1 Downtown Etobicoke Creek Revitalization Studies

Downtown Etobicoke Creek Revitalization Studies

May 29th, 2013

Feasibility Studies Overview

Presentation to Committee of Council

2 Downtown Etobicoke Creek Revitalization Studies

Presentation outline

1. Introductions, background (A. Taranu, COB)

2. Urban Design and Land Use study (D. Leinster, TPP)

3. Flood Mitigation Measures: Hydrology and Engineering Study

(R. Schekenberger, AMEC)

4. Conclusions, next steps (A. Taranu)

3 Downtown Etobicoke Creek Revitalization Studies

Background

• Special Policy Area established in the

1980s

• Studies in the 1990s

• Rosalea Park/Etobicoke Creek

established as a special character area

with key role in the 2005 Downtown

Urban Design Vision; riverwalk concept

developed

• Rosalea Park master planning exercise

in 2009

• UD Vision revisited in 2010

• Significant Land use/Urban design

concepts in the SPA Policy work (2010

to present)

4 Downtown Etobicoke Creek Revitalization Studies

Background

• Joint Team City/TRCA established in 2011

• Technical Team with monthly coordination

meetings

• Initial focus on policy work, governance,

coordination

• Terms of Reference for Feasibility Studies

coordinated

• TRCA hired consultant for hydrology and

engineering work (AMEC) Fall 2012

• City hired consultant for urban design and land

use study in February 2013

• April 3rd Committee of Council Report

• Coordinated work with joint schedule and

meetings

5 Downtown Etobicoke Creek Revitalization Studies

Conclusions/Next steps

• Work is of high importance and complexity • The team believes that solutions to solve the problem

from flood and redevelopment perspective are possible but more detailed work is needed

• Based on SMT direction staff will finalize the Report for May 29th Committee of Council and the team will finalize the materials and presentation

• Materials will be prepared for the Public Information Session scheduled for June 12th

• Work plan includes: - detailed work and level of magnitude estimates in the Summer - finalization of the concepts in August, report to Council and 2nd Public Session in September - final report with potential budget request late Fall

Project Goal:

To identify options to reduce and/or eliminate

flooding during the Regional Storm (Regulatory).

Etobicoke Creek flows

Spill into historic valley

Backwater from downstream

Must not create more flood risks upstream or downstream

!

!

!

Existing Flood Risk & Mitigation Options:

EXISTING SPA BOUNDARY

Alternative ‘A’: Conveyance Improvements Alternative ‘B’: Flood Control Alternative ‘C’: Diversions Alternative ‘D’: Floodproofing Alternative ‘E’: Land Acquisition Combinations of the above

! mitigation must not increase flood impacts elsewhere

Alternative ‘A’: Conveyance Improvements Alternative ‘B’: Flood Control Alternative ‘C’: Diversion Alternative ‘D’: Floodproofing Alternative ‘E’: Land Acquisition Combinations of the above

Engineering Study:

Hydraulic Impacts: • Can flood levels in SPA be eliminated

or reduced? • Can the frequency of flooding in SPA

be reduced (e.g., Regional Storm) • Are there any upstream or

downstream impacts to risk? Policy Impacts: • Will the SPA policy still apply?

(permanent vs. non-permanent flood protection)

• If it does still apply, can floodproofing requirements be reduced?

3-4 Mitigation Options

Evaluate Options in More Detail: • Economic Impacts /

Opportunities • Social Impacts /

Opportunities • Environmental Impacts /

Opportunities Engage all stakeholders including public

Feasibility Study EA

Preliminary Alternatives:

1. Church Street Berm

3. Flood Protection Landform

4. Bridge Improvements

5. Channel Deepening

7. Valley Re-Shaping

6. Channel Widening 2. Rosalea Park Berm

Wet Side Crest Dry Side

Key

5-15 % slope 1.5-2.5 % Slope

Existing Ground

River

Water overtopping structure

Normal Water Level

Normal Water Level

Flood Protection Landform: Water spreads out and flows away

Flood Protection Berm: Water may scour away dry side if overtopped

River

Water overtopping structure

>15 % slopes

Key Existing Ground

Risk of Scour

The following restrictions are required related to intrusions into, through or under the FPL to ensure permanency of flood protection: No servicing or utilities are permitted within the FPL

Services crossing the FPL must do so below the structure and must be water tight

Any services located in additional fill above the FPL must be designed to ensure that no impact to FPL will occur in the event of a breach.

Any intrusions into the FPL must follow guidelines established ( see WDL FPL Operations and Maintenance Manual)

Features such as roads or park areas may reside upon FPL including additional soils required to facilitate these uses upon approval by TRCA

Flood Protection Landform

Key Messages:

• Preliminary results show that it is possible to eliminate the Regional Storm (Regulatory) flooding in Downtown with a Flood Protection Landform (FPL)

• Flood Protection Landform (FPL) will have some restrictions as to what can be built on, in or around it

• Upstream flooding impacts must be mitigated prior to implementation and associated cost included in the project

• It is likely that a combination of alternatives would be required to both manage the existing flooding and mitigate upstream flooding impacts

• Next Steps:

• TRCA & AMEC will further develop the hydrology & hydraulics to support the flood risk management approach and develop high-level cost estimates which will contribute to the feasibility assessment to be completed by the joint City/TRCA team

• Complete an Environmental Assessment to select the preferred alternative

Downtown Etobicoke Creek

Revitalization Study: Urban Design & Land Use

Study

May 29, 2013

2

Principles

Flood Mitigation Options

Framework Plan - Applied Design Principles

Concept Plans

Downtown Etobicoke Creek Revitalization Study: Urban Design & Land Use Study

2

3

4

5

Questions & Clarifications6

Background Summary & Current Condition Analysis1

3

1. Built Form / Streets

2. Public Realm / Rosalea Park

3. Trail / Creek / Connectivity

Balance of development goals with flood mitigation measures for:

Background Summary1

4

2 Principles

The City Faces the River The City Rediscovers the River

5

2 Principles

1. Built Form

1.1 redevelopment sites that face the river and rediscover the river are huge opportunity

1.2 redevelopment in relation to the river provides a driver of change for Downtown

1.3 frames the public realm / park - redefines built form and open space relationship

1.4 urban character with activated street edges - patios, retail, pedestrian realm etc.

1.5 mix of built form including tower with podium base, low rise, mid rise, integration of heritage buildings

1.6 sustainable building including green roofs, integrated natural systems

6

2 Principles

2. Rosalea Park Special Character Area

2.1. major asset with redevelopment of entire Downtown core based on main attraction of re- discovered river

2.2 new special character area with activated residential & commercial built edge facing river

2.3 urban open space with flexible programming options (not single recreational use)

2.4 program linked to HACE initiative and broader Downtown revitalization

2.5 flood mitigation measures as infrastructure and public realm

2.6 enhance connectivity to Downtown and trail system

2.7 completes Downtown open space system

2.8 enhance social sustainability (gathering spaces, events) inclusive of all users, ages, seasons

7

2 Principles

3. Trails and Creek Connectivity

31. reconnect the Downtown to the River

3.2 access to the river at various entry points and at various elevations

3.3 enhance urban ecology along river and trails (habitat planting, urban canopy, permeability)

3.4 rediscover and celebrate the river - river revitalization has a public education function to

connect citizens to participate in watershed health and link to programs such as SNAP

3.5 enhance public health and connecitivity with continuous, accessible trail system

8

2 Principles

4. Public Realm - Streets - Development

4.1. enhance sustainability, public health and ecology

4.2 create pedestrian-priority streets and complete streets

4.3 improve multi-modal access

4.4 character to be urban with connection to nature, balance new with heritage

4.5 create variety of pedestrian experiences along the river - street edge, urban squares and park

4.6 integrate streets and parks to create places for people

9

Civic Nodes, Pedestrian Links and Tracing the Former River

Framework Plan - Applied Design Principles4

Civic NodesPrimary Pedestrian LinkagesCivic BuildingsHeritage BuildingsFloodplain

DugganPark

RosaleaPark

Central Public School

CentennialPark

Rose Theatre

GageParkFair

Grounds

Castle Park&

Train Station Square

Brampton Cemetery

10

Pedestrian Proximity from the Mobility Hub & Four Corners

10 minute walk

10 m

inute walk

5 minute walk

5 m

in

ute walk

11

Potential Development Areas

• area as major attraction• reconnect to natural feature of river• special character area / and business

attractions• linked to mobility hub

12

Concept Plan5

• exploratory concept plan for discussion• internal to Council, stakeholders• to be finalized Fall 2013

13

Rosalea Park

Development Option for Rosalea Park Concept - with Tennis Court Development Option for Rosalea Park Concept - without Tennis Court

14

Don River Park precedent

15

Ljubljana, Slovenia precedent

16

Park Feature Precedents

17

South Channel Enhancement

18

Ljubljana, Slovenia Guadalupe River Park, San Jose, CA

19

Guadalupe River Park, San Jose

20

Calgary Riverwalk, Bow River Allegheny River Walk, Pittsburgh

21

Calgary Riverwalk, Bow River

22

Built Form Framing the Public Realm - Preliminary Options

Option 2 Relocated Tennis Club Option 3 Relocated Tennis ClubOption 1 Framing the Tennis Club

Built form frames new public realm along rediscovered river

23Built form framing public realm precedents

24Water features in public realm precedents

25

Existing Etobicoke Creek

26

Revitalized Etobicoke Creek