The purpose of this PIC is to present:

• a description of the Class EA process;

• a summary of the existing conditions;

• a summary of the problems and opportunities;

• a description of the alternative solutions considered (i.e. do nothing);

• evaluation of alternatives including criteria and methodology;

• a description of the preliminary recommendations; and

• a summary of the future activities to be completed.

Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) Study for the Stormwater Servicing and Tributary Works for the North

Lambeth No. P-9 SWM Facility

Your comments are important to us. Following your review of the information, please

complete one of the comment forms and place it in the box provided or send it back to the

address on the form prior to November 28, 2014.

If you have any questions our representatives will be pleased to assist you.

David Gough, P.Eng.Environment Service Engineer

David Gough, P.Eng.Environment Service Engineer

Scott MathersManager, Stormwater Management Division

Scott MathersManager, Stormwater Management Division

David Gough, P.Eng.Environment Service Engineer

Scott MathersManager, Stormwater Management Division

Nelson Oliveira, P.Eng.Nelson Oliveira, P.Eng.Project ManagerProject Manager

Nick Emery, P.Eng.Nick Emery, P.Eng.Water Resources EngineerWater Resources Engineer

Corri Marr, H.B.Sc.Corri Marr, H.B.Sc.Senior PlannerSenior Planner

Nelson Oliveira, P.Eng.Project Manager

Nick Emery, P.Eng.Water Resources Engineer

Corri Marr, H.B.Sc.Senior Planner

The Class EA process is a five phase planning process which:

o identifies reasonable solutions to the Problem;

o considers advantages and disadvantages including net environmental effects;

o requires public consultation; and

o provides clear documentation that describes the decision making process.

This study will :

o Follow the Schedule ‘B’ Class EA requirements.

o Complete Phases 1 & 2.

o Document the decision making process in a Screening Report to be filed for a 30 calendar day review period.

Schedule AProjects

Prepare and File Environmental Study Report

(ESR) Documenting Phases 1-3 for Public Review

Problem or Opportunity

Phase 1

Alternative Solutions

Phase 2

Alternative Design Concepts for Preferred Solution

Phase 3

Environmental Study Report

Phase 4

Typical or Emergency Operational Infrastructure

Projects

Evaluate Alternative Design Concept, Identify

Environmental Effects –Mitigation & Preferred

Concept

Prepare Environmental Inventory, Identify/Evaluate

Alternative Solutions & Establish the Preferred

Solution – Prepare and file Project File

Identify & Describe the Problem/Opportunity

Pre-approved – Proceed to Construction

Project Constructed / Restore Disturbed Areas

Typical Infrastructure Projects

Pre-approved – Notify Public Prior to Implementation

Schedule A+Projects

Implementation

Phase 5

Schedule BProjects

Schedule CProjects

• Confirm all drainage/catchment and sub-catchment areas;

• Identify a drainage conveyance system for the proposed North Lambeth No. P-9 SWM Facility;

• Identify any necessary downstream channel modification works;

• Evaluate the benefits of incorporating Private Permanent Systems (PPS) into the preferred stormwater servicing strategy;

• Provide a preliminary design for the preferred solution and develop corresponding cost estimates;

• Preserve downstream channel baseflow;

• Mitigate the possibility of downstream channel erosion caused by the runoff from future growth;

• Prevent any increase in future flood risk potential;

• Protect surface water quality;

• Maintain an appropriate diversity of aquatic and terrestrial life; and

• Provide opportunities for human uses.

As a result of ongoing urban development within the study area, a comprehensive stormwater servicing strategy must be developed.

The intent of the Servicing Strategy is to:

o Mitigate negative impacts of growth on water quality/quantity, as well as flooding and erosion;

o Identify required infrastructure;

o Reduce negative impacts on landowners and the environment;

o Provide a cost-effective solution.

Ultimately, the Servicing Strategy and stormwater management measures will IMPROVE ecological function and result in the greatest environmental benefit.

• Schedule A of the City of London Official Plan identifies land use designations for the study area as low & medium density residential and open space.

• Schedule B1 identifies the natural heritage features of the area. This includes areas of unevaluated vegetation patches and significant corridors along the creek.

• Schedule B2 indentifies natural resources and hazards for the area and identifies the study area as being within the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority regulation limit and within the regulatory floodline.

Anguish Drain (Closed)

Forest City Community Church: Run-off

controlled by existing on-site SWM pond

Anguish Drain (Open)

Colonel Talbot Road Box Culvert

Tributary C

Reach Breaks

Watercourse

Ill-Defined Channel

DP-1a -(Downstream)Channel transitions from manicured lawn to a naturally vegetated area downstream of private property. Flow is split into two small, shallow flow paths heavily controlled by dense vegetation. Numerous flow paths within the broader valley become active during high flows as the watercourse approaches its confluence with Dingman Creek, resulting from the dense shrub vegetation and minor variations in local topography.

DP-1b - Based on observations made from Colonel Talbot Road, the channel becomes well-defined and displays a more natural form. Evidence of widening as bank erosion was typically observed and installed stone protection was being out flanked. Signs of overbank flow were observed with deposition noted on the floodplain at the downstream reach limits.

DP-2 - This reach is geomorphologically sensitive transitioning from hardened banks to less resistant, natural bank materials. A scour pool has formed immediately downstream of the transition point as flows are sediment starved. Scoured material is deposited further downstream forming depositional features as the channels carrying capacity is re-established. A more natural channel form is established in the upstream portion of this reach. Erosion and slumping exists along the Colonel Talbot Road embankment as it acts to direct flows towards the downstream culvert crossing. The Colonel Talbot Road culvert appears to be large enough to convey flows, but does not provide sufficient space for natural channel migration to occur.

DP‐3Channel has been modified, straightened and lined with rip rap, as it flows adjacent to numerous residential propertiesDue to the stone lining, the channel is more or less geomorphologically stable with evidence of overbank flow noted

DP‐4Demonstrated more defined channel form, with an irregular meandering planformSigns of overbank flow were evident via brushed grasses and siltation over floodplain vegetationThe small more defined channel conveys low flows while higher flows are conveyed within the broad, vegetated valley floodplain which also provides prolonged water storage

DP‐5 (Upstream) is a low-lying, intermittent (semi-dry) drainage channel located within an agricultural area. The channel is poorly-defined, with diffuse flow occurring over the flat floodplain.

• archeological and cultural heritage• public health and safety • property impacts/acquisition• aesthetics• land use (e.g. meets Official Plan

objectives and is consistent with the existing Draft Plan)

• aboriginal/first nations lands, treaty rights

• compliance with applicable studies/reports

Social/Cultural• achieves stormwater design targets

developed based on the Draft 2014 Dingman Creek Subwatershed Study Update

• compliance with applicable design standards

• compliance with OMB Decision dated February, 2014 regarding Auburn lands and servicing

• compliance with applicable watercourse and floodplain policies (Official Plan, UTRCA guidelines)

• site design and operational challenges

• geotechnical considerations that may affect implementation of storm drainage measures

• risk and consequence of system failure

Technical

• initial capital cost • property acquisition costs• operation and maintenance costs• compliance with Development

Charges Background Report

Economic

• floodplain impact/ policy • erosion and sedimentation in

downstream tributary• aquatic habitats• terrestrial habitats• migratory/other birds: (e.g. waterfowl,

songbirds)• special habitat areas (specially

designated or protected habitats, migration routes, specific policies)

• groundwater quality and quantity

Natural EnvironmentRecommended

Solution

Option A:

SWAP SWM Pond

Location

Option B:

Pond in area

withheld from

OMB Decision

Option C:

SWAP & OMB SWM

Pond Location

Alternative Description Preliminary EvaluationCarried Forward

for Further Consideration

Do Nothing Improvements or changes to existing storm drainage and stormwater management (SWM) measures would not be implemented in the study area to service future growth.

This solution does not address the problem. It does not comply with the Official Plan Policies or the Provincial Policy Statement specific to the provisions to ensure necessary infrastructure will be available to meet current and projected growth. It does not comply with regulatory requirements or protect human health and the natural environment.

Limit Growth Residential growth would be limited within the study area.

This solution does not address the problem. It does not comply with the Official Plan Policies or the Ontario Municipal Board decision permitting growth within the study area.

Low ImpactDevelopment

(LID)

LID is a series of cost-effective, lot-level strategies that try to replicate predevelopment conditions and generate less runoff by infiltrating rainfall into groundwater, evaporating rainwater back into the atmosphere after a storm, and finding beneficial uses for water rather than conveying it through storm sewers.

This solution does not provide sufficient capacity to treat runoff on its own and meet the quality and quantity control targets as outlined in the Dingman Creek Subwatershed Study (DCSS). This solution may supplement end-of-pipe controls.

Permanent Private SWM Measures

(PPS)

PPS are intended to be used in medium and high density residential; (MDR/HDR) institutional ; commercial and industrial developments (ICI). These systems may include depressed storage in parking lots, green roof storage, and oil and grit separators.

Permanent Private SWM measures may be beneficial to address water quality and quantity in MDR and ICI land use designations but given that the MDR land use forms a relatively small percentage of the development area, benefits may not be significant if implemented on their own. PPS may supplement end-of-pipe controls.

“End-of-Pipe” Alternatives

Typically multi-purpose stormwater management facilities addressing objectives relating to water quality, erosion control, and peak flow control. Dry ponds, wet ponds, and wetlands are typical alternatives, although dry ponds are not considered a feasible alternative for this application.

This solution does address the problem. It complies with the Official Plan Policies, Provincial Policy Statement and OMB decision specific to the provisions to ensure necessary infrastructure will be available to meet current and projected growth. End of pipe facilities can be designed efficiently, provide water quality and quantity control to meet DCSS targets, and can service drainage areas > 10 hectares.

• This solution provides storm conveyance and SWM measures for an approximately 119 hectare area triggered by development.

• A Regional SWM Facility designed as a wet pond will provide water quality, quantity, and erosion control for 115 hectares.

• Runoff from the remaining service area will be treated by on-site SWM controls that will discharge to external drainage works located in the Colonel Talbot Road right-of-way.

• The SWM measures will provide MOE “Enhanced” Protection Level water quality control, as described in the MOE design guidelines.

• Outlet improvements will be required to convey stormwater from the proposed SWM facility to the existing downstream channel. Pipe or open channel could be used for this purpose, an open channel provides potential benefits including natural heritage mitigation, passive recreation, and habitat creation. The proposed outlet improvements will be identified in further detail following confirmation of the preferred solution.

Notice of Project Commencement

issued July 24th and August 21st, 2014

Distribution of :•Letter•Newspaper

Notice•City of London

website

Project Team Meetings

• Project Team meets regularly throughout the study

•Includes City personnel and consultants

•Review existing conditions

•Identify the Problem

•Confirm the need and justification

•Identify solutions

Receive and Address

Comments from PIC

Notice of PIC issuedOctober 30th,

November 6th, 2014PI C #1

November 12, 2014

Draft Recommendations to

the City

Document Class EA process, alternatives

and recommendations

Notice of Project Completion

•File Class EA documentation for mandatory 30 day review period

•If no Part II orders, proceed to detailed design and implementation

Summer 2014

Class EAPhase 1

•Present evaluation criteria & methodology

•Alternative solutions•Preliminary

recommended Alternative

30 Day Review Period

Fall 2014

Indicates where we are in the process.

Winter 2015

City Council Endorsement

Distribution of :•Letter•Newspaper

Notice•City of London

website

Distribution of :•Letter•Newspaper Notice•City of London

website

Agency/StakeholderConsultation

•UTRCA•MNR•MOE•CNR•AANDC/MAA

•Develop evaluation criteria and methodology

•Identify impacts•Identify mitigation

measures•Identify preliminary

recommendations

Class EAPhase 2

Municipal Class Environmental

Assessment Study for the North Lambeth No. P-9 SWM Facility

Detailed Design and Implementation

• Receive / consider input from public and agency consultation to confirm or refine the preliminary recommended solution;

• Stantec to identify mitigation measures to reduce/offset potential adverse effects;

• Receive council endorsement of recommended solution;• Prepare Screening Report.

• Issue a Notice of Completion and File the Screening Report for the mandatory 30 day review period;

• Address comments raised during the 30 day review period;• Anyone with outstanding concerns, which cannot be addressed, may,

within 30 calendar days of the Notice of Completion, request the Minister of Environment to issue an order to comply with Part II of the EA Act, known as a ‘Part II Order’, bumping up the status of the project;

• If no Part II Order requests are received, then the City may proceed with design & implementation.

Fall 2014/

Winter 2015

Winter 2015

Spring 2015 • Detailed Design and Construction