal fees; disbursements; testing and inspections; financing; moving expenses and HST. Staff also recommend creating a maintenance reserve/endowment fund in the $10 million range to ensure that there is available budget to undertake a proactive operation, maintenance and replacement schedule based on the Project life cycle requirements. It is proposed that staff enter into discussions with City of Toronto and the Regions of Durham, Peel and York (Participating Municipalities) staff related to including a request for special funding in their respective capital budgets for construction of a wildlife rescue, rehabilitation and education centre. Staff is recommending the Participating Municipalities contributions be based on the annual Modified Current Value Assessment (CVA) formula; which is subject to annual updating. Staff is also recommending this be an equal partnership between TWC and TRCA with TWC matching the Participating Municipalities contributions with donations of money and in kind services. TWC would also like to retain right for naming opportunities for the facility to offer to their donors. Staff will also explore opportunities for other grant funding contributions and federal and provincial infrastructure funding programs. If successful, these funds would be used to offset the participating municipal contributions. DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE

Approach City of Toronto and the Regions of Durham, Peel and York for special funding support for the construction of a new wildlife facility in the Rouge National Urban Park.

Work with TWC and the City of Toronto to resolve the water supply issue.

Continue discussions with TWC and Parks Canada regarding the arrangement for utilization of the site for a wildlife rescue, rehabilitation and education centre.

Explore other funding opportunities.

Work with TWC to finalize design and construction costs of the facility.

Determine whether TRCA or TWC will manage the construction of the facility.

Work with TWC to determine who will be responsible for managing the maintenance reserve/endowment fund and how it will be managed.

Work with TWC to develop a plan for naming opportunities for the facility. Report prepared by: Nadia Wells, extension 5859; Mike Fenning, extension 5223 Emails: nwells@trca.on.ca; mfenning@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Mike Fenning, extension 5223) Emails: mfenning@trca.on.ca Date: May 9, 2017 Attachments: 3

23

STEELES AVE E

9TH LINE

0 200 400Meters

F© Queen’s Printer for Ontario and its licensors. [2017] May Not be Reproduced without Permis s ion. THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY.

PEEL

YORK DURHAM

TORONTO

Lake Ontario

Key Map

LegendSubject PropertyWatercours es

! ! ! ! ! ! FloodlineRegulation LimitTRCA PropertyParcel As s es s ment

Subject Property#

Rouge River

^SITE

24

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1. New two storey building

2. New rescue workshop

3. New two storey bulk storage shed

4. Existing residential house

5. Existing barn

25

Item 7.4

Section I – Items for Authority Action TO: Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #4/16, Friday, May 19, 2017 FROM: Mike Fenning, Associate Director, Property and Risk Management RE: PROJECT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE

BUILDING FOR TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY Request for Proposal #10004404 ____________________________________________________________________________ KEY ISSUE Award of contract for professional project management services to ensure overall delivery of the project to construct Toronto and Region Conservation Authority’s new administrative office building located at 5 Shoreham Drive, Toronto, within the confirmed project budget and schedule.

RECOMMENDATION THAT Contract #10004404 for Project Management Services in support of the Project for the Construction of an Administrative Office Building for Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) be awarded to Jones Lang LaSalle for a total cost not to exceed $848,630.00, plus HST, it being the highest ranked proponent resulting from evaluation criteria set out in the Request for Proposal (RFP); THAT TRCA staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 20% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement with the above-mentioned proponent, staff be authorized to enter into contract negotiations with the next highest ranked proponent; AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the necessary action to implement the contract including the signing and execution of documents. BACKGROUND At Authority Meeting #5/16, held on June 24, 2016, Resolution #A85/16 approved the construction of an administrative office building at 5 Shoreham Drive in Toronto and directed staff to take the necessary action to complete the Project, including the submission of formal requests for approval to the participating municipalities and the Province of Ontario. On February 24, 2017, staff reported at Authority Meeting #1/17 that all six of TRCA’s participating municipalities, by way of their respective Councils, had approved the Project and the allocation of $60,000,000 in new and existing capital funding toward the Project. On March 27, 2017 staff submitted a formal request to the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry for approval of the Project and a rate of interest. Minister’s approval pursuant to the requirements of Section 3(5) and 24 of the Conservation Authorities Act is required in order to satisfy the lending conditions of a financial institution for funds borrowed for the Project and to allocate approximately $10 million to the Project from existing and future land sale disposition proceeds. Staff anticipates a response from the Province of Ontario within the next two months.

26

Item 7.4

Staff is currently procuring the services of a comprehensive team to provide final design and project management support through site plan, tendering and construction phases of the Project, based on the schematic design completed by DTAH Architects Limited in 2016. RATIONALE TRCA advertised a Request for Proposal for Project Management Services in support of the Project on April 18, 2017. On May 12, 2017, the Procurement Opening Committee opened five complete proposals and one incomplete submission as follows:

Consultant Fees (plus HST)

p2i strategies ltd. $814,410.00

Jones Lang LaSalle $848,630.00

Turner & Townsend $1,050,000.00

METTKO $1,112,763.60

AECOM $2,081,726.00

Future Insulation Systems Disqualified

The Selection Committee consisting of TRCA staff (Aaron D’Souza, Mike Fenning and Laura Stephenson) reviewed the proposals based on a weighted scoring system consisting of 80% based on the technical review of the proposal and the remaining 20% on the fee proposal. The criteria used to evaluate the submissions and to select the recommended consultant included the following:

Experience, qualifications, and availability of the consultant and its employees proposed for the services;

Consultant’s understanding of the services, Project and scope of work;

Proposed approach and methodology for the services including an assessment of any anticipated difficulties and the proposed approach to overcome them;

Proposed schedule, benchmarks, timelines and work plan, and ability to comply with proposed schedule;

Relevant Project examples; and

Cost of services.

The results of the evaluation of received proposals are as follows:

Consultant Ranking

Jones Lang LaSalle 1

p2i strategies ltd. 2

METTKO 3

Turner & Townsend 4

AECOM 5

Based on the evaluation results and the results of TRCA reference checks, it was determined that the technical proposal and fee proposal submitted by Jones Lang LaSalle was the highest rank proposal meeting the needs of TRCA’s Project and offering the best value for services. FINANCIAL DETAILS The final design and site plan approval process will be undertaken between October 2017 and into early 2019, followed by construction and commissioning phases that will conclude in 2021. The cost of the contract is $848,630, plus 20% contingency, plus HST. Funds are available in the Capital Budget for the contract period of 2017 – 2021, in account 006-50.

27

Item 7.4

DETAILS OF WORK TO BE DONE On May 11, 2017 a Request for Statement of Qualifications for Architectural, Landscape Architecture and Professional Engineering Services was issued to invite firms to pre-qualify to provide these services to TRCA. Following this process TRCA will evaluate the consultant submissions and invite the top five by service area to participate in the second phase of the bid competition. During the Request for Proposal phase, the pre-qualified consultants will be invited to prepare and submit a technical proposal. The results of this process are expected to be reported to the Authority on September 22, 2017. Report prepared by: Laura Stephenson, extension 5296 Emails: lstephenson@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Laura Stephenson, extension 5296 Emails: lstephenson@trca.on.ca Date: May 17, 2017

28