DOWNTOWN BRAMPTON

FLOOD PROTECTIONEnvironmental Assessment

PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2

MAY 30, 2019

We acknowledge the land we are standing on is the traditional territory of many nations including the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat peoples and is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples.

We also acknowledge that Toronto is covered by Treaty 13 with the Mississaugas of the Credit.

LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

3

WELCOME TO PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE #2

Present the evaluation of Alternative Solutions and the Preliminary Preferred Alternative Solution

Seek your feedback on:

• The evaluation and the Preliminary Preferred Alternative Solution

• Your issues and concerns

1

2

WHY ARE WE HERE?

The Downtown Brampton Flood

Protection Project has completed the

first round of Public Consultation

activities and is now in Phase 3 of

the Municipal Class EA.

Spring 2019Fall 2018 Summer/Fall 2019 Fall 2019 - Winter 2020

Summer 2020

PROJECT UPDATE

ProblemOpportunity

AlternativeSolutions

EnvironmentalStudy Report

Design Concepts for Preferred

Solution

Anticipated Approval of EA

1 2 3 4 5

Consultation Activities in Phase 1:

✓ Project Website Launch

✓ Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1

✓ Executive Steering Committee Meeting #1

✓ Community Liaison Committee Meeting #1

✓ Public Information Centre #1

(November 8, 2018)

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

WE ARE HERE

Consultation Activities in Phase 2:

✓ Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2

✓ Executive Steering Committee Meeting #2

✓ Community Liaison Committee Meeting #2

✓ Public Information Centre #2

(May 30, 2019)

WHERE IS THE PROJECT?

• Existing flood protection (a concrete-lined

bypass channel) protects the downtown area

from most storm events.

• It does not provide protection during extreme

weather events such as during the Regulatory

Flood, and it does not account for future

flooding due to climate change.

• This Project will consider alternative ways to

reduce flood risk which will, in turn, unlock the

potential for revitalization and redevelopment

to its full potential of the Downtown Core.

5

In Southern Ontario, this is the extent of the flood plain that is used to regulate development and define risk. It is based on rainfall from Hurricane Hazel – the largest storm of record.

REGULATORY FLOOD

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?

Flooding results in a significant risk to life and property.

THE DOWNTOWN AREA IS AT RISK TO FLOODING FOR TWO REASONS:

UPSTREAM: The river “spills” out of the valley north of Church St.

DOWNSTREAM: The river is not able to flow past Centennial Park freely and backs-up out of the valley.

UPSTREAM AREA (north of Church St):

The flood spills over the river banks just upstream of Church Street and flows through Downtown Brampton along the historic river valley before re-joining the river below the CN Railway.

DOWNSTREAM AREA (through Centennial Park):

Narrow valley conditions in Centennial Park cause the flood water to ‘back-up’, out of the river, finding its old valley and flooding portions of the downtown.

WHAT IS THE OPPORTUNITY?

• Development is restricted in Downtown Brampton because of flood risk.

• Reducing flood risk will create the opportunity to remove the SPA designation (as a whole, or in part) which would allow revitalization of the downtown core and reconnect the public to the river and enhanced open space.

STAY TUNED... An Urban Design (Open Space) Master Plan is being developed to complement the EA with focus on the open space and public realm opportunities.

CONCEPT USED FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES

WHAT WE HEARD AT PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE (PIC) #1

Common questions at PIC #1:• Why are we doing this project and how will it be paid for?• What is the relationship of the DBFP EA to other Downtown

Brampton projects?• Can TRCA and the City of Brampton improve communications

with residents?• Is there land available for flood protection?• What changes are proposed and how will this impact our

existing infrastructure?

Some issues that were raised include:• Property impacts and uncertainties.• Importance of public space and opportunities for

active transportation.

• Natural environment improvements.

PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS PRESENTED AT PIC #1

UPSTREAM AREA

1

2

3

PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS PRESENTED AT PIC #1

DOWNSTREAM AREA

A

B

C

Create more room in the valley

COMBINATION OF PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS KEY MAP

UPSTREAM AREA

DOWNSTREAM AREA

1. Block the flow from spilling out of the channel2. Create more room in the valley3. Create more room in the channel by deepening and/or

widening4. Do nothing alternative5. Combination of 1 and 3 = Block the flow from spilling

out of the channel + Create more room in the channel6. Combination of 2 and 3 = Create more room in the

valley + Create more room in the channel

A. Block the flow from spilling out of channelB. Create more room in the valleyC. Enlarge bridge opening(s)D. Do nothing alternativeE. Combination of B and C = Create more room in the

valley + enlarge bridge opening(s)

2

3

AB

C

1

SCREENING OF PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS

Alternative solutions were screened to determine if they could address the upstream or downstream spills. Those that could not were dropped from further consideration.

UPSTREAM ALTERNATIVES SCREENING QUESTION

1. Block the flow from spilling out of the channel NO

2. Create more room in the valley NO

3. Create more room in the channel by deepening and/or widening

YES

4. Do nothing alternative NO

5. Combination of 1 and 3 = Block the flow from spilling out of the channel + Create more room in the channel by deepening and/or widening

YES

6. Combination of 2 and 3 = Create more room in the valley + Create more room in the channel by deepening and/or widening

YES

DOWNSTREAM ALTERNATIVES SCREENINGQUESTION

A. Block the flow from spilling out of channel

NO – BLOCKS URBAN DRAINAGE

B. Create more room in the valley NO

C. Enlarge bridge opening(s) NO

D. Do nothing alternative NO

E. Combination of B and C = Create more room in the valley + Enlarge bridge opening(s)

NO

Is the alternative able to eliminate the upstream spill during a Regulatory Flood event without causing flooding upstream?

Is the alternative able to eliminate the remaining downstream spill during a Regulatory Flood event without causing flooding upstream?

THE DOWNSTREAM SPILL: STATUS QUO DOWNSTREAM AREA

What does this mean to the residents and businesses in the area?

• During a Regulatory (rare, extreme) flood event:• The river water will spill from Centennial Park up the old creek valley to Wellington Street.• With the implementation of the Upstream Preferred Alternative the flood risk is slightly reduced, as

the flood waters in the Downstream area are anticipated to be slower and shallower.• The spill is relatively slow providing time for people to leave area at risk of flooding.• City of Brampton has a comprehensive Emergency Plan to educate the local residents and

businesses on flood preparedness and readiness.

• All but the Regulatory (rare, extreme) flood event are contained within the channel and valley system.• The Special Policy Area designation will still apply to ensure appropriate development occurs within the

area at flood risk.

FLOOD RISK MAP DOWNSTREAM AREA

Do nothing alternativeD

FLOOD RISK LEVEL(MNRF FLOOD RISK CRITERIA)

Low Considered safe for both pedestrians and emergency vehicles (flood depth less than 0.3 metres).

Moderate Considered safe for pedestrian access and egress but flooding too deep for emergency vehicle access.

High* Not safe for pedestrians or emergency vehicles.

* Exceedance of any one of the criteria results in high risk

(with the implementation of Upstream alternative 6)

THE DOWNSTREAM SPILL DOWNSTREAM AREA

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2-year 5-year 10-year 25-year 50-year 100-year 350-year Regional

Flo

w (

m2/s

)

Storm Event

Approximate flow where initial spill occurs

High Probability of Occurrence/ Low Risk Flood Events

Low Probability of Occurrence/ High Risk Flood Events

HOW DO WE CHOOSE THE BEST OPTION?

• Removal / disturbance or enhancement of terrestrial habitat

• Removal / disturbance or enhancement of aquatic habitat

• Ability to physically accommodate planned infrastructure changes

• Ability to achieve public realm objectives

• Area removed from RegulatoryFloodplain (SPA)

• Effects to existing servicing, utilities and infrastructure

• Removal or disturbance to private property and uses

• Removal or disturbance of archaeological resources

• Effects on built and cultural heritage features and landscapes

• Potential to provide safe pedestrian and vehicular traffic ingress and egress

• Conformity with approved / planned local and provincial plans, policies, regulations and guidelines

• Construction constraints and complexities

• Effects on upstream flood levels

• Resiliency for future extreme weather conditions and events

• Capital cost • Operations and

maintenance cost

EVALUATION CRITERIA

ASSUMPTIONS

Treatment of the By-pass Channel• To avoid obstructions to flood conveyance and damage

to property, vegetation and uses within the new flood plain are limited for all Alternative Solutions.

Infrastructure Changes• The Church Street, Scott Street, Queen Street, and CN

Bridges will need to be lengthened for all alternatives.• Local underground servicing changes will be required

for all alternatives.

Downtown Revitalization• All Alternative Solutions that eliminate the

Upstream spill provide opportunities for the revitalization of downtown.

Construction• Construction activities are assumed to be similar for all

alternatives.

SHORT-LISTED ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS

3 Create more room in the channel by widening and/or deepening

WIDENING: the base of the channel by 15m and the top of the channel by 30 m, for a total corridor width of 50 m

DEEPENING: by a total of up to 2 m

UPSTREAM AREA

Advantages Disadvantages

• Fewest impacts on terrestrial habitat• Potential to enhance aquatic habitat• Conforms with provincial and municipal plans and policies

• Little flexibility to avoid and mitigate social impacts• Little flexibility to meet public realm objectives• More construction complexities

SHORT-LISTED ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS UPSTREAM AREA

4 Do nothing alternative

UPSTREAM AREA

Advantages Disadvantages

• No property acquisition required

• No capital cost and low operations and maintenance cost

• Flooding remains in Downtown Brampton

• Limited changes can be made to development (remains in SPA)

• Risk to life andproperty during regulatory flood event

• Limits opportunity to revitalize the downtown and implement Riverwalk.

• Provides no opportunity for habitat enhancement

SHORT-LISTED ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS

5 Combination of 1 and 3 = Block the flow from spilling out of channel + Create more room in the channel

This includes a Flood Protection Landform (FPL), in combination with widening and deepening of the channel.

WIDENING: the base of the channel by 5 m and the top of the channel by 20 m, for a total corridor width of 50 m

DEEPENING: by a total of 0.9 m

Advantages Disadvantages

• High level of resiliency against larger future extreme flood events

• Flexibility to mitigate potential impacts to social environment

• Flexibility to meet public realm objectives

• Infrastructure will be restricted within the footprint of the FPL

• Uncertain provincial approvals for FPL

• Limited ability to mitigate terrestrial impacts

• High capital cost for FPL

UPSTREAM AREA

SHORT-LISTED ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS UPSTREAM AREA

6 Combination of 2 and 3 = Create more room in the valley + Create more room in the channel

This includes the realigning of Ken Whillans Drive, the regrading of Church Street, in combination with the widening and deepening of the channel.

WIDENING: the base of the channel by 5 m and the top of the channel by 20 m, for a total corridor width of 50 m

DEEPENING: by a total of 0.9 m

Advantages Disadvantages

• High level of resiliency against larger future extreme flood events

• Flexibility to mitigate potential impacts to social environment

• Flexibility to meet public realm objectives

• Conforms with provincial and municipal plans and policies

• Require realigning Ken Whillans Drive and regrading of Church Street.

• Limited ability to mitigate terrestrial impacts

UPSTREAM AREA

PRELIMINARY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION

WIDENING: the base of the channel by 5 m and the top of the channel by 20 m, for a total corridor width of 50 m

DEEPENING: by a total of 0.9 m

6 Combination of 2 and 3 = Create more room in the valley + Create more room in the channel

Do nothing alternativeD

NEXT STEPS

Next Stage of the Environmental Assessment will include the following:• Refine evaluation and preferred alternative solution based on feedback received

• Consider Alternative Design Concepts which includes:

• Refining the widening, deepening, and realignment of the by-pass channel to minimize impacts• More detailed consideration of changes to infrastructure including bridges, roads, and underground

servicing• Integrating the work of the Urban Design Master Plan into the Preferred Alternative Solution to

address access points, trail location, property requirements, active transportation• More detailed modeling to refine design of flood protection works to withstand flooding associated

with the Regulatory Storm and address long term resiliency from climate change

• Alternative Design Concepts and evaluation criteria will be brought back to the public for comment.

• On-going consultation with agencies, landowners and other stakeholders

THANK YOU

We appreciate the time you have taken to learn more about the Downtown Brampton Flood Protection EA.

HOW TO STAY CONNECTED:

• The next PIC is tentatively scheduled for fall 2019.

• Join our mailing list – leave us an email or mailing address so we can keep you up-to date as the study progresses.

Contact the Project Team: DBFP EA Project CoordinatorEMAIL: DBFPEA@trca.caToronto and Region Conservation Authority101 Exchange Avenue, Vaughan ON