Approval Process for the Siting
of Waterfront Windmills
The Works Committee:
(A)recommends the adoption of the report dated September 23, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and
Emergency Services, subject to:
(i)amending Recommendation No. (1) by deleting the word "waterfront" and adding thereto the words "for a
maximum of three windmills";
(ii)striking out Recommendation No. (2); and
(iii)adding to Recommendation No. (3) the words "and Toronto Hydro" after "Toronto Renewable Energy
Co-operative (TREC)";
so that such Recommendations read as follows:
"(1)That Council support, in principle, the potential use of City owned lands or lands leased by the City as sites
for windmills (wind turbines) so that City owned or leased sites may be considered in the comparison of potential
sites for a windmill under the Provincial Environmental Assessment process, for a maximum of three windmills;
(2)that the Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative (TREC) and Toronto Hydro, be requested to provide a
proposed environmental assessment Terms of Reference including public consultation procedures, in accordance
with the requirements of the Provincial Environmental Assessment Act, for approval by City Council prior to
proceeding within the environmental assessment study;
(3)that City staff be requested to report further in the event that City owned or leased lands are identified as
preferred site locations through the environmental assessment process, and to clarify what, if any, additional
approvals, leasing agreements, or zoning amendments would be required, and how best obtained, at that time;
(4)that Toronto Hydro and TREC be requested to take into account, as part of the environmental assessment, the
comments and recommendations of City Council with respect to this matter;
(5)that this report be referred to the Economic Development and Parks Committee and each of the Community
Councils for information; and
(6)that TREC and Toronto Hydro be advised that the City reserves the right to accept or reject the use of any
City owned or leased lands for a windmill, irrespective of any environmental assessment process"; and
(B)further recommends that:
(1)neighbourhood consultation committees be established for communities that are affected to assist in the site
selection process, the terms of reference for such environmental assessment processes as may be required, and such
environmental assessment processes themselves;
(2)Toronto Hydro and TREC be requested to submit Terms of Reference for the formation of a public evaluation
committee that would provide ongoing input and commentary on this demonstration project;
(3)this report be referred to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority for ongoing comment;
(4)Toronto Hydro, in consultation with the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, be requested to
report back to the Committee within three months, on potential sites throughout the City of Toronto where
windmills can be located, with specific attention to the former stockyards and rail corridors, brown field sites,
Hydro corridors and other potentially suitable sites;
(5)the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to report to the Works Committee on a
public consultation process that could be undertaken in the evaluation of such potential sites;
(6)the question of not siting the windmills on lands zoned G, GR or GM, be referred to the Commissioner of
Works and Emergency Services for a report back to the Committee when dealing with the specific siting;
(7)notwithstanding Recommendation No. (6), TREC, in consultation with Works and Emergency Services
Department staff, be requested to examine the following locations and report back to the Committee on these sites
as part of the site selection process:
-43 Junction Road;
-south embankment of Earlscourt Park;
-115 Wiltshire Boulevard and northern property;
-640 Lansdowne Avenue;
-Wychwood yards on Christie Street; and
-Union Street north of Turnberry;
(8)the City Solicitor be requested to submit a report to the Committee on the bonusing aspects of allowing the
production of a saleable commodity on City-owned property; and
(9)the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to submit a report to the Committee on
noise levels produced by commonly used wind turbines.
The Works Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the Commissioner of Works and
Emergency Services to submit a report directly to Council for its meeting on October 26, 27 and 28, 1999, on who the
proponent for the windmill project will be, i.e., Toronto Hydro, TREC or the City of Toronto Works and Emergency
Services Department, and to provide further information on TREC, including the membership of the Board of Directors,
whether it is incorporated, its relationship with Toronto Hydro, and whether there is a legal agreement between them.
The Works Committee submits the following report (September 23, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and
Emergency Services:
Purpose:
The purpose of this report is to seek Council's support in principle for the siting of waterfront electricity generating
windmills (wind turbines) along the Toronto waterfront in areas that appear to best meet the selection criteria and that may
be sited on City owned or leased lands, subject to the proponent's satisfactory completion of required environmental
assessments including public consultation, and to clarify the approval process required to locate windmills on the Toronto
waterfront.
Source of Funds:
There is no direct financial implication to the City associated with this report.
Recommendations:
(1)That Council support, in principle, the potential use of City owned lands or lands leased by the City as sites for
waterfront windmills (wind turbines) so that City owned or leased sites may be considered in the comparison of potential
sites for a windmill under the Provincial Environmental Assessment process;
(2)that the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority be requested to support, in principle, the use of its lands that are
leased to the City as potential sites for waterfront windmills so that these sites may be considered in the comparison of
potential sites for a windmill under the Provincial Environmental Assessment process;
(3)that the Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative (TREC), be requested to provide a proposed environmental
assessment Terms of Reference including public consultation procedures, in accordance with the requirements of the
Provincial Environmental Assessment Act, for approval by City Council prior to proceeding within the environmental
assessment study;
(4)that City staff be requested to report further in the event that City owned or leased lands are identified as preferred site
locations through the environmental assessment process, and to clarify what, if any, additional approvals, leasing
agreements, or zoning amendments would be required, and how best obtained, at that time;
(5)that Toronto Hydro and TREC be requested to take into account, as part of the environmental assessment, the
comments and recommendations of City Council with respect to this matter;
(6)that this report be referred to the Economic Development and Parks Committee and each of the Community Councils
for information; and
(7)that TREC and Toronto Hydro be advised that the City reserves the right to accept or reject the use of any City owned
or leased lands for a windmill, irrespective of any environmental assessment process.
Report Request:
The Works Committee on July 14, 1999, had before it a communication (July 8, 1999) from Councillor Jack Layton,
Vice-Chair, Toronto Hydro Board, recommending that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services report to the
Works Committee in September 1999 on the siting of two wind turbines along the Toronto Waterfront (a.k.a. waterfront
windmills). The Committee also received a communication (July 21, 1999) from Councillor Irene Jones
(Lakeshore-Queensway) listing concerns of constituents and requesting that they be addressed in the report. Councillor Bill
Saundercook, Chair, Works Committee, agreed in a communication (July 22, 1999) to Councillor Irene Jones that her
constituents' issues should be taken into account in the staff report. Subsequently, TREC wrote to Councillor Saundercook
(August 10, 1999) requesting that the report be forwarded to the October meeting of the Works Committee as a deputation
item.
Specifically, the request was to identify the approval process required to locate two wind turbines (windmills) on the
Toronto waterfront, including an outline of the process needed to obtain City and other agency approvals (including
environmental assessment), the technical viability and environmental expectations to be satisfied, other environmental
impacts and viability concerns, the public consultation and communication process to be followed and other legal and
financial aspects including potential leasing arrangements.
This report addresses the original request and the supplementary request but deliberately does not fully address all issues in
order to avoid prejudicing the appropriate environmental and planning approval processes, both of which require
community consultation and input.
However, the report does indicate the criteria used to identify and select potential sites; the sites that appear to meet the
selection criteria; the sites that meet the selection criteria and that are also City owned or leased; and the various site
dependent approval processes required to permit the construction and operation of the waterfront windmills (wind
turbines).
The report has been prepared in consultation with Toronto Hydro and Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative.
Comments:
The City's Perspective:
City Council has adopted a commitment to achieve a reduction of 20 percent in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from all
sources by the year 2005 (Clause embodied in Report No. 26 of The Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee, as adopted
by Council, December 16 and 17, 1999).
Locating windmills, as along the Toronto waterfront, is clearly supportive of this policy, since the use of wind for electrical
generation reduces the need to burn fossil fuels and hence would contribute to the achievement of the City's 20 percent
CO2 emission reduction goal. The recommendations contained in this report are directed towards a process that will result
in the implementation of a windmill project. However, the recommendations contained in this report do not pre-determine
the site to be selected, nor do they resolve the apparent social conflicts over cluster area selection or conflicts with other
environmental directions, such as use of public parkland areas. These questions will be addressed and resolved as part of an
environmental assessment process complete with public consultation, and will be subject to subsequent Council review,
including potential further public input if City lands are selected for the project and land use regulation amendments are
required.
City Council has also adopted Report No. 26 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee at its meeting of December
16 and 17, 1998, which included adopted recommendations for staff to report back on how to further "¼ facilitate the
expeditious development of the ¼. TREC wind turbine and similar renewable energy projects as part of the City's overall
sustainable energy strategy".
The Proponents:
The waterfront windmills project is a joint venture partnership of Toronto Hydro (through Toronto Hydro Energy Services
Inc.) and Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative, TREC (through Toronto Renewable Energy Windpower Co-op,
TREC-WPC).
TREC was founded in 1997 by members of the North Toronto Green Community, a neighbourhood-based environmental
group. The Co-operative was launched with grants from the Toronto Atmospheric Fund, a statutory agency of the City of
Toronto whose mandate is to fund projects to help Toronto meet its commitment to lower carbon dioxide emissions.
Toronto Hydro was incorporated in May 1999. It has supported several local community-based green energy programs, and
is committed to work with the City of Toronto to meet the 1990 United Nations Summit objective of reducing carbon
dioxide emissions by 20 percent by 2005.
Proposal Concept:
Modern windmills are more technically called wind turbines (wheel driven by air flow) or a wind driven generator because
they are used to generate electricity rather than mill grain. However, in more common parlance, the modern wind driven
turbine is still referred to as a windmill, and that common use is continued here.
Modern windmills differ in appearance and purpose from their predecessors. The proposed waterfront windmills will
consist of a white painted, hollow tubular supporting tower structure which is approximately 4 metres in diameter at its
base, tapering to less at the top, and between 55 and 65 metres high (depending on specific local wind regime requirement).
Mounted to the tower is a three-thin-bladed impeller (a reverse propeller) made of white fiberglass laminate with each
blade being approximately 25 metres long (23.5 or 26 metres). The tower and blade (at blade zenith) together have an
approximate maximum height of between 80 and 90 metres.
The proponents propose to construct two wind turbines each with a rated output between 660KW and 1MW. Within the
anticipated wind regime of the Toronto waterfront, these will be sufficient to generate 2800 MWh (megawatt-hours) of
electricity annually. This is sufficient to provide the electricity requirements of 500 to 600 households in Toronto. The
"green electricity" obtained (i.e., non-fuel combusting or CO2 releasing) from these turbines is equivalent to the benefit
obtained by 400,000 medium sized trees sequestering carbon dioxide. For comparison, replacement of the power generated
by the Lakeview Generating Station would require in the order of 1000 wind turbines.
The wind turbine generates electricity that can be added to the electricity grid. The recent restructuring of Ontario Hydro
included generic permissions to allow local power utilities to generate power and provide it to the grid. This recent change
provided TREC and Toronto Hydro with an opportunity that was not previously available. Power can be added to the grid
directly and customers can be charged for that "green electricity" plus a "wheeling" or transmission fee. The wind turbine
provides green power that can be purchased at a modest premium by anyone with a share in TREC, or by direct purchase
through Toronto Hydro. Technically, TREC's shareholders each own a portion of the wind turbine structure rather than any
share of the power output. Shareholders contribute to initial capital construction and to subsequent operating costs.
TREC's shareholders will obtain a credit on their electricity bill as partial return of their investment.
Membership in the TRE Co-op (TREC-WPC) is open to all Toronto Hydro subscribers at a cost of $500.00 per share or
"turbine unit". TREC-WPC members will regularly receive an energy credit on their Toronto Hydro bill for the amount of
energy their portion of the turbine produces during its anticipated 25-year life.
At this time, Toronto Hydro and TREC are proposing to establish two waterfront windmills within the boundaries of
Toronto. This not a pilot project because the technology is already proven and the business schemes have been
demonstrated to be successful elsewhere (e.g., Copenhagen, Denmark where the municipal utility combined with a similar
green energy co-operative). However, the project is a demonstration project in that it is a new concept for Toronto, and
could contribute to building awareness in the City that power may be derived from a variety of sources and that green
power, which is environmentally responsible, can also be economically viable and practically applied. The greater the
success of the demonstration, the greater the likelihood of developing further community support for additional green
energy projects in the City by Toronto Hydro, TREC and other organizations. The maximum economic success is hoped
for by siting the wind turbines in as optimum a location as possible. Ideally, wind turbines should be sited where there is
strong and undisturbed wind. In Toronto, this encourages their siting in the vicinity of Lake Ontario or at high elevations.
The capital costs for each turbine (approximately $1.2 million each) is to be provided in two ways: (i) by selling "turbine
unit" shares, and (ii) by Toronto Hydro providing its share of the cost of the joint venture through its capital budget. The
Government of Canada, through the Technology Early Action Measures component of the Climate Change Action Fund, is
providing $330,000.00 to TREC, and through Environment Canada is also providing a further $98,500.00 in pre-purchased
"turbine shares" for its Toronto offices and laboratories.
The Toronto Atmospheric Fund has also agreed to provide up to $800,000.00 in bridge financing to TREC for the project
subject to certain conditions.
Environmental Assessment
Under any environmental assessment (EA), either federal or provincial, the proponent is responsible for ensuring that they
comply with EA requirements. The proponent in this case is Toronto Hydro and TREC (TREC). This proposal could be
subject to environmental assessment under both the federal and provincial legislation. The federal legislation is entitled the
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). The provincial legislation is referred to as the Environmental
Assessment Act (EAA).
Under the CEAA, an environmental assessment is required for projects for which the Federal Government is the proponent
or where the project uses federal funds or lands. Where a project is subject to a federal EA, the applicable federal
department assesses the project under the CEAA and ensures that the project fulfills the associated CEAA requirements
including possible referral to mediation or a hearing. It is the federal department's responsibility to establish the scope of
the project and the scope of assessment. As such, the proponent should contact the specific federal department and obtain
confirmation of EA requirements.
The waterfront windmill proponents, TREC and Toronto Hydro, have already obtained details regarding the federal
environmental assessment requirements from Environment Canada. The proponents are required to comply with the
requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) because federal funds have been provided to the
project.
Only municipal and other government agency projects similar to the windmill are statutorily required to comply with the
provincial EAA. Therefore this project is only subject to the provincial EAA if the Province designates it under the Act
(which is possible for private projects). If the Province does deem the undertaking subject to the EAA, then the proponent
must make an application to the Ministry of the Environment for approval of the project. Such an application consists of
proposed Terms of Reference submitted under section 6 (1) of the EAA and an Environmental Assessment submitted
under Sub-section 6.2 (1) of the EAA. Generally speaking, the Terms of Reference is the plan or road map for the actual
environmental assessment. In it, the proponent describes how their process will address the requirements of the EAA
including the consultation done in developing the Terms of Reference. Regarding the requirements of the provincial
environmental assessment itself, the project must include a description of the purpose.
The proponents have requested a ruling from the Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE) to determine whether or not the
waterfront windmill project is to be officially subject to the Province's Environmental Assessment Act. The proponents
have indicated that they wish to follow the provincial environmental assessment process irrespective of the decision of the
MOE. The Ministry has indicated that it will not oversee any environmental assessment if it is not "designated" by the
Ministry.
As noted above, if the Ministry of the Environment does not "designate" the project as subject to provincial requirements
the proponents have indicated that they will still informally follow, to the fullest extent possible, the guidance provided by
the provincial environmental assessment process while ensuring that they satisfy the federal environmental assessment
requirements. However, if the project is formally "designated" by the Province, a more formal melding of the two
processes will be developed. Regardless of the outstanding Ministry of the Environment decision, the proponents have
already initiated a joint study and public communication program to satisfy both the Canadian Environmental Assessment
Act and the provincial Environmental Assessment Act. They are also developing a procedure to address all identified
aspects of both. The expanded study, communication and reporting procedure is intended to ensure the appropriateness of
the project and to ensure that appropriate public consultation takes place. The study process, including the public
consultation process, should be approved by City Council before being proceeded with.
Use of City Owned or Other Sites for Windmill:
It could be considered prejudicial to the environmental assessment process if the City were to recognize and approve of any
sites without an appropriate environmental assessment being conducted. Therefore, at this stage only the use of public land
for the purpose of installing wind turbines (windmills) should be supported in principle.
Further municipal approvals related to municipal planning and ownership may be required. Potential sites may need
Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendments before a Building Permit can be issued.
If the yet-to-be-identified preferred site is City owned or leased, the proponent will require the City's approval subject to a
satisfactory leasing agreement.
Most of the City's remaining unbuilt waterfront lands are "open space" and are in public ownership. The waterfront
windmill proponents have not established ownership as a selection criteria, but the application of other comparative
criteria, plus the apparent shortage of siting opportunities on private lands on the waterfront, indicates that serious
consideration should be given to siting the project on public lands.
In the City of Toronto, such public open space is most commonly associated with one of the following categories:
(a)lands used for public works (sewage treatment, water filtration);
(b)lands used for recreation (public parks);
(c)lands with restricted use (environmentally sensitive areas, natural areas); and
(d)lands that are vacant (abandoned or undeveloped industrial lands).
The use of several publicly owned sites will also require additional approvals and/or comments to be obtained from
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (in areas of Lake Ontario shoreline flooding), from the Waterfront
Regeneration Trust (in areas proximate to the Waterfront Trail), public liaison committees, the Greater Toronto Airports
Authority (in flight path zones of Lester B. Pearson Airport), Toronto Port Authority (in flight path zones of the Toronto
City Centre Airport on the Toronto Islands), Transport Canada and NavCan (in proximity to navigation equipment for both
airports).
Public Consultation and Communication Process:
TREC and Toronto Hydro have been conducting ongoing public consultation on the proposed wind turbine siting project
since May 1998. TREC and Toronto Hydro have advised that public involvement and consultation has four goals:
-raising awareness and educating the public about wind turbines as a sound source of "green energy";
-scoping issues of public concern related to the proposal;
-addressing and responding to concerns using educational material, oral responses, research of issues, and where needed,
further study to develop factual responses; and
-development of public acceptance of wind turbine sites on publicly owned land in the City of Toronto.
Toronto Hydro and TREC have indicated that public consultation activities are directed to site-specific interested parties, to
create early involvement of those groups in the siting process, and to the broad city-wide public for the purposes of
building public awareness about wind turbines as a renewable source of energy. Toronto Hydro and TREC have indicated
that through its public consultation activities, it will address public concerns, propose mitigation and develop a critical
level of public acceptance for wind turbines in the City of Toronto.
Toronto Hydro and TREC's public consultation activities have included a tour of a wind turbine in Kincardine, Ontario,
presentations to stakeholders and environmental groups, and two public meetings. Toronto Hydro and TREC have held
public meetings in those areas where they are of the opinion that the siting for the wind turbines appears favourable. One
meeting was held in the east end of Toronto near to the Ashbridges Bay Treatment Plant and the other in the west end of
Toronto near the Colonel Samuel Smith Park/R.L. Clark Water Filtration Plant.
A City staff review of the consultation process to date indicates that the public is generally not aware of key decision
making points in the process, or when and how its input should be given.
Toronto Hydro and TREC have indicated that public consultation activities to date have been done in support of their
federal environmental assessment requirements. As noted above, Toronto Hydro and TREC have already indicated that
they will adopt the guidance provided by the provincial EA Act, including all public consultation, even though they may
have no obligation to do so. City Council should confirm its endorsement of this arrangement.
Potential Windmill Locations:
A.Site Selection Criteria Proposed for use by TREC and Toronto Hydro:
A number of site selection criteria developed by TREC and Toronto Hydro effectively scope the proposal to a limited set of
sites. The criteria fall into two groups: those which must be met (i.e., they are essential) and those that are deemed
preferred (i.e., they are desirable but not essential). The essential site selection criteria group consists of those criteria that
must be satisfied, a site must:
(a)be in Toronto Hydro's grid connection area and billing zone;
(b)have adequate wind regime;
(c)be compatible with present and future land uses;
(d)comply with Official Plan and Zoning requirements;
(e)have landowner's permission to use the site; and
(f)be more than 200 metres from the nearest residence.
The preferred criteria group identified by Toronto Hydro and TREC includes those criteria that encourage a speedier
approval, and minimize avoidable extra costs and problems, as well as maximize benefits. Wherever possible a site should
preferably:
(g)not require soil clean-up;
(h)not require to be flood-proofed;
(i)have suitable soil and groundwater conditions to support the required structure;
(j)require minimum connection requirements (length) to grid;
(k)be accessible to the public for educational purposes; and
(l)receive local community support.
Toronto Hydro and TREC have indicated that the project has to be located in the City of Toronto in order to connect to the
Toronto Hydro grid. Early regional wind studies were undertaken in the Toronto area by Zephyr North on behalf of the
Federal Government. Zephyr North's study indicated the desirability of choosing a site in close proximity to the waterfront.
More recently, TREC commissioned Zephyr North to confirm their findings for the Toronto Waterfront and to undertake
further analysis of local wind regime in site cluster areas.
B.Preliminary Site Search:
A number of City owned sites have been previously ruled out in a preliminary assessment by Toronto Hydro and TREC for
various reasons such as: land stability and suitability for foundation requirements, Transport Canada height restrictions as a
result of the operation of Toronto Island Airport, poor or obstructed wind regime, close proximity to residences and cost
prohibition. Also, a number of City owned and leased sites have been identified by TREC and Toronto Hydro as suitable
for further investigation.
C.Site Selection Conflicts to be Resolved:
The potential City owned and leased candidate sites includes parklands owned by the Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA) and operated by the City. The agreement of the TRCA as landowner and of the City as operator needs to
be obtained prior to final approval. The City should consider providing its support in principle for locating windmills in the
City and on City lands and requesting similar support from the TRCA, subject to the proposed site being identified through
an appropriate environmental assessment process.
A number of potential conflicts need to be considered in locating a windmill in, or near to, any parklands. These issues
include but are not limited to recreational issues, such as kite flight and picnicking, environmental issues, such as possible
impacts on bird and butterfly migrations, and impacts on adjacent natural areas (conservation lands), plus the visual
impacts, if a windmill is sited in or near a park, that could detract from park users enjoyment.
Clearly, although the provision and use of "green energy" is likely to be environmentally beneficial, there are other
environmental aspects that should be considered. All such issues will be addressed and resolved as part of the intended
Environmental Assessment process, including holding public meetings and consulting with affected agencies. Support in
principle to consider the use of City owned or leased lands, in the context outlined above, would help to facilitate the
environmental assessment process but not pre-determine its outcome.
The potential use of the City's Water Filtration Plant or Wastewater Treatment Plant lands are also complicated by future
operational expansion requirements, ongoing environmental assessments, and related matters, including community
approval. These issues will be further explored and resolved as part of the environmental process.
Project Viability:
The general technical validity of the proposed installations has been proven at numerous sites in Europe, California,
Alberta and elsewhere. The sufficiency of the expected local wind regime to generate wind energy has been proven by
analysis of anemometer readings taken in the west and east ends of the City.
The financial viability depends on the market price for electricity. Preliminary assessment by the proponent indicates that
wind power might have to be sold at a premium. Accordingly, in the case that the City of Toronto enters into a land lease
agreement with the proponent, such an agreement should stipulate the requirement of dismantling the turbine by the
proponent when the operation of the turbine is terminated.
The viability of the project from a community standpoint, as identified from public meetings which have already been held,
appears to focus on concerns regarding noise, birds, and ice shedding plus a further concern regarding visual aesthetics.
The literature regarding wind turbines suggests that additional noise associated with such installations is virtually inaudible
beyond a 200 metre radius in urban environments. The potential for birds to fly into the tower, or into the surface of the
rotating blades is apparent, especially during storm conditions, however, the literature suggests birds can normally see and
avoid such installations during less active weather conditions.
Ice shedding, from tower and blades, is possible following periods of freezing rain or following windless periods where
ambient air temperatures are below the freezing point and the air is saturated or supersaturated such that rime coatings
develop. The occurrence of freezing rain or rime (i.e., ice) coatings will occur similar to any unheated structure, tower or
tree. What is different is the potential for ice to be "thrown" from the windmill's blades as they turn.
However, wind turbines installed in comparable European installations in similar climates are governed by sensors that
close down the turbine in the event of ice build-up on the blades. This is a standard operating procedure and precautionary
measure to prevent damage to the turbine unit by unbalanced blade weights causing uneven rotation, but it also acts to
address ice on blades being "thrown" off. Maintenance people attending on site are required to restart the windmill. Heated
blades are another possible option for the waterfront windmills. There is every reason to assume that with appropriate
facility design and operation, ice thrown from windmill blades should not occur.
In order to address perception and acceptance of the visual aesthetics of wind turbines, Toronto Hydro and TREC are
encouraging and facilitating guided visits to the Ontario Hydro installation on the Bruce Peninsula to allow people to judge
the visual impacts for themselves, as well as to experience the additional noise levels created by similar installations, albeit
in a non-urban setting.
The proponent has indicated that all of these potential concerns will be fully addressed as an integral part of the project's
environmental assessment.
Conclusions:
Waterfront windmills (wind turbines) are a renewable power source (green energy). Their use assists in meeting Council's
commitments to reduce generation of greenhouse gases and reduce the use of air polluting and smog producing power
sources.
Conceptually, the proposal is potentially environmentally beneficial and technically viable as exemplified by many
installations in Europe, California, Alberta and elsewhere. The specific location(s) at which such wind turbines can be
installed will be determined as part of an environmental assessment process including appropriate public consultation.
It is recommended that in order to better facilitate the use and acceptance of electricity generating windmills in Toronto,
Council should support in principle, subject to the conclusions of an environmental assessment, the installation of
waterfront windmills in Toronto, in support of Council's own commitment to a 20 percent carbon dioxide (CO2 ) reduction
by the year 2005.
Further, prior to the environmental assessment being proceeded with, its Terms of Reference should be submitted to City
Council for approval.
Also, to facilitate the evaluation of siting options under the environmental assessment process, it is recommended that
Council support, in principle, the potential use of City owned or leased land for two waterfront windmills.
City Council's support, in principle, should be subject to the satisfactory completion of an appropriate site selection
process in keeping with the principles of the provincial environmental assessment process, and in keeping with provincial
requirements if the project is "designated" by the MOE. The environmental assessment should also comply with federal
environmental legislation, and be in compliance with local by-laws (or amendments to these by-laws should be sought).
It is also recommended that staff be requested to report back on the completion of the site selection process and the
determination of the preferred site(s) resulting from the CEAA and EA process, and the details of any required lease
arrangement and land use regulation changes that are required. Public meetings should be held by the proponent rather than
City staff in order to avoid any perceived conflict of interest.
This report has been prepared in consultation with the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism.
Contact Name:
Christopher Morgan
Senior Specialist - Air Quality Improvement Branch
Technical Services
Tel. 392-6903
--------
The Works Committee reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it during consideration of the
foregoing matter the following communications and submissions:
(i)(September 7, 1999) addressed to Mr. Don Barnett, Toronto Ornithological Club, from the Ministry of the
Environment in response to his communication with respect to the announcement by the Toronto Renewable Energy
Co-operative and Toronto Hydro of their intention to build up to three 660 KW wind turbines on the Toronto lakefront; and
expressing reservations with respect to the site selections in the proposal;
(ii)(September 23, 1999) from Mr. Bryan Young, General Manager, Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative, and Ms.
Joyce McLean, Manager, Green Energy Services, Toronto Hydro, requesting that the report regarding the windmill project
be listed as a deputation item;
(iii)(October 2, 1999) from Ms. Kate Chung, Toronto, Ontario, in support of the wind turbine proposal of the Toronto
Renewable Energy Co-operative;
(iv)(October 4, 1999) from Mr. W. H. Bayley, Scarborough, Ontario, requesting the City to support the Toronto
Renewable Energy Co-operative proposal for approval, in principle, of the siting of wind turbines on City lands;
(v)(October 4, 1999) from Mr. William J. Mathews, Toronto, Ontario, requesting approval of the process for Toronto
Renewable Energy Co-operative to install a wind turbine on municipal land, as soon as possible;
(vi)(October 4, 1999) from Mr. Barrie Gray, Toronto, Ontario, urging the support of the wind turbine project;
(vii)(October 4, 1999) from Mr. Wilf Moll, Renewable Energy Solutions, commenting on the TREC wind turbine
proposal, the suitability of the Ashbridges Bay Treatment Plant site, and the impact on birds;
(viii)(October 4, 1999) from Ms. Liz White, Director, Animal Alliance of Canada, advising that the Animal Alliance of
Canada supports the recommendations in the staff report, and the Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative and Toronto
Hydro in their decision to satisfy the requirements of both the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Provincial
Environmental Assessment Act;
(ix)(October 5, 1999) from Mr. H. Bruce Crofts, Toronto, Ontario, advising that he and his wife strongly endorse the
wind turbine project for the Toronto waterfront;
(x)(October 5, 1999) from Mr. Michael Harrison, President, Citizens Concerned about the Future of the Etobicoke
Waterfront, expressing concern with respect to the approval process for the siting of waterfront windmills, including the
use of public lands for private businesses to generate profit, the use of the Colonel Samuel Smith Park and other waterfront
parks, and the impact of the proposal on avian wildlife;
(xi)(October 5, 1999) from Ms. Ruth Richardson, Manager, Environmental and Corporate Affairs, Lever Pond's,
advising that Lever Pond's supports the generation of renewable energy such as wind energy within the City of Toronto as
a means to help combat issues of urban smog and global climate change and the issuing of a site approval for the proposed
Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative wind turbine on City of Toronto property;
(xii)(October 5, 1999) from Ms. Gillian Hegge, Danforth Massage Therapy Clinic, requesting that the Committee
approve in principle the idea of siting wind turbines on public land, subject to approval from the provincial and federal
governments;
(xiii)(October 5, 1999) from the Toronto Environmental Alliance, submitting briefing notes in support of the approval
process for the siting of a waterfront windmill;
(xiv)(October 5, 1999) from Dr. Sheela V. Basrur, Medical Officer of Health, Toronto Public Health, expressing support,
in principle, of the approval process for the siting of waterfront windmills provided that the appropriate studies are
undertaken through the environmental assessment process regarding the siting of these facilities, and provided that these
studies take into account community, public health and environmental concerns;
(xv)(October 5, 1999) from Mr. Mark Pomerantz, Pharmacist, encouraging support for the proposal that Council
approve, in principle, the siting of two wind turbines on City land;
(xvi)(October 6, 1999) from Ms. Karey Shinn, Chair, Safe Sewage Committee, raising questions and concerns with
respect to the approval process for the siting of waterfront windmills;
(xvii)(October 6, 1999) from Mr. Richard Brault and Ms. Dianne Croteau, Studio Innova Inc., expressing full support for
the construction of two wind turbines on Toronto's waterfront;
(xviii)(October 6, 1999) from Ms. Karen Buck, Toronto, Ontario, expressing concern with respect to the approval
process for the siting of waterfront windmills;
(xv)(undated) from Mr. Robert Mew, President, Hurricane Canvas Inc., in support of the Toronto Renewable Energy
Co-operative initiative, and the siting of the turbine on public land;
(xvi)(undated) from Mr. Brian Milani, Eco-Materials Group, in support of the TREC/Toronto Hydro proposal to erect
wind turbines on the Toronto waterfront;
(xvii)(October 6, 1999) from Mr. Bryan Young, General Manager, Toronto Renewable Energy, and Ms. Joyce McLean,
Manager, Green Energy Services, Toronto Hydro, submitting copies of their deputations and additional material with
respect to the Waterfront Wind Turbine Project; and
(xviii)(October 6, 1999) from Ms. Jennifer Morrow, Toronto Atmospheric Fund, submitting a copy of her presentation.
The following persons appeared before the Works Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:
-Mr. Bryan Young, General Manager, Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative, and submitted material with respect
thereto;
-Ms. Joyce McLean, Manager, Green Energy Services, Toronto Hydro, and submitted material with respect thereto;
-Ms. Shirley Farlinger, United Nations Association of Canada;
-Mr. Oliver Carroll, Toronto, Ontario;
-Mr. Tooker Gomberg, Energy & Climate Campaigner, Greenpeace;
-Ms. Jennifer Morrow, Toronto Atmospheric Fund, and submitted a copy of her presentation;
-Mr. Dan McDermott, Director, The OntAIRio Campaign;
-Mr. Jose Etcheverry, Sustainable Energy Group, University of Toronto;
-Mr. Peter Schrama, Toronto, Ontario;
-Mr. Glenn McTaggart, Etobicoke, Ontario;
-Ms. Lois Corbett, Toronto Environmental Alliance;
-Mr. Ken Ogilvie, Executive Director, Pollution Probe;
-Mr. Boris Mather, Past President/Director, Citizens for Lakeshore Greenway;
-Ms. Karey Shinn, Chair, Safe Sewage Committee, and submitted a communication with respect thereto;
-Mr. John Carley, Co-Chair, Friends of the Spit;
-Mr. Douglas Buck, Toronto, Ontario;
-Ms. Karen Buck, Toronto, Ontario, and submitted a communication with respect thereto;
-Ms. Sara Bjorkquist, Vice-Chair, Ontario Clean Air Alliance;
-Ms. Liz White, Director, Animal Alliance of Canada, and submitted a communication with respect thereto;
-Mr. Cameron Miller, Toronto, Ontario;
-Councillor Sandra Bussin, East Toronto; and
-Councillor Irene Jones, Lakeshore Queensway.