1 Working Session #3 Alternatives September 7, 2005 Website: http://www.trca.on.ca/water_protection/don_mouth/default.asp?load=whats_new Phone: 416-661-6600
2 Meeting Purpose � To review the EA process � To provide an overview of why and how evaluation methods are used in an EA � To present how the evaluations are proposed to be conducted as part of this EA � To present a preliminary discussion on evaluation criteria � To learn from the public what additional information should be considered
3 West Don Lands Existing and Flood Protection Landform Planned Don River Park Revitalization Initiatives and Rail Bridge Extension Infrastructure Gardiner Lakeshore/Rail Port Lands Commissioners Park Don Greenway Cherry St. Bridge Modification Potential Queens Quay Re-alignment Lake Ontario Park East Bayfront
9-18 Months 1 – 5 Years 4 Project Schedule
5 Stage 1 – Consultation Framework • Study Objectives • Proposed Undertaking • Draft Terms of Reference • Study Areas • Scope of Studies • Alternatives Framework • Description of Environment • Consultation • Evaluation Criteria • Alternatives To and Alternative Methods • Consultation Plan
6 EA Process – Two Steps The key difference between a ToR and carrying out the EA is: � The ToR outlines what will be done and how it will be done � During the EA, the process described in the ToR will be carried out. What will be done What will be done Doing it Doing it and how and how
7 Project Purpose - Goal and Objectives (public comments not yet added) � Goal � To establish and sustain the form, features, and function of a natural river mouth within the context of an urban environment. � Objectives � Naturalize the Mouth of the Don River Mouth � Provide Flood Protection � Manage operation of the river (sediment, debris and ice management) � Integrate existing infrastructure functions that could not be reasonably moved. (including road, rails, utilities, trails, and power) � Support additional compatible recreational, cultural, and heritage opportunities � Coordinate with other planning efforts for the revitalization of the waterfront and associated certain and reasonably foreseeable infrastructure
8
9 Goals � Highlights of public feedback: � People generally satisfied with the goal as written � Additional detail on definitions of “form, features, and functions” would be helpful � Integrate concept of “sustainable” � “Urban” environment vs “City” environment
10 Objectives � Highlights of public feedback: � Integrate “diversity” of species � Recognize need for balance between “human fix” and “leave it to nature” � Include the opportunity for infrastructure to be removed (in addition to “reasonably moved”) � Not negatively impact existing recreational facilities, and look at opportunities to expand existing recreational facilities � See this project influence other projects in an ecologically responsible way – and consider including this as an Objective � Integrate the concepts of accessibility, sustainability, creative remediation, and adaptive management should be considered for integration into the Objectives � Work with private landowners – as an Objective
11 Naturalization Study Area
12 Protection Study Area Flood
13 Key Definitions � Naturalization - permitting natural, sustainable ecosystem functions to control a natural area � Alternative to – alternative ways of carrying out the project – in our case each way is defined by an alternate discharge point for the river � Alternative method – the development of each “alternative to” through the combination of forms and features to create natural river mouth functions. � Evaluation method – a formal procedure for establishing an order of preference among alternatives
14 Key Definitions ……continued � Weighting – importance assigned to an attribute relative to other attributes � Trade offs – attributes that are kept over others that are viewed as less important � Criteria/criterion – explicit considerations on which a comparison is based � Indicators – ways that each criterion is measured
15 What is an Evaluation Methodology in an EA? � Formal procedures to establish an order of preference between alternatives � Develop evaluation criteria and indicators based on the project goal and objectives � Requires trade offs by keeping more desirable attributes over those less desirable � Incorporate public values through weighting and trade offs � Decisions should be traceable, replicable and understandable
16 Alternatives Level of Detail With each evaluation With each evaluation With each evaluation step the level of detail With each evaluation step the level of detail step the number step the number in data collection, in data collection, of alternatives of alternatives the design of alternatives, the design of alternatives, decreases decreases and analysis increases and analysis increases
17 Types of Evaluation Methods � Different evaluation methods may be used � Methods can be qualitative (e.g. trade offs), quantitative (e.g. mathematical) or a combination � Objectives are defined by criteria (sometimes grouped by technical discipline), criteria are measured by indicators � Weights are used to identify differences in importance when comparing objectives, criteria, and indicators � Measurement of indicators requires data � Data can be quantitative (e.g. # of hectares of wetland created), qualitative (e.g. views created) or a combination
18 Roles of the Public in Evaluations During the EA � Provide comment on evaluation methodology � Provide comment on objectives, criteria and indicators � Provide input to the weighting and trade offs
19 List of “Alternatives to” 1. Start with list of “alternatives to” from initial presentation 2. Give consideration to other “alternatives to” from the public – Extend alternative #3 through the Ship Channel, and out to the Outer Harbour – Consider a discharge point to Ashbridges Bay to the east – Split flow in three directions by adding a third discharge point emptying into the lake creating a natural delta
20 Alternatives To Alternatives To 1. Do Nothing 2. River with discharge to the inner harbour 3. River with discharge through the Port Lands 4. Combination of Discharge Point (Primary and Regional flood Overflow) 5. Third discharge into lake creating delta 6. Eastern discharge point
21 Determination of “Alternatives To’s” from the ToR � All “alternatives to” will be evaluated to determine whether they meet each of the project objectives: 1. naturalization 2. flood control 3. manage the operation of the river 4. integrate with existing infrastructure 5. support compatible recreational, cultural, and heritage opportunities 6. coordinate with other planning efforts “Alt To’s” � Only those “alternatives to” that meet all from ToR of the project objectives will be carried forward
22 Stepwise Process to Identify “Alternative Methods” Alternative Long List Reduced Preferred Short List To’s of Short List Alternative from ToR Alt.Methods (if necessary) Only required if Short List greater than 10 Step 4: Step 4: Step2: Step 3: Step 3: Step2: Step1: Step1: Detailed Initial Screen/ Combine Comparison Comparison Refine Functions
23 Step 1 – Develop Long List Step 1A – Develop Functions Identify forms and features which combine to deliver positive individual functions that meet the Naturalization and Flood Protection Objectives for the project Long List Alternative To’s from of ToR Alt Methods
24 Step 1 – Develop Long List Step 1B- Combine Functions to Identify “Alternative Methods” Identify different combinations of positive functions that will meet the Naturalization and Flood Protection Objectives resulting in the long list of “alternative methods” Long List Alternative To’s from of ToR Alt Methods
25 Step 2 Long List to Short List Step 2A Technical Feasibility Assessment � Assess the Long List of “Alternative Methods” to determine which are technically feasible � “Alternative methods” not technically feasible will be eliminated - those remaining will be short listed � Criteria used in the assessment will only consider the naturalization and flood protection objectives Long List Short List of Alt Methods
26 Step 2ATechnical Feasibility Assessment Examples of Criteria and Indicators Objective Wt Criteria Wt Indicators Wt 1. Naturalization 1.1 Creation of functional 1.1.1 Area of aquatic habitat habitat 1.1.2 Area of terrestrial habitat 1.1.3 Increase in biodiversity of native birds/amphibians 1.1.4 Use of habitat for migratory species; for foraging for post-dispersal species. 1.2 Creation of self- 1.2.1 Percent cover of native sustaining native plant vegetation. communities Increase in biodiversity of native plant species. 1.2.2 Percent of non-native invasive species present
Recommend
More recommend
