Environmental Study Report

Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study
Environmental Study Report

December, 2009
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
Since 2000, a broad range of planning studies have considered the need for a potential community link across the two rail corridors north of Fort York, between Strachan Avenue and Bathurst Street. Two of the more strategic reports included the Fort York: Setting it Right document, completed in June 2000 by the Friends of Fort York and Garrison Common (The Friends) and the Fort York Management Board, and the Garrison Creek Open Space Linkage Plan, a Council-approved, comprehensive civic improvement strategy to reinstate open space linkages and revitalize interest in the environmental benefits of Garrison Creek (October 1998). In addition to a vision for a bridge connection over the rail corridors, both of these planning reports placed an emphasis on restoring Fort York to a position of increased prominence within the City of Toronto. As a first step in realizing a vision for a new pedestrian and cycle bridge at Fort York, the City of Toronto, through the Waterfront Secretariat, initiated a Class Environmental Assessment (EA) Study for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. The EA process requires that the proponent (City) confirm the need and justification for the undertaking (define the problem and opportunity), identify and evaluate alternative solutions and concepts, assess impacts of the design concepts on the natural, social and economic environments, and present a recommended preferred design concept for final consideration and approval. Fort York, the birthplace of Toronto, has been one of the focal points of this Class Environmental Assessment Study. All decisions and actions arising from this study have had the potential to significantly impact on current and future plans for the Fort, and the adjacent lands surrounding the Fort (the Precinct). Fort York is a National Historic Site of Canada, and consists of both the Fort lands, at 100 Garrison Road, as well as Victoria Memorial Square, bounded by Wellington, Portland and Niagara Streets. For the purpose of this study, the area directly associated with the Fort lands was of primary concern, while Victoria Memorial Square was outside of the study limits. Figure 1 provides an overview of lands surrounding Fort York, and also illustrates the broad limits of the Study Area considered appropriate for this project. The Study Area limits were as follows:

Strachan Avenue to the West. Wellington Street to the North. Bathurst Street to the East. Fleet Street and Fort York Boulevard to the South.
Stantec Consulting Ltd.
NORTH
REA DY A U T S
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Key Map and Study Area Limits

Figure 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Stantec Consulting Ltd., with the support of various subconsultant specialists, was selected by the City of Toronto to provide professional planning, engineering, architectural and environmental services in conjunction with the Class Environmental Assessment Study. The Stantec proposal for this assignment was chosen in a competitive process based on the City of Torontos Request for Proposal No. 9121-087029. 2.0 CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS
The Class Environmental Assessment for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge project has been undertaken in accordance with the guidelines set out in the provincially approved document titled Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Municipal Engineers Association, October 2000, as amended in 2007). The project falls within the category of a Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment, and included the first four (4) Phases of the study process (detailed design not included). At the outset of the project, background reports, property ownership data, land use, and other information related to the natural environment was collected and reviewed. Additional data was gathered through field investigations of natural and social environmental conditions, geotechnical, hydrogeological, wildlife habitat, and topography within the Study Area. In addition, input from government agencies and local interest groups was solicited through direct correspondence and liaison. In addition to convening two (2) Public Information Centre (PIC) meetings, details of the project were also reviewed at Project Team meetings, at Project Technical Advisory Committee meetings, as well at specially arranged presentations to the City of Toronto Design Review Panel, the City of Toronto Pedestrian Committee and at briefings with elected officials. In summary, the Class Environmental Assessment for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge has ensured, through adherence to the guiding principles of the EA process, that the following key elements of the project have been completed:
Consultation with affected agencies, the public, property owners and other interest groups. Consideration of a reasonable range of alternatives, including both alternatives to and alternative methods of implementing a solution. Identification and consideration of the impacts of the alternatives on all aspects of the environment. Completion of a thorough evaluation process that led to the selection of a recommended preferred design concept.
iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An outline of mitigative measures to protect and/or enhance the environment, in response to agency input, public feedback and study data. Documentation of the planning process in a comprehensive, clear and traceable format, with respect to the decision-making principles.
As a requirement of Schedule C projects, the Environmental Study Report (ESR) will be filed on the public record for a minimum 30-day review period. During this period, any member of the public, an agency, property owner or other stakeholder may request that the proponent address any concerns that they may have with the project recommendations. If any concerns cannot be resolved through consultation between the City and the objector, then a formal request may be made to the Minister of the Environment that a Part II Order be issued. Such request by the objector must be in writing. A Part II Order, if granted by the Minister of the Environment, would elevate the project from a Class EA Study to an Individual EA. If this were to occur, then the project would not be able to proceed until the proponent completed an Individual EA Study. If a Part II Order was not issued, or if no requests or objections were received during the filing period, the project would be automatically approved under the Environmental Assessment Act and could proceed to design and construction. Public involvement is an integral and ongoing part of the EA Study process. The public consultation requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment were comprehensively addressed throughout this project. A Notice of Study Commencement was issued in October 2008 which appeared in two issues of NOW Magazine and the Parkdale Liberty and on the Citys Get Involved website. Based on an agency stakeholder list, notices were directly mailed to relevant agencies, area businesses, property owners and residents/neighbourhood associations, and distributed electronically through the Deputy Mayor/Ward Councillors office. The distribution of the Notice of Study Commencement announced the initiation of the Class EA Study and invited interested stakeholders to participate. Two Public Information Centres (PICs) were held at key decision points during the study. The information presented at the PICs included the need and justification for the project, the alternative solutions and concepts being considered, the evaluation criteria and process for assessing the alternatives, the identification of recommended preferred design concept for the pedestrian and cycle bridge, and other preliminary design details. In addition to a Drop-in format to present the study data at PIC#2, a formal presentation and question/answer period was convened. In general, the overall response of the public was very positive at each of the two Public Information Centre Meetings.
iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3.0 GO TRANSIT AND METROLINX
CN Rail and GO Transit are the owners and primary operators on the two railway corridors within the study area. The Project Team recognized, in the beginning, the significant importance of these two agencies in the decision making process and conceptual design associated with any structure over the tracks. Therefore, meetings were initiated with CN and GO Transit as soon as possible in the study schedule. One of the key design criteria affecting the conceptual design of the pedestrian and cycle bridge was the vertical clearance between the top of rail and the underside of the structure. Rail clearance parameters may vary from site to site, depending on issues such as track profile, horizontal alignment, and sight line impacts. It was necessary, therefore, to confirm the factors affecting vertical clearance at this location before proceeding with any structure profile concepts. In early discussions with GO Transit, it was determined that a Sight Line Visibility study would be needed to confirm actual clearance restrictions at the proposed bridge crossing location. This technical study, it was learned, would need to be facilitated by GO Transit and funded by the proponent (City of Toronto). In the interim, GO Transit proposed that a clearance of 8.4 metres (27.6 feet) be used for functional planning during the Class EA, such clearance being subject to change based on further analysis during detailed design. Going forward, all bridge planning was based on a railway clearance of 8.4 metres, under the assumption that 8.4 metres was somewhat conservative and any minor increase to this interim value would not negatively impact the functional level detailing of the bridge. Further, it was recognized that any potential reduction in the clearance restriction, below the 8.4 metres, could be readily accounted for in the detailed design, and would serve to reduce the project cost. In response to growing concerns over the inadequacy of road and public transit systems in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), the Government of Ontario passed legislation in 2006 that created the Metrolinx Agency. Its mission is to create a state-ofthe-art transportation system for the GTHA that will move people and goods effectively, economically and in an environmentally sustainable manner. One of the first major project initiatives of Metrolinx has been the planning of the proposed Georgetown South Rail Corridor Expansion and New Rail Service between Union Station and Pearson International Airport. This project would have direct impacts on the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge as it crosses the Georgetown Rail Corridor just east of Strachan Avenue (north tracks in study area).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In addition to plans by GO Transit/Metrolinx to provide future electrification of its entire GO system, the subject study also examined alternatives for a new grade separation (bridge) at Strachan Avenue. The planning for a structure at this location required numerous technical and social factors needed to be weighed and balanced in reaching a solution that was ultimately acceptable to Metrolinx, the City of Toronto and local property owners/stakeholders. As part of the Metrolinx Environmental Assessment Study, public meetings were convened in the area which focused, to a large extent, on the functional plans for the Strachan Avenue grade separation. Initially, Metrolinx proposed that Strachan Avenue be constructed over the existing tracks, with no change to the rail elevations. However, this concept would have significant detrimental impacts on the adjacent neighbourhoods, cutting off access to Wellington Street and dividing the community on either side of Strachan Avenue. Following public meetings and civic engagement on other fronts, Metrolinx reconsidered its approach to the Strachan Avenue railway grade separation, opting for a compromise solution that would:

Raise Strachan Avenue by 4 metres at the track crossing. Lower the expanded rail corridor by 5 metres at the Strachan Avenue crossing. Install retaining walls over the limits of the track lowering to avoid property acquisitions on either side of the tracks. Gradually raise the elevation of the lowered track, both east and west of Strachan Avenue, matching existing track grade just west of Bathurst Street to the east.
As a result of the Metrolinx EA Study and the compromise solution for the Strachan Avenue grade separation, the rail clearance requirement for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge was reduced by Metrolinx and GO Transit from 8.4 metres to 7.4 metres. This clearance criteria was used in the final planning of the Fort York Bridge.
vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4.0 4.1 ALTERNATIVES TO THE UNDERTAKING Alternative Planning Solutions
In accordance with the Class Environmental Assessment process, the project team identified and evaluated a range of Alternative Planning Solutions to the Undertaking. Alternative Planning Solutions identify ways of solving the problem in the Problem and Opportunity statement. All of the Alternative Planning Solutions included the planned Bathurst Street and Strachan Avenue rehabilitations. For this project, the following Alternative Planning Solutions were considered: Do Nothing
Rely on current road corridors/sidewalks for pedestrian and cycle circulation and access to Fort York.
Enhance Pedestrian/Cyclist Infrastructure on Existing Roads
This alternative includes providing on-street bike lanes on Bathurst Street and Wellington Street and improving pedestrian facilities on Strachan Avenue, Wellington Street, and Bathurst Street.
Construct New Pedestrian/Cyclist Link
Build a new pedestrian and cycle crossing of the railway corridor, between Strachan Avenue and Bathurst Street. Provide a user friendly linkage between the Stanley Park/Niagara Neighbourhoods, the Fort York district neighbourhood, and the Toronto Waterfront.
Note: Other Alternative Planning Solutions were identified but were screened out in advance of the detailed evaluation, including limiting development and improvements to other modes of transportation. These solutions were not consistent with existing City and Provincial planning strategies and were not considered to be reasonable alternatives in the context of current City and Provincial planning strategies. The evaluation process provided an objective approach to the analysis and evaluation of alternative planning solutions. Evaluation criteria that address key issues related to the decision-making process were identified and are listed below. Each of the evaluation criterion is an independent variable that can contribute a positive or negative influence on the overall suitability of an alternative solution.
vii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Transportation

Social Environment

Pedestrian and Cyclist Access Opportunities Public/User Safety Pedestrian and Cycle Operational Constraints Impact on Railway Operations (CN and GO Transit) Transit Operations and Planning
Property Impacts Support of Fort York Visibility-InThe-Community Support of Visual Vista Objectives Compatibility with Community Sustainability Objectives
Land use

Technical

Compatibility with Continuous Open Space Link Objectives Compatibility with Neighbourhood Planning Objectives Compatibility with Fort York and Garrison Common Open Space Planning policies approved by the City of Toronto Compatibility with Land Use Planning Objectives Provincial Policy Statements Compatibility with Official Plan Policies Compatibility with Provincial Planning Policies (Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe)
Road and Bridge Infrastructure Needs and Impacts Constructability Geotechnical Considerations Utility Impacts
Natural Environment

Impact on Vegetation Impact on Garrison Common and Garrison Creek Impact on Roadside environments Surface Water/Drainage Impacts
Culture Environment

Cost
Archaeological Resources Built Heritage Landscape Cultural Heritage Landscape
Overall cost of design and construction
An Evaluation Matrix was created based on the three (3) Alternative Planning Solutions and the seven (7) major Evaluation Criteria categories. An assessment was completed to create an overall summary of the positive and negative features of each Alternative Planning Solution against the selected evaluation criteria. It was determined that Alternative 3, Construct a Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, was preferred in some evaluation categories, but not all. Overall, however, it was concluded that the Preferred Planning Solution was to Construct a Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge.
viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4.2 Alternative Design Concepts
The development of concepts for the Fort York Pedestrian & Cycle Bridge focused on three primary objectives: 1. To Connect the Niagara Neighbourhood to Lake Ontario: The Bridge would provide a much needed north-south pedestrian/bicycle link over the rail corridor. In addition, it would form part of a network of proposed linkages through the Fort York precinct. 2. To Enhance Fort York: The Bridge would find the right balance between providing excellent viewing opportunities of Garrison Common, Fort York and the city beyond, while minimizing physical and visual impacts on the historical significance of the site. 3. To Evoke the History of Fort York and Garrison Creek: The bridge design would incorporate elements that evoke and interpret the history of Fort York and the strategic relationship it had with the alignment of Garrison Creek. Four Alternative Bridge Alignment Concepts were developed for the project. They are presented in Figures 2 to 5 and described as follows: Option 1:

Straight Bridge. Approximately 195 metres long, not including approach ramps. Switch back ramp at Garrison Common with direct access to proposed Visitor Information Centre. Meandering ramp at Stanley Park Extension (north side).
Option 2:

Concave to the west, or curves away from downtown. Approximately 216 metres long, not including approach ramps. Switch back ramp at Garrison Common with direct access to proposed Visitor Information Centre. Meandering ramp at Stanley Park Extension (north side).
Option 3:

Concave to the east, or curves towards the downtown. Approximately 252 metres long, not including approach ramps. Ramp hugs northern property line with rail corridor, at Garrison Common. Meandering ramp at Stanley Park Extension (north side).
ix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Option 4:

S Curve Bridge, evoking original alignment of Garrison Creek. Approximately 234 metres long, not including approach ramps. Ramp hugs northern property line with rail corridor, at Garrison Common. Meandering ramp at Stanley Park Extension (north side).
Two basic structure types were also developed for the project, recognizing that all of the load carrying capacity of the structure was desirable above the deck level, to minimize the height of the bridge deck above the tracks. In other words, a typical deck-on-girder structure was ruled out. Thru-Truss: Alternative Bridge Structure Type 1 was a Thru-Truss design, which would completely enclose the deck of the bridge with a steel truss support structure. An example of a Thru-Truss Bridge is the Bathurst Street structure, immediately to the east of the proposed Fort York Bridge. Tied Arch: Alternative Bridge Structure Type 2 was a single Tied Arch design, with the arch inclined from vertical on one side of the structure. An example of a tied arch pedestrian bridge is the Humber River Bridge, except that it is a double-arch structure with both arches vertical. A schematic of the two bridge structure types is provided in Figure 6.
SCALE 1:2000

Bridge Alignment Concept Option 1

Figure 2
SCALE 1:2000


Figure 3
SCALE 1:2000


Figure 4
SCALE 1:2000


Figure 5
Thru-Truss
Tied Arch

Alternative Bridge Structure Types

Figure 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
4.3 Evaluation of Alternative Design Concepts
An objective assessment of the four (4) alternative alignment concepts, which were presented at the first Public Information Centre meeting, was completed and reviewed with the Project Team and the Technical Advisory Committee. The evaluation process provided commentary on the advantages, disadvantages, and potential impacts of each of the four alignment concepts within broad categories, including:

Environmental. Planning and Land Use. Historical Context. Architectural and Engineering.
Based on the aggregate of assessment criteria and commentary, it was concluded that Alternative Alignment Concept 4 was the preferred design alignment and should be the recommended concept for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. Alternative Alignment Concept 4 was the preferred design within each of the above categories, but was most favoured for the following reasons:

It evokes the historical relevance of the Garrison Creek alignment. Its southern connection to the Garrison Common provides good connectivity to Fort York and the future Visitor Information Centre, while limiting direct physical impact on the historical and vegetated grounds within the Common. The geometry of the structure offers variable viewing opportunities of the surrounding lands and the Toronto skyline. The geometry of the structure creates an aesthetically pleasing and innovative design, one that has the potential to become a landmark structure in a rapidly redeveloping area of the City.
In terms of the Structure Type, it was determined that an Inclined Tied Arch design concept was preferred over the Thru-Truss design concept for many reasons, some of which included:

The inclined tied arch concept would integrate better with Alignment Concept 4. The inclined tied arch concept would provide a more open and inviting feel to pedestrians and cyclists.
xvi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The inclined tied arch concept would provide a more aesthetic statement on the cityscape. The inclined tied arch would add to the historical attachment of Garrison Creek, representing the erosion of embankment along a creeks meandering edge. The inclined tied arch would be more aesthetically pleasing and fulfill the objectives of creating a Legacy project in the commemoration of the War of 1812.
At the first Public Information Centre meeting on April 16, 2009, the general public was offered its first look at the four alternative alignment concepts as well as the thru-truss and tied arch structure options. It was an opportunity for the Project Team to receive initial feedback on the alternative alignment and structure types, before further analysis was carried out on the designs. It was important at this point in the study to gauge the interest of the local community on the need for a pedestrian and cycle bridge as well as what the structure should look like. Attendees at the first PIC demonstrated both a keen interest in the proposed pedestrian and cycle link as well as a preference for a specific bridge alignment and structure type. 5.0 RECOMMENDED PREFERRED DESIGN CONCEPT
The Recommended Preferred Design Concept for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge evolved over the course of the Class EA Study, ultimately being selected on the basis of an evaluation process, public and agency input, feedback from internal City committees, and extensive discussions by the Project Team and the Technical Advisory Committee. In the end, the preferred concept was a clear winner over the other alternatives that were considered for the bridge, despite the fact that changes were made to the preferred design due to structural design constraints. The recommended preferred design concept reflects the original configuration of Alternative Alignment 4, with inclined tied arch support structures on each of two spans. Computer renderings of the proposed bridge, generated on aerial photos at the site, are provided in Figures 7, 8 and 9. The following provides an overview of the architectural and engineering features of the proposed bridge:
Tied arches are inclined 25 from vertical and are situated on the interior of the bridge radius. The location of the arches was revised from the original concept, which had them on the outside of the bridge radius, due to structural design issues.
xvii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The radius of each segment of the two span bridge is approximately 120 metres. This radius was increased from the original concept due to structural design constraints. The unobstructed bridge deck width is 5.0 metres. Deck surface texture and materials will be determined during detailed design. Bridge railings are proposed to be as transparent as possible, recognizing the need to prevent harm to people and/or trains due to people or objects falling off the structure. The railing design is to be confirmed during detailed design. A central lookout Pod is proposed at mid span for viewing the skylines of Toronto. As well, intermediary interpretive and vista viewing stations may be provided along the bridge, subject to confirmation during detailed design. The arches are proposed to be white. Illumination treatments will be determined during detailed design, but must provide a high level of safety and security for the public. Provisions for an access to the Ordnance Triangle will be included in the detailed design, even though an actual access facility may not be constructed until a later date.
The preliminary estimated cost to construct the bridge, including approach ramps and landscaping, is $19.5 million. 6.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This Study was commissioned by the City of Toronto and directed by the Waterfront Secretariat. The purpose of the study was to complete a Class EA planning process that would confirm the preliminary details of a proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge in the vicinity of Fort York. The need and justification for the undertaking was confirmed through an evaluation process and a review of numerous other planning studies that preceded this Class Environmental Assessment, dating back almost ten years. The concept of a readily accessible link, between communities to the north and Fort York, began to take on a higher priority when plans for Bicentennial Commemorative Celebrations of the War of 1812, scheduled for Spring 2012, began to take shape. A Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge became one of four Legacy Projects aimed at improving public awareness of this National Historic Site.
xviii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge Study has been completed in accordance with the Guidelines for a Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment, as outlined in the document titled Municipal Class Environmental Assessment, Municipal Engineers Association, October 2000, as amended in 2007, approved by Order-in-Council No. 1920/2000. Through this structured process, a recommended preferred design concept has been selected for a new pedestrian and cycle bridge to cross the two rail corridors north of Fort York. Incorporated within this Environmental Study Report (ESR) are all of the background reports, data, correspondence, public and agency feedback, and functional details for the proposed bridge structure. Based on the extensive analysis, evaluations, Project Team and Committee direction and feedback, public and agency input, and other considerations, the following summarizes the final recommendations of this Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment: 1. It is recommended that the City of Toronto and the Waterfront Secretariat accept Alternative Alignment Concept 4, with a Tied-Arch support structure as the recommended preferred design concept for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, as illustrated on the functional plans and graphic simulations included in this report. It is recommended that the City of Toronto remove the existing parking lot on the south side of Wellington Street (municipal address: 53 Strachan Avenue), and redevelop this site as an extension of Stanley Park. It is recommended that the Stanley Park Extension, noted above, be constructed in conjunction with the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge so that a proper ramp approach may be provided between Wellington Street and the bridge. It is recommended that the City of Toronto proceed, as soon as possible, to negotiate a contract with a qualified consulting team to complete the final design and contract drawings for the Fort York Bridge, and to provide contract administration services during construction. Time is of the essence in order that completion of the structure, and all related works, is realized by spring 2012. It is recommended that the City of Toronto continue to liaise with CN Rail and GO Transit during the detailed design phase, in order that drawings and construction approvals may be expedited. The tight schedule associated with the design and construction phases warrants close cooperation between the City of Toronto and railway authorities.
2.
3.
4.
5.
xix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
6. It is recommended that a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment be carried out in all areas where the proposed bridge structure and approach ramps encroach within areas designated as having archaeological site potential, as noted in the Stage I Archaeological Assessment report. The Stage 2 assessment should be conducted as soon as possible in the detailed design program, and in accordance with the Ministry of Cultures draft Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. It is recommended that a qualified heritage professional assess the detailed design plans for the bridge in order to determine if there are specific impacts to identified cultural heritage resources in the study area. It is recommended that a geotechnical and foundations investigation be completed to determine existing subsurface conditions at the proposed bridge foundation locations, based on detailed design calculations. The investigation is to include boreholes at foundation locations and provide recommendations related to the structural design of the bridge. The report should also examine subsurface conditions and foundation needs in the area of the Stanley Park Extension, to support the proposed fill material and deal with any contaminated soils. It is recommended that a legal survey be completed to clearly identify property boundary limits and ownerships in the area of the proposed bridge. A proper reference plan should be prepared to show the limits of the proposed bridge, based on final design geometry. It is recommended that any future construction contract contain provisions for dust and noise control, in accordance with City of Toronto Bylaws and/or Ministry of the Environment Guidelines. It is recommended that appropriate tests be completed on any existing soils that may require removal from the site to determine contaminant levels from previous land uses or dumping. Appropriate action shall be taken consistent with the Environmental Protection Act, should contaminated soils be discovered. It is recommended that the Toronto Police Service be consulted during detailed design to ensure that an appropriate approach to Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) be implemented, through strategies of natural surveillance, natural access control and territorial reinforcement. It is recommended that the Toronto Emergency Medical Services (EMS) be consulted during detailed design to incorporate any features in the bridge and/or approaches that will contribute to improved accessibility of EMS teams and service to the public.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
xx
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
14. It is recommended that the Friends of Fort York and the Fort York Management Board be partners in the detailed design process, ensuring that features of the bridge and approach areas are consistent with the vision of the Fort York Master Plan. Aspects to be considered include a coordinated landscape plan, signage and historical markers, vista platforms, bridge materials (railings, deck, etc), pathway linkages, and tree preservation and restoration. It is recommended that appropriate measures be taken to protect existing trees, within the project limits, that do not require removal to accommodate the bridge construction, particularly in the Garrison Common. All such trees shall be clearly marked prior to construction and all protection measures implemented in accordance with the Tree Inventory Report, dated October 2009, employing the services of an ISA Certified Arborist. Tree management measures shall conform to the City of Torontos Tree Protection Policy and Specifications for Construction Near Trees. It is recommended that a survey be completed to identify the potential presence of nesting areas for Chimney Swifts, such survey to be conducted the same year as proposed construction. Should nesting areas be observed, they should be protected with a 25 metre buffer during construction, where possible. COUNCIL MOTIONS
15.
16.
7.0
Recent meetings of the Toronto East York Community Council and Toronto City Council have resulted in the following actions related to the Class Environmental Assessment Study for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge:
The Fort York pedestrian and cycle bridge will cross over the Ordnance Triangle lands, and the preferred design concept provides for future access to these lands from the bridge. At its meeting of November 10, 2009, Toronto East York Community Council adopted a motion that City Planning prepare a report by December 31, 2009 regarding the appropriate zoning of the Ordnance Triangle lands, with a view to having them classified as future parkland. At its meeting of November 30, December 1, 2, 4 and 7, 2009, Toronto City Council granted authority to City staff to issue a Notice of Study Completion following completion of the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge Environmental Study Report to the satisfaction of the Waterfront Secretariat and Transportation Services, substantially in the form outlined in the staff report to City Council. Staff were also authorized to file the Environmental Study Report on the public record for 30 days, in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment.
xxi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
______________________________ Garry E. Leveck, P. Eng. Vice-President, Transportation
xxii
LOOKING NORTHWEST
LOOKING EAST
LOOKING WEST

CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY
Recommended Preferred Design Concept

Figure 7
LOOKING EAST
LOOKING EAST
FORT YORK GARRISON COMMON


Figure 8
LOOKING WEST
LOOKING NORTHEAST
LOOKING EAST


Figure 9
Fort York Pedestrian And Cycle Bridge Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4.1 1.4.2 1.4.3 1.4.4 2.0 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.4 3.5 3.5.1 3.5.2 3.5.3 3.5.4 3.5.4.1 3.5.4.2 3.5.4.3 3.5.4.4 3.5.4.5 3.5.5 3.6 3.6.1 3.6.2 3.6.3 3.6.4 3.6.5 3.6.6 4.0 4.1 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5 4.2 4.2.1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY THE STUDY AREA RELATED STUDIES PROJECT NEED AND JUSTIFICATION Background Policy and Planning Context Current Situation and Identified Problem Identified Opportunity STUDY OBJECTIVES STUDY PROCESS CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS PART II ORDERS WORK PLAN, PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND STUDY SCHEDULE General Project Deliverables Work Plan and Schedule PROJECT STUDY ORGANIZATION PUBLIC AND AGENCY CONSULTATION Notice of Study Commencement Public Information Centre (PIC) Meeting Number One: Thursday, April 16, 2009 Public Information Centre (PIC) Meeting Number Two: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 Correspondence and Liaison The Friends of Fort York and Garrison Common CN Rail and GO Transit Metrolinx Ministry of the Environment Other External Agencies Notice of Study Completion CITY OF TORONTO INTERNAL LIAISON Project Team Technical Advisory Committee City Design Review Panel City Pedestrian Committee Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor Joe Pantalone Consultant Design Team EXISTING CONDITIONS NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Physiography and Soils/Foundations Tree Inventory Assessment Natural Environment Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Hydrogeological Assessment CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT Archaeological Assessment Page 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.1 3.1 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.11 3.16 3.18 3.18 3.20 3.21 3.23 3.25 3.26 3.26 3.26 3.27 3.27 3.27 3.28 3.28 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 i
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.2.2 4.3 4.3.1 4.3.1.1 4.3.1.2 4.3.2 4.4 4.4.1 4.4.2 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 6.0 6.1 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.2 6.3 6.3.1 6.3.2 6.3.3 6.3.4 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 8.0 8.1 8.1.1 8.1.2 8.2 8.3 8.4 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 Built Heritage Resources and Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment Study ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT Existing Land Use Official Plan and Zoning Secondary Plan Policies Property Ownership SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT Landscape Architecture Commentary Transportation (Pedestrian and Cycle) Assessment ALTERNATIVE PLANNING SOLUTIONS ALTERNATIVE PLANNING SOLUTIONS EVALUATION CRITERIA SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVE PLANNING SOLUTIONS AND SELECTION OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONCEPTS DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONCEPTS Alternative Alignment Concepts Alternative Structure Concepts EVALUATON OF ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONCEPTS FEEDBACK ON ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONCEPTS Public and Agency Response City Design Review Panel City Pedestrian Committee Briefing of the Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor RECOMMENDED PREFERRED DESIGN CONCEPT DESCRIPTION OF THE DESIGN CONCEPT THE STANLEY PARK EXTENSION (North Parkette) THE GARRISON COMMON/FORT YORK CONNECTION THE ORDNANCE TRIANGLE LANDS METROLINX STUDY IMPACTS THE FORT YORK TREE NURSERY Page 4.8 4.11 4.11 4.11 4.12 4.14 4.15 4.15 4.15 5.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 6.1 6.1 6.2 6.7 6.7 6.9 6.9 6.10 6.13 6.14 7.1 7.1 7.5 7.7 7.10 7.11 7.12
SUMMARY OF IDENTIFIED CONCERNS AND MITIGATING MEASURES 8.1 INTERNAL 8.1 Project Team and Technical Advisory Committee 8.1 Other Internal Committees 8.2 EXTERNAL AGENCIES 8.4 ASSOCIATED STUDY REPORTS 8.6 PUBLIC 8.10 PRELIMINARY DESIGN: PREFERRED DESIGN CONCEPT GENERAL ARRANGEMENT AND DETAILS GEOTECHNICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE BUILT INVESTIGATION ILLUMINATION PROJECT COST ESTIMATE 9.1 9.1 9.3 9.3 9.5 9.7 ii
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 10.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Page 10.1
LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I Appendix J Appendix K Appendix L Notices and Agency Circulation Public Information Centre (PIC) Meetings Technical Reports Planning Solutions Evaluation Matrix Alternative Design Concepts/Alignments Evaluation Matrix Minutes of Meetings General Correspondence Metrolinx Liaison Technical Memoranda 1, 2 and 3 (without Appendices) Study Design Report (without Appendices) Presentations to City Design Review Panel and City Pedestrian Committee Property Ownership Map
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Key Map and Study Area Limits Site Restoration Components (2008-2012) Demonstration Plan Overall Parkland/Trails Context Plan Municipal Class EA Planning and Design Process Workplan and Schedule Land Use Plan Bridge Alignment Concept Option 1 Bridge Alignment Concept Option 2 Bridge Alignment Concept Option 3 Bridge Alignment Concept Option 4 Alignment Bridge Structure Types Recommended Preferred Design Concept Recommended Preferred Design Concept Recommended Preferred Design Concept North Parkette Viewed from Wellington Street Bridge Ramp Viewed from Garrison Common Bridge Ramp Entering South Parkette Bridge General Arrangement Bridge Illumination Examples
iii
1.0
1.1
Introduction
BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
In June 2000, The Friends of York and Garrison Common (The Friends) and the Fort York Management Board released a study document titled Fort York: Setting It Right, which focused on the relationship between Fort York, its surrounding landscape, and the emerging neighbourhoods around it. Through the presentation of recommended guidelines and principles for redevelopment in the area, a renewed sense of opportunity prevailed that Fort York could be restored to a more prominent level of accessibility and visibility in the City of Toronto. The Setting It Right document represented support for the Garrison Creek Open Space Linkage Plan, a Council approved, comprehensive strategy for the planning and development of urban infrastructure, pathways and parks that would, over time, connect neighbourhoods along the former Garrison Creek with Fort York and the waterfront. Its objective was to restore the legacy of Garrison Creek and enhance the position of Fort York in a new urban landscape. The above documents provided a road map for future development in the Fort York area, in conjunction with a strategic list of design principles that relate to this Class Environmental Assessment Study:
The outstanding archaeological resources associated with Fort York and its neighbourhood should be recognized and protected, and, where appropriate, should be explored professionally. Views to and from the Fort should be protected and enhanced. A system of parks and open spaces should connect the Fort York Precinct with the adjoining neighbourhoods and the waterfront. A public pathway system should link the paths in the Fort York Precinct, the sidewalks of the surrounding streets, the paths in adjoining neighbourhoods and the waterfront promenades and trails. Vehicular access and parking should be provided in ways that support other objectives for restoring the landscape setting of the Fort while ensuring ease of access for visitors.
The above design principles 1 have a commonality about them, in that they consider the spatial integration of pathway and park facilities adjacent to, and within, the Fort York Precinct and adjacent neighbourhoods.
Relevant Design Principles extracted from Fort York: Setting It Right, June 2000
1.1
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Both the Fort York: Setting It Right and the Garrison Creek Open Space Linkage Plan documents identified the need for a new pedestrian and cycle bridge across the railway corridors north of the Fort, connecting the Niagara Neighbourhood and Stanley Park to Fort York. South of the Fort, the trail system would extend to Gore Park, the Exhibition Grounds, Coronation Park and the Martin Goodman Waterfront Trail. The proposed bridge would be located west of the Fort entrance, within the Garrison Common. In subsequent years, further planning studies recognized the need for improved community trail connections in the neighbourhoods surrounding Fort York, many of which have included consideration of a pedestrian and cycle link across the two rail corridors north of Fort York. The War of 1812 Bicentennial Steering Committee has included this bridge connection as one of four (4) legacy projects in its plans for the Bicentennial Celebrations scheduled for 2012. The other legacy projects include:
Revitalization of the Fort York National Historic Site, which is to include the creation of a coherent open space plan of the entire 43-acre site, construction of a new visitors centre outside the ramparts, and restoration/reinterpretation of the buildings inside the ramparts. Nomination of Fort York for inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage List, based on its connection to the War of 1812, which has already been recognized by UNESCO as an event of international significance. The designation would be a major contribution to the shared goal of the Province, the City, and Tourism Toronto to make the city a gateway to cultural and heritage tourism in Ontario and to position Toronto as a distinctive premier tourist destination. Creation of the Toronto Heritage Trail System, including an 1812 to Confederation trail, to provide a way-finding system for visiting historical and notable sites and providing local economic benefits as visitors explore neighbourhoods. The Toronto system would link to a proposed province-wide system.
As a first step towards building a new pedestrian and cycle bridge at Fork York, the City of Toronto, through the Waterfront Secretariat, initiated a Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment (EA) Study for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. The project commenced in September, 2008. 1.2 THE STUDY AREA
Fort York, the birthplace of Toronto, has been one of the focal points of this Class Environmental Assessment Study. All decisions and actions arising from this study have had the potential to significantly impact on current and future plans for the Fort, and the adjacent lands surrounding the Fort (the Precinct).
1.2
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Fort York is a National Historic Site of Canada, and consists of both the Fort lands, at 100 Garrison Road, as well as Victoria Memorial Square, located at the corner of Wellington, Portland and Niagara Streets. For the purpose of this study, the area directly associated with the Fort lands was of primary concern, while Victoria Memorial Square was outside of the study limits. The primary focus of this project has been the assessment of a preferred location for a pedestrian and cycle bridge connecting the Fort lands to the north, based on a confirmed need and justification statement. To address the many issues and constraints within the Class EA process, a study area beyond the general location of the proposed bridge was appropriate. Figure 1 provides an overview of lands surrounding Fort York, and also illustrates the broad limits of the Study Area considered appropriate for this project. The Study Area limits were as follows:

Strachan Avenue to the West. Wellington Street to the North. Bathurst Street to the East. Fleet Street and Fort York Boulevard to the South.
Within the context of a potential location for the pedestrian and cycle bridge, Figure 2 provided a starting point in the creation of an appropriate terms of reference for the Class Environmental Assessment Study. Figure 2 is courtesy of the City of Toronto.
1.3
NORTH
REA DY A U T S

Key Map and Study Area Limits

Figure 1

Site Restoration Components (2008-2012) Demonstration Plan

Figure 2
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 1.3 RELATED STUDIES
To support the Project Study Teams understanding of the project, various background and community planning reports were consolidated at the beginning of the EA Study. The information within these documents was considered relevant to the overall historical context of the project, and its current importance within the communities surrounding Fort York. The previous study documents, referenced during this EA Study, are summarized below in no specific order of importance:

Garrison Creek Open Space Linkage Plan, October 1998. Fort York: Setting It Right, Fort-Centred Planning and Design Principles, June 2000. Fort York and Garrison Common: Parks and Open Space Design and Implementation Plan, May 2001. Canadas Urban Waterfront: Waterfront Culture and Heritage Infrastructure Plan, 2001. City of Toronto Bike Plan: Shifting Gears, June 2001. Defining the Public Realm: Waterfront Culture and Heritage Infrastructure Plan, 2003. City of Toronto City Clerk: Directions Report Bathurst/Strachan Part II Official Plan of the former City of Toronto and Bathurst Strachan Secondary Plan (TrinitySpadina, Wards 19 and 20), April 2003. City of Toronto Staff Report: Directions Report for the Fort York Neighbourhood, March 2003. Bathurst/Strachan Secondary Plan. Fort York National Historic Site of Canada: Commemorative Integrity Statement, March 2004. Fort York Neighbourhood Public Realm Plan, February 2004. Fort York: Adding New Buildings, June 2005. Fort York Heritage Conservation District Plan, including the Revised Amendment. Central Waterfront Public Space Framework. City of Toronto Staff Report: Fort York: Adding New Buildings, Ward 19 Trinity Spadina, October 2005. Toronto West-Central Area: Strategic Transportation Network Review, November 2006.
1.6
Environmental Study Report: Class Environmental Assessment Study (Schedule C) for the Infrastructure Improvements in the Fort York and Railway Lands West Neighbourhoods, August 2006. Strachan Avenue and Georgetown/Milton Rail Corridor: Grade Separation Study, October 2008. Spacing Toronto: Lets Build the Bathurst Street Bridge Toronto Deserves, March 2008. City of Toronto Staff Report: Strachan Avenue and the Georgetown/Milton Rail Corridor Grade Separation Design Concept Study, October 2008. PROJECT NEED AND JUSTIFICATION
1.4
Fort York (the Fort) is a significant historical resource in the City of Toronto that has been designated as a National Historic Site of Canada for its role in the defense of early York (Toronto) and the survival of an important collection of early military buildings, earthworks, and cemetery. 1.4.1 Background
The significance and need to preserve and enhance Fort York as a resource has been confirmed in a number of studies, including the Fort York: Heritage Conservation District Study (1984), and more recently in the Fort York: Setting It Right (Fort-Centered Planning and Design Principles) (2000), Fort York and Garrison Common Parks and Open Space Design and Implementation Plan (2001), and Fort York Neighbourhood Public Realm Plan (2004). These reports, and particularly the planning and design principles within the Public Realm Plan, have focused on maintaining and enhancing the cultural heritage and landscape design of the Fort York Site. These reports have also identified the potential to increase the visibility of the site by improving pedestrian and cyclist connectivity between Fort York, the Toronto Waterfront, and adjacent communities. For example, the 2001 Open Space Design and Implementation Plan identified a need to integrate the historic site with it surroundings by linking the site with adjacent community open spaces. The 2001 study suggests that linking the site would commemorate the common history of Fort York and the adjacent neighbourhoods. The desire to link the site to adjacent neighbourhoods was also identified in the Setting It Right document of 2000, which also highlighted a desire to connect the Fort with adjacent neighbourhoods and to integrate the Fort into a broader system of public parks.
1.7
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 1.4.2 Policy and Planning Context
The Province of Ontarios Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan (2006) indicates that Cities should plan for community infrastructure to support growth. The plan includes policies recommending that a balance of transportation choices be provided to residents by reducing the publics perceived current reliance on a single mode of travel. It would promote transit, cycling, and walking by providing multi-modal access to cultural and recreation opportunities. In addition to the context within which provincial goals and objectives support sustainable and people-oriented growth, a number of local policy documents also support multi-modal travel and endorse past proposals for a bridge connection:
A pedestrian/bicycle connection, from Fort York to Stanley Park across the existing rail corridor, was originally proposed in 2001 as part of the Fort York and Garrison Common Parks and Open Space Design and Implementation Plan. At the time, the identified goal was to provide a recreational connection from Fort York over the railway corridors to Stanley Park. This connection is supported by policies included in the City of Torontos Official Plan, which identifies a desire to provide a connected green space network that links parks and open spaces. Meanwhile, the City of Torontos Bike Plan includes a goal that all Toronto residents be within a five minute bicycle ride of any bikeway network. A pedestrian/cyclist connection at Fort York would also support the Citys Green Space System policies that propose to improve public access and enjoyment of lands under public ownership, link new and expanded parks and open spaces , and improve public access to lands along the waters edge and between parts of the waterfront. The City of Torontos Central Waterfront Secondary Plan (2007) indicates that the waterfront trails should be connected to a city-wide trail/pathway system, including Garrison Creek, and identifies a pedestrian/cyclist connection across Fort York as a key pedestrian link. Current Situation and Identified Problem
1.4.3
The public street network accommodates the majority of north-south bicycle and pedestrian movements from the Liberty Village/Niagara neighbourhoods and from Stanley Park to the Waterfront, utilizing Strachan Avenue and Bathurst Street. These north-south arterial corridors present concerns related to convenience, comfort and safety, despite recent improvements. The planning and study documents discussed above, as well as local residents and the public, support the concept of off-street pedestrian and cyclist connections in the study area particularly between:
1.8
Liberty Village/Niagara Street neighbourhoods and the Martin Goodman Trail Network. The Garrison Creek Trail and the Toronto Waterfront. Fort York and lands to the north.
However, the current situation clearly indicates that barriers to pedestrian and cyclist movement exist in the study area, including:
Comfort and safety concerns on existing roads, including Bathurst Street and Strachan Avenue bridges. CN and GO Transit rail corridors. Identified Opportunity
1.4.4
To support goals of the City of Toronto, the Friends of Fort York and the Fort York Management Board, and Waterfront Toronto, in commemorating the common history of Fort York and the Fort neighbourhoods, existing parks and trails in the Fort York area need to be connected through a strategic north-south open space connection over the railway corridors. A structure over the existing railways would:
Connect major City of Toronto Parks, including Trinity Bellwoods Park, Stanley Park, June Callwood Park, Coronation Park, the Martin Goodman Trail and Garrison Common (Fort York). Promote positive redevelopment of lands north of Fort York. Re-establish a continuous park system extending from the original Iroquois Shoreline (now St. Clair Avenue) to Lake Ontario, as identified in the Garrison Creek Linkage Plan. Increase the public presence of Fort York by increasing public traffic and providing a new view-shed to Fort York from a bridge structure. Support policies in the City of Torontos Official Plan and Bike Plan. Improve pedestrian and cyclist safety and comfort in the Fort York area by providing an alternative to the rail crossings on Strachan Avenue and Bathurst Street, which are both busy municipal roads. Provide access to the future Fort York Visitor Information Centre.
1.9
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Figure 3 is an aerial photo plan of the study area, which illustrates a system of existing trails and pathways providing for the needs of pedestrians and cyclists both north and south of the rail corridors. By completing the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, an extension of the existing trail system may be created, as illustrated by the Potential Trail System, encompassing Fort York, the proposed bridge and an extension of Stanley Park south of Wellington Street.
1.10
EXISTING TRAIL SYSTEM POTENTIAL FUTURE TRAIL

Overall Parkland/Trails Context Plan

Figure 3
2.0
Study Objectives
The main objectives of this Class Environmental Assessment Study, and how they were generally approached, are summarized as follows: Objective 1: To implement a cooperative and solution-directed approach to liaison with property owners, business representatives, municipal/government agencies, the general public, and other stakeholders, leading to a consensus-oriented solution. A key element of any environmental assessment process is the solicitation and evaluation of study dialogue and technical input from various affected property owners, government agencies, the general public and other stakeholders, leading to the selection of a preferred solution which generally satisfies a majority of expressed concerns and/or desirable results. By means of Public Information Centres, Public Information Packages, individual consultations, Committee meetings and correspondence, a thorough approach was taken to general liaison over the course of the project. At all times, constructive dialogue, in a cooperative environment, was promoted so that the preferred design concept represents a consensus-oriented solution. This approach is the foundation of the Class Environmental Assessment Process and was the prime focus of the Project Team. Objective 2: To identify and consolidate all relevant natural, social, cultural and economic issues and constraints within the Study Area, and determine how the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge may be constructed within the context of conserving and enhancing the current community environment, while recognizing the mobility needs of pedestrian and cycle traffic. This Class Environmental Assessment Study was completed in the context of previous planning studies, reports and environmental research. Where needed, the data from these previous reports was used and updated to reflect the current status of existing conditions. Environmental specialists, architects, planners and engineers were included on the Project Team to interpret data and to assist with the integration of bridge and landscape design details into the existing urban environment.
2.1
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Objective 3: To develop alternative improvement solutions and design concepts based on acceptable design and operational standards, and to systematically evaluate the alternatives according to established impact criteria and mitigation potential. The process of evaluation must be accountable to legislative planning strategies and policies, natural and social environmental constraints, property issues, railway crossing standards, scheduling and costs. Various alternative design concepts were developed for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, employing suitable architectural vision and insight into the historical setting of the proposed structure. The evaluation process for the bridge recognized various issues and constraints associated with its horizontal and vertical geometry, its significance to the Toronto skyline, its relevance to the surrounding communities, its functionality, and its potential impact on the natural and cultural features of the area, particularly within the Fort York Precinct. Objective 4: To complete a functional design of the recommended preferred design concept that illustrates specific details of the proposed bridge and addresses any environmental enhancement or mitigation measures within the immediate limits of the structure. Upon selection of the preferred design concept over the course of the Class EA study process, a functional General Arrangement (GA) drawing was prepared which documented the structural and geometric parameters of the bridge. This functional design was augmented by the presentation of various computer generated images and graphic renderings of the bridge, approaches and other features, which were also important in the consultation and selection process. Objective 5: To summarize the environmental assessment and functional design documentation in a concise and defendable Environmental Study Report (ESR). This Environmental Study Report (ESR) represents the culmination of four phases of a five phase Class EA process. The fifth phase represents the detailed design and construction stages of the project, which were not part of this assignment. The Environmental Study Report is a comprehensive document that summarizes the entire Class EA process for the project, and presents the recommended preferred design concept along with recommendations for mitigation of any environmental impacts that may be anticipated during construction.
2.2
3.0
3.1
Study Process
CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS
The Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) Planning and Design process is an approved five-phase planning procedure, under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, that applies to municipal infrastructure projects. Projects undertaken through this planning process are classified by municipalities into one of three Schedule types ranging from Schedule A to Schedule C, in accordance with their degree of anticipated environmental impact. Schedule C projects have the highest potential for environmental impacts and must proceed under the full planning and documentation procedures specified under the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Guidelines. The five phases of the Class EA planning and design process are summarized as follows: Phase 1 Phase 2 Identify the problem (deficiency) or opportunity Identify alternative solutions to address the problem or opportunity, taking into consideration the existing environment, and select a preferred solution based on a thorough evaluation process and consultation with public, agencies and other stakeholders. Examine a range of alternative design concepts for implementing the preferred solution, based on existing constraints, public and review agency input, potential environmental impacts, and methods of mitigating any negative environmental affects. Document, in an Environmental Study Report (ESR) the rationale for the recommended preferred design concept, based on the planning, design and consultation process established through Phases 1 to 3. The ESR must be made available for public and agency review and comment, for a specified period of time. Complete contract drawings and documents, and proceed to construction of the recommended design concept, once all EA approvals are in place. Monitoring of construction activities and operations is warranted to ensure adherence to environmental provisions and mitigation measures noted in the ESR.
Phase 3
Phase 4
Phase 5
A copy of the flow chart outlining the Municipal Class EA Planning and Design Process is provided in Figure 4, courtesy of the Municipal Engineers Association (MEA).
3.1

Municipal Class EA Planning and Design Process

Figure 4
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT The Class Environmental Assessment for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge project has been undertaken in accordance with the guidelines set out in the provincially approved document titled Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Municipal Engineers Association, October 2000, as amended in 2007). The project falls within the category of a Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment, and included the first four (4) Phases of the study process (detailed design not included). At the outset of the project, background reports, property ownership data, land use, and other information related to the natural environment were collected and reviewed. Additional data was gathered through field investigations of natural and social environmental conditions, geotechnical, hydrogeological, wildlife habitat, and topography within the Study Area. In addition, input from government agencies and local interest groups was solicited through direct correspondence and liaison. In addition to convening two (2) Public Information Centre (PIC) meetings, details of the project were also reviewed at Project Team meetings, at Project Technical Advisory Committee meetings, as well at specially arranged presentations to the City of Toronto Design Review Panel, the City of Toronto Pedestrian Committee and briefings with elected officials. In summary, the Class Environmental Assessment for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge has ensured, through adherence to the guiding principles of the EA process, that the following key elements of the project have been completed:
Consultation with affected agencies, the public, property owners and other interest groups. Consideration of a reasonable range of alternatives, including both alternatives to and alternative methods of implementing a solution. Identification and consideration of the impacts of the alternatives on all aspects of the environment. Completion of a thorough evaluation process that led to the selection of a recommended preferred design concept. An outline of mitigative measures to protect and/or enhance the environment, in response to agency input, public feedback and study data. Documentation of the planning process in a comprehensive, clear and traceable format, with respect to the decision-making principles.
3.3
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3.2 PART II ORDERS
Class Environmental Assessments place emphasis on both an assessment of various alternatives and on a strict protocol for public and agency consultation. The encouragement of stakeholder participation, throughout the process, is strongly recommended so that all project-related issues and concerns may be resolved before a recommended preferred design concept is adopted and the Environmental Study Report (ESR) is completed and filed on the public record. If concerns are raised during the public review period that cannot be resolved through discussions with the proponent (City of Toronto), a Part II Order request may be submitted to the Minister of the Environment by any objector. For Schedule C projects, a written request must be submitted to the Minister within a minimum 30 calendar day review period after the proponent has issued the Notice of Study Completion and filed the ESR on the public record. Requests made or received after the minimum 30 calendar day review period will not be considered. Part II Order requests can be submitted to: Minister of the Environment 77 Wellesley Street West Ferguson Block, 11th Floor Toronto, ON M7A 2T5 john.garretson@ontario.ca Copy to: Ministry of the Environment Class EAs and Declarations Section Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch 2 St. Clair Avenue, Floor 12 Toronto, ON M4V 1L5 Phone: 1-800-461-6290 In the event that there are no Part II Orders on the project, or the Minister denies a Part II order request (with or without conditions), then the proponent (City of Toronto) will have complied with Section 13 (3) (a) of the Environmental Assessment Act and will have the right to proceed to design and construction of the recommended preferred design concept (Phase V of the Class EA process). 3.3 3.3.1 WORK PLAN, PROJECT DELIVERABLES AND STUDY SCHEDULE General
The Planning, Environmental Assessment and Functional Design Study for the Fort York Pedestrian Cycle Bridge has been conducted within the framework of the Municipal Engineers Association Class Environmental Assessment document (Amended 2007), as a Schedule C project.
3.4
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT More specifically, in this case, the Municipal Class EA process has provided verification of the following:

Confirmation of the study area. Confirmation of the need and justification for a new pedestrian bridge over the existing railway corridors. Identification of existing social, environmental and economic environmental conditions. Evaluation of alternative planning solutions based on appropriate assessment criteria. Development of alternative design concepts for the pedestrian and cycle crossing. Selection of a recommended preferred design concept. Refinement of the preferred design concept. Consultation with agencies, the public, advisory committees, elected officials and other stakeholders, at strategic points in the study process.
Public and Agency consultation was a key element of the process and determined to a large degree, the success of the project. In providing a thorough and transparent public consultation and planning process, and in securing broad base support for the recommended design concept over the course of the study, the Study Team developed confidence in the recommendations that were being considered for the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge. 3.3.2 Project Deliverables
The scope of deliverables for a Class Environmental Assessment Study are reasonably straight forward, and are documented in the Municipal Engineers Association Class EA document. A summary of the project deliverables, associated with the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge Class EA, were as follows:

Preparation of a Study Design document. Notice of Study Commencement. Summary of relevant background data and reports. Stage I Archaeological Assessment Report.
3.5

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Report. Hydrogeological Report. Traffic Assessment (rail, vehicular, pedestrian, cyclist) Report. Property ownership and contact mailing list. Photographic summary of study area. Geotechnical Assessment Report. Built Heritage and Cultural Report. Need and Justification Statement. Three Technical Memorandum Reports. Alternative Solutions Evaluation. Development of Alternative Design Concepts, including all plans, graphics, architectural renderings, photo imaging, and preliminary engineering. Evaluation Criteria and Summary of the selection process leading to a recommended preferred design concept. Notice of Public Information Centre (PIC) Meetings. PIC displays and Handouts/Comment Sheets. Summaries of PIC feedback. Agendas and Minutes of Meetings (Project Team, Technical Advisory Committee, etc.). Environmental Study Report (ESR). Content Assistance for Citys project Website (Website development by City). Correspondence documentation.
3.6
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3.3.3 Work Plan and Schedule
A copy of the approved Work Plan and Schedule is provided in Figure 5. This schedule, dated November 2008, provided a milestone road map governing all activities and target dates associated with the project. For the most part, the Project Team has been able to achieve all of the project activity objectives and deadlines, with the exception of a minor delay through July and August, 2009. Due to an unexpected labour disruption that affected City operations, Public Information Centre (PIC) Two was delayed from August 20, 2009 to September 16, 2009. However, efforts were made by all connected with this project to complete the Environmental Study Report by the original finish date of December 23, 2009. The following provides a summary of the key milestone activities and dates associated with the project:

Project Start-Up Meeting: September 11, 2008. Notice of Study Commencement: First issued October 3, 2008 and Advertised in Local Newspapers on October 16, 17, 23 and 24, 2008. Technical Memorandum One: December 22, 2008. Public Information Centre Meeting One (PIC #1): April 16, 2009. Technical Memorandum Two: April 30, 2009. City Design Review Panel Meeting (1st Meeting): May 25, 2009. Public Information Centre Meeting Two (PIC #2): September 16, 2009. City Pedestrian Review Committee Meeting: September 22, 2009. Technical Memorandum Three: October 1, 2009. City Design Review Panel Meeting (2nd Meeting): October 22, 2009. City Executive Committee: November 2, 2009. Environmental Study Report: o o Draft Document: November 13, 2009. Final Document: December 24, 2009.
Notice of Study Completion: January 7, 2010.
3.7

Workplan and Schedule

Figure 5


Figure 5


Figure 5
3.4
PROJECT STUDY ORGANIZATION
The success of this project may be attributed to input from the Project Team, the Director of the Waterfront Secretariat, the Technical Advisory Committee, the City Design Review Panel, the City Pedestrian Committee, the area Ward Councillor and Chair of the War of 1812 Bicentennial Committee, and other information meeting groups associated with the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. The structure of the Project Team, which was the primary committee group directing the project, was as follows: City of Toronto

Stephen McKenna, Project Manager, Waterfront Secretariat; Stephen OBright, Technical Coordinator, Waterfront Secretariat; John Bryson, Manager, Structures & Expressways, Technical Services; Marilia Cimini, Transportation Engineer, Infrastructure Planning, Transportation Services.

Garry E. Leveck, P. Eng., Project Manager, Vice-President, Transportation; Maya Caron, Environmental Coordinator, Environmental Planner; Mike Trader, P. Eng., Bridge Design, Head, Structural Engineering; Mike Dartizio, OALA, CSLA, Landscape Architecture, Senior Landscape Architect.
Montgomery Sisam Architects

Robert Davies, Bridge Architecture, Senior Architect/Partner; Kirsten Thomson, Bridge Architecture, Assistant Project Architect.
Assisting Stantec Consulting Ltd (Prime Consultant) throughout the project was Montgomery Sisam Architects, who played a major role in developing the bridge design concepts and attending all meetings over the course of the study. Other subconsultants included Archaeological Services Inc. (ASI), who completed a Stage I Archaeological Assessment and a Cultural Heritage Assessment (Built Heritage and Cultural Heritage Landscapes), and Peto MacCallum Limited, who completed a Preliminary Foundation and Geotechnical Assessment Investigation Report. The Project Team had formal meetings at various stages during the study, to review project data, alternative solutions, alternative design concepts, evaluation criteria and recommendations, public and agency input, PIC presentation material, technical issues, and other pertinent study content. The minutes of all Project Team meetings are included in Appendix F.
3.9
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT To supplement the guidance and direction provided by the Project Team, details of the study were presented to and reviewed by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), made up of City staff from various departments as well as GO Transit, Toronto Police Services and EMS. In addition to the Project Team members noted above, who were integral to the TAC Committee, the following personnel made up the balance of the Technical Advisory Committee: Technical Advisory Committee (in addition to Project Team members)

Eric Pedersen, Program Manager, Urban Design, City Planning; David OHara, Museum Administrator, Museum Services, EDC & T; Jo Ann Pynn, Supervisor, Cultural Affairs, EDC & T; Mary MacDonald, Acting Manager, Heritage Preservation, City Planning; Susan Hughes, Supervisor, Heritage Preservation, City Planning; Jamaica Hewston, Planner, Community Planning, West Section, City Planning; Kathie Capizzano, Project Manager, Policy & Appraisal, Facilities & Real Estate; David Dunn, Engineer Coordinator, Pedestrian & Cycling Infrastructure, Transportation Services; Sean Harvey, Acting Supervisor, Design & Development , Parks, Forestry & Recreation; Jennifer Tharp, Planner, Design & Development, Parks, Forestry & Recreation; Hans Riekko, Assistant Planner, Transportation Planning, City Planning; Jeff Bateman, Senior Planning Officer, GO Transit; Caroline Mellor, Senior EMS Planning Officer, Emergency Medical Services; * Gordon Reid, Police Constable, Community Response Unit, Toronto Police Service.*
Throughout the Class EA Study, the Project Team and Technical Advisory Committee meetings provided excellent forums for assessing relevant issues and constraints, with lengthy discussions and team building evident at all times. As a result, critical decisions were reached in an atmosphere of cooperation for the good of the project and the community, and within the spirit of the Class Environmental Assessment process. 3.5 PUBLIC AND AGENCY CONSULTATION
Public and agency consultation is a key feature of the Ontario Municipal Class Environmental Assessment planning and design process. Through an effective public and agency participation program, the proponent can generate meaningful dialogue between the project planners and external stakeholders, allowing an exchange of ideas, a broadening of the project information base, and ultimately a consensus-oriented decision making process. One of the principal aims of external consultation is to achieve resolution of differences of points of view, thus reducing or avoiding controversy and avoiding the need for implementing Part II of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act.
Note: Consulted through liaison with Project Team
3.10
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3.5.1 Notice of Study Commencement
The first step in the public and agency consultation process was the publication and circulation of the Notice of Study Commencement, a copy of which is provided in Appendix A. Advertising was as follows: NOW Magazine: October 16/23, 2008. Parkdale Liberty: October 17/24, 2008. Citys Get Involved Website (http://www.toronto.ca/involved/index.htm). Circulation of the Notice of Study Commencement was also made by mail to an extensive list of Agencies, Associations and Residents/Property Owners. A complete list of the Agency and Association contacts is provided in Appendix A, while residents/property owners are not provided. This contact list was updated over the course of the project based on responses from the circulations, attendance at Public Information Centre Meetings, and comments received as input to the study. The Notice of Study Commencement advertising and circulation process resulted in responses being received from various agencies and interested stakeholders, including the following:

Ministry of the Environment, Ontario (MOE); Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA); Enbridge Pipelines; Waterfront Action; Toronto Police Service; The Friends of Fort York; Ministry of Culture, Ontario; Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration.
Copies of the initial responses to the Notice of Study Commencement, as noted, are included in Appendix G. 3.5.2 Public Information Centre (PIC) Meeting Number One: Thursday, April 16, 2009
The first of two Public Information Centre (PIC) meetings was convened on Thursday, April 16, 2009. It was held at the Niagara Public School, located in the heart of the Niagara Neighbourhood, which is the central community area to the north of the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge. The purpose of the first Public Information Centre was to introduce the public to the background studies that prompted the Class Environmental Assessment, to confirm the Need and Justification for the project, to provide data and reports in fulfillment of the EA process, and to introduce the Alternative Solutions and Preliminary Design Concepts under consideration. No decisions on a preferred alternative were presented at this initial Public Information Centre Meeting.
3.11
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT All attendees were invited to view display panels that were arranged in the meeting room, and to provide comments to the Project Team members on any issues of interest or concern. A total of seventeen (17) written Comment Sheets were received at the meeting, which was attended by an estimated 65 public participants. Three email responses were received after the PIC. A general overview of the organization and documentation details of the first Public Information Centre meeting is provided below. A copy of each of the Notice of Public Information Centre Meeting, the Display Panels, the Public Handout Document, and Completed Comment Sheets and E-mail Responses are included in Appendix B. (i) Location, Time and Format:

Date: Time:
Thursday, April 16, 2009. 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Location: Niagara Public School, 222 Niagara Street, Toronto. Drop-In format with one-on-one interaction between attendees and Project Team Members.
(ii)
Advertisement Process (Notice of Public Information Centre Meeting):
Publications in NOW Magazine (April 2 and 9, 2009) and the Parkdale Liberty Newsletter (April 3 and 10, 2009). Direct mailing to Agencies, Community Organizations, Property Owners within the Study Area, and Interested Stakeholders. Mass postal mailing to local residents and businesses (+ 12,000 mailings) within the general distribution boundary of Queen Street West, Bathurst Street, Lakeshore Boulevard West, and Shaw Street.
(iii)
PIC Display Panels and Public Handout Document:
Twenty five (25) display panels were available for public viewing. These displays were grouped into the following broad categories:
o
Welcome, Project Objectives and Overview of Class Environmental Assessment Process Project Need and Justification Historical Fort York and Garrison Creek
o o
3.12
o
Background Studies and their relevance to the Fort York Bridge Class EA Study Recent Studies: Archaeological, Built and Cultural Heritage, Landscape Architecture and Transportation Assessments Alternative Planning Solutions and Evaluation Matrix, including identification of Preferred Planning Solution (New Pedestrian and cycle Structure) Property Ownership Mosaic Preliminary Bridge Design Concepts, including Alignment and Section Alternatives, and the Approach to Design Photo Overview of Study Area What are the Next Steps in the Study Process?
o o
o o
A Public Handout Document and Comment Sheet was provided to each attendee for their review and use in providing feedback on the project.
(iv)
Attendance and Response:
Public Information Centre No. 1 was attended by the Director of the Waterfront Secretariat, four (4) members of the Stantec Consultant Team, four (4) members of the City of Toronto/Waterfront Secretariat Project Team, two (2) members of the City of Toronto Technical Advisory Committee, and Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor, Joe Pantalone. Fifty four (54) members of the public officially registered for the PIC; it is estimated that there were approximately 65 public attendees as not everyone wished to sign the Attendance Registry. Seventeen (17) Comment Sheets were received from attendees at the PIC. They were filled out on-the-spot and left in a Comment Drop Box provided at the meeting. Three email responses were received after the PIC. In general, the overall response to the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge was positive. Further, it was felt that the attendance level and extent of written responses was excellent, providing a good cross-section of thoughts as well as strong support for a specific type of structure. A general summary of the Public Comments follows:
3.13
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Public Response:
Seventeen (17) comment sheets were filled out and left at the meeting, with an additional three (3) email submissions forwarded at a later date.
Public Comments: (1) In favour of Pedestrian and cycle Bridge:

19 out of 20 (95%). 1 cautiously in favour, subject to available funding (5%).
(2) Preferred Alternative Design Concept:

Of the 20 respondents, nine attendees specified a preferred design concept, while 11 did not state a preference. Of the nine who commented on a preferred design concept, all (100%) recommended Alternative 4/Arch design.
(3) General Comments:

Provide viewing platforms on the bridge to enjoy the various vistas in the area. Provide safety and security to users, particularly at night. Avoid, wherever possible, detrimental impacts on Garrison Common. Provide a pathway connection to Bathurst Street, north of Fort York. Preserve the history of Fort York. Provide access to the Ordnance Triangle Lands, for future use. Design should be creative and unique.
3.14
PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE MEETINGS
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3.5.3 Public Information Centre (PIC) Meeting Number Two: Wednesday, September 16, 2009
The second of two Public Information Centre (PIC) Meetings was held on Wednesday, September 16, 2009 at the Wellington on the Park condominium complex, 15 Stafford Street, which is located adjacent to existing Stanley Park. It is estimated that 44 members of the public attended the second PIC meeting. The primary purpose of the second Public Information Centre was to present the Recommended Preferred Design Concept for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, based on the extensive study documentation, evaluations, public and agency feedback, project team reviews, and technical design criteria. A recommendation to approve Alternative Alignment 4/Tied Arch as the preferred design concept was presented to the public for final consideration. In addition to a series of displays available for public viewing and discussion, a formal Power Point presentation was made to explain, in greater detail, the evolution of the design process that culminated in the recommended preferred design concept. A question and answer period followed the formal presentation, which was attended by about twenty four (24) members of the public. A general review of the organization and documentation details of Public Information Centre Meeting Two is provided below. A copy of each of the Notice of Public Information Centre Meeting, the Public Display Panels, the Power Point Presentation, the Public Handout Document, and the Completed Comment Sheets and Email Responses are included in Appendix B. (i) Location, Time and Format:

Date: Time
Wednesday, September 16, 2009. 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Location: 15 Stafford Street, Wellington on the Park. Drop-in format with one-on-one interaction between attendees and Project Team members. Formal presentation at 7:00 p.m. followed by a question and answer period. Formal part of the meeting lasted until 7:50 p.m.
(ii)
Advertisement Process (Notice of Public Information Centre Meeting):

Publication in NOW magazine (September 3 and 10, 2009). Direct mailing to agencies, community organizations, property owners within the Study Area, attendees from PIC#1, and interested stakeholders. 3.16
Mass postal mailing to local residents and businesses (+ 12,000 mailings), within the general distribution boundary of Queen Street West, Bathurst Street, Lakeshore Boulevard West, and Shaw Street.
(iii)
PIC Display Panels and Public Handout Document:
Twenty-four (24) display panels were available for public viewing. These displays were grouped into the following broad categories:
o o o o o o o o
Welcome, and Invitation to Participate The Environmental Assessment Process and Property Ownership Parkland and Trails Context Planning Review of Bridge Concepts presented at PIC#1, and Public Feedback Tree Inventory Assessment within Study Area Metrolinx Study Impacts on Fort York Bridge Study Evaluation of Alternative Design Concepts Recommended Preferred Design Concept and Computer Generated Images Landscape Architectural Concepts and Artistic Renderings, plus Illumination opportunities What are the Next Steps in the Study process?
A Public Handout Document and Comment Sheet was provided to each attendee for their review and use in providing feedback on the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge project.
(iv)
Presentation at Public Information Centre Meeting: At the second Public Information Centre Meeting, a formal presentation was made to attendees who wished to receive additional information on the project, and to ask questions of the Project Team. A Meeting Facilitator was engaged by the City of Toronto to run this formal part of the PIC. The presentation was made by Stantecs Project Manager after introductory remarks by Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor Joe Pantalone. Twenty-four (24) members of the public were present for the presentation, which lasted 50 minutes.
3.17
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT (v) Attendance and Response:
Public Information Centre No. 2 was attended by three (3) members of the Consultant Team, two (2) members of the City of Toronto/Waterfront Secretariat Project Team, two (2) members of the City of Toronto Project Technical Advisory Committee, and Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor Joe Pantalone. Thirty-five (35) members of the public officially registered for the PIC; it is estimated that there were approximately 44 public attendees as not everyone wished to sign the Attendance Registry. Five (5) Comment Sheets were left by meeting attendees. Six (6) additional comments were forwarded by email after the PIC. In general, the overall response to the public display presentation, the formal Power Point Presentation, and the Recommended Preferred Design Concept was extremely favourable at the second PIC. It was clear that a majority were in support of the design being recommended for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge.
3.5.4
Correspondence and Liaison
Over the course of the study process, there has been correspondence and liaison with various agencies and interested stakeholders, all of whom provided input to the issues, constraints, solutions, concepts and details of the project. The following summarizes external agency and public input outside of the interaction arising from the Public Information Centre (PIC) meetings. 3.5.4.1 The Friends of Fort York and Garrison Common The Friends of Fort York and Garrison Common is a non-profit organization dedicated to the preservation and enhancement of Fort York by supporting its operations as a National Historic Site and through the communication of its past history for the benefit of all citizens and visitors. Over the course of the Class EA Study, Friends of Fort York representatives have taken an active interest in the direction of the project, plus the assessment of bridge alternatives and their relative impacts on the Fort York Lands.
3.18
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT The Project Team convened a meeting with the Friends of Fort York on March 5, 2009, at which time the scope of the EA project was outlined, initial bridge concepts were presented, and various design constraints and opportunities were reviewed. As a result of that meeting, the Fort-centered objectives of the Friends of Fort York were clearly articulated, as was the focus of the City of Toronto to create a pedestrian and cycle bridge that would be in harmony with it surroundings. Representatives of the Friends of Fort York maintained contact with the study team through letters, emails and personal conversations. Three key comments of the Friends of Fort York were provided in their letter dated April 20, 2009 (see Appendix G), as a follow-up to the March 5, 2009 meeting.
The planning of the Bridge must continue to be concerned with, and respect the location of, the existing archaeology, spaces and building of the FortIt is also important that the location of the Bridge is well coordinated with the location and orientation of the new Visitor Centre, pedestrian and cycling amenities proposed for the Fort all of this new work must be considered part of one larger, single vision for the future of the Fort and its lands. The Bridge design should, at this stage of the project, be concerned with integral look-out points and wayfinding/historical signage. Wayfinding and signage developed now and integral to the Bridge structure (the guards/handrails/walking surface) is critical to precluding a tacked-on solution once the Bridge is built. The Bridges layout and structure should also, at this point in its development, allow for integral look-out points to significant features of the Fort and/or the surrounding area. The Friends are not concerned that the proposed contemporary form and appearance of the Bridge will detract from, or conflict with, the historical fabric of the Fort.
Additional contacts were made with representatives of the Friends of Fort York, related to the recommended preferred design concept and the possible impacts that the Metrolinx proposal for the Strachan Avenue Grade Separation (track lowering) would have on the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. Copies of emails are provided in the Appendices for reference. It is believed that the current bridge proposal addresses the objectives of the Friends of Fort York, both within the context of the Class Environmental Assessment functional planning and within the recommendations associated with detailed design, to come at a later date. The Project Team acknowledges the valuable input and support of the Friends of Fort York throughout the study process.
3.19
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3.5.4.2 CN Rail and GO Transit CN Rail and GO Transit are the owners and primary operators on the two railway corridors within the study area. The Project Team recognized, in the beginning, the significant importance of these two agencies in the decision making process and conceptual design associated with any structure over the tracks. Therefore, meetings were initiated with CN and GO Transit as soon as possible in the study schedule. What was learned by the Project Team included the following:
The North Tracks (East of Strachan Avenue):

o o o o
Georgetown (Galt Subdivision) Line Currently 4 tracks Future 7 tracks as part of Metrolinx Expansion Plans Corridor and tracks owned by GO Transit
The South Tracks (East of Strachan Avenue):

o o o o
Lakeshore (Oakville Subdivision) Line Currently 4 tracks No current plans for track expansions Corridor and tracks owned by CN Rail
In early discussions with CN Rail and GO Transit, it was determined that all liaison related to design criteria, issues and constraints, and overall railway operations was to be through GO Transit staff, who would represent CN Rail. To facilitate ongoing liaison and ensure that GO Transit authorities were up-to-date on the progress of the study, GO Transit was invited to be represented on the Project Technical Advisory Committee. GO Transit obliged, and Mr. Jeff Bateman, Senior Planning Officer with the Transportation Planning and Development division of GO Transit, attended various TAC meetings. One of the key design criteria affecting the conceptual design of the pedestrian and cycle bridge was the vertical clearance between the top of rail and the underside of the structure. Rail clearance parameters may vary from site to site, depending on issues such as track profile, horizontal alignment, and sight line impacts. It was necessary, therefore, to confirm the factors affecting vertical clearance at this location before proceeding with any structure profile concepts. In discussions with GO Transit, it was determined that a Sight Line Visibility study would be needed to confirm actual clearance restrictions at the proposed bridge crossing location. This technical study, it was learned, would need to be facilitated by GO Transit and funded by the proponent (City of Toronto). In the interim, GO Transit proposed that a clearance of 8.4 metres (27.6 feet) be used for functional planning during the Class EA, such clearance being subject to change based on further analysis during detailed design.
3.20
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Going forward, all bridge planning was based on a railway clearance of 8.4 metres, under the assumption that 8.4 metres was somewhat conservative and any minor increase to this interim value would not negatively impact the functional level detailing of the bridge. Further, it was recognized that any potential reduction in the clearance restriction, below the 8.4 metres, could be readily accounted for in the detailed design, and would serve to reduce the project cost. Over the course of the Class EA Study, the impact of the Metrolinx Georgetown Rail Corridor Study grew in significance, and ultimately had a direct bearing on the direction provided by GO Transit on clearance requirements at the Fort York Bridge site. In May, 2009, GO Transit merged with Metrolinx with a goal to integrate the planning and growth strategies of the two organizations. A discussion of how the Class EA study was affected by the Metrolinx Rail Corridor Study Environmental Assessment is provided in Section 3.5.4.3. In the end, the rail clearance requirement for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge was relaxed by Metrolinx and GO Transit to 7.4 metres. Copies of meeting notes and correspondence with CN And GO Transit are provided in Appendix F. 3.5.4.3 Metrolinx In response to growing concerns over the inadequacy of road and public transit systems in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), the Government of Ontario passed legislation in 2006 that created the Metrolinx Agency. Its mission is to create a state-ofthe-art transportation system for the GTHA that will move people and goods effectively, economically and in an environmentally sustainable manner. One of the first major project initiatives of Metrolinx has been the planning of the proposed Georgetown South Rail Corridor Expansion and New Rail Service between Union Station and Pearson International Airport. This project would have direct impacts on the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge as it crosses the Georgetown Rail Corridor just east of Strachan Avenue (north tracks in study area). In addition to plans by GO Transit/Metrolinx to provide future electrification of its entire GO system, the subject study also examined alternatives for a new grade separation (bridge) at Strachan Avenue. The planning for a structure at this location required that numerous technical and social factors be weighed and balanced, in reaching a solution that addressed the perspectives of Metrolinx, the City of Toronto and local property owners/stakeholders. As part of the Metrolinx Environmental Assessment Study, public meetings were convened in the area which focused, to a large extent, on the functional plans for the Strachan Avenue grade separation. Initially, Metrolinx proposed that Strachan Avenue be constructed over the existing tracks, with no change to the rail elevations. However, this concept would have significant impacts on the adjacent neighbourhoods, cutting off access to Wellington Street and dividing the community on either side of Strachan Avenue.
3.21
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT In response to requests from the City of Toronto and local residents, Metrolinx reconsidered its approach to the Strachan Avenue railway grade separation, opting for a compromise solution that would:

Raise Strachan Avenue by 4 metres at the track crossing. Lower the expanded rail corridor by 5 metres at the Strachan Avenue crossing. Install retaining walls over the limits of the track lowering to avoid property acquisitions on either side of the tracks. Gradually raise the elevation of the lowered track, both east and west of Strachan Avenue, matching existing track grade just west of Bathurst Street to the east. Raise the intersection of Strachan Avenue with Wellington Street/Douro Street by approximately 1.0 metre, and the intersection of Strachan Avenue with Liberty Street/Ordnance Street by approximately 2.0 metres.
The details of the Metrolinx solution for the Strachan Avenue bridge were presented at a Public Information Centre Meeting held June 16, 2009 at the Fort York Blue Barracks Room. At the proposed Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, it is estimated that the future track elevation (Georgetown Line) will be about 3.0 metres lower than the existing track, which is more or less equal to the grade of the Oakville Line (south tracks). This lowering of the track was deemed to be extremely beneficial in the development of functional plans for the Fort York Bridge, as it would contribute to significant construction cost savings. However, it is understood that the lowering of the Georgetown tracks will not occur within the time frame proposed for construction of the Fort York Bridge. Therefore, the elevation of the pedestrian and cycle bridge may only be lowered to a clearance of 7.4 metres above the existing track. Once the railway is lowered, however, the clearance will end up being in the order of 10.4 metres, assuming that the track lowering at the bridge will be about 3.0 metres. In the end, the compromise solution that Metrolinx ultimately selected for the Strachan Avenue grade separation was agreed to by the City of Toronto and the community. It is unfortunate that the timing of the two projects will not mesh and allow a further lowering of the bridge, but there does not appear to be a possibility that the Metrolinx project will be accelerated to match the 2012 completion date of the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. Correspondence and file data related to the Metrolinx Environmental Assessment Study and its impacts on the Fort York Bridge are provided in Appendix H.
3.22
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3.5.4.4 Ministry of the Environment The Ministry of the Environment is an important agency in any Environmental Assessment process. In conjunction with the circulation of the project Notice of Study Commencement, first contact was made with the Technical Support Section of MOE, who responded with a detailed summary of issues that should be considered as part of the proposed undertaking. The issues of concern, as outlined in their letter dated December 1, 2008 (see Appendix G), included:

Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Surface Water Groundwater Dust and Noise
Contaminated Soils Mitigation and Monitoring Class EA Process First Nations Consultation
In addition to general comments provided by MOE to assist the proponents in dealing with the above issues, it was requested that further contact be made with the Ministry by providing copies of Public Information Centre (PIC) materials and handouts, as well as a draft copy of the Environmental Study Report and Notice of Study Completion, when available. In response to the requests of the Ministry of the Environment, the following actions have been taken:
Copies of the Public Display Panels and Handout Document for PIC No. 1 (April 16, 2009) were submitted to Ms. Shannon McNeill, at the MOE, on April 28, 2009. Copies of the Public Display Panels and Handout Document for PIC No. 2 (September 16, 2009) were submitted to Ms. Shannon McNeill, at the MOE, on October 27, 2009. The Project Team for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge project has systematically addressed the potential issues of concern, as follows: (i) Ecosystem Protection and Restoration:
Through consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and other agencies (MNR), no areas of interest were noted within the study limits, with respect to ecosystem protection.
(ii)
Surface Water:
There are no existing watercourses within the study limits. Therefore, there have been no identified ecological functions of local watercourses noted. Any storm water runoff arising from the deck surface of the bridge structure will be dealt with in conjunction with final design. These design features are expected to be a modest component of the overall local drainage patterns and systems. 3.23
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT (iii) Groundwater:
There are no known well water supply systems in the area that will be impacted by the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge. Therefore, there will be no anticipated impacts or decommissioning needs, or will there be any specific need for a Permit to Take Water (PTTW) under the Ontario Water Resources Act.
(iv)
Dust and Noise:
Normal constraints will be included within the construction contract documents to control dust and noise, in accordance with local Bylaws and MOE guidelines. Such notification requirements will be outlined in the Environmental Study Report.
(v)
Contaminated Soils:
In accordance with Phase I ESA and Geotechnical Studies, completed as part of the Environmental Assessment, no contaminated subsurface soils have been identified. Therefore, there is no expectation that contaminated soils will be an issue during construction. However, further geotechnical investigations will be completed during detailed design to confirm this data. There has been no evidence of buried storage tanks that could be affected by construction.
(vi)
Mitigation and Monitoring:
Design and construction reports and plans will be based on a best management approach that will focus on the prevention of impacts, protection of the existing environment, and opportunities for rehabilitation and enhancement of any impacted areas. All waste generated during construction will be disposed of in accordance with MOE requirements. Contractors will be made aware of all environmental considerations so that standards and commitments for both construction and operation are met. Mitigation measures will be clearly referenced in the EA Document and future contract documents so that all construction activity is monitored for compliance.
(vii)
Class EA Process
The EA Document provides clear and complete documentation of the planning process. It also demonstrates how the consultation provisions of the Class EA have been fulfilled, including documentation of all public consultation efforts undertaken during the planning process and how identified concerns have been addressed throughout the study. 3.24
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT (viii) First Nations Consultation
As part of the stakeholder and agency consultation process, the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs and the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs was contacted in accordance with governing procedures. The Aboriginal communities who may be affected by the project were provided with an opportunity to participate in any planned public consultation sessions and comment on the project.
3.5.4.5 Other External Agencies As mentioned, numerous agencies were contacted as part of the Notice of Study Commencement circulation. In addition to the details provided above for the Friends of Fort York, CN Rail, GO Transit, Metrolinx, etc., responses were also received from the following outside agencies:
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA): o Letter dated January 13, 2009. o No TRCA areas of interest within the study limits, and no concerns with the project. o No additional contact by the study team deemed necessary. Waterfront Action: o Email dated January 21, 2009. o Project should be of a scale and design that properly denotes the importance of the War of 1812 in the development of Toronto and Canada. o Waterfront Action was forwarded future notices of Public Information Centre meetings. Toronto Police Service: o Letter dated January 15, 2009. o Concern that suitable access for emergency response and crime prevention patrol to the bridge is accounted for in the design. o Recommended application of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), which embodies the concept that the design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the opportunity for crime. o Ongoing dialogue was held with Toronto Police Services through an invitation to have a representative on the Technical Advisory Committee. Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration, Ministry of Culture and Ministry of Health Protection: o Letter dated April 7, 2009. o No comments or changes to highlight. o Recommendation to contact Ministry of Culture directly for any comments. o Details of project were forwarded to the Ministry of Culture on November 13, 2009.
3.25
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. o Email dated December 15, 2008. o No facilities in the area of the project and no further interest in the study. o Noted that Enbridge Gas is a separate company, and may have an interest (no response from Enbridge Gas). o No further contact deemed necessary. Notice of Study Completion
3.5.5
The final step in the public and agency consultation process was the publication and circulation of the Notice of Study Completion, a copy of which is provided in Appendix A. Advertising was as follows: NOW Magazine: January 7/14, 2010. Citys Get Involved Website (http://www.toronto.ca/involved/index.htm). Circulation of the Notice of Study Completion was also made by mail to various Agencies, Associations and Residents/Property Owners. 3.6 CITY OF TORONTO INTERNAL LIAISON
As observed under Section 3.4, this Environmental Assessment Study was guided by, and had input from, various City of Toronto Committees. Some of these committees were formed specifically for this project while others are standing City committees that provide feedback on many project developments. In addition to formal committee meetings, arrangements were made for other meetings, from time to time, to receive important project input. One such example included three briefings with the Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor. The following provides a synopsis of the Project Management and Internal Liaison structure that was utilized on the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge Class Environmental Assessment Study. 3.6.1 Project Team
The Project Team was the primary management and technical group, with responsibility for developing and considering project solutions, concepts and other details before they were forwarded to other committees. The Project Team consisted of Project Managers from the City of Toronto (Waterfront Secretariat) and the Consultant, as well as technical support staff from the City and Consultant. The makeup of the Project Team is provided in Section 3.4, and Minutes of the Project Team Meetings are included in Appendix F.
3.26
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3.6.2 Technical Advisory Committee
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) consisted of staff from various City of Toronto divisions, in addition to the Project Team members. Details of the project were presented to the TAC by the Project Team so that divisional input could be received over the course of the study. A total of three meetings were held with the Technical Advisory Committee; Minutes are included in Appendix F. The makeup of the TAC is outlined in Section 3.4. 3.6.3 City Design Review Panel
The Design Review Panel is a Council-approved group of architects, landscape architects, planners and professional engineers whose mandate is to provide objective advice on matters that affect the public realm. The panel is structured to complement the development process by upholding standards of design excellence. The input of the Design Review Panel is to be integrated, where possible and practical, into the design process, striving for positive impacts on the urban domain. Two presentations (May 25, 2009 and October 22, 2009) were made by the Project Team to the City Design Review Panel, with positive feedback and constructive advice and direction provided at both meetings. The comments of the panel have been accommodated either in the general design of the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, as presented, or within the commentary of this Environmental Study Report. Minutes of the Panel meetings are included in Appendix F. 3.6.4 City Pedestrian Committee
The City Pedestrian Committee is comprised of diverse representation from Council, School Boards, Community Groups and Citizens, to ensure that the extensive interests of pedestrians are considered in the design and enhancement of public space. One of the primary objectives of the committee is to work for improved pedestrian safety in all areas of the public realm. One meeting and presentation (September 22, 2009) was held with the City Pedestrian Committee, at which time the recommended preferred design concept was outlined. The concept for the pedestrian and cycle bridge was well received by the committee members in attendance. Minutes of the Pedestrian Committee meeting are presented in Appendix F.
3.27
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3.6.5 Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor Joe Pantalone
Three briefing meetings were held with Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor Pantalone, to provide updates on the direction of the Environmental Assessment Study and to better understand the community perspective. Minutes of the briefing meetings are included in Appendix F. 3.6.6 Consultant Design Team
In managing the technical details of the project, several informal and formal meetings were held by consultant team members, including staff from Stantec Consulting Ltd. and Montgomery Sisam Architects. Two of the key meetings included the following:
May 14, 2009: The meeting was arranged to review the conceptual bridge designs and to generate discussions and consensus on various details related to the functional design of the recommended preferred design concept. Details that were reviewed included ramps and approaches, bridge superstructure and substructure, landscaping and graphics, bridge constructability, cost, and schedule.
June 26, 2009: The meeting was convened to complete a final review of the structural design issues related to preferred Alternative Alignment #4, with the intent of resolving the arch/alignment interface while satisfying architectural design needs. The meeting resulted in changes to the bridge curvature and relocation of the tied arches from the outside to the inside of bridge curves. Minutes of these meetings are provided in Appendix F.
3.28
4.0
Existing Conditions
The Class Environmental Assessment process requires that existing natural, cultural, economic and social environments be examined so that any potential negative impacts from the proposed design solution may be evaluated. The following section summarizes the local environmental conditions within the study area. Copies of all technical and environmental reports are included in Appendix C. 4.1 4.1.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Physiography and Soils/Foundations
Peto MacCallum Ltd. Consulting Engineers was engaged to complete a preliminary geotechnical investigation and report, with specific reference to subsurface conditions in the general area of the proposed pedestrian bridge. The investigation was based on a review of previous geotechnical data in the area, leading to an interpretive assessment of inferred geotechnical conditions. No boreholes were advanced as part of this preliminary study. The project study area is located within a glacial ice deposit known as the Sunnybrook Till, which is made up of mixtures of silty clay and silt with sand and gravel contents. The underlying bedrock consists of shale, typically found at about 8-10 metres below ground surface elevations. The bedrock generally slopes toward Lake Ontario. The local stratigraphy also consists of topsoil or fill over discontinuous limits of the silt/silty sand, while ground water was encountered in previous boreholes at 0.8 to 3.7 metre depths. It is envisaged that the planned pedestrian and cycle bridge will be a relatively light structure in comparison with standard vehicle bridges. Further, the site for the bridge is located in an area where competent glacial till soils exist below a layer of fill/topsoil of variable depth, based on the subsurface conditions previously encountered at this site. It is considered feasible, therefore, to found this light weight pedestrian and cycle bridge on spread footings bearing on native soils. The footings must be placed below the fill and/or topsoil which may be encountered at the site, or, alternatively, footings on structural fill may be considered. Deep foundations such as cast-in-place caissons may also be used in this area, as well as steel H-piles. Deep foundations would need to extend to bedrock level or terminate in the glacial till subgrade, at an appropriate depth to be determined during the detail design phase of the project.
4.1
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Design and construction of foundations to support the proposed structure must be in accordance with Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC), 2006 Edition. A minimum of 1.2 m of earth cover is required over the footings or pile caps for adequate frost protection. Finally, the subsurface data in the Peto MacCallum report is preliminary only and based on a literature review of available data. Additional investigations and/or detail design investigations must be carried out at the selected bridge site upon completion of the Class Environmental Assessment study and commencement of final design. 4.1.2 Tree Inventory Assessment
A Tree Inventory, based on a visual assessment only, was completed by a certified arborist from Stantec Consulting Ltd. The inventory included two general groups of trees, with the first including hedgerow and woodland areas and the second including all individual trees within the Garrison Common area of Fort York. The Assessment of the general condition of trees was completed in accordance with accepted arboricultural techniques. These included a visual examination of the aboveground parts of each tree for structural defects, scars, external indications of decay, evidence of insect presence, discoloured foliage, and the general condition of the trees in the surrounding area. No invasive actions were used to assess tree conditions. Observations And Recommendations (i) Hedgerow And Woodland Areas
The Hedgerow and Woodland study area was grouped into Unit Compositions, and referenced on the drawing that accompanies the report. A description of the observations and recommendations, within the seven (7) Unit areas, is provided in the following:
4.2
Unit
Rare/Significant Species:
None Observed
None Observed
None Observed
None Observed
None Observed
The unit is located directly adjacent to the parking lot entrance off of
None Observed
Average Height of Trees:
12 metres
10 metres
10 metres
13 metres
12 metres
4 metres
Approximate Number of Trees:
43
200
36
110
11
Garrison Road. It is an active nursery yard for the City of Toronto
30
Average Tree Condition:
Good to Fair
Good
Fair
Good
Good
Fair
Community Age:
Semimature
Semimature
Semimature
Semi-mature
Semi-mature
and plant quantities and species composition vary on a regular basis. Future plans for the nursery may include removal of all temporary vegetation and restoration of the site.
Mature
Recommendations:
Due to the undesirable species composition this unit has a low preservation priority.
This unit exhibits retainable species and provides a natural screening from the railway. Efforts to preserve this unit are recommended.
This unit exhibits retainable species and provides a natural screening from the railway. Efforts to preserve this unit are recommended.
Due to the fair condition rating of this unit preservation priority is low.
(ii)
Garrison Common Area
Within the Garrison Common, individual trees were numbered as illustrated on the drawing that accompanies the report. For each of the 61 trees assessed on site, the Botanical Common Names were provided, along with DBH (cm), Height (m), Dripline Radius (m) and General Condition. In addition, a Preservation Priority rating (Low/Medium/High) was recommended.
4.3
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT A summary of the detailed inventory within the Garrison Common is available for viewing within the study report. Otherwise a summary of Preservation Priority recommendations are as listed in the chart below. Preservation Priority Low Medium High TOTAL 4.1.3 Natural Environment Number of Trees 7 9 45 61 Trees
A Natural Environment Study was completed to identify natural features within the local ecosystem that may be impacted by the proposed undertaking. The purpose of the assessment was also to address avoidance and mitigation measures to minimize such impacts. Since the study area for the Fort York bridge is comprised of cityscape with no areas of remnant natural vegetation, the natural environment study was scoped to focus on features relevant to the current conditions, which included the terrestrial ecosystem only (since there are no water features or surface water drainage features, there is no potential for aquatic habitat ecosystem issues). Within the terrestrial ecosystem, attention was given to any potential loss of habitat form or function for flora or fauna, with an emphasis on species-at-risk. Secondary source natural science information indicated that seven species-at-risk had historically been known to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area. The historical records date from 1879 to 1939. Since that time, the landscape in the vicinity of the Study Area has experienced a high level of development and loss of all natural vegetation cover, including any natural riparian or beach habitat along the shoreline. The site assessment concluded that suitable habitat was no longer present for these seven species-at-risk. One species-at-risk is known to occur within the Study Area, however, that being the federally threatened Chimney Swift. Chimney Swifts communally breed and roost in chimneys, air vents or other similar structures. Potential nesting structures occur on buildings within the Study Area, and they can tolerate high levels of noise and disruption. As such, they are unlikely to be disturbed by the functioning pedestrian bridge. However, construction activities may cause desertion of the area if such work is in close proximity to a nesting structure.
4.4
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Nesting dates for Chimney Swifts in Ontario extend from late May through to the end of August (Peck and James, 1983). Should construction activities occur during this period, a survey should be completed to identify structures (chimney, air vents etc) in the vicinity of the construction area that may contain Chimney Swifts. Such surveys should be conducted the same year as construction, as swifts are known to use different structures from year to year. Should structures that contain Chimney Swifts be identified, they should be protected with a 25m buffer during the nesting period. No buffer is necessary for construction activities between September 1 and May 24. Finally, secondary source natural science information did not identify any significant natural environment features within, or in the vicinity of, the Study Area, such as Natural Areas, Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs), and Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSIs). The site assessment confirmed that there were no significant natural environment features within the Study Area. In addition, there were no features within the Study Area that appeared to provide an ecological linkage. 4.1.4 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was completed in March 2009, with the intent of identifying the presence of actual and potential environmental concerns at the site, which may be within soil, water, groundwater, air or structures, according to the Canadian Standards Association. The work associated with this study consisted of a review of historical records and documentation available for the site and vicinity, supplemented by a reconnaissance inspection. Based on the technical work carried out, various environmental concerns were identified in the Phase I EAS, including:
Based on a previous Phase II ESA, contaminated soil, potentially located on the site, represents an environmental concern with respect to soil and groundwater quality. The operation of a waste disposal site (Western Crematory) represents an environmental concern. Other activities within 0.25 km of the site, including fuel storage, PCB storage, pesticide storage, certain manufacturing processes, confirmed spills, and the demolition of buildings containing hazards materials represent environmental concerns with respect to soil and groundwater quality that may be disturbed during foundation excavations for the structure.
4.5
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT As a result of the identified environmental concerns, the following recommendations were provided:
A Phase II ESA, including soil and groundwater testing, should be completed at the Site to investigate environmental concerns related to potential soil and groundwater contamination. The Phase II ESA may be initiated after the Class Environmental Assessment Study is completed, when the locations and design of the underground footings have been determined. A designated substances survey should be completed prior to the removal or alteration of any structures (e.g., underground utility pipes) to confirm the presence of special attention items (e.g., asbestos, lead, mercury) and to provide recommendations for managing such materials in accordance with applicable environmental and health and safety legislation. A soil management plan should be created for the construction phase of the Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge in the event that contaminated soil is encountered. Soil to be transported off-site for use of clean fill (e.g., to an aggregate pit) should meet the Table 1 Site Condition Standards. Excavated soil that does not meet the Table 1 Site Condition Standards should be hauled by licensed waste carriers to licensed waste disposal facilities. If dewatering is required, pumped groundwater may be treated to meet the City Sanitary Sewer Use By-Law criteria prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer, provided the City consents to the disposal of water in the sanitary sewer system. Alternatively, the water could be removed from the Site by a licensed waste carrier to a licensed disposal/treatment facility. Removal of the water by a licensed waste carrier would require the site to be registered as waste generator on the MOEs Hazardous Waste Information Network (HWIN). A Permit to Take Water (PTTW) will be required if greater than 50,000 L of water is pumped per day. Hydrogeological Assessment
4.1.5
A desk top level hydrogeological assessment was completed to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge on the hydrogeological system(s) within the study area, and to identify any hydrogeological constraints associated with the proposed structure. The specific objective of the hydrogeological study was to review the existing subsurface conditions of the site by determining/identifying:

Aquifer and aquitard sequences and depth to groundwater. Aquifer vulnerability. Significant groundwater recharge. Linkages between groundwater and nearby surface water features. 4.6
Groundwater or surface water source protection areas and municipal wellhead protection area. Potential impacts to nearby well users. Dewatering requirements during construction.
Based on the results of the hydrogeological study, it was determined that:
The overburden geology of the Site consists of sand and gravel fill at ground surface extending to 0.5 m to 4.3 m below ground surface, overlying fine-textured silt and clay based materials to bedrock. Bedrock is interbedded shale and limestone of the Georgian Bay Formation. Available data suggests that the depth of bedrock across the Site ranges from 3 m to 13 m below ground surface. The hydrostratigraphy of the Site consists of a confined to semi-confined bedrock aquifer. There are no surface water features within the Site. The closest surface water feature is Lake Ontario. The depth to the groundwater table is thought to be situated between 1 m and 10 m below ground surface with increasing depth toward the north. Based on the potential for shallow groundwater table conditions, dewatering may be required during construction depending on the type of foundation that is selected to support the bridge structure. There were no confirmed groundwater users in the area. The vulnerability of the bedrock aquifer is high in areas where the overburden cover is thinnest (i.e., south-central portion of the site). Although the proposed structure would not be considered to be a significant threat to groundwater, best management practices particularly related to fuel handing and temporary storage should be employed during construction. The Site is not considered to be a Significant Groundwater Recharge Area. CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT Archaeological Assessment
4.2 4.2.1
A Stage 1 Archaeological Investigation Study and Report was completed by Archaeological Services Inc. (ASI). The report provides an overview of the historical changes that have occurred, and continue to occur, within the vicinity of Old Fort York, which is defined as an Archaeological Sensitive Area (ASA) in conjunction with the City of Torontos Master Plan of Archaeological Resources. It is also registered as a National Historic Site and corresponds, in part, to the boundaries of the Fort York Heritage Conservation District.
4.7
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT The complexities of the archaeological resources within the study area are significant, and cover a large extent of the lands under study for the pedestrian and cycle bridge, particularly in the area of the Garrison Common. In order that an inventory of archaeological resources could be compiled for the subject property and surrounding area, three sources of information were consulted: the site record forms for registered sites housed at the Ministry of Culture (MCL); published and unpublished documentary sources; and files located at Archaeological Services Inc. The Stage 1 archaeological assessment determined that one previously registered archaeological site, the Fort York Garrison, occurs within the study area. Additionally, a review of the general development history of the lands that comprise the study area suggested that archaeological site potential is present in specific locales. In light of these results, the following recommendations were made: 1. Should construction of the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge impact any lands determined to have archaeological site potential, a Stage 2 archaeological assessment should be conducted in accordance with the Ministry of Cultures draft Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeological (MCL 2006) prior to any land disturbing activities. 2. If any additional areas not covered by this assessment are required for construction (staging areas, temporary access roads, etc.), those areas should be subject to a Stage 2 archaeological assessment. The above recommendations are subject to Ministry of Culture approval, and it is an offence to alter any archaeological site without Ministry of Culture concurrence. No grading or other activities that may result in the destruction or disturbance of an archaeological site are permitted until notice of Ministry of Culture approval has been received. 4.2.2 Built Heritage Resources and Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment Study
A Built Heritage Resources and Cultural Landscape Assessment Study was completed by Archaeological Services Inc. (ASI), which considered cultural heritage resources within the context of improvements to specified areas, pursuant to the Environmental Assessment Act. The study investigated above ground cultural heritage resources over 40 years old, which represents a threshold for the collection of resource information at sites that may retain a certain heritage value. The value may apply to both cultural landscapes and built heritage features. In the course of the cultural heritage assessment, all potentially affected resources were subject to inventory within the study area.
4.8
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT The Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge has the potential to affect cultural heritage resources in a variety of ways. These include the loss or displacement of resources through removal or demolition and/or the disruption of resources by introducing physical, visual, audible or atmospheric elements that are not in keeping with the resources and/or their settings. For the purposes of this assessment, the term cultural heritage resources was used to describe both cultural landscapes and built heritage features. A cultural landscape is perceived as a collection of individual built heritage features and other related features that together form farm complexes, roadscapes and nucleated settlements. Built heritage features are typically individual buildings or structures that may be associated with a variety of human activities, such as historical settlement and patterns of architectural development. The analysis throughout the study process addressed cultural heritage resources under various pieces of legislation and their supporting guidelines. Under the Environmental Assessment Act (1990) environment is defined in Subsection 1(c) to include:

Cultural conditions that influence the life of man or a community. Any building, structure, machine, or other device or thing made by man.
Historic research and a review of supporting studies regarding the Fort York Heritage Conservation District and National Historic Site confirmed the study areas rich military and industrial history. The field review corroborated that a number of well preserved heritage resources are extant, which commemorate these historical themes and stages in the areas land use development. Fort York stands as a reminder of military history and architecture, reflecting upon the birth of Toronto as a city and denotes the beginning of the heritage preservation movement when the site was first designated in 1932. Additionally, a number of cultural heritage resources are located north of Fort York, in the Ordnance triangle and north of the rail corridors. These resources recall the areas late 19th century reliance upon industrial and cattle-based operations. To understand the potential impacts of the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge on the Fort York Heritage Conservation District and National Historic Site, ASI reviewed documents that address preservation of Fort Yorks heritage significance. These documents included: Fort York National Historic Site Commemorative Integrity Statement (CIS); Fort York National Historic Site Statement of Significance (SOS); and the Fort York Heritage Conservation District Statement of Significance (SOS). The following provides a summary of heritage attributes that have the potential to be impacted during the course of the project:
Open character of the Garrison Common: The Garrison Common is located west of the entrance to Fork York and is included in the boundaries of both the National Historic Site and Heritage Conservation District designations. This open swath of green space stretches westward from the entrance to Fort York to Strachan Avenue 4.9
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT and is currently used as a public space. The Garrison Common also contains the Strachan Avenue Military Cemetery. The Garrison Common was originally used as a mustering ground where troops gathered for inspection. Maintaining this area as an open landscape represents this original function and recalls the original military uses of the overall site. Construction of structures or elevated walkways that would alter the open character of the Garrison Common would compromise the heritage values of this landscape.
Garrison Road: Garrison Road served as the historic access route to Fort York and is included in the National Historic Site and Heritage Conservation District designations. Although this road has been modernized, its general alignment east of the Fort York Armouries follows the approximate alignment of the original road cut. Although direct impacts to Garrison Road are not expected, viewsheds of the Fort from this road way are of heritage interest. Strachan Avenue Military Cemetery: The Strachan Avenue Military Cemetery is located in the western portion of Garrison Common. This burial ground was Torontos third military cemetery and it is known that at least 97 soldiers, veterans and their family members, who died between 1862 and 1911, are interred there. The burial ground is currently marked by a flag pole, plaque, and brick wall which contain broken headstone tablets. While the commemorative structures which mark the burial ground are not expected to be impacted during the course of the proposed project, consideration should be given to preserving the spatial relationship between the burial grounds and the Garrison Common.
The following provides a summary of cultural heritage resources located in the overall study area:
A total of four built heritage resources and six cultural heritage landscapes were identified in the study area during the field review, which include five industrial sites, one group of late 19th century row houses, two railscapes, one military facility, and one remnant orchard. The built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes in the study area represent two distinct phases of land use history in the City of Toronto, illustrating the impact of military settlement at the end of the 18th century on the development of the City of Toronto and the later rise of an industrial base in the City of Toronto, concentrated near the waterfront. Three cultural heritage resources located in the study area have been previously identified by the City of Toronto and are listed on their Heritage Properties Inventory. One cultural heritage resource located in the study area has been designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and as a National Historic Site. Four cultural heritage resources located in the study area were identified during the field review. 4.10
Two cultural heritage resources in the study area were identified through a review of historic mapping. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT Existing Land Use
4.3 4.3.1
Land use in the study area is regulated through several City of Toronto planning documents including:

City of Toronto Official Plan (2007). City of Toronto Zoning By-law (draft 2009). Bathurst/Strachan Secondary Plan (2006). Garrison Common North Secondary Plan (2006).
The study area includes two significant park/open space areas, Fort York and Stanley Park, industrial property, high density residential developments, major rail transportation corridors, a municipal maintenance yard and the Fort York Armoury. The neighbourhood is known as the Niagara Neighbourhood bounded by Bathurst Street, King Street West, Shaw Street and the CN Georgetown rail corridor. This neighbourhood has experienced an influx of both residential and commercial development. South of the study area, the Toronto Waterfront is also experiencing rapid growth, particularly through the development of high density residential development. 4.3.1.1 Official Plan and Zoning The City of Toronto Official Plan policies identify where and how the City will grown and develop. The policies contained within the plan are based on four key principles:

Diversity and Opportunity. Beauty. Connectivity. Leadership and Stewardship.
Land use in the study area is primarily designated as Parks and Open Space (i.e. Stanley Park, Fort York, and the Community Garden) and Employment Land. The study area also includes Residential areas and Utility Corridors. Commercial/Mixed Use and Commercial/Residential/Employment Lands are generally east of Bathurst Street and North of Wellington Street West, adjacent to Strachan Avenue.
4.11
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Existing Land Use designations are illustrated on the accompanying map (Figure 6: City of Toronto Official Plan, August 2007). The lands making up Fort York are designated as Parks and Other Open Space Areas, while the Ordnance Triangle Lands and Lands between the Georgetown Rail Corridor and Wellington Street are both designated as Employment Areas. Parts of the Fort York Property, Stanley Park, and the connecting parks to the north are also identified in the Official Plans City Parkland map. There are no Natural Heritage, Special Policy, Environmentally Sensitive Areas, or Site Specific Policies within the study area. 4.3.1.2 Secondary Plan Policies Garrison Common North Secondary Plan This Secondary Plan covers the area north of the Georgetown railway corridor and south of Queen Street West, between Dufferin Street and Bathurst Street. In the Study Area, the Garrison Common North Secondary Plan (2006) outlines site specific policies for the existing meat processing facility and development policies (i.e. urban design, community improvement, and environmental policies) associated with certain residential/employment lands. Section 3.2 of the plan identifies a desire to improve pedestrian circulation through Garrison Common North and to Fort York and the waterfront, [by considering] pedestrian links over the rail corridors.through public and private initiatives.
4.12

Land Use Plan

Figure 6
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Bathurst/Strachan Area Secondary Plan This Secondary Plan covers the area north of Lake Shore Boulevard West and South of the Georgetown railway corridor, between Strachan Avenue and Bathurst Street. The Plan includes specific design requirements relating to development in the vicinity of the Fort York Heritage Conservation District, including the need to consult with Heritage Toronto for all development proposals. Section 2 of the Bathurst/Strachan Area Secondary Plan (2006) identifies three key goals relevant to this study:

The development of the area as a vital new mixed use neighbourhood. Recognition of Fort York and the Fort York Heritage Conservation District. Improvements to transit, bicycle and pedestrian routes to connect to the Central City and the Central Waterfront.
Section 5.9 of the Plan identifies potential upgrades to the pedestrian circulation system, including pedestrian links over the rail corridor. 4.3.2 Property Ownership
In conjunction with the topographic surveys that were completed for the project, a property ownership plan was compiled for the study area. The property data was based on information provided by the City of Toronto, and was superimposed on an aerial photomap of the area. It is important to note that the property lines illustrated on the Property Photo Map (see Appendix L) are noted based on legal surveys but are approximated for the purposes of the Environmental Assessment Study. In the future, and during the detailed design stage, the City of Toronto will need to complete legal surveys and reference plans showing the bridge limits relative to existing properties. In all planning for the pedestrian and cycle bridge, proposed alignments were specifically selected to avoid existing private property holdings. For the most part, the City of Toronto owns all lands within the vicinity of the proposed structure. Based on planning for the bridge structure, land acquisitions will not be required.
4.14
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 4.4 4.4.1 SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT Landscape Architecture Commentary
Stantecs Landscape Architectural Team completed an early site reconnaissance of the Study Area, within the context of identifying project issues related to Pedestrian and Cycle Linkages, Views/Spatial Relationships, and Vegetation. The team also reviewed all relevant background documents in their research program, resulting in a Draft Landscape Architectural Summary report that focused on three distinct zones of the EA Study:

North of the Rail Corridor. The Ordnance Street Triangle. South of the Rail Corridor.
Key conclusions that arose early in the study process were that key vistas and views, to and from the Fort York Precinct, should be protected and enhanced and that new viewing opportunities presented by the proposed bridge should maximize sightlines to the Fort, the Waterfront, and the Citys skyline, where possible. Furthermore, the bridge structure, along with its connecting pathways, should be a catalyst to the further development and evolution of the parks, trails and open space networks in the area. The involvement of the Landscape and Cycling Teams continued over the course of the Environmental Assessment Study. 4.4.2 Transportation (Pedestrian and Cycle) Assessment
Stantecs Transportation Team completed a review of recent planning study documents that supported the Need and Justification background to the proposed Fort York bridge, in terms of pedestrian and cycling activity within the Study Area. Various factors provide justification for the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge at Fort York, including:
New and extended multi-use trails and pathways are planned for the Fort York neighbourhood, to create a continuous system of public cycle routes, pedestrian walkways/trails and sidewalks. Redevelopment is taking place on several large tracts of land in the area, which will increase the number of residential units in the Fort York and Railway Lands (West) Neighbourhoods in excess of 10,000 units.
4.15
An induced/latent demand exists to provide pedestrian and cycle links between existing parks, the Waterfront Trails system, Fort York and other open spaces, forging key links in the Garrison Creek chain of cycle and pedestrian routes, away from busy streets. There is a need to connect and enhance access to the proposed Fort York Visitor Information Centre, proposed to be opened by 2012. There is recognition to provide safe, off-site alternatives to both the Strachan Avenue and Bathurst Street railway crossing routes, which are deficient in appropriate pedestrian and cycle designs.
The Preliminary Transportation (Pedestrian and cycle) Assessment report formed an integral part of the Need and Justification documentation for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge.
4.16
5.0
Alternative Planning Solutions
Phase II of the Class Environmental Assessment process focuses on the identification and evaluation of Alternative Planning Solutions that may address the natural, social and economic issues presented in the Problem Definition for the project. Before the proponent can move forward with a design concept, a proper review of broader scope solutions must be completed which puts the environmental assessment study on the right course within the planning context. Agency and public consultation forms part of this solutions evaluation process. For this project, an initial matrix of planning alternatives was developed, along with specific evaluation criteria. A draft of the Alternative Planning Solutions and Evaluation Matrix was reviewed by the Project Team and the TAC, resulting in recommendations to revamp the scope of alternatives, the description of criteria assessments, and the methodology for ranking the alternative solutions. A revised Alternative Planning Solutions and Evaluation Matrix was prepared and presented to Agencies and the Public at the first Public Information Centre, held on April 16, 2009. The evaluation process concluded that the Preferred Planning Solution was to construct a pedestrian and cycle link in the vicinity of Fort York, connecting the neighbourhoods to the north of the railway corridor with historic Fort York and the parklands and waterfront to the south. 5.1 ALTERNATIVE PLANNING SOLUTIONS
In accordance with the requirements of the Class Environmental Assessment process, the project team identified and evaluated a range of Alternative Planning Solutions to the Undertaking. Alternative Planning Solutions identify ways of solving the problem presented in the Problem and Opportunity statement. All of the Alternative Planning Solutions included the planned Bathurst Street and Strachan Avenue rehabilitations. For this project, the following Alternative Planning Solutions were considered: Do Nothing
Rely on current road corridors/sidewalks for pedestrian and cycle circulation and access to Fort York.
Enhance Pedestrian/Cyclist Infrastructure on Existing Roads
This alternative planning solution includes the provision of on-street bike lanes on Bathurst Street and Wellington Street and improving pedestrian facilities on Strachan Avenue, Wellington Street, and Bathurst Street.
5.1
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Construct New Pedestrian/Cyclist Link
Build a new pedestrian and cycle crossing of the railway corridor, between Strachan Avenue and Bathurst Street. Provide a user friendly linkage between the Stanley Park/Niagara Neighbourhoods, the Fort York district neighbourhood, and the Toronto Waterfront.
Note: Other Alternative Planning Solutions were identified but were screened out in advance of the detailed evaluation, including limiting development and improvements to other modes of transportation. These solutions were not consistent with current City and Provincial planning strategies and were not considered to be reasonable alternatives in the context of current City and Provincial planning strategies. 5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA
The evaluation process provided a qualitative approach to the analysis and evaluation of alternative planning solutions. Evaluation criteria that address key issues related to the decision-making process were identified and are listed below. Each evaluation criteria is an independent variable that can contribute a positive or negative influence on the overall suitability of an alternative planning solution. Transportation

Social Environment

Pedestrian and Cyclist Access Opportunities Public/User Safety Pedestrian and Cycle Operational Constraints Impact on Railway Operations (CN and GO Transit) Transit Operations and Planning
Property Impacts Support of Fort York Visibility-InThe-Community Support of Visual Vista Objectives Compatibility with Community Sustainability Objectives
Land use

Technical

Compatibility with Continuous Open Space Link Objectives Compatibility with Neighbourhood Planning Objectives Compatibility with Fort York and Garrison Common Open Space Planning policies approved by the City of Toronto Compatibility with Land Use Planning Objectives Provincial Policy Statements Compatibility with Official Plan Policies Compatibility with Provincial Planning Policies (Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe)
Road and Bridge Infrastructure Needs and Impacts Constructability Geotechnical Considerations Utility Impacts
Natural Environment

Impact on Vegetation Impact on Garrison Common and Garrison Creek Impact on Roadside environments Surface Water/Drainage Impacts
5.2
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Culture Environment

Cost
Archaeological Resources Built Heritage Landscape Cultural Heritage Landscape
Overall cost of design and construction
5.3
SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVE PLANNING SOLUTIONS AND SELECTION OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
An Evaluation Matrix was created based on the three (3) Alternative Planning Solutions and the seven (7) major Evaluation Criteria categories. An assessment was completed to create an overall summary of the positive and negative features of each Alternative Planning Solution against the selected evaluation criteria. It was determined that Alternative 3, Construct a Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, was preferred in some evaluation categories, but not all. Overall, however, it was concluded that the Preferred Planning Solution was to Construct a Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. The Evaluation of Planning Solutions Matrix was reviewed by the Project Team, the Technical Advisory Committee, and the Public (PIC #1), receiving endorsement from all parties. A copy of the Evaluation Matrix is provided in Appendix D.
5.3
6.0
6.1
Alternative Design Concepts

DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONCEPTS
The development of concepts for the Fort York Pedestrian & Cycle Bridge focused on three primary objectives: 1. To Connect the Niagara Neighbourhood to Lake Ontario: The Bridge would provide a much needed north-south pedestrian/bicycle link over the rail corridor. In addition, it would form part of a network of proposed linkages through the Fort York precinct. 2. To Enhance Fort York: The Bridge would find the right balance between providing excellent viewing opportunities of Garrison Common, Fort York and the city beyond, while minimizing physical and visual impacts on the historical significance of the site. 3. To Evoke the History of Fort York and Garrison Creek: The bridge design would incorporate elements that evoke and interpret the history of Fort York and the strategic relationship it had with the alignment of Garrison Creek. In addition to the above objectives, various design criteria and constraints either governed or affected the general layouts or features of the bridge. The following additional design issues were considered in the development of alternative design concepts:
Train Clearance: GO Transit initially required approximately 8.4 m (27.5 ft) clearance between the top of rails and the underside of the bridge structure in order to maintain clear views of signaling devices. To achieve this, the bridge was 8.4 m above the tracks as it crossed the rail corridor property lines. Barrier-free and Cyclist-Friendly Path: In order to achieve the clearance requirements stated above and to provide a path that is both barrier-free and cyclistfriendly, the approaches leading to the bridge would incorporate a maximum 1:20 slope. Garrison Common Approach Ramp: In order not to detract from the historical significance of Garrison Common, the bridge and approach ramp within Garrison Common would have as minimal a footprint as possible. To this end, the ramp was elevated on structural columns that would require no change to the existing ground plane and the least disruption to the landscape. Stanley Park Extension Approach Ramp: The north side of the bridge touches down in what will be new park space, referred to as the Stanley Park Extension. It was proposed to fill and re-grade the park area upwards from Wellington Street to the height of the new bridge. Fill material will be to MOE Table 3 Residential Parkland Standard. 6.1
Bridge Width: An unobstructed bridge width of 6.0 m (19.7 feet) was originally considered to accommodate both pedestrians and cyclists. Access to Ordnance Street Triangle: Between the two rail corridors, there is a piece of land which is owned, for the most part, by the City of Toronto and referred to as the Ordnance Street Triangle. There is the possibility that this land might be converted to park land in the future. Therefore, future access from the bridge to this area of land was considered. Security and Safety: The bridge is crossing over two sets of tracks so consideration was given to protection, safety, and security of both the railway operations and the pedestrians and cyclists using the bridge. Alternative Alignment Concepts
6.1.1
Four Alternative Bridge Alignment Concepts were developed for the project. They are presented in Figures 7 to 10 and described as follows: Option 1:

Straight Bridge. Approximately 195 metres long, not including approach ramps. Switch back ramp at Garrison Common with direct access to proposed Visitor Information Centre. Meandering ramp at Stanley Park Extension (north side).
Option 2:

Concave to the west, or curves away from downtown. Approximately 216 metres long, not including approach ramps. Switch back ramp at Garrison Common with direct access to proposed Visitor Information Centre. Meandering ramp at Stanley Park Extension (north side).
Option 3:

Concave to the east, or curves towards the downtown. Approximately 252 metres long, not including approach ramps. Ramp hugs northern property line with rail corridor, at Garrison Common. Meandering ramp at Stanley Park Extension (north side).
Option 4:

S Curve Bridge, evoking original alignment of Garrison Creek. Approximately 234 metres long, not including approach ramps. Ramp hugs northern property line with rail corridor, at Garrison Common. Meandering ramp at Stanley Park Extension (north side).
6.2
SCALE 1:2000


Figure 7
SCALE 1:2000


Figure 8
SCALE 1:2000


Figure 9
SCALE 1:2000


Figure 10
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 6.1.2 Alternative Structure Concepts
Two basic structure types were also developed for the project, recognizing that all of the load carrying capacity of the structure was desirable above the deck level, to minimize the height of the bridge deck above the tracks. In other words, a typical deck-on-girder structure was ruled out. A description of the two bridge structure alternatives is provided below, while a schematic of the elevations is provided in Figure 11. Thru-Truss: Alternative Bridge Structure Type 1 was a Thru-Truss design, which would completely enclose the deck of the bridge with a steel truss support structure. An example of a Thru-Truss Bridge is the Bathurst Street structure, immediately to the east of the proposed Fort York Bridge. Tied Arch: Alternative Bridge Structure Type 2 was a single Tied Arch design, with the arch inclined from vertical on one side of the structure. An example of a tied arch pedestrian bridge is the Humber River Bridge, except that it is a double-arch structure with both arches vertical. 6.2 EVALUATON OF ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONCEPTS
A qualitative assessment of the four (4) alternative alignment concepts, which were presented at the first Public Information Centre meeting, was completed and reviewed with the Project Team and the Technical Advisory Committee. The evaluation process provided commentary on the advantages, disadvantages, and potential impacts of each of the four alignment concepts within broad categories, including:

Environmental. Planning and Land Use. Historical Context. Architectural and Engineering.
The results of the evaluation process are included in the Matrix Table within Appendix E, which was also presented to the public at the second PIC meeting dated September 16, 2009. Based on the aggregate of assessment criteria and commentary, it was concluded that Alternative Alignment Concept 4 was the preferred design alignment and should be the recommended concept for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. Alternative Alignment Concept 4 was the preferred design within each of the above categories, but was most favoured for the following reasons:
6.7
Thru-Truss
Tied Arch

Alternative Bridge Structure Types

Figure 11

It evokes the historical relevance of the Garrison Creek alignment. Its southern connection to the Garrison Common provides good connectivity to Fort York and the future Visitor Information Centre, while limiting direct physical impact on the historical and vegetated grounds within the Common. The geometry of the structure offers variable viewing opportunities of the surrounding lands and the Toronto skyline. The geometry of the structure creates an aesthetically pleasing and innovative design, one that has the potential to become a landmark structure in a rapidly redeveloping area of the City.
In terms of the Structure Type, it was determined that an Inclined Tied Arch design concept was preferred over the Thru-Truss design concept for many reasons, some of which included:

The inclined arch concept would integrate better with Alignment Concept 4. The inclined arch concept would provide a more open and inviting feel to pedestrians and cyclists. The inclined arch concept would provide a more aesthetic statement on the cityscape. The inclined arch would add to the historical attachment of Garrison Creek, representing the erosion of embankment along a creeks meandering edge. The inclined arch would be more aesthetically pleasing and fulfill the objectives of creating a Legacy project in the commemoration of the War of 1812. FEEDBACK ON ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONCEPTS Public and Agency Response
6.3 6.3.1
At the first Public Information Centre meeting on April 16, 2009, the general public was offered its first look at the four alternative alignment concepts as well as the thru-truss and tied arch structure options. It was an opportunity for the Project Team to receive initial feedback on the alternative alignment and structure types, before further analysis was carried out on the designs. It was important at this point in the study to gauge the interest of the local community on the need for a pedestrian and cycle bridge as well as what the structure should look like. Attendees at the first PIC demonstrated both a keen interest in the proposed pedestrian and cycle link as well as a preference for a specific bridge alignment and structure type.
6.9
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Of the seventeen comment sheets that were completed at the meeting and three (3) email submissions received later, ninety five percent (95%) were in favour of the pedestrian and cycle bridge as proposed. Further, of the twenty respondents who commented on the need for a bridge, nine (9) actually indicated a preferred design concept even though they were not asked specifically to provide an answer to this question. Of these respondents, all nine noted a preference for the Alternative Alignment 4/Tied Arch design. The response of the public from Public Information Centre One carried forward to the second PIC, held on September 16, 2009. Although the attendance was not as great at PIC#2 and there were fewer written comment sheets submitted, the general tone of both the Open House and formal Presentation sessions was very supportive. It was evident that the innovation, character and configuration of the recommended preferred design concept made a positive impression on a vast majority of attendees. After much scrutiny by the public and local residents, it was concluded by the Project Team that there was strong support for Alternative Alignment Concept 4 with an Inclined Arch. In terms of agency response, there have been no objections to the proposed bridge. There have also been no submissions from agencies that would indicate a preference for one alternative alignment or structure type over another. In essence, agencies have been typically more interested in specifics that relate to their jurisdictional responsibilities, and how the proposed undertaking will deal with any concerns, impacts and/or mitigation factors affecting the agency. Such issues are dealt with in Section 7.0 Summary of Identified Concerns and Mitigative Measures. 6.3.2 City Design Review Panel
Two presentations were made to the City Design Review Panel, on May 25, 2009 and on October 22, 2009. At the first meeting, the Panel was provided with an overview of the alternative alignment and bridge structure concepts, noting that a preferred concept had not been selected at that time. At the second meeting in October, however, the Design Review Panel was presented with details of the recommended preferred design concept, being the inclined tied-arch on an alignment similar to Alternative Concept 4. The following summarizes the comments and recommendations of the City Design Review Panel (comments are paraphrased and not intended to be direct quotes): May 25, 2009 Meeting:
There was strong support for alternative alignment 4, as it embodies the original course of Garrison Creek and celebrates its hidden history, the south end of the structure pulls away from Garrison Common and defers to the Fort, and it provides alternating viewpoints along its length to enhance connectivity with the local neighbourhoods.
6.10
A large majority of the Panel members favoured the tied-arch structure type as it is more poetic than the thru truss, it further embodies the curves of hidden Garrison Creek, and it would result in a more interesting and celebratory bridge. There was some support for the thru-truss design as it would fit within the historical context of the Fort and the Bathurst Street Bridge. It was generally felt that the project must be connected to the overall development of neighbouring lands and that its success will be defined by its broader scope of creating a comprehensive and integrated solution. There was a sense that funding should be allocated to do the right thing for the local community. It was noted that the bridge design must be carefully integrated with a landscape strategy that will address the needs at the three landing locations (Stanley Park Extension, Ordnance Triangle, and Garrison Common/Fort York). In particular, specific interest was shown for the Stanley Park Extension grade changes and the nature of the ramp connection to Fort York. The Panel expressed interest in the bridge deck width, noting that it should be sufficient to accommodate future pedestrian and cyclist volumes.
October 22, 2009 Meeting: The Panel was able to focus on specific design details and issues arising from the presentation of the recommended preferred design concept, for which there was strong support. Comments, concerns and suggestions raised by the Panel members included (comments are paraphrased and not intended to be direct quotes): (i) Fort York (south) Connection:
Although there was general acceptance of the bridge design, some concern was expressed with respect to the touchdown design at the Fort York side. There was a sense that the landing needs to be lighter and more in harmony with the understated character of the Fort York site. It was suggested that the conceptual display panels at the base of the ramp may be redundant, as any information related to the history of Fort York would be presented in the proposed Visitor Information Centre. In addition to the above comment, it was suggested that the south ramp should be more fluid, as an extension of the lines of the bridge. The concepts shown to the Panel appeared to create an impression of a very straight ramp within the Fort York touchdown zone. It was further suggested that additional thought be given to the pathway connections in the Fort York lands, which will link the bridge to the various parks and the Visitor Information Centre.
6.11
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT (ii) Stanley Park (north) Connection:
There was general acceptance of the proposed filling, grading and park conversion plans at the north landing, which would link the proposed bridge to an extension of Stanley Park. The conversion of the existing parking lot to park land, complete with a sinuous ramp leading from Wellington Street to an elevated bridge deck, was seen as a positive contribution to community enhancement. It was suggested that the stairs, which offer an alternative to the winding ramp, should be wider and more to the scale of the site than what was illustrated on the preliminary concept view.
(iii) Ordnance Triangle Lands
There was considerable discussion concerning the future of the Ordnance Triangle lands and how the bridge may be linked to this space. Although future plans for the lands between the two track corridors and east of Strachan Avenue are uncertain, there is a strong sense that this space may become an extension of park land and open space linkages in the Fort York, Stanley Park, and Liberty Village areas. To fully achieve any future goals, however, it was strongly recommended that the design of the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge make provisions for a direct connection, by means of stairs or ramp, or both, to the Ordnance Triangle Lands. Any structure connection to the Ordnance Triangle should be created and designed such that the elegance of the current bridge concept is not compromised in any way.
(iv) General Commentary
The bridge railings should be designed so that they reflect the fluid design of the structure while maintaining functional characteristics. Strategically located viewing stations should be provided that present users with opportunities to see vistas offered by the Toronto Skyline, the Waterfront, Fort York, Liberty Village and other viewscapes. If possible, such viewing stations should not interfere with pedestrian and cyclist movement on the bridge. A prime location for a viewing platform was suggested to be at the mid span of the bridge. Lighting of the bridge should be considered for safety and security reasons as opposed to simply as an enhancement of the artistic form of the bridge. Recognition of environmental protection, in the form of energy conservation, should be observed in the selection of an illumination scheme. Pathway connections within the Fort York lands should be integrated with the bridge ramp configuration, providing a unified approach to trail network designs and connecting with the urban landscape, the Fort York Visitor Information Centre, other landmarks in the area, plus the waterfront. Any potential lowering of the bridge, in conjunction with the track lowering proposed on the Georgetown rail corridor, was encouraged.
6.12
Opportunities to experience the history of the area and interpret other aspects of the developing neighbourhoods were encouraged. Locations for interpretive areas would extend from Stanley Park to Fort York, over and above the vista stations that may be on the bridge structure.
In summary, it was the conclusion of the Design Review Panel that the concepts for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge were founded on excellent design and philosophical principles and that, once constructed, it would be a striking example of positive development in a great City. The Panel recognized that various details were beyond the scope of the Class Environmental Assessment and would be dealt with at the final design stage. 6.3.3 City Pedestrian Committee
The presentation to the City Pedestrian Committee, on September 22, 2009, was received with similar enthusiasm to what was displayed by the Design Review Panel and other interested stakeholders. There was a consensus that the bridge would become a significant landmark while serving the walking and cycling needs of the community. The aesthetics of the design concept were deemed to be innovative, striking and appropriate within the context of being connected with the Fort York lands. Specific questions and comments provided by the Committee are summarized in the following (comments are paraphrased and not intended to be direct quotes):
There are issues associated with pedestrians and cyclists crossing Lakeshore Boulevard, between Strachan Avenue and Bathurst Street. Will the current study address this issue, noting that the volume of cyclists and pedestrians will increase once the Fort York Bridge is opened? It was confirmed that a study of crossing issues at Lakeshore Boulevard is beyond the scope of the current Class EA for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. The concerns expressed by the Committee were noted by City staff.
The Committee was interested in knowing the proposed bridge deck width and how pedestrians may be separated from cyclists? The Committee felt that the bridge should be as wide as possible and preferably 6 metres. It was noted that the deck width was originally proposed to be 6 metres, but considerations also needed to include the funding allocation in the Waterfront Capital budget. Therefore, the Project Team considered a narrower deck width of 5 metres, acknowledging that both options should also consider a goal of providing appropriate separation between cyclists and pedestrians on such a long structure. In terms of pedestrian and cyclist separation, variable deck surface textures, colouring, striping, and other means will be considered at the final design stage.
6.13
Will there be a connection to the Ordnance Triangle, and will these lands be converted to green space at the time of bridge construction? As noted in the response to the Design Review Panel, the Ordnance Triangle lands will be integral to the future linkage plans within the overall community. However, current plans for these lands have not been concluded, so the bridge will be designed such that opportunities for a future connection to the Ordnance Triangle are not precluded. It is not anticipated that these lands will become an area for active public use, at the time of bridge construction, although the lands may be converted from an asphalt parking lot to a green field. This decision is pending further discussion.
Will there be a lookout point provided at mid span, or other locations? The Committee was advised that vista viewing areas were considered appropriate, but specific locations are subject to final design detailing. It was suggested that a logical location would be at mid span.
What is the timing for construction? The current plans of the City are to have this Fort York legacy project completed and opened in time for the Bicentennial Commemoration Ceremony of the War of 1812, scheduled for Spring 2012.
6.3.4
Briefing of the Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor
Over the course of the Class Environmental Assessment Study, regular briefing meetings were convened with the Deputy Mayor and Ward Councillor. Some of the key discussion items included:
Recognition of the financial aspects of the project and support for the 5 metre deck width alternative. Resolution with Metrolinx and GO Transit regarding the bridge clearance design criterion revision from 8.4 metres to 7.4 metres. Relocation of the Fort York Nursery, making way for the bridge construction in the Fort lands. The importance of future development of the Ordnance Triangle lands as a continuation of the green space linkage system, and the potential for a green connection from the north bridge landing to Strachan Avenue, south of Wellington Street.
6.14
7.0
7.1

DESCRIPTION OF THE DESIGN CONCEPT
The Recommended Preferred Design Concept for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge evolved over the course of the Class EA Study, ultimately being selected on the basis of a qualitative evaluation process, public and agency input, feedback from internal City committees, and extensive discussions by the Project Team and the Technical Advisory Committee. In the end, the preferred concept was a clear winner over the other alternatives that were considered for the bridge, despite the fact that changes were made to the preferred design due to structural design constraints. The recommended preferred design concept reflects the original configuration of Alternative Alignment 4, with inclined tied arch support structures on each of two spans. Computer renderings of the proposed bridge, generated on aerial photos at the site, are provided in Figures 12, 13 and 14. The following provides an overview of the architectural and engineering features of the proposed bridge:
Tied arches are inclined 20 from vertical and are situated on the interior of the bridge radius. The location of the arches was revised from the original concept, which had them on the outside of the bridge radius, due to structural design issues. The radius of each segment of the two span bridge is approximately 120 metres. This radius was increased from the original concept due to structural design constraints. The unobstructed bridge deck width is 5.0 metres. Deck surface texture and materials will be determined during detailed design. Bridge railings are proposed to be as transparent as possible, recognizing the need to prevent harm to people and/or trains due to people or objects falling off the structure. The railing design is to be confirmed during detailed design. A central lookout Pod is proposed at mid span for viewing the skylines of Toronto. As well, intermediary interpretive and vista viewing stations may be provided along the bridge, subject to confirmation during detailed design. The arches are proposed to be white.
7.1
LOOKING NORTHWEST
LOOKING EAST
LOOKING WEST


Figure 12
LOOKING EAST
LOOKING EAST
FORT YORK GARRISON COMMON


Figure 13
LOOKING WEST
LOOKING NORTHEAST
LOOKING EAST


Figure 14
Illumination treatments will be determined during detailed design, but must provide a high level of safety and security for the public. Provisions for an access to the Ordnance Triangle will be included in the detailed design, even though an actual access facility may not be constructed until a later date. THE STANLEY PARK EXTENSION (North Parkette)
7.2
The pedestrian and cycle bridge is proposed to connect to the existing municipal parking lot on the north side of the Georgetown rail corridor. At the property line, between the rail right-of-way and the parking lot, the underside of the bridge will be 7.4 meters above the railway track, to achieve GO Transit clearance standards, and 6.8 meters above the parking lot elevation. At this point, the bridge deck surface will be about 1.20 meters higher than the underside of the bridge. Wellington Street is approximately 75 meters north of the railway property line and about 60 meters away from the northerly end of the bridge. To accommodate the difference in grade between these two points, it is proposed that a sinuous pathway be constructed between the bridge deck and the Wellington Street sidewalk, which would result in an average walkway gradient of 4-5%. A rendering of the proposed walkway connection, at the north end of the bridge, is illustrated in Figure 15, which provides a view looking south from Wellington Street. In conjunction with the construction of the pathway, it is proposed that the existing parking lot be converted to open space/parkland, as part of an overall plan to connect to Stanley Park. The conversion of this area for parkland will fulfill one of the primary objectives of several past studies, specifically to provide a green space linkage of Fort York and the waterfront, in the south, to Trinity Bellwoods Park and Stanley Park, in the north. The Stanley Park Extension at the entry to the Fort York Bridge will welcome pedestrians, cyclists and other users to explore areas to the south, including Fort York, June Callwood Park, Coronation Park and the Martin Goodman Trail. Precise details of the Stanley Park extension landscaping design will be subject to further review by the City of Toronto, in conjunction with the detailed design process. A preliminary estimate of the imported fill required to accommodate the conversion of these lands to park space is 43,000 cubic metres. Approximately 1500 cubic metres of topsoil will also be required.
7.5

North Parkette Viewed from Wellington Street

Figure 15
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 7.3 THE GARRISON COMMON/FORT YORK CONNECTION
The bridge landing point in the Fort York lands will be, for the most part, in the area of the existing City tree nursery. This point of connection will significantly minimize the impacts on existing trees within the Garrison Common. In fact, it is believed that only 56 trees will require removal from the Common area, as a direct result of the bridge and approach ramp construction. A swath of the hedgerow (Unit 4 of the Tree Inventory Report) must be removed to accommodate the bridge connection across the rail corridor and into the Fort lands. The actual extent of tree removals and restoration will be determined during detailed design. As the new bridge crosses the boundary between the CN Rail corridor and the Fort York lands, the underside of the bridge will be 7.4 metres above the rail elevation and 3.4 metres above the ground elevation in the Commons. The deck of the bridge will be another 1.2 metres higher, resulting in a ramp transition change of about 4.6 metres. In view of the significant archaeological potential within the Fort lands, it is proposed that the approach ramp, leading from the bridge deck to ground elevation, be supported by a combination of columns and retained earth. The highest section of the ramp (nearest to the bridge) is proposed to be on columns while the lowest portion (below 2.1 metres high) is proposed to be supported by earth fill contained by retaining walls. Under no circumstances should unretained earth embankments, with typical 3:1 side slopes, be used in the Garrison Common due to the potential negative impacts on these sensitive lands. Two renderings were created to illustrate the potential configuration of the bridge approach ramp within the Garrison Common. (See Figures 16 and 17). The first rendering clearly illustrates the column support structure nearest to the abutment of the bridge, extending down to a retained portion of the ramp at its lowest position. The second rendering provides a more detailed view at the lower level of the approach ramp. It presents a concept of display panels depicting the history of Fort York and the Battleground of 1813, within a courtyard area that could be a resting area and centre point for pathways branching out to the east (Bathurst Street), the west (Garrison Common) and the south (Fort York Visitor Information Centre and the waterfront). There was much feedback on the conceptual renderings developed for the Garrison Common approach ramp. For the most part, the comments focused on ensuring that the bridge touchdown in this area is as soft as possible. Further, it was suggested that the historical display panels may be better presented in the proposed Visitor Information Centre and that a small, landscaped plaza area may be more suitable at the base of the ramp, with adjacent pathways radiating outwards.
7.7

Bridge Ramp Viewed from Garrison Common

Figure 16

Bridge Ramp Entering South Parkette

Figure 17
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT It was acknowledged that the renderings presented within this report are conceptual only, and that the ultimate design of the approach ramp and other landscape areas will be determined during detailed design of the bridge, and coordinated with the overall site development and trail circulation planning associated with the Fort York Visitor Information Centre. 7.4 THE ORDNANCE TRIANGLE LANDS
The Ordnance Triangle Lands are bounded by the two railway corridors and Strachan Avenue. The land is approximately 3.8 hectares (9.40 acres) in size and is owned, for the most part, by the City of Toronto. One parcel, at 30 Ordnance Street, is privately owned, while another smaller parcel at the far east end of the triangle, with the address of 10 Ordnance Street (rear), is currently owned by the Greater Toronto Transit Authority (Metrolinx). Over the course of the Environmental Assessment Study, much was said about the future of the Ordnance Triangle lands and how the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge should be integrated with this parcel. Although the creation of a development plan for these lands was beyond the scope of the Class EA Study, there was recognition of the direct connection between the future integration of these lands into the Community fabric and the planning of the bridge. To this end, the following points were noted over the course of the study and should be considered in future area planning:
A comprehensive plan for the Ordnance Triangle lands that will govern its redevelopment into the future. Conversion of the lands to green space, as an extension of the community parkland network that will extend from Trinity Bellwoods Park /Stanley Park to the waterfront in a north-south direction, and from Liberty Village to the Railway Lands and Downtown in an east-west direction, utilizing the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, as an integral link in these parkland connections. A future physical connection at the bridge, in the form of a ramp and/or stairs, that will allow pedestrians and cyclists to access the redeveloped Ordnance Lands from the Fort York Bridge. The design of the bridge shall be such that it does not preclude the addition of this connection at a future date.
7.10
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 7.5 METROLINX STUDY IMPACTS
Metrolinx recently completed an Environmental Assessment for the Georgetown South Rail Corridor Expansion and New Rail Service between Union Station and Pearson International Airport. The Project Team followed the progress of the Metrolinx Environmental Assessment Study and its potential impacts on the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge EA Study. The following summarizes the key elements of the Metrolinx study that had a direct bearing on the functional details of the Fort York Bridge:
Metrolinx proposes a new Grade Separation at the Georgetown crossing of Strachan Avenue. The preliminary details of this bridge propose a raising of the elevation of Strachan Avenue combined with a lowering of the tracks, to provide for a road-overrail crossing. The proposed clearance of the Strachan Avenue Bridge over the tracks is shown as 7.4 metres. Metrolinx agreed to the same clearance criteria for the Fort York Bridge, in a letter to Deputy Mayor Joe Pantalone, City of Toronto, dated October 26, 2009. The reduced clearance criteria (7.4 metres versus 8.4 metres previously provided by GO Transit) has resulted in a lowering of the elevation of the Fort York Pedestrian Bridge over the Georgetown corridor. It is estimated that the lowering of the rail corridor at Strachan Avenue (5.0 metres) will translate into an approximate 3.0 metre lowering of the tracks at the Fort York Bridge. This would have, in turn, enabled a further lowering of the pedestrian bridge at this point, which would have reduced the filling and grading requirements north of the tracks (Stanley Park Extension). It is understood that the Strachan Avenue Grade Separation and Georgetown track lowering is to be completed by approximately 2014. Since the completion date for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge is currently scheduled for early 2012, it was concluded that the pedestrian bridge could not be lowered any further, and that the underside of the structure will be 7.4 metres above the existing rail, increasing to about 10.4 metre clearance upon completion of the Metrolinx project. Details of the Metrolinx crossing at Strachan Avenue, including a profile of the proposed lowered track and a rendering of the future bridge, are provided in Appendix H. Reference may also be made to the Metrolinx Website at www.metrolinx.com.
7.11
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 7.6 THE FORT YORK TREE NURSERY
To accommodate the proposed Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, the current Fort York Tree Nursery Operation, located on the north side of Garrison Road opposite the visitor parking lot, must be relocated. The proposed southerly connection of the bridge will touchdown at the nursery, and the need to create a new trail system and site landscape plan is not compatible with retention of the existing nursery. It is understood that the City of Toronto and the Fort York Management Board have considered the relocation of the nursery for some time now. This project simply reinforces the need, which has been recently dealt with by City and Fort York staff. Plans are currently in the works to relocate the nursery, which will be completed in time for construction of the pedestrian bridge.
7.12
8.0
Summary of Identified Concerns and Mitigating Measures

INTERNAL Project Team and Technical Advisory Committee
8.1 8.1.1
The Project Team and the Technical Advisory Committee, consisting of staff of the City of Toronto, GO Transit, Toronto Police Services, Emergency Medical Services, Stantec Consulting Ltd. and Montgomery Sisam Architects support the conclusions of this Environmental Study Report, and recommend acceptance of Alternative Alignment Concept 4 (S Configuration) with a Inclined Tied-Arch Support Structure as the recommended preferred design for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. In addition to the general characteristics of the proposed bridge, the Project Team and Technical Advisory Committee also endorse the following features of the design:

A five (5) metre clear deck width. Major viewing platforms on either side of the bridge at mid span, offset from the main deck so as not to obstruct normal pedestrian and cycle movements. Secondary vista viewing and interpretive centres at other locations across the bridge, to be determined during detailed design. Provisions for a future ramp and/or staircase to provide access to the Ordnance Triangle lands. An appropriate railing system that will provide for both the safety of users and for the security of CN Rail and GO Transit railway operations. A deck surface treatment that discourages cyclists from speeding across the bridge and interfering with the health and safety of slower moving pedestrians. A deck surface treatment, and/or paint striping system, that separates cyclists and pedestrians, to be determined during detailed design. An illumination system that provides for the safety and security of night time users, and also enhances the bridge profile on the Citys skyline. Illumination should be energy efficient. A winding pathway and staircase within the Stanley Park Extension (north connection), combined with an appropriate level of landscaping that will welcome users to the bridge that leads to Fort York and the Toronto Waterfront.
8.1
Integration of the south approach ramp with a suitable pathway linkage to the Visitor Information Centre and other east-west and southerly trails. A supported approach ramp within the Fort York Lands (south connection) that minimizes its spatial impact on the archaeologically sensitive Fort property. The approach ramp shall be a combination of short sections of sloped ramp with level rest areas, of about 3 metres long. An appropriate pedestrian plaza at the base of the south ramp, integrated with an overall Fort York landscape plan. The plaza will serve as a junction for the adjacent pathway system. Other Internal Committees
8.1.2
City Design Review Panel Issue and Concern Mitigation/Response Does the bridge alignment provide community The preferred design concept provides a connectivity to the waterfront? positive link to the Fort York lands while mitigating major impacts to its sensitive archaeological features. In conjunction with planning for the future Visitor Information Centre, integration of the bridge with a new trail system is possible, providing excellent connectivity between north, south, east and west. Does the bridge enhance Fort York? The proposed bridge will be aesthetically striking but will not compete with the historic nature of Fort York. In fact, with the improved accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists, the bridge significantly enhances the presence of Fort York.
How does the bridge preserve the history of The recommended design evokes the Garrison Creek and Fort York? historical alignment of Garrison Creek as well as the natural actions of a watercourse in eroding its banks on the curves of the watercourse (arch). The bridge also has minimal impact on the Garrison Common while also providing interpretive viewing areas on the bridge. How does the proposed bridge structure provide connectivity to/from Liberty Village through the Ordnance Triangle Lands? The bridge design will not preclude the opportunity to make a pedestrian connection to a redeveloped Ordnance Triangle, linking to future green space, Liberty Village and an improved Strachan Avenue grade separation.
8.2
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT City Design Review Panel Issue and Concern How does the bridge address the context of Fort York as a National Historic site? Mitigation/Response The tied-arch design is more poetic in its form than the thru-truss and the tilting of the southern arch to the east defers to the Fort. It is also believed that the structure design more overtly celebrates the historical nature of the site. During the final design, the project team will concentrate on lightening the touchdown area by removing the display panels and creating a welcoming plaza area that links to the Visitor Information Centre and an improved trail system. A comprehensive landscape plan is required to link all facets of the site design. The rendering in this area was modified accordingly, but the scale of the walkway and stairs will be reviewed during detailed design. Mitigation/Response This issue is beyond the scope of the current Class EA, but the issue was noted by City staff for future consideration. At the time of the Committee meeting, the deck width was between 5 metres and 6 metres. After considering various criteria, including financial aspects, the recommended deck width is 5 metres. This detail will be confirmed during detailed design. There will be provisions in the design for a future connection to the Ordnance Triangle. Discussions regarding greening of this area are part of ongoing area planning considerations. There will be a viewing platform at mid span. There are tentative plans for other viewing areas across the bridge. Completion by 2012.
The southern ramp connection to the Fort lands needs to be softer in respect of the Fort lands.
Stairs at Stanley Park Extension are desirable but should be at a scale that compliments the pathway size. City Pedestrian Committee Issue and Concern Will the study address trail crossing issues at Lakeshore Boulevard? What is the bridge deck width?
How will pedestrians and cyclists be separated? Will there be a connection to the Ordnance Triangle, and will this area be converted to green space at the time of bridge construction? Will there be a lookout provided at mid span? Other locations? What is the timing for construction?
8.3
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 8.2 EXTERNAL AGENCIES
The concerns and questions raised by external agencies who responded to the study information packages, along with the responses of the Project Team, are as follows: Agency Ministry of the Environment Issue and Concern Consider the potential impacts of dust and noise levels on sensitive land uses resulting from construction and operations. Design and construction reporting shall be based on a best management approach that centres on the prevention of impacts and protection of the environment. Mitigation/Response Normal, contractual constraints will be imposed for dust and noise control, at the time of construction, in accordance with municipal bylaws. Proper field monitoring and reports will be carried out to address field environmental concerns, including potential waste generation. Such requirements are to be outlined in contract documents. Through consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), no areas of interest were noted within the study limits. There are no existing watercourses within the study area and no issues were raised by the TRCA.
Any impacts to ecosystem form and function must be avoided where possible.
Address any negative impacts on the natural features or ecological functions of any surface water features or watercourses Address any potential impacts to groundwater well supplies and secure approvals for any groundwater taking.
There are no known well water supply systems in the study area and no groundwater taking is anticipated.
8.4
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Agency Friends of Fort York Issue and Concern The touchdown point for the bridge, at the Garrison Common, must respect the location of existing archaeological resources, opens spaces and buildings of the Fort. Ongoing plans for wayfinding signage and historical markers, in and around Fort York, should be incorporated into the design plans for the bridge. Mitigation/Response This issue has been dealt with through other comments/mitigative solutions.
The recommendations for the bridge design will include provisions for appropriate signage and visual displays to capture the history and culture of the area, when viewed from strategic points on the bridge. The preliminary plans adhere to the revised 7.4 metre clearance design criteria. A detailed site line clearance study is not required by GO Transit as confirmed by Metrolinx.
GO Transit/Metrolinx/CN Rail
A minimum clearance of 8.4 metres, between the underside of the bridge structure and the top of rail was originally identified by GO Transit and CN Rail. Metrolinx and GO Transit subsequently revised this clearance to 7.4 metres Project should be of a scale and design that properly denotes the importance of the War of 1812 in the development of Toronto and Canada. Suitable access for emergency response and crime prevention services should be considered in the bridge planning. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CTED) should be implemented.
Waterfront Action
It is believed that the proposed design achieves these objectives.
Toronto Police Services and EMS
The study team has worked with the Toronto Police Service and the EMS department to address safety of users, crime prevention and emergency access provisions. Further input will be received during detailed design.
8.5
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 8.3 ASSOCIATED STUDY REPORTS
Concerns and recommendations were presented in various reports associated with the Class Environmental Assessment. They are summarized ,along with the responses of the Project Team, in the following: Report Stage I Archaeological Study Report Issue and Concern A Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment should be completed on any lands that may be impacted by the bridge and which have been determined to have archaeological potential. Mitigation/Response The City of Toronto (proponent) will arrange for the completion of a Stage 2 Study during the detailed design stage and in advance of any land disturbing activities. Ministry of Culture Approval will be secured in advance of any construction. The City of Toronto (proponent) will arrange for the completion of a Stage 2 Study on other lands affected by construction activities. Ministry of Culture approval will be secured in advance of construction. The current preferred bridge plan does not directly impact cultural heritage built resources, within the study limits. The design team has been cognizant of this and other needs with respect to the Garrison Common area, and has aligned the bridge access ramp in close proximity to the adjacent railway track, minimizing its impact on the Common. As well, a structural design approach has been adopted for the ramp configuration, as opposed to an intrusive earth embankment alternative. 8.6
A Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment should also be completed on lands that may be required for construction activities associated with the bridge construction (example: access roads, equipment storage and staging). Cultural and Built Heritage Report The proposed bridge should be suitably planned to avoid impacts on identified above ground cultural heritage resources. Given the open character of the Garrison Common and its contribution to the heritage significance of Fort York, the bridge design should not compromise or reduce accessibility to/from the area or negatively alter available view sheds of the Fort.
Report Cultural and Build Heritage Report (Continued)
Issue and Concern The bridge layout should avoid encroachment or disruption to the Military Cemetery near Strachan Avenue. Grading of the south bridge landing should be minimized to maintain the current elevation and topography of the Garrison Common.
Mitigation/Response The preferred design concept has no impact on the Military Cemetery.
The preferred design concept provides a structural design approach for the bridge ramp, supported by concrete columns as opposed to an earth embankment that would involve grading and elevation changes to the Garrison Common. The preferred bridge concept provides excellent vantage points from its deck, to view the Bathurst Street bridge, the Toronto skyline, and other landmarks in the area. A Phase II ESA will be completed by the City of Toronto (proponent) at the conclusion of the Class Environmental Assessment and initiation of detailed design. A designated substances survey will be completed in advance of construction, once any structures for removal are known.
The preferred bridge design should maintain and/or enhance view sheds of the through-truss bridge at Bathurst Street.
Phase I ESA Study Report
A Phase II ESA, including soil and groundwater testing, should be completed at the Site to investigate environmental concerns related to potential soil and groundwater contamination. A designated substances survey should be completed prior to the removal or alteration of any structures (e.g. underground utility pipes) to confirm the presence of special attention items (e.g., asbestos, lead, ODS, UFFI, mercury) and to provide recommendations for managing such materials in accordance with applicable environmental and health and safety legislation;
8.7
Report Phase I ESA Study Report (Continued)
Issue and Concern A soil management plan should be created for the construction phase of the Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge in the event that contaminated soil is encountered.
Mitigation/Response A soil management plan will be part of the Construction Specifications and will deal with the disposal of clean fill to a licensed aggregate pit, where such soil meets the Table 1 Site Conditions Standards. Excavated soil not meeting Table 1 standards will be hauled by licensed carriers to approved waste disposal facilities. Appropriate measures will be taken during construction to deal with dewatering of the site, if required.
If dewatering is required, pumped groundwater should be treated to meet the City Sanitary Sewer Use By-Law criteria prior to discharge to a localized sanitary sewer, provided the City consents to the disposal of water into the sanitary sewer system. Alternatively, the water may be removed from the Site by a licensed waste carrier to a licensed disposal/treatment facility. Removal of the water by a licensed waste carrier would require the site to be registered as a waster generator on the MOEs Hazardous Waster Information Network (HWIN). A Permit to Take Water (PTTW) would be required if greater than 50,000 L of water is pumped per day.
8.8
Report Fort York: Setting It Right plus other Planning Studies
Issue and Concern The extension and linkage of existing parklands in the area of Fort York is a high priority of this study, and the proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge should be a catalyst to the planning, design and construction of these future park linkages.
Mitigation/Response One of the primary objectives of this Class EA Study has been the development of bridge concept that will provide a safe and practical access for pedestrians and cyclists crossing the tracks between Stanley Park and the Fort York area. All of the alternatives, including the preferred design concept, provide solutions to this objective. The recommended preferred design concept does not impact any privately owned lands. The design team considered options for a pedestrian connection and potential redevelopment of the Ordnance Lands. The bridge will be planned so that a future pedestrian connection may be extended from the bridge structure to the Ordnance lands, at a future date. The recommended preferred design concept evokes the original alignment of Garrison Creek, establishing a double curve pattern across the two sets of railway tracks.
Limit direct impacts of the bridge on privately owned lands in the study area. The need for a pedestrian connection to the Ordnance Triangle lands, between the two railway corridors, should be considered in the bridge design.
Where possible, the bridge design should reflect the past physical prominence and historical culture of Garrison Creek.
8.9
Report Geotechnical Assessment Report
Issue and Concern Preliminary recommendations are provided for bridge foundation designs, but further detailed field investigations are required to confirm actual conditions and foundation requirements.
Mitigation/Response A detailed geotechnical and foundation investigation report will be commissioned by the City during the detailed design stage, based on more accurate calculations of bridge geometry and foundation locations.
8.4
PUBLIC
The major concerns of the public, as expressed at the two Public Information Centre meetings, and through email correspondence, are identified below along with the study response and/or mitigation measures. Listed issues are not in any particular order of receipt or importance. Public Issue/Concern Bridge should include separate bicycle and pedestrian rights-of-ways so as to reduce incompatible traffic flows. Consideration could be made for a train viewing area for railway enthusiasts. Mitigation/Response Opportunities to include design features that encourage separation between pedestrians and cyclists will be examined during detailed design. A central viewing area will be provided on the bridge which will allow users to view the rail corridors in either direction. Other vista viewing stations may be provided directly above the railways, the details of which are subject to further review. Recommended preferred design concept minimizes impact on Garrison Common and only impacts 5-6 trees within Garrison Common. Any removed trees will be replaced with new trees. This issue was raised on several occasions. However, this project has no ability to influence the removal of the billboards. Appropriate lighting will be determined during detailed design, providing for the safety of users and the enhancement of night views of the bridge. 8.10
Maintain the integrity of Garrison Common and preserve as many trees as possible.
Any chance that you can get rid of the offensive-blinking billboards that destroy the ambience of peaceful Fort York? The bridge and its landing zones should be properly lit to provide a safe environment at night.
Public Issue/Concern I would hope you install a connection to Bathurst Street in addition to the connection to Fort York Boulevard. Mitigation/Response An east-west pathway is proposed to link the Bridge and Garrison Common to Bathurst Street, along the north edge of the Fort. Plans for this pathway are not part of this Class EA Study. The project is funded through the Waterfront Capital Budget. The final cost of the bridge will be refined during detailed design. Provisions will be made in the design of the bridge to allow for a connection to the Ordnance Triangle. The extension of Stanley Park and the provision of a welcoming entry feature to the bridge will integrate the gardens to the north. Suitable access beneath the Gardiner Expressway will be developed as part of the Visitor Information Centre planning, while an improved crossing of Lakeshore Boulevard is an issue that is acknowledged by the City and is being reviewed. Resolution of both of these items is outside the terms of this EA Study. Such a design would make the bridge extremely wide and result in a construction cost that would be prohibitive and well beyond current funding levels. The bridge is for pedestrians and cyclists who must respect each other. Excessive speed by cyclists will be discouraged. The current design will be readily usable by cyclists.
Im for the bridge as long as the price is not out of the world.
How is access from the Ordnance Triangle planned? How will the community gardens on the north side be integrated?
In addition to the bridge, a safe bike/pedestrian path across Lakeshore/The Gardiner is needed to really create a well developed access for commuters and nature peepers alike.
Why cant the bridge be split in two halves with a pathway in the island of green space, underneath the current proposed design? The switchbacks will be a deterrent for those who use the bridge on bikes. They are awkward and difficult to navigate while riding. The more gradual ramps will encourage bike use on the bridge.
8.11
Public Issue/Concern Final design should not be finalized until all other studies are finalized (Metrolinx Western Corridor, GO Transit/Metrolinx Toronto Airport Corridor, Fort York grounds). By all means, preserve the history of Fort York. Unfortunately, I have regrets that the Meat Packing plant should be moved though Toronto does not mind getting rid of commercial taxpayers. I prefer a flat platform bridge with plexiglass sides or something similar for safety. Mitigation/Response The results of all relevant studies have been accounted for and any impacts have been taken into consideration in the functional planning of the recommended preferred design concept. All attempts have been made, and will continue to be made, in preserving and enhancing the historic nature of Fort York. The Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge does not impact, nor is it affected by, the existing meat packing plant. Plexiglass sides will not be provided as they would detract from the elegance of the bridge. Safety of pedestrians and the security of rail lines will be examined in greater detail during final design. The Fort York bridge will provide a safe and environmentally friendly alternative for runners currently using Strachan Avenue. The Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge is part of the Waterfront 5 Year Plan, as well as being one of four legacy projects associated with Fort York. The City is engaged in improving area transit systems throughout the City that provide alternative travel options to personal automobiles. There are no current plans to replace the existing parking lot with a new facility in the area.
Great idea for us runners as well; it is terrible to run on Strachan Avenue because the traffic is awful and it is very bad to suck in all those fumes. Please consider how this scheme fits in with the overall Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Plan. The planned bridge landing near Wellington Street will result in the loss of existing parking on land owned by the City of Toronto. How will this loss of parking be dealt with?
8.12
Public Issue/Concern I believe that until we solve the high vehicular traffic nature of Gardiner/Lakeshore arterials, any improvements are stop gap and patchwork in nature. Better to save money and fix bigger problems first. Mitigation/Response The Fort York bridge deals with traffic of a different type (not vehicular) and is focused on linking communities that are currently divided by rail corridors. It also will provide an improved focus on the historical culture of Fort York. It is agreed that issues related to traffic congestion are real, and attempts are being made to mitigate concerns in this regard through other strategic works, including improved GO service and the Metrolinx studies. Increasing traffic congestion is a problem and does affect pedestrian and cyclist flow. However, the Fort York bridge will address community green space linkage issues, as well as moving pedestrians and cyclists away from busy road corridors. The Project Team believes that the recommended preferred design concept presents a very unique bridge structure, which result in a significant landmark on the Toronto skyline. The Fort York bridge will provide a readily accessible alternative to Strachan Avenue.
The identified issue is that vehicular traffic prevents/deters pedestrian and bike traffic. Can we not treat the sources of the problem instead of avoiding it. (via a bridge)?
There are too many mediocre structures in Toronto. If we decide to invest in a bridge, the design must be creative and unique. It must be something that we can be proud of! I often cycle down Strachan Avenue and I fear for my life every time. The street is narrow and vehicles roar over the current bridge at high speed. I am in favour of the bridge. Please build it immediately.
8.13
9.0
9.1
Preliminary Design: Preferred Design Concept

GENERAL ARRANGEMENT AND DETAILS
Stantec Consulting Ltd. prepared a General Arrangement Drawing of the proposed Fort York Bridge, based on the basic layout of the recommended preferred design concept. The details of the General Arrangement Drawing may be found on Figure 18, and are summarized as follows:

Two span, tied arch, reverse curve steel bridge on concrete foundations. Span lengths (chord): 100.0 metres+. Total span: 232 metres+. (Note: total span length was refined from preliminary concept, which had an approximate length of 234 metres.) Tied arch: Inclined to vertical by 25o on the inside of each curve. Deck width: Minimum 5.0 metres (wider at viewing platforms). Deck profile: 2.6% gradient sloping down from north to south. Major viewing/interpretative platform at midspan (size to be confirmed). Provision for future ramp and/or staircase to Ordnance Triangle lands, at centre span (details to be confirmed). Deck surface to be confirmed, but should distinguish between pedestrians and cyclists through texture and colour variations. Intermediary viewing and interpretative stations to be confirmed. Steel arches and ties to be white. Railing design and colour to be confirmed (safety and security issues to be considered during design). Illumination to be energy efficient and provide for the safety and security of users, and to highlight the elegance of the structure on the Toronto skyline. The north side bridge approach (Stanley Park Extension) to include sinuous pathway plus staircase. Landscape treatment to be confirmed. The south side bridge ramp to include a column supported section nearest to the bridge and an enclosed section nearest to the landing. Columns and retaining walls to have a texture and finish that evokes the history of Fort York. 9.1
Pathway system in the Garrison Common to be coordinated with the plans for the Visitor Information Centre. GEOTECHNICAL
9.2
Design and construction of foundations to support the proposed bridge shall be in accordance with the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC), 2006 Edition. Since the pedestrian and cycle bridge is anticipated to be a relatively light structure in comparison to typical vehicular bridges, it is expected that the structure may be founded on spread footings bearing on native soils, below any existing fill that may be encountered. As an alternate to spread footings, the designer may choose to utilize deep foundations such as cast-in-place caissons or steel H-Piles. These foundations would typically extend to bedrock levels, as indicated in the geotechnical report (Appendix C) or terminated in the glacial till at a depth to be determined. Regardless of the method of foundation design and construction, a detailed geotechnical and foundations investigation report is required in the early stages of the final design program. The geotechnical investigation will include, as a minimum, site boreholes at each of the abutment, centre pier, ramp columns, and ramp retaining walls, as required to adequately determine the precise subsurface conditions and foundation design requirements. The number and location of boreholes should be determined in consultation between the structural engineer and the geotechnical engineer. Appropriate archaeological clearances should be obtained before any boreholes are advanced in areas with known archaeological potential. Finally, supplementary boreholes should be advanced in the area of the proposed Stanley Park Extension, to confirm any subsurface contamination issues that may be present in the existing parking lot. 9.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE BUILT INVESTIGATION
The Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment, undertaken for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, determined that one previously registered archaeological site, the Fort York Garrison (AjGu-26), occurs within the study area. Fort York has further been defined as an Archaeologically Sensitive Area (ASA) as part of the ongoing work of the City of Torontos Master Plan of Archaeological Resources. The defined boundaries of the registered archaeological site correspond, in part, to the boundaries of the Fort York Heritage Conservation District and the Fort York National Historic Site. Additionally, a review of the general development history of the lands that comprise the study area suggests that archaeological site potential is present in specific locales.
9.3
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT In light of these results, the following recommendations are appropriate for this project: 1. Since construction of the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge is anticipated to impact lands determined to have archaeological site potential, a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment should be conducted in accordance with the Ministry of Cultures draft Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MCL 2006) prior to any land disturbing activities. The purpose of this work will be to identify any archaeological remains that may be present and to identify appropriate mitigation measures. 2. If any additional areas not covered by this assessment are required for construction (e.g. staging areas, temporary access roads, etc.), those areas should also be subject to a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment. The above recommendations are subject to Ministry of Culture approval, and it is an offence to alter any archaeological site without Ministry of Culture concurrence. No grading or other activities that may result in the destruction or disturbance of an archaeological site are permitted until notice of Ministry of Culture approval has been received. The following conditions shall apply to the Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment:
In the event that deeply buried archaeological remains are found on the property during construction activities, the consultant archaeologist, Heritage Preservation Services (Policy and Research Division, City Planning), and the Regional Archaeological Review Officer, Culture Programs Unit, Ontario Ministry of Culture, should be notified immediately. In the event that human remains are encountered during construction, the proponent should immediately contact the consultant archaeologist, Heritage Preservation Services (Policy and Research Division, City Planning), the Regional Archaeological Review Officer, Culture Programs Unit, Ontario Ministry of Culture, and the Registrar or Deputy Registrar of the Cemeteries Regulation Unit of Ministry of Government and Consumer Services, Consumer Protection Branch (1.800.889.9768). The documentation related to this archaeological assessment is to be curated by Archaeological Services Inc. until such a time that arrangements for their ultimate transfer to Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, or other public institution, can be made to the satisfaction of the project owner(s), the Ontario Ministry of Culture, and any other legitimate interest groups.
The above information is referenced in the Stage 1 Archaeological Study Report, prepared for this Class Environmental Assessment by Archaeological Services Inc. (ASI), and is provided in Appendix C.
9.4
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT In addition to archaeological issues and the relevant study actions noted above, the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge may also have a variety of impacts on built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes. These may include the loss or displacement of resources through removal, demolition or disruption caused by physical, visual, audible or atmospheric elements that are not in keeping with the resources and/or their natural setting. Study findings suggest that the proposed bridge is expected to have minimal direct impacts on the surrounding cultural heritage resources. The proposed design concept will not directly impact any identified cultural heritage resources, through displacement, however the Garrison Common may be potentially disrupted through impact on the visual elements that may not be in keeping with the landscape setting. Therefore, in keeping with the intent of the Built Heritage Resources and Cultural Heritage Landscape Report, it is recommended that a qualified heritage professional assess the proposed final bridge plans, during the detailed design stage, to determine any specific impacts to identified cultural heritage resources in the study area. 9.4 ILLUMINATION
Neither a theme nor preliminary design has been developed for lighting the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge. This process will occur at the detailed design stage, but should follow the following basic principles:
Illumination must provide for the safety and security of pedestrians and cyclists who may use the bridge in night time periods (deck lighting). Illumination should enhance the profile of the bridge on the Toronto skyline, but not be overpowering. The illumination theme for the bridge should continue onto the Stanley Park Extension and the Fort lands (Garrison Common), while respecting adjacent neighbourhoods and Fort lands, respectively. Illumination fixtures on the ramps should be consistent with the bridge, where possible.
Samples of illumination themes applied to bridges around the world were presented to the public at PIC No. 2, for information only. These examples are reproduced in Figure 19, but are not intended to represent or depict a specific lighting theme for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge.
9.5
Jiak Kim Bridge Singapore
Toome Bridge Ireland
Gateshead Millennium Bridge United Kingdom
York Millennium Bridge United Kingdom

Bridge Illumination Examples

Figure 19
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 9.5 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
Over the course of this Class Environmental Assessment Study, the development of a comprehensive and reliable construction cost estimate was determined to be a challenging exercise. The problem that the architectural and engineering teams faced was the lack of comparable inclined arch pedestrian bridge structures in North America, which could provide a benchmark for creating a preliminary cost estimate that was based on some experience. The closest local structure is the Humber River Bridge, which was constructed in 1996. However, the Humber River Bridge is a straight structure with twin vertical tied-arches. To gain confidence in the development of a cost estimate for the Fort York Bridge, the team contacted a bridge designer in Britain with experience on similar structures. There are, fortunately, several inclined tied-arch structures in Europe, and so cost parameters are likely more reliable, allowing for CDN dollars versus EURO/POUND exchange rates. The following summarizes the findings related to benchmark costs, the basis for creating a cost estimate for the Fort York Bridge, and preliminary cost estimate that was ultimately developed for a 5 metre wide structure:
Approximate cost for a similar bridge in Britain: o o 5000-7000 Pounds Sterling per square metre deck area This converts to approximately $9,200-$12,900 per square metre deck area, in Canadian Dollars
As a comparison, the Humber River Bridge cost $3.25 million in 1996 dollars. With appropriate inflation, the cost today would be $5.8 million, or $9,700 per square metre (100 metre span bridge). For estimating purposes, a 12% premium was used for working over two sets of railway tracks. A 20% premium was used to account for ramp construction, landscaping, environmental issues, and site monitoring. A 25% premium was used to account for architectural and engineering fees, plus a contingency allowance.
9.7
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT Cost Estimate for Recommended Preferred Design Concept: Length: Deck Width: Deck Area: Benchmark Cost for Bridge: 232 metres 5.0 metres 1,160 square metres 1,160m2 @ $10,170 11,800,000 1,400,000 2,400,000 3,900,000 $19,500,000
Premium for Work Around Railways (12%): Premium for Ramp Construction, Landscaping, etc. (20%) Engineering, Architectural and Contingency (25%): Total Estimated Cost
It is important that the City of Toronto recognizes that the above cost estimate is preliminary and has been based on benchmark costs, as opposed to a bottom-up estimate using quantities and unit prices. It will be important that the City refines the cost estimate in the early stages of detailed design, once more information is known about foundations, archaeological, landscape features, illumination, railway security, and other related project issues. It is also noted that actual costs will be dependent upon market conditions at the time of construction, including contractor availability for such bridge construction, steel pricing, availability of fill for the Stanley Park Extension and other major contract items.
9.8
10.0 Summary and Recommendations

This Study was commissioned by the City of Toronto and directed by the Waterfront Secretariat. The purpose of the study was to complete a Class EA planning process that would confirm the preliminary details of a proposed pedestrian and cycle bridge in the vicinity of Fort York. The need and justification for the undertaking was confirmed through an evaluation process and a review of numerous other planning studies that preceded this Class Environmental Assessment, dating back almost ten years. The concept of a readily accessible link, between communities to the north and Fort York, began to take on a higher priority when plans for Bicentennial Commemorative Celebrations of the War of 1812, scheduled for Spring 2012, began to take shape. A Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge became one of four Legacy Projects aimed at improving public awareness of this National Historic Site. The Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge Study has been completed in accordance with the Guidelines for a Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment, as outlined in the document titled Municipal Class Environmental Assessment, Municipal Engineers Association, October 2000, as amended in 2007, approved by Order-in-Council No. 1920/2000. Through this structured process, a recommended preferred design concept has been selected for a new pedestrian and cycle bridge to cross the two rail corridors north of Fort York. Incorporated within this Environmental Study Report (ESR) are all of the background reports, data, correspondence, public and agency feedback, and functional details for the proposed bridge structure. Based on the extensive analysis, evaluations, Project Team and Committee direction and feedback, public and agency input, and other considerations, the following summarizes the final recommendations of this Schedule C Class Environmental Assessment: 1. It is recommended that the City of Toronto and the Waterfront Secretariat accept Alternative Alignment Concept 4, with a Tied-Arch support structure as the recommended preferred design concept for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge, as illustrated on the functional plans and graphic simulations included in this report. It is recommended that the City of Toronto remove the existing parking lot on the south side of Wellington Street (municipal address: 53 Strachan Avenue), and redevelop this site as an extension of Stanley Park.
2.
10.1
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 3. It is recommended that the Stanley Park Extension, noted above, be constructed in conjunction with the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge so that a proper ramp approach may be provided between Wellington Street and the bridge. It is recommended that the City of Toronto proceed, as soon as possible, to negotiate a contract with a qualified consulting team to complete the final design and contract drawings for the Fort York Bridge, and to provide contract administration services during construction. Time is of the essence in order that completion of the structure, and all related works, is realized by spring 2012. It is recommended that the City of Toronto continue to liaise with CN Rail and GO Transit during the detailed design phase, in order that drawings and construction approvals may be expedited. The tight schedule associated with the design and construction phases warrants close cooperation between the City of Toronto and railway authorities. It is recommended that a Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment be carried out in all areas where the proposed bridge structure and approach ramps encroach within areas designated as having archaeological site potential, as noted in the Stage I Archaeological Assessment report. The Stage 2 assessment should be conducted as soon as possible in the detailed design program, and in accordance with the Ministry of Cultures draft Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. It is recommended that a qualified heritage professional assess the detailed design plans for the bridge in order to determine if there are specific impacts to identified cultural heritage resources in the study area. It is recommended that a geotechnical and foundations investigation be completed to determine existing subsurface conditions at the proposed bridge foundation locations, based on detailed design calculations. The investigation is to include boreholes at foundation locations and provide recommendations related to the structural design of the bridge. The report should also examine subsurface conditions and foundation needs in the area of the Stanley Park Extension, to support the proposed fill material and deal with any contaminated soils. It is recommended that a legal survey be completed to clearly identify property boundary limits and ownerships in the area of the proposed bridge. A proper reference plan should be prepared to show the limits of the proposed bridge, based on final design geometry.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.2
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT 10. It is recommended that any future construction contract contain provisions for dust and noise control, in accordance with City of Toronto Bylaws and/or Ministry of the Environment Guidelines. It is recommended that appropriate tests be completed on any existing soils that may require removal from the site to determine contaminant levels from previous land uses or dumping. Appropriate action shall be taken consistent with the Environmental Protection Act, should contaminated soils be discovered. It is recommended that the Toronto Police Service be consulted during detailed design to ensure that an appropriate approach to Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) be implemented, through strategies of natural surveillance, natural access control and territorial reinforcement. It is recommended that the Toronto Emergency Medical Services (EMS) be consulted during detailed design to incorporate any features in the bridge and/or approaches that will contribute to improved accessibility of EMS teams and service to the public. It is recommended that the Friends of Fort York and the Fort York Management Board be partners in the detailed design process, ensuring that features of the bridge and approach areas are consistent with the vision of the Fort York Master Plan. Aspects to be considered include a coordinated landscape plan, signage and historical markers, vista platforms, bridge materials (railings, deck, etc), pathway linkages, and tree preservation and restoration. It is recommended that appropriate measures be taken to protect existing trees, within the project limits, that do not require removal to accommodate the bridge construction, particularly in the Garrison Common. All such trees shall be clearly marked prior to construction and all protection measures implemented in accordance with the Tree Inventory Report, dated October 2009, employing the services of an ISA Certified Arborist. Tree management measures shall conform to the City of Torontos Tree Protection Policy and Specifications for Construction Near Trees. It is recommended that a survey be completed to identify the potential presence of nesting areas for Chimney Swifts, such survey to be conducted the same year as proposed construction. Should nesting areas be observed, they should be protected with a 25 metre buffer during construction, where possible.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
10.3
FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY REPORT COUNCIL MOTIONS Recent meetings of the Toronto East York Community Council and Toronto City Council have resulted in the following actions related to the Class Environmental Assessment Study for the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge:
The Fort York pedestrian and cycle bridge will cross over the Ordnance Triangle lands, and the preferred design concept provides for future access to these lands from the bridge. At its meeting of November 10, 2009, Toronto East York Community Council adopted a motion that City Planning prepare a report by December 31, 2009 regarding the appropriate zoning of the Ordnance Triangle lands, with a view to having them classified as future parkland. At its meeting of November 30, December 1, 2, 4 and 7, 2009, Toronto City Council granted authority to City staff to issue a Notice of Study Completion following completion of the Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge Environmental Study Report to the satisfaction of the Waterfront Secretariat and Transportation Services, substantially in the form outlined in the staff report to City Council. Staff were also authorized to file the Environmental Study Report on the public record for 30 days, in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment.
______________________________ Garry E. Leveck, P. Eng. Vice-President, Transportation
10.4

Environmental Study Report - Fort York Pedestrian &amp; Cycle Bridge

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental Study Report - Fort York Pedestrian &amp; Cycle Bridge

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Key Map and Study Area Limits

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Enhance Pedestrian/Cyclist Infrastructure on Existing Roads

Construct New Pedestrian/Cyclist Link

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Archaeological Resources Built Heritage Landscape Cultural Heritage Landscape

Overall cost of design and construction

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Bridge Alignment Concept Option 1

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Bridge Alignment Concept Option 2

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Bridge Alignment Concept Option 3

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Bridge Alignment Concept Option 4

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Alternative Bridge Structure Types

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

______________________________ Garry E. Leveck, P. Eng. Vice-President, Transportation

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Recommended Preferred Design Concept

FORT YORK GARRISON COMMON

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Recommended Preferred Design Concept

FORT YORK PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE BRIDGE

Recommended Preferred Design Concept