Anyone interested in learning more about plans to build soccer fields on the contaminated, but forested, soils by Cherry Beach — and judging by the more than 3,000 names that have signed the petition to “Save Cherry Beach” there are a lot of you — may want to consider attending a meeting scheduled for tomorrow night. Thursday Nov. 16, the Port Lands Action Committee will discuss issues of tree removal and replacement and soil contamination at the Ralph Tornton Centre (765 Queen Street East).
Clear cutting over 250 mature trees for soccer fields, when there is already barron space, and plans, for them to be built elsewhere in the Port Lands, certainly stinks, but I have a feeling this issue is much more complex than either side makes it out to be. What is the soil contaminated with? Would it need to be remediated if the area wasn’t going to be developed? Why build temporary soccer fields (if this is in fact the plan)? And what happened to the plans to build permanent ones elsewhere? Why the sudden change?
Skeptical? Have questions? The PLAC meeting might be a good place to start as would a call to the Councillor for the area, Paula Fletcher or the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation.
image courtesy blugflag.org
5 comments
I’m curious what Councillor Fletcher’s take on this is. If anyone who sends her an email hears back, could you please post her reply in the comments here? Thanks.
This came up in tonight’s Waterfront Corporation Annual Meeting. John Campbell (TWRC CEO) replied that the grove of “mature” trees is not affected, that the trees slated for removal would be otherwise killed by the soil remediation process, and that there’s a 2-for-1 replacement of removed trees.
I believe temporary soccer fields are being built because building on the permanent Commissioner’s Park site will take much longer (due to land acquisition issues, and possibly funding). Oh, and lead was mentioned as a major contaminant on the Cherry site.
BTW, I don’t know enough about the issue to take sides — but given the TWRC seemed to be trying to respond to the issue I thought I’d pass their comments along.
Anyone attend the TWRC meeting tonight? This should have been discussed there.
One of the legacy’s of the former Commissioner’s Street incinerator is soil contamination in the general area from particulate fallout from the stack output, the heavier the metals the quicker they fall out and the higher the concentrations in the immediate area, hence lead is a particular problem in the area. Since it’s particulate fallout in the upper layers of the soil the biggest issue from a human health point of view exists where people will disturb the soil (in yard and parks, especially where children are), followed at a much lower level by rain water leaching the heavy metals into the ground water, so yes paving over the soil is actually a reasonable mid-term measure, it doesn’t clean up the problem but it does stabilize it and keep it from spreading. Actual remediation of the soil (as has been done in some of the residential sites in South Riverdale) would be better of course but it too would require replacing existing trees.
I’m okay with temporary soccer fields if the land was going to sit there undeveloped for five or ten years. It’s a practical solution to the city’s lack of soccer fields, especially close to the downtown ‘hoods. But if the trees are to come down unnecessarily, then they should look elsewhere in the vicinity for the facility. There is certainly enough space in that part of town to build temporary soccer fields without having much of an impact on the surrounding environment.