Chapter A - Introduction - City of Pickering

COMMENT MESPA RESPONSE (December 2011) CITY RESPONSE (October 2012) RESPONSE
outlined in the City’s design guide, which is consistent with Policy 11.45 of the
Conformity Amendment.
In addition to the above the City requests that the Neighbourhood Functional
Servicing Reports provide provisions for operation and maintenance
requirements, specifically as it relates to maintenance access requirements.
City staff have, through the review of the SWM Matrices (Appendix B6-B),
identified 18 stormwater management facilities (out of the 60 proposed
facilities) which alternative locations, or additional facilities may be warranted
for consideration. Concerns with these facilities may be associated, but not
limited to the following; Geotechnical, Major System flow direction, Operation
and Maintenance, etc. A detailed list of concerns associated with the
proposed SWM facilities is provided in Appendix B.
Please note that City staff still have significant concerns associated with
erosion of watercourses which have no current defined channel, have existing
erosion issues, or are classified as gully systems. City staff has identified 17
watercourses of concern (Appendix C), where erosion may potentially occur,
regardless of the level of SWM controls. City staff would like to work
proactively with representatives from TRCA, MNR, and the SLG to address
this issue.
In addition to the issues identified above, the City has concerns with the
requirements to maintain water balance to some of the headwater drainage
features identified in the MESPA. A majority of these features should be
considered Gully systems, or systems with no defined channel, where erosion
will be an issue due to the mitigation measures proposed. Details related to
the City’s concerns, and recommendations for the mitigation measures have
been provided in Appendix D.
The Annotated Table of Contents, which sets out the scope of work required for the NFSSRs, has been revised to reference the City’s “Stormwater
Management Design Guidelines” and identify the need for maintenance access for SWM facilities.
The concerns for each SWM facility have been reviewed and responses provided as Appendix B to these comments. Please note that the analysis
presented in the MESPA is a high level review of the location for SWM facilities and that more detailed analysis of geotechnical, major system flow
direction, pond configuration and operation and maintenance design considerations will take place as part of the NFSSRs.
Each of the 17 watercourses of concern have been reviewed and a response provided as Appendix C to these comments. This has been incorporated
into the MESPA in Chapter B Section 10.5.
The City’s concerns regarding headwater drainage features have been reviewed and a response provided as Appendix D to these comments. Additional
discussion of the proposed mitigation measures for augmentation to headwater drainage features is presented in Chapter B Section 10.5.
REPORT CHAPTER
AND SECTION
J2.0
Appendix J2
Chapter B, Section
B10.0
Provincial Responsibilities
Although the MESP provides a recommended stormwater management plan
for Seaton, there is no discussion on the role of the Province regarding longterm
operations and maintenance of stormwater management facilities within
the Natural Heritage System (NHS). It is further complicated by the fact that
until all future impacts are known, the need for additional easements from the
Province to mitigate the impacts cannot be determined. Any potential impacts
on these lands such as increased flooding, erosion, residual impacts on the
aquatic system due to increased runoff volumes, decreased baseflow,
thermal instability, water quality, etc. must be reviewed and approved by the
Province. We concur with TRCA that an overall approach to provide the
appropriate mitigation/ compensation for direct impacts (i.e. crossings,
changes in flow regime) should be developed in consultation with TRCA,
Region and the Province.
The role of the province was discussed at the
MESPA/NFSSR Coordination meeting (February 17 th ,
2011).
Comment noted.
City staff are unclear as to how the response
provided addresses the City’s concern.
City staff are requesting clarification/direction
from the province for the following;
• Given that the CPDP is a provincial plan,
the province will need to provide final
signoff on impacts to the NHS, specifically
as it relates to the presence of endangered
species.
• Clarify the City’s role and responsibility for
addressing future impacts to the NHS,
specifically as it relates to municipal
drainage being directed to the NHS (i.e.
stormwater management, feature based
water balance).
• To ensure success of the SWM plan the
MNR needs to be involved at this stage of
the process. If MNR’s involvement is left to
the detailed design phase of the process,
then there will be less viable options for
mitigation. In addition under the Planning
A meeting between TRCA, MNR and the
City took place on November 7, 2012 where
the topic of management of infrastructure in
the NHS was discussed.
As discussed at this meeting and outlined in
an email from OILC dated January 31,
2012, the Province does not have a role
regarding the long-term operations and
maintenance of stormwater management
(SWM) facilities, including Low Impact
Development (LID) measures, constructed
within the Natural Heritage System. These
SWM facilities and LID measures will be
constructed by the Private Developers,
based on approved design by all of the
appropriate authorities, and after a specified
operating maintenance period that satisfies
the Municipality, responsibility for the facility
will be with that Municipality. The Province
has identified that it will provide to the
Municipality an Exclusive Easement for the
Chapter H, Appendix
H15-D
The Sernas Group Inc., Stonybrook Consulting Inc. December 2011, Revised February 2013 Master Environmental Servicing Plan - Amendment
SPL Beatty, Bird and Hale Limited, Earthfx Inc. 07161 Seaton Community, City of Pickering
AMEC Earth & Environmental, R.J. Burnside Appendix A7 – Page 5
Amos Environment + Planning