HomeMy WebLinkAboutFlood Control & Water Conservation Advisory Board 1977
~~ C-l
fF
"
,
the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority
minutes
FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONS. ADV. BOARD THURSDAY-MARCH-31-1977 #1/77
The Flood Control and Water Conservation Advisory Board met at the
Authority office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on Thursday, March
31, 1977, commencing at 2:00 p.m.
PRESENT WERE
Vice Chairman Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
Members R. Fitzpatrick
G. Ross Lord
F.R. Perkins
G. Risk
J.S. Scott
H. Westney
L. Martin
Chairman of the Authority R. Grant Henderson
Vice Chairman of the Authority Mrs. F. Gell
Secretary-Treasurer K.G. Higgs
Adm. - Water Resource Division M.R. Garrett
Head, ~lood Control Section J.C. Mather
Project Engineer, Dev. A.G. Sahabandu
Project Engineer R. Saadia
Project Planner T.E. Farrell
Project Biologist I. Macnab
Development Co-ordinator J.W. Maletich
Biologist, Planning & Policy -A. Freeman
ABSENT WERE
Chc.;.irman J. Carroll
Members C.F. Kline
F.J. McKechnie
J. Sewell
A. Tonks
In the absence of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman assumed the Chair.
Mr. Herridge asked all members to introduce themselves.
Mr. Garrett introduced the staff of the Water Resource Division.
MINUTES
The Minutes of Meeting #2/76 were presented.
Res. #1 Moved by: F.R. Perkins.
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #2/76, as presented, be adopted.
CARRIED;
STAFF PROGRESS REPORT
The staff presented the Progress Report for the year 1976.
Res. #2 Moved by: Mrs. F. Gell
Seconded by: J.S. Scott
RESOLVED rfHAT: The staff progress report for the year 1976, as
presented, be received for information. CARRIED;
C-2 ...2-
PROJECT ~v.C. -60, EROSION CONTROL & BANK ST^BILIZ^TION
IN METROPOLIT^N TORONTO: lO-YEAR PROGRAMME and 5-YEAR
PROJECT -
Progress Report, Current Priorities and 1977 Work
Programme
The staff submitted a report outlining the accomplishments to date,
the current priorities and the 1977 work programme.
Res. #3 Moved by: F.R. Perkins
Seconded by: G. Risk
RESOLVED THAT: The staff communication respecting Project W.C.-60,
Progress Report, Current Priorities and 1977 Work Programme, be
received; and
THAT the Board concurs with the Current Priorities and the 1977 Work
Programme as outlined and approved by the Executive Committee.
CARRIED;
Res. #4 Moved by: J.S. Scott
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The staff be requested to include a review
uf the present policy regarding the contributions of owners towards
erosion control projects as part of the Flood Control Plan Review.
CARRIED;
WATERSHED CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
With the agreement of the Board, the item 'Watershed Classification
System' was withdrawn and will be considered at a later meeting of
the Board.
EROSION CONTROL METHODOLOGY -
PROPOSED EROSION CONTROL AND PRIORITY STUDY:
Hegions of Peel, York and Durham
A staff communication was presented respecting a proposed Erosion
Control and Priority Study in the Regions of Peel, York and Durham.
Res. #5 Moved by: G. Risk
Seconded by: G. Ross Lord
RESOLVED THAT: The staff report respecting Erosion Control Methodology,
Proposed Erosion Control and Priority Study - Regions of Peel, York and
Durham, be received; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: An Erosion Inventory and Priority Study be
carried out for the Regions of Peel, York and Durham. CARRIED;
FLOOD WARNING SYSTEM
Contingency Planning
A staff report was presented respecting Contingency Planning for the
Flood Warning System.
Res. #6 Moved by: L. Martin
Seconded by: F.R. Perkins
RESOLVED THAT: The staff report having regard to Contingency Planning
for the Flood Warning System be received; and
THE BO^RD RECOMMENDS THAT: The recommendations contained in the staff
report respecting Contingency Planning for the Flood Warning System,
as amended and set forth herein, be adopted:
(a) The Regional Municipalities of Peel, York, Durham
and Metropolitan Toronto be requested to develop
a Flood Contingency Plan, as required by the Ministry
of Natural Resources.
-3- C-3
(b) The contingency plan be presented to the appropriate
Regional Municipal Countil for enactment as a By-law
under Section 242 of the Municipal Act, as required
by the Ministry of Natural Resources.
( c) The Councils direct their appropriate departments to
meet with The Metropolitan Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority to discuss the flood
contingency plans and the subsequent response after
being alerted to a potential flood emergency.
CARRIED;
Res. #7 Moved by: G. Risk
Seconded by: L. Martin
RESOLVED THAT: The staff be requested to obtain advice from. the
Authority solicitor regarding the Authority's liability for the
operation of the Flood Warning and Forecasting System. CARRIED;
WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
A staff report concerning the Watershed Environmental Monitoring
Program was presented.
Res. #8 Moved by: G. Ross Lord
Seconded by: H. WesLney
RESOLVED THAT: The staff communication having regard to the Watershed
Environmental Monitoring Program be received; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The staff be directed to act, where
appropriate, on the recommendations contained in the staff report
entitled 'watershed Environmental Monitoring Program - 1976', dated
1977, as appended as Schedule "A" of these r-1inutes; and
THAT the watershed environmental monitoring program be continued in
1977. CARRIED;
HIGHLAND CREEK FLOODING
The staff presented a communication concerning flooding in the
Highland Creek - August 27 and 28, 1976.
Res. #9 Moved by: F.R. Perkins
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED THAT: The staff communication and report having regard to
the Highland Creek flooding be received for information.
CARRIED;
PROJECT W.C.-75 -
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS ON THE HIGHLAND CREEK
The staff presented a communication respecting Project W.C.-75 - 'A
Project for Channel Improvements on the Highland Creek'.
Res. #10 Moved by: G. Ross Lord
Seconded by: H. Westney
RESOLVED THAT: The staff communication and project having regard to
Project W.C.-75 - 'A Project for Channel Improvements on the Highland
Creek' , be received and the brief appended as Schedule "B" of these
Minutes; and'
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: Project W.C.-75 - 'A Project for Channel
Improvements on the Highland Creek' be adopted; and further in this
connection
~ -
C-4 -4-
.
THAT the following action be taken:
(a) The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be designated as
the benefiting municipality on the basis set forth in the
Project;
(b) The Government of Ontario be requested to approve the
Project and a grant of 50% of the cost thereof;
(c) The Ontario Municipal Board be requested to approve the
Project pursuant to Section 23 of the Conservation
Authorities Act;
(d) When approved, the appropriate Authority officials be
authorized to take whatever action is required in
connection with the Project, including the execution of
any necessary documents; and further
THAT for the year 1977, The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be
levied $62,485; it being their share of the 1977 expenditures of
$124,970. for this Project; and further
'rHAT the staff be requested to provide additional design criteria
for submission to Authority Meeting # 3, to be held April 22, 1977.
CARRIED;
POSSIBLE DIVERSION
East Branch Mimico Creek to
West Branch Humber River
Res. #11 Moved by: J.S. Scott
Seconded by: F.R. Perkins
RESOLVED THAT: Consideration of the item: 'Possible Diversion - East
Branch Mimico Creek to West Branch Humber River', be deferred to the
next regular meeting of the Board. CARRIED;
SILTATION - KEATING CHANNEL
A staff communication was presented having regard to Siltation of the
Keating Channel.
RGs. #12 Moved by: G. Ross Lord
-
Seconded by: F.R. Perkins
hr;SOLVED THAT: The staff communication having regard to Siltation of
the Keating Channel be received; and
THAT the Board concurs in the recommendations of the Executive
Committee as adopted at Meeting #3/77, held March 9, 1977. CARRIED;
NEW BUSINESS:
CONTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY OWNERS
Erosion Control Structures
The staff made an oral presentation having regard to the contributions
of owners towards erosion control structures.
Res. #13 Moved by:' L. Martin
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED TH^T: The staff be requested to prepare a report in respGct
of the contribution of owners toward erosion control structures for
submission to the next regular meeting of the Board. Cl\RRIED;
On Motion, the Meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m., March 31.
Wm. R. Herrid<Je, Vice Chairman K.G. IIi9gs
Acting Chairman Secretary-Treasurer.
SCHEDULE "A" C-5
To: The Chairman and Members of the Flood Control and
Water Conservation ^dvisory Board - Meeting #1/77
Re: WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
In September 1976, as part of the Flood Control Plan review
process and to assist in environmental assessment of flood
control projects, the Authority began an environmental monitoring
program of the watercourses within its jurisdiction. The goal
of this program is to develop the ability to predict the impact
of flood and erosion control works, on the environmental regime
of a river or stream.
The monitoring program examined water quality, sediment quality
and bottom dwelling invertebrate populations from eleven areas
over a twelve week period.
Variation in water quality, as a result of Authority structures,
was minor and could not be distinguished from other sources of
variation acting on the watercourse. Although direct analytical
evidence did not indicate structural effects, it appeared from
visual observation that sediment characteristics varied above,
at, and below some Authority stabilization works as a result of
associated changes in stream flow characteristics. At most
stations the effect of Authority works on the benthos appeared
to be hidden by the variability of upstream water quality and
point source additions of storm sewer effluent.
Attached for your review and information is a summary of the
Report entitled "Watershed Environmental Monitoring Program -
1976", dated 1977.
The monitoring program will be continued in 1977 with Authority
staff undertaking all field work and report preparatioD. A
consultant will undertake the laboratory analyses and provide a
technical review of the monitoring report.
The monitoring program will be structurally altered in 1977 ln
order to make it more responsive to assessing environmental
conditions and change. Alterations will be made after discussion
with the program consultant and the Province.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT: The staff communication and Report entitled: "Watershed
Environmental Monitoring Program - 1976", dated 1977, be
received; and,
THE BOARD RECO~MENDS THAT: Staff be directed to act on the
recommendations contained in the Report, where appropriate; and,
FURTHER THAT: The watershed environmental monitoring program
be continued in 1977.
.
M. R. Garrett
Administrator
Water Resource Division
Attach:
March 23, 1977
Idm/md
C-6
WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM - 1976
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
MARCH 1977
.
C-7
l. INTRODUCTION
As a stream progresses from source to mouth, water enters it from
groundwater outflows, snow melt and runoff from the land. Contacts with
the air, stream bed, and subterranean material influence the characteristics
of this water. Contaminants in the air or on the land originate from a
variety of domestic, agricultural, industrial and urban sources. Carried
from the watershed by runoff, these materials enter the stream, usuapy
adversely affecting water quality. The severity of degradation is largely
correlated with the scope and number of man's activities, as well as
quantity and frequency of precipitation.
In September 1976 the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
initiated a watershed environmental monitoring program.
The goal of this program is to develop the ability to predict the impact
of dam and reservoir construction, channelization, and bank stabilization
works on the environmental regime of streams and their surrounding environs.
In addition, the information collected through the monitoring program will
provide input into the Flood Control Plan review process and the environ-
mental assessment of flood and erosion control projects.
2. SCOPE OF STUDY
The monitoring program examined eleven areas over a twelve week period between
September 21 and December 14, 1976. During this period of time, water quality
was monitored on a weekly basis. The parameters examined were temperature,
turbidity, total suspended solids, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH,
Kheldahl nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen, total phosphorus, total coliforms,
fecal coli forms and fecal streptococci. In addition, benthic invertebrate
populations were sampled and sediments analyzed for grain size, Kjeldahl
nitrogen, total phosphorus, total carbon, volatile solids, protein, lead,
mercury and zinc.
Sampling stations were located within the Etobicoke Creek, Humber River,
and Don River watersheds. The areas monitored included existing dam sites;
concrete, gabion and rip rap channels; and areas undisturbed by Authority
structures (control areas). In each area a series of stations consisting
of an upstream site, a site within the Authority structure, and a downstream
site, were monitored. By examining this series of stations at each area it
was hoped to determine the impact of the Authority structure on the environment.
C-8 J?age ~2-
3. W1\TER QU1\LI'l'Y
Streams entering Metropolitan Toronto were typic~l of those associated with rural
watersheds. Generally, such streams have low dissolved solids, nutrient and
bacteria levels. 1\s the streams flowed through t-letropoli tan Toronto, wa tf~r
quality impairment took place. Fecal pollution was particularly noticeable
at stations along Black Creek, Newtonbrook Creek, and the East and West
Branches of the Don River. Bacterial levels found at stations along the
Humber River and Etobicoke Creek were also moderately high. Values of
nutrients, dissolved solids and particulate matter were elevated at some
stations. Consistently high levels of Kjeldahl nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen,
total phosphorus and dissolved solids were monitored at the control station
on the East Don River and in the vicinity of the G. Ross Lord Dam on the West
Don River.
Although interpretation of the data was not meant to identify all sources
and processes involved, evidence did suggest certain trends and strong
influences. As expected, diffuse sources such as surfacG rWloff resulting from
rainfall events did contribute to the degradation of water quality. However,
the monitoring program showed that point sources were the main cause of poorer
water chemistry. The data exhibited very large standard deviations which appeared
to be related to the intermittent and variable water quality flows from sewers.
Some stations indicated that probably unidentified point sources could have
very significant effects on stream quality. These areas included Black Creek
in the vicinity of High',vay 401, NE\vtonbrook Creek and East Don River near Finch
Avenue.
Statistical analyses indicated that there was no statistically significant
difference in water quality upstream, at, and downstream of Authority works
except at the Claireville Dam.
At the Claireville Dam bacteria counts were lower at the downstream stations than
the upstream stations. This was attributed to the large detention time
associated with the dam. Higher conductivity values downstream of the reservoir
may be due to a slightly higher total dissolved solids concentration as a result
of evaporation from the reservoir surface.
At the Westleigh Crescent channelization site on the Etobicoke Creek, water
quality did not appear to be affected by local point sources of contamination.
the higher concentrations of Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus and suspended
solids at the downstream stations were associated with the construction of the
channel. Elevated values were most pronounced during bulldozing. Since s.lmples .
Page -3- C-9
were collected during peak construction activity, the sediment pollution
observed may be an example of what might be expected under normal channelization
work.
4. SEDIMENT QUALITY
The streams under study were defined as moderately polluted in terms of the
sediment quality parameters investigated. As might be expected, there appeared
to be a relationship between water quality observed at a stream station and
the degree of contamination in the corresponding sediments.
The best sediment quality was found along the Humber River at the Woodbridge
and Claireville stations and along the Etobicoke Creek at Snelgrove. These
areas are outside Metropolitan Toronto. Although rich in organics and nutrients,
the heavy metal levels in these sediments were relatively low.
The poorest sediment quality was observed at the Black Creek stations, along
Etobicoke Creek at Westleigh Crescent, along the Humber River near Dundas Street
and the Newtonbrook Creek stations. These sediments had high organic, nutrient
and heavy metal levels.
Although direct an~lytical evidence did not indicate structural effects,
visual observations suggested that sediment characteristics varied above, at,
and below some Authority structures as a result of associated changes in stream
flow characteristics.
At the Claireville Dam the sediment in the reservoir was composed mainly of
silty clays. This siltation was a result of lower flow velocity through the
reservoir; pebbles, sand and gravel predominated. As expected, the silty clays
in the reservoir showed higher organic, nutrient and trace metal concentrations
than did the upstream and downstream sediments. In field observations
indicated that the substrate below the dam was of a larger grain size than
upstream of the reservoir. This is typical of an area scoured, by high velocity
discharges.
In most instances changes in sediment quality between sampling stations was
considered to be due to effluent discharges, tributary stream inflows and
surface runoff into the water course. In areas where construction was occurring,
there was evidence of downstream siltation.
C-IO Page -3-
were collected during peak construction activity, the sediment pollution
observed milY be an example of what might be expected under normal channeliziltion
work.
4. SEDIMENT QUALITY
The strcams under study were defined as moderately polluted in terms of thc
sediment quality parameters investigated. As might be expected, there appeared
to be a relationship between water quality observed at a stream station and
the degree of contamination in the corresponding sediments.
The best sediment quality was found along the Humber River at the Woodbridge
and Claireville stations and along the Etobicoke Creek at Snelgrove. These
areas are outside Metropolitan ~oronto. Although rich in organics and nutrients,
the heavy metal levels in these sediments were relatively low.
The poorest sediment quality was observed at the Black Creek stations, along
Etobicoke Creek at Westleigh Crescent, along the Humber River near Dundas Street
and the Newtonbrook Creek stations. These sediments had high organic, 'nutrient
and heavy metal levels.
Although direct analytical evidence did not indicate structural effects,
visual observations suggested that sediment characteristics varied above, at,
and below some Authority structures as a result of associated changes in stream
flow characteristics.
At the Claireville Dam the sediment in the reservoir was composed mairly of
silty clays. This siltation was a result of lower flow velocity through the
reservoir; pebbles, sand and gravel predominated upstream and downstream of
the reservoir. As expected, the silty clays in the reservoir showed higher
organic, nutrient and trace metal concentrations than did the upstream and
downstream sediments. In field observations indicated that the substrate below
the darn was of a larger grain size than upstream of the reservoir. This is typical
of an area scoured by high velocity discharges.
In most instances changes in sediment quality between sampling stations was
considered to be due to effluent discharges, tributary stream inflows and
surface runoff into the water course. In areas where construction was
occurring, there was evidence of downstream siltation.
.
Page -4- C-ll
4. Sediment Quality (continued)
Channelization did not appear to directly affect sediment quality. However,
the sediments found within the concrete channel on the Black Creek tetween
Wilson Avenue and Queens Drive were contaminated with heavy metals (lead, Zinc) .
The contaminants were associated with sewer inputs into the channel, and, due
to the concrete lining of the channel these inputs could not be diluted with
stream bed sediments. Consequently high levels were recorded.
'Prior to channel construction at Westleigh Crescent on the Etobicoke Creek
there was a somewhat uniform distribution in sediment quality and type.
Variation was related to streambed and flow irregularities. As a result of
construction activity siltation occurred in the immediate vicinity of the
new channel. Sediment stations downstream of the channel did not show
significant increases in silt and clay indicating that deposition of fines
occurred primarily in the immediate area of construction. Sediment quality improved
near the channel site as a result of this deposition of fines but such improvement
was thought to be temporary as degraded water quality and polluted sediments
continued to enter the area from upstream.
5. BENTHOS
The quality and diversity of benthic invertebrates indicated moderate to
severely degraded conditions at all stations within the. boundaries of Hetropolitan
'l'oronto. Black Creek, Don River, and NE~wtonDr:)()k C~eek stct.i'::-Hs =.!:,pc:.ared to
suffer from both nutrient overloads and toxic inputs. Upstream water quality
and point source additions of storm sewer effluent app,:",red to be the dominant
factors controlling benthic populations. To a large extent these factors
hid the effects of Authority works on the benthos.
The dam at Claireville had detectable effects on downstream sediment and thus
on the benthic community structure. The extent of the downstream area affected
by the dam has not yet been determined. The reservoir, as expected, created a
completely different environment from that of the stream and consequently the
benthos was altered. The benthos established within the reservoir was affected
by drawdowns.
The channelization on the Humber River at Woodbridge appeared to have had an
adverse 'affect on the benthic population. The lack of variation in habitat
within the channel is believed to be responsible for the decrease in benthic
.
diversity.
The gabion channel at Newtonbrook Creek and on Black Creek at Yvonne Avenue had
higher numbers of benthic invertebrates and a greater species diversity than did
the areas outside of the gabion channel. This indicated that the gab ions provide a
better habitat for the benthos than does the natural substrate in the upstream-
downstream areas.
C-12 Page .-5-
5. Benthos (continued)
The concrete channel on the Black Creek near Wilson Avenue had no permanent
benthic populations. This was due to a lack of habitat variation and underlies
the importance of habitat to the maintenance of the benthos.
6. CONCLUSIONS
The first year of monitoring has provided a data base which shows a diversity
of inputs acting on the environmental regime of watercourses within the
Metropolitan Toronto region. The effects of Authority works could not be
easily differentiated from these many inputs. Future monitoring must be
refined and additional data collected if this differentiation is to be
made and if the impact of Authority works are to be understood.
It appears that the variations in water quality at a stream station result
from variations in waste discharge, in stream flow, mixing, dilution,
rainfall and surface runcff. These all appear to overshadow any possir1e
minor changes in water quality which might be expected to occur as a result
of Authority works. As a consequence, water quality monitoring alone can
give little insight into the impact of structural effects on the environmental
regime of streams.
Changes in sediment quality are primarily due to effluent discharges, tributary
stream inflows and surface runoff into the watercourse. By altering stream
flow characteristics, Authority works may change sediment characteristics.
These changes are difficult to separate from the other sources contributing
to variation in sediment characteristics.
Upstream water quality and point source additions of storm sewer effluent
appear to be the dominant factors controlling benthic populations. To a
large extent any effect of Authority works appears to be hidden by these
outside variables. However, benthic diversity is higher in gabian channels,
than in concrete channels due to increased habitat available for colinization.
7. RECOHMENDATIONS
A rev~ew of the literature indicated channelization practices resulted in
permanent decreases in biomass of both macro-invertebrates and fish.
Estimates of these parameters should be included in future monitoring .
programs. Periphyton growth is influenced by temperature, as well as the
Page -6- C-13
7. Recommendations (continued)
amount of sunlight reaching the stream, and could be altered by flood
plain alterations. If natural vegetative cover is removed during MTRCA stream
works, periphytic growth should also be monitored.
Due to the large variable influence of water quality on stream biota, only
structures with reasonable upstream water quality parameters should be
monitored.
Those areas selected for study should be monitored more intensely. The
extent and distance downstream of structural effects should be quantified.
Airphoto interpretation, as well as additional downstream benthic sampling
should be considered in future programs.
The Snelgrove stations are most likely to yield information pertaining to
the effects of channelization on the benthos, and should be studied in
greater detail even though Authority flood control works have not yet
begun. There is currently a diverse fauna at all stations in this area.
These stations offer the possibility of detecting and separating effects
on water, sediment, and benthic quality caused by channelization, bank
stabilization and possibly a dam.
Hydrological and substrate composition of areas sampled should be
quantified to minimize habitat variation. The installation of flow
gauges and thermographs above and below major Authority works should be
considered.
Management practices at dams should be reviewed. Reduction of sudden
reservoir drawdowns and riparian flow policy downstream should reduce many
effects of dam operation.
A pre-construction evaluation should be considered before initiation of
any major construction. Measures to minimize constructional effects
downstream may then be implemented.
Terrestrial components affected by stream alterations should 'be considered.
C-14
SCIIEDULE liB II
TO: THE CIlAIRMAN AND MEMl3ERS OF 'lIBE EXECUTIVE COMMIT'l'EE,
M.T.R.C.A. - Meeting #5/77
RE: W.C.-75 PHOJECT FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS OK' THE IJIGHLAND CREEK
The stonns of August 27th and 28th, 1976 caused considerable
damage to the Highland Creek watershed. In all there was
approximately $2,000,000 damage; of this $775',000 was damage
to Authority works along the watercourse.
It is imperative that certain restorative works be undertaken
to repair damaged Authority works and for this purpose,
Project W.C.-75 for Channel Improvements on the Highland Creek
has been prepared for your consideration and is attached.
Although the total cost of the works is $775,000, it will not
be possible to implement all the restoration in one year. In
1977 the Authority's cash flow from the Province of Ontario
will only permit a total expenditure of $124,970; 50'% or
$62,485 to. be raised both from the Province of Ontario and the
Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto which is designated as
the benefiting municipality.
RECOMMENDATIONS
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT: Project W.C.-75, A Project for Channel
Improvements on the Highland Creek, dated March 1977, be
adopted; and,
THAT the following action be taken in connection therewith:
( a) the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto be designated
as the benefiting municipality on the basis set forth
in the Project;
(b) the Government of Ontario be requested to approve the
~roject and a grant of 50010 of the cost thereof;
( c) the Ontario Municipal Board be requested to approve
the Project pursuant to Section 23 of the Conservation
Authorities Act;
(d) when approved, the appropriate Authority officials be
authorized to take whatever action is required in
connection with the Project, including the execution
of any necessary documents; and,
FURTHER THAT for the year 1977, the Municipality of Metropolitan
Toronto be levied $62,485; it being their share of the 1977
expenditures of $124,970 for this Project.
M. R. Garrett
Administ-rator
Water Resource Division
Attachment:
March 15, 1977
Mrg/md
- .
C-15
THE METROFOLITAN TOROKTO AND REGION
CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
PROJECT W.C.-75
II A PROJECT FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS Or:\' THE
HIGHLAND CREEK FROM
Submitted for Approval
to The Hor.ourable Minister
of Natural Resources
March, 1977
C-16
CONTENTS OF BRIEF
I PURPOSE OF PROJECT
II LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
III COSTS AND FINANCING
IV AUTHORITY APPROVALS AND REQUESTS
V LAND VALUES
VI AGREEMENTS
.
---
C-17
I PURPOSE OF PROJECT
The purpose of this Project is to enable the Metropolitan
Toronto and Region conservation Authority to carry out
channel repairs on the Highland Creek. This work has
become necessary as a result of damage which occurred during
the floods of August 27th and 28th, 1976.
On August 27th an average rainfall of approximately 1.9
inches fell on the Highland Creek watershed. This rainfall
caused a peak flow of 4800 cubic feet per second which was
equivalent to the flow which actually occurred in 1954 as a
result of Hurricane Hazel. The flood waters resulting from
this first storm passed rapidly down the valley but left
behind considerable damage and debris. The flood which
resulted from this storm is estimated to have a return period
of between 35 and 40 years. The next day, August 28th,
another thunderstorm hit the same area with an average
rainfall of approximately 2.25 inches; a very severe
rainfall, which occurs on the average, only every 50 - 100
years. The flood waters which passed through the' valley
as a result of this rainfall meet with many obstructions
resulting from the previous days storm. These obstructions
acted like small dams, which had the effect of reducing the
peak of the flood. The peak flow resulting frorr. this
rainfall was estimated to have a return period of between
3 - 5 years, largely due to the effect of the many small
dams created by debris. A full report on the impact of the
floods is outlined in the Authority's "Report on the Storms
of August 27th and 28th, 1976 and Subsequent Flocding on the
Highland Creek."
The damages to Authority works as a result of these storms
was due primarily to overtopping and scour behind the
erosion control and channelizing structures, which for the
most part were of gabion construction.
The work proposed is entirely for the repair or replacement .
of damaged or failed channel improvements, and will be
composed of three types of works:
C-18
(1) Complete reconstruction,
(2) Major repairs to existing structures,
( 3) Minor repairs and cleanup.
The estimate of damage to Authority works during the storms
is in the order of $775,000.00. This project is for the
rectification of channel works and should be initiated
immediately, in order to prevent further damage should
another serio~s rainfall event occur in the near future.
.
C-19
II LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The works proposed in this Project are situated on the
Highland Creek; on the west branch between Markham Road and
Lawrence Avenue; on the east branch between Bighway 401 and
Sheppard Avenue and the main creek between the confluence
and Lawrence Avenue. The locations of the major works
proposed are more particularly described in Figure 1. Minor
restoration will take place at several locations all along
the watercourse.
The works proposed are all restorative in nature. Under this
Project, existing channel improvements which were damaged are
either repaired or replaced. Where the channel is corr:pletely
reconstructed, the typical channel sections shown in Figure 2
will be used, incorporating some design changes considered
necessary to minimize damage due to overtopping. The changes
are not ;.ntended to increase the channel capacity, but are
required to provide increased protection at bends and to
protect the gabion revetment from being washed out from
behind should the channel be overtopped.
The major areas where works are to be carried out are shown
on Fi':rures 3 through 7 and involve specifically:
LOCATION ~RE
1. Complete reconstruction of channel 3
for approximately 3,000 feet.
2. Complete reconstruction of channel 4
for approximately 1,000 feet.
3. Complete reconstruction of channel 5
for approximately 600 feet.
4. Complete reconstruction of channel 6
for approximately 200 feet.
5. Filling and Grading 7
6. Reconstruction of weirs and repairs 8
to 400 feet of channel.
7. Reconstruction of channel for 9
approximately 300 feet.
8. Reconstruction of channel for 10
approximately 1,000 feet.
General repairs and cleanup are required to approximately
2,400 feet of channel throughout the watershed.
-- ~- - ~
~
,
C-20
W.C. 75
PROJECT FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS
ON THE HIGHLAND CREEK
S~EPPARD AVE.
H\h'401
3:
401 0
:u
z
z
C>
Ul
0
'"
ELLESMERE
S
n S
() 1:>
0 )J
~ ^
1:> I
Z 1:>
Ul S
)J ::u
~ ~
AVE.
~
C.N.R -/7
j'/
~-~
~
~~O~\~t<\O
~\.-f\.\<-t.
4/
?/-
.
.-- . FIG 1
t
CHANNEL
SODDING I
GABIONS ".3'. ,i
30'
I
t
CHANNEL
3
""""==::::Jl
I
" COMPACTED
2"CRUSHER RUN
GABIONS ,'.3'. 12'
<>"'0 o.io~a 0
~ r ~l
r3d
(')
I
TYPI CAL CHANNEL SECTIONS N
I-'
FIG 2
C-22
,. .' ,. ....
.. un ')~ .~__........~ . "V'.~. ,...."'~___.:--_-:--,.,._~.......~~..~,._,..~'---:-.-:-. ... .~_....~
\ \\ .' ,:., , . '\" (. \.... \ . j, .
\. .' . .': <'- '... , ., . " ,,' '- i' .r . ( ,./. ',' .,'
\,. , I \)' "} "\. ' ,', '. / I ,-- f' . / l / \ 1
J....... /.............. . ~,' ~ ' ". \ t' . , 1 ( " ........ . I
",':. . " "'-.........J I I /" ' ... ....'. . ", ~.' I . ',,, , ',,' {' I~'" .... ,,'
"..,.......... I).'~....,~ . ....\ \..~~ I ." ,'.-- "I, J' j . \. ...,.... ..... I
\.., " ~..:::--.... ((/(,.\ \e; \ "-,, \ \, ~' \: \.. I \' \) , '. I,. . </'" ,
..Jr(, ) ~:c~, :"! \ ~ i . '" \'\':I;'} ,I d... '.. ~ ' "f .\';' '\v/,/ . '\
.\ .. --""', : 'I \ "\/' '~( I"" ','. ..' " '(' . I I (' / . !;,./. ,
,\ \r: .........~.,...I...... "" \. ~~_'lJ.J''''',: {(' ./ \I,"'"f 1\: ,'..... /". I
f::) \\ , ~" ',:" ".. \..\ 1,' / .' '.' / , ..". \)) " ", f' '/"1"
\ \1 ( '''-..,., . , '-. "{ I ( '1' '( 'i"'-., . ':',; . f .... " '
'\-.,', "..... ".....~'................:' I " \' 1.\11...:-: ,', ,.,'/,', i 1\ I
. .......... I ......... .............. \ \..' (,' , ( (J ,/'.. I' I ,. I
\ e' J 3 <;c'c', '- ':":>) :~ , ~i :'; .:; .c< :.1; i 1:/:'" I ).i ul/; '; ,(,>>1
, '0.1.....' ......................,......... .... ' '" .II I 11,,:>..---, " ',' ./, J: ~~1 ., II
v tI......_ ................... ..... ',,"'~ ............. ~'\ f" U 1'\ , I' . ,. . I
'-, ---: J-..."':.......::-.................~ ......,.. - 1'- .\., . : " /:' ..' II I
) "1' . ---'....-..'',........ ,.) " '. \ \ . " 1\ [ j;~!;
, ';~'--""""'~", - .... . c ,'. J' I \,)., I I
.- "\ "'-") .",....., '---'~''''''' I \" ", '01 . I, , . '\ J'-- '. ,
- -- '-0 ...\......-- - 1././ t "',\ ",...~. I.!./ I, ....... \. "1' '\ :/ \ :: I '; I ..... /' '.
-".;.., )'1}' '. / GS," ,.., ' " I"" \
J. .1(1 ..... ~ ...... . \., . ,.
_-' .r'Jl' ~r ",-- J //""'1/"':"- .... :,-C:ty -,.' ... ('I \\ I )I'~' 111JI. /. ~
:'\. I:} \,\'>~: ~ ''$(- / "~'?-.... ~'" "........... . \ ,'. ;'1 \ ,.1;].. '.,
I" -\~~ "\' jr ~- /// ,.... .~~~'-----....lto.... \' . " , 'f l'~.' -,"f'
'/../" .,. ,I, (' ---,
i-/' / /,') , .'~'" 1 - ,-'. '.~' ;> , .
. /. '''-):;. '.1 ....., .' ". \
) ..- '\ n' -:?" . ./ ,', ( "Jj ,,0.. -......:-1... J( /"', I
j 2-' ' / ' - /' '.... loC' I ''-', 't. f i ' ,
r"'" ----' .- - ---..:::... ./ '. i7~ "<"f- ---:). ' .
- ----------.-..' ~J)~'\l. -- -- ~~....-' 1 ,..-.' '~. "! .'..........")______. _,0~}__ ,--.--
\ I" I.:..~.~--'~.~~-_.-\"" ,.... '1''''.,<.., ;'........."~,.
\ 1... ) I' . ..._, . r;:.',:7/.L __.. ...... _ _"Yo /' I ..... ........ ...........
1', 1(1'\)'1\' I':, ,.......; 'J---....,>.__ .. / ;.! ,,(-"':,,~- ", -
(\ ;" ,.} ,': ..'>..."....~..'-- / 'j ~..". '-- ",--~,
.... I";,) I' I __ ~........... ' ~'t" \ ....".... ................ 6,
. \\ ;~,,-<1'~ .... \ ((: :' /."~~,.-, ~ . /;:. ')~' \.~.'.,l :-.........., J
J 0 ~S\~01~ 'J'~)~. 1.\ .;...:;! :. :~;. (-----~:.,~\-- >~\"A-)~':~?~ ,'1. . "\2'.',:,:"' 'r:;~)\""'"", I
",' . . ,. t, '\'~'-" (..r, / "'" .J ';'_' --./ '
.). .,... .,., . ,I" 1\ r:,.... ""_ I 0/ r \., ~ ..... ,.
t.:.:-\'- \ .\ \\ " .,' /....' ',--- ,,' ,. \ ;p../"'j: ..)
~ .J' ,{\ \.. , . .......... ,) .'. L ..."1...___ -
-..- \ ~n 'J <..- < ,"~ '\:'''/ --: .:::----0.-: ~~' ",,', ,.;..'--:'> .. ,-, -,--,rn" .
\ . \I \ I >'. ...... \ I ' /.-.. - ~.--' ... /
" \ \ \) . . ..,( ..) ............ ~ ":, ..../ '. ~', ~. I
, ~\~"<'\ 1\ \{::.~ '- ~!tl\. ~~'i~
f\:\~j\-\\ j' (\,. ',' <:----------~~!..\/'t...",.:0~ I / C:J . "I
/ \. '1'\:: \J.::-~, "'\ ~ \ ---.----- / 7"\ ','" Q I"
\r- // (' ,.~\ ,-.. \ \\' I . I \ \ II
... ..' .. '...... - ,.. - /" ~. '. ......
~ ,c. :\~\c-----.:s-(.' .,': " "\, ...J......--:; i ........ :') ~ ":::'...J
~O \\ \- \\ (:\ '\' \ ", '. ", ....: > ,_' " . ._'''" '.., ' 1),/ /
. 000 ' h ... 1,,' ..,.', " '~"""':. .:.. ,..,'<:':,;. ~:~. '.' ~ I \:'J ....
l {~I\ .~ '/-..-// ...).:1....: .~-.....:..... ..... ". .~; "
l' \-.. 0: \ ,f,\\ 'VI --0'~'--' / .'. ", ,..: ,..,_.::,..:".......~.'." '. '- I ,I 1
. ........\ 'l'-.. )., C ...- - . / . -- "... - ... . '
.<v-l . I .' . " ~. /_ ';~, ":.' .'. '.: . ". ; I , '~:-;-7 j'
} \; 0",> 1~(1' _/.../:-.' ,.->:-,-?---,:-:-:~:. ',',' /. :/:J:;'~ ,. \) '.
C,.~,~\ .\ I' ./ /.. -- ,,' '''' '>.'( /.(), I.. ({..,
,r.:; (, \ ',' ., -.-' ~ /-. ..~-- -'r ')\.', . l"-,'/,? .. /.)'1....,
. ~ "'11' l ( ....- - .-:_-:," yTI__;";:'::.' ~ - \..:_" \_. ~-- -:::-1~ ,~. /. .: . 7 .-]/ I
V/;( o~~~\{~.%:. ;:.~>\r(~- ,,>'~~ft:"/gj /ff/'I'/ "'''2;' \
~..... ~ " \~, . \:. J " .' ,'" /,/ / ~ \..... ~__________-,,~ ,.,/ ,-/ , '../". 'oJ! ,J. '
-' I' . "-.'\ \ Y.-'j" f.-,/ ,,_---.--:,;-- ) '--r. '..:.,. ',,- I
.____~" _~ Q~'--:"'_")___,,,~,,),,{:,, _I'. I,. _._....---~---_.c:1. ..--..___..\ _"\',0 ",':;:: /...~..,~,,!,-j_ _.__,_.____ .----
"/,;" /. '\ 'J, J' \ ././') -"':":--... "(')' < \ I . 2
/ J) ~J::--::.......- - ...-;/ : \ ,...., ... /'1 -;// ./ (~/ \ ",:, / ~ : :' ''1 I,
~" ~jl -\':'....'::..--< jl.(,;J.//'h~~'~', '/ f//'" /.' .f' "(' i
ll:" ....,. -..' ., I I" .. / .f t '.. ':.. _ . I- , , ,', ,'.' :
<, \:..' ~ "" \ ~ HIGH" Ai" .' \. ......,j . .' /I .,' '\~
f)', ';\'-..AJ;' ,",-'<./.....-;:--. :-// .,~'.~:: /; ,.', .....:~-=- .p,....)__CR'r:-r.-'j' l.,.~. / J/!!f:' <.J J )/.1:, ;2 ~--:..~
'VY;;' . . I, '\.' I. . .,.' . ". '---L: .. . ("';.f / .
{"-, '- ............ , , -. . f I II' I .... , ."/"..:....... .-..,:"...... .~............ ~ \ . '."' "
l...\''-,-\, . .:: '.,: ./>.~/, /;-/0 t. ~ 1'.:.- /1""" / .....---.:-"...:.. .(:.~ l'"-o.T"---:...... . ......~,. .". . ,:,"1'
./::s.Y \ ." /; "') .......//.'., '1'\ \. I " , ' L~'_'", .:' :.,,'.;.1'...... 0!;-:J;0 I
~ 1 :-" '---;- f ./ (' l )':;' r '. - - - / '. 1 /) .
rJ?OI' \ ).1 ;-: - . i..'() - i?/Y':) i :; \ 'V, ~ ... (' ..r' -.....-:----'-.-----------"'.-1',<.-<./....,:1
JO{:)' -,/<,] y l' ., r' ,(. . .'- '---~ " / .~~\, .\....,,~_,..--'...j).,. t-<
. J-. _. { .'.(-..-:~~' },r:(.~..-:\\>,\ 1'\,(""'" \'. '---/ \--........~'-....:.'....:....c-=:~ '.~t!i'./~~
?7 ( //'..J '" II. \ \.(f\l , '0:---. '---.... ", ...........~ -........:.... '0" l I .' .' r>>
'1 J~,.' .II.I;:~f...""""'II':',' .\\ IL~ \)j '-", \. .~ ... \"');~\> l1:JQ. ,....
......, I 0 ,'f" ,---- II ' () IJ ,. '" ~ '\ ,\ - I
~)-. 1.1, ,,(': il ";- . ) (i /' __ ", ,.~.-..:. ,'\.... :' / :. .~
V'C' , ,," I,,' II - ) /1 '.". .,..... ..\\, ,.... ':i I
~ Y..~~ I" I ;,~\ (--'-\i \["'/' \, '-n ([.~~~,_..".,:=.",\.., C~\\ I)" ) 0 $ I
.", j II)' II I \,. oJ ,.~..... \ '\ {\ oJ I
o \';.\ J'" \ .:\ J \ ,--' ': ':;.: ""<, \:" \ 1 "...'<;7 I
;--- - . [' ~." ,\ \ ." '\ ~ i; \. V // " J. ~:1 ", I , '-../ ,"';
C-1 --~., \ " I / ~ <"...../, --.. . I I...... ,'y I
r~',/, <.\:, 'It. r-,I' 1,,-- ~ I)"," ,('"................ (..... ~ ~ / 1\,"I._/'I
I ~ \ I -- '. . '., /,' ) ( , ..,; , .....~~>, , / /. .
!l{-J--}/ ~ '''I) ( ,~\>,. ,j.'\. ~.. \\ \ ~.' -=;...::.: .~; l"";' C' r.....j ~ ..' '.1 ,., ~(! Ir// // I
)/1 ..'- . .~\., '\/-. '.. . ...~/ y
, - I ,;' ~ .'. \ ,\ " .', - , . _ ' "" '>1 J' .......~ I
h . ~ l]o ' \ '~\\" (\ I.... .---- -!'.,.,.,.,....." '. '''. ':,,;r~. / // ~ '-- . -
o "\' ~,~ 1 v, ~ -.-.. --____.. ' ~....... . // \oj
\ ;; )'~ ' ,\, \',' \ I ('. i --".<'" '.,,,. .<'.8" .' " ,/...- / . .
" --, r \ '\' \., . I . ,-.. ,,, , .' / .. ____ . .:
I .. .,.-/ .
V t(. ~~~ <:. -==- ...:..--.> '}\\, 'j\ I;:' '/ . -- . I --;. .(': -', .~=:~~.' '!';j:: /;-./ . ,-.-- -- .. .. ------. .- .. - ..-- -"
, }~~ /' ill , i \ I ( ------ ~
'\ ---~I -;' . ,/ ,;\ I"~ ) :. ( , / '. . / .
_'J}'( \ \''\ .,0 " (I: \' , '~I'I ,'I -'I '..... '\O.~\. '/
II \.. '-, . , . . I / I ,....... ';. '--' , ,
., ') "I ' "--./"
I' \\) (" "'f. ,', \(, ( '.'-v' J<......
'j \ \ ......) I (" , . ../
\/, /~~\\\\. ('Jr'l ,- ~/., 1,./): ~t / '!"'J/;IJ,--_"" <'::/ ~
'\.1 . '\ \ .....", .._ /' _ . "I .' I l I. /' . i, . . ~ b I:
~ ,/ r_ t ,#,' '"
f' ---..... ).. -.' ' I I ..... .... I ,~/.:' I
....\. - '~-'- ' :<"-"''';' / II, // ~ <.;:,. , ,
,.. -. ,',,-. ., " I r
'" .-. ---- ",.,,' . f ' . '! <{'> . !
'\ . '.' -- .' ,'" / . /. '... J ..... . .
1 // '.' ,-, - I ~ ~ \<' ,," . " . ! Ff G 3 .
7::;;~ ---. .b<4 ~ lo.fi.w.... rl J. . '1" .....~ .....-..., _.-. Y"' -'....~~-
..~ '''~' -_.,. .----.-----....---.-.~..,........"t'.........'OIU"__"""'" o'<"'l;#...,....._~~ "'ow~_......,''''''''''__ ....__.__.....-..- .. ----..------....~.-.........._,_..
~..,........._.
.-----
___ C-23
:--~-.::- . - -------.,-.. .....-.,.-. -'- ..
~ \' - --
" - ---.
~ .. . '--, -. .---.
~' ".' ," . .-. -
. , ~.."':' . ';.... -' " -. ~-
I'" \" ~' ,..' .... ." ..
, ' .< ,.\ ." ..- /-: - ~ --' -..-.,.
,\' . . .'--, '- .,.,. --" I ',.,' M
" . " ~. \ . ,'- ,.<' ..... .. --
". , ,-:--;:: \" I \1, " ,f) "",. \' \. \ \ ..1> -." ...- r - '.
~_ .'.: ,_.:', ~\\' ,'. '{'\\' \1 . ",.) .'~,\,.l ,.J/ \..7:0 ..". ---... ..... .
. '. - -----.._ _.', ,I _ \ ~ I '. -... I '. / ' \ (' ( \ \ ~, . .
'- _' __ ._ ._-_-.~" ~ 1 I / " \ 't '.
'",.,''' . '. ._.... '..' ..', . I p., ...... .. .\
" ,_,.",-,. '..1'\\ ....\ '- . i"'~' i"'I'.. . ....,\.i '.' ." ,.... ' ~. '.
.. <,J~ ,.;7) ,.! I' .il '-\ '. I. _.... I /(C I _ ',,-0 ~...' \.. ..," " \,.. ~ ,," ' \ .J~' k
" . " . .1, I . \ . \' ... .. ' . , . . ..,,' '..', " ,-. ,'. n' ," .
" I.. :_>>. ~ .' '" ' ,,.) ";" _...,. ". : ,.~~........ /'" .... "'.,' ..'" ",.; 1.<\;'" //.</' I.' ~""'h_
/;/ j x,) r _..'i..:' ""/'1 '. ~~/j\1 I (('/, ..1-' \..... . 'Ill.." <.) .( r",: .\ ,I :-<' ..'coy'" . // /..7....\ "t'
[0a" ,,'././'~' '''J "//' . ~~' ' ,;, ..... . XI .)" ['J.."" ., '...... .-". (.'..' . lv'
/;:/ '/'-:-";/':)\ ,,,;. .It '.. " (", "", ". " ,,\) I .,' .J" ..:_.-:_-\.............:'i' : ..:,..' \";. i
/ / ~/.,) \ ,\: II ~ I'" '. ....' .' ,.... /' - // '
. ..' ,.v ' . ,,," .' ,"'" . . ,,, ", 1\" ...,' .. , . ." ." '. - \' ,
: ...'1'-\ ,/' .., fr'..---\ "" ,'.... .... ../ ...,...... .," / '
. . . " . ...... ' .., , .' ,..' . .....~., . ' . ..-./ .. .' . .
~. :/,.. ,(,',; )\1\Gi-\i..~\'l\J :::"!-' J ,lit';; ,);(::. \ ',\ ,) ?,~..,..:,/jl/f^~';"" "/..r I~ ~J\
!!. . ff .. ".' ..<.,,,.,..... ...,..., ......, v~ \ :.< .'''.cf I~" \: -),' j '.: .... ",,,.....~r/~c~l)- () ~ " , .. ". 0 ~,
..,~' ,J"'" . ...... """...... ,. ^ / i /~~ \. ". fl/!;' .. -,,----- --.-/' ' ./ 'f I ('D( ~~ ,-
/, 'I,/'I'~' ,:-:,." ~"-,...,.. ....'{'T' '. / ~ \'~ ~.. (/ -'---/ f' {J\, -----
" . I J / ; / _._ _ .' ,II, '. .' I r ,l . /' .----- 'I "- \ "
, " .' .....,.. .,,' ,,' .... ... ' .
. (' ? 1'\ :/ ..'__ -'. ~.." : ~"0.." "..." ,,,,,/ ,\ ... _............~.. ., c -".. .. "
'/. ./' ,,-, _,.',:;:: ". !"r.;r\~' \ I . . r;;':' //'-:"--
.," I' /,' .' ..' ' .,__.._.-d' \"''- /' -.......
. ..-' ",." ," , ,." .. ,,, . /. ' I '
11,~~,"UI:I/;,~J I(~..,/ff':;~:'..", '.,.' <~,j.. :L,/;afj; //:;.~"" f";":'\ 'IV;"~ 1 ,
,; /:/ \.. ...,'.1- ,,;..<".. ~, ", Z:", . ~ .... ../ !I/ 1 ! /': ,'nl]' I \ \ .'
,II ( ([ ~~' -:-<;JI,r'(' >,.;:/' ~..'""..,. .../ /' r/ ,'.' '{'\.\.J., {;.... ..\\~ '
,J ...c _ "'C",..-" ." '. ..' ...... 0: ~."'. ..Y ..... I: ,v. n' ., ,I,
'.' v . ,....~.......,.....,.. "..' . .....,.,..: ~""";;!AI" J I' ?-..-..V/ .-." I()<{' ," '
i"--- I\.\,-- --.. ,_~ J (I" \ \ .. ' . ., ..- :::--.- \. '\" ,.J 1-" I ~ 10'" ~'-i '
,_,.~';>_:::--' ....' _ vi' \ "( .//: ~';' ~- j' J 'or ~Y/;;~ \i\1 '
.:,' \\,' ,~l:'.."'/ :..~.... 1.....'0..;.../' ; i:,:t;} .. /.., "" '
'('/':~' ..'\....;,.'",.:.". "'--.,,- ",,':-"-~~'f~\ "';,~~_;-_:'\,,-:- ,...:::=___,/ ~~ \({;;:)....O)/(~"~"./ I~
______.....~c. '. ".;'\. '\ \.. -.,"'- /,// '"~' I"
""...., c. .. ,,', . .... .. .... ,,,-- II'>" '
'.', '. ,,,' , . " . c _ .... ." . '.. > ' ·
) .",,:__.-.:,~..;;..\~.:..\;;\\ y VVv .~~__\ '. ~\_(O~'/v.>L ..__~~_._u__
\.. I (J ' ,0....\\.n\1 IV...." ' .-..
0"- ,.. ,,' ,. ,. (\.V~ ./ / I
, /,>" .. . ' ..v / ~." -
. ..1p\ '~/l .-:':,,,"' ./:: i) 'N I ~ I:r~~~~~/;"" '-
_,.,...., ... ....... . .;,.,...' .... ,,'" Q~ r~--' r- i
/' \~ ...J"":-'''''' ..' .', :!J __..0-----../
,-'. "': .........- i' _,,) I I} ,.
r .....' ' .' / 'I I I
> -', .-: -",' . /. -- .
, /-~-,-. .". -' .'. .'. ,
.0.../ ~~'/o il) I -/"- ,',,-' ''',', _/. ..:-J
? 1/ .II ~.', 1 /~ :,...:.' /~
:. . v 'v . ,.,,, /....~ 3 I
___________ ::-:' II ' . . 1..- ..-/ -- v..-
.r~.;.:::..:::-/:' ..,' /1 ,,' / y'" _/~~\-- .
./r _ I ( . .-. <---- Ir~" '
'II //' " .., Go - ..... '
/ ~. '." ., ' -' '
\' '... 0 // ,~ . ' ~... ....0.',. .' '
: . v;''' /'. ~., .',,, ..........., ,~"..,e';-O ,
:::.: ,_~;', II~'-~)'('Y {'j ~;'I'I \I\\'~" r\.'~"? i
.\. 11_, 1(".. ~\ )\0)\ \.. I
-:.1 lit ',I;("'c::;,J.' .. '.f, ?( r\. \.
.; :.\~~~ 0' \ ,;;\.1'./';',;/ ""0 II. ,.......\ .. "" ;
'.:' .. ,:,,y.' ' . ...~;;, I,...... ....
',<;;'~...I .-<:.<' (! ,( ,if ,~, ~' ..-../..,' '
. ". \.0> . . " , I I 1
....\,.. ,._., J ,\..,\1 ",.1 ' ' '
/ '."'" ,,! \ ,I.' '\ .,.. ,.. \
J. ",,, ..' , ..., '.. '
. ~:) \ a \' N- "", .,-' I,: ,~?.:::::-::..-_._----
'\ ...,'. ~ I \ \.". - I -.1:"-;\ ., ..:1- ~ -----.-
j .., I r- .' 'I 'II 'J ...."..., ....--
.. \':' , !" . I'" ~; ........... ..
, . , ,,<f>.. .. . -...-.
,.1 i ,,, ,,,PC 1,\" ~ II, II ~ . ..__H_.._
.. '(/.., I ..' J, ,I .... \ ' .." .... '
. 'i,1 If, ....(,1.7 I !!)1 (" ,~d' (, 7 - ....... -'
\ ill .J:--------r-i2". .. '-:i\~~ \+- ~' '
~/' ..,./ </j;' ( .. ....... _. 'J. / J ' \ \ \\" ~ \ \ ( .,''' ~ . I
". .7 Ii; ........./.1/ {~\. \ l...\ ( ')
.,..'d ' ,. I " I ' :
'/J /..//.\) \~ j/ . {\ .~~ )" ~, \" :
/Jl.,d<~ \./P \'~.; ;' ,,:1 ..11" (\ i
/,"(' 'I .,., I lllie
-2fS,\\ \) flh):' 'I'\"()\~}\\ \ 12(,' c::,~) l.....r-' ~ A ~
/'l/ ".~~ ("'} I,: .l ? r (~ ..\:\)1 '. . ,
I II \, ,\. I I '.
I V)/-' '", I ,~)' -,.... . '
/ YJ\',~~);/ '~Il I' ' ;1\ (' (,.. 1;'._ ' N :
,,,,,'. / " / ,I). ".,!::. ,<~'i...'- , '
iI. _ j :,I( , \;".. v,cY'. -<.c....-:---:c i
( > ) , ( .. ", F ,"'. . .' . . '
( /~'/ '.I I~,' I)' \?f'-':'--)'':'' I:
. "',. _,/ I . ~" . ) /
,I.... ,/ . ,. ' / I I
0;("::: ..z<: ~ ~\. " :
.' <. I,,'" _,' I'" ,\.\ I . I
........:.' . (,/. '\':l'" ......
.~...;.,. . ',' " ..
. __ ' , ....... _ i
....'" ..~".,;;;'7'''''' ..- ,-_. , - ... .... ..';
.. .,...... ...... __ FIG 4
... ....C;' .....T..... ..-..-:.. I;
. ,,' -..
, .. .. : ." ... -
.
C-24 __.
~.-w.....""",-""",~_"",,, ~
----.... "
'._- '. \
-.------,~ { " " . \', \\ l
" '..-; ., \ , .
... . . --''', , , . , , ,
-,.'w . 'I,' l \ \ \. \. \ \
-"-- : , I', . ,< "
- , , '" '- I,. "
-- , ..: ' I " , ',I '" c \" .
,-- I'. ,'" '~ 1,1 ,\ I.. ',c" ..,,, :
I' ",' !,' '. , '. "\ , ". "" . " " ;
\ \. '. . , \-. " .', I' '. ""'''"
. '.. . '. " '. . , ". " , , ' "",.
' . n ( c", ' ", . "\ \. . .' . , , , . 'I ..,'.. "'" . :
. ", "'0' . ,I \"\ ", .. \ \ _._ I\. ,.': "\,,( \', . \ , r
' '. :.\. . " . . .' ..., ",
\\ '.. . .' \. \ '. '" "" ',.J . . ."." \ ' '_ "' ~ '" \ \1 ' \
J' , "." J " . "" ' ',\ ......, ;, ". II. ':'; . "'\. " '.' ~ 'J ' "
. .- -.-. .. h.~:'" /'J' ".:','.. "'-.. '. \..!~;., C,,' . /,' ..'....'11 Ii \' .. ,'.,. 'j /',
'. , " '.,\.,.", c...,.. ,. '..~ -"I'... "',
~. r'\r1QI1 '1'\ ,; \\., ~,'". ";.<, " . "'" 'Ie / ., ,\\ "" 'I. , "( .
J', "\\1 \. .', .,', ....., ..(.~ - ".:-' I, J\. ,.'. \\ ' ..\ \D" ,
",", \~ \ (1' ,.,".... -"', , . . ',.., I' .......,. . , '. ./
~,',. ':'. \'-" .' /:-"--""""'''',j 'C , . .\". fl, ." .'
-.. ,.<,." '-,0. ""~"" . .... .\ "<~. \ , ,'; -: .... _- . _ _ 1/1 , (I I / /t.
.. . .. '.' ~ ., ~ , '... '''.'.. .\. " \.." !' - ,
. '\;' ~ ", - --"" " . ''''. .. . ,. . \ '. .' ,'" . I ' "
' . , .-- -, '--... \ -. '-. '. -/'
',', . -' ." , , /' ',. ....'.., .", '," " . //',
. " ^ '.. '.. , , "", c, .
." '., ""'C' ~ '). --- "', . " \.. i\., I ---c-/), , " . .'
- '''''. '--. II -\::-- :, ""''('-'''''' ""'\\"\.l\ '\.\ ~.___ _ \ "1'( /__ 'i
.,." - , ~. ---- -- '--~"" r ", '.", 1\' \" ,-, _', ~ ., ...,. /... .
-- .\ . . ""~" ", ",' ,'-, ,.. "" " \./ " ." "
.. . "" ..j" ""... ~''''. ", ~"..' ,,~. / , '/. I
-- { (' " ~I I,,'," :\ '. "'.. "', C"',,,,, .. , ..... '. ,.....' '." ''''',,,. :. ., J.. ..'
.-- ----- I '\\.' -~\" A, 'c-.."" '" "',,,,, \ >-.. , . . "'" /71, .
~ " "',., '''" '~'" ",'"," '. '''. ''', ,'....... ,..','~ ., .'
,(\~ """;;u'>".:~:.,~;:.:~O L:J /')~. , '~'''''c_''~''_''~~' ". i!' ~( .
'r'\ I 'I I ..'.. ,.....-) V '/1 (,:-... " '-__ '. . I ' . / ,\
"\> (. ':',:,'" 'Olv:'. .-...:..... (".. _ _.~......, '. .' .'. : \,.., _ ~. /V " -\ \.
' '...,. ,/ '" '., '-...... , . -. . ...... ',,\ . '. ,
(I...,.. '. ''''', , ""',,.. '"',' . '. . .... "'. . ., '.... , 'I..
','iQ "/ /" ""'''''-/.\, . "" ". ,. .... i '. \' I
'I '\ '; 1./;', ( \, '_~~~ .':1; \ " :,'~' ~
~' , , . .......... : ....~\;"'------ !! , '. ,
\ ""0" Q ,5';) \ '0.........\, '.: " :; i ">'-", .. "'. ......., .. "i, .'.\ \': '
/ . ' ',I, "", 'I. , , ,',. ,
' ~---'\---, \\ \OO,~). /' II ('" \., .' (', ,....\ '. ",.. \1
. '" --- ~.,,,. . , \ ",' I " , . .
'1 .~- i -0' "). '-",,',', '\ 1\,. __ \..., \ \ c.<~ "J. \'
I , ", ,. '. '-. "."<1 ,
' . .--1 " ,"., \ ." . '\' ""'. \ ," . ,
'\. "", " .' " \',. j
\....;. , .'" ::''''1''" i ,. '. ,.' .e",::, " \. .,
~ ,,' ,[ ),.". '.' " "\, '... ...
' \'-', \,'.. '; ..:. " .,."" "''', '. ..'
' Q" " \ '..:- <" \" ,.., , "" "
I~ \ 0', "\\'\".,:<..:..':~\\,\.,. ./ ". : 'j' ~
.. , , , ,'~ ", '" "".... t
I~; 0' \(0\ '-'. ,'.11\\,-/), ',-,. I'
I.' \ 0 .>.~~. -..:..----'--... \' "j \'. ''. ; ,---..1
.. '. 'I" .
0'\ . ", . \ I ", I " .: '.' I
~ \ <~\a\ '2''''/~...<. : c.../.? 'I
I '\ \:.. ,\,,"./ <. /y:,. 'c, ,
. I , '\0 \, \---:-:e:;-., <.,'. <.,., 'co, 0, /'.' . (, .
I O' \ ." /, , , . , I. <' '::'
I " '.. I' 14'"' ' ,( / ') I, '. ..;: ,
. \., ,'. "\....- " ' , . . .
1"\.& I \~,.l"I" .' .....,.. ,,([1.;, fi
· "'" '-', "" \ I J . / I'
0\) 1/. ".'11 : I, ~ , :...':.. /
4 \0 r 'I I {, ,(" (~
. ).--:(/ "\ ~ .,"" 0 \: ~!) i '\ "~ ,1
' O' " \ ('' , .' '" ~
,'" , ", , ~ ", (', \(
) 1 I ' "( \ t . """ ", }
, I ','" " \ ,.
I. , ," "- I, ' ;,' ., ". ,
#. '," '" ,
' ..---</ l) 0 ' ':"....' " I.. :.'. .(".' ,
II", -'0' ....\\ 1',,-........,
" - /.' , ., , I "" "
- '.' r"'\ \\ \ I... "\\ I', /. " ,\ !
~-:---- '.. ,----) \- . I) I (, .,': , ' j ': ,':: .;
--, "'-"\ . '---:;:" , '. I \',r,( "'\ ,/ '''0" '.1
/. << . """ . ". . . ....,
-,~o -.-\.. \ C,_ '''', \, \ \ : ", " \ .. \1 \ II /! . :.. .1
I . ,N - f\' \._.... \'/' - '. '( ',\', I. . \ 1.,/ '\ ,. . . I
i , . . , ",'.. '.. '. \ '" ''''',." .. ,
/ \(.\~t' - \,,\ \-'''''\', . \ \ I'" . '".,.,\ .. 1/, J",," "'. _ .' I
\. t k Q.\--' - .-.., 1 ( .. 1 I, , I
) \) O'NL --;J--\ ....~,> \ 11 ~'" '-;c':~~.', I'I.' i..' '. ".,," I
,'" c. '. "",. " ". "'" \, '.
J ... ~:". - '--'0 \ '~\.'~ I ~ \ '.I \ _ :;.J " . "./ I -' \..
~'Y "C'"..,. "'\'" ". , " ",. ... '('1 , ....
\\.'----c .~' :"('\CI'.. '\" \""\\"(\\..1 '.. ~\ ...),- \./....".,.... '. . I
.~ -""~\(\,-'\I - "'., I '\ '\ N, ..,,~ I" ..../ ... C(- , . .,
. -." , ,\..- .-';., . 'i I. , , \.. , ). ." ,>, (j . __ ._ I
..--. -... ..~;:.-. ,,>:: \, '.;, \",,'" . ,'.. ''''\ I.."", " .:. ..;: ....'e : "', . ':., __..,
,----- ,.- 2-> "cO\) ..." \ 'I II.,.". ", \ i\.~;" \ .." \ '\"" ( '), l.,., ~( ., \':~;'" ': _ _I
.---..-::::.',. rI.\-J'--' \...... 1~,.)\n., ,'" "1,),\..., ...... , '.. '. 0" \"'" ~_ . :
-"1 1- \...., \ _ . ...' ~. '.."" \ ,.'...." ) ." . . ,,". Qj ""'" .',
'1-::'-0 \\ ,\'--'-~ " .. "~":""" , \ '\ .:;"\ /).,.' "..':' " ij ,< I,. . -:;'.', ,
::.-;-': 0 -- -,,' -----. :;-~".,., '" I.) \ ,,' '\' ',. . J. \, "".~... '_' ", "'1' ".._ [
,........ .. ", . ''', " .' .'"., .' . .'" -".' .'., .. ;""0' ~ ~ f . '( "
(/ '" .'.......... --. .' '. "'..- . ~"'''' ....."'.,,,- I,' I. , .,
,,-----.- ~~~. '" '( -, .:;.;.., \,.:.: " '. -"':'. / . ,', ,,:..: .:,.. .." " u / . ~. <,."... , ,,:./. . r/' /, ;
~~ ,'V, . ,'" ,...~.",.",...>.. ,'j', .\ '\. , ~" " \, v j. "'), I
.~. '"<,, ",.' Y<.." .... '.' "-."", "'. _. .'. ,I. "'" r .
O .-:>' ~""--(,'''_. -'\;"":""'''''- ............ .-....,,~,',. ." / .'-: .' .'_ ".l'''I;~_,.., 1 ii, \ [
, .. '"'''' ... . " .! '.. .. "..
'\ >, '" ~.~'~:--.... ..,~,,, '. "-.,, ''', .' . I . ' ,I'. ,.....- \', I .
" c::> "''''.::... '.:,.:-- . ........,. . " '..'''.", ..,'__ ,c / '",' \ ./
"'. , - I,', "". " , .. '.. ',. ",.,.. " I / I .. ,
.. ." ),. '''' 0 1'. /.:.' '-",,--_, f., 0. '. . .' '-. ... "V.' .".." . .... " . """'.,
~ ,. ,./ "S'l " \.' '"., ~\'" : I. '.....;: \"". ..,,' " .,' ....' ",/ )\,.,\ ... ," ,
f'~._,I., '..".> \ "" \\' ,~. \ '--.. "\" ..' (I'- ""',,,' . j ! . '.r. "'''.:, ..
r " ~ '" '. ''''' " " ../, .' ''', j _ . / . \ . " / I \, . . :
-' ,.;,-:.:", '0_') \ >':",- .'\:' . :" :."'. ~ /', \ "/D" ", :..-__ ,'':.' 's'
'<""1 ...." .. ."...... ""',' -. "--" .. ,'. ., ,"\" /\, '~, I:'rG . I
') [\ I \ ' '--"~, . -, , . /. , .' I ..
"J (.1\ () 0 I" 'J I . "" '. , '..) ".......::' _ . .' , I') i \' __ _''\ . / . . '_"', . ',: !
" .. ,. '"'' ''''. "/' I. ""), . ...._
.'1 ,I "{J .' ........" , .. / , i;. __". ... !, . , , __.__
."... ~\."...", "" " ,.... . . \ ...." I . ._ ".
'('). ';" ,.. 'I ""', .. .. """ '." _____ ;'" , _ .._..
' ) -~"\. ", '- .I~ , f) ,"', \~ _v_
{,.... ..- ",,, ...... '\-.11 '/<':, :" _~_,,\..........
./ - -- .... / \' f \ , . __ ,
... ", .--,,'-. -'. . ~ G\" ,'. _ ...",
;/ " . ~,~M." ,,, ;" -- 0._' .....
' " ''''. "-'"
" . / "'. " - - --
"~>;.., '. -.,,~ ~--= ---".,."..,.",... ".---'--- ...-""----
0_. .... ... ... ...-. . ___.....__
. ..
C-25
c",<p. ..:;...~'......_, '.. .. (-., .~,~..:'.'J.:.\. . ," .."':'-:\.:t:~~:P~::'''':~.:''. Ir'~~{.,P;".\,
~ , . .. ~
. .... .. . ...!.......~. " . ...
. .' .. .-- -.
,., -, '- -.-..
- --
.......11....-.,....- . ~ A.L ",' J
- ...._'..,.. "._.,~ -' .' .1 '. --; / /
.-..- ~ I .', . (J / /
------... . .'\ I I' :J" /...-, "('" . / /
-- \ \\..... "'i' . . \ ( ". ..\', .-.) //
I~"\\\ ~., \~'; '\','.", \;;;'-J'\\"\~;"',\,/;(j':~:' .\\)'(r.\\~/:.:-/
.1........ ". " . t..\.. \'1 . \, II'{ /~~/ _ -;...:....------
\.J '-- "'", i "1 \ i I ) 'I' ',. " . \ 'I /' '\ \ . / "/
. ::v ('\ '.\ ' y , I I. '" '., I ('o .- /
[-.,. v," ..... '.\I" , \ .. 1/, '-/'1/
'-"'J- \\\ \ 'f' ~ /;{\ ", \\I.:.I/....r;::;.. " /
'i \, {, . ( \, \ .". ('-'J
I 'I'. " / ,I'" t "oJ." . .
\\J ,j'Il:,' '();U \ ;' _-:::-
\ VJ / ;, ) \ . \'". <;::I < _ \
., (J,//) !/lJ"",)\" \ ~/.~ r ,...d/ o'J\)~
~.," ~//; / " 'I .tJw ') /5' ",.
/' ~:->, ( /;:,;'1/. / ,"'/'/. ' I \ ~~) . 0~--> ._','
. ,.. ." , .' " , . ".'. ,
.;I'//'01'~":'--'\":'/~I/'~"~"':';\~,"\' ~.~;...-- \. \0v/~.Y'\O: ; ";'..;'._ .
--------- ~ O' '0 ' '.' " . " '~---- ). ('-..,v . j, . \
~ ./ '1 ''7'' .:, . ." "_......,.. , .,.. .
~'r\'- ',\ ~/ "'JI,',~ l {II' "....,. . "
C \..--1\, 'f"'/>'> ", ..', '. /Y.,., '" . _/ '. ,
:q ~ j ,'. f y i, ". .' ::' C\;C \),.; ,"/ . :." '-::"~>Zi;S:ij7' ,;- < -:' ..~,
o )"r II ,//1 /.. (- I /.,-' '.:, J -f) 'OOf '7.:"--.. 0"_ \)), /. /'" /, '___
\:'CJ/I f,' ,'. N. ..... .~ "'. " [-]0 _\] t' II ( __/ ..' ".
-~l ,': 1/././..... --';.,\ . ~ \ ~.' fj, /1..,...,/;-,:.._
/. / , ,. \ \'.. .'\ ~...., , . / / <',
'\ )'\.\" I', " I.. (\ "~\ -; (.~) . '_'__~.' . _ "0, \ '.. ~_~
'''-...)\)1 .... '. I,d. '{..--" .... ""... C-.. -.. . ',.
,.'.. '1/. I.. ". ".,. '- -....., . ......... .......... ... _' ~ --:..... "'\..F \; . , \ .
~J 1/: /,;: ;~. i/ :'/ ~/'''~:\..' \i\\~;- "\\~~ .....~\ \) )s...:-:;:;:::....<::;c::::.~Q.~! \ ill. \ ,
,-_-.... .1.. " I;; r ,,' . \-))1 . \" \ ) c 11'1 I. .// ____, ,.~.......... .J .,.......~ '(I 0--.. \'.
.. "" '. , ,., . -/ r '.. _'_. , , ,.
:-.::..::.... /"::;//1:::,.( .!\\Cy :::/---; \~\~ .\, ~__":;Y""----Y~-: ,//J._:;...-':..,.~ \ ' '.rJ \ ~ ',~
::.-:....... J' [' ,I,'/i '. :\ ; \., \ ....- , \t \\ \e c=)i. ... .',"'J ~!c.... ," /: \, '.
/... \/H' I, './ 'I\~' '), .\'."....0"" ....) I " .. ............,.~ . 'I' ....
;/J}' 1'1/",. 'I"'" \' \ .-'-, S;'/..\_.. .."0-:",,,,<.., ". '.".-^' ""'., _ ,.
,J/ I,'. ",I \ . \ \.-'- -"''::-'''''-?'l~. _ ".J,J-'~'" ,":, _',...',. \" , .'
~""")I~. 11\\\ ~~ ' ,- __:-"-;:-/ '~(<\ II -;~'// /' _. ':_',:-- ',/'" '_':;:__'/'\"" .:. ( " ,
. '-..., \\" ., , \.~ \ /4"", \ ,.. \ /. .... ,.. _// ",:'. . J' __ ..C;. ';;'''\,' ',', " . :
-.... '" \'o<,.( " .'. ( ,", -I--,'~'-;;:~t;"~) ,(' II ',;-;. 1-- ), //./ \' \.\\\ ; '; i ~ . .;
. , " '''',,,,, ,.. ... '/' 'j' \. I ' . <
) ....' , , .' " I . . - S::---/) -- .. . (<\ . I? '-_. ) . \ \ I 1 \ l' .~___
~~.... ". .," ..,.... :- ,. ./-/: 1'..'. '1-/ .. /. Yo,' , _" '. . "," '.
... ,......--;;- ~~..,. ~,.~~-~.. r,-..r.<. "./:; , \ "\ <:S --- /I'~ )'f J)" ':. )-'_ . .
.., : '................ . "'''' . " '.. ...., . .. 0" ./ ././ _ J./Y c'".... <" .... ..'
. o' k. .... .... . I". J., r. C. , ...... " .. " . .0 . ...'
'" ..... .. ""'" <. -".. U' ..
o 2 /) ~,~ ~ ~^'--''-;- /,>; <"Y' ~~ ___ ,/", -ff \ ~.=b'~"l'\ '--\.'''''''_ " '-_._
/.--::>~ ". . . ~ ". .. ,-- \. ;:.- -:::- 1('\\ 1)"-' ...
/ J~./' '... "" '.. :.:..... _/'~"'l. " ...'..----..---:-X' /'_ 0 \\ \", ,
)., '.., '. ,.. ....... ....... "-..../ ".... '. ~ " '" .. ", ~.'. I ''', ..
\ 0 ~/"0''',~:- . ""'~~<",: <>;/ ", \.. 4" .../ ) \ 'lt2 IL;.:\... _', \ .... ...... ."
(\../ ~,' '\ ~~~/J ,/~~. ~ ,/ _.~~\) / \'. \__"':-' _::1 c;.::? (JS\\~'<) >~-~\-",\)", ': Ol-)) ""'~~'''_'' _~~_
J A........, K;' " . 1"'...' ..?: ''''\/_:. :..... ", .... J\ ". ,-".." .'. ,
/\, / ''^'/'---',.. ..G\?o'-... .. .........-.....,' 1''0.' ,"','-...\ "'.... .
/,~. . ~ ______,r.,/ ....,,':.. ~;'I " .. ". /. "":.c. " ..:::..".,.......... ~ \\,.'.. ,. .... '("... ...... I
/7-'; :""-'\". "'11/'""\( \~" ." " L'" '.-. '/(':'/'-::' r,JI;'\_---.\'\....,~,,'_ <.! J..'",~,::;:::,,,,,,, .-s--...., .
,- ~,) J \1' r .. .... .,..... __ _ "." ......... ""'<c...... '. '.. .~._ _ \ ...... _ .
.... "/\...",.. W' ". .. --- )"/_...>>,,_ ... ,'.' J"',' .....'- ...,
.../; 'i \W, ~ ~.'-.... / ',__---- _ , 'Ii'" , '. ,... ... >,.. -c. <c... .-, ;~" ...
).~"OoJ.\\.,............. .......~ .... ....... '. _....,....~~ ""'-... ~ ..~~.._...... ~...
"" \""" :.,...... . ::;'''''''''- ~ ~ c, c. '....~. .. ". ;../ \ ';';:-..;: ..c.. ....=C;;"-:'-:'.: _ ..:;, '.' c.... ....:.; ",:,,- ..... ../ ...
....ii\ :,:\,..,.<.~\0~.-{~,~~. ,':. r~C' '''-; ~'~-\--"":-----<~-':'-'::~-"1',~_ .;,.....:. .\:_ __
~~~.....:).~. 2t{:~ I. . .....n. ... - ~ ............ 'I........... c.... :'.... .:, .....'"~........ '.....:__ _< .. ,.....,...
"'~ . ... '. \ ., . \.... ......... ....... \ ,. \y <......-...,' . '"... , . ".' '., .
-"':::'';:'-'~~--:''(''\'. '-"\,-- - ('..... <....,>\ '\\~.~'\\'/:::.~/;-- \ ':'':.'\\~ " '::.. I~I .. '.
000. .''' '''::..~. :-' \. :.::. -----..... -'::-. '-\" l; ()" ~:'-;<<' .:.s.;( \~,~/..:,~...! ~ ... ~. ,.'" ''-'>,\''':::- _,: I ....".. ! \' _~ ,>
J. D" '. 'oJ.... . .....\,... ,~.' "V""'O'/"'" V , /1 . \'~ ___''\\' ,;., ~
. 'zJ.. ' ~-'L . ."".,' " \ '\ ~ " ---:<6,' :' ',,'.,-:----' 'I 1,'-/ ="'~; I' (\1/'. 'I . I )' .
-....' ....., . '... ,. .......,../., ,. / .... - '-" ,'" . . ,
~:;...::iP(1C:_;8~"\.,' >~\.~\..:...:;:~l..,~ .. !;( ~,;;~- ~1..(\(( /~j' 'f\\. ... __'
I ~ ... ,.w' ,\ ''''\.../. "' '," :~/\:> "" C t I, ... 'O~' 0 \ '. "." , ,
~x.~.., :';-.. -..:::-- .~ .,:- /\J'~----""":.- ~'-' ~",._: . 1-\ ""'~" ,\ .
- V...., ....'........ ~"" C/ ....--<,.....- -v, \ y. \,. . 'I
<)" '\. -' ----."'-'-::,'. -..... ~ \) ../ '"' ).-,-::.. -' '---,\'. 0 "', t \ .: \.. /
' "~---""",,- ~-. ... .-.-.- - '., \"'.
", ^. 'I.,,,,.., -F Cl' tl..., 0 . ..:::.---::. ".__ \........ ?;" ..r . '.. /
. , v ' , ..' > .. . \\ <. \ I' '. ; '\ .. .. ',. ". ..-
\: 0@J2',"', /:.~;.- .\\ ". ....N..I.} 'K' ..~_\...... "."'~':""-'_"_'
\ D" O\-'\..J. ~ '------;:'.' '\\ " I \ ' ~ '::--" ,
" .. \ \...l ____ __ , .. .. ..' ~\ _ __ _
,J _ ..~.. ,\\ / '! ,~. ., ; _ ' __,
o .. ..- \ .. \\ '.. .\. ...< ' ......
\ '::~// ----- -- ! loQ \ \\' ..".~\ ',' 8 <'~-:-:.-.-:-~_., .....---,
,'C~ .... . ,. " ............_....
. \ ,/. 1 I . \ \, . _-, .'
'. ~-.-:::;--J~ < '~, ~ \, r-.'
.,~ ... C' ': C' -:3.1 ,... , .', ',. .,. . \
:...IC .'-' ./ ~ ' . \'.' ,--,., \._
,,~ \-.....{..-.~~.. G :}
. --~;~ '\....._--, \ \ \ n .
. \\, ) ,
I \\ \'~ \. '..... :. . a
' ., . ~) .
.,' '- f--""", "\ _ :.--\\ '- \ ._ \.
:... . \----- . . ' ."
~~ ,&'() :,.... \:)o--...._.J-.
- J::"~ . __._.. \\ ~ .~" _ '\\\\ '.
J .oJ''''- I -------------- "U,_,~-:. ,__,. __.__ _ ,
.... ....--- , "'., . 1 \ ~ /, --:.----
--.--- -... -- -' ~(~'. I~: \'6 \:'1 /'\:-/
-- ...-----. --- - " .'\...., I \ ""'_. _,-."
- ,...... t\ '\ I ' ._
'--1\' \> \'L.. '\-'- ",
\ . 'Y~\~. r \'- -.' ~ .
\. FIG 6
..... ....... A
4. v~" -
....... ~~
...... M1.....--.._~
_ II.
- ~ -.--.---.....--.------
'l:iI.""'.....".,.}~..I,L\.,.II.'t'CM .-....
._--~
. ...--- ----...---
~,,_....,..
... '",,\""" ,
,;,.' , !', ~~ .
C-26 .... ....... .
...-...~ ..,.",..---~
.. .-" I
... -- . --
III'''' v-
................
d,o___bl"''''' -~_.....
~--. A
-, t.1
N
.- _.
-..- - .. .-
-.--- ---
'--' --~ -
_.--- ---
____0.
-, I . _ _ _ ~'_~,Ot'_",')(H'.... _. _, ____ '...,__. _ .
'-".--. '- -~, 6
:::h.. ,,~::-:, :;-~_:::.::::::::. __. _ 1,./
,,\ \ " r^.....~ -- --:::::-t-~ \. J
1 ) f \ '__ ~.--.J {_ _ _
J "" J <'-"',,- ".."<.\ - I -. __ :. _____ r _ _ ,
\ "'\' '/ . ------. 1--_ -- ,- >--L '.
~\ \. ,\ 0\ \ , v{\. () 0 r";:c .:.;' c:=-< .
) ~::;:J \\ 0 ..JC\"-___, ,) \\ ".,0 /)t.. .'f '~-.---..MJL1"" . /I.._~__
L. , .,,-.>. .. v, " ,'':-:;-'.. ".n, '_. . ., /
- , { ...- ~ ,~ ~. 'PoG)\~O 0 ~ \.... --'-5. ' \~/ / '/'-J,:,_. -l':;-'--;!~~[i..;C'Y"{ _
/ I ,) \\ \ '\}.] / [',/ \1.0 ~l' -- '-')\,.1( f _. '_' ..\ . __..:--_"-"'-'---__ J J
( l .... 'Il i '\ i 0' ",. 5 (,' '<, .J / v:" ./' ~ ..'.' <-:r'<-j_ 1-:'0<.., ,. , .
-\ >'<,./ \ 0 /(\(;. -'//(0 ~ I') r .~'\>')-) "ll hIC)';..') 1~r' '1.JO 0 '/'>fQ)'-- 1-, ,r_-,_-, .,,:----::.:r-, _. :'-:--:-::_'_
'---" S ~I ,. .. ,.\.1\. \.~. ';v- '-'1-"0 0' 0... c/.... '~i ' "'" '.,.' '. __.
.~, '~".~ ~.' )1) ,"'. '" ',,/ . ,," " 11'.\ ..,;c. ..Ii. '1/ " . I ~.-. ~ I ';
-- ~ .", ... J.. " __. __. , , "',', ". ''', , . '...... ; '.
,.:::.... ~( ",t. ~. ";"/.~"'''---c'', """\/\/JR(i\\;r:~-;'~/',0<>;.;...'--<tl """~J<"""I] _-"..
~,:':": ..." , 0 ';..-/ /.'-' --"--., '---- ' :. \ ' ( I' \\'''--5 -~ ' /.'/ " - "-(3 '\.'J1i'''I'' ,'. ~r::::'::::::...--.,!" __' --./ /
: .. ~....- .~. .' '." :...... ...., ',,', '. ~ '" -::';//'" " -y,'. -..----::;~:; ------':':/--. I
/\', ---" '.' , -.. fl' ~/ '7' -------- -, ,\./ \ '^ . . / /, A"..,. "" '" ... '''. ~
-'---"'" - ., ,'. ^ ". '. <,-, - - ------...~ ._---'10; \ .~,''::-, ~/" 'V " '.' __. .:... "'.' ':"""
..~~ ": ' " . Co;" '..' "'~' r ,., . 'VI' , .' _..,.~ "'-"/ r..
~~..-.......~~~" //-/ :%, - CR'-~:K"'l '. ". ~"'{-.-:. ....'..~l/ /.I\.~~..:.__- :.--,---..:.:::.1
':.,-' . .' - - '..---,""- - '. :"'~ . ~'"... '. / (/ ,'. "':;.....' ',. '... - --'. '!~
~ -. --- --- N'" .... '.. "\'. ',--...;, 'I' i-'=... ..0 -'..~. '...". _/ . '_,. ~
....-- - ---=~. ------.. -I'L", \) . ", '--.- "', '--: ';,--" \ _.:.. _ f.
--. ..--....-- -. '--1\"" ,", .... . . / .... __.... .. '. '-F . , _ _"', ..
'-...::: -~ ---,. '>-. t.v. ,c.'...'...;...'......,.... /- ,<'__,.., .' _"" .. /._. ',. .,
~ ~.::-~. .......,... ,0'., "', " ,-,;,~ _. / , 'co '-'-=', __<',...-------,..." i. I,
' ,J/ ~ '1 ... , .....<,. -;. .; \.. '''''.' 'j /.... > '...,.___, 0./,// _.;, "'-', , "".~
--',- ,\. ')) )... '~'''';:' ,,,{,,';"'( , .' /' \\. ".... -'i;;"~, ..-,// .;. / \3-- I(~:"- ~~ _ __ 7 _ , >=:'......;_,,;_.. . _,_ ! :/' ~
\ ~ ''\, \ ,\;~ ' " , , '.~ ""':".?'\./,,/(( ('~\- -, .- \ ) f\--/ (\ :~',,I,
,\ \ 'I' I '\,--,; · ,I," '.. . ')-,-,': )' f I,. \ .. ';r~-.'-I I!
~.;: '" ,,,,~~/ :7// ,c.\.c \~':Q~.~' -<~\"..~<. ~\!~-- ~~~>"'>'''~~':';' '\~u "~I ; ....--::-1:::-----------..... ) (1.-;:;.--i;1...."~ '0 '~.:'-::) ....----/''<-~/:'-,I,-Q~'
~ r' ", . -- .: ..J . . \". ". ~ '0" \,j //: .."-,, L /. .",'. f, r,'>' \ .' "
\\ .. - " C'" ,'. . . . ., ,. -. '. 'ce /.' ... ....
\ . . /"" ,) '\, r-/,. '...\.... '0..~'-S-On____-_ '", '. ". .~~ (: :.'/ i. I ,
\ \ \ " }, ---- , ,I , , ' /' . r \ -,').( ~ ,:- . ,--" . '\ ' . "0-' j } 'II '. r
" .., " ~'. '.. , u, __ . . .., ""'.
-,,\,,\ .......'-,\':o--....~ " '0" (j.- '\ ,.--'/-- /.,....' )"", ".,,\/.', /' ". ',:. ,',,-:.,c ,'//.-'0"''-
I. \ . '... , . .0 j, "'. ..,', ,u,/, ,'__'''". ,"v ,/. ',..
~\"-'I""t '':"l~'__~~.'.. '\\ \;.:"';'0/;$j-"" ..1'\'\ ,,,",j , "'-'. 'r> ;'/';",,.'/1, '_
. ' .' r .......~), . '-v----.,. \. I .' " ). .. ~'"
'.' \1 (' '.-; ".. ,. // ,'l "';.0.. Co." Ii\. ' f.__ ..' " ",', . ..' 'Y'.~\, /, .
". '/ Co' -y./ "\ ", ~ \ '-...-- , _ ".... .. "'. __
.... \.....,'\ ..\. ~" .1~",._~,(/) ~:'<'\.k J,..;,[;\ . ,,' 0 L..!..,,,. -"d~(I :1\ ' .'
~" '.- -----.'- -., j/~l: '~'--:.\ ,/ .'f/r/) -, \8../.' I .',' "', "~I '> ,,/ >-.. )) _~_ _ _ .,-)', _' it,'" ",
\' I' I ..., Y., '/' I L../)J,/ (, '(' "'\"0'''' 1/,';"--." _/,,' ;t:..j 1/, I,.
'\ \ '\ '-..... . "-"'. '-----... '. ( . h . ',. I I . '\, t , , .
· " , 'y"" . ,. ,/' " ,. , I' / ./. \ . ,.. '/.>. . .
A\-) ',)\\-\ "'0)' -~~! ... ~~'t7"^O\ ff~\ ~~'/;~\\1:;\1 0 )~.~~/ :_.\.-:-q;,1"11/;-:{1-"'\~\0,
I / 1.\ . I ) \11 r t "'----"" \ r' '..o{I//'I// . 1 J'" I'.. ~~
(, \\\1... ('V \~ ; ."'0 'j ,,\ /. - .) ,,'}' /''''~' )) ~\\ f' ~
1\' \\~~ :'/ --,'.---.'----- ..~II\ I.,,'. 7' \V ;," '.... ~
\1\ /.-- . . I ", '---:- .-=-.=--~~ --... '-' ',1,1'\ ,rY//': / _ , J " ,'. 'I'
. ".0 , ," ~.~ '0-. ---...... {, ./" ./ /' '.' .'1 I , ., ~
~,~ ':108", ." !o.a/'Jli';;J'i\rr~''\~~'::..=J?c< ,./o(Y"'.' f,~J "" .
r '-'-'.......-:--.-:-1\\~:;:> (~\ifj '::') , ~ D. ~}: ).o_~ .-"-~' :\'..;_'::--", ,~, .'-:: _ , "I 0/,/ f/ _ r/ /\ 1 (_,' "', .
" . ',' ---"- '" '.', '-... '/' ..' - "".. .. -- 'I 1; \
\ (, '-y " ,,- --, ~".,~, / Y'" . :::. ".. ""'.:., , ,--:' ...." ',,~.. ,. " , .l
I( (, ,I, \ "'''..., . , -. ' . ...., '_ _ . , ,,_ .. , 1 ., .
r I . \ I ...,~ '.' //.. .... .. '.' __ >, ,?.. " ,. . \ c '"
' . I . '" , '., ._. . ,. . . ,... ~
I.). 1\ '\\\\ \Jl)// /(',,,,({:/ ~.~ '-, " _ v. .' 99c-..,lJ) ~I .~" '8'::\'
I !' "":"-.'-II'~\ \"'\ ,,, oi~;/~ ,. v .////1 />-';~'-r ')'~~~_-'::'''--'''~::'!-__~;~''\( ~':-'::.---0~-fJ II I ,.;:."" \'" (\ ''''
· '".', ;7/' -' I:: .',' _ )""~'''''''.' .,~____ '~_ __--....... 1/ / ( '.
. " .~.\ '~. -; 'If... , 1(1\ ~/I','''-=- /--- )----.. .,::-.-__--,. '\ --....... 1".,/ r-- ,'., P(\") .
/" ~-. , , / ( I' , , " , -- -- r . - c , _', . r . \ "
' :\' //: . .,.., ,,,..... .., V"-- .. /. .) I . . .
,. , .. . --. .. . ".
",> ',., 0 . t. --"C"""";"!'. .' ') / , . \0. "L.
11~..,;.:):, \\,,\\C'J/ I I .;// I)]'.' Z) \ <""00-- ~a.o,,, ~ 0 II/; ~ \ ,I"" __ _ ,
II! '/. \.-', "'.-- - , , ) \ / f/ ,_ ....-.
" , , , \..." / / ~j) . 'I,.. /1 '
. <<." . . . " . . --',. .
I-?", f,' < /'-:..'.,--<...../...-..-/,_ J \ "-(' tl) "^""':~-,t( ,"'" ,,', _'.
..~.. .~./ .. -,....,'. ;/'.,' ,,' ' \ ' I 'r__- \} d.\d t ___;-.....,,__
(-<'--.. /' ;':-> ...----.......~'---:. '</'/,.r/ \ r /.' -:1\ , ,.., ,) />,
:: r 1./(' ,>,. '. .., / ....... 0 . .'_ ~'.", f'// /1 <.J. _::::::____
"< /," , ,'/ ,., " /,~., . ,. /' \- ---...---/1:........7 j/, -: .,-- _
.V __ . ,./ '. / .. __.. ---;'''? / . _ .
././ ,'000 ^\\' \ ~( /'/ ~
/ '-. , J.); ( .
'.,./ --, 'I,/;. ,
/ \ C:>f'I '// ,
~()jQq DQ.... ., lJ / i
,,'" , .
.." _.__._~ , .
',~o~~~-=-c_-_.._:_>, . FIG 7 .
.........................
....-
~~........lV
-
.~
. .', -~~.. ..... ..--...
.....-,........
" -.--.-.-..--...-----
__.......r..~.......
------........-
. '._4_..__.~"__
.-". ~.. ..
,
III COSTS ^ND FINANCING C-27
(a) Costs
The estimated expenditures for this Project are based
on the .best information currently available for the
works to be undertaken. The costs stated shall be
understood to include all materials, labour, equipment,
surveys, . interest, engineering and contingencies required
to carry out the work.
Channel reconstruction and repairs for the Highland
Creek are listed by area below:
AREA AMOUNT
-
I $270,000
II 87,000
III 54,500
IV 17,000
V 94,500
VI 128,500
VII 89,000
General Repairs 34,500
TOTAL $775,000
The breakdown of the total cost is:
Filling $49,500
Regrading 38,000
Gabions 456,000
Crushed Stone 32,000
Rip Rap 14,000
Removal of Damaged Gabions 13,500
Filter Haterial 78,500
Restoration 29,000
Engineering and Contingencies 64,500
TOTAL $775,000
C-28
III COST~n FIN^NCING
(b) Finuncing
Total Cost of the Project gZl~~~~~
Authority Share $387,500
Province of Ontario Share $387,500
The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto is
designated as the benefiting municipality and
to raise the Authority's share of the cost of
the work.
C-29
IV l\UTHORI'l'Y APPROVALS AND RE~STS
Authority motion
Letter to Hetro
Metro's approval
Letter to Minister
Letter to OMB
.
C-30
V LAND Vz\LUF:S
--------
No further land c'l'::qui -..;i t,lor. is rC(1uired in order to carry
out the works proposed under tllis Proj ect.
VI AGREEJ\'1E:N'J'S
1\"'- this Project does not involve new land acquisition, no
agreements ,,,,ill be requi.red.
Easements, where necessarYr have been obtained as part of
previous wuter cont~ol projects.
\fhe~e Authority land is involved, those parts not required
for wa'ter contro L "'larks are managed, unde:L agreemelJtr by
the Metropolitan Toronto Parks Department.
.
~~
.'\.~ .
\.. '\" C-31
(!7
//,
,/
the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority
minutes
FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONS. ADV. BOARD WEDNESDAY-MAY-25-1977 tf2/77
The Flood Control and Water Conservation Advisory Board met at the
Authority Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downs view, on Wednesday, May 25,
1977, commencing at 2:00 p.m.
In the absence of the Chairman, Mr. J. Carroll, the Vice Chairman,
Mr. Wm. R. Herridge, assumed the Chair.
PRESENT \-'lERE
Vice Chairman Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
Members R. Fitzpatrick
C.F. Kline
Dr. G. Ross Lord
L. Martin
F.R. Perkins
J.S. Scott
H. Westney
Secretary-Treasurer K.G. Higgs
Dir. - Planning & Policy W.A. McLean
Adm. - Water Resource Division M.R. Garrett
Head, Flood Control Section WRD J.C. Mather
Project Biologist WRD I. Macnab
Project Engineer, Dev. WRD A.G. Sahabandu
ABSENT WERE
Chairman J. Carroll
Members F.J. McKechnie
G. Risk
J. Sewell
A. Tonks
MR. J. CARROLL, CHAIRMAN
Members of the Board were sorry to hear of the illness of Mr. John
Carroll, Chairman and expressed sincere wishes for a full and speedy
recovery.
Res. tf14 Moved by: J.S. Scott
Seconded by: F.R. Perkins
RESOLVED THAT: A card, expressing best wishes for a speedy recovery
be fODvarded to Mr. Jcl1n Carroll on behalf of Members of the Board
and sta ff.
CARRIED;
MINUTES
The Minutes of Meeting #1/77 were presented.
Res. #15 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: H. Westney
RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting U:l/77, as presented, be
adopted.
CARRIED;
C-32 -2-
DELEGATION - MR. C.Do REBlTRN
Mr. C. Dudley Reburn outlined the problems of erosion on his property
located on the East Branch of the Don River, south of Finch ^venue.
He was. very concerned wi th the exten't of the erosion and advised the
Board that it was a continuing problem and was seriously affecting
the value of his property. The staff made a slide presentation of
the erosion on Mr. Reburn's property.
Res. #16 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED 'rHA'l': '1"he staff be requested to review the erosion problem
on the property of Mr. C. Dudley Reburn, 91 Forest Grove Drive,
~vi llowdale, to evaluate the status of its priority in the Downstream
Erosion Control Programme and to prepare a report with recommendations
for consideration of the Board.
CARRIED;
ST1\FF PROGRESS REPORT
The staff presented a Progress Report for the period January 1 to
April 30, 1977.
Res. #17 Moved by: J.S. Scott
Seconded by: Dr. G. Ross Lord
RESOLVED THAT: The Staff Progress Report for the ~eriod January 1 to
April 30, 1977, as presented, be received.
CARRIED;
PROJECT W.C.60
DOffNSTREAM EROSION CONTROL
The staff presented a communication, including a recommendation from
the Borough of Etobicoke, that funding for the Downstream Erosion
Control Programme be expanded.
Res. #18 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: F.R. Perkins
RESOLVED THAT: The staff communication h2ving regard to Project
W.C. 60 - Downstream Erosion Control be received; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: Increased funding for erosion control
programmes be regarded as a top priority within the new Flood Control
Plan; and
THAT upon completion of the Erosion Inventory and Priority studies
the staff report back as to a recommended level of funding; and
further
THAT the staff be requested to consider the extension of Project
~v. c. 60 in 1979 at an increased level of funding.
CARRIED;
EAST BRANCH - MIMICO CREEK
TO WEST J3Rl'illCH HUNBER RIVER
- DIVERSION
-
The staff presented a report regarding the diversion of the East
Branch of the Mimico Creek to the West Granch of the Humber River.
Res. ,tH9 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: H. WeGtney
-3- C-33
RESOLVED THAT: Upon completion of the hydrologic models of the
Mimico Creek and the Humber River, the possibility of diverting
a portion of the Mimico Creek drainage area into the West Branch
of the Humber River be investigated, should it be determined that
no other practical means of reducing flooding problems downstream
on the Mimico Creek exist.
CARRIED;
TOWN OF VAUGHAN - ICE JAMS
The staff presented a communication from The Town of Vaughan, request-
ing that the Authority consider being responsible for alleviating
ice jams and flooding that may result from ice problems.
Res. #20 Moved by: J.S. Scott
Seconded by: L. Martin
RESOLVED THAT: The staff communication and attached correspondence
from The TOvffi o~ Vaughan having regard to ice jam problems be
received; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The staff prepare a report describing
alternate means of handling ice jam problems in order that a com-
prehensive policy can be formulated for inclusion in the updated
Flood Control Plan.
CARRIED;
PRELIMINARY BUDGET ESTI~~TES - 1978
The 1978 Preliminary Budget Estimates were presented.
Res. #21 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED THAT: The 1978 Preliminary Budget Estimates for the Water
Resource Division, Flood Control Section, dated May 17, 1977, be
approved in principle; and further
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The 1978 Preliminary Budget Estimates
for the Flood Control Section, Water Resource Division, as appended
as Schedule "A" of these Minutes, be included in the 1978 Preliminary
Budget Estimates of the Authority.
CARRIED;
1979-1982 MULTI-YEAR FORECAST
Mr. Garrett presented the 1979-1982 Multi-Year Forecast for the
Flood Control Section, Water Resource Division, dated May 17, 1977.
Res. #22 Moved by: J.S. Scott
Seconded by: Dr. G. Ross Lord
RESOLVED THAT: The 1979-1982 Multi-Year Forecast be received; and
THE BOARD RECCt-'lMENDS THAT: The 1979-1982 Multi-Year Forecast for
the Flood Control Section of the Water Resource Division, dated
May 17, 1977, as amended and appended as Schedule "B" of these
Minu tes, be included in the 1979-1982 Multi-Year Forecast of the
Authority.
CARRIED:
REC~ENDATIONS OF THE
~roMDER V^LLEY ADVISORY BOARD
A staff communication was presented, including two recommendations
from the Humber Valley Advisory Board, as follows:
C-34 -4-
1- ~Vhere flood control works have been undGrtaken
by the Authority which require further works to
make them operate effectively, consideration in
the Flood Control Plan Review be given to
allocating high priority to the additional works;
2. The staff be requested to prepare a report of
the channelization of the Centreville Creek in
the Town of Caledon in the vicinity of Caledon
East.
Re~#23 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: F.R. Perkins
RESOLVED THAT: The staff con~unication, containing two recommendat-
ions from the Humter Valley Advisory Board, be received; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: An update of flooding in the vicinity
of Caledon East be carried out immediately prior to implementation,
currently scheduled for 1979-1980.
CARRIED;
HUMBER RIVER IMPROVEMENTS
AT OAK RIDGES - TO~VN OF
RICHMCND HILL
The staff presented a report and communication from The Town of.
Richmond Hill rega~ding improvements to the Humber River at Oak
Ridges.
Res. #24 Moved by: F.R. Perkins
Seconded by: J.S. Scott
RESOLVED THAT: The staff report and communication from The Town of
Richmond Hill be received; and
TK~T the staff be requested to meet with officials of The Regional
Municipality of York, The TO\VIl of Richmond Hill and The Town of
~Vhi tChurch/Stouffville, to discuss the financing and priorities
for channel improvements to the East Branch of the Humber River at
Oak Ridges, and channel improvements to the Duffin Creek in The
Town of ~Vhitchurch/Stouffville; and further
TO prepare a report and recommendations for consideration of the
Board at the next regular meeting.
CARRIED;
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m., May 25 to make a tour of
inspection of the Flood Warning Centre.
~vm. R. I'I~rridge, Q.~Vice Chairman K.G. Hiqqs
Acting Chairman Secretary-'l'reasurer
en
()
-
~
Ci
1978 CAPITAL BUDGET ESTIMATES c
t-t
t::l
=
PROGRAM Water & Related Land Manaqement - Water Control Pr()jpr.t-~(Rpnpf;t-;nlJ Mlln;r.;prllities) (\'12) PAGE 1 >'
.
1978 BUDGET SOURCES OF FINANCING 1977 ACTUALS 1977 BUDGET
Provincial Hunicipal
Activity Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Grant Levy Other Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Revenues
W.C.-58 - Don River
Bathurst - Finch 0 0 0 0 60,000
-
W.C.-60 - Downstream
Erosion Control 515,000 515,000 250,000 250,000 15,000 500,000
W.C.-75 - Highland 400,000 400,000 200,000 200,000 124,970
Creek Restoration
'i'lilket Creek 224,000 224,000 112,000 112,000 0
. Sherway Drive 90,000 90,000 45,000 45,000 0
W.C.-61 Stouffville 400,000 400,000 200,000 200,000 0
Channel
()
I
W
Ln
[ )[ 1,629,000 I 11,629,000 )[ 814,500 1814,500 I 15,000 )[ I ]( 684,970 I ]
1978 CAPITAL BUDGET ESTIMATES ()
I
w
PROGRAM Water & Related Land Management - Surveys & Studies (Benefitinq Hunicipalities) (vH) PAGE C"I
~
1978 BUDGET SOURCES OF FINANCING 1977 ACTUALS 1977 BLJDGET
Provincial Hunicipa1
Activity Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Grant Levy Other Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Revenues
\hlket Creek 12,000 12,000 9,000 3,000 I 14,667 I
I
Sherway Drive 10,000 10,000 7,500 2,500 0
Stouffville 10,000 10,000 7,500 2,500 0
.
r 1f 32,000 I I 32,000 1[ 24,000 I 8,000 I )[ I }[ 14,667 I )
1978 CAPITAL BUDGET' ESTIMATES
PROGRAM Water & Related Land Manaqement - Surveys & Studies & proiects n-n) & nn) PAGE 3
Flood Control Plan
1978 BUDGET SOURCES OF FINANCING 1977 ACTUALS 1977 BUDGET
Provincial Hunicipal
Activity Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Grant Levy Other Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Revenues
Acquisition 1,938,000, 1,938,000 969,000 969,000 2,004,296
Mapping 50,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 800,000
Hydrologic Models 375,000 375,000 187,500 187,000 150,000
Environmental Moni- 350,000 350,000 175,000 175,000 150,000
toring & Assessment
Erosion Inventory 10,000 10,000 5,000 5,000 150,000
Plan Review 100,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
(J
I
w
-....J
[ ][ 2.823,000 I I 2,823,000 ][ 1,411.50011,411,500 I ][ I ][3,304.296 I ]
1978 CURRENT BUDGET ESTIMATES ('J
I
w
co
PROGRAM Water & Related Land Management - Water Control Projects (W2 ) PAGE 1
Activ"~L. ...:... I 1978 BUDGET SOURCES OF FINANCING 1977 ACTL'ALS 1977 BUDGET
Net Provincial Municipal
Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Grant Levy Other Expenditures Revenues Expenditures ~e'l..enues
Staff Salaries 55,000 55,000 I 27,500 27,500 29,705 I
Staff Travel 2,700 2,700 1,350 1,350 450
FLOOD WARNING
Radio 15,000 15,000 7,500 7,500 20,000
Telemarks 6,000 6,000 3,000 3,000 6,000
Flood Control 2,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000
Centre
Flood Control
Structures 12,000 12,000 6,000 6,000 10,000
- ----- ---- If I 192, 700 H 46,350 I I If I If I 1
92,7C'O 46,350 70,155
1978 CURRENT BUDGET ESTIMATES
PROGRAM Water & Related Land Management - Operation & Maintenance of Water Control Structures (WS) PAGE 2
1978 BUDGET SOURCES OF FINfu~CING 1977 ACTUALS 1977 BUDGET
Net Provincial Municipal
Activit Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Grant Levy Other Expenditures Revenues Expenditures Revenues
Operation of Flood
Warning System 12,000 12,000 9,000 3,000 10,000
Claireville Dam 23,000 23,000 17,250 5,750 21,000
Hilne Dam 5,500 5,500 4,125 1,375 4,000
G. Ross Lord Dam 22,800 22,800 17,100 5,700 20,000
Small Dams 5,200 5,200 3,900 1,300 5,000
River Channels 68,000 68,000 51,000 17,000 62,000
Erosion Channels 2,000 2,000 1,500 500 0
Major Maintenance 20,000 20,000 15,000 5,000 18,000
()
I
w
""
[ ][ 158,500 I I 158,500 )[118,875 I 39,625 I )[ I ][ 140,000 I )
~SLTI-YEAR FORECAST 38.
---- (J) n
n I
::: .z,.
t:j 0
I ~urveys and Studies (H1) tJ
c
I ,!):;lOGD~'.'. Hater & Related Land Hanagement Support r-<
_ ..\, .\",i;__ a ~
=
t::l
=
I Cln.-rt2nt I
I Year I
FIN A N C I ~ G (1977) 1979 1980 1981 1982
I
, I
I
Expenditu~~s ...................................... 15,530 - - - -
Reve:1ues .................. ... .... ................... - - - - -
I
I "~o" 't'.....uen..; tu....~s I
_,"--"-......... ..c_ _ 15,530 - - - - I
I I
.
Gr an t s ............................................ I 7,765 - - - -
Dona t:ions .............................................................................. - - - - - I
I Levy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,765 - - - -
15,530 I - - - -
EXPENDITURES
Salaries 13,280 - - - -
Travel and Expenses 2,250 - - - -
15,530 - - - -
THIS PROGRAM NOW INCLUDED UNDER HATER CONTROL
PROJECTS (W2) I
1979 -1982 MULTI-YEAR FORECAST
PROGRAM WATER & RELATED LAND Ml\N^GEMENT - WATER CONTROL PROJECTS (W2 ) - SUPPORT & DEVELOP~lliNT PAGE 39.
PURPOSE: To provide technical data, equipment and labour required for the carrying out of the
Authority's Flood Control Plan.
.
1979-1982 OBJECTIVES: - to continue the program of the installation of a radio system in co-operation with
the Ministry of Natural Resources for transmitting flood control and flood warning
information.
- the installation of two Telemark stream gauges in the continuing program of stream
gauge telemetry.
- the provision of funds to carry out minor improvements on flood control structures.
FUNDING: This is a shared program, 50% of the cost of the proposed' works being eligible for a grant
from the Province of Ontario, the balance being funded from the General Levy on all
participating municipalities.
FINANCIAL COMMENTS: The Multi-Year Forecast includes funds for the continuing programme for the installation
of the Authority's radio system and additional improvements of flood control structures.
n
I
..,.
~
WJLTI-YEAR FORECAST
40.
(')
I
Water & Related Land Management Water Control Projects (W2) Support ~
PROGRAl1 : l\.l
Current
Year
FIN A N C I N G (1977) 1979 1980 1981 1982
Expenditures ...................................... I 30,155 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000
L\evenues I I
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
Net Expenditures 30,155 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000
Gr an t s ............................................ 15,077 36,500 36,500 36,500 36,500
Donations .........................................
Levy .............................................. 15,078 36,500 36,500 36,500 36,500
I
I 30,155 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000
i
I I I
EXPE:~DITURES I
Staff Salaries 29,705 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000
Staff Travel . 450 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000
30,155 73,000 73,000 73,000 73,000
- MULTI-YEAR FORECAST
41.
PROGRAM : Water & Related Land Management Water Control Projects (W2 ) Development
Current
Year 1980
FIN A N C I N G (1977) 1979 1981 1982
Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,000 33,000 17,000 17,000 17,000
Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net Expenditures 40,000 33,000 17,000 17,000 17,000
I
Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000 16,500 8,500 8,500 8,500
Donations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000 16,500 8,500 8,500 8,500
Levy ..............................................
40,000 33,000 17,000 17,000 17,000
EXPENDITURES
FLOOD WARNING SYSTEM - Communications 20,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
- Telemarks 6,000 5,000 4,000 4,000 4,000
- ,Rain Gauges 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000
- Flood Control Centre 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
(')
I
SAFETY STATIONS 2,000 ~
w
FLOOD CONTROL STRUCTURES 10,000 10,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
40,000 33,000 17,000 17,000 17,000
1979 -1982 MULTI-YEAR FORECAST n
I
~
~
PROGRAM WATER AND LAND MANAGEMENT - OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES (W5) PAGE 44.
PURPOSE: To maintain Flood Control works established under the Authority's Plan for
Flood Control and Water Conservation.
1979-1982 OBJECTIVES: - a continuation of the maintenance of Flood Control Works.
FUNDING: A Provincial Grant of 75% is available, the balance being funded from the
General Levy on all participating municipalities.
FIN~~CIAL CO~~ENTS: Funding has been allocated in order to cover a progressive maintenance
program including non-recurring major maintenance.
MULTI-YEAR FORECAST 45.
PROGRAM: Water and Related Land Management Operation and Maintenance of Water Control Support
Structures (\--JS)
Current
Year
FIN A N C I N G (1977) 1979 -1980 1981 1982
Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . 140,000 159,000 163,000 167,000 172,000
Revenues .... ................ ...... ..... ...........
Net Expenditures 140,000 159,000 163,000 167,000 172,000
Grants ....... ..... .... ............ ................ 105,000 119,250 122,250 125,250 129,000
Donations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,- . . . . . . . .
Levy .............................................. 35,000 39,750 40,750 41,750 43,000
140,000 159,000 163,000 167,000 172,000
EXPENDITURES 1
I
I
Operation of Flood Warning System 10,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000
Claireville Dam 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000
Milne Dam 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000
G. Ross Lord Dam 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
Small Dams General 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
n
River Channels 62,000, 66,000 68,000 70,000 72,000 I
.z:,.
U1
Major Maintenance 18,000 23,000 25,000 25,000 25,000
Erosion Channels 5,000 5,000 7,000 10,000
140,000 159,000 163,000 167,000 172,000
'-- -----
1979 -1982 MULTI-YEAR FORECAST ()
I
~
O'l
PROGRAM WATER AND RELATED LAND MA:,1\JAGEMENT - SURVEYS AND STUDIES (Wl) PAGE 79.
PURPOSE: To carry out surveys and studies necessary to upgrade the base information
necessary for comprehensive Flood Control and Water Conservation planning.
1979-1982 OBJECTIVES: - to carry O<.1t a reviev..r of the Aut:hori ty' s Flood Control Plan not only from a
hydrologic/hydraulic point of view, but from an environmental aspect as well.
_ to corrmence the program of updating the Flood Plain Mapping in 1981.
FUNDING: A 5~1o grant is available from the Province of Ontario, the balance being
funded from the Capital Levies on participating municipalities.
.
MULTI-YEAR FORECAST
80.
PROGRAM: Water and Related Land Management Surveys and Studies (Wl) Development
Current
Year
FIN A N C I N G (1977) 1979 1980 1981 1982
Expenditures ......... ....... .... ...... .... ........ 1,300,000 525,000 150,000 200,000 275,000
Revenues ...... .... .... ... ... .......... ............
Net Expenditures 1,300,000 525,000 150,000 200 000 27S nnn
Grants ......... ... .... .... ...... .... ... ... ........ 650,000 262,500 75,000 100,000 137,500
Donations ... ..... ............. ........ ............ I
Levy .............................................. 650,000 262,500 75,000 100,000 137,500
1,300,000 525,000 150,000 200,000 275,000
EXPENDITURES
Watershed-Mapping 800,000 - - 50,000 125,000
Hydrologic Modelling 150,000 200,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Environmental Monitoring & Assessment 150,000 250,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
n
Erosion Inventory and Priority Study 150,000 I
.::.
Flood Control Plan Review 50,000 75,000 ~
1,300,000 525,000 150,000 200,000 275,000
I
1979 -1982 MULTI-YEAR FORECAST ()
I
~
00
PROGRAM \-lATER & RELATED LAND MAN.Z\.GEHENT - WI\TER CONTROL PROJECTS (W2) PAGE gl.
PURPOSE: To carry out capital development and land acquisition in accordance with the pro?osals
of the Authority's Flood Control Plan.
1979-1982 OBJECTIVES: - to continue the land acquisition component of the Flood Control Plan.
- to carry out erosion control and flood control structures in accordance with the
proposals and the revised flood control plan.
FUNDING: This is a shared program, 50% of the cost of the acquisition of flood plain and
conservation land and construction of flood control and erosion control structures
being eligible for a grant from the Province of Ontario, the balance being funded
from the Flood Control Capital Levy on all participating municipalities. Authority
revenues received from flood plain and conservation lands expropriated by the
Province of Ontario have been applied to the Flood Plain and Conservation Land
Acquisition Program.
MULTI-YEAR FORECAST
82.
PROGRAM: Water and Related Land Management Water Control Projects (W2) Development
Current
Year
FIN A N C I N G (1977) 1979 1980 1981 1982
Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,004,296 2,298,000 4,750,000 4,700,000 4,625,000
Revenues .......... ................ ..... ........ ...
Net Expenditures 2,004,296 2,298,000 4,750,000 4,700,000 4,625,000
Grants .... ... .... .......... ....... ..... ....... .... 761,648 1,149,000 2,375,000 2,350,000 2,312,500
Donations .. ...... ......... ............. ........... 481,000
Levy .............................................. 761,648 1,149,000 2,375,000 2,350,000 2,312,500
2,004,296 2,298,000 4,750,000 4,700,000 4,625,000
EXPENDITURES
G. Ross Lord Darn 50,000 - - - -
Flood Plain & Conservation Land Acquisition 1,954,296 2,298,000 2,750,000 2,700,000 2,625,000
Erosion & Flood Control Structures - - 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,.000
(')
I
,:,.
\.0
2,004,296 2,298,000 4,750,000 4,700,000 4,~25,OOO
1979 -1982 MULTI-YEAR FORECAST (')
I
Ln
0
PROGRAM WATER & RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT - SURVEYS & STUDIES (BENEFITING MUNICIPALITIES) (Wl) PAGE 83.
PURPOSE: To carry out surveys and studies required to upgrade flood control planning by
the Authority where the benefits accrue to one municipality.
1979-1982 OBJECTIVES: To carry out engineering studies as required such as, on the Crooked Creek,
East Humber at Oak Ridges and Centreville Creek at Caledon East.
FUNDING: A 75% grant is available from the Province of Ontario, the remainder being
funded from Levies on participating municipalities.
- MULTI-YEAR FORECAST
84.
PROGRAM: Water and Related Land Management Surveys and Studies (Benefiting Development
Municioa1ities) (Wl)
Current
Year
FIN A N C I N G (1977) 1979 1980 1981 1982
Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,667 31,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net Expenditures 14,667 31,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
Grants . ... ............ ....................... ..... 11,000 23,250 15,000 15,000 15,000
Donations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Levy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,667 7,750 5,000 5,000 5,000
. I
14,667 31,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
I
EXPENDITURES
Engineering Studies:- Wilket Creek (East Don) 14,667
- Crooked Creek (East Highland) 16,000
- Oak Ridges (East Humber) 10,000
- Caledon East(Centreville Creek) 5,000 ()
I
r..n
- OTHER 20,000 20,000 20,000 ......
14,667 31,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
n
1979 -1982 MULTI-YEAR FORECAST J
lJ1
I\.)
PROGRAM W.I\TER & RELATED LAND MANAGEMENT - WATER CONTROL PROJECTS (BENEFITING MUNICIPALITIES) (W2 ) PAGE 85.
PURPOSE: To carry out capital devGlopment required to ameliorate the effects of flooding or
erosion and which principally benefit one municipality.
1979-1982 OBJECTIVES: - continuation of Project W.C.-60 - Downstream Erosion Control for 1979
- the completion of damaged areas in the Highland Creek
- the completion of the Stouffville Channel on the Duffin Creek and the completion of
works on the Wilket Creek and channel maintenance on Centreville Creek at Caledon East.
- construction of Flood Control channel in the Village 'of Oak Ridges on the East Humber.
- all Benefiting Municipality Projects transferred to Flood Control Plan by 1982.
FUNDING: A 50% grant is available from the Province of Ontario, the balance being funded from the
Capital Levies on participating municipalities.
- MULTI-YEAR FO?ECAST
86.
?ROGi\&"1 : Water Control Projects (Benefiting Developr.-,ent I
Water and Related Land Management Municipalities) ( \-J 2 )
Current I
Year
FIN A N C I N G (1977) 1979 1980 1981 1982
Expenditures .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 684,970 1,950,000 365,000 300,000
Revenues .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. , .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Net Expenditures 684,970 1,950,000 365,000 300,000
I
Grants 342,485 967,500 182,500 150,000
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
Donations .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15,000 I
Levy .............................................. 342,485 967,500 182,500 150,000
684,970 1,950,000 365,000 300,000
EXPENDITURES
W.C.-58 - Don River, Bathurst to Finch 60,000
W.C.-60 - Downstream Erosion Control 500,000 750,000
W.C.-75 - Highland Creek Repairs 124,970 250,000
W.C.-61 - Stouffville 400,000
W.C.-62 - Oak Ridges 365,000 300,000 n
I
In
~vilket Creek 500,000 w
Caledon East 50,000
684,970 1,950,000 365,000 300,000
~ FC&WC C-54
, ET-MH1 L-4
the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority
J-O-I-N-T
minutes
FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONS. ADV. BOARD FCWC #3/77
ETOBICOKE-MIMICO ADVISORY BOARD FRIDAY-OCTOBER-14-1977 E-M #2/77
The Flood Control and Water Conservation Advisory Board and the
Etobicoke-Mimico Advisory Board met in joint session at the Authority
Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on Friday, October 14, 1977,
commencing at 10:00 a.m.
PRESENT - FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD
Chairman J.S. Scott
Vice Chairman Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
C.F. Kline
L. Martin
F.J. McKechnie
A. Tonks
Chairman of the Authority R. Grant Henderson
Vice Chairman of the Authority Mrs. F. Gell
Authority Members L. Beckett
Mrs. L. Hancey
Dr. W.M. Tovell
Secretary-Treasurer K.G. Higgs
Adm. - Water Resource Division M.R. Garrett
Research Planner - Pl. & Policy Mrs. A.C. Deans
Development Coord. " " J.W. Maletich
Head, Flood Control Section, WRD J.C. Mather
Engineer, Flood Control Sec.,WRD R. Saadia
Proj~ct Engineer, Flood Control
Section, WRD A.G. Sahabandu
James F. MacLaren Limited
Consulting Engineers R. Wigle
ABSENT
Members R. Fitzpatrick
Dr. G.R. Lord
F.R. Perkins
G. Risk
J. Sewell
PRESENT - ETOBICOKE-MIMICO ADVISORY BOARD
Chairman C.F. Kline
Members Wm. Baillie
F.J. McKechnie
Mrs. N. Pownall
G.B. Sinclair
Chairman of the Authority R. Grant Henderson
Vice Chairman of the Authority Mrs. F. Gell
Authority Members L. Beckett
Mrs. L. Hancey
Dr. W.M. Tovell
Secretary-Treasurer K.G. Higgs
Adm. - Water Resource Division M.R. Garrett
Research Planner - Pl. & Policy Mrs. A.C. Deans
Development Coord. " " J.W. Maletich
Head, Flood Control Section, WRD J.C. Mather
Engineer, Flood Control Sec.,WRD R. Saadia
Project Engineer, Flood Control
Section, WRD A. G. Sahabandu
James F. MacLaren Limited R. Wigle
ABSENT
Vice Chairman T.W. Butt
Members R.F. Bean
M.J. Breen
C-55
-2- L-5
It was noted that October 14, 1977, is the 23rd anniversary of
Hurricane Hazel.
Mr. Scott was congratulated on his election as Chairman of the
Flood Control and Water Conservation Advisory Board.
Res. #25 Moved by: C.F. Kline
(FC&WC) Seconded by: Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
RESOLVED THAT: A letter be forwarded to Mr. John Carroll, former
member of the Authority and Chairman of the Flood Control and
Water Conservation Advisory Board, thanking him for his leadership
as Chairman of the Board during the last 2~ years.
The meeting was chaired jointly by Mr. Kline and Mr. Scott.
MINUTES
The Minutes of Etobicoke-Mimico Advisory Board Meeting #1/77 were
presented.
Res. #6 Moved by: G.B. Sinclair
(E-M) Seconded by: Mrs. N. Pownall
RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #1/77, as presented, be
adopted.
CARRIED;
The Minutes of Flood Control and Water Conservation Advisory Board
Meeting #2/77 were presented.
Res. #26 Moved by: F.J. McKechnie
(FC&WC) Seconded by: H. Westney
RESOLVED THAT: The Minutes of Meeting #2/77, as presented, be
adopted. CARRIED;
STAFF PROGRESS REPORT (FC&WC)
The staff submitted a Progress Report to the Flood Control and Water
Conservation Advisory Board, outlining work that had been completed
in 1977 under Maintenance of Water Control Structures, the Flood
Warning and Forecasting System, and Acquisition of Flood Plain and
Conservation Lands, the Hydrologic Model study, the mapping of
Flood Plain and Conservation Lands, the Erosion Inventory,
Environmental Monitoring Programme, the works that had been completed
under Project W.C.-60 (Erosion Control & Bank Stabilization in Metro-
politan Toronto - 10 Year Programme & 5 Year Project), and the
present status of Project W.C.-75 (Channel Improvements on the
Highland Creek) .
Res. #26 Moved by: Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
(FC&WC) Seconded by: L. Martin
RESOLVED THAT: The Staff Progress Report, as presented, be received.
CARRIED;
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Res. #27 Moved by: Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
(FC&WC) Seconded by: L. Martin
RESOLVED THAT: The staff be requested to submit a report at the
next regular meeting of the Flood Control and Water Conservation
Advisory Board on Resolutions #16, 19, 20 and 24 of Minutes #2/77 of
the Board, held Wednesday, May 25, 1977.
CARRIED;
-3- C-56
L-6
The staff presented a Progress Report on works which had been
completed in the Etobicoke-Mimico Valleys, including the Erosion
Control Priority Study, the Hydrologic Model Study and the
erosion control works which had been completed in the Westleigh
Crescent area.
The Etobicoke-Mimico Advisory Board suggested that the next meeting
take the form of a field trip.
HYDROLOGIC MODEL STUDY,
ETOBICOKE-MIMICO CREEKS
Mr. Ron Wigle, of the firm James F. MacLaren Limited, Consulting
Engineers, presented a comprehensive report and slide presentation
on the Hydrologic Model Study on the Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks.
The members of both Boards asked a number of questions and there
was considerable discussion on the various aspects of the study.
Res. #28 Moved by: Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
(FC&WC) Seconded by: F.J. McKechnie
Res. #7
(E-M)
RESOLVED THAT: The report on the Hydrologic Model Study on the
Etobicoke and Mimico Creeks, dated November 1977, be received for
information and study.
CARRIED;
FLOOD PLAIN CRITERIA &
MANAGEMENT EVALUATION STUDY,
DECEMBER, 1976
The Board was advised that the Hon. Frank Miller, Minister of Natural
Resources, on behalf of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and
the Ontario Ministry of Housing, had forwarded a copy of the Flood
Plain Criteria and Management Evaluation Study, together with a
Discussion Paper on Flood Plain Management Alternatives in Ontario, to
all Authorities in the Province, and had requested that comments be
forwarded to the Policy Coordination Secretariat of the Ministry of
Natural Resources by December 15, 1977.
Res. #29
(FC&WC) Moved by: L. Martin
Seconded by: Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
RESOLVED THAT: Copies of the Discussion Paper on Flood Plain
Management Alternatives in Ontario be forwarded to all members of the
Authority; and further
THAT the staff be requested to prepare a report and recommendations
for consideration of the Flood Control and Water Conservation
Advisory Board, to be present~d at a Special Meeting of the Board, to
be held in time for the Authority to consider the report and
recommendations at the next regular meeting of the Authority,
scheduled for November 25, 1977.
ADJOURNMENT
On Motion, the Meeting adjourned at 12:30 p.m., October 14, 1977.
J.S. Scott
Chairman, Flood Control and Water
Conservation Advisory Board K.G. Higgs
C.F. Kline Secretary-Treasurer
Chairman, Etobicoke-Mimico Advisory
Board
~ C-57
,
the metropolitan toronto and region conservation authority
minutes
FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONS. ADV. BD. THURSDAY-NOV-24-1977 ~4/77
The Flood Control and Water Conservation Advisory Board met in the
Board Room, Authority Office, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, on
Thursday, November 24, 1977, commencing at 1:30 p.m.
PRESENT WERE
Chairman J.S. Scott
Vice Chairman Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
Members R. Fitzpatrick
C.F. Kline
L. Martin
A. Tonks
H. Westney
Chairman of the Authority R.G. Henderson
Authority Member Mrs. S. Martin
Secretary-Treasurer K.G. Higgs
Director of Planning & Policy W.A. McLean
Adm. - Water Resource Division M.R. Garrett
Research Planner P & P Mrs. A.C. Deans
Development Supervisor FIC WRD R. Dewell
Head, Flc Section WRD J.C. Mather
Engineer, Flc Section WRD R. Saadia
Project Engineer F/C Section WRD A. Sahabandu
ABSENT WERE
Members Dr. G. Ross Lord
F.J. McKechnie
F.R. Perkins
G . Ri sk
J. Sewell
MINUTES
The Minutes of Meeting ~3/77 were presented.
MR. H. WESTNEY advised that his presence was not indicated in the
Minutes of Meeting ~3/77 but he actually was present.
Res. #:30 Moved by: H. Westney
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED '!HAT: The Minutes of Meeting ~3/77, as amended, indicatinq
that Mr. Westney was present, be adopted.
CARRIED;
PRESENTATION OF MR. WM. BURRELL
re Erosion on the Highland Creek
~62, 63 & 64 Creekwood Drive
Borouqh of Scarborouqh
Mr. Burrell outlined for the Board the erosion, loss of trees and
the problems regarding noise from Highway 401 in the vicinity of
#:6 2 , 63 and 64 Creekwood Drive in the Boroogh of Scarboroogh. 'rhe
erosion had accelerated because of the two major storms in 1976 and
1977. A dam north of his property had been breached in one of these
floods.
C-58 -2-
Mr. Burrell further indicated that wi th the development of the
Malvern area upstream from his property, the amount of run-off was
increasing and causing serious problems downstream. The Board
Members saw slides of the location.
Res. #=31 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: A. Tonks
RESOLVED THAT: The staff be requested to prepare a report and
recommendations on erosion control on the Highland Creek in the
vicinity of #=62, 63 and 64 Creekwood Drive, Borough of Scarborough.
CARRIED;
STAFF PROGRESS REPORT
Staff presented a verbal progress report covering a number of items
of importance to the Board, including:
. Maintenance programme
. Environmental Monitoring
. Acquisition of flood plain and conservation lands
. Construction of access ramps for maintenance
purposes to the Black Creek Channel
. Installation of 5 telemetering recording stream
gauges
. The establishment of an additional two snow course
stations
and the Members were advised regarding the progress of the following
projects:
. Dam Operator's residence at the G. Ross Lord Dam
and Reservoir was 75% complete
. Project W.C.75 - Highland Creek, had been approved
and work was under way
. Flood Control Plan Review is proceeding
. The Etobicoke-Mimico Hydrologic Model Study was
complete and would be presented at the next meeting
. The Hydrologic Modelling of all the other rivers
under the jurisdiction of the Authority had
commenced
. An interim Flood Control Project was being prepared
and would be presented to the next meeting of the
Board.
Res. #=32 Moved by: R. Fitzpatrick
Seconded by: Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
RESOLVED THAT: The Staff Progress Report, as presented, be received.
CARRIED;
1978 PRELIMINARY BUDGET
A staff communication, together with revised budget sheets~ were
presented drawing attention to the fact that the budget revision is
merely a re-allocation of funds within the Flood Control Plan and
does not constitute a change in budget totals.
Res. #=33 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: L. Martin
-3- C-59
RESOLVED THAT: The 1978 Budget for Water and Related Land Manage-
ment - Surveys and Studies (W1) and Water Control Projects (W2) , as
revised, be received.
CARRIED:
PROJECT W.C.60 - EROSION CONTROL
AND BANK STABILIZATION IN METRO-
POLITAN TORONTO: lO-YEAR
PROGRAMME AND 5-YEAR PROJECT
Progress Report, Erosion Inventory,
Current Priorities and 1978 Work
Proqramme
The staff presented a staff report having regard to Project W.C.60,
outlining the accomplishments to date, the erosion inventory by
watershed, the current priorities and the 1978 work programme.
Res. #34 Moved by: A. Tonks
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED THAT: The Progress Report and the Erosion Inventory on
Project W.C.60 be received and appended as part of Schedule "A" of
these Minutes; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The 1978 Work Programme and the Current
Priorities for Project W.C.60 - Erosion Control and Bank Stabilization
in Metropolitan Toronto: 10-Year Programme and 5-Year Project, as
appended as part of Schedule "A" of these Minutes, be approved.
CARRIED:
REVIEW OF EROSION PROBLEM AT
NO. 91 FORESTGROVE DRIVE
BOROUGH OF NORTH YORK
DON RIVER WATERSHED
The staff submitted a report outlining a review of the erosion problem
on the property of Mr. C. Dudley Reburn, 91 Forestgrove Drive,
Wi11owda1e and an evaluation of its priority status in Project W.C.60,
- Erosion Control and Bank Stabilization in Metropolitan Toronto.
Res. #35 Moved by: WIn. R. Herridge, Q.C.
Seconded by: L. Martin
RESOLVED THAT: The staff report outlining a review of the erosion
prOblem on the property of Mr. C. Dudley Reburn, 91 Forestgrove Drive,
Willowdale, Borough of North York, Don River Watershed, be received:
and
THAT the staff be directed to advise Mr. C. Dudley Reburn of the
current priority status of this site.
CARRIED:
PROJECT W.C.78 - A PROJECT FOR
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS ON THE
ETOBICOKE CREEK AT SHERWAY DRIVE
CITY OF MISSISSAUGA
A staff communication together with draft of Project W.C.78 - A Project
for Channel Improvements on the Etobicoke Creek at Sherway Drive, City
of Mississauga, were presented.
Res. #36 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
C-60 -4-
RESOLVED THAT: Project W.C.78 - A Project for Channel Improvements
on the Etobicoke Creek at Sherway Drive, City of Mississauga, dated
November-1977, be received and appended as Schedule "B" of these
Minutes; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: Project W.C.78 - A Project for Channel
Improvements on the Etobicoke Creek at Sherway Drive, City of
Mississauga, dated November-1977, be adopted; and
THAT the following action be taken in connection therewith:
( a) The Regional Municipality of Peel be designated as the benefit-
ing municipality on the basis set forth in the Project;
(b) The Government of Ontario be requested to approve the Project
and a grant of 50% of the cost thereof;
(c) The Ontario Municipal Board, if required, be requested to
approve the Project pursuant to Section 23 of The Conservation
Authorities Act;
( d) When approved the appropriate Authority officials be authorized
to take whatever action is required in connection with the
Project, including the execution of any necessary documents.
CARRIED;
ICE JAMS - TOWN OF VAUGHAN
Pursuant to Resolution #20/77 of the Board at Meeting #2/77 held
Wednesday, May 25/ 1977/ the staff presented a report describing
alternate me~ns of handling ice jam problems.
Res. #37 Moved by: Wm. R. Herridge, Q.C.
Seconded by: L. Martin
RESOLVED THAT: The staff communication having regard to alternate
means of handling ice jams in order to develop an Authority policy
regarding the removal of ice jams be received; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The Executive Committee be requested to
obtain a legal opinion and an opinion on the insurance implications
of the Authority assuming responsibility for the removal of ice jams;
and
THAT subject to the Executive Committee being satisfied with respect
to the legal and insurance responsibilities;
THE BOARD FURTHER RECOMMENDS THAT: The recommendations contained in
the staff report having regard to ice jams, as set forth herein, be
adopted:
( a) The Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority assume
responsibility for the removal of ice jams where it is deemed
necessary to prevent or alleviate flooding throughout the area
under the jurisdiction of the Authority;
(b) All municipalities be informed that The Metropolitan Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority will be providing this service;
(c) Appropriate staff be trained in the use of explosives through
attendance at a recognized programme such as that sponsored by
the Construction Safety Association of Ontario.
CARRIED;
-5- C-6l
EROSION INVENTORY & PRIORITY S'lUDIES
REGIONS OF PEEL, YORK AND DURHAM
A staff communication was presented outlining a programme for erosion
inventory and priority studies for the Regions of Peel, York and
Durham .
Res. #38 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: A. Tonks
RESOLVED THAT: The staff report "Erosion Inventory and Priority
Studies - Regions of Peel, York and Durham", dated November 8, 1977,
be received.
CARRIED;
PROGRESS REPORT ON
STOUFFVILLE AND OAK RIDGES CHANNELS
A staff progress report was presented having regard to the priorities
of the Region of York as they relate to the Stouffville Channel and
the Oak Ridges channelization.
Res. #39 Moved by: L. Martin
Seconded by: R. Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED THAT: The staff progress report on the Stouffville Channel
and the Oak Ridges Channel in the Oak Ridges area be received for
information.
CARRIED;
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PONDS
A staff communication having regard to the planting of trees and wild-
life shrubs around storm water management ponds was presented.
Res. #40 Moved by: C.F. Kline
Seconded by: A. Tonks
RESOLVED THAT: The staff communication having regard to planting
around storm water management ponds be received and considered by
development control staff when commenting to municipalities regarding
development proposals.
CARRI ED;
A DISCUSSION PAPER ON
FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT
ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO
A staff communication was presented advising that The Honourable
Frank S. Miller, Minister of Natural Resources has forwarded to the
Authority for review and comment "A Discussion Paper on Flood Plain
Management Alternatives in Ontario". A copy of the Discussion Paper
was provided to all Members of the Board.
Res. #41 Moved by: L. Martin
Seconded by: WIn. R. Herridge, Q.C.
RESOLVED THAT: The staff report on "A Discussion Paper on Flood
Plain Management Alternatives in Ontario", as amended, be received
and appended as Schedule "c" of these Minutes; and
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The staff report on "A Discussion Paper
on Flood Plain Management Alternatives in Ontario" be forwarded to
the Minister of Natural Resources as the Authority's comment; and
further
C-62 -6-
THAT copies be forwarded to all local and regional municipalities
within the jurisdiction of the Authority.
CARRIED;
ADJOURNMENT
On Motion, the Meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m., November 24.
J.S. Scott K.G. Hiqqs
Chairman Secretary-Treasurer
SCHEOOLE IIAII C-63
TO: THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER
CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD
M.T.R.C.A. - MEETING #4/77
RE: PROJECT W.C.-60, EROSION CONTROL AND BANK STABILIZATION IN
METROPOLITAN TORONTO: lO-YEAR PROGRAMME AND 5-YEAR PROJECT.
Progress Report, Erosion Inventory, Current Priorities and
1978 Work Programme
Submitted herewith is a staff report outlining the accomplish-
ments to date, the erosion inventory by watershed, the current
priorities and the 1978 work programme.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT: The 1978 Work Programme and the Current
Priorities for Project W.C.-60, IIErosion Control and Bank
Stabilization in Metropolitan Toronto: 10-Year Programme and
5-Year projectll, be approved; and further
THAT: The Progress Report and the Erosion Inventory be received.
M. R. Garrett
Administrator
Water Resource Division
Attachments:
November 7, 1977
Agslfn
C-64
PROJECT W.C.-60
PROGRESS REPORT, EROSION INVENTORY, CURRENT PRIORITIES
AND THE 1978 WORK PROGRAMME
INTRODUCTION:
The purpose of this report is to outline the progress of
Project W.C.-60, which is designed to carry out the following:
(a) Major erosion control and bank stabilization remedial
works on a priority basis for the major and intermediate
watercourses.
(b) Initiate a preventative programme in the form of minor
remedial works and re-vegetation of embankments.
Since site conditions change continually, the priorities have to
be reviewed on a regular basis. The current top priorities are
reflected in the work programme for 1978 and the proposed major
remedial work sites for 1979, which are found in the respective
sections of this report.
The section on "Current Priorities" indicate those sites that have
been placed in a high priority pool. It should be noted that the
present five year project will terminate at the end of 1978 and
that for the purpose of this report, the annual budget for
Project W.C.-60 is assumed to be increased from $500,000.00 to
$1,000,000.00 commencing 1979.
- 2 - C-65
PROGRESS REPORT:
The following is a list of sites at which major or minor
remedial work was carried out between September, 1974
(inception of project) and November, 1977.
LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR
MAJOR REMEDIAL WORKS
90 Forestgrove Dr. East Don River 1974
20-30 Islay Court Humber River 1974
39-41 Storer Drive Humber River 1974-1975
99-103 Burbank Dr. Newtonbrook Creek 1974-1975
HI Mount Drive Newtonbrook Creek 1974-1975
8-10 King Maple Place Newtonbrook Creek 1974-1975
113 Burbank Drive Newtonbrook Creek 1975
14-22 Archway Cres. Humber River 1975
6 Woodhaven Heights Humber River 1975
45 Riverbank Dr. & Mimico Creek 1975
Vicinity
32-38 Bonnyview Dr. Mimico Creek 1975
37-43 Lake1and Drive West Humber 1975-1976
Yvonne Public School Black Creek 1976
30-56 Grovetree Road West Humber 1976
95 & 97 Portico Drive East Branch of the 1976
Highland Creek
197-205 Sweeney Drive East Don River 1976
24 Stonegate Road Humber River 1976-1977
24-36 Westleigh Cres. Etobicoke Creek 1976-1977
158-168 Three Valleys Dr.)
& ) East Don River 1976-1977
190-212 Three Valleys Dr.)
C-66 - 3 -
LOCATION WATERSHED WORK YEAR
MINOR REMEDIAL WORKS
520 Markham Rd.Vicinity Highland Creek 1975
(Cedarbrook Retirement
Home)
84-89 Greenbrook Drive Black Creek 1975
Kirkbradden Road Mimico Creek 1975
West Hill Collegiate Highland Creek 1975
Shore ham Court Black Creek 1975
27-31 Ladysbridge Dr. Highland Creek 1975-1976
(West Branch)
N.W. of 56 Grovetree West Humber River 1975-1976
Road
37-43 Mayall Avenue Black Creek 1976
79 Clearview Heights Black Creek 1976
S.W. of Shoreham Drive Black Creek 1976
Bridge
Driftwood Court Black Creek 1976
75 Decarie Circle Mimico Creek 1976
4 Woodhaven Heights Humber River 1977
73 Van Dusen Boulevard Mimico Creek 1977
EROSION INVENTORY:
The following table indicates the erosion inventory for the
watercourses designated major or intermediate within Metropolitan
Toronto. These sites have been identified by design block, where
the Authority has either been informed by way of requests for
assistance or is aware of a significant erosion problem.
WATERCOURSE NO. OF SITES
Etobicoke Creek 14
Mimico Creek 34
Humber River 76
Don River 109
Highland Creek 32
Centennial Creek 2
TOTAL 267
- 4 - C-67
CURRENT PRIORITIES:
Due to the large number of sites requiring erosion control and
bank stabilization work throughout Metropolitan Toronto, major
remedial work is being undertaken on a priority basis. The
original priority ratings listed in the James F. MacLaren
report of March, 1970, are used only as a starting point in
assessing the rate of progress and deterioration during the
eight years that have elapsed. Based on year-round monitoring,
the severity of the problem in its present state and a fair idea
of its relative potential to deteriorate, the staff has
determined a pool of sites bearing high priority ratings.
Because erosion is a dynamic problem, the priorities within this
pool change continually as we strive to ameliorate the list with
the steady influx of technical data on site conditions.
Therefore, the accompanying list of "current priorities" will be
reviewed regularly during 1978 in order to accomodate any
significant changes and the possible inclusion of new sites.
PROPOSED MAJOR REMEDIAL WORK SITES FOR 1978 1
LOCATION r-_ ~A~ERSHED BOROUGH I APPROX. I COMMENTS
COST
-- -- -
()
35 CANYON AVENUE WEST DON RIVER NORTH YORK $220,000.00 PROBLEM: Riverbank erosion and slope failure. I
0'1
co
Structures affected - 1 Apartment complex
Height of bank - 110 ft.
Length of bank - 110 ft.
DON VALLEY DRIVE DON RIVER EAST YORK $130,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope failure.
VICINITY
Structures affected - Metro Road and Services
Height of bank - 130 ft.
Length of bank - 60 ft.
19 FAIRGLEN CRESCENT HUMBER RIVER NORTH YORK $30,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope failure (Exposed Shale)
& VICINITY and Riverbank Erosion.
Structures affected - 1 Residence
Height of bank - 55 ft.
Length of bank - 110 ft.
19-53 RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS HUMBER RIVER ETOBICOKE $33,500.00 PROBLEM: Slope failure (Exposed Shale)
& 1025 SCARLETT ROAD and Riverbank Erosion.
Structures affected - 15 Residences and
1 Apartment
Height of bank - 52 ft.
Length of bank - 600 ft.
I VVL VI LI \V0IVI" r~ I \ I VI \ I I I ....)11 Lv .G
LOCATION WATERSHED TECHNICAL APPROX. I COMMENTS 1 PROJECTED
PRIORITY COST WORK YEAR
- ' -
10 CODECO COURT VICINITY EAST DON RIVER 1 $90,000.00 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion and Slope Failure 1979
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 1 INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
(U.E. Union Office)
Height of Bank - 90 ft.
Length of Bank - 160 ft.
,- - ---- - - -
50-56 STANWOOD CRESCENT HUMBER RIVER 2 $80,000.00 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion and Slope Failure 1979
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 4 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 75 ft.
Length of Bank - 250 ft.
--
6-12 SULKARA COURT EAST DON'RlVEF 3 $130,000.00 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion 1979
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 4 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 90 ft.
Length of Bank - 300 ft.
8-12 AZALEA COURT EMERY CREEK 4 $105,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure (Fill Material) 1979
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 110-120 ft.
Length of Bank - 70-80 ft.
-
51 COLONEL DANFORTH HIGHLAND CREEK 5 $175,000.00 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion 1979
TRAIL STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 1 RESIDENCE
Height of Bank - 100 ft. ()
I
Length of Bank - 280-300 ft. (j)
\D
POOL h
OF EROSIOf\J PRIORITY SITES 3
-- -
LOCATION WATERSHED TECHNICAL APPROX. COMMENTS PROJECTED
PRIORITY COST WORK YEAR
---
PROBLEM: Slope Failu~e (Fill Material) 1979 ()
9-49 PRESLEY AVENUE MASSEY CREEK 6 $70,000.00 I
-..J
0
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 RESIDENCES
I... ...._ Height of Bank - 65-70 ft.
Length of Bank - 200 ft.
OTTERY ROAD DON RIVER 7 $50,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure 1979
TODMORDEN PARK VICINITY) STRUCTURES AFFECTED: ROADWAY
Height of Bank - 100 ft.
Length of Bank - 150 ft.
L .
2 ENFIELD AVENUE ETOBICOKE 8 'l'otal : PROBLEM: Slope Failure (Exposed Shale) 1979
-- and Riverbank Erosion
ND VICINITY CREEK $265,000.00
1979: STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 1 RESIDENCE
$180,000.00 Height of Bank - 55-60 ft.
Length of Bank - 200 ft.
1980:
$85,000.00
"
\
. -.'-
. - ,....,,--
- - -- ~- -.----..--...... - ...--.... - ---. . --
---------
LOCATION WATERSHED TECHNICAL APPROX. COMMENTS
PRIORITY COST
27-31 ALAMOSA DRIVE EAST DON RIVEF 9 $45,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 35-40 ft.
Length of Bank - 170 ft.
31-35 RIVERCOVE DRIVE MIMICO'CREEK 10 $25,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure and Riverbank Erosion
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 45 ft.
Length of Bank - 180 ft.
JELLICO-SUNSET VICINITY ETOBICOKE 11 $55,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure (Exposed Shale) and
CREEK Riverbank Erosion
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 4 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 50 ft. ~ . ._-
Length of Bank - 120 ft.
- ----- EAST DON R1VEi
55 WYNFORD HEIGHTS 12 $230,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure and Riverbank Erosion
CRESCENT STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 APARTMENT BUILDINGS
Height of Bank - 90 ft.
Length of Bank - 300 ft.
-- -
100-104 GWENDOLEN CRES. w'"EST DON RIVEF 13 $25,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure and Riverbank Erosion
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 RESIDENCES ()
Height of Bank 110 ft. .
- -...J
Length of Bank - 150 ft. I-'
POOL OF EROSION PRIORITY SITES 5
LOCATION WATERSHED T~~~~:~LI~~~X,u_ [ ._..__ COMMENTS
-- - ---- -- -- ----- ----- -- - - --- -- ---
360 WESTON ROAD HUMBER RIVER 14 $25,000.00 PROBLEM: Surface Erosion (Exposed Shale) n
I
-..J
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 1 APARTMENT BUILDING N
Height of Bank - 40 ft.
Length of Bank - 15 ft.
.
42-168 HUMBERVALE BLVD. ~.uMICO CREEK 15 $50,000.00 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 9 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 30 ft.
Length of Bank - 350 ft.
4 RESTW~LL CRESCENT EAST DON RIVER 16 $35,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure and Riverbank Erosion
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 60-65 ft.
Length of Bank - 200 ft.
--
EADOWVALE ROAD LITTLE ROUGE 17 $40,000.00 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion
NORTH OF FINCH) STRUCTURES AFFECTED: ROADWAY (MEADOWVALE ROAD)
Height of Bank - 15-20 ft.
Length of Bank - 450 ft.
-- ,-
9-41 FUTURA DRIVE BLACK CREEK 18 $35,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure
STRU~TURES AFFECTED: 2 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 45-50 ft.
Length of Bank - 45 ft.
- '- ---- ---
- -- -. -...---.-..... . .. .. -. ... . . -... -- ~
,-- ------- -
LOCATION WATERSHED TECHNICAL APPROX. COMMENTS
PRIORITY COST
---
6-12 LONEY AVENUE BLACK CREEK 19 $40,000.00 PROBLEM: Slope Failure and Riverbank Erosion
\
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 4 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 40 ft.
Length of Bank - 100 ft.
--. --- -
18-22 BEAUCOURT ROAD MIMICO CREEK 20 $40,000.00 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion
A.J.~D VICINITY Slope Failure Behind #22
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 RESIDENCE S
Height of Bank - 50 ft.
Length of Bank - 40 ft.
8-42 DELROY DRIVE MIMICO CREEK 21 PROBLEM: Slope Failure (Exposed Shale) and Riverbank Erosion
47-51 BERL AVENUE AND STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 18 RESIDENCES AND PUBLIC SCHOOL
KINGSMILL QUEENSWAY Phase I $140,000.00
Height of Bank - 40-45 ft.
, CP-.l1PUS Length of Bank - 1,100 ft.
Phase II $100,000.00 Bank Stabilization
OPPOSITE NOS. 74 & 76
COLONEL DANFORTH TRAIL HIGHLAND CREEK 22 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: ROADWAY
Height of Bank - 80-90 ft.
Length of Bank - 250 ft.
-
0
I
~
W
POOL OF EROSION PRIORITY SITES --
7
- ---------- ---
LOCATION WATERSHED TECHNICAL AP PROX. COMMENTS
PRIORITY COST
()
ENNISON AVENUE HUMBER RIVER 23 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion (Shale Bank) I
-...J
~
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 3 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 50-60 ft.
Length of Bank - 400 ft.
- -,
7-31 LADYSBRIDGE DRIVE HIGHLAND CREEl< 24 PROBLEM: Slope Erosion
STRUCTURES AFFECTED - 3 RESIDENCES
Height of Bank - 100 ft.
Length of Bank - 150 ft.
------- -
1 FORESTGROVE DRIVE EAST DON RIVER 25 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion
ND VICINITY STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 1 Residence
Height of Bank - 60 ft.
Length of Bank - 75 ft.
OWNTREE MILLS PARK HUMBER RIVER 26 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion
ADJACENT TO AVIEMORE DR.) STRUCTURES AFFECTED: Par.k Pathway
Height of Bank - 35 ft.
Length of Bank - 200 ft.
---- --
6 RESTWELL CRESCENT EAST DON RIVEF 27 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion
STRU~TURES AFFECTED: 1 RESIDENCE
Height of Bank - 70 ft.
Length of Bank - 40-50 ft.
- -_._-------- -----
, --- -. ...... ,.....,'-"',""""". .. . '~''-'"'' . ..........., .. -...-........... ts
- ----- - ---
LOCATION --1 WATERSHED TECHNICAL APPROX. COMMENTS
PRIORITY COST
,-
OPPOSITE
232-234 MARTIN GROVE ROAD MIMICO CREEK 28 PROBLEM: Slope Failure and Riverbank Erosion
AND VICINITY STRUCTURES AFFECTED: ROADWAY
Height of Bank - 30 ft.
.. Length of Bank - 100 ft.
-- --
-- - - - -
91 MATSON ROAD BLACK CREEK 29 PROBLEM: Riverbank Erosion
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: 1 APARTMENT BUILDING
Height of Bank - 20 ft.
Length of Bank -100 ft.
- -
COLONEL DANFORTH TRAIL HIGHLAND 30 PROBLEM: Surface and Riverbank Erosion
AND BONACRES ROAD CREEK
STRUCTURES AFFECTED: ROADWAY
Height of Bank - 85-90 ft.
Length of Bank - 300 ft.
()
I
-...J
(J'I
C-76
1978 WORK PROGRAMME
The following table shows the proposed work programme for
1978, together with the accompanying budget analysis:
ITEM ESTIMATED SUB-TOTAL
COST
ADMINISTRATION
Survey and Legal $1,000.00
Salaries 30,000.00
Material 1,100.00
Equipment 600.00
Travel Expenses 3,000.00
Rental 1,500.00 $37,200.00
STUDIES
Engineering: 6-12 Sulkara Court $12,000.00 $12,000.00
Soil: Azalea Court 2,500.00
Pottery Road 1,500.00
39-49 Presley Ave. 3,000.00
Extra 300.00 $7,300.00
LABOUR BENEFITS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
MAIN~ENANCE AND RE-VEGETATION
PROGRAM $10,000.00 $10,000.00
MINOR REMEDIAL WORK
10 Satock Terrace
Kennedy Road Mall
Westleigh Crescent Vicinity
Deanewood Crescent Vicinity $10,000.00 $10,000.00
MAJOR REMEDIAL WORK
35 Canyon Avenue $225,000.00
Don Valley Drive 130,000.00
19 Fairglen Crescent Vicinity 30,000.00
19-53 Riverview Heights & 33,500.00
1025 Scar1ette Road $418,500.00
TOTAL $500,000.00
SCHEDULE IIBII C-77
TO: THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD
M.T.R.C.A. - Meeting #4/77
RE: PROJECT W.C.-78
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS ON THE
ETOBICOKE CREEK AT SHERWAY DRIVE
Erosion of the steep valley wall of the Etobicoke Creek at
Sherway Drive is threatening the development at the top of
the valley as well as the Sherway Drive bridge. The
Authority had been requested by the Region of Peel and the
City of Mississauga to study the problem and to carry out
the necessary remedial work.
In this regard the attached project has been drafted which
will allow the remedial works to be undertaken at an
estimated cost of $116,000. The Regional Municipality of
Peel will be designated as the Benefiting Municipality and
will be responsible for raising 50% of the cost of this
project.
RECOMMENDATIONS
I TIS RECOMMENDED THAT: Project W.C.-78, A Project for
Channel Improvements on the Etobicoke Creek at Sherway
Drive, dated November 1977, be adopted; and,
THAT the following action be taken in connection therewith:
(a) the Regional Municipality of Peel be designated as
the benefiting municipality on the basis set forth
in the Project;
(b) the Government of Ontario be requested to approve
the Project and a grant of 5~~ of the cost thereof;
(c) the Ontario Municipal Board, if required, be
requested to approve the Project pursuant to
Section 23 of the Conservation Authorities Act;
(d) when approved, the appropriate Authority officials be
authorized to take whatever action is required in
connection with the Project, including the execution
of any necessary documents.
M. R. Garrett
Administrator
Water Resource Division
Attachment:
1977.11.10
JCM/md
C-78
THE METROPOLITAN TORONTO AND REGION
CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
PROJECT W.C.-78
A PROJECT FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS
ON THE ETOBICOKE CREEK AT
SHERWAY DRIVE
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL
TO THE HONOURABLE MINISTER
OF NATURAL RESOURCES
NOVEMBER, 1977
CONTENTS OF BRIEF C-79
I. DETAILS OF PROJECT
(a) Location and Description
(b) Purpose of Project
(c) Costs
(d) Financing
II. AUTHORITY APPROVAL AND REQUESTS
( a) Motions
(b) Letter of Request to Ministry (and Ontario Municipal
Board if required)
(c) Date of Approval by Ministry
(d) Date of Approval by Ontario Municipal Board
III. LAND VALUES
( a) Ownership and Cost to Vendor
(b) Authority Appraisal
IV. AGREEMENTS - MANAGEMENT OR OTHER AGREEMENTS
V. MINISTRY APPROVAL RE: GRANT
--------------
.
C-80
I. DETAILS OF PROJECT
(a) Location and Description
The work proposed under this project involves that portion
of the Etobicoke Creek immediately north of Sherway Drive, as
illustrated on the accompanying drawing.
At the present time, the river bank and valley wall are
coincident which is resulting in erosion of the toe of the valley
wall as well as the removal of detritus from the slope created by
surficial erosion on the near vertical shale bank which does not
allow the natural stabilization of the bank to occur. Also, due
to the sharp bend of the river at this location the Sherway Drive
bridge abutment has been eroded and is causing concern as this
bridge forms a major pedestrian link across the valley.
The present development at the top of the valley wall
consists of private homes and if the bank is not stabilized the
loss of private property will continue and will eventually
endanger the houses and a swimming pool that has been constructed
at the rear of one of the residences.
The corrective measures are illustrated on the accompanying
drawing. As illustrated, the river is to be re-aligned to create
a new channel which will be removed from valley wall. The new
channel will be lined with rip rap to prevent further erosion. The
old channel will be filled and a new slope created on the valley
wall to ensure the bank's stability thereby preventing any further
loss of private property. The filled areas will be sodded and
seeded to prevent surface erosion. The new channel will also
protect the Sherway Drive bridge and provide a more hydraulically
suitable approach to the bridge.
There are several existing services in the project area
and further concrete protection will be provided for the sanitary
trunk sewer.
Since the lands affected are privately owned, acquisition
of the required properties is required. The acquisition will be
carried out under the Flood Control Plan and will not form part
of this project.
- - -----
C-81
- -
CREEK
'"
:E
~
~
".
N
...,
THE OUEENSWAY
,...
Z
'"
LAKE SHORE BLVD.
.
EROSION CONTROL AND
BANK STABiliZATION
ETOBICOKE CRK. REALIGNMENT AT SHERWAY DRIVE
-
C-82 SHERWAY DRIVE PROJECT
ETOBICOKE CREEK
~~ '~ffiJ
~ ~,f
'.,~~
. .'.. :~;f
- ~,
--
.
~'ii'
C-83
-
",.
.
"'.
(~
..~
~
~\
LEGEND <S~ the metropoltUln t_IO end regoon
- 'i CONTOUR conu",etion eulhonty
- INTERIoIIL (Z7 !I_ Omo __. --
--II INTERPOLA T tON
~ RIP RAP 113M 1S4
Pwo,tcl -
~ FILL, GIlAOE .. StEO Ero,ion Cont,ol ond 80'* Slobdizolton
~..-
ETCl8ICOkE CRJ(. REALIGNWEHT AT SHVlWAY ClIl
_._._ PAQPOS('O ~[W TOE 1)0"-
0# '-()P( AuQulf ,
.... ...- EC .. .... .
-------
C-84
!
10"" 20" RIP RAP lQ"-2'C" RIP RAP
RUN 6" OF 2" CRUSHER
1
'\'\ ~I
.
o _
, ..
'", ~
~
60"0" -J
TYPICAL CHANNEL SECTION
SCAl.E ,.. 6' -0"
360
POOL
350
340
"
"
"
,
" 2
330 " I'
"
"
"
,
"-
"-
320 "-
,
"- - - - - - - - - - - - -
'"
"-
~ "-
"-
"-
310 '-
i OLD CHANNEL NEW
300
0 20 .0 60 80 100 120 1.0 160 IllO 200 aD
SECTION 'A-A'
'I'[IIt ,'. td c&. the metropolitlln toronto and region
NCIlIZ ,.. 20' CGntervllt'on authorIty
(!7 ~ S/DnI_ On.. ()MNIr.., 0rIII'tt
11301 II.
P~JIICf-
Ero$'on Cont,oI and Ben Stabilization
1._'''' - noelcoKE CRK R[ALIGNIolENT AT SHEAWA'/' DR,
00..-
Sept. 1977
... ...' EC
I . DETAILS OF PROJECT C-85
(b) Purpose of Project
The purpose of this project is to permit The Metropolitan
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to carry out channel
improvements and erosion control on the Main Branch of the
Etobicoke Creek at Sherway Drive.
Implementation of this work will reduce erosion which if
left unchecked, would pose a threat to development along the
top of the valley and will protect the Sherway Drive bridge
from failure.
.
C-86
I. DETAILS OF PROJECT
(c) Costs
Re-alignment and Channelization of Etobicoke Creet at
Sherway Drive.
Excavation $14,500.00
Backfilling & Bank Stabilization 49,000.00
Sewer Encasement 5,000.00
Rip Rap and Crushed Stone 26,500.00
Restoration 11,000.00
Interest, Legal Fees and 10,000.00
Contingencies
TOTAL $116,000.00
.
C-87
1. DETAILS OF PROJECT
(d) Financing
l. Costs
Total Cost of Project $116,000.00
Authority Share $58,000.00
Government Grant $58,000.00
2. Benefiting Municipalities
The Municipality of the Region of Peel is designated
to be the Benefiting Municipality and will be levied
the Authority's share of the cost or an amount of
$58,000.00.
C-88
II. AUTHORITY APPROVAL AND REQUESTS
(a) Motions:
C-89
II. AUTHORITY APPROVAL AND REQUESTS
(b) Letter of Request to Ministry:
Letter of Request to the Ontario Municipal Board:
-- ------
C-90
II. AUTHORITY APPROVAL AND REQUESTS
(c) Date of Approval by Ministry:
Cd) Date of Approval by Ontario Municipal Board:
IV. LAND VALUES C-91
As land acquisition does not form a part of this Project,
this section is not applicable.
I
C-92
V. AGREEMENTS
.~
VI. MINISTRY APPROVAL RE: GRANT C-93
C-94
SCHEDULE "c"
TO: The Chairman and Members,
Flood Control & Water Conservation Advisory Board,
Meeting 114/77.
RE: 'A DISCUSSION PAPER ON FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT
ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO'
The Honourable Frank S. Miller has forwarded to the Authority for review
and comment the above-noted report. A copy of the report is attached for the
Board's information.
In his Letter of Transmittal, the Minister commented:
"During recent years, support to review the province's flood plain
criteria and management policy has increased. Concern has been
expressed that areas defined as 'flood plain' under existing
criteria are too large and policies which regulate development in
those areas of the flood plain which can expect only shallow
flooding, have become economically unjustifiable, particularly in
light of rapidly increasing land values over the past five or six
years. In addition, some municipalities have stated that more
flexibility is needed in the application of flood plain criteria
in order that unique local situations can be recognized.
Against this desire by some to generally relax present flood plain
criteria, one must place the rather sobering event of the 1974
Grand River flood. Although this flood caused in the neighbour-
hood of $7,000,000. damages, it did not extend to the limits of the
area defined as 'flood plain' under the existing criterion.
Another realization, shared by the province, the conservation
authorities and municipalities, is the need to integrate land use
and water management planning at the local level. The need for
such integration is most obvious in those areas where the pressures
of urban growth are the greatest.
In response to these concerns and in recognition of the increasing
sophistication of evolving flood plain management techniques, the
Ministry of Housing and the Ministry of Natural Resources
commissioned the consulting firms of M.M. Dillon and James F.
MacLaren Limited to undertake a comprehensive Flood Plain Criteria
and Management Evaluation Study."
GENERAL COMMENTS
1. The shape and character of the valleys under the jurisdiction of The
Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority are such that
there is very little to be gained in terms of lower lot prices by
making flood plain land available for development. The relatively
small amount of land which experiences only 'shallow flooding' would
be insufficient to have much effect on the price of land, and any
effect is likely to be offset by increased costs incurred in making
the land safe for development.
2. None of the Authority's member municipalities has expressed dis-
satisfaction with the present designations of flood plain areas as
being excessive. Most of the comment received by this Authority from
municipalities expresses dissatisfaction with the Authority's
inability, under present legislation, to exercise complete control
beyond the flood plain. Within the Authority's area of jurisdiction,
pressure is being exerted by municipalities to strengthen the
C-95
RE: 'A DISCUSSION PAPER ON FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT 2.
ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO'
regulation of valleyland use. In Metropolitan Toronto, in fact,
a valleyland study has been initiated to develop specific Official
Plan policy statements which will allow the municipality to control
land use not only within the flood plain but to top of bank and
beyond. The purpose of this policy direction is to enable the
retention of valley lands as undeveloped corridors within the built-
up urban landscape.
The municipal interest, generally being expressed, is that river
valleys, in an urban environment, have a unique value as social
assets to the community and that the preservation and conservation
of these natural resources must be based on criteria which is more
comprehensive than merely for flood plain management.
The Authority has made recommendations to its member municipalities
under the heading 'Conservation Aspects of Official Plans'. These
recommendations have been circulated and municipal response has
been favourable. A copy of the recommendations is appended to this
report.
3. While this study addresses the flood plain area, it ignores those
lands regulated by the Authority and lying between the flood plain
and the fill regulation line (top of bank). The Authority recognizes
that these 'conservation lands' under the two-zone concept, would be
beyond what could be regulated on the basis of interference with
flood flows or flood storage. However, the continued regulation of
these lands is essential to enable the control of development or
redevelopment proposals recognizing the slope and stability and land
conservation characteristics of individual sites. To enable the
Authority to continue monitoring such proposals in an effective
manner, a more precise and legally defensible definition of the
requirement for 'conservation of land' should also be included in
any amendments to The Conservation Authorities Act. In fact, a
legal opinion should be obtained with respect to the strength of all
definitions suggested and, further, with respect to improving the
administration of Section 27 of The Conservation Authorities Act.
4. The review of flood plain management in Ontario should include the
administrative procedures by which management is achieved. At the
present time, the Executive Committee of the Authority sits as a
hearing board in judgement of its own regulations. This system
should be replaced by the Authority simply issuing or not issuing a
permit, and any appeal being dealt with by an independent body
capable of evaluating technical evidence.
5. In many applications under Ontario Regulation 735/73, the proponent
is a municipality. The Authority is of the opinion that
responsibility for decisions respecting such regulations should not
be delegated to the municipality.
C-96
RE: 'A DISCUSSION PAPER ON FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT 3.
ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO'
The following comments refer specifically to the recommendations of the
Flood Plain Study Steering Committee, but should be considered in conjunction
with the preceding general discussion:
RECOMMENDATION 1
"That individual municipalities be given increased scope to permit
more intensive land uses in the fringe areas of their flood plains
through the adoption of the two-zone floodway-flood fringe concept,
provided that:
(i) The municipality can show to the local conservation
authority, or to the Ministry of Natural Resources
(for areas where no conservation authority exists),
through hydrologic and hydraulic analyses that such
development will not significantly and adversely
affect other municipalities in the watershed.
(ii) The municipality develops and adopts an Official
Plan and zoning by-laws, supported by information
which shows that development in the 'flood fringe'
is essential to the future, social and economic
well-being of the community and that present and
permitted future land uses will not be subject to
unnecessary risk of flood damage."
In the broader terms of its conservation mandate for valley management
from top of slope to top of slope, the Authority cannot accept this
recommendation as generally applicable. It is improper to encourage
municipalities to make more intensive use of fringe area lands where the
shape of the valley, vegetative cover, slope conditions and many other
factors may indicate less intensive or no use at all.
The two-zone floodway-flood fringe concept, as a rational use, is only
applicable after a decision has been made with respect to the desirability
of valley preservation and if, in f ac t , there is a fringe area. This
principle will usually only apply in ill-defined valleys where the flood
plain is broad and valley slopes low. In such circumstances, the Authority
could support more intensive use of the flood-fringe area; only, however,
after a decision concerning proper use has been made.
Provisions one and two in the recommendation are important, and (i)
should be strengthened to include 'and any proposal will meet criteria
adopted by each Authority' .
RECOMMENDATION 2
"That flood plains in Ontario be based on the one in 100-year flood
or the regional flood, whichever is greater. Individual
municipalities should have the option of adopting a higher level
of protection if they wish."
Conditional on the comments made with respect to Recommendation 1,
the Authority would support the use of a two-zone floodway-flood fringe
concept and would use the regional flood or the 100-year flood, whichever
is greater, to define its flood plain.
------ , - - '
C-97
RE: 'A DISCUSSION PAPER ON FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT 4.
ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO'
The Authority assumes that the regional flood is equivalent to the
flood resulting from the regional storm as defined by Ontario Regulation
735/73. It is further assumed that each conservation authority will be
responsible for defining technically-justifiable limits for the floodway,
based on hydrologic and hydraulic studies, but that the flood frequency
chosen for protection against may not necessarily be the same for each
Authority.
In defining the floodway for regulatory purposes, projected
development within each watershed should be taken into consideration and
reviews should be undertaken as required by changing projections to
continually update the limits of the floodway.
RECOMMENDATION 3
"That the term 'flood plain' be used in Official Plan designations
for flood prone areas rather than the more general term 'hazard
land. ' "
The Authority agrees that a separate and specific definition of
'flood plain' should be used within the municipal official plans and, in
fact, has so recommended to its member municipalities.
The term 'hazard land' should, however, not be deleted from official
plans, but rather redefined to identify those remaining areas of natural
hazard beyond the flood plain.
The Authority, following the completion of its current hydrologic
modelling studies, would be the logical agency to provide its member
municipalities with the technical information necessary to define their
'flood plain' lands.
RECOMMENDATION 4
"That land uses which are permitted in the flood plain be clearly
defined in Official Plan policies and zoning by-laws."
The Authority concurs with this recommendation and would further
recommend that, assuming the adoption of the two-zone floodway-flood fringe,
the permitted land uses for each zone would be separately and clearly
defined.
RECOMMENDATION 5
"That a specific definition of 'flood plain' be included in Section I
of The Conservation Authorities Act and that such a definition be
cross-referenced in The Planning Act."
While there would be merit in having a definition of 'flood plain' in
both The Conservation Authorities Act and The Planning Act, the Authority
does not feel that, given Recommendation No. 2 , this is possible. Having
supported the concept of each authority choosing to define the 'flood plain'
- -- -- -~ -----
C-98
RE: 'A DISCUSSION PAPER ON FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT 5.
ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO'
for their own regulatory purposes, it would, therefore, be more appropriate
for such a definition to form part of the regulation of the authority.
If, following hydrologic and hydraulic studies, each authority chose
the same definition, it would then be possible to include this within the
Acts.
It is suggested that both Acts should, therefore, include reference to
the 'flood plain - as defined by the local conservation authority'.
RECOMMENDATION 6
"That a municipality be given the option of being exempted from
construction and filling regulations under The Conservation
Authorities Act, once it has adopted similar control procedures
through zoning by-laws. Once an exemption is given, the
conservation authority (or the Ministry of Natural Resources)
would be notified of all proposed amendments."
The Authority does not concur with this recommendation. The use of
zoning by-laws, in our opinion, is not the best way to administer flood plain
regulations. While the floodway may be a dynamic boundary (see comments,
Recommendation 2), alternations should only be initiated on the basis of up-
dated hydrologic information. The Authority, as the agency responsible for
conducting such studies, should have the responsibility of administering
related regulations. Assumption of this responsibility by the municipality,
with only the requirement of notifying the Authority respecting proposed
amendments, could greatly weaken the overall watershed management approach,
particularly where more than one municipality might assume such responsibility
within a particular watercourse.
The Authority's regulation extends beyond the flood plain for purposes
of requiring a permit to fill between the flood plain and the top of bank.
Should the Authority transfer responsibility for interpretation and
administration of flood plain regulations to its municipalities, the strength
of its position with respect to the administration of its fill regulation
line is questionable.
RECOMMENDATION 7
"That the provision of flood-proofing measures to regulate the
design and construction of structures erected in the flood
fringe be incorporated into the Ontario Building Code."
The Authority concurs with this recommendation insofar ~s it would be
proper to establish sound technical criteria, assuming the need for
construction on flood plain lands. The Authority would not, however, wish
to see provisions under the Building Code become a substitute for adequate
flood plain regulations .
C-99
RE: 'A DISCUSSION PAPER ON FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT 6.
ALTERNATIVES IN ONTARIO'
RECOMMENDATION 8
"That flood plain mapping programs be accelerated to cover all major
watersheds in Ontario. All future programs which include the mapping
of flood plains should comply with the base mapping standards adopted
by the Surveyor General of Ontario."
The Authority concurs with this recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION 9
"That present and future property owners and tenants of the flood
plain should be clearly informed of the risk of damage to which they
are susceptible."
The Authority supports this recommendation and further recommends
that additional methods of bringing this risk to the attention of the land-
owner be investigated.
RECOMMENDATION:
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT: The staff report on 'A Discussion Paper on Flood
Plain M~nagement Alternatives in Ontario' be received and forwarded to the
Minister of Natural Resources as the Authority's comment; and further
THAT copies of the report be forwarded to all local and regional
municipalities within the jurisdiction of The Metropolitan Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority.
M.R. Garrett,
Administrator
Water Resource Division
1977 .11. 30.
/KC.