Aerial view of the Port Lands 2008
Photo credit: Waterfront Toronto

The PLFP project outcomes broadly target climate change, economic, accessibility and inclusiveness objectives. These are in line with INFC’s mandate, particularly the focus on community resilience, and align with a current and documented need for climate-resilient infrastructure and flood protection able to respond to the increase of natural disasters due to climate change and other factors such as human interventions in natural habitats. To achieve these outcomes, the project includes brownfields remediation and redevelopment.

More specifically, the PLFP project is designed to address the need to protect 240 hectares of urban land that have historically been at risk of flooding. This includes extensive flooding under the Regulatory Flood^Footnote1, due to heavy urbanization (over 80%) and development of the area prior to stormwater management control requirements. The project also intends to address significant human impacts on the Don River because of marsh/pond filling, removal of vegetation, rerouting of streams, and destruction of natural habitats.

The project is well positioned under the TWRI. As part of the broader initiative, the PLFP project is expected to result in land that is usable, sanitary and safe, allowing for public infrastructure and green spaces that achieve climate change objectives.

While it is too early to assess the achievement of long-term outcomes, some data for immediate and intermediate outcomes was available. Flood protection, brownfield remediation and river naturalization work is in progress and partially completed. Work on green infrastructure and green and public spaces is pending and is expected to be completed by the end of the project. As of December 31, 2020, the following results had been achieved: ^Footnote2

Some immediate and intermediate outcome indicators could not be assessed due to the following challenges:

Considerations for performance measurement

• The indicators chosen to measure project outcomes are inconsistent across program documents, causing some difficulties in matching reported results to the predefined outcomes in the CA. These internal discrepancies were noted by the CIP Branch who recently undertook to review and standardize these in consultation with INFC ’s Policy and Results Branch (PRB).
• Despite detailed and regular reporting, much of the progress data does not align with the outcome indicators from the CA. The CA did not require progress against outcomes measures to be reported prior to completion of the project and several project indicators can only be fully measured upon project completion, which makes measuring progress of the PLFP project challenging. However, Waterfront Toronto was able to provide and validate data on some of the performance measures in the CA upon request.

Examples of PLFP project achievements:

Designing and installing new bridges:

Cherry Street North bridge on its way
Photo credit: Waterfront Toronto

Text description of image2

The photograph depicts the Cherry Street North bridge on a barge while it travels toward Toronto from Nova Scotia in November 2020. The photograph is credited to Waterfront Toronto.

The design of the Cherry Street North, Cherry Street South and Commissioners Street bridges that will connect Villiers Island to the mainland was completed by the end of 2020. The first new bridge, the Cherry Street North bridge, traveled over 1,200 km on the Atlantic Ocean and St. Lawrence Seaway to get to Toronto from Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, arriving in November 2020. The design and engineering of the Port Lands bridges were recognized with a Special Jury Award for Catalytic Infrastructure at the 2019 Toronto Urban Design Awards.

An aquatic bird in the Port Lands area
Photo credit: Waterfront Toronto/Vid Ingelvics/Ryan Walker

Digging in the Port Lands
Photo Credit: Waterfront Toronto/Vid Ingelvics/Ryan Walker

Text description of image3

The first photograph shows an aquatic bird standing on rocks in the Port Lands area.

The second photograph shows a digger excavating a channel in the Port Lands area. Both photographs are credited to Waterfront Toronto, Vid Ingelvics and Ryan Walker.

Forming new collaborations for environmental and archeological monitoring:

In collaboration with the MCFN, Waterfront Toronto has been carefully protecting and monitoring ecosystems throughout the project to minimize the effects of lake filling and other work on wildlife. As well, it is working closely with the MCFN and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to identify, recover and protect any artifacts uncovered during excavation work. This collaboration has been solidified in an MOU signed in 2020.

Some challenges and inefficiencies posed risks to the project in terms of cost, schedule and scope, but Waterfront Toronto successfully navigated and resolved these unanticipated issues.

Cost and schedule uncertainties

In March 2020, the COVID-19 global pandemic created a climate of uncertainty with the potential to severely impact the PLFP project’s schedule and budget. Waterfront Toronto successfully managed this unexpected challenge and associated negative impacts by mobilizing and responding quickly to new and evolving circumstances. For example, in response to the shutdown of nonessential workplaces in Ontario in April 2020, Waterfront Toronto and EllisDon (construction manager) established the site as an essential construction workplace, thus ensuring that on-site work continued. Non-site project staff were able to work from home during this time. As well, when the city of Toronto stopped collecting permit applications temporarily in the spring of 2020, Waterfront Toronto worked successfully with the City of Toronto’s Waterfront Secretariat to continue its work. Lastly, as public engagement, public meetings and on-site archeological monitoring were suspended in the spring of 2020, Waterfront Toronto implemented interim measures and alternatives to maintain these activities. For example, smaller public meetings were held on Microsoft Teams and digital photos and video were used to record and share work for field liaison representatives from the MCFN to review for monitoring purposes. Sound mitigation strategies and regular and open communication between project partners on unanticipated issues as they arise have helped lessen cost and schedule uncertainties like the ones discussed here.

Potential implications

The rising costs due to COVID-19, as well as additional work and unexpected costs resulting from utilities relocation issues, have placed some added strain on the remaining contingency. As noted, communication is strong for the project, ensuring that all project partners are aware of this situation and able to monitor it closely.

The four-party project delivery mechanism supports the delivery and implementation of the PLFP project, a complex infrastructure project with multiple partners, in a transparent, well-coordinated and effective manner.

While complex, the four-party governance structure is well suited to the PLFP project and aligns with best practices for multi-partner projects such as working within a formal agreement with the help of a facilitating agency; maintaining clear roles, responsibilities and expectations; and supporting regular communication through committees and other forums. All four parties agree that the governance structure is appropriate and efficient given the requirements of the project. The governance structure supports continuous and direct communication among the partners, as well as facilitating transparency of information and decision-making. For example, the ESC meets monthly and may identify issues to the IGSC as necessary. Interviews confirmed that documentation such as the CA and Terms and Conditions outline and define expectations, roles and responsibilities for the project, thus ensuring that these are clear and being implemented as planned.

There are some challenges internal to INFC with respect to the nested nature of the PLFP project within the larger Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Initiative.

At times, there is some complexity and lack of clarity concerning internal responsibilities and committee relationships for the project. Indeed, the management of the PLFP project and the management of Waterfront Toronto are distinct yet related within INFC. Because the PLFP project – a CIP responsibility – is part of the broader TWRI that Waterfront Toronto – an IPI responsibility – oversees, there is some perceived overlap in responsibilities towards project management and project queries that involve Waterfront Toronto. As well, while the roles and responsibilities of the IGSC and the OC are defined in their respective governance documents, some interviewees expressed that the hierarchy and accountability relationships between these committees could be clearer. However, interviewees agreed overall that regular and open communication between CIP and IPI on these matters helps shed light on these situations. As well, these internal considerations did not have a visible impact on external partners.

GBA+ Considerations in Project Implementation

While project construction phases often lead to traditionally gendered employment opportunities (i.e., most construction positions are often filled by men), the PLFP project has resulted in direct positive employment impacts for women in this sector through targeted hiring by Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates (MVVA), the lead landscape architect and designer for the project in 2020.

As well, Waterfront Toronto’s Employment Initiative (TWRI) and the MOU with the MCFN have also enabled employment and training opportunities for unemployed and underemployed individuals such as new immigrants, youth, and Indigenous people, thus supporting a more diverse workforce. The TWRI promotes employment opportunities at Waterfront Toronto, as well as connects unemployed and underemployed individuals to employment and training opportunities on projects like the PLFP. The MOU with the MCFN aims to create opportunities for participation in economic and commercial initiatives resulting from the PLFP and other waterfront projects. It also recognizes the need to offset costs related to MCFN’s meaningful participation in activities like environmental monitoring or working groups.

Indigenous Engagement

Overall, engagement with Indigenous communities and representatives for the PLFP project has been well received and demonstrates potential best practices for other projects. Waterfront Toronto has engaged with several Indigenous communities and organizations by providing regular updates and information since the start of the PLFP project, in alignment with the duty to consult delegated by the province of Ontario. In response to a 2018 Crown directive to seek a higher level of engagement with the MCFN as treaty holders for the project area, Waterfront Toronto signed a MOU in 2020. This MOU leverages best practices for Indigenous engagement and recommends establishing collaborative relationships. The MOU formalizes Waterfront Toronto’s relationship with the MCFN, outlining commitments to an Indigenous presence and an ongoing relationship with MCFN, as well as to employment opportunities, economic development and the continued celebration of Indigenous history and culture in the area through the PLFP and other waterfront projects.

Waterfront Toronto’s approach to Indigenous engagement emerges as exemplary because of its inclusive, holistic, open, respectful and knowledgeable stance towards Indigenous ways. Waterfront Toronto has actively incorporated Indigenous cultural frameworks and knowledge by, for example, working from the four directions, forming online sharing circles during COVID-19 and taking the time needed to engage properly and fully with Indigenous peoples and organizations. Indigenous project partners have received Waterfront Toronto’s efforts positively.

The ongoing relationship with MCFN has directly resulted in environmental and wildlife monitoring in the construction area and fish habitats, as well as archeological monitoring of the site during excavation. More recently, engagement has also involved design and creative components for the project. This has included discussions on the inclusion of cultural identifiers such as clan-based family structure identifiers, references to different Indigenous languages, the selection and landscaping of indigenous plants in habitat restoration areas, Indigenous involvement in calls for proposals and the selection of Indigenous artists for design elements.

Finally, future plans for development in the area include open spaces on Villiers Island that are expected to be inclusive and inviting for Indigenous peoples. These spaces will form an open, public ceremonial area by the water for various uses and ways to reconnect to the land and water.

Public Consultations and Engagement

Waterfront Toronto continued to build upon previous consultations that began in 2005 during the environmental assessment phase of the project. Over an 11-year span, Waterfront Toronto engaged with over 150,000 people by using a variety of forums and media such as detailed presentations, displays, in-person and virtual meetings, and stakeholder advisory and landowner and user committees. This broad public engagement helped reach diverse audiences and, from 5,300 initial comments, helped identify 183 consensus comments on public priorities such as affordable and accessible activities and housing, green space, and inclusive and accessible transit. The input from this public engagement serves as a key component of Waterfront Toronto’s design process and plans of public realms, particularly parks.

Having mostly reached middle-aged, higher income and white audiences in its initial public consultations, Waterfront Toronto held additional focus groups and workshops in 2019 with underrepresented groups such as youth, seniors and users outside downtown and east Toronto. These targeted consultations with underrepresented groups helped to further focus programming and design choices on needs such as park spaces for all ages, spaces and opportunities for socializing, accessible uses and public transportation. This reflects best practices for public engagement that seek to overcome systemic inequities by considering diverse representation and the existence of potential barriers to broader participation within a given community.

Waterfront Toronto continues to engage in public engagement and awareness through social media, newsletters, media releases and other platforms.

Future Considerations for Inclusive and Accessible Public Spaces

A theme of public access and inclusivity runs through the programming and design of future plans for development in newly remediated lands and developable lands created through the PLFP project. This project creates the foundation for future land development plans that aim to incorporate accessible and inclusive design and delivery. Plans are outlined in the Port Lands Planning Framework and the Villiers Island Precinct Plan and include mixed-use complete community with affordable housing, sustainable building and design, transit that connects the area to the rest of the city, and specialized playground equipment.

These plans align with documented strategies to make spaces more inclusive by diversifying their uses and research that shows that socially mixed neighbourhoods strengthen local economies and increase social cohesion. Future plans for the Toronto waterfront meet and may even surpass provincial Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) requirements. These plans outline expectations for diverse and accessible experiences, public areas, and parks that reflect best practices for accessibility, such as considering the physical aspects and materials of parks and accessible transportation to public and green spaces.

However, these plans are out of scope of the current project and there are no requirements in place to ensure that the design and development is implemented as intended. Given the documentation for PLFP has a strong emphasis on equitable and inclusive spaces in future development, and INFC is responsible for affordable housing initiatives, it would be in the Department’s interest to establish a mechanism to ensure that its support for creating developable space results in the desired outcomes beyond the completion of PLFP Phase 2.