Main Page   What's New   About   Information   Contacts   Feedback   Open Forum   Exit

A concise history In 1948, the old Dixon farm at Port Union Road and Lawrence Avenue became the site of a Johns-Manville manufacturing facility. Much has happened in the fifty+ years since then. To get a good understanding of what has happened to this area since then, read the concise history offered here.  Click here to read it

Political Commitment In the CCRA News edition of July 1999, Councillor Moeser summarised his commitment to the community for input and safety. In the September issue this commitment was repeated.  Click here for more  Following the October 13 Open House, where many residents were concerned about the lack of a coherent emergency response plan, Councillor Moeser wrote a strong  letter to the proponent  concerning the emergency response plan, as well as a  letter to the City staff review team.

Public Input and Communications Following representations by the community associations, the City of Toronto agreed that there would be opportunities for public review and input. Councillor Moeser and the late Councillor Frank Faubert guaranteed "meaningful input" to the community. Beginning in April, 1999 a number of meetings have been held. Notwithstanding that these meetings have been attended sporadically by representatives of some public agencies,  Terms of Reference  for the Public Review Committee were agreed and the members of the committee began working towards finalizing the first newsletter specific to the project. The City of Toronto insisted on being responsible for the preparation and distribution of the information. After many weeks of delay while lawyers for the proponent and the City considered the content, and City staff re-wrote the newsletter with various 'slants', the final version of the very first newsletter was released a couple of days before the 'Open House' - and the community associations were not happy with the City's efforts!! To appreciate the efforts of the City's communications team, read the letters between the CCRA, the Communications team, and the ward councillors. Despite great reluctance and occasional outright refusals on the part of the City and the proponent, the community associations persisted in their request for a theatre style presentation with experts on hand to answer questions from the public in an open forum. That format - the norm in this community - was finally accepted by the City and the proponent. The Open House was held on October 13. The experts were on hand but many questions went unanswered. The City's Peer Reviewer was the most forthcoming expert and frequently answered questions directed to others. The City's communications team promised to provide answers to all questions for which no answer (or no satisfactory answer) was given - but declined to volunteer any timeframe for the provision of the answers. To see the 'official' list of questions (unanswered nine weeks after the Open House) -  Click here  Minutes of all committee meetings are produced. Few (if any) of the meeting minutes had been adopted as final. The CCRA requested that copies be provided in digital format on many occasions. In mid-November, 1999 the first were received. More have followed -  Click here for draft minutes  Progress reports have been issued by Candec Consultants, and the City of Toronto has issued Press Releases and three Newsletters - one with the agreement of the Community Associations, and the second with the associations declining to endorse the content. A third newsletter has been issued.

Demolition & Remediation Plans To read the history of the demolition and remediation plan, and its various reviews and addenda ... click here. There were community concerns about those plans, but neither the City's Peer Reviewer or the City were prepared to press for improvements to the plan to address specific concerns raised. In mid-2000, Yellow Moon took over from Penfund and their team. The community associations met informally with Candec - the new consultants overseeing the demolition and clean-up works. The new project team not only adopted the earlier approved plans, but also committed to: lowering roof slabs to the ground instead of dropping them on to the concrete floor. that dust emissions off the site was an unreasonable criterion for work stoppage, and that the new project team's criterion was no dust emissions at the point of work. .... both things that the CCRA had requested as reasonable improvements to the old plan, and all things that the Peer Reviewer declined to recommend and the City declined to recommend. Candec also made other improvements to the demolition and remediation plan.

Port Union Road On or about September 25, 2000 an excavation was carried out on Port Union Road. The excavation was approximately eight feet long and the full width of Port Union Road, fifty feet south of Lawrence Avenue East to allow the connection of a water main from the IntraCorp development on the south-east corner of Lawrence and Port Union. This excavation was overseen by IntraCorp's consultants and a City of Toronto inspector was in attendance. Despite being immediately adjacent to a site where full worker protection, air monitoring, and wetting of all exposed surfaces was a requirement, this excavation involved a few unprotected workers and a backhoe. CCRA Liz Bowers was not impressed with this and advised Steve Gilchrist. When questioned about this method of working being so dissimilar to the required methods a few feet away, the City's response was 'there are no records of any asbestos in the area' as their justification. Subsequently, the Ministry of Labour advised they were dissatisfied with the way in which the work had been conducted, as transite pipe had been 'discovered' during the excavation. the IntraCorp incident

Manson Property Tax Sale/Conversion to a park You may have heard the story about how the owners of the Manson lands have unpaid taxes approximating $2,000,000 and that the City of Toronto has put the lands up for sale. You may have heard that the Manson land will become/should become a park. In May 2000, that the land was still owned by Penfund and it doesn't look much like a park. Exactly  who said what?  FLASH: Penfund decided not to pay the $3.24 million back taxes owed and Yellow Moon stepped in and paid in full right at the tax sale deadline. As the City puts it 'Yellow Moon has taken over responsibility' - so is it likely that it will become a park? Not very!!

The Role of the Ministry of the Environment The Ministry of the Environment undertook a review of the proponent's demolition and remediation plans. While it was thought at first that that would conclude their role in the project, they clarified their future role in a letter to the City of Toronto's Public Consultation and Community Outreach Program.  click here to read the Ministry position  There was an expectation that MOE staff would attend all meetings of the Public Review Committee and selected sub-committees to assist the community associations and other parties attending these meetings. Councillor Moeser formally requested MOE attendance in late June, 1999. The MOE wrote back to explain their position on attendance -  click here to read the Ministry's letter  There was some confusion in the community as to whether the MOE would have a continuing role in the plan review. This was clarified in a letter from Jim Martherus (Senior Environmental Officer at the MOE's Central Region, Toronto District Office) to the City of Toronto's Public Consultation and Community Outreach Program. The Ministry clarified a continuance of their role in the plan review.  click here to read the Ministry's letter  One matter that has caused confusion in the community has been that the Brookfield site was cleaned up under Section 46 (then S45) of the Environmental Protection Act, whereas the Manson site is not covered by that legislation. Waste asbestos products have been found to the west of the Manson site; to the south of the Manson site (and out into the lake!); under Port Union Road and east of Port Union Road; and in scattered pockets on the Manson site -- but the Manson site was never used as a 'dump'. Hence, the provisions of Section 46 of the EPA do not apply. The MOE position/rationalization is in their  letter of October 12 .

CCRA Planning Report Each month, the CCRA Newsletter carries a report from the Planning Committee. The most recent (October) includes an update on the Public Consultation Process and the joint CCRA/PUVHA/WRCA/City of Toronto committee efforts.  Click here for more

The Intracorp Easement In 1997, Intracorp (the developer on the east side of Port Union below Lawrence) needed to construct a sewer connecting their development to a sewer main located on the Brookfield site. This necessitated construction across the Manson land owned by Penfund - the Intracorp Easement. Proctor and Redfern Limited (the same consulting group that was responsible for the investigation and remediation on the Brookfield site), were responsible for the easement design. The same City of Scarborough staff were involved with both projects. Asbestos was discovered (one sample containing 10 to 25% chrysotile asbestos - source Proctor & Redfern report) during the construction across the Manson site. The Ministry of Labour were informed. About thirty truckloads of asbestos waste were removed from the site before the Ministry of the Environment were notified - not by the contractor, not by the consultant, not by the City of Scarborough, but following a tip from an observant passer-by. The Ministry of the Environment directed that the work stop, and issued Field Order F0000172 8.22.97, for a Violation of Section 15 of the Environmental Protection Act.  Click here for more  And just to prove that the lessons from that fiasco were well learned ..... in September, 2000 many of the same players were involved when 'somebody' dug up part of Port Union Road near Lawrence without any precautions at all. After being advised (after the event) by the CCRA, the Ministries of Labour and Environment investigated, reportedly 'warning' the City of Toronto about the City's role in the event.

Letters about Manson The CCRA has been involved with the Johns-Manville site for many years. To read some of the letters sent over the past few years on behalf of area residents, .....  Click here  To read the CCRA Environment Chair's letter to the Minister of the Environment,  Click here , or the Environment Chair's letter to the Peer Reviewer which summarized the CCRA position on the Demolition and Remediation Plan -  Click here  To read the answers -  Click here

Discover for yourself The Internet contains many sites where information can be obtained on asbestos and site remediation. You are encouraged to do your own research and form opinions based on what you find. Two sources offered as starting points on your journey are: The New England Journal of Medicine: editorial on Asbestos at http://www.nejm.com/content/1998/0338/0022/1618.asp ADVISORY NOTICE The City of Toronto's Peer Reviewer for the Manson Demolition and Remediation Project expressed concern that the link below is to a U.S. government agency and that some site visitors might confuse these regulations and requirements as applying to the Manson Project. Please be advised that U.S. regulations and requirements relating to asbestos removal/remediation apply in the United States and do not apply in Canada. The United States Environmental Protection Agency: DEMOLITION PRACTICES AND NONFRIABLE MATERIALS relating to Asbestos at www.epa.gov/region04/air/asbestos/demolish.htm

Ontario Municipal Board At an Ontario Municipal Board hearing some time ago, the site density and area allocations for schools and parkland on the Brookfield/Manson was determined (not entirely to the satisfaction of the CCRA and WRCA). Yellow Moon - who were no part of that OMB hearing - recently appealed the ruling. The OMB granted them a hearing. This year's OMB hearing was chaired by the same Mr. S.W. Lee who overturned his previous ruling and permitted the proponent's application to reduce the parkland/school area allocation. To read Mr. Lee's decision -  Click here  This decision was reviewed earlier this year by David Soknacki and reported in his column in The Mirror. To read the article -  Click here

Top of Page