Sosc3710Ppp  Downsview test
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Sosc3710Ppp Downsview test






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Sosc3710Ppp  Downsview test Sosc3710Ppp Downsview test Presentation Transcript

    • Servicing and Stormwater
    • Policy Objective – Servicing and Stormwater
      • Places to Grow Growth Plan
      • Provincial Policy Statement
      • City of Toronto Official Plan
      • Servicing and Stormwater Management Master Plan
      • Wet Weather Flow Master Plan
    • Servicing and Stormwater – Assessment:
      • Little existing servicing infrastructure
      • Majority of servicing infrastructure privately owned and opperated
      • Private servicing not of suitable capacity and location for future developments.
    • Servicing and Stormwater – Resolution:
      • Internal private networks replaced by public networks in municipal right-of-ways.
      • New public systems
      • External networks improved to support future development
    • Wet Weather Flow Master Plan Goals:
      • Water Balance – erosion control, groundwater recharge, downstream habitat protection
      • Water Quality – for protection of water resources
      • Water Quantity – peak flow control, flood management, runoff control
    • Recommended Stormwater collection system
    • Recommended Wastewater Collection System
    • Servicing and Stormwater System Cost Analysis Item Cost Water System $5,110,000 Wastewater System $10,630,000 Stormwater Trunk Sewer $5,160,000 Total $20,900,000
    • Servicing and Stormwater - Strengths RESIDENTS *Improved water and sewer services *Plan forward thinking -future needs EMPLOYMENT *Existing and future business located in the north- east side will benefit. *Networks maintained by the city. DEVELOPERS *Upgrade done before development, no disruption after project constructed. Less future cost.
    • Servicing and Stormwater - Weaknesses RESIDENTS *Traffic jams. *Unpleasant streetscape. *Possible difficulty in mobility for people with disabilities. EMPLOYMENT *businesses may suffer losses during construction. *Loss of control. DEVELOPERS *construction has to be held off until new infrastructure in place.
    • Servicing and Stormwater - Opportunities RESIDENTS *greater variety of water usage ex. swimming pools, community farming, green houses etc. EMPLOYMENT *improved value of business. *greater business variety. DEVELOPERS *possibility to develop new areas = profit
    • Servicing and Stormwater – Threats RESIDENTS * new infrastructure, may result in higher taxes. EMPLOYMENT * new environmental/ sustainable regulations - higher operating costs? *new taxes/charges. *new business = more competition DEVELOPERS *higher land development charges. *complications political / bureaucratic reasons.
    • Servicing and Stormwater – Conclusion The plan provides for the develpoment of public water, sanitary and stormwater sewer systems in order to support further growth and development within the plan.
    • Heritage and Archaeology
    • Plan Objective – Heritage and Archaeology
      • Heritage Building Conservation Study
      • - Aviation and Military History
      • Plan Identifies Cultural and Natural features
      • Consultation and Communication with the Federal Heritage Building Review Office
    • Heritage and Archaeology – Strengths RESIDENTS *Benefits from cultural and natural heritage, open space, beautification. *Healthier lifestyle. EMPLOYMENT *Sustainable work environment . DEVELOPERS *Design in natural setting = beautification without spending $$$. *Marketing potential
    • Heritage and Archaeology - Weaknesses RESIDENTS *Tax $$$ used somewhere else. *William Baker neighbourhood not recognized. *Natural heritage = small area & recreated. *Participation? EMPLOYMENT *May constrict allowable uses DEVELOPERS *Heritage buildings not attractive. *Constricts development. *Archeological assessment $$$.
    • Heritage and Archaeology – Opportunity RESIDENTS *Reuse and readapt. *Involved in preservation of heritage EMPLOYMENT *Historical businesses: museums, galleries *Film industry DEVELOPERS *Market sustainable design and heritage preservation. *Redevelop heritage buildings.
    • Heritage and Archaeology – Threats RESIDENTS *Large and obstructive buildings. *Upkeep = tax $$$ spent EMPLOYMENT *Additional taxes? *Noise or environmental controls implemented DEVELOPERS *Lower profits / Higher risks. *Archeological findings.
    • Conclusion– Heritage and Archaeology
      • Plan identifies Heritage sites
      • It may provide costly and inefficient to maintain some of the buildings
      • Natural Heritage protected but small area.
      • Communication and Cooperation with the FHBRO may prove difficult