Kanata Lakes Environmental Studies March 4, 2015 Facilitator: David Sherwood Meeting Sponsor: Councillor Wilkinson, Kanata North Chair: Lee Ann Snedden, Manager, Policy Development and Urban Design 1
Agenda 1. Welcoming remarks and guidance (David Sherwood) 2. Ward Councillor remarks (Councillor Wilkinson). 3. Status of the South March Highlands Blanding s Turtle Population (Nick Stow). 4. Shirley s Brook and Watt s Creek Stormwater Management Study Phase 2 (Darlene Conway) 5. Next Steps (Lee Ann Snedden) 6. Formal Question and Answer (David Sherwood moderating) 7. Closing remarks (Councillor Wilkinson) 2
Status of the South March Highlands Blanding s Turtle Population Nick Stow, Senior Planner Land Use and Natural Systems March 4, 2015 3
4
5
Conclusions of the South March Highlands Blanding s Turtle Conservation Needs Assessment The current, long-term outlook of the population is poor. The population is likely already in decline. Development without mitigation would accelerate the decline. Mitigation measures can improve the outlook for the population. Even with mitigation, the current habitat may be too small to support the population p in the long term. 6
Modelled d Effects of Development on Population (no loss of nesting area) 7
Modelled d Effects of Development on Population (loss of nesting area) 8
Recommendations of the South March Highlands Blanding s Turtle Conservation Needs Assessment Rd Reduce the loss of mature, reproductive females to road mortality and poaching Reduce egg and hatchling mortality Identify and protect core habitats of the population and surrounding populations Continue to monitor and research the population and surrounding populations Establish education and awareness programs in the surrounding communities. 9
What is Being Done to Conserve the Population? KNL is working with the City and the Ministry of Natural Resources on an Overall Benefit Permit Application for development of Phases 7 and 8 (Phase 9 does not require a permit) Councillor Wilkinson is working with staff on a proposal p for a Student Naturalist Program in the Conservation Forest Staff have been attending community events to promote awareness Wetlands are being created and enhanced to expand the effective habitat area for the population. 10
11
12
Shirley s Brook and Watts Creek Stormwater Management Study Phase 2 Darlene Conway, P. Eng. Infrastructure Policy March 4, 2015 13
Study Background Proposed development within the headwaters of Shirley s Brook k(kanata Lk Lakes North) was draft approved d on the basis of a previous study recommendation to divert about 150 ha of drainage area into the Kizell Drain/Watts Creek system Given the size of the proposed diversion, changes in regulatory approval and permitting requirements and anticipatedconcerns concerns of downstream landowners, the City initiated the Shirley s Brook and Watts Creek SWM Study to provide the necessary tools to assess the impact of the proposed development of KNL phases 7, 8 and 9 on both receiving watercourses 14
Study Background The Study has been carried out in two phases: Phase 1 SWM Study: assessed the performance of the existing Beaver Pond SWM facility (for uncalibrated model completedin October2011) Phase 2 SWM Study: calibrated the model and identified existing conditions (flows, water levels, erosion) in Shirley s Brook and Kizell Drain/Watts Creek downstream of the future development conceptual SWM servicing alternatives 15
16
17
Key Phase 1 Study Finding: Review and update of previous modeling identified that the 100 year water level and peak discharge for the existing Beaver Pond SWM facility exceeded the approved target values 18
Summary of Phase 2 Findings: Calibration A key task of Phase 2 was to calibrate the existing conditions hydrologic model to observed data collected by the City Draft Phase 2 results (March 2013) were based upon rainfall and flow monitoring data from 2011 and 2012 and showed a decrease in 100yr water level and peak outflow (compared to the Phase 1 results) Additional calibration efforts were undertaken based upon 2013 and 2014 monitoring data to arrive at the final existing condition model 19
Summary of Phase 2 Findings: Calibration Beaver Pond SWM facility results: 100yrwater 100yrpeak outflow level (m) (cms) MOE Cof A 92.60 0.96 approved value Phase 1 SWM Study 92.85 4.55 Phase 2 SWM Study (draft) Phase 2 SWM Study (final) 92.70 1.50 92.34 0.91 20
Summary of Phase 2 Findings: Calibration 21
Summary of Phase 2 Findings: Calibration lb Reason for differences between draft and final calibration results: allowance for additional underground storage to reflect effect of relatively pervious blast rock backfill material used in much of the existing development (south of existing Beaver Pond SWM facility) validating the model to a larger rainfall event in June 2014 (65mm) helped to confirm this approach 22
Summary of Phase 2 Findings: Hydrology (flows) A good calibration has been achieved between modeled and observed events The existing i condition i 100 year water level land peak outflow from the Beaver Pond SWM facility do not exceed the approved values identified in the facility s MOE Certificate of Approval 23
Summary of Phase 2 Findings: Hydraulics (water levels) Updated 100 year (draft) flood levels and spill areas are generally consistent with previous MVCA flood risk mapping (1989) A flood sensitive reach was identified on Shirley s Brook between Shirley s Brook Drive and Terry Fox Drive FloodVulnerable Structures (FVS) were identified: o o 3 upstream of Herzberg Road on Kizell Drain 2 upstream of March Road on Kizell Drain within MDS Nordion site FVS also identified in MCVA s previous flood risk mapping (1989) Capacity of some road crossings does not meet the City s design criterion for roadway overtopping: Kizell Drain: Legget Drive and Goulbourn Forced Road Shirley s Brook: Goulbourn Forced droad and the DND crossing below March Valley Road 24
Summary of Phase 2 Findings: Geomorphology (stream function) Shirley s Brook and Kizell Drain/Watt s Creek are currently adjusting to changes induced by past land use changes Channel downcutting (erosion) is occurring in some locations while other locations are aggrading Erosion sites threatening property and infrastructure have been identified ifi d at a number of locations on both systems Further alteration to the existing flow regimes as a result of land use change has the potential to affect watercourse functions and impact infrastructure, flood levels and aquatic species/habitat; appropriate stormwater management will be required to mitigate all such anticipated impacts 25
Phase 2: Conceptual Stormwater Management Servicing Alternatives Potential alternative options (diversion and non diversion) to service development of KNL phases 7, 8 and 9 For each alternative, Anticipated impacts to: osurface and groundwater resources ostream function (erosion and sedimentation) ti onatural systems (terrestrial, wetlands, aquatic) Engineering and cost considerations Anticipated approvals and permits required 26
KNL Development Inc Next Steps Overall Benefit Permit Application for development of Phases 7 and 8 (Phase 9 does not require a permit) High level Stormwater solution Permits for tree removal in phase 7, the realigned Goulbourn Force Road, and Turtle Fencing Corridors will be issued upon MNR and City approvals Registration for Phases 7, 8, and 9 27