eSCRIBE Agenda Package...2019/05/24 · issued. The GRCA has been given until June 28th 2019 to...

Grand River Conservation Authority Agenda - General Meeting

PUBLICFriday, May 24, 2019

9:30 a.m.Auditorium

Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1R 5W6

Pages

1. Call to Order

2. Roll Call and Certification of Quorum – 13 Members constitute a quorum (1/2 ofMembers appointed by participating Municipalities)

3. Chair’s Remarks

4. Review of Agenda

THAT the agenda for the General Membership Meeting of May 24, 2019 be approvedas circulated.

5. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest

6. Minutes of the Previous Meetings

THAT the minutes of the General Membership Meeting of April 26, 2019 be approvedas circulated.

7. Business Arising from Previous Minutes

8. Hearing of Delegations

a. John and Elinor Hueton - History of Dumfries Conservation Area

b. Rick Hilborn - Current Affairs at Dumfries Conservation Area

9. Presentations

10. Correspondence

11. 1st and 2nd Reading of By-Laws

12. Reports:

a. GM-05-19-54 - Cash and Investment Status 12

THAT Report Number GM-05-19-54 Cash and Investment Status – April 2019be received as information.

b. GM-05-19-59 - Financial Summary 14

THAT the Financial Summary for the period ending April 30, 2019 be approved.

c. GM-05-19-57 - General Levy Apportionment Legal Update 19

THAT Report Number GM-05-19-57 - General Levy Apportionment LegalUpdate be received as information.

d. GM-05-19-55 - Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations toShorelines and Watercourse Regulation - Application 219/19

23

THAT the Grand River Conservation Authority approve permit applicationnumber 219/19.

e. GM-05-19-56 - Environmental Assessments 27

THAT Report Number GM-05-19-56 Environmental Assessments be receivedas information.

f. GM-04-19-60 - Pines Campground Reconfiguration - Elora Gorge ConservationArea

29

THAT the Grand River Conservation Authority award the tender for the PinesCampground Reconfiguration project to Kieswetter Excavating Inc. of St.Clements, Ontario in the amount of $1,120,565.00 excluding HST.

AND THAT the Grand River Conservation Authority approve a total projectbudget for the Pines Campground Reconfiguration project of $1,289,065.00.

g. GM-05-10-53 - GRCA Applications Intake 5 of the National Disaster MitigationProgram Update

35

THAT the Grand River Conservation Authority approve matching funding of$90,000 for the New Hamburg Flood Mitigation Study from the Land SaleProceeds Reserve.

h. GM-05-19-58 - Current Watershed Conditions 37

That Report Number GM-05-19-58 – Current Watershed Conditions as of May15, 2019 be received as information.

13. Committee of the Whole

14. General Business

15. 3rd Reading of By-Laws

16. Other Business

17. Closed Meeting

THAT the General Membership enter a closed meeting to discuss proposed or pendingacquisitions or dispositions and a personal matter regarding an identifiable individual.

a. Minutes of the previous closed meeting

b. Proposed or pending property acquisition or disposition

c. Proposed or pending property acquisition or disposition

d. Personal matter regarding an identifiable individual

18. Resolutions from Closed Session

19. Next Meetings

June 28, 2019 at 9:30 a.m.

20. Adjourn

21. Grand River Source Protection Authority Meeting (if required)

Regrets only to:

Office of the Chief Administrative Officer, Phone: 519-621-2763 ext. 2200

Grand River Conservation Authority

Report number: GM-05-19-54

Date: May 24, 2019

To: Members of the Grand River Conservation Authority

Subject: Cash and Investment Status – April 2019

Recommendation:

THAT Report Number GM-05-19-54 Cash and Investment Status – April 2019 be received as information.

Summary:

The cash position included Notes Receivable of the Grand River Conservation Authority as at April 30, 2019 was $28,828,390 with outstanding cheques written in the amount of $348.431.

Report:

See attached. The CIBC bond for $726,046 that came due May 15, 2019 was reinvested into a Bank of Nova Scotia bond earning 2.11%, maturing on December 2, 2021. On May 15th the two year government bond rate was 1.59% and the ten year government bond rate was 1.66%.

Financial implications:

Interest rates, etc. are shown on the report.

Other department considerations:

Not applicable.

Prepared by: Approved by:

Carol Anne Johnston Senior Accountant

Sonja Radoja

Karen Armstrong Deputy CAO/Secretary Treasurer

Manager of Corporate Services

12

BANK ACCOUNTS Location Type Amount

Interest

Rate

CIBC Current Account 2,666,495 2.05%

RBC Current Account 64,147 nil

Wood Gundy Current Account 36,518 0.20%

CIBC - SPP Holding Current Account 124,270 2.05%

TOTAL CASH - CURRENT ACCOUNT 2,891,430

INVESTMENTS Date Invested Location Type Amount

Face

Value

Interest

Rate

Yield

Rate Date of Maturity

2019 Total

Interest

Earned/

Accrued

September 9, 2009 CIBC Renaissance High Interest Savings Account 1,928,705 1.60% 1.60% not applicable 30,494

October 1, 2014 CIBC Trust Savings High Interest Savings Account 494,554 1.60% 1.60% not applicable 11,464

July 15, 2016 One Investment Savings High Interest Savings Account 4,179,655 2.415% 2.41% not applicable 100,833

December 8, 2014 Laurentian Bank Bond 1,578,000 2.81% 2.364% June 13, 2019 16,938

January 28, 2015 CIBC Step up bond 726,046 1.80% 1.80% May 15, 2019 5,010

September 3, 2015 CIBC Step up bond 2,000,000 2.30% 2.30% September 3, 2025 46,652

October 14, 2015 Laurentian Bank Bond 1,996,000 2.50% 2.62% January 23, 2020 51,814

March 1, 2016 CIBC Bond 1,300,000 1.70% 1.80% March 1, 2023 25,573

September 16, 2016 CIBC Bond 1,184,000 1.30% 1.30% March 13, 2020 15,868

August 24, 2017 Bank of Montreal Bond 1,550,000 1.61% 2.01% October 28, 2021 30,781

March 15, 2018 Bank of Nova Scotia Bond 2,000,000 3.036% 2.20% October 18, 2019 36,266

July 16, 2018 Bank of Nova Scotia Bond 1,000,000 2.27% 2.23% January 13, 2020 22,311

October 11, 2018 National Bond 2,000,000 2.404% 2.326% October 28, 2019 38,388

October 11, 2018 RBC Bond 2,000,000 2.35% 2.34% December 9, 2019 44,005

October 11, 2018 Bank of Nova Scotia Bond 2,000,000 2.27% 2.399% January 13, 2020 47,953

TOTAL INVESTMENTS 25,936,960 $524,350

TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS $28,828,390

* Reserve Balance at December 31st, 2018 23,677,015

% of Total Portfolio

C.I.B.C. 29%

Bank of Nova Scotia 19%

Bank of Montreal 6%

Royal Bank 8%

National 8%

Laurentian 14%

One Investment Program 16%

100%

* Reserve balances are reviewed annually by the Board in November.


Cash and Investments Status Report

April 30, 2019

Investment By Institution

13



Date: May 24, 2019


Subject: Financial Summary for the Period Ending April 30, 2019

Recommendation:

THAT the Financial Summary for the period ending April 30, 2019 be approved.

Summary:

The Financial Summary includes the 2019 actual year-to-date income and expenditures. The budget approved at the February 22, 2019 General Meeting is included in the Budget column. The Current Forecast column indicates an estimate of income and expenditures for the whole year. At this time a deficit of $321,385 at year-end is forecast.

Report:

A. Total Expenditures increased by $450,000.

Resource Planning compensation and benefit expenses decreased by $100,000 due to staff vacancies and rate savings.

Head Office Major Maintenance expenses increased by $550,000 for roof replacement project which includes wood siding replacement. The details of this project were outlined in the board report dated March 22, 2019 ‘Administration Centre Roof replacement Tender Results’.

B. Net Transfer from Reserves increased by $550,000.

Transfer from the Head Office Building and Mechanical Equipment Reserve increased by $550,000 to fund spending on roof replacement. At December 31, 2018 there was $1.7 million in the reserve and it is forecast to decrease by $1.0 million to $700,000 in order to fund this project.

Future Forecast Adjustment – Conservation Areas (Brant)

A fuel oil spill was discovered at Brant Conservation Area. A TSSA order has been issued. The GRCA has been given until June 28th 2019 to submit an assessment report. A preliminary assessment estimates the cost to be approximately $450,000. This expense would need to be funded with the Conservation Area reserve. A forecast adjustment and board report will follow once the assessment is completed.

14

Status of Provincial Transfer Payments

At the time of releasing this report final funding approval was still unknown for the section 39 transfer payments related to GRCA’s Source Protection program and for Water and Erosion Control infrastructure (WECI) Capital Investment Program.

The Financial Summary is attached.


The activity summarized will result in a deficit of $321,385 at December 31, 2019. Staff will be addressing this funding shortfall in future forecast reports.


The management committee and appropriate supervisory staff receive monthly financial reports and advise the finance department of applicable forecast adjustments.


Sonja Radoja Manager Corporate Services

Karen Armstrong Secretary-Treasurer/Deputy CAO

15

GRAND RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITYFINANCIAL SUMMARY - FORECAST

General Membership May 24, 2019

FORECAST - MARCH 31, 2019 - NET RESULT ($421,385)

CHANGES - April 2019

Sch 4 Resource Planning $100,000 Compensation and Benefit Expenses decreased $100,000

Sch 9 Corporate Services ($550,000) Major Maintenance Expenses increased $0$550,000 Funding from Building Maintenance Reserve increased

FORECAST - APRIL 30, 2019 - NET RESULT ($321,385)

16

Actual Budget Actual Previous Current ForecastSCHEDULE 2018 2019 YTD Forecast Forecast Change

REVENUEMunicipalGeneral Municipal Levy (Operating) various 10,302,000 10,586,000 3,467,598 10,586,000 10,586,000 0General Municipal Levy (Capital) various 1,050,000 1,050,000 350,000 1,050,000 1,050,000 0Special Municipal Levy various 98,571 150,000 485 150,000 150,000 0Other various 1,023,016 870,000 1,435,327 870,000 870,000 0

12,473,587 12,656,000 5,253,410 12,656,000 12,656,000 0

Government GrantsMNRF Transfer Payments various 871,073 871,073 0 449,688 449,688 0Source Protection Program-Provincial various 1,384,626 835,000 523,829 835,000 835,000 0Other Provincial various 944,800 1,177,500 843,671 1,177,500 1,177,500 0Federal various 441,116 250,000 109,556 250,000 250,000 0

3,641,615 3,133,573 1,477,056 2,712,188 2,712,188 0Self GeneratedUser Fees and Sales

Enquiries and Permits 4 458,583 466,000 204,416 466,000 466,000 0Plan Input and Review 4 450,331 453,000 219,647 453,000 453,000 0Nursery and Woodlot Management 5 499,498 465,000 316,464 465,000 465,000 0Consulting 4 0 0 3,726 0 0 0Conservation Lands Income 10 58,247 71,000 3,979 71,000 71,000 0Conservation Areas User Fees 13 9,160,051 8,600,000 565,020 8,600,000 8,600,000 0Nature Centres and Camps 8 983,252 1,000,500 219,854 1,000,500 1,000,500 0Merchandising and Sales 8 1,926 0 10 0 0 0

Property Rentals 11 2,888,225 2,875,000 1,504,028 2,875,000 2,875,000 0Hydro Generation 12 556,736 473,000 91,539 473,000 473,000 0Land Sales 10 1,166,343 0 0 0 0 0Grand River Conservation Foundation various 421,413 454,000 26,806 454,000 454,000 0Donations various 158,284 426,000 267,337 426,000 426,000 0Landowner Contributions 5 199,269 200,000 156,413 200,000 200,000 0Investment Income 14 555,037 450,000 103,808 450,000 450,000 0Miscellaneous Income various 17,897 48,000 1,637 48,000 48,000 0Total Self-Generated Revenue 17,575,092 15,981,500 3,684,684 15,981,500 15,981,500 0TOTAL REVENUE 33,690,294 31,771,073 10,415,150 31,349,688 31,349,688 0

GRAND RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITYSTATEMENT OF OPERATIONS

FOR THE PERIOD ENDING April 30th, 2019

17

Actual Budget Actual Previous Current ForecastSCHEDULE 2018 2019 YTD Forecast Forecast Change

GRAND RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITYSTATEMENT OF OPERATIONS

FOR THE PERIOD ENDING April 30th, 2019

EXPENSESOPERATING

Water Resources Planning & Environment 1 1,981,020 2,243,200 799,527 2,243,200 2,243,200 0Flood Forecasting and Warning 2 739,376 801,000 287,367 801,000 801,000 0Water Control Structures 3 1,712,256 1,723,900 370,428 1,723,900 1,723,900 0Resource Planning 4 1,942,897 2,084,600 651,857 2,084,600 1,984,600 (100,000)Forestry & Conservation Land Property Taxes 5 1,422,785 1,411,400 395,588 1,411,400 1,411,400 0Conservation Services 6 803,924 885,200 289,153 885,200 885,200 0Communications & Foundation 7 613,385 733,900 225,775 733,900 733,900 0Environmental Education 8 1,420,157 1,382,400 389,028 1,382,400 1,382,400 0Corporate Services 9 2,922,538 3,797,768 1,030,227 3,797,768 4,347,768 550,000Conservation Lands 10 1,897,866 2,095,700 606,494 2,095,700 2,095,700 0Property Rentals 11 1,596,859 1,594,700 423,431 1,594,700 1,594,700 0Hydro Production 12 134,677 133,000 35,802 133,000 133,000 0Conservation Areas 13 7,732,014 7,585,000 1,055,709 7,585,000 7,585,000 0Miscellaneous 14 63,754 70,000 5,313 70,000 70,000 0Information Systems 16 1,133,065 1,243,000 445,831 1,243,000 1,243,000 0Motor Pool 16 878,525 908,700 240,910 908,700 908,700 0Less: Internal Charges (IS & MP) 16 (2,011,590) (2,151,700) (686,741) (2,151,700) (2,151,700) 0Total OPERATING Expenses 24,983,508 26,541,768 6,565,699 26,541,768 26,991,768 450,000

CAPITALWater Resources Planning & Environment 1 97,368 110,000 2,588 110,000 110,000 0Flood Forecasting and Warning 2 161,212 190,000 76,592 190,000 190,000 0Water Control Structures 3 1,274,516 1,500,000 429,360 1,500,000 1,500,000 0Nature Centres 8 0 0 0 0 0 0Conservation Areas 13 1,791,805 2,590,000 36,946 2,590,000 2,590,000 0Corporate Services 9 0 0 0 0 0 0Information Systems 16 229,951 200,000 40,711 200,000 200,000 0Motor Pool 16 435,669 350,000 57,918 350,000 350,000 0Less: Internal Charges (IS & MP) 16 (422,012) (342,300) (602,333) (342,300) (342,300) 0Total Capital Expenses 3,568,509 4,597,700 41,782 4,597,700 4,597,700 0

SPECIALWater Resources Planning & Environment 1 326,115 340,000 74,793 340,000 340,000 0Flood Forecasting and Warning 2 425,964 560,000 168,933 560,000 560,000 0Forestry 5 137,911 130,000 36,490 130,000 130,000 0Conservation Services 6 1,082,201 921,000 405,558 921,000 921,000 0Communications 7 0 0 0 0 0 0Environmental Education 8 0 0 0 0 0 0Conservation Land Purchases 10 269,473 0 144,920 0 0 0Conservation Lands 10 365,863 750,000 139,714 750,000 750,000 0Property Development 11 0 50,000 0 50,000 50,000 0Hydro Generation 12 80,721 0 355 0 0 0Miscellaneous 14 28,236 35,000 0 35,000 35,000 0Source Protection Program 15 1,384,626 835,000 523,829 835,000 835,000 0Total SPECIAL PROJECTS Expenses 4,101,110 3,621,000 1,494,592 3,621,000 3,621,000 0

Total Expenses 32,653,127 34,760,468 8,102,073 34,760,468 35,210,468 450,000Gross Surplus 1,037,167 (2,989,395) 2,313,077 (3,410,780) (3,860,780) (450,000)Prior Year Surplus Carryforward 412,314 469,695 469,695 469,695 469,695 0Net Funding FROM/(TO) Reserves (979,786) 2,519,700 (498,704) 2,519,700 3,069,700 550,000NET SURPLUS 469,695 0 2,284,068 (421,385) (321,385) 100,000

18



Date: May 24, 2019


Subject: General Levy Apportionment Legal Update

Recommendation:

THAT Report Number GM-05-19-57 - General Levy Apportionment Legal Update be received as information.

Summary:

The Mining and Lands Commissioner issued a decision on December 21, 2017 pertaining to a matter between Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority and the City of Hamilton, stating that the agreement that had been used for apportionment of the City of Hamilton’s levy since the early 2000’s was not valid. The Grand River Conservation Authority was also a party to this agreement.

Based on legal advice and subsequent Board direction, the GRCA discontinued following the agreement and has followed levy Regulation 670/00 for the 2018 and 2019 General Levy apportionment calculations. This resulted in an increase to the City of Hamilton’s share of the GRCA’s General Levy from 2.4% to just over 12%.

The City of Hamilton appealed the decision to the Divisional Court for judicial review and the case was heard on February 6, 2019. A decision was issued on April 30, 2019 that the City of Hamilton’s appeal was unsuccessful. The City has 30 days from the date of the decision to file an appeal of that decision.

The City of Hamilton also appealed the GRCA’s 2018 and 2019 levy apportionments to the Mining and Lands Tribunal and both appeals are being held in abeyance pending the outcome of the judicial review of the December 21, 2017 Mining and Lands Commissioner decision. The Mining and Lands Tribunal has advised the GRCA that they will advise us of the status of these appeals at the end of May.

Report:

The amalgamated City of Hamilton was formed on January 1, 2001, by the amalgamation of Hamilton and its five neighbouring municipalities: Ancaster, Dundas, Flamborough, Glanbrook, and Stoney Creek.

Prior to amalgamation, the Regional Municipality of Hamilton Wentworth contributed about 2.3% of GRCA’s General Levy, based on the following estimated percentage of the geographic areas of the local municipalities being in the Grand River watershed:

19

Former Region of Hamilton-Wentworth

Local Municipality Percent in Grand River Watershed based

on Geographic Area

Ancaster 22%

Flamborough 33%

Glanbrook 3%

Hamilton, Dundas, Stoney Creek 0

Following amalgamation, MNR advised Grand River Conservation Authority that approximately 19% of geographic area of the “new” City of Hamilton was in the Grand River watershed. The standard levy apportionment formula would have assumed that the new City’s total assessment multiplied by 19% equaled the portion of Hamilton’s assessment that was in GRCA’s watershed. Using this formula would have caused Hamilton’s levy for GRCA to be approximately four times the amount that the former Region of Hamilton-Wentworth had been paying. Similar increases would have been required by Conservation Halton and Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA). This seemed unreasonable since the majority of the urban assessment was not in those three watersheds. Prior to 2001, the GRCA wrote to the Minister of Natural Resources to ask for a resolution to this anomaly, which was caused by creating a large municipality that spanned four Conservation Authority jurisdictions. The Ministry issued Regulation 670/00, which allowed for maintenance levies to be apportioned by agreement among a conservation authority and its participating municipalities. The City of Hamilton and its four Conservation Authorities met to develop such an agreement and in 2001, they passed motions in an effort formalize it. The following motion was passed by GRCA in January 2001:

THAT the total 2001 General Levy be apportioned to participating municipalities on the basis of Modified Current Value Assessment as defined in Ontario Regulation 670/00: AND THAT the Modified Current Value Assessment for the new City of Hamilton be calculated based on the former area municipalities as agreed to by the new City of Hamilton, the Grand River Conservation Authority, the Halton Region Conservation Authority, the Hamilton Region Conservation Authority, and the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority.

By 2004, the formula was revised slightly, as a result of a detailed study undertaken by NPCA, using geo-referencing to determine the actual portion of Hamilton’s assessment that fell in the watersheds. The City and its four conservation authorities passed resolutions again, to use these revised numbers for their levy apportionment in 2004. Following, is a comparison of the 2004 agreement to the current (updated) geographic area that falls in the four watersheds:

20

Conservation Authority Estimated Watershed

Assessment (per 2004 Agreement)

Geographic Area in Watershed

(per GIS study in 2018)

Hamilton CA 87.4 % 37.98 %

Halton Region CA 4.0 % 14.17 %

Grand River CA 4.7 % 26.75 %

Niagara Peninsula CA 3.9 % 21.09 %

Total 100.0 % 100.00 %

In 2014, the NPCA questioned the validity of the 2001/2004 agreement and was of the opinion that it was not valid because:

a) there was no written agreement, and,

b) they believed that in order to have “agreement” under Regulation 670/00,

resolutions would have to be passed by the councils of all participating

municipalities (rather than by the four Conservation Authority Boards and the City

of Hamilton)

The NPCA advised the City of Hamilton in early 2015 that their levy would be increasing from approximately $500,000 to more than $1.3 Million per year, because NPCA was no longer prepared to honour the 2001/2004 agreement. The City of Hamilton appealed this decision to the Mining and Lands Commissioner. On December 21, 2017 the Mining and Lands Commissioner issued a decision, dismissing the City of Hamilton’s appeal. The decision supports the position that NPCA took in 2015, which essentially makes the 2001/2004 agreement invalid. GRCA immediately contacted the MNRF to find out what percentage to use for the geographic area of the City of Hamilton in the Grand River Watershed. Although the estimate at the time of amalgamation was 19%, MNRF advised GRCA that updated GIS information indicates that 26.75% of the City of Hamilton is actually in the Grand River Watershed. GRCA staff have confirmed this figure in GIS. Using this revised area, the levy formula resulted in Hamilton’s levy increasing to 12.24% of the total GRCA levy in 2018. The impact of this change in allocation in 2018 is summarized below:

GRCA 2018 Levy Calculated

according the “agreement”

GRCA 2018 Levy Calculated

according to the geographic area*

Change $

Change

%

City of Hamilton 271,563 1,389,640 1,118,077 +412 %

Other Municipalities 11,080,437 9,962,360 (1,118,077) -10 %

Total GRCA Levy $ 11,352,000 $ 11,352,000

*26.75% of the Geographic Area of the City of Hamilton is in the Grand River Watershed

GRCA has been using the numbers from the “agreement” to apportion all general levies (administration, maintenance and capital) since 2001. Every year, the board resolution approving the levy apportionment included the following acknowledgement of the agreement: “…AND THAT each member municipality’s share of the [year] General Levy be calculated using “Modified Current Value Assessment” with an adjustment for the City of

21

Hamilton which is based on a “local agreement” with the municipality and its four Conservation Authorities.” This wording was also included in the letters to participating municipalities, advising them of their share of the levy each year. In early 2018, the GRCA staff obtained a legal opinion that the agreement could no longer be used and that the 2018 levy apportionment for administration and maintenance, must be calculated in accordance with the CVA formula using geographic area (per Regulation 670/00). The levy apportionment for capital is to be determined based on benefit. GRCA uses the aforementioned CVA formula using geographic area to apportion the capital levy where the benefit has been determined to be watershed-wide. The GRCA Board confirmed this approach at the January 26, 2018 General Membership meeting and has followed it in 2018 and 2019. The City of Hamilton filed an appeal to the Mining and Lands Tribunal with respect to the levy apportioned to them by the GRCA within the 30-day timeline from the date of notice in 2018 and 2019. They requested that both appeals be held in abeyance pending the outcome of the judicial review. A decision on the judicial review was issued on April 30, 2019 and the Mining and Lands Tribunal has advised the GRCA that the City of Hamilton has 30 days from that date to file a further appeal.


Included in the report. The table showing levy distribution is included with the budget package.


Not applicable


Karen Armstrong Secretary-Treasurer/Deputy CAO

Joe Farwell Chief Administrative Officer

22



Date: May 24, 2019


Subject: Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation - Application #219/19 for Consideration

Recommendation:

THAT the Grand River Conservation Authority approve permit application number 219/19.

Summary:

Drewlo Holdings Inc. is proposing to construct a portion of a road (Jeffrey Place) and undertake grading for residential lots within the floodplain of Balzer Creek and Schneider Creek, in the City of Kitchener. The lots will also be within the allowance to the riverine erosion hazard and immediately adjacent to a wetland. The proposal will implement works previously approved through GRCA Permit No. 19/02, with modifications to move the lot lines outside of the riverine erosion hazard. The Permit Application contained in this report does not conform to current Authority Policy, however, staff support approval of this application due to other factors in addition to the policy considerations, which the General Membership may wish to consider in reaching a decision on permit issuance.

Report:

The applicant proposes to construct a portion of a road (Jeffrey Place) within the floodplain of Balzer Creek and Schneider Creek, to undertake grading of residential lots within the floodplain and within the allowance to a riverine erosion hazard and immediately adjacent to wetland, at Part of Lot 13, Plan 1482 east of Fallowfield Drive, in the City of Kitchener. The works are required for the last phase of a plan of subdivision that was draft plan approved with Grand River Conservation Authority support in 1992.

Permit Approval Process

As a result of changes made in 2011 to Ontario Regulation 97/04, the ability to delegate permit approval to an employee of the GRCA was granted. The General Membership subsequently authorized staff on May 25, 2012 (Resolution 30-12) to issue permits which meet Board approved policies. Revisions to the GRCA By-law and permit approval process were approved by the General Membership on June 12, 2012 to enable this delegation. Staff had also asked the Province to update Ontario Regulation 150/06 which is specific to the GRCA to bring it into conformity with Ontario Regulation 97/04. These amendments were approved in February 2013.

A staff committee was established to review applications that meet GRCA policies and to make a recommendation to the Chief Administrative Officer regarding the approval of permits. The permit process for applications that do not meet policy did not change. These applications could either be presented to the General Membership for their

23

consideration where staff recommend approval or a hearing is scheduled where staff recommend refusal.

The criteria for permits that can be presented to the Membership for their consideration includes an application that:

1) is not covered by an approved Authority Policy 2) has factors in addition to the policy considerations which should be considered 3) precedes a decision or settlement of a legal proceeding or tribunal

The current permit application does not meet policy, however is being recommended for approval by staff due to other factors and is being presented to the Membership for consideration.

Background on Proposal

The draft plan of subdivision was submitted in 1986. The consultants for the applicant completed a site specific floodplain study in 1989. The floodplain extended onto portions of the road network, 14 lots and a block within the subdivision. It was anticipated at the time that as a result of infrastructure improvements, the extent of the floodplain would be reduced. Furthermore, construction of a collector road would effectively cut-off the floodplain from several lots. The plan was approved in 1992 with GRCA support.

In 1994, the Schneider Creek Floodplain Mapping Study was completed which resulted in a 0.72 metre increase in the floodline elevation within the plan of subdivision. The applicant subsequently worked with GRCA and City staff and modified the plan of subdivision by removing some of the lots that were completely within the updated floodplain. Portions of the road network, twenty lots and a block remained within the floodplain. With the construction of the collector road however, the majority of the residential lots and the block would be cut-off from the floodplain. The approved grading plan proposed to raise the lots to ensure the houses would be out of the floodplain.

Permit 19/02 was considered and approved by the GRCA Board on May 30, 2003 and staff supported the revised plan of subdivision.

Current proposal

One phase of the subdivision remains to be constructed. Pre-grading of this phase was not completed through the previous permit approval and 1 lot remains completely in the floodplain and 8 lots are partially within the floodplain (as shown on Figure 1).

A new issue affecting the last phase became apparent during the Balzer Creek Rehabilitation Class Environmental Assessment (EA) undertaken by the City of Kitchener. A geotechnical investigation completed as a component of the EA identified erosion hazards associated with Balzer Creek which is adjacent to this phase of the subdivision. A subsequent Slope Stability Analysis was completed by the applicant, and based on that analysis and GRCA review, it was determined that the erosion hazard encroaches into the approved lot lines.

The applicant has been working with GRCA and City staff and agreed to modify the plan of subdivision to pull the lots outside the erosion hazard. GRCA policy for new development in the allowance to the erosion hazard requires a minimum 6 metre access allowance from the top of bank to enable access to the slope in case remedial efforts are required in the future. The new lot configurations do not provide this 6 metre access allowance (as shown on Figure 1). However, the lands adjacent to the subdivision containing the creek are owned by the City of Kitchener. Future access to the slope is available from the bottom of the slope on public lands. The height of the slope in this case is about 4 metres high so the entire slope can be accessed from below.

24

Figure 1: Development Proposal

25

Floodplain Policy

Current Grand River Conservation Authority policy does not allow for new development within the floodplain. However, staff recommend approval of the application upon consideration of the following factors:

a) Grand River Conservation Authority historical involvement and approvals, b) the lots will be raised to ensure the houses will not be subject to flooding, and c) the loss of floodplain storage resulting from the development of the site will not

alter Regional flood levels in the area.

Riverine Erosion Hazard Policy

Current Grand River Conservation Authority policy does not allow for new development within the allowance to the riverine erosion hazard unless certain criteria are met. The minimum access allowance for new development is not being met. However, staff recommend approval of the application upon consideration of the following factors:

a) Grand River Conservation Authority historical involvement and approvals, b) the applicant has adjusted the residential lot lines to be outside of the riverine

erosion hazard, and c) access to the slope is available from public lands.


Not applicable


Not applicable


Trisha Hughes Resource Planner

Beth Brown Supervisor of Resource Planning

Nancy Davy Director of Resource Management

26



Date: May 24, 2019


Subject: Environmental Assessments

Recommendation:

THAT Report Number GM-05-19-56 Environmental Assessments be received as information.

Summary:

To provide the General Membership of the Grand River Conservation Authority with information on Environmental Assessments being reviewed, a summary report is presented below. The report has been prepared as directed through Motion No. P44-99 (May 18/99) adopted through General Membership Res. No. 55-99 (May 28, 1999).

Report:

Report on Environmental Assessments for May 24, 2019

A. New Environmental Assessments Received

New: Environmental Assessments received by the Grand River Conservation Authority and currently under review.

1. First Notice – Bridge 24-WG and Bridge 4-WG in the Township of Centre Wellington

The County of Wellington has initiated a Class ‘B’ Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) Study for both Bridge 24-WG and Bridge 4-WG to address their advance state of deterioration. The study will confirm and document the existing operational and structural deficiencies and identify alternative solutions, including rehabilitation or replacement of the structures. Bridge 24-WG is located on First Line between Sideroad 10 and Sideroad 15, and Bridge 4-WG is located on Fifth Line between Wellington Road 18 and Eramosa-West Garafraxa Townline. The study area contains features of interest to the GRCA including Irvine Creek, a tributary of the Speed River, wetlands, floodplain, and the regulated allowances adjacent to the features. Staff have advised the Township of Centre Wellington that we have an interest in this EA and will continue with our involvement in the project.

27

B. Classification of Reviewed Environmental Assessments

Minor: Minimal potential resource impacts that can be mitigated using conventional construction methods.

Major: Significant impacts on identified resource features. Alternatives and proposed mitigation will be outlined in detail.

Minor Impacts – None for this report.

Major Impacts – None for this report

Financial implications: Not Applicable

Other department considerations: Not Applicable


Beth Brown Supervisor of Resource Planning

Nancy Davy Director of Resource Management

28



Date: May 24, 2019


Subject: Pines Campground Reconfiguration - Elora Gorge Conservation Area

Recommendation:

THAT the Grand River Conservation Authority award the tender for the Pines

Campground Reconfiguration project to Kieswetter Excavating Inc. of St. Clements,

Ontario in the amount of $1,120,565.00 excluding HST.

AND THAT the Grand River Conservation Authority approve a total project budget for

the Pines Campground Reconfiguration project of $1,289,065.00.

Summary:

Not applicable

Report:

The Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) purchased an existing trailer park in

1986 which was located immediately adjacent to the westerly limit of the Elora Gorge

Conservation Area. This property was purchased as part of the West Montrose

Reservoir project. At the time of purchase there were approximately 110 serviced

campsites in the campground. Immediately upon purchasing the property the GRCA

retired sixty of these sites as they were located in the floodplain or within wetland zones.

The remaining fifty sites have been used as the park’s seasonal campground since that

time.

The campground is divided into an upper and a lower campground separated by a steep

slope. In 1996, the GRCA received site plan approval to develop an additional 120

campsites in the upper portion of the campground. In 2004 and 2005 the first phase of

thirty-five additional sites were completed as well as the enlargement of the onsite septic

system.

The Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for the conservation area, issued by the

Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, regulates how subsurface sewage

treatment systems are operated. The terms of the ECA required the existing septic

system for the Pines campground to be connected to municipal services by 2018. An

assessment of the existing campground was conducted in 2016/17 which identified a

number of options for repairing or replacing the existing services. It also highlighted

29

several environmental concerns related to the location of the existing sites in the lower

section of the campground. Those concerns included:

the location of a sewage pumping station immediately adjacent to the river,

the fact that the majority of the sites were within the inundation zone for the

West Montrose Reservoir, and

sites located with the regulated area of flood plain and steep slopes.

At the June 2017 meeting of the General Membership (GM-06-17-67), the Board

approved a recommendation to proceed with Option Five of the various options

presented, which included the connection of the existing campground to municipal

services and the reconfiguration of the campground by retiring the fifty (50) campsites

from the lower section of the campground and replacing them with an equal number of

campsites in the upper section of the campground. The campsites in the lower section of

the Pines campground were closed in the fall of 2017.

The proposed modifications result in a net improvement both environmentally and

operationally. Removing the sites, services and pumping station from the floodplain

reduces the risk of accidental discharges to the river and allows the riverbank to return to

a more natural state. Situating all of the campsites in one area allows for improved

security, easier maintenance, and closer proximity for campers to the washroom

building. In addition, a portion of the lower campground is proposed to be redeveloped

as a day use area which will help to alleviate visitation pressures in the existing day use

area and provide direct access to the river for boating, fishing and picnicking. Appendix

A shows the Pines campground modifications.

Phase One of the project has now been completed. The thirty-five (35) campsites

constructed in 2004/05, and the existing Pines washroom, are now connected to

municipal services via a pumping station and force main. Phase Two of the project

involves the construction of fifty new campsites in the upper section of the campground

as shown in Appendix B.

Seven contractors were prequalified to bid on the tender. The invitation to tender was

issued to the prequalified contractors on April 18, 2019. The tender closed on May 7,

2019. The tender packages were opened at GRCA’s Administration Centre by an

opening committee consisting of Sonja Radoja (Manager of Corporate Services), Pam

Walther-Mabee (Manager of Conservation Areas), Mark Slade (Supervisor of Central

Services) and Paul Lucier (Capital Projects Coordinator). The tender results are shown

in Table 1.

30

Table 1: Tender Results

Rank Company Bid Amount

(HST Excluded)

1 Kieswetter Excavating Inc. $1,120,565.00

2 Bomar Landscaping Inc. $1,197,739.97

3 Alfred Fach Excavating Ltd. $1,342,354.39

The low bid for this project was received from Kieswetter Excavating Inc. and meets all

of the requirements outlined in the tender package. The tender documents did not

include a contingency allowance. Therefore, it is proposed that the total project budget

include an internal contingency. The total project budget is shown in Table 2. This

project is eligible for a 100% HST rebate therefore taxes have not been included in the

budget amount.

Table 2: Project Budget

Tender Amount $1,120,565.00

Contingency $50,000.00

Tree Removal (Estimate) $65,000.00

Engineering Fees $53,500.00

Total Project Budget $1,289,065.00


The project budget of $1,289,065.00 will be transferred from the Conservation Areas

Reserve. There are sufficient funds in the Conservation Areas Reserve to fund the

modifications to the Pines Campground and to complete the projects outlined in the ten-

year capital forecast.

The reconfigured campsites will open for occupancy in the 2020 season. Potential

revenues from the fifty sites have been estimated based on both seasonal and nightly

camping occupancies. The estimates are based on the approved 2019 pricing and

occupancy rates that are consistent with existing serviced sites at Elora Gorge CA. The

results of that analysis are shown in the Table 3 below.

Table 3: Potential Revenue from New Campsites

Estimated Annual

Revenue

Return on Investment

Seasonal Campsites $141,000 9.14 years

Nightly Campsites $323,000 3.99 years

There is a high demand for three-way (sewer, water and hydro) sites within the camping

community. Elora Gorge CA currently does not offer three-way sites for nightly camping.

The existing two-way (water and hydro) sites have a consistent occupancy rate of 45%

throughout the entire season which is second only to the occupancy rates at Rockwood

31

CA. It is expected that three-way sites would experience similar, or higher, rates of

occupancy.

It is proposed that the new campsites be offered for nightly camping. The thirty-five (35)

existing sites will continue to be offered for seasonal camping in 2020. Demand for

nightly campsites will be monitored and adjustments may be made to the number of

nightly sites offered in future years.


None.


Dave Bennett Director of Operations

Joe Farwell, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

32

Appendix A: Pines Campground Modifications – Elora Gorge Conservation Area

Pines Washroom

Area of Campsite

Replacement

Middlebrook Gatehouse

Proposed Day Use Area

Sewage Pumping Station

33

Appendix B: Pines Campground Reconfiguration Plan

Exis

tin

g C

am

psit

es

Pro

po

sed

Cam

ps

ites

Op

en

Sp

ac

e

34



Date: May 24 2019

To: Members of Grand River Conservation Authority

Subject: GRCA Applications Intake 5 of the National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP) Update

Recommendation:

THAT the Grand River Conservation Authority approve matching funding of $90,000 for the New Hamburg Flood Mitigation Study from the Land Sale Proceeds Reserve.

Report:

In August 2018 staff presented board report GM-08-18-13 requesting authorization to submit three separate project applications to Intake 5 of the National Disaster Mitigation Program (NDMP). The board approve motions to submit applications for three separate project along with a letter of support and approved using reserves for the GRCA 50% share of project costs.

The NDMP program contributes up to 50% of an approved project’s cost, providing an important opportunity to share the cost of flood-related related studies, analysis, floodplain mapping, or small mitigation works.

The September 2018 submission included the following three proposed projects and rationale for their selection is as follows:

1. New Hamburg Flood Mitigation Study – In response to recent flooding events, and following discussion with Township of Wilmot staff and requests from residents in New Hamburg, the GRCA agreed to apply for NDMP funding to review and update floodplain mapping, complete a flood damage assessment, and investigate potential options and costs to reduce the risk of flooding along the Nith River through New Hamburg. Field work and background information review is expected to include the acquisition of bathymetric topography, a survey of existing flood-prone infrastructure (e.g., first-floor elevations, lowest points of water entry), a review of any privately completed flood damage assessments, and compilation of data related to recent flooding (e.g., high-water marks). Anticipated deliverables include updated floodplain mapping, estimate of average annual flood damages, a review of potential options to mitigate flood risk and a cost-benefit analysis to determine feasibility of potential options and support for future applications to obtain external funding to assist with cost of their implementation.

2. Floodwall stabilization along Ballantyne Drive, Brantford – A 100m extent of the

wall is tilting towards the river resulting in 30 mm gaps between a sections and a concern with stability. Additional assessment of the floodwall were completed in 2018. Repair works and construction are anticipated in 2019. As flood control infrastructure, it is expected that grants from both federal (NDMP) and provincial (Water and Erosion Control Infrastructure, or WECI) sources can be leveraged against a GRCA contribution of the project cost.

35

3. Purchase of monitoring equipment and software including the following: a) Purchase and utilization of Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) b) Process controller and programming updates at GRCA dams and Cambridge

Operations Centre - associated with new computer hardware, programming and documentation.

c) Replace aging gauge station infrastructure d) Purchase and install new level loggers Purchase access to Earthquake Notification

System e) Purchasing (and installation) new rain and/or weighing gauges

f) Purchase "Field Visits" software

GRCA received notification from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) that

GRCA’s application for the New Hamburg Flood Mitigation Study was successful. Total

project budget of $180,000 is cost shared 50% by the Federal NDMP program. The MMAH

is the provincial agency administering the NDMP program on behalf of Public Safety

Canada.

GRCA was also informed its other two applications were unsuccessful.

Financial Implications:

It is proposed that GRCA’s 50% share of cost of the the New Hamburg Flood Mitigation Study totalling $90,000 be funded from the land sale proceeds reserve. This approach is consistent with the previously approved approach in board report GM-08-18-13.


Staff from the Engineering and Information Systems Divisions will be involved in these projects.

Prepared by:

Approved by:

Scott Robertson, P.Eng. Senior Water Resources Engineer

Dwight Boyd, P.Eng. Director of Engineering

Joe Farwell, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

36



Date: May 24, 2019


Subject: Current Watershed Conditions as of May 15, 2019

Recommendation:

That Report Number GM-05-19-58 – Current Watershed Conditions as of May 15, 2019 be received as information.

Report:

Precipitation

April and early May have been very wet across the watershed. Precipitation in the first half of May has been above the long term average throughout the watershed. The central and southern parts of the watershed recorded the normal total monthly precipitation by the middle of the month. The Shades Mill climate station recorded a total of 81.2mm by May 15th, while the normal average for the month is 80mm.

April was also a very wet month with all of the watershed climate stations recording well above the long term average. The last 3 full months (February to April) of precipitation was between 118 and 155% of the long term average. Consistently high precipitation means that soils are saturated and many landscape features such as wetlands and ponds are full.

Table 1 includes monthly and recent precipitation trends for select watershed climate stations. Monthly precipitation at the Shand, Shades and Brantford climate stations from 2015 to 2019 is shown in Figure 1.

Table 1: Precipitation Averages at Watershed Climate Stations

Station Monthly Precipitation Percentage of Long Term Average

15-May Long Term Current Last Last Last Last Last

Average Half Full 3 Full 6 Full 12 Full 15 Full

(mm) (mm) Month Month Months Months Months Months

Shand 59.0 81.0 146% 143% 155% 134% 101% 105%

Conestogo 45.6 89.5 102% 124% 118% 101% 88% 97%

Guelph 65.3 79.3 165% 153% 138% 131% 108% 109%

Luther 56.6 88.6 128% 140% 135% 119% 107% 109%

Woolwich 51.6 67.9 152% 136% 127% 128% 107% 105%

Laurel 67.6 82.2 165% 146% 129% 128% 112% 114%

Shades 81.2 80.0 203% 127% 121% 118% 110% 114%

Brantford 72.7 74.1 196% 149% 144% 120% 107% 113%

37

Air Temperatures

The average air temperature for the first half of May was well below the long term average across the watershed. Temperatures at the Shand Dam climate station were close to 2 and a half degrees below the long term average, while they were only about 2 degrees below average at the head office station in Cambridge.

April was a very cold month across the watershed. At the Shand Dam climate station, the average monthly air temperature was approximately 1.4 degrees below the long term average. At the Brantford Airport Environment Canada station the average air temperature was about 0.8 degrees below the long term average. Average air temperatures have been at or below average for the year to date.

Cool temperatures have reduced evaporation and contributed to the persistence of wet soil conditions. Cool temperatures have also reduced evaporation off the Great Lakes that has contributed to all high static Lake Erie levels along with the high precipitation and runoff to the great lakes.

Figure 2 presents recent mean monthly air temperature departures from the long term average recorded at Shand Dam.

Lake Erie Conditions

The level in Lake Erie is near an all-time high for the month of May and is very close to the same level in May of 1986. The average lake elevation to date in May is 174.95m, which is approximately 0.65m above the long term average and only 2cm below the monthly average for May 1986. Forecast lake levels from Canadian Hydrographic Survey from May 1st indicate that the lake will likely continue to increase over the next month. The current static Lake Erie level has reached 175.1 m if the current levels persist it is likely a new maximum mean monthly elevation will result. The current maximum mean monthly Lake Erie levels is June 1986 that saw mean monthly Lake Erie levels of 175.04 m.

The high lake level increases the risk of shoreline flooding and erosion from wind and wave run up.

Figure 3 presents current and forecast Lake Erie level from the Canadian Hydrographic Service.

Reservoir Conditions

Wet conditions above the large reservoirs have resulted in high inflows and a need to carefully manage water levels. Discharges from the reservoirs have been higher than normal for May. The reservoirs are all at their normal operating level for this time of year and are occasionally above the normal level for brief periods while managing high flows.

May and June are transition months where operation of the reservoirs switches from filling to flow augmentation. With the very wet conditions to date in May there has not been a requirement to start low flow augmentation. The focus of reservoir operations has been to maintain a sufficient level of flood storage under very wet conditions.

Reservoir levels are shown in Figures 4 and Figure 5 for the four large reservoirs.

Long Range Outlook

38

Environment Canada’s seasonal forecasts are predicting close to normal temperatures and precipitation for Southern Ontario for the May to July period.

The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry operational forecast is predicting cool and wet conditions into early summer with a possibility of a drying period by August and into September.

Flood Preparedness

Conditions are being monitored closely. Staff continues to hold weekly Senior Operator meetings as part of overall succession planning initiatives and flood emergency preparedness.

Work with municipal emergency management coordinators (CEMC’s) in Waterloo Region and with Wellington County continues in preparation for a test of the Conestogo Dam emergency preparedness plan in the fall of 2020. The desk top exercise is planned to be a multi municipality and multiagency exercise. A meeting was held in April with municipal GIS staff and CEMC’s to the GIS layers GRCA is developing and will be providing to municipal staff. These new GIS layers map out five zones of flooding up to the Regulatory flood and include three additional zones beyond the limit of the Regulatory flood that include the probable maximum flood, sunny day dam break flood and probable maximum flood with dam break.


Not applicable


Not applicable


Stephanie Shifflett Water Resources Engineer

Dwight Boyd Director of Engineering

39

Figure 1: Precipitation at Shand Dam, Shades Mill Dam and Brantford 2015 to May 15 2019

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 Jan-19

Mo

nth

ly P

recip

ita

ito

n (

mm

)

Date

Shand Dam Monthly Precipitation 2015- 2019

Monthly Precipitation Long Term Average

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200


Mo

nth

ly P

recip

ita

ito

n (

mm

)

Date

Shades Mill Dam Monthly Precipitation 2015- 2019


0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200


Mo

nth

ly P

recip

itait

on

(m

m)

Date

Brantford Monthly Precipitation 2015- 2019


40

Figure 2: Departures from Average Air Temperatures

Figure 3: Forecasted Lake Erie Levels

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

Jan

-09

Jan

-10

Jan

-11

Jan

-12

Jan

-13

Jan

-14

Jan

-15

Jan

-16

Jan

-17

Jan

-18

Jan

-19D

ep

art

ure

s F

rom

Avera

ge

Mo

nth

ly A

ir T

em

pera

ture

(

oC

)

Date

Departures From Average Monthly Air Temperature at Shand Dam 2008 - 2019

*only partial data available for May 2019

41

Figure 4: Shand and Conestogo Reservoir Elevation Plots

408.0

410.0

412.0

414.0

416.0

418.0

420.0

422.0

424.0

426.0

1-J

an

31-J

an

2-M

ar

1-A

pr

1-M

ay

31-M

ay

30-J

un

30-J

ul

29-A

ug

28-S

ep

28-O

ct

27-N

ov

27-D

ec

Lake E

levati

on

(m

)

Date

Shand Dam Reservoir Elevation Plot 2019

Shand Upper Buffer Shand Lower Buffer 2019

370.0

372.0

374.0

376.0

378.0

380.0

382.0

384.0

386.0

388.0

390.0

392.0

394.0

396.0

1-J

an

31

-Ja

n

2-M

ar

1-A

pr

1-M

ay

31

-Ma

y

30

-Ju

n

30

-Ju

l

29

-Au

g

28

-Se

p

28

-Oct

27

-No

v

27

-De

c

La

ke E

levati

on

(m

)

Date

Conestogo Dam Reservoir Elevation Plot 2019

Conestogo Upper Buffer Conestogo Lower Buffer 2019

42

Figure 5: Guelph and Luther Reservoir Elevation Plots

Luther Dam Operating Curves

Luther Dam primarily provides a flow augmentation function to the upper Grand River and to Shand Dam. While it does provide some benefits from a flood control perspective, these benefits are limited due to the small drainage area regulated by Luther Dam.

The buffers between March 1st and September 30th define the operating range to meet downstream low flow targets. The lower buffer defines the lowest operating range for flow augmentation before reducing downstream flow augmentation targets. The earlier winter (January 1st to March 1st) and late fall (October 1st to December 31st) upper buffer curve is defined from ecologic considerations from the Luther Marsh Master Plan.

340.0

342.0

344.0

346.0

348.0

350.0

1-J

an

31-J

an

2-M

ar

1-A

pr

1-M

ay

31-M

ay

30-J

un

30-J

ul

29-A

ug

28-S

ep

28-O

ct

27-N

ov

27-D

ec

Lake E

levati

on

(m

)

Date

Guelph Dam Reservoir Elevation Plot 2019

Guelph Upper Buffer Guelph Lower Buffer 2019

480.0

480.3

480.5

480.8

481.0

481.3

481.5

481.8

482.0

482.3

482.5

1-J

an

31-J

an

2-M

ar

1-A

pr

1-M

ay

31-M

ay

30-J

un

30-J

ul

29-A

ug

28-S

ep

28-O

ct

27-N

ov

27-D

ec

La

ke E

levati

on

(m

)

Date

Luther Dam Reservoir Elevation Plot 2019

Luther Upper Buffer Luther Lower Buffer 2019

43

eSCRIBE Agenda Package...2019/05/24 · issued. The GRCA has been given until June 28th 2019 to...

Documents

Transcript of eSCRIBE Agenda Package...2019/05/24 · issued. The GRCA has been given until June 28th 2019 to...