Ministry Review for the Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment

Transcription

1 Ministry Review for the Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment

2 NEED MORE INFORMATION? Public Record Locations The public record for this amended environmental assessment can be reviewed during normal business hours at the following ministry office: Ministry of the Environment Environmental Approvals Branch 2 St.Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, Ontario Voice: (416) / Fax: (416) The Review and Notice of Completion are also available at the following locations: Ministry of the Environment Central Region Office 5775 Yonge Street, 8th Floor North York, ON M2M 4J1 (416) Regional Municipality of York Office of the Regional Clerk Yonge Street, 4th Floor Newmarket, ON L3Y 6Z ext Woodside Square Library Woodside Square Mall 1571 Sandhurst Circle Toronto, ON M1V 1V Ministry of the Environment Environmental Approvals Branch 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, Ontario M4V 1L5 (416) Town of Markham Office of the Town Clerk 101 Town Centre Boulevard Markham, ON L3R 9W3 (905) City of Toronto Scarborough Civic Centre Clerk s Department 150 Borough Drive Toronto, ON M1P 4N Markham Village Library 6031 Highway 7 Markham, ON L3P 3A This Review is subject to the provisions of Ontario Regulation 616/98 which sets out a deadline for the completion of this document. The deadline for the completion of the Review was November 18, This paragraph and the giving of the Notice of Completion are the notices required by subsection 7(3) of the Environmental Assessment Act. The Review documents the ministry s evaluation of the EA and takes the comments of the government agencies, the public and Aboriginal communities into consideration. Cette publication hautement spécialisée n est disponible qu en anglais en vertu du règlement 441/97, qui en exempte l application de la Loi sur les services en français. Pour obtenir de l aide en français, veuillez communiquer avec le ministère de l Environnement au

3 Ministry Review for the Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review prepared pursuant to subsection 7(1) of the Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O Province of Ontario by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch PIBS 8594e Queen s Printer for Ontario, 2011 For more information: call or toll free pic .moe@ontario.ca

4 Table of Contents Executive Summary Environmental Assessment Process Terms of Reference Environmental Assessment Ministry Review The Proposed Undertaking Results of the Ministry Review Conformance with ToR and EAA Ministry Analysis Consultation Conclusion EA Process Key Issues Conclusion Proposed Undertaking Key Issues Conclusion Summary of the Ministry Review What Happens Now? Additional Approvals Required Modifying or Amending the Proposed Undertaking List of Appendices Appendix A Environmental Assessment Act Requirements Appendix B Submissions Received During the Initial Comment Period Appendix C Supplemental Information List of Tables Table 1 Government Review Team Comment Summary Table Table 2 Public Comment Summary Table Table 3 Aboriginal Communities Comment Summary Table

5 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review Executive Summary WHO WHAT The Regional Municipality of York Ministry Review of an Amended Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed undertaking which includes: A four-lane urban arterial roadway extension of Morningside Avenue from McNicoll Avenue north to Steeles Avenue; a widening of Steeles Avenue to a six-lane urban roadway from east of Tapscott Road to east of Ninth Line; a widening of Ninth Line to a four-lane urban roadway from Steeles Avenue to the south limit of the Box Grove Development Area; and, new ramps at the Donald Cousens Parkway and Highway 407 Interchange to provide access onto Highway 407 from the south. The undertaking also includes a new crossing of the Neilson Tributary and replacement of the existing Steeles Avenue crossings of the Rouge River and Morningside Tributary. WHEN Amended EA Submitted: July 19, WHERE WHY CONCLUSIONS Ministry Review comment period: December 2, 2011 to January 13, 2012 Southeast Markham and Northeast Toronto (Scarborough). To address the capacity deficiencies between southeast portion of the Town of Markham and northeast portion of the City of Toronto The proposed transportation improvements will benefit the communities the Town of Markham and the developed areas and the proposed to be developed areas of the north-eastern are of the City of Toronto. The proposed mitigation methods and contingencies will ensure that any potential negative impacts will be minimized and managed. Based on the government Review of the EA, the ministry has concluded that the EA has been carried out in accordance with section 6(2) (c) of the Environmental Assessment Act. However, the ministry has also concluded that there is an outstanding issue of jurisdiction and York s ability to implement the undertaking as contemplated in the amended EA. November 18,

6 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review 1. Environmental Assessment Process Environmental Assessment (EA) is a proponent driven planning process designed to incorporate the consideration of the environment into decision making. This is done by assessing the effects of an undertaking on the environment. In Ontario, the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) sets out the general contents for the preparation of an EA, as well as the ministry s evaluation process. For those proponents and undertakings subject the EAA, approval under the Act is required before the undertaking can proceed. Proponents address a wide range of potential effects on the natural, social, cultural and economic environments to ensure the protection, conservation and wise management of the environment. An EA determines, on the basis of the environmental effects, if an undertaking should proceed, and if so, how environmental effects can be managed. EAs may identify a problem or opportunity; consider alternative ways of addressing a problem or opportunity; evaluate the environmental effects of the alternatives; and, select a preferred undertaking from the alternatives. The proponent must consider actions to avoid, reduce and mitigate potential environmental effects. In preparing the EA, the proponent completes various studies and consults with interested stakeholders including government agencies, the public and affected Aboriginal communities to evaluate the alternatives and determine the preferred undertaking. Once the undertaking is approved, the proponent is required to monitor to demonstrate compliance with standards, regulations and the EAA approval. 1.1 Terms of Reference EA Process ToR Approval EA Preparation EA Submission EA Comment Period Ministry Review Review Comment Period Minister s Decision Preparing an EA is a two step application to the Minister of the Environment (Minister). The first step requires the proponent to prepare and submit a Terms of Reference (ToR) to the Ministry of the Environment (ministry) for review and approval. The ToR is the work plan or framework for how the EA will be prepared. On July 13, 2004, the Minister approved the Markham Bypass Extension from Highway 407 to Morningside Avenue ToR. The ToR set out how the Regional Municipality of York (York) would evaluate environmental effects, assess alternatives and consult with the public during the preparation of the EA. The ToR established the rationale for addressing the capacity deficiencies between the southeast portion of the Town of Markham (Markham) and northeast portion of the City of Toronto (Toronto). The ToR also outlined a consultation plan for the EA process. November 18,

7 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review 1.2 Original Environmental Assessment Once the ToR is approved by the Minister, the proponent can proceed to the second step of the EA process and prepare an EA. The EA must be prepared in accordance with the approved ToR and the requirements of the EAA. Once the proponent has completed the EA, including consultation, the EA is submitted to the ministry for review and approval. On December 23, 2005, York submitted the Transportation Improvements in the Markham Bypass Corridor South of Highway 407 EA (original EA) to the ministry for a decision. The original EA sought approval to construct a four-lane urban arterial roadway, extending from the existing terminus of the Markham Bypass (now referred to as the Donald Cousens Parkway) at Highway 407 southerly to the future Morningside Avenue and McNicoll Avenue intersection in Toronto. The proposed roadway was intended to provide York and Toronto with the capacity to support the increasing transportation needs between the southeast Markham and the northeast of Toronto. The original EA was made available for public inspection and comment for a seven week period which ended on February 17, Ministry Review of the Original Environmental Assessment The original EA was circulated for review to a Government Review Team (GRT). The GRT, including federal, provincial and local agencies, reviewed the original EA to ensure that the information and conclusions of the original EA were valid, based on their agencies mandates. Members of the public and Aboriginal communities also had an opportunity to review the original EA and submit their comments to the ministry. All comments received by the ministry are considered by the Minister before a decision is made about the undertaking for which approval is being sought. The EAA requires the ministry to prepare a review of an EA submitted for approval, known simply as the ministry Review (Review). The Review is the ministry s evaluation of the EA. The purpose of the Review is to determine if the EA has been prepared in accordance with the approved ToR, the requirements of the EAA, and whether the evaluation in the EA is sufficient to allow the Minister to make a decision about the proposed undertaking. The Review outlines whether the information contained in the EA supports the recommendations and conclusions for the selection of the proposed undertaking. Ministry staff, with input from the GRT, evaluate the technical merits of the proposed undertaking; the anticipated environmental effects; and, the proposed mitigation measures. The Review also provides an overview and analysis of the public, agency and Aboriginal community comments on the EA and the proposed undertaking. The Minister considers the conclusion of the Review when making a decision. The Review itself is not the EA decision making mechanism. The Minister s decision will be November 18,

8 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review made following the end of a five week comment period on the Review. The Minister s decision is subject to the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council. The Review comment period allows the GRT, the public and Aboriginal communities to see how their concerns with the EA and the proposed undertaking have been considered. During the Review comment period, anyone can submit comments on the EA, the undertaking and the Review. In addition, anyone can request that the Minister refer the EA, or any matter relating to the EA, to the Environmental Review Tribunal for a hearing if they believe that there are significant outstanding environmental impacts that the EA has not addressed. Requests for a hearing can only be made during this comment period. The Minister will consider all requests and determine if a hearing is necessary. The Review of the original EA was made public on January 25, 2008 and concluded that York had provided sufficient information to enable a decision to be made about the undertaking. The Review also explained the ministry s analysis of the original EA. The Review concluded that the original EA assessed and evaluated a reasonable range of alternatives to arrive at the preferred undertaking; assessed the potential environmental effects of the alternatives and proposed undertaking; and, provided sufficient mitigation and monitoring measures to ensure that the potential negative environmental effects of the undertaking will be minimized. The ministry was satisfied that the analysis of alternatives assessed the potential environmental effects for each of the alternatives to the undertaking; the alternative methods of carrying out the undertaking; and, the proposed undertaking for which approval was being sought. The Review also concluded that the original EA provided a description of the mitigation and monitoring measures that would be applied to address and minimize the potential negative environmental effects of the undertaking. The ministry and GRT did not raise any issues of concern in regard to the proposed mitigation measures and proposed monitoring program. The Review determined that York provided sufficient time and opportunities for the GRT, the general public, stakeholders and Aboriginal communities to comment on the preparation of the original EA. The ministry was satisfied that the original EA clearly documented the consultation methods utilized by York to engage these groups during the original EA process. The original EA clearly sets out the issues and concerns raised and how they were addressed by York. York s consultation methods were found to be in accordance with the requirements of the ToR. The Review, however, also concluded that there was a jurisdictional issue of concern that remained unresolved. The Review identified that a portion of the proposed roadway for which York was seeking approval, west of 19 th Avenue and south of Steeles Avenue, was located within the jurisdictional boundaries of Toronto. The Review explained that York had the authority to only construct the portion of the preferred undertaking located within its jurisdictional boundaries. It would be the decision of Toronto whether to construct the portion of the proposed undertaking within its boundaries. Although Toronto had acknowledged the need to address the increasing transportation demands in the area, it November 18,

9 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review opposed to the proposed direct linkage of the roadway recommended in the original EA. On February 14, 2006, Toronto submitted a letter to the ministry stating that it would not extend Morningside Avenue to Steeles Avenue along the recommended alignment. In response to the conclusions of the Review, York acknowledged that it could not be the sole proponent for the construction of an undertaking outside its municipal boundaries, and that proceeding with the implementation of the preferred undertaking described in the original EA could only proceed with the approval of Toronto. The Review concluded that because York can only construct the portion of the preferred undertaking located within its jurisdictional boundaries, due to the fact that Toronto declared that it would not extend Morningside Avenue to Steeles Avenue in accordance with recommended alignment of the roadway in the original EA, the Minister would have to decide whether it is prudent to approve an undertaking that may never be constructed. In accordance with Ontario Regulation 616/98, the Minister was required to make a decision on the original EA by May 30, Minister s Order On May 1, 2008 York provided information to the ministry indicating that a tentative resolution to the jurisdictional issue with Toronto had been reached. York had agreed in principle to seek approval for a road alignment supported by Toronto, but which differed from the preferred undertaking described in the original EA. The alignment agreed upon by York and Toronto was a discontinuous arterial road, an alternative ranked third out of nine in the original EA. York requested that the Minister consider approving the original EA conditionally on the submission of an addendum or a separate Class EA process for the portion of the alignment which differs from the alignment of the preferred undertaking identified in the original EA. On June 10, 2008 the Minister denied the request to approve an alignment that was not identified as the preferred undertaking in the original EA. This was because the original EA did not contain the information required to allow the Minister to make an informed decision about approving an alignment other than the preferred alignment recommended in the original EA. In addition, consultation undertaken to date with the public, Aboriginal communities and the GRT was based on the preferred undertaking in the original EA and not a potentially different alignment. The Minister therefore concluded that the approval of an undertaking other than that described as the preferred undertaking in the original EA was not an appropriate course of action and would therefore not be consistent with the purpose of the EAA. The Minister also concluded that it was in the public interest to allow the outstanding jurisdictional issue to be formally resolved in a subsequent approval process. November 18,

10 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review Because of the progress that was made in resolving the dispute between York and Toronto, on June 13, 2008 the Minister advised York in writing that the ministry was willing to postpone a decision on the original EA. The postponement would allow York to continue the self-directed mediation with Toronto so that a formal resolution could be finalized. If a potential resolution to the jurisdictional issue was to result in any change to the preferred undertaking, as described in the original EA, York would be expected to prepare an amendment to the original EA that would include, but not be limited to, the following: A work plan setting out timelines for the completion of all work related to the proposed changes; A comparative evaluation of each alternative in the EA; Any additional supporting information or studies required to assess the potential environmental effects of a different Preferred Undertaking, if the Preferred Undertaking set out in the EA was to change; A public, Aboriginal, and government consultation plan, and the results of any consultation; and A public and Ministry notification protocol related to the proposed changes. York was required to provide a response to the ministry by July 2, 2008, indicating how York wished to proceed. If a response was not received by this date, the Minister would make a decision on the original EA. On June 25, 2008 York responded and accepted the ministry s approach. Accordingly, on July 15, 2008 the decision on the original EA was postponed. On January 23, 2009 York notified the ministry that it intended to move forward with an amendment to the original EA. In support of the request for an amendment, York provided the ministry with a work plan, entitled Regional Municipality of York Transportation Improvements in the Donald Cousens Parkway/Morningside Link Corridor South of Highway 407 Amendment to the EA Work Plan (work plan), January 2009 (Appendix C). The work plan outlined how York intended to re-examine the alternative alignments studied in the original EA. Ministry staff reviewed the work plan and were satisfied that it met the Minister s requirements, as set forth in his June 13, 2008 letter to York, and that the work plan complied with the provisions of the EAA and the ToR. Section 6.2 of the EAA establishes the conditions for submitting, amending and withdrawing an EA. The provision allows a proponent to amend or withdraw the EA after the deadline for completion of the Review of the EA only upon such conditions as the Minister may by order impose. The authority for issuing such an order is found in section 6.2(3) of the EAA. On July 2, 2009 the Minister issued Order MO to York. The Minster s Order granted York permission to re-examine the alternative alignments studied in the original November 18,

11 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review EA in consideration of the outstanding jurisdictional issue and the transportation needs of Toronto by way of an amendment, subject to conditions including the following: York shall prepare and make available a Notice of Commencement of the Amendment to the EA upon the initiation of the amendment process. York shall amend the EA in accordance with the Regional Municipality of York Transportation Improvements in the Donald Cousens Parkway/Morningside Link Corridor South of Highway 407 Amendment to the EA Work Plan (Appendix B) dated January 2009 and provided to the ministry. York shall prepare and make available a Notice of Submission of the Amendment to the EA upon the submission of the amended EA. Should York be unable to fulfill the conditions of the Order, York shall abandon the amendment process and officially withdraw its EA. York shall complete the amendment process within 12 months from the date upon which the Order is issued, subject to any extension given by the Director of the ministry s Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch. On March 11, 2009 Ministry staff met with representatives from York and Toronto to discuss the process of moving forward with a proposed amendment to the original EA and the next steps in the EA process. The ministry informed York that the amendment process was to be initiated with the publication and distribution of a formal Notice of Commencement of an Amendment to the original EA. At the conclusion of the amendment process York would be required to prepare and make available a Notice of Submission of the Amendment to the original EA. The Notice of Commencement of an Amendment to the original EA was issued by the York on December 3, Amended Environmental Assessment On November 5, 2010 York submitted a draft amended EA to the ministry for review and comment. The ministry review of the draft identified a number of outstanding concerns. These concerns were submitted to York on January 13, In order to fully address the concerns raised by the ministry, York submitted a written request to the Director of the ministry s Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch seeking an extension to the completion deadline of the Minister s Order. The additional time would allow York to properly address the ministry comments on the draft amended EA. The completion deadline was therefore extended until August 1, November 18,

12 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review On July 19, 2011 York formally submitted the Transportation Improvements, Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended EA (amended EA) for a decision. The amended EA seeks approval to construct a new urban arterial roadway extending from the southern limit of the Box Grove Development Area in Markham to the future Morningside Avenue and McNicoll Avenue intersection in Toronto. The arterial roadway is intended to provide the Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link corridor with the capacity to support the increasing transportation needs between the southeast Markham and the northeast of Toronto. The amended EA was made available for public review and comment for a seven week period which ended on September 16, A description of the undertaking can be found in Section 3.3 of this Review. 1.6 Ministry Review of the Amended Environmental Assessment The amended EA was circulated to the GRT for review and comment. The GRT, including federal, provincial and local agencies, carried out a review of the amended EA to ensure that the information and conclusions presented in the amended EA were valid, based on their agencies mandates. Interested members of the public and Aboriginal communities also had an opportunity to review the amended EA and submit their comments to the ministry. All comments received by the ministry are considered by the Minister before a decision is made about the proposed undertaking. A Notice of Completion of the Review was published in the Toronto Star, Markham Economist and Sun, and the Scarborough Mirror indicating that this Review has been completed and would be available for a five week comment period from December 2, 2011 to January 13, Copies of the Review have been placed in the same public record locations where the original EA was available, and copies have been distributed to the GRT members and potentially affected or interested Aboriginal communities. Those members of the public who submitted comments during the original EA comment period have also received copies of the Review. 2. The Proposed Undertaking York is seeking approval to construct a new urban arterial roadway extending from the southern limit of the Box Grove residential area in Markham to the future Morningside Avenue and McNicoll Avenue intersection in Toronto. The arterial roadway is intended to provide the Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link corridor with the capacity to support the increasing transportation needs between the southeast Markham and the northeast of Toronto. According to the York Region Transportation Master Plan (June 2002) there is a significant flow of traffic crossing the York-Toronto boundary, which is represented by Steeles Avenue. The increased traffic has resulted in the November 18,

13 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review congestion of many of the arterial roadways in the southern portion of York, some having become so congested that they are exceeding the capacity for which they were designed. York has advised that the primary factor for the increased congestion is the lack of an arterial link between the York and Toronto in the amended EA Study Area (Figure 1). There is also no north-south freeway in York, Toronto or Durham Region (Durham) east of Highway 404. Numerous previous studies, including the Morningside Transportation Study (1994), Morningside Corridor Transportation Alternative Study (1995) and Morningside Heights Secondary Plan (1998) prepared by the Ministry of Transportation (MTO), have concluded that a major arterial road is required in the Morningside Corridor to service the anticipated development in West Durham and Southeast York by As part of the original EA process, York determined that the interaction of travel demand between York and Toronto is expected to grow proportionately with population and employment growth in York, Toronto and Durham. Both York and Markham carried out investigations of the transportation system. These included the York Region Transportation Master Plan (June 2002) and the Markham Transportation Planning Study (2002). Both studies confirmed that improvements to the transportation network are required to accommodate future travel demands. It should be noted that since the submission of the original EA, the built environment in the EA Study Area has changed. This is primarily a result of the completion of the first phase of residential and infrastructure development in the Box Grove Residential area by Markham. The Ninth Line Bypass (now known as the Box Grove Bypass) was constructed in conjunction with the first phase of the Box Grove development, which is located in a section of the recommended alignment for the Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link. In conjunction with the final build-out of the Box Grove residential area, Markham is constructing the remaining section of a Town Arterial Road to address local traffic needs from the Box Grove Bypass to the existing terminus of the Donald Cousens Parkway at Highway 407. This road is currently under construction. It should be noted that the Box Grove Bypass and the Town Arterial Road do not form part of the undertaking for which approval is being sought; however, these sections of roadways will be part of the alignment referred to as the Donald Cousens Parkway in Markham. To account for the changes to the built environment since the submission of the original EA, York carried out additional traffic analysis based on updated population and employment projections found in the most current Official Plans and Transportation Master Plans (2010), as well as taking into consideration road and transit improvements that have been planned in the surrounding municipalities. Through this additional analysis York has concluded that the need and justification, as set forth in the original EA, remains unchanged and that additional transportation capacity is still needed between York and Toronto. November 18,

14 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review If EAA approval is granted, the Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link will be completed in accordance with the terms and provisions outlined in the amended EA and any conditions of approval. In addition, York must still obtain all other legislative approvals it may require for the undertaking. November 18,

15 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review Figure 1: Transportation Improvements, Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended EA Study Area November 18,

16 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review 3. Results of the Ministry Review The Review provides the ministry s analysis of the amended EA. The Review is not intended to summarize the amended EA nor present the information found in the amended EA. For information on the decision making process please refer to the amended EA itself. The amended EA and supporting documentation outlines the EA amendment process and demonstrates how York has used the amended EA process to determine the preferred undertaking for which approval under the EAA is being sought. The purpose of the Ministry Review is to determine whether: The EA has met the requirements of the ToR and the EAA. There are any outstanding issues with the EA. The proposed undertaking has technical merit. As noted earlier, the Review does not make a decision about the proposed undertaking. That is the decision of the Minister, which is subject to the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council. In addition, any conditions of EAA approval referred to in this document are only suggested to be imposed as a means of addressing outstanding issues in the event that the Minister decides to approve the undertaking. 3.1 Conformance with ToR and EAA Ministry Analysis The ministry coordinated an analysis of the amended EA with the GRT that, in part, looked at whether the requirements of the approved ToR, the EAA and the Regional Municipality of York Transportation Improvements in the Donald Cousens Parkway/Morningside Link Corridor South of Highway 407 Amendment to the EA Work Plan have been met. Must Haves in the EA: The EA must be prepared in accordance with the approved ToR. EA must include all the basic EAA information requirements. EA demonstrates where all the additional commitments in the ToR were met, including studies and the consultation process. Appendix A summarizes this analysis and identifies how the requirements of the ToR have been addressed in the EA Consultation One of the key requirements of the EAA is pre-submission consultation completed during the preparation of the EA and EA amendments. This consultation is the responsibility of the proponent and must be done prior to the submission of the EA or an amendment to the EA and in accordance with the consultation plan outlined in the ToR and any conditions the Minister imposes in an order allowing an EA to be amended. The ministry is satisfied with the level of consultation that occurred during the preparation of the original EA and the Section 5.1 of the EAA states: When preparing proposed terms of reference and an environmental assessment, the proponent shall consult with such persons as may be interested. November 18,

17 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review amended EA. The ministry is also satisfied that the level of consultation was appropriate for the EA amendment process and the proposed undertaking. The amended EA clearly documents the consultation methods utilized by York to engage the GRT, the general public, stakeholders and Aboriginal communities in the EA process. Once an EA or amended EA is submitted to the ministry, additional ministry driven consultation occurs during a five week comment period. The GRT, the public and Aboriginal communities are provided with the opportunity to review the EA or amended EA, as the case may be, and to submit comments to the ministry on the EA or amended EA or on the undertaking for which approval is being sought. All comments received by the ministry during this comment period are forwarded to the proponent for a response as to how it proposes to address any issues or concerns that have been raised. Summaries of the all comments received during the comment period on the amended EA, along with York s responses, are included in Tables 1-3. Copies of the submissions are also available in Appendix B. Government Review Team Consultation with the GRT was carried out from the initiation of the ToR in 2004 through to the submission of the original EA, and during the preparation of the amendment to the EA. The consultation program was initiated during the preparation of the ToR and it was continued up until the submission of the amended EA. York developed the consultation program to ensure that opportunities were provided to seek input and identify issues at each specific milestone of the original EA process and during the EA amendment process. The consultation process was documented in a Public Consultation Record, which provided a summary of the issues and concerns raised during the consultation process on the original and amended EA. At the beginning of the original EA process a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was established by York. The TAC was comprised of local municipalities and government agencies that expressed an interest in participating in the preparation of the original EA. The municipal members of the TAC included York, Markham, Toronto and Durham. The external agencies included the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), the Ministry of Transportation (MTO), Canadian Pacific Rail (CP), and the Rouge Park Alliance (RPA). The TAC was actively involved in identifying issues of concern, developing and assessing alternatives, and developing mitigation measures for unavoidable impacts. The TAC held meetings prior to each project milestone to address any issues or concerns as the original EA process progressed. In addition, a process of ongoing dialogue was maintained throughout the entire original EA study process. During the preparation of the amendment to the EA, consultation with the GRT was carried out as a continuation of the consultation process that was undertaken during the original EA. Two meetings were held with the TAC during the EA Amendment process. November 18,

18 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review September 17, 2009 TAC Meeting #1 to review rationale for EA Amendment, overview of Work Plan of the EA Amendment, consultation strategy, and update of existing conditions. January 26, 2010 TAC Meeting #2 to review the update of the alternatives, alternative evaluation and preliminary recommendations. In addition to meetings with the TAC, presentations were also made to York and Municipal Committees of Council during the EA Amendment process. Presentations during the EA Amendment process included: March 25, 2010 Presentation to York Region Planning and Economic Development Committee. April 13, 2010 Presentation to Town of Markham Development Services Committee. The GRT was consulted during the EA amendment process. They were notified at key points of the amendment process, including the Notice of Commencement, notification of TAC meetings and Notice of Completion. During the EA amendment process, issues identified by the TAC and the GRT were noted and incorporated where appropriate in the EA amendment. A draft of the amended EA was provided to members of the TAC and the GRT for review in November In addition, meetings were held with the RPA, Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), and the TRCA during the EA amendment process to discuss issues related to the potential Rouge River, Morningside Tributary and Neilson Tributary crossings. Public Consultation The public, which includes the general public, communities, interest groups and property owners, were provided with several opportunities to participate and provide input in the preparation of the EA and the amended EA. Public participation in the EA and the EA amendment process was achieved in a variety of ways. Mailing lists were prepared during the ToR stage of the EA process and were carried forward during the preparation of the original EA. Interested members of the public were added to the list throughout the EA process. The mailing lists provided an on-going means for York to update the public on the EA process and to request comments. Two formal Public Consultation Centres were held by York. The first Public Consultation Centre was held on October 13 and 14, 2004 and involved a review of the need and justification for the transportation improvements, the transportation improvement alternative solutions that were examined, the development and assessment November 18,

19 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review of these alternatives, and the next steps of the study. The second Public Consultation Centre was held on April 20 and 21, 2005 and involved the review of the analysis and evaluation of transportation alternatives, and the identification of the technically preferred alternative. A public Consultation Summary Report was prepared following each consultation centre and was included as part of the original EA documentation. During the EA amendment process, the general public, communities, interest groups and property owners were consulted. They were notified at key points during the amendment process, including the Notice of Commencement, notification of Public Consultation Centres and the Notice of Completion. York held two formal Public Consultation Centres during the EA amendment process. The purpose of the Public Consultation Centres was to present work carried out as part of the EA amendment process and to present the technically preferred alternative. The first Public Consultation Centre was held in Toronto on May 11, 2010 and the second was held in Markham on May 13, York placed notices of the Public Consultation Centres in local and national newspapers, including the Toronto Star, Markham Economist and Sun, and the Scarborough Mirror. York also mailed notices about the Public Consultation Centres to property owners bounded by Highway 407 to the north and Finch Avenue to the south, Markham Road to the west and York Durham Line to the east. A copy of the notice was also mailed to each individual who had previously provided comments during the EA process. A Summary Report of the Public Consultation Centres was prepared following and included as part of the amended EA documentation. Aboriginal Community Consultation In addition to consultation with the broader public, Aboriginal communities were consulted. Aboriginal communities may have special Aboriginal rights and land claims that need to be considered. During the preparation of the original EA, York contacted both the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (MAA) and Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (formerly Indian and Northern Affairs Canada). York was informed that neither agency was aware of a land claim or any ongoing Aboriginal litigation within the EA Study Area. Aboriginal rights stem from practices, customs or traditions which are integral to the distinctive culture of the Aboriginal community claiming the right. Treaty rights stem from the signing of treaties by Aboriginal peoples with the Crown. Aboriginal rights and treaty rights are protected by section 35 of the Constitution Act, In addition, York contacted the following Aboriginal groups and communities with a potential interest in the undertaking due to its location and requested their input: Mississaugas of the New Credit November 18,

20 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review Anishinabek Nation/Union of Ontario Indians Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians Native Canadian Centre for Toronto Six Nations of the Grand River First Nation Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation Wahta Mohawks First Nation Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte Oneida First Nation Hiawatha First Nation Curve Lake First Nation Beausoleil First Nation Alderville First Nation Huron Wendat of Wendake Quebec Algonquins of Pikwakanagan Chippewas of Mnjikaning (Rama) First Nation Moose Deer Point First Nation Each of the above groups and communities was provided a copy of the original EA documentation by this ministry. The ministry Review of the original EA found that no opposition or concerns were raised by the consulted Aboriginal communities during the preparation or submission of the original EA. During the EA amendment process, consultation with Aboriginal communities was continued by York. In addition to the Aboriginal communities that were consulted during the preparation of the original EA, the following Aboriginal groups and communities were also contacted by York during the preparation of the EA amendment: Union of Ontario Indians Nippising First Nation Iroquois Confederacy Munsee-Delaware Nation Metis Nation of Ontario Chippewas of Nawash Chiefs of Ontario Coordinator for Williams Treaty First Nations Aboriginal groups and communities were consulted at key milestones during the amendment process, including the Notice of Commencement, Notification of Public Consultation Centres and the Notice of Completion. A draft of the amended EA was also provided to Aboriginal groups and communities for review in November Issues identified by Aboriginal communities were noted and incorporated where appropriate in the amended EA. Alderville First Nation indicated that the Project has minimal potential to impact its rights, and wishes to be kept apprised throughout the project, including about November 18,

21 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review archaeological findings and environmental impacts. The Chippewas of Rama First Nation indicated that it had forwarded the matter to the Coordinator for the Williams Treaties First Nations. To date, no other Aboriginal communities have submitted comments to York or the ministry about the amended EA. Ministry Conclusions on the Consultation Program Overall, the ministry believes that York has provided sufficient opportunities for the public, the GRT and Aboriginal communities to participate and provide input during the preparation of the original EA and the EA amendment. The amended EA clearly documents the consultation methods utilized by York to engage these groups during the original EA and EA amendment process. The amended EA clearly sets out the issues and concerns raised and how they have been addressed by York Conclusion The amended EA has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the ToR and the EA amendment work plan. The amended EA also demonstrates how the required components of the EAA for consultation have been met. 3.2 EA Process An EA is a planning process that requires a proponent to identify an existing problem or opportunity; consider alternative ways of addressing a problem or opportunity; evaluate the environmental effects of these alternatives; and, select a preferred alternative that will become the undertaking for which approval under the EAA will be sought. In August 2002, York commenced an EA process to address the transportation needs in the Markham Bypass Corridor (now referred to as the Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Corridor). The analysis of transportation improvements is a Schedule C project under the Municipal Engineers Association Municipal Class EA; however, due to the expected public and agency interest in this matter, and the concern regarding the potential impacts to the Rouge River, its tributaries and the Rouge Park, York voluntarily decided to prepare an individual EA. The purpose of the EA was to address the existing and future transportation deficiencies across the boundary of the south-eastern areas of Markham and the developed areas and the proposed to be developed areas of the north eastern portion of Toronto. On December 23, 2005, York submitted the original EA to the ministry for a decision. The original EA sought approval to construct a continuous four lane urban arterial roadway, extending from Highway 407 southerly to the future Morningside Avenue and McNicoll Avenue intersection in Toronto. Due to the fact that York only has the authority to construct the portion of the preferred undertaking located within its jurisdictional boundaries, it was the decision of Toronto as to whether or not the relevant portion of the undertaking would be constructed within its boundaries. Although Toronto November 18,

22 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review acknowledged the need to address the increasing transportation demands in the area it opposed to the preferred alignment of the roadway recommended in the original EA. On July 2, 2009 the Minister issued an Order to York which granted permission to reexamine the alternative alignments studied in the original EA in consideration of the outstanding jurisdictional issue and the transportation needs of Toronto by way of an amendment to the original EA. At the start of the EA amendment study, York re-examined and evaluated the range of alternatives presented in the original EA. The alternative solutions evaluated included: Do nothing; Widen existing roads (Base Case); Widen existing roads beyond base case; Base case plus dedicated transit facility; Base case plus transit initiatives; Base case plus a transportation management plan; Base case plus transit initiatives and a transportation management plan; Base case plus a new road alignment (Markham Bypass Corridor south of Highway 407); and, Base case plus transit initiatives, a transportation management plan, and a new road alignment. York followed a logical and transparent decision-making process that was clearly outlined in the amended EA. York confirmed that the study area for the amended EA remained the same as the original EA, and confirmed that the existing transportation conditions and alternative solutions from the original EA had also not changed. The amended EA provides an evaluation of a reasonable range of alternative solutions that would address the current and future transportation needs in south-eastern Markham and the north-eastern portion of Toronto. The documentation of this evaluation methodology clearly outlines how the evaluation criteria were developed and applied to each alternative. Each of the alternative solutions was developed with the intent of building upon each other to form a wide range of transportation network options. The proposed improvements to the transportation network were designed to be consistent with the recommendations of the York s Transportation Master Plan. Each of the alternative solutions was then carried forward in the amended EA process for further analysis and evaluation to determine the preferred undertaking. The analysis and evaluation of alternative solutions found that planned road improvements; transit improvements; a detailed transportation demand management strategy; and, a new major arterial road provided significant improvements to the existing transportation network and addressed the capacity needed to accommodate the planned growth and travel demands of the amended EA study area. In particular, the construction November 18,

23 Transportation Improvements Donald Cousens Parkway to Morningside Avenue Link Amended Environmental Assessment Review of an arterial road would provide the foundation upon which York could develop options for the design and implementation of both transit and road network improvements. Upon selecting a new road alignment as the preferred solution, an evaluation of alternative methods for carrying out the undertaking was conducted, using the same evaluation criteria presented in the original EA. York identified nine alternative methods, including determining the general location of the new road and specific alignments. The alternatives were developed based on design criteria that would allow York to develop alternatives that were considered reasonable, feasible and reflected the types of constraints that existed within the study area. Each alternative method was evaluated using a set of criteria that were developed by York to be relevant, clear and logical. The alternatives were evaluated based on the advantages and disadvantages of potential environmental effects and were presented in a traceable manner. The evaluation was built upon baseline data and the existing conditions in the study area. York s evaluation was completed using criteria that fell into the following categories: Socio-Economic Environmental Effects Natural Environmental Effects Transportation Benefits Cost York also considered public opinion and general service provisions as they related to each alternative. The screening criteria were weighted based on the relative importance to each aspect of the environment, and were then given a quantitative or qualitative result. These results were tabulated and presented in section 6 of the amended EA in the form of a matrix. York completed various updates to the studies and investigations carried out as part of the original EA in order to reconfirm and support the evaluation of the alternatives and the selection of the preferred undertaking. Feasibility studies, environmental impact studies, natural heritage features assessments, air quality and noise impact assessments, archaeological assessments were all completed and presented in the amended EA for the potential development and implementation of a new arterial roadway. York also considered public input obtained during public information centres and general service provisions as they related to each alternative. The analysis of alternatives assessed the potential environmental effects for the alternatives to the undertaking, the alternative methods and the proposed undertaking, and provides a description of the mitigation and monitoring measures to address the potential negative environmental effects. The ministry and GRT have not raised any issues of concern in regard to the proposed mitigation measures and proposed monitoring program. November 18,