February 8, 2018…

February 8, 2018

Elizabeth Elder
Senior Policy Advisor
Ministry of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure
Infrastructure Policy Division
Policy and Planning Branch
900 Bay Street Floor 5, Mowat Block
Toronto, ON
M7A 1C2

Dear Ms. Elder:

Re: Ontario’s Long-Term Infrastructure Plan 2017, EBR#013-1907

Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on Building Better Lives: Ontario’s Long-Term Infrastructure Plan 2017 (the Plan). We understand that the Plan is a requirement of the Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act (2015), and that the Plan highlights, among other things, how Ontario is integrating climate change considerations into infrastructure planning to ensure environmental sustainability, and building resilient and substantive infrastructure in an era of accelerated change and disruptive technologies.

The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has a keen interest in sustainable infrastructure planning as a resource management agency with delegated responsibility to uphold the provincial interest in natural hazards, as a public commenting body under the environmental assessment and Planning Act processes, and as a regulator and major facility and landowner in the Toronto region. We are the proponent or co-proponent of a number of environmental assessments (EA), both Individual EAs and many others that fall under a provincial Class EA process. The latter are predominantly Conservation Authority Class EAs (remedial flood and erosion control) and Municipal Class EAs (infrastructure).

TRCA provides environmental expertise to our municipal partners on their infrastructure master plans and environmental assessments, and approves permits for infrastructure where it affects our section 28 Regulation under the Conservation Authorities Act. TRCA works with federal, provincial ministries and agencies, municipalities and developers in the planning, siting and alignment of both public and private infrastructure. With the goal of protecting and enhancing natural heritage and managing and mitigating natural hazards, TRCA takes a collaborative and interdisciplinary approach to ensuring a sustainable interface between infrastructure and the natural system. These endeavours contribute to achieving mutual provincial and municipal objectives such as eliminating or reducing risk to public infrastructure and enhancing its resilience to the effects of climate change. Also integral to this work is TRCA’s nature-based recreation network of parks and trails on TRCA-owned or managed lands that provides opportunities for active transportation, forming an important part of the regional transportation network.

TRCA also has a role to play in catalyzing and facilitating actions that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To this end, we deliver a suite of programs that engage business, hospitals, schools, universities, municipalities and residents in reducing both their energy use and emissions, namely: Greening Health Care, Sustainable Schools, Mayors’ Megawatt Challenge, Sustainable Neighbourhood Action Plans, and Partners in Project Green. These partnership programs are highly effective at engaging their target audiences in actions that address climate mitigation. Moreover, in many cases, these programs identify or develop science-based design criteria that can be used in the development of energy efficient, low carbon new infrastructure and practices.

Specific to provincial infrastructure, TRCA has service level agreements with Metrolinx whereby we review and provide advice on environmental assessments through the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP) process, and on detailed design through their Alternative Financing and Procurement (AFP) and Project Specific Output Specifications (PSOS) processes. Although Metrolinx is a Crown agency exempt from the section 28 conservation authority regulation, Metrolinx works in partnership with TRCA though our Voluntary Project Review (VPR) process to assess issues related to natural heritage, natural hazards, water management and opportunities for community benefit, striving to address the tests of TRCA’s regulation (impacts to the control of flooding, erosion, pollution, conservation of land or dynamic beaches).

Also through service level agreements, TRCA and Metrolinx are making efforts to address climate change by building a strategy for flood exposure identification and mitigation tailored for each of TRCA’s nine watersheds across the Toronto region. Additionally, TRCA provides advice to Metrolinx related to erosion protection given changes to the water regime in these watersheds. For Metrolinx’s Regional Express Rail (RER) program that spans across the Greater Golden Horseshoe, our two agencies are developing a comprehensive natural heritage compensation strategy for the unavoidable losses of natural features. Identifying opportunities for integrating sustainable design, efficient energy use, GHG emission reduction measures, low impact development, and green infrastructure, Metrolinx and TRCA also engage community partners through both the TPAP and AFP processes. TRCA works with Metrolinx to integrate project synergies into designs, and identify community benefit opportunities, such as trails and environmental stewardship.

Overall, TRCA supports the principles, objectives, and actions outlined in the Long-Term Infrastructure Plan. We offer the following comments, arranged by Plan section and subsection, for your consideration, with our key messages being underlined for your reference.

Covering Letter: TRCA wholly agrees with the partnership message from the Minister’s letter.

“Our long-term infrastructure objectives cannot be achieved without the support of our partners. Ontario is committed to working closely and collaboratively with federal and municipal counterparts, private-sector and community partners and First Nations communities to meet the government’s shared infrastructure goals.”

Indeed, TRCA routinely works in partnership with stakeholders in both the public and private sectors, and supports the inclusion of conservation authorities, in addition to those above, as sharing in the government’s commitment to building sustainable infrastructure for the betterment of Ontario’s communities.

1.4 Principles and Objectives for Ontario’s Infrastructure Address the Changing Climate: We applaud the Province’s commitment to designing and building resilient infrastructure assets to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change and support the resilience of surrounding communities. This section cites the reduction of emissions and the use of lower-carbon building materials, and TRCA agrees that these measures are important. However, we submit that achieving resilience also entails siting and aligning infrastructure to avoid natural features and natural hazards, and where they cannot be avoided, to seek opportunities for restoration, compensation and remediation, or at minimum, to pursue naturalized approaches to mitigation.

Further, we suggest that in the Plan’s urgency to create resilient infrastructure, both new and existing, to adapt to the impacts that Ontario experiences, it should be careful not to inadvertently promote “over-engineered solutions” to withstand extreme weather events. These historical solutions, such as hardening and channelizing watercourses for transportation crossings, have resulted in major alterations to the hydrologic cycle, exacerbation of flooding and erosion hazards, and losses in biodiversity. To this end, we recommend that the Plan incorporate direction for infrastructure to avoid natural features and natural hazards, and where they cannot be avoided, to seek opportunities for natural solutions to mitigation, compensation, restoration and remediation. We note that in 1.3 of the Plan, figure 2 illustrates that over half of the Province’s infrastructure portfolio is linear (transit and transportation), which can be a particularly problematic form of construction for attempting to avoid natural areas. Innovative solutions are often required to establish safe and resilient structure without damaging the environment. Conservation authorities have the experience and expertise in negotiating these environments and would be happy to share examples of a variety of infrastructure projects.

Get the best value: We are pleased to see that achieving multiple objectives and community benefits is part of the Plan’s approach to infrastructure investment. Applying a multi-objective lens to infrastructure renewal projects is a critical principle for all levels of government and agencies. It supports not only good value for the investment, but also the achievement of a broader set of environmental, social, cultural and economic objectives that benefit all Ontarians and the institutions that serve them. Engagement of multiple levels of government and partner agencies on a strategic or project level can support this work. Ontario’s conservation authorities and municipalities have watershed plans and other strategic documents that could help inform this approach.

Coordinate among all orders of government: We are supportive of the Plan’s coordinated approach to infrastructure planning, design and delivery. Being a significant holder of natural and built assets (including extensive green infrastructure), conservation authorities can also be part of this coordinated effort.

In particular, TRCA commends Metrolinx for its innovative and proactive partnership with TRCA through service level agreements. TRCA strongly recommends that other provincial agencies, in particular the Ministry of Transportation (MTO), engage with TRCA through their AFP and PSOS process, and commit to the TRCA VPR process. To meet the objectives of the Plan, we believe it is imperative that MTO projects meet the standard set by Metrolinx, whereby projects are assessed for the impact on natural heritage, natural hazards and water management. Other partnership and community benefit opportunities include flood exposure and erosion protection identification, natural heritage compensation, sustainable and low carbon options, trails, and community environmental stewardship.

1.5 The Government’s Vision for Ontario’s Infrastructure

TRCA fully supports the Plan’s vision statement, in particular where it states that Ontario’s infrastructure: “Supports sustainability and resiliency against the impacts of climate change: The government will ensure that infrastructure investments reduce the government’s impact on the environment to support the transition to a low-carbon economy. Infrastructure investment decisions will also be informed by evidence of the impact of greenhouse gases on the changing climate.” TRCA recommends that across all sectors, programs aimed at improving energy efficiency and reducing GHG emissions in existing infrastructure be supported through the Plan, including education, health, transit and transportation. We recommend that the Province emphasize the need to invest, and put policies in place to mandate investment, in the ongoing maintenance and upgrading of existing infrastructure (in addition to the investments in new infrastructure). Mandating investment in the operations, maintenance and efficiency of existing infrastructure will allow for greater gains in energy efficiency and GHG emissions reductions in the short and medium term, and thus are integral to reaching low carbon targets. Further, these investments grow multiple sectors of the economy that can have larger impacts on local and regional employment than do investments in new infrastructure, providing a greater community benefit. Investments in new infrastructure, such as public buildings, impact energy use and climate in the longer term.

2.1 Planning Based on Evidence Considering the Full Cost of Infrastructure: We support the Plan’s emphasis on life-cycle analysis. TRCA, through our own Asset Management Policy, aims to “optimize the total life cycle and the associated costs of assets”. This analysis should include a range of alternatives based on full life-cycle costs and integrated planning when undertaking a project. The aim would be to minimize the total cost of owning and operating the assets while reducing disruptions to natural and constructed systems. Green infrastructure, when it augments traditional infrastructure, is an example of an upfront investment that can reduce long-term costs.

Improving How Projects are Prioritized: This section states that the government is undertaking research to understand best practices in infrastructure planning and will apply these findings to ongoing work. As mentioned, TRCA works with both private and public partners to plan and design infrastructure that conforms to provincial plans and policies, aligned with our own Living City Policies, and would be pleased to meet with the Ministry to discuss this integrated watershed management approach to infrastructure planning.

2.2 Building in the Right Place TRCA supports the Plan’s direction for Ontario to align infrastructure planning with elements of the land use planning framework. This section points to four requirements of the Growth Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement, including supporting protection of the natural heritage system. While we are pleased to see these highlighted, other key requirements of these documents important for resiliency in infrastructure planning, include directing development away from natural hazards and to undertake watershed planning and stormwater management to inform plans for urban expansion, development and infrastructure. For example, 3.2.1.2 of the Growth Plan states that: “Planning for new or expanded infrastructure will occur in an integrated manner, including evaluations of long-range scenario-based land use planning and financial planning, and will be supported by infrastructure master plans, asset management plans, community energy plans, watershed planning, environmental assessments, and other relevant studies where appropriate.”

In accordance with the IJPA, the Plan reminds provincial ministries that they must consider alignment with the land use planning framework, noting that Ontario’s infrastructure assets need to contribute to the communities and the environment. We note that this section of the IJPA applies to all public sector infrastructure providers, which could include provincial or municipal bodies and conservation authorities. However, we respectfully submit that the Plan is MOI’s opportunity to provide directional leadership among public infrastructure providers, given that the Province’s level of effort in its undertakings is often perceived as the level that sets the bar for municipalities’ undertakings.

Coordinating planning: We are supportive of the Plan’s suggestion of a one-dig policy, and would encourage this approach at all levels of government. In addition to avoiding multiple construction periods and disruption to communities, it is also a mechanism for bringing multiple ministries and other levels of government and agencies together. This offers a platform for finding multiple project benefits, including shared government and community benefits. Further to this, in order to minimize impacts on the environment (as aspired to by the Plan) it is important to not only dig at the same time, but also to dig at the “right time”, e.g., if digging near water, MNRF’s fish timing windows should be adhered to.

2.3 Considering Climate Change We are pleased that the Plan recognizes the necessity of integrating climate change mitigation and adaptation considerations in the designing, building, and management of infrastructure in this section and throughout the Plan.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): We support the Plan’s determination to use LCA as a tool for new and retrofitting of infrastructure to reduce environmental impact. Retrofitting of existing infrastructure is especially relevant in the Toronto region because of the scale of redevelopment and intensification taking place within existing built up areas in need of infrastructure renewal. Aging infrastructure in poor condition is prevalent in the heavily urbanized parts of TRCA’s jurisdiction, where exposed, at-risk infrastructure is frequently proposed for maintenance, replacement or expansion under environmental assessments and within TRCA regulated areas. In this regard, the Plan should consider incorporating a requirement for LCA to be built into the EA process, including the MCEA. This would be consistent with the directions found in MOECC’s “Consideration of Climate Change in Environmental Assessment in Ontario” (2017).

Climate change adaptation: We suggest that the Plan more formally acknowledge the utility of green infrastructure solutions in the context of climate change adaptation. Living green infrastructure should be recognized for the cost-effective manner in which it provides multiple climate adaptation co-benefits, notably stormwater management and extreme heat. We are aware of examples of municipalities choosing green infrastructure over grey infrastructure for purely cost-benefit purposes; for example, New York City is using green infrastructure to reduce discharge into the combined sewer system and achieve their 20-year stormwater objectives.

At the same time, we are concerned about the following example provided in this section given that it appears to oversimplify low impact development measures: “…leveraging natural vegetation, such as existing wetlands, to improve stormwater management, can sometimes avoid the need for traditional infrastructure entirely.” While TRCA supports the use of green infrastructure to augment the water management functions of traditional forms of infrastructure, outletting road runoff directly to a wetland, even if it is treated through a stormwater facility, will degrade and significantly affect the ability of that feature to function. Indeed, a protected, robust natural heritage system supports a more natural hydrologic regime that provides a range of benefits, including flood attenuation and filtering water contaminants. In promoting the use of green infrastructure, the Plan should recognize that many factors need to be considered in order to achieve the right balance between protecting natural features and leveraging them for other ecosystem services, i.e., separating clean from contaminated stormwater, gauging the volume, timing, and duration of stormwater inputs and outputs to/from the feature.

Ontario is supporting flood protection in the Port Lands: On page 31, “acres” should be revised to “hectares” in the following sentence: “That’s why the governments are pushing ahead with this critical infrastructure work in the Port Lands that will unlock 240 acres of prime real estate for development, as well as protect some existing neighbourhoods from flooding.” We suggest that other opportunities for flood remediation in urban growth centres need to be highlighted. In TRCA’s jurisdiction alone, there are 42 flood vulnerable areas and 15 Special Policy Areas in need of funding for remediation to reduce natural hazard risk for existing and future communities living and working in these areas.

2.6 Working with Partners Municipal and regional governments: A municipal asset management planning regulation should also include a commitment for municipalities to consider how the project could integrate with other government or community priorities and needs. Based on our own experience, working together results in higher quality projects and co-benefits, but does require additional time commitment to support the upfront planning process, including communication between teams, scoping, partnership development and integrated design. The Province could support municipalities and provide guidance in best practices in this regard.

Federal government: As the Province continues negotiations regarding bilateral agreements with the federal government to finalize the implementation of Ontario’s allocation for the next phase of infrastructure funding, TRCA urges the Province to ensure that living green infrastructure is well-represented in the share of funding. Living green infrastructure advances many of the Province’s existing strategies and initiatives and fits within the definition of an asset included in the latest draft of the Province’s municipal asset management regulation. Dedicated funding will help ensure that this vital infrastructure is a viable option.

3.6 Supporting Community Benefits Supplementary community benefits: In addition to new/improved physical built assets as part of Supplementary Community Benefits, the Plan should also support programming that local communities may need or value. For example, initiatives that build community connections and local resilience, local skills training programs, support for large community events, etc. could be considered.

Community benefits pilot project: We are very supportive of the concept of achieving community benefits through infrastructure investment. With this approach, we anticipate a need for the Province to help proponents coordinate planning and decision-making for the allocation of community benefits. TRCA’s Sustainable Neighbourhoods group, part of the Watershed Strategies Division, is currently working with the City of Vaughan on a screening process for identifying integrated, multi-objective infrastructure renewal projects with community benefits. This may be of interest to the Province, and we would welcome the opportunity to meet to discuss any potential interest in becoming involved in the project. The project may also serve as a pilot to help inform the Community Benefits Framework.

5.2 Managing Congestion and Offering Choice in Transportation How Ontario is building better transportation infrastructure: Trails are an important part of transportation infrastructure and should be recognized as such in this section. Trails, which facilitate active transportation and first-mile last-mile connections, provide additional options to move in many parts of the Province. We would suggest the Plan provide for the inclusion of trails in the definition and classification of provincial assets and inventory. It should also be noted that trails include those associated with active transportation, and as such this type of trail should be included in the definition.

5.7 Managing Resources and the Environment Sustainably Challenges in Ontario’s natural resources sector: In addition to the challenges and mitigation measures described in this section, the Plan should also acknowledge the challenges of planning for and managing infrastructure in the context of natural hazards. In particular, it should emphasize the need to avoid existing hazards and ensure no new hazards are created in the siting and construction of new infrastructure and, where existing infrastructure within hazards is being upgraded or expanded, to ensure that opportunities for the remediation of hazards take place to reduce or eliminate risk.

How Ontario is building better natural resources infrastructure:

•We suggest strengthening the reference to promoting green infrastructure to further emphasize the utility of green infrastructure in the context of climate change adaptation.

•We support “managing natural heritage and protected areas” as a key activity, but recommend emphasizing that this include not just protection but also enhancement of natural features and areas, for example through expanding the natural heritage system and/or putting threatened environmentally significant and natural hazard lands into public ownership. Given that urban expansion is intensifying demands on the natural heritage system, efforts should be taken to expand the system in order to increase its resilience.

•We are pleased that the Province’s commitment to maintaining funding for conservation authorities for essential water and erosion-control infrastructure is mentioned here.

•However, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry’s “Conserving Our Future” document, released as part of the recently completed review of the Conservation Authorities Act, indicates the Province intends to explore options for updating provincial funding levels, including assessing the funding required to support the delivery of existing and new programs and services and identifying opportunities to access new funding envelopes to help finance conservation authority programs and services. We recommend that the Plan acknowledges these intended actions to further support conservation authority programs.

•One of the challenges TRCA faces in our planning and development work is related to Infrastructure Ontario’s surplus land process. In our experience, following an environmental assessment process, saleable surplus lands are typically sold with no pre-planning for sustainable infrastructure or development. We are aware that Waterfront Toronto employs a model whereby lands are pre-planned with sustainability objectives built into them, and then sold to willing developers. Perhaps the Province could consider a similar model or, alternatively, an environmental counterpart to the Social Purpose Real Estate strategy mentioned in the Plan, whereby environmental and sustainability considerations are embedded in government decision-making on surplus properties and infrastructure planning.

5.10 Enhancing Tourism and Sport While Promoting Ontario’s Culture and Heritage How Ontario Is Building Better Culture, Tourism and Sport Infrastructure: In addition to facilitating transportation, trails are also important sport and recreation infrastructure. Indeed, the infrastructure created as a result of the 2015 Pan Am and Parapan American Games, mentioned at the beginning of section 5.10, includes the Pan Am Path, a multi-use trail currently managed by the City of Toronto in collaboration with TRCA, Waterfront Toronto, and the Ministry of Transportation. We suggest that the Plan affirms the Province’s commitment to maintain and enhance trail infrastructure as part of its culture, tourism and sport assets.

Technical Appendix

We find the Technical Appendix highly informative in the discipline of asset management and is appreciated given TRCA’s recent efforts in adopting an Asset Management Policy (November 2017), and in our pending development of an Asset Management Strategy. The Strategy will guide TRCA staff in developing a number of asset management plans for their respective business functions. We also applaud the assertion within the “General Overview of the Infrastructure Planning Cycle” to make Ontario a world leader in infrastructure planning. We note, however, that the bulk of the Appendix is focused on asset management and asset inventory and we submit that infrastructure planning is a much broader endeavour than asset management alone. Therefore, we reiterate our comments that in order to more widely and effectively implement the good directions found in the main body of the Plan, it should further stipulate ways to integrate, not just with the land use planning process, but also with the environmental assessment process.

Again, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on Ontario’s Long-Term Infrastructure Plan 2017. TRCA also commented on the government’s other infrastructure planning initiatives referenced in the Plan, such as the Metrolinx draft Transportation Master Plan (November 2017) and MTO’s Greater Golden Horseshoe Transportation Plan draft goals and objectives (December 2017). Through Conservation Ontario, TRCA also provided comments to the EBR on the proposed municipal asset management regulation under the IJPA (July 2017).

Should you have any questions, or would like to discuss any of the above comments or correspondence, please contact Mary-Ann Burns at extension 5763, or the undersigned at extension 5217.

Yours truly,

W. Beth Williston, MCIP, RPP Associate Director, Environmental Assessment Planning Planning and Development

Cc: John Mackenzie, Chief Executive Officer, TRCA Carolyn Woodland, Senior Director, Planning, Greenspace and Communications, TRCA Mary-Ann Burns, Senior Planner, Policy, TRCA Kim Gavine, General Manager, Conservation Ontario

[Original Comment ID: 212407]