Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
01/23/2012
C1 s arin on Leading the Way 9t GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE DATE: January 23, 2012 TIME: 9:30 A.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING(S) (a) Minutes of a Regular Meeting of January 9, 2012 5. PUBLIC MEETINGS 4 -1 (a) Application for a Proposed Draft Plan of Condominium and Proposed 5 -1 Revisions to Draft Approved Plans of Subdivision Applicant: Halloway Developments Ltd. and H &H Properties Inc. Report: PSD- 005 -12 6. DELEGATIONS (Draft List at Time of Publication — To be Replaced with Final 6 -1 List) (a) Rob Frizzell, Manager Water and Natural Resources Group Markham, and Jason Cole, Hydrogeologist, AECOM, Regarding Report PSD- 006 -12, Watershed Management Plan for Robinson and Tooley Creeks (b) Hida Manns, Clarington Representative to the Durham Environmental Advisory Committee, Regarding the Durham Environmental Achievement Awards (c) Rosemary McConkey, Regarding Report CLD- 003 -12, Local Look Back Project 7. PRESENTATIONS No Presentations CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 G.P. & A. Agenda - 2 - January 23, 2012 8. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) PSD- 005 -12 Application for a Common Elements Draft Plan of 8 -1 Condominium, and Revisions to Draft Plans of Subdivision 18T -87087 & 18T -89021 Applicant: Halloway Developments Ltd. and H &H Properties Inc. (b) PSD- 006 -12 Watershed Management Plan for Robinson and Tooley 8 -8 Creeks _ (c) PSD- 007 -12 Green Permit Initiatives — Showcasing Water Innovation 8 -23 Grant and Green Municipal Fund Grant (d) PSD- 008 -12 Official Plan Review Update 8 -28 9. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) EGD- 004 -12 ' Monthly Report on Building Permit Activity for 9 71 December, 2011. 10. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT No Reports 11. EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) ESD- 001 -12 Monthly Activity Report —November 2011 11 -1 (b) ESD- 002 -12 Monthly Activity Report —December 2011 11 -7 12. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) CSD- 001 -12 Newcastle & District Recreation Complex— Concession 12 -1 Operation Expression of Interest to Private Sector 13. MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT (a) CLD- 002 -12 Animal Services Quarterly Report — 13 -1 October — December 2011 (b) CLD- 003 -12 Local Look Back Project 13 -8 14. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) COD - 002 -12 Process Followed for Surveys: - Strategic Plan & Media 14 -1 Habits G. P. &A. Agenda - 3 - January 23, 2012 15. FINANCE DEPARTMENT (a) FND- 003 -12 List of Applications for Cancellation, Reduction, 15 -1 Apportionments or Refund of Taxes 16. SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT No Reports 17. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE No Reports 18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 19. OTHER BUSINESS 20. COMMUNICATIONS None 21. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS No Reports 22. ADJOURNMENT Clarin� ton l.eadeng the Way General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 Minutes of a meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on Monday, January 9, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present Were: Mayor A. Foster Councillor R. Hooper Councillor M. Novak Councillor J. Neal Councillor W. Partner. Councillor C. Traill Councillor W. Woo Also Present: Chief Administrative Officer, F. Wu Municipal Solicitor, A. Allison Director of Engineering Services, T. Cannella Director of Community Services, J. Caruana Director of Planning Services, D. Crome Director of Operations, F. Horvath Director of Corporate Services & Human Resources, M. Marano Director of Finance/Treasurer, N. Taylor Director of Emergency & Fire Services, G. Weir Deputy Clerk, A. Greentree Committee Coordinator, J. Gallagher Mayor Foster chaired this portion of the meeting. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST Councillor Hooper indicated that he would be declaring a pecuniary interest in Report PSD- 001 -12, regarding the community improvement annual report. Councillor Partner indicated that she would be declaring a pecuniary interest in Report PSD- 004 -12, regarding the rezoning application from Bruce and Karen Ellis. ANNOUNCEMENTS Councillor Partner attended the Bowmanville's Association of Hospital Volunteers' 100th Anniversary Wine & Cheese Party on Saturday. with Mayor Foster and Councillors Woo and Hooper on Saturday, January 7, 2012 at the Newcastle Town Hall. - 1 - 4 -1 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 Councillor Woo attended the opening ceremony of the "Friendship Hockey Tournament" between the Finland and Bowmanville hockey games teams on Saturday, December 31, 2011 with Mayor Foster and Councillor Hooper. He also attended the Bowmanville's Association of Hospital Volunteers' 100th Anniversary Wine & Cheese Party on Saturday, January 7th. Councillor Woo announced that there will be an electronic waste collection event held on January 14, 2012 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at the Waste Management Centre at 4600 Garrard Road in Whitby. Councillor Hooper attended the following: • The opening ceremony of the "Friendship Hockey Tournament" between the Finland and Bowmanville hockey games teams on Saturday, December 31, 2011 with Mayor Foster and Councillor Woo. • The Annual Mayor's Levee on Sunday, January 8, 2012. • The Valleys 2000 dinner on Sunday, January 8, 2012 which was held at Boston Pizza; who donated 10% of the revenues back to Valleys 2000. • The Animal's Gift Clarington presentation on January 3, 2012, at the Bowmanville Zoo, with Councillor Partner. Councillor Hooper noted that Hampton was featured in an article in the Toronto Star regarding the book, A Village Called Hampton. Councillor Neal attended the Annual Mayor's Levee. on Sunday, January 8, 2012. He also attended the Valleys 2000 dinner on Sunday, January 8, 2012 which was held at Boston Pizza. Councillor Novak congratulated Hampton for the article on the book, A Village Called Hampton. She also attended the Annual Mayor's Levee on Sunday, January 8, 2012. Councillor Novak announced that on Thursday January 19, 2012, there will be an Open House for Lambs Road School property at the John M.-James Public School. Mayor Foster thanked the Air Cadets and Clarington Staff for organizing the well attended Annual Mayor's Levee on Sunday, January 9, 2012. He participated in the Clarington Polar Bear Swim on January 1, 2012 to raise awareness of the urgent need of organ and tissue donations and to raise funds for the Sick Kids Foundation. Mayor Foster noted that the "2011 Festive R.I.D.E." statistics, conducted by Durham Regional Police Service, were higher than last year. He noted that local artist, Jane Eccles, was recognized at the Durham Art of Transition Awards. Mayor Foster informed the Committee that he and Councillor Woo attended a luncheon hosted by the Region of Durham to consider China as a place for foreign direct investment on Friday, January 6, 2011. Mayor Foster thanked Councillor Novak for performing the duties of Deputy Mayor during the past year and announced that Councillor Woo has taken over as Deputy Mayor, as per the established schedule. -2- 4 -2 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 MINUTES Resolution #GPA- 001 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT the minutes of the regular meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on December 12, 2011, be approved. CARRIED PUBLIC MEETING There were no public meetings held. DELEGATIONS Gary Jeffrey, Chair of the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington (AACC), was present regarding the AACC Annual Update for 2011. Mr. Jeffrey noted that Council has been provided a copy of the AACC 2011 accomplishments. He reviewed the history of the Committee. Mr. Jeffrey noted that the issues which the Committee is involved with are wide ranging. He noted that Clarington has the largest agricultural production of all the Durham municipalities. Mr. Jeffrey noted that the coming year will see the AACC involved in several issues including the matter of the dog strangling vine, and the official plan review. Resolution #GPA- 002 -12 Moved by Councillor Partner, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT the-delegation of Mr. Gary Jeffrey, regarding the annual update from the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington, be received with thanks. CARRIED Anne Black was present regarding Report EGD- 001 -12, Train Whistle Cessation. Ms. Black provided the Committee with the history of the train whistle. She indicated that, since 1984, many communities throughout Canada. have successfully initiated a train whistle cessation by -law. Ms. Black provided. the Committee with noise disruption information pertaining to train whistles. She informed the Committee that 705 eligible voters of the Mearns Avenue and Wilmot Creek areas signed a petition for a ban on the train whistle (which she submitted). Ms. Black noted that the common concerns from the residents were decreased property values and health concerns due to sleep deprivation. She acknowledged that the safety is a concern but that other safety measures are in place at the intersections. Ms. Black noted that the train whistle noise affects more residents than the Orono Gun Club noise issue. She concluded by -3- 4 -3 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 requesting that Council being the process required by Transport Canada to eliminate the train whistle in our community. Ms. Black added that if the train ban cannot be Clarington -wide, then at minimum a partial ban that would include the crossings at Mearns Ave., Lambs Road, Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road. PRESENTATIONS There were no presentations. Councillor Novak chaired this portion of the meeting. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT ANNUAL REPORT ORONO, BOWMANVILLE, NEWCASTLE AND COURTICE Councillor Hooper declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Report PSD- 001 -12 as he owns property in downtown Bowmanville.. Councillor Hooper left the room and did not participate in discussions and voting on this matter. Resolution #GPA- 003 -12 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT Report PSD- 001 -12 be received; and THAT any interested parties to Report PSD- 001 -12 be notified of Council's decision. CARRIED Councillor Hooper returned to the meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP 2011 PROGRAM UPDATE Resolution #GPA- 004 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report PSD - 002 -12 be received; and THAT any interested parties listed in Report PSD- 002 -12 be notified of Council's decision. CARRIED 4 -4 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF HOLDING FOR 42 SEMI - DETACHED (LINK) DWELLING UNITS AND TWO (2) SINGLE DETACHED DWELLING UNITS APPLICANT: KAITLIN HOMES ASPEN IV LTD. Resolution #GPA- 005 -12 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report PSD- 003 -12 be received; THAT the application submitted by Kaitlin Homes Aspen IV Ltd.,to remove the Holding (H) symbol be approved; THAT the By -law attached to Report PSD- 003 -12 to remove the Holding (H) symbol be passed and a copy forwarded to the Regional Municipality of Durham; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 003 -12, any delegations and the Regional Municipality of Durham Planning Department be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED PROPOSED ZONING BY -LAW AMENDMENT TO PERMIT AN EXISTING NOW CONFORMING ACCESSORY BUILDING Councillor Partner declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Report PSD- 004 -12 as the applicants contributed to her 2010 Municipal Election Campaign. Councillor Partner left the room and did not participate in discussions and voting on this matter. Resolution #GPA- 006 -12 Moved by Councillor Woo, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT Report PSD- 004 -12 be received; THAT the rezoning application submitted by Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, on behalf of Bruce and Karen Ellis, be approved and that the proposed Zoning By -law contained in Attachment 2 of Report PSD- 004 -12 be passed and that no further public meeting be deemed necessary; and THAT the Regional Municipality of Durham Planning Department, all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 004 -12 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED Councillor Partner returned to the meeting. -5- 4 -5 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 Councillor Traill chaired this portion of the meeting. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT TRAIN WHISTLE CESSATION Resolution #GPA- 007 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Partner THAT Report EGD- 001 -12 be tabled to the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting scheduled for January 23, 2012. MOTION LOST Resolution #GPA- 008 -12 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT Report EGD- 001 -12 be received for information. CARRIED METROLINX - BIKELINX FUNDING FOR SHELTERED BICYCLE PARKING Resolution #GPA- 009 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Mayor Foster THAT Report EGD- 002 -12 be received; THAT the Region of Durham be requested to provide Bikelinx funding for sheltered bicycle parking in Clarington at the locations identified in Report EGD- 002 -12; and THAT, should Clarington receive funding, the Mayor and Municipal Clerk be authorized to execute an agreement with the Region governing the expenditure of the funds. CARRIED RECESS Resolution #GPA - 010 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT the Committee recess for 10 minutes. CARRIED elv HM-1 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 The meeting reconvened at 11:20 a.m. Mayor Foster chaired this portion of the meeting. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. CLERK'S DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. FINANCE DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. SOLICITOR'S DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER REQUEST FOR JOB DESCRIPTIONS FOR NEW EMPLOYEE POSITIONS Resolution #GPA- 011 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Traill THAT all Members of Council be provided with copies of detailed job descriptions for the new employee positions proposed in the 2012 budget. MOTION LOST r2l 4 -7 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 Resolution #GPA- 012 -12 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Trail[ THAT all Members of Council be provided with copies of the job postings for the new employee positions proposed in the 2012 budget. CARRIED UNFINISHED BUSINESS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. OTHER BUSINESS TRAIN WHISTLE CESSATION COSTS AND FEASIBILITY Resolution #GPA- 013 -12 Moved -by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT Staff report to Council with the detailed information regarding the cost and feasibility of potentially implementing whistle cessation at Mearns Avenue, Lambs Road, Cobbledick Road and Bennett Road crossings; and THAT Staff describe the steps that would need to be taken to implement said cessations. CARRIED AS. AMENDED LATER IN THE MEETING (See following motions) Resolution #GPA- 014 -12 Moved by Councillor Trail[, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT the foregoing resolution #GPA- 013 -12 be amended to insert the words "all urban area crossings, including but not limited to" in the first sentence following the word "at ". CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See following motion) =1 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes January 9, 2012 Resolution #GPA- 015 -12 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT the question be now put. CARRIED The foregoing resolution #GPA- 014 -12 was then put to a vote and Carried. The foregoing resolution #GPA- 013 -12 was then put to a vote and Carried as Amended. COMMUNICATIONS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. ADJOURNMENT Resolution #GPA- 016 -12 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Neal THAT the meeting adjourn at 12:04 p.m. MAYOR CARRIED DEPUTY CLERK 4 -9 Leading the Way NOTICE OFCOMF Q�z PUBLIC MEETING REPORT # PSD- 005 -12 Halloway Holdings Limited The Municipality of Clarington has received a Complete Application for a proposed Draft Plan of Condominium, and for proposed Revisions to Draft Approved Plans of Subdivision 18T -87087 & 18T- 89021. APPLICANT: Halloway Developments Ltd. and H &H Properties Inc. PROPERTY: Part Lot 12, Concession 2, Former Town of Bowmanville 237 & 239 Scugog Street, Bowmanville PROPOSAL: A proposed Common Elements Draft Plan of Condominium and proposed Revisions to Draft Approved Plans of Subdivision 18T -87087 & 18T -89021 FILE NO.s: C -C- 2011 -0002, 18T -87087 & 18T -89021 (X -REF: (SPA2011 -0035 & ZBA2011- 0036) . A Public Meeting to receive input on the application will be held on: DATE: Monday, January 23, 2012 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, Municipal Administrative Centre, 40 Temperance St., Bowmanville, Ontario Additional information relating to the applications are available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (during July and August 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.) at the Planning Services Department, 3rd Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L1 C 3A6, or by calling Bob Russell- (905) 623- 3379, extension 2421 or by e -mail at brussell @clarington,net. If you cannot attend the Public Meeting on this application you can make a deputation to Council at their meeting on Monday, January 30, 2012, commencing at 7:00 p.m. Should you wish to appear before Council, you must register with the - Clerks Department by noon. on Wednesday, January 25, 2012 . to have your name appear on the Agenda. If you wish to be notified of the decision.of the Clarington Council in respect of the proposed plan of condominium and the proposed revisions to the draft approved plans of subdivision, you must make a written request to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department. APPEAL If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or'make written submissions to the Municipality of Clarington, Planning Services Department in respect to. the proposed plan of condominium and the proposed revisions to the draft approved plans of subdivision, before the approval authority gives or refuses to give approval, the person .or public body: i) is not entitled to appeal the decision of Clarington Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and ii) may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board; there are reasonable grounds to do so. Dated e Municipality of Clarington this � day of � 2011. David ..Crome, M.C.LP., R.P.P. 40 Temperance Street Director of Planning Services Bowmanville, Ontario Municipality of Clarington L1 C 3A6 - Cc: LDO 5 -1 ti n ® c O C C OZ IL 5 6® ;C o�' _ CO) L � CD a. a a o O �aL� { , c Z O O.o Q V �. m C.) O� £ s V EL 00QF` a LL 65 CL J to �i C' g �'�ar w as O 2 �, hN 40 - _ —T tar -_,-- = i ,.—F� '•.. `h' ^c N OD -L ti �� $ J. I. I - ' - Yi^.ytT � � '� - �• � � ll:. AIN - itlP _ _ `' \� i- ', \•�i 4 ! ` �k -{ `4i . �� �LI.�+T J� ti� y ..I�I =1 'S`S\ _ , �I �eCCL� A \ _�,•� Sw iTRJis 000nos 5 -2 DRAFT LIST OF DELEGATIONS GPA Meeting: January 23, 2012 (a) Rob Frizzell, Manager Water and Natural Resources Group Markham, and Jason Cole, Hydrogeologist, AECOM, Regarding Report PSD- 006 -12, Watershed Management Plan for Robinson and Tooley Creeks (b) Hida Manns, Clarington Representative to the Durham Environmental Advisory Committee, Regarding the Durham Environmental Achievement Awards (c) Rosemary McConkey, Regarding Report CLD- 003 -12, Local Look Back Project 6 -1 • lar�. n Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT PUBLIC'MEETING Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: N/A Report #: PSD- 005 -12 File #: C -C 2011 -0002, 18T -87087 and 18T -89021 Subject: APPLICATION FOR A COMMON ELEMENTS DRAFT PLAN OF CONDOMINIUM, AND REVISIONS TO DRAFT PLANS OF SUBDIVISION 18T- 87087 & 18T -89021 APPLICANT: HALLOWAY DEVELOPMENTS LTD. AND H &H PROPERTIES INC. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 005 -12 be received; 2. THAT the application for a Common Elements Draft Plan of Condominium, and Revisions to Draft Approved Plans of Subdivision 18T -87087 and 18T- 89021, continue to be processed, including the preparation of a subsequent report considering all agency comments and comments received at the Public Meeting; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 005 -12 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: _ a2k_= DgvicYJ. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director, Planning Services BR/CP /df /av 17 January 2012 Reviewed by: Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 REPORT NO.: PSD- 005 -12 PAGE 2 1. APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant/Owner: Halloway Developments Ltd. and H &H Properties Inc. 1.2 Agent: D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited 1.3 Proposed Draft Plan of Condominium: To permit a common element condominium tenure for private streets, pedestrian connections, amenity area, visitor /parking areas and utility building portion of the development. 1.4 Proposed Revisions to Draft Approved Plans of Subdivision 18T -87087 and 18T- 89021: To permit the creation of one block in each subdivision plan to be used jointly for the development of 120 townhouse units. 1.5 Area: 3.002 hectares (7.418 acres) 1.6 Location: Part Lot 12, Concession 2, Former Town of Bowmanville, 237 & 239 Scugog Street and unaddressed property at southeast corner of Scugog Street & Longworth Avenue, Bowmanville (See Attachment 1 to Report PSD- 005 -12 — Property Location Map and Site Plan). 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 A 120 unit common elements condominium townhouse development is proposed for the lands at the southeast corner of Longworth Avenue and Scugog Street. Part of Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision 18T -87087 is proposed to be revised and all of Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision 18T -89021 is proposed to be revised to accommodate the proposed development. The revisions would create one block in each plan of subdivision to be used jointly for the development of 120 townhouse units. The layout of the 120 unit development will be approved through application for Site Plan approval. Application for a Common Elements Plan of Condominium has also been submitted. 2.2 On November 22, 2011, the applicant submitted applications for: Draft Plan of Condominium, revisions to Draft Plans of Subdivision 18T -87087 and 18T- 89021, Removal of Part Lot Control and Site Plan Approval (Residential) all to permit the above- mentioned proposed development (See Attachment 1). If the proposed development is approved, each townhouse unit and the lot upon which it is constructed will be bought and sold individually by each respective purchaser. The owner(s) of each lot would have a shared common interest in the private streets, private sidewalks, amenity area, visitor parking areas and utility building. The shared common interest gives each of the owners the right to access and use the shared common areas. There is also a financial component of the condominium approval to ensure ongoing maintenance and repairs to the common areas. 8 -2 REPORT NO.: PSD- 005 -12 PAGE 3 2.3 Under the Condominium Act, the municipality may grant exemptions from sections of the Planning Act dealing with subdivision approvals, (such as the requirement to hold a public meeting and provide notice to land owners within a 120 metre radius). However, providing notice and holding a public meeting for the proposed plan of condominium is appropriate at this time, together with'applications to amend the draft approved plans of subdivision. 3. LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject lands are located at the southeast corner of Scugog Street and Longworth Avenue, with frontage on both Scugog Street and Longworth Avenue. The vacant land is generally flat and there are some trees in groupings and individually. 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Longworth Avenue and beyond, Supermarket Commercial property being developed South - Residential East - Residential West - Scugog Street and beyond, Tributary Valleyland (EP Designation & Zone) and Residential 4. PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) The PPS encourages growth within settlement areas on full municipal services. Land use patterns are to promote a mix of housing choices. The subject application is consistent with the PPS. 4.2 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) The Growth Plan directs growth to built up areas where the capacity exists to best accommodate expected population growth. Transit supportive densities and a healthy mix of residential uses are promoted. The Growth Plan principles are supportive of the subject application. 5. OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Living Area ". The proposed development conforms to the Durham Regional Official Plan. . REPORT NO.: PSD- 005 -12 5.2 Clarington Official Plan PAGE 4 The Clarington Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Urban Residential ". The proposed development conforms to the Clarington Official Plan. The Clarington Official Plan has an "M" (Medium Density) Symbol on the proposal site straddling the two properties. Table 9 -2 'Housing Targets by Neighbourhood' allows for 200 medium density units in the Elgin Neighbourhood. Approximately 124 units of the designated 200 medium density can still be accommodated in the Neighbourhood with little undeveloped land left elsewhere. Therefore, this 120 townhouse unit proposal can be developed in the Elgin Neighbourhood without exceeding the Clarington Plan housing unit targets for said Neighbourhood. The proposal site occupies the southeast corner of the intersection of two Type 'C' Arterial Roads necessitating a noise study. 6. ZONING BY -LAW 6.1 Within Zoning By -law 84 -63, as amended, the subject lands are zoned "Holding - Urban Residential Type Three ((H)R3) Zone ". The R3 zone permits link "townhouse units" with a maximum density of 40 units per ha. The proposed 120 townhouse units conform. 7. PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS 7.1 Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject site and two (2) public meeting signs were installed along the Scugog Street and Longworth Avenue frontages. 7.2 One inquiry on the subject applications was received at the time this report was written. One couple living east of the proposal advised that during severe storms, there was a drainage issue on -site. They inquired about tree preservation and traffic studies, as well as the appearance of the units and a noise study. 8. AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 The application has been circulated to agencies for comments. Most comments have not been received as of yet. 8.2 The Clarington Engineering Services Department has commented that they have no objection to the two applications for Amendment to Draft Approval or the application for proposed Plan of Condominium however the Site Plan application needs further review. This includes addressing the following issues: • Traffic; • Noise attenuation; • Grading and drainage; 8 -4 REPORT NO.: PSD- 005 -12 • Storm Water Management; • Entrances and Access; • Privacy; • Parking; and • Servicing. 9. STAFF COMMENTS PAGE 5 9.1 In addition to typical proposed condominium plan, site plan and revised draft approved plan of subdivision drawings, staff has received from the applicant: • A functional servicing report; • A stormwater management brief; • An energy management/sustainability plan; • An environmental noise report; and • A tree preservation report. These will be reviewed by the relevant agencies. 9.2 The proposed amendments to draft approval eliminate a proposed public street which was draft approved in the early 90's with 6.0 metre wide townhouses on both sides of the street. This form of development, with townhouses across the street from townhouses, is typically not permitted today, due to on- street parking concerns. The proposed development eliminates that issue as well as the rear yards and noise fences occupying the majority of the frontage of the two Type 'C' arterial streets. 9.3 The proposed development will be reviewed in detail including the site plan approval prior to final recommendation to Committee and Council. Should the development be approved the site plan agreement will include clauses that will adequately protect the Municipality's interests, including: building placement and parking areas; servicing and grading; landscaping; entrance works; and financial securities. 9.4 Municipal planning documents focus more on built form versus tenure or ownership of the lands. Common Elements Condominium approval is an appropriate mechanism to create the shared private streets, private sidewalks, amenity area, visitor parking areas and utility building. 10. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 11. CONCLUSION 11.1 It is respectfully recommended that the Common Elements Condominium application, the application to revise Draft Approved Plans of Subdivision 18T -87087 and 18T -89021 be referred back to staff for further processing. REPORT NO.: PSD- 005 -12 CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN PAGE 6 The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Bob Russell Attachments: Attachment 1: Property Location Map and Site Plan List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Halloway Developments Ltd. H &H Properties Inc. D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Durham Regional Planning Department M. Attachment 1 To Report PSD- 005 -12 G ? W a J LLJ W t0 E ��' ® � cn ® > _� Z 0Z ld r a O ado ci = E N CD Z c. 5 CDi V CO > o d N Z 0Oo O cow o e 011 U'� zZF --a s °'00 C'J$ '.Y W d L a ❑ W ' O �t r= N 40 7020 Z� rte, �� �• M1' % /Vole y� k�. PIN ID' LS I� � i �'•I I �2 11 ," 8 g. 14, I �i I E I. d7 i ='4<i4 % /r °�• n' 1u.a .�¢ I I. I 9 I `Yk ^ �, it A W r-$ �-1 R: S I• \ .1 `� _ \�7, J I AvMX 00� I # �..°°„� ;._. l 1 Ik. I ., .15 00 II 'I �_— ^� Ih� • ,I Y i . �v DD,V��\d.`�� -� 3 ~I- .� �Il�fa,- _ -- �� II � _yY� r• � " -y'• r��T3._.. . ---r -. � �___`_'j.sra ?. •_r__u3 nN.e»'� 1J :� :� 3. )'tf T Gil•v1.1 1 1332:J1S eoenos C-iding the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: N/A Report #: PSD- 006 -12 File #: PLN 17.13.9 Subject: WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ROBINSON AND TOOLEY CREEKS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 006 -12 be received; 2. THAT AECOM be thanked and commended for their work in preparing the Watershed Management Plan for Robinson and Tooley Creeks; 3. THAT the CLOCA staff be thanked for their assistance in reviewing the Watershed Management Plan Robinson and Tooley Creeks; 4. THAT the Watershed Management Plan be received and referred to Staff for consideration during the Official Plan Review process; 5. THAT the Existing Conditions Report and Watershed Management Plan be utilized for the preparation of the Secondary Plans, particularly for the South Courtice Employment Lands, a special project of the Official Plan Review; 6. THAT the Special Study Area identified in the northern portion of Robinson Creek, on the future Town Centre site be carried out to` inform'the Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan; 7. THAT as per Policy 24.6 of the Official Plan, the identified existing natural heritage features on Map 'C' be updated; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD- 006 -12 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 REPORT NO.: PSD- 006 -12 Submitted by: Da i rome, RPP, MCIP Director of Planning Services FL /df 16 January 2012 • PAGE 2 Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer REPORT NO.: PSD- 006 -12 PAGE 3 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 In recent years, planners, decision makers and the public have developed a deeper understanding of the cumulative negative impact that our use of the land has on the natural environment that sustains us. This has required a fundamental shift from a focus on protecting individual natural features to protecting the entire natural heritage system and its vital ecological functions. In turn, this has resulted in an increased emphasis on incorporating consideration of the natural heritage system into all aspects of land use planning, from official plan policies and secondary plans through to zoning, subdivision and site plan approvals. 1.2 Watershed planning is currently recognized as one of the most effective mechanisms for the protection, management and enhancement of the natural environment. It uses a holistic approach to managing all aspects of a watershed's natural heritage system, including hydrological resources (groundwater and surface water), terrestrial resources (wildlife habitat and habitat connectivity), aquatic resources and habitat (e.g. fish, streams, wetlands), and the inter - relationships that exist between these resources. Watershed plans are also locally based and therefore reflect, and are responsive to, the unique conditions including human land uses that exist within each watershed. 1.3 Both the Durham Region and the Clarington Official Plans include policies that recognize the importance of watershed planning to the protection and wise management of natural heritage resources, and support the preparation of multi - stakeholder watershed planning studies. The Regional and Clarington Official Plans include policies to implement individual watershed plans. 1.4 In 2002, the provincial government, through the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, directed every upper -tier and single -tier municipality to prepare watershed plans for every watershed whose streams originate on the Moraine; the Greenbelt Plan also endorses watershed planning. In response to these legislative requirements, the CA's in partnership with the Region of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington and other watershed municipalities, have coordinated the preparation of watershed plans for the lands regulated by GRCA. KRCA have watershed plans for Blackstock and East Cross Creeks in final draft. CLOCA has been working on the Harmony /Black /Farewell; Oshawa and Soper /Bowmanville Creek Watershed Plans (see Attachment 1). 1.5 There are a number of small creeks that do not originate on the Oak Ridges Moraine and carrying out watershed plans for these creeks is necessary prior to development being able to proceed in that geographical area. As part of the Official Plan Review, Clarington undertook the watershed planning exercise for Robinson and Tooley Creeks (Attachment 2). AECOM was retained to carry out the watershed plan as per PSD- 030 -09. These two watersheds are experiencing pressures for urban development. Watershed planning is the basis for the Secondary Plans and future urban residential areas of Courtice plus the South Courtice Employment Lands, a special project of the Official Plan Review. 8 -10 REPORT NO.: PSD- 006 -12 2. WATERSHED PLANNING PROCESS 2.1 The process for preparing a watershed plan involves eight steps, as follows: Step 1: Scoping Step 2: Characterization of the watershed system Step 3: Setting goals, objectives and working targets Step 4: Developing management alternatives Step 5: Evaluating management alternatives Step 6: Selecting preferred management alternatives Step 7: Finalizing targets Step 8: Developing implementation and monitoring plans PAGE 4 2.2 Step 1 ( Scoping) involves choosing a study area, identifying issues of concern and information gaps, and creating a Terms of Reference for the study. Step 2 (Characterization of the Watershed) entails defining the historical and current conditions of the study area (i.e. the watershed). AECOM completed the scoping exercise and the ABC (Abiotic, Biotic and Cultural) Background Reports for each of the subject watersheds in 2009. These background reports contain the scientific information and local knowledge necessary for the preparation of the actual Watershed Plans (Steps 3 to 8 of the process). The Robinson/Tooley Creek studies were carried out at a finer detail level than many other watershed studies because of the extensive field work and site specific information that is characterized in the Existing Studies report. 2.3 A successful watershed planning process is, by necessity, a cooperative process that involves a variety of governmental and non - governmental stakeholders. A Technical Review Committee composed of Municipal Staff assisted by CLOCA was created to provide technical assistance to AECOM in the preparation of the watershed plans. 2.4 The planning process employed by AECOM in preparing the existing conditions study and Watershed Management Plan is employed throughout the province. It is consistent with the process used by the other Conservation Authorities that have jurisdiction over lands in Clarington. They are employing a similar process for their watershed plans. The Robinson and Tooley. Watershed Management Plan is consistent with this process and will be presented to the CLOCA Board for approval on January 17th, 2012. 2.5 Public input during the process was sought through two open houses. A number of additional stakeholder meetings have been held with various land owners, developers and consultants as we have moved through the process (See Section 4). 2.6 The CLOCA Board endorsed "How Much Nature is Enough" as the approved methodology for all of their watershed planning exercises at the June 2010 Board meeting. The methodology for the determination of the functional natural heritage system was provided to AECOM by CLOCA; AECOM because of the extensive field knowledge took the principles of the methodology and applied them at a finer scale than has been done for other watershed studies. It is anticipated that this finer level of detail will be helpful for the Secondary Plans that have yet to be prepared and will provide a basis for all future Environmental Impact Studies (EIS). 8 -11 REPORT NO.: PSD- 006 -12 3. OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN PAGE 5 3.1 The Watershed Management Plan divides the watersheds into eight separate components to facilitate the presentation of information and the discussion of issues, as follows: • Groundwater quantity • Surface water quantity • Groundwater quality • Surface water quality • Fisheries and Aquatic habitat • Terrestrial natural heritage 3.2 Issues /Opportunities, Goals, Obiectives and Management Actions 3.2.1 The discussion of each watershed component was, in turn, divided into a number of sub - categories, as discussed below. 3.2.2 Issues and Opportunities —These are current or future activities and conditions that currently or could negatively impact the watershed. For example, an issue identified with respect to Surface Water Quantity relates to the need to better understand natural flow variations in the various watercourses in the watersheds. 3.2.3 Management Goals — A goal statement was created for each watershed component to identify a desired outcome to be achieved through the implementation of the watershed plan. For example, the goal for Surface Water is "Protect and Maintain Surface Water Quantity ". 3.2.4 Objectives — Objectives were created for each goal statement in order to facilitate and achieve the desired goal for the watershed component. All issues and opportunities identified in the Watershed Plan are addressed by the Objective statements. For example, one of the objectives for Surface Water Quantity is "Maintain and enhance the water balance and baseflow ". 3.2.5 Management Actions — Activities that need to occur were identified under each Objective in order to achieve the goal of each watershed component. Management actions are defined in three categories: Regulation and Policy, Education and Stewardship, and Land Acquisition and Dedication. Monitoring is also listed as an implementation action to assist in understanding how the recommendations in the Watershed Plans are influencing the watersheds. The management actions most relevant to the Municipality are those listed under Regulations and Planning, which are primarily policies intended to be incorporated into municipal, Conservation Authority and. other agency planning and regulation documentation. Some of the management actions listed under Stewardship are applicable to the Municipality — for example, encouraging the adoption of urban land use design practices that increase groundwater recharge; as well, the Municipality is involved with and supports CLOCA's stewardship programs. 8 -12 REPORT NO.: PSD- 006 -12 4. CONSULTATION 2,Tcl MID 4.1 Two Public Open Houses where held. On June 17, 2010 the Existing Conditions information and report was presented and reviewed. On February 24th, 2011 the natural heritage system and targeted systems was presented. The Feb 24th meeting was moved during the day of the meeting to Courtice Complex due to a power outage at South Courtice, press releases were issued, interested parties were notified by e-mail and signage was posted to ensure attendees were directed to the correct location. 4.2 In late August 2011 the final draft of the Management Plan was posted to the Official Plan review website. The existing conditions report has been on the website since June 2010. Notifications were sent to all the interested parties that the final draft had been posted and that comments on the draft would be appreciated before September 30, 2011. In addition newspaper advertisements appeared on September 2 and 9 in the Clarington this Week, the announcement also appeared in the E- update. 4.3 A number of stakeholder meetings have taken place with land owners, developers and consultants representing various interests during the summer and fall of 2011. A summary of the comments we have received is Attachment 3. Many of the comments focus on the process to implement the management policies of the Watershed Plan and how the information generated from the Watershed Plan will be utilized in the Official Plan, Secondary Plans and EIS's. 4.4 By referring the Watershed Plan to the Official Plan Review it is anticipated that the information regarding the existing natural heritage system will become part of Map C the Natural Heritage System, as per Policy 24.6. Map 'C' is amended when natural features are identified. Both the Clarington Official Plan and Region's Official Plan policies recognize that not all natural features can be identified on the various schedules. If natural heritage features (including features lying below the surface such as high volume recharge areas) are existing, on or adjacent to a property, it is required that they be identified, assessed and mitigation measures proposed through an Environmental Impact Study (EIS). 4.5 Clarington through the policies in the 1996 Official Plan was a leader in the development of the use of EIS's to determine and assist in the protection of ecological functions and overall goal of developing and encouraging sustainable communities. The public consultation undertaken at the beginning of the Official Plan review reaffirmed "preserving the natural environment" as the number one priority with a 93% approval rating from the public. . 4.6 It is not surprising that the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan have garnered greater comment than the other watershed planning studies. These watersheds are almost entirely within the urban area. Their headwaters are the former Lake Iroquois Beach, an area of high volume recharge close to the surface and already impacted by development. The ecosystem is under stress and the management policies recommended reflect this reality. 5. CONCURRENCE - Not applicable 8 -13 REPORT NO.: PSD- 006 -12 6. CONCLUSION PAGE 7 6.1 The preparation of a Watershed Management Plan is the first step in the ongoing process of managing and protecting the resources and ecological functions of a watershed. In order to be effective in achieving its stated goals and objectives, the management actions recommended by the Watershed Management Plan need to be implemented by the various stakeholders to the watershed planning process. Provincial legislation and the Provincial Policy Statement plus the policies in the Durham Region Official Plan require the Municipality to incorporate appropriate policies into our Official Plan in order to implement watershed plans. 6.2 It is therefore appropriate that the Watershed Management Plan for Robinson and Tooley Creeks be referred to Staff for detailed consideration through the ongoing Clarington Official Plan review process. 6.3 There are current development applications in the watersheds that the Existing Conditions Report and Watershed Management Plan can assist with providing background information for. Specifically a special study area was identified in the headwaters of the Robinson Creek on the Courtice Town Centre site that requires further study. The Existing Conditions and Watershed Management Plan should also be utilized for the preparation of the Secondary Plan for the South Courtice Employment Lands, a special project of the Official Plan Review. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington X Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Attachments: Faye Langmaid Attachment 1 - Watersheds in Clarington Attachment 2 - Robinson and Tooley Watersheds Attachment 3 - Comments Chart The watershed plan was distributed to Members of Council under separate cover by CD. 8 -14 REPORT NO.: PSD- 006 -12 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Durham Region Planning Department AECOM: Jason Cole and Rob Frizzell Edward Oegema Thomas Robinson M. Domovitch Mark Foley Bryce Jordan Curt Morris Templar Trinaistich Dom Dan Remollino Dean Kemper Henry Tang Nick Mensink J. Robinson F. Filippo Warren May Glen Severn Laura Paris Gord Lund Lucas Farlan Harry Zonik Hugh Neill Tammy Chung Mark Stanisz Steve Conway John Lovisek Mary Novak Libby Racansky Adrian Foster Michelle Breault Ian Kelsey Corina Brdar Margaret Edmondson John Fusco 8 -15 Richard Szarek Bill Creamer Peter Campbell Bryan DeCunha Chris Darling Mara Samardzic, BURPI Cam McCaulty Hannu Halminen Peter and Michelle Viney Glenn Genge Ronald Armstrong Kyle Bland Councillor Joe Neal Bill Bagg Lesli Anne Bagg Graham Bagg Heather Brooks Stefanie Gauley Russ Powell Don Fraser Abe Afana Linda Hellas Peter Campbell Rebecca Evans Glenn Fehr J. Shewchuk David Phalp Kerry Meydam Stan, Mary Ann Found Dan Moore Fred Biesenthal Bryce Jordan Brian Elston PAGE 8 -� Watersheds In The Municipality Of Clarington 0 z M 0 D rD N v � n � S o� 9� N N a I WWI OVA RAA i Ilk ALI MW plow NOT LANON , Date Individual Comment Response Sept 4, Edward How is his property affected, 1869 Bloor Ed thanked us for response. Change would be when 2011 Oegema St East development occurs in the future, management policies are similar to existing policies in O.P. August Nick Mensink Provided letter and peer review of Responded to Nick and provided him with link to study. Followed 30, 2011 on behalf of Ormiston property regarding natural up with voice mail about meeting. On Sept 7 followed up with e- Preston features, called an requested a meeting mail asking for specifics of the request, that an application and /or Group week of Sept 12 definition of FNHS would not be accepted in advance of Secondary Plan and application Oct 11, Nick Met to discuss peer review of Ormiston Peer Review for ELC did not use the same methodology as 2011 Mensink, property. AECOM and what is approved by CLOCA Board. In addition, the Janice Figures provided in Peer Review did not combine the various Robinson for layers to determine a functional natural heritage system. Preston Discussion on "no net loss" will be at the Secondary Plan stage, Group, Allen Municipality cannot commit to a proposed realignment of an Beech from intermittent tributary in advance of the Secondary Plan. While we Dillon understand the argument put forward that the stream could be enhanced, that could happen in the existing or a proposed location at a future date. An EIS of a specific site is pre- mature at this time. Issue is whether existing natural heritage system is defined on both Schedule C (natural heritage) and A (Land Use ) of Official Plan. Sept 6, Bryce Provided letter that their issues identified Forwarded to AECOM on Sept 6 for written response to Bryce, 2011 Jordon on at March meeting had not been informed Bryce on Sept 12 that we would be getting back to him, behalf of addressed, felt minutes misrepresented AECOM issued a letter on* October 20th addressing the various Intracorp results of meeting items identified. November Intracorp, 1. Delineation of FNHS Meeting held on November 7, 2011 to discuss various items 7, 2011 Bryce (a) Valleyland on Intracorp Property outlined by Intracorp and their consultants. Jordon - We agree that the valleyland is (Sernas), worthy of identification as FNHS Review of how the Watershed Plan would be addressed as part Don Fraser - We question the accuracy of the of the Official Plan Review process. That functional natural (Beacon) mapping given it was done by ' heritage system would be used to inform Secondary Plan process air photo interpretation. Section as would existing conditions report. o 6 of the report identifies a number of actions (e.g. 3.1, 4.2) o 5.1) Whereby the FNHS associated with the creeks is to be determined. We � D � h � m � n T O O �p Q1 � i r-r N W K-1 Date Individual Comment Response can agree to the larger of: top -of- bank based on a stable slope, Regional Floodline or 30 metres from the stream as defining the FNHS. We cannot agree to the FNHS as mapped defining the FNHS. (b) Thickets on east side of eastern tributary on Intracorp Property (see attached plan) - We do not agree that these are worthy of identification as FNHS (c) FODM4 -5 and FODM4/WDM5 -3 on north side of Bloor Street on Intracorp Property (see attached plan) - We disagree with the classification of this area as "Forest" - It is not worthy of designation as FNHS (d) Meadow on property to the north of Intracorp Property (see attached plan) - We do not agree that this area is worthy of identification as FNHS 2. Targeted Natural Heritage System We believe that the 30% target for natural cover is fundamentally inappropriate to these small, urban watersheds 3. Implementation Under the Planning Act - We require a full understanding of how the Municipality intends to implement the recommendations of this study under the Planning Act Date Individual Comment Response Sept 14, Mark Foley 1678 Bloor Street, Courtice Provided an email response thanking Mark for comments. At 2011 The majority of this property appears to this point the process moving forward would be to have Council retain its future urban residential receive the Watershed Plan as a background document to the designation with the exception of Official Plan Review. This is the same process that we have approximately 291.50 ft (88.85m) located followed for all other watershed studies (please see attached between our northeast property limit and report). As part of the Official Plan Review the functional natural the westerly limit of the Courtice Flea heritage area would be information for Schedule C of the Official Market; and a limited area at the Plan. The articulation of specific land uses would come at the northern boundary of the property time of the Secondary Plan for the future urban residential areas. abutting 2141 Trulls Road to the north. It is at that point that the specific land uses including natural We are pleased to report, we have no heritage areas would be designated- on Schedule A. objection to the section of property approximately 88.85m in width and located immediately north of the Courtice Flea Market having a proposed Functional Natural Heritage System (FNHS) designation, however we do not support a FNHS designation at the north boundary of the property abutting 2141 Trulls Road (to the north) as this affects our future urban residential development tans for the area. Sept 14, Mark Foley 2141 Trulls Road, Courtice Provided an e-mail response thanking Mark for comments. At 2011 This property is located on the east side this point the process moving forward would be to have Council of Trulls Road, immediately north and receive the Watershed Plan as a background document to the abutting our lands at 1678 Bloor Street. It Official Plan Review. This is the same process that we have would appear the FNHS proposed followed for all other watershed studies (please see attached designation encroaches on the future report). As part of the Official Plan Review the functional natural urban residential designation for the heritage area would be information for Schedule C of the Official property east of the boundary between Plan. The articulation of specific land uses would come at the the two watersheds. We are pleased to, time of the Secondary Plan for the future urban residential areas. report, we have no objection to the It is at that point that the specific land uses including natural easterly 291.50 ft. (88.95m) of the heritage areas would be designated on Schedule A. property having a proposed FNHS designation as this would be an extension of the proposed FNHS designation to the south. However, we 0 Date Individual Comment Response do not support .a FNHS designation beyond this point to the west, particularly the area abutting 1678 Bloor Street as this affects our future urban residential development plans for the area. Sept 29, MNR Comments on Darlington Provincial The higher level of imperviousness shown for the north west 2011, Park, comment that drawing may be in portion of Darlington PP is simply a product of the sub - watershed error. Support for the management scale approach to the imperviousness mapping. This portion of policies proposed in the study the park is in the same sub - watershed as lands covered by Hwy 401 and developed areas north of the 401 Sept 29, CLOCA Met with Heather Brooks and Debbie V. Final version of the Watershed Plan has addressed CLOCA 2011 To review comments from CLOCA staff comments. to be incorporated into final version of the report. Sept Mr. Massey 2472 Hancock Road — inquiry about the Called Mr. Massey and provided him with 407 timing as-we 29,30 small tributary north of his property and understand it , informed him that the Municipality has not how the 407 storm pond at Highway 2 received detail drawings and do not anticipate them for a number would affect it. Inquiring if we have of years. The tributary will be protected through the policies in detailed drawings of it to share with him. the Official Plan as reinforced by the Watershed Plan. October 4 Region of Applicable Planning Initiatives, Wording in the report has been updated as requested. 2011 Durham suggested rewording for sections Clarification of what ROPA policies and ROPA 128 Appeal relating to DROP and ROPA 128, process included in final version. comment on source of water budget and recommended wording for implementation October Linda Hellas, Function Natural Heritage System Sent a letter responding to the various issues on October 24, 2011 BIRD and Figure 5.1. In our opinion, the FNHS 2011. HALE Ltd. depicted on Figure 5.1 is not accurate. Lucy Stocco, There should be text indicating that the At this point the process moving forward would be to have Tribute limits of the FNHS are representative Council receive the Watershed Plan as a background document Communities and would be confirmed through more to the Official Plan Review. This is the same process that we Bryce detailed site specific investigations (e.g., have followed for all other watershed studies (please see Jordan, an EIS). attached report). As part of the Official Plan Review the Sernas Targetted Natural Heritage System In functional natural heritage area would be information for Associates our opinion, the concept of a 30% Schedule C of the Official Plan. The articulation of specific land natural cover is being misapplied to a uses would come at the time of the Secondary Plan for the future small urban watershed. Artificially urban residential areas. It is at that point that the specific land Date Individual- Comment Response increasing the NHS in this instance is uses including natural heritage areas would be designated on unnecessarily taking developable land Schedule A. that is not to be protected under the PPS and sterilizing it from urban use. This will The property owned by Tribute Homes is outside the current lead to "environmental sprawl" and urban boundary so attempting to establish land uses at this point unnecessary increases in serving costs is very pre- mature. EIS will be required in -the future should they per unit. These small watersheds should eventually acquire development rights. be combined with the larger,. over- arching watershed of the Harmony, Provided copy of the methodology "Developing Natural Heritage Black, Farewell system in measuring a System ". 30% natural cover. target. Groundwater Quantity Management Action 1.2: This recommendation would restrict development and site alteration within and adjacent to (120m) a HVRA unless a water budget and hydrogeological evaluation is undertaken., scope studies for small developments. Surface Water Quantity Management Action 3. 1, Surface Water Quality Management Action 4.2, Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Management Action 5.1: These recommendations would restrict development to the area outside the greater of a number of features. The Terrestrial Natural Heritage Management Actions: Figure 5.1 should be provided for information only, not as a schedule in the Official Plan. It should be subject to further study and refinement. i N N REPORT PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report #: PSD- 007 -12 File Nos.: PLN 11.4 Subject: GREEN PERMIT INITIATIVE - SHOWCASING WATER INNOVATION. GRANT AND GREEN MUNICIPAL FUND GRANT RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD- 007 -12 be received; 2. THAT Council support the partnership with the Region of Durham for the Green Permit Initiative; 3. THAT staff be authorized to apply to the FCM — Green Municipal Fund Program; 4. THAT the Municipality's financial contribution of $24,000 per year for the next three years be funded from the Municipal Government Enterprise Reserve Fund; 5. THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary agreements; and 6. THAT the interested parties list in Report PSD- 007 -12 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Davi J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director, Planning Services COS /df /sn 12 January 2012 Reviewed Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830 8 -23 REPORT NO.: PSD- 007 -12 1. PURPOSE PAGE 2 1.1 One of the six priorities of the Municipality's Strategic Plan for 2011 -2014 is Promoting Green Initiatives. Within this priority, two objectives identified were to reduce the Municipality's energy consumption and to create a culture of 'going green'. The latter included actions to continue the Green Committee of Clarington and develop community participation programs. The Clarington Green Permit Project is one such project derived from the Clarington Green Community Strategy, the work of the Durham Water Efficiency Coordinator and the Regional Roundtable on Climate Change. In 2011, municipal staff were approached by the Region with respect to developing a joint proposal for the Showcasing Water Innovation Program. It was indicated that any project would need to have a direct relationship to the Municipality's responsibilities. The Green Permit concept was developed and in June 2011, a proposal was submitted to the Ministry of Environment Showcasing Water Innovation Program. The proposal was successful and the Ministry has awarded the Municipality a grant of $217,500.00 The joint proposal with the Region of Durham was subject to Council approving the local matching contributions in the amount of $72,500. The Region of Durham is making an in -kind contribution of $40,000. The proposal calls for additional funding Green Municipal Fund of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities - FCM. The purpose of this report is to request Council approval of the funding and authorization to proceed with the FCM Grant Application. The FCM Green Municipal Fund opened for another round of applications as of December 11, 2011 with projects in the area of energy, transportation, water and wastewater, and brownfields ,redevelopment. This project would be submitted under the water and waste water category. 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 Over the last few years, municipalities throughout Ontario have undertaken different initiatives to promote sustainability through better green development practices from site and subdivision design to construction. Clarington has also made a commitment to sustainable development. The following sections provide and overview of Clarington's sustainable initiatives. The Municipality's Official Plan has, as one of its three pillars, the concept of "sustainable development" with many concrete policies regarding ecosystem integrity, energy conservation, and water and air quality. The Municipality adopted in principle a Green Community Strategy prepared by the Living Green Community Advisory Committee. The strategy focuses on transportation, energy efficiency (in both new and existing buildings), zero waste, a thriving green economy, and a healthy natural environment. The strategy awaits further resource allocation for implementation. 8 -24 REPORT NO.: PSD- 007 -12 PAGE 3 The Municipality has created an Energy Management Plan to enhance the business - related environmental footprint. The plan aims to create a culture of energy conservation in the workplace, and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Clarington has been working to promote green building principles in both commercial and residential developments. The Region of Durham has also taken a strong stand to support sustainable development including such initiatives as: Establishing the Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change to provide leadership in addressing regional climate change issues. The Roundtable is currently completing the third phase of the Local Action Plan winnowing down the potential projects the key projects which hold the promise of substantive impact. Undertaking a pilot project known as the Water Efficient Demonstration Community project in conjunction with Tribute Communities, Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), to assess the potential to improve efficiency in new homes by offering buyers a high - efficiency upgrade option. This project achieved reductions of 22% in water use, 13% in electricity, 9% in natural gas, and 11 % in CO2 emissions. 3. OVERVIEW 3.1 The Green Permit Concept The Green Permit Concept is a way of advancing the objectives of both Clarington and Regional Council in a pilot project. It builds upon the results of the Region's Efficient Community project. The most highly ranked incentive from the development community is expedited approvals. The Green Permit Concept is not an actual permit but an approach. Any project would have to meet other criteria in the Official Plan and is not a way of advancing non - sequential development. The key components of the concept are: • A review of municipal applications and permit processes to identify areas for improvement and where prioritization could be used in order to fast track "green applications ". • Collaboration with the development community to develop specific criteria for what qualifies as a "green application" with a focus on water conservation • Working with a developer for the pilot project. • Providing a municipal staff member to escort "green applications" through the process. • Design and develop a monitoring program for savings in water, energy, and CO2 emissions for developments adopting the "green" standard. • Prepare final report with the identified best practices and recommendations to present it to Council and through workshops and presentations to other municipalities. 8 -25 REPORT NO.: PSD- 007 -12 _ PAGE 4 3.2 Funding The proposed budget for the Green Permit Concept is a combination of funding from the three levels of government for a period of three years. The Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Environment Showcasing Water Innovation Program has announced a grant of $217, 500.00 for Clarington. The following table illustrates the proposed cash contributions: Cash Status Contribution MOE 217,500 confirmed Region of Durham 40,000 confirmed —Municipality of Clarin ton 72,500 As recommended in this report FCM — Green Fund 217,500 Application pending Total Contributions $547,500 In addition, the project requires a contribution of staff time as an in -kind contribution over the three years. The funds provide for a contract position to coordinate and manage the project for the three years. The project would also cover all the costs like workshops with the development community, purchase/ leasing of monitoring equipment, and data collection and monitoring and preparation of final reports. Upon Council approval, staff may apply for other sources of funding to leverage Clarington's contribution to increase communications and community awareness of the project. Staff recommend funding Clarington's cash share of this initiative over three years from the Municipal Government Enterprise Reserve Fund. 4. CONCURRENCE The Finance Department concurs with the funding recommendations of this report. 5. CONCLUSION 5.1 Over the last few years, municipalities have sought to address one of the key issues of our generation, environmental sustainability. The Green Permit Project is a joint project with Durham Region to explore one possible action. It will develop the criteria for more sustainable greenfield development and pilot a project for an approval system designed to reward developers optimizing the sustainable features in their projects. It includes concrete measurement of the impacts of the projects. It is just one step in the direction of creating a culture of "going green ". 8 -26 REPORT NO.: PSD- 007 -12 CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN PAGE 5 The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington X Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Carlos Salazar List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: Glen Pleasance, Region of Durham 8 -27 2mr.-Nol TI REPORT PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: N/A Report#: PSD- 008 -12 File #: PLN 38.1 Subject: OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW UPDATE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Staff Report PSD- 008 -12 be received for information. Submitted by: 4DaviCrgome.,�MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services COS /LB /df 18 January 2012 Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 8 -28 REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -11 PURPOSE Page 2 1.1 The purpose of this report is to update Council on the progress of the Official Plan Review and advise of changes to the Work Program. 2. BACKGROUND 2.1 Since the adoption of the Official Plan in 1996 there have been significant changes at the Provincial level. Changes to the Planning Act, the Provincial Policy Statement and the introduction of Provincial Plans like the Oak Ridges Moraine and the Greenbelt, and the Places to Grow Act have introduced new planning policies and procedures at the local level. These provincial initiatives required that the Region of Durham update the Regional Official Plan, and in turn, the Clarington Official Plan must be updated to conform to Regional and Provincial Policy. 2.2 Growing Durham The Region completed many elements of their Official Plan Review and adopted it through Regional Official Plan Amendment 114 in September, 2006. As their review was being completed, the Province's Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Places to Grow) was legislated. This led to the Region's Growth Plan process known as Growing Durham. Staff has spent considerable time participating in the Region's Growth Plan exercise and reviewing the implications of the proposed Regional Official Plan Amendment 128 (ROPA 128). A number of concerns were raised due to the implications for Clarington. Staff advised and sought Council approval (Staff Report PSD- 031 -09) as to Clarington's position regarding the proposed Amendment. Clarington had requested: • An Eastward expansion of the Courtice Urban Area for additional residential and employment lands near the Courtice Road interchange and the Durham East Link; • Resolution of Deferral Area 4 in Orono to designate it Employment Area; • An expansion of the Bowmanville Urban Area to Living Area to facilitate the proposed Phase 8 of the Wilmot Creek Retirement Community; • A Regional Corridor designation for Courtice Road from Highway 401 to Highway 2 connecting the future GO Train Station site to the Highway 2 Transit way Station for the Durham East Link; and • The exclusion of the designation of future Employment Area and Living Area lands (Schedule 'F') beyond 2031. The majority of Clarington's concerns were positively considered by the Region except for the employment area expansion in Courtice. ROPA 128 was adopted by Regional Council in June 2009. It was then sent to the Province for approval. 8 -29 REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 Paqe 3 The Province issued its Decision on ROPA 128 in October 2010. Parts of the Ministry's decision were not supportive of Clarington Council's position, specifically the refusal of the eastward expansion of the Courtice Urban Boundary as Employment Area. In addition, the Ministry withheld their decision on a number of Clarington specific issues including: The eastward expansion of the Courtice Urban Boundary as Living Area; The expansion of the Bowmanville Urban Boundary for the proposed Phase 8 of the Wilmot Creek retirement community; and The eastward expansion of the Orono Urban Boundary for Employment. Several aspects of ROPA 128 that were not approved by the Minister are subject to Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) appeals including the Municipality of Clarington as one of the appellants. These include area municipal population, housing and employment allocations, greenfield density and intensification targets and proposed urban boundary expansions. The OMB appeal will also deal with elements of the methodology for calculating these projections. The final outcome of the various OMB appeals will have an impact on the Regional Official Plan policies and targets allocated to Clarington. The Region has advised staff that they will not consider lower tier Official Plan conformity proposals implementing the Growth Plan and the Regional Plan (ROPA 128) until after the appeals to the OMB are settled. 3. APPROACH TO THE CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW 3.1 Introductory Discussion Paper and Public Consultation The purpose of the Introductory Discussion Paper released in May, 2008 was to open dialogue with regard to the effectiveness of our current planning policies and the challenges Clarington's community could be facing over the next 25 years. The Introductory Discussion Paper provided an overview of the current Official Plan, how it has changed since 1996 and a discussion of what needs to be reviewed by using /revisiting our current vision. The existing principles in the Official Plan of Sustainable Development, Healthy Communities and Growth Management were the starting point. 3.2 Work Plan Council formally initiated the Official Plan Review process with a special meeting of Council. At the meeting, Council approved an approach for Clarington's Official Plan review which does not follow the traditional model; Clarington's workplan emphasizes continuous public involvement with phased implementation rather than one exercise with a final amendment. To facilitate this, the Review has been broken into several major components including: M. 1] REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 • Community Vision; • Built Environment and Planning Process; • Planning for Prosperity and Growth; • Planning for the Countryside; and • Planning for Sustainable and Healthy Communities. Special Projects: • Courtice Main Street; • Courtice Employment Lands Secondary Plan; and • Parks, Open Space and Trails Plan. Paae 4 Each component follows the same process, beginning with Discussion Papers and finishing with an Official Plan Amendment. Public input and review opportunities are presented as often as possible to ensure that the Official Plan Amendments proposed to Council meet the needs of the community. 3.3 Consulting Services The Official Plan Work Plan was designed with a combination of staff -led and consultant -led components. The consultant -led components require considerable staff time to administer including the compilation and co- ordination of background information, mapping, analysis review and to ensure that the final reports are fully complete and satisfactory. Dillon Consulting was selected in 2009 as the principal consultant with their supporting sub - consultants in urban design and land economics. Other consultants have been hired: • Hemson has been the Municipality's consultant for Development Charges and the growth forecasts for the development charges study and the Official Plan are co- ordinated. • AECOM is the Municipality's consulting engineer and have been involved in certain components, such as the Courtice Main Street Study. • Urban Metrics was the retail market analyst for the commercial policy review and is updating their work as part of the Official Plan Review Process. Specialized Consultant costs are anticipated as part of the Review. For the most part, 90% of the costs are covered by Development Charges funds. 4. WORK PROGRAM STATUS 4.1 Community Vision The first phase of public consultation began following the release of the Introductory Discussion Paper. More than 600 residents provided input during this initial phase which consisted of: 8 -31 REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 Paqe 5 • Community sessions in Bowmanville, Courtice, Newcastle, Newtonville, Orono and Solina; • Stakeholder meetings with the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington, Living Green Community Advisory Committee, Clarington Heritage Committee, Clarington Board of Trade, Building Industry and Land Development Association and the Visual Arts Centre Board; • Community surveys with 400 Clarington residents and 75 business owners/ managers; and • Consultation with government agencies, including the Durham Regional Planning Department, Inter - ministry Working Group, Ganaraska and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authorities, School Boards and Municipal Departments. The following three community priorities have remained at the forefront: 1. Preservation of the natural environment, including environmental features, open spaces and agricultural lands. 2. Commitment to creating employment opportunities, not just residential development. 3. Maintenance of the rural, small town character of Clarington, partly through the preservation and enhancement of historic downtowns. 4.2 Built Environment and the Planning Process The second discussion paper, Let's Have a Discussion... Improving our Built Environment and the Planning Process, was released in 2009. This Discussion Paper explores the new tools that have been provided to municipalities to help manage the land use planning process and built environment including, Employment Areas protection, Community Benefits (bonusing) and Urban Design. It also focuses on the changes to the Planning Act that emphasize transparency and the shift of information needs to the beginning of the planning process. On September 13, 2010 Council held the statutory public meeting to present Official Plan Amendment 77 to the public. After this input, staff has revised the Official Plan Amendment. The revised Amendment will be the focus of Council's public meeting on February 6, 2012. 4.3 Planning for Prosperity and Growth Planning for Prosperity and Growth is a major component of the Official Plan Review and has been subdivided into several topics: • Clarington Community Forecast: Population and Employment Projections • Commercial Market Analysis Update • Economic Base and Employment Lands Discussion Paper • Intensification Discussion Paper • Growth Management Discussion Paper 8 -32 REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 4.3.1 Community Forecasts Population and Employment Projections e6 Hemson Consulting was retained by the Municipality of Clarington to prepare growth forecasts based on the Provincial Growth Plan and the Durham Regional Official Plan. The growth forecasts are for population, housing and employment for the entire Municipality and for the four urban communities and the rural areas within Clarington. The paper was released in September 2011. Area 2006 2031 Percent Change Bowmanville 31,600 66,400 110% Courtice 23,200 35,000 51% Newcastle 8,900 20,900 134% Orono /rural 17,200 18,100 5% Total 80,900 140,300 74% 4.3.2 Commercial Market Analysis Update The Update will be based on the 2005 Commercial Policy Review analysis that resulted in the allocation of retail space based on a population threshold of 91,000 people for Clarington. The Update by Urban Metrics will evaluate the appropriateness of the existing retail and service space (supply and demand) in Clarington and assesses whether there is sufficient commercial land designated in each of the Urban Areas ( Courtice, Bowmanville, Newcastle, Orono) to accommodate demand until 2031. The Commercial Market Analysis Update will serve as background information to the Growth Management component of the Official Plan Review. The Update will be released in the first quarter of 2012. 4.3.3 Economic Base and Employment Lands Discussion Paper The purpose of this discussion paper was to provide information and analysis on the economic base and employment lands in Clarington. This Paper was released in July 2010. This discussion paper included a review of: • Clarington's role in the context of the GTA economy including its share of employment in Durham Region by sector and labour flows; • Clarington's economic base including employment and sector growth; • Projected employment levels by the type and location in Clarington; and • Employment lands in Clarington and their suitability to meet employment targets. Some Conclusions from this paper include: • Clarington has sufficient employment lands supply to accommodate forecasted employment growth to 2031, however lack of servicing will limit growth potential. Less than 10% of the vacant employment lands in Clarington are serviced; • Clarington's economic development and investment attraction efforts are being hampered by a low supply of serviced vacant employment lands; 8 -33 REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 Page 7 Unserviced lands in Clarington have attracted cost - sensitive, space extensive uses with outside storage which detracts from the attractiveness of such lands for prestige and technology uses; and Space extensive uses normally have low employment levels which impact the Municipality's ability to meet the employment density targets stipulated in Places to Grow. The lack of servicing will continue to attract such space extensive uses. 4.3.4 Intensification Discussion Paper The Intensification Paper released in September 2011 includes an analysis of Regional Official Plan Amendment (ROPA) 128 and provides recommendations for Clarington's conformity requirements to meet the residential intensification targets of 6181 units between 2015 and 2031. These recommendations will be confirmed once a decision has been made on the outstanding Regional Official Plan Amendment 128 policies (see Section 2.2). However, for the purposes of discussion, the Paper set the stage for meaningful public consultation regarding the implication of planning for residential intensification and also provided a platform to formulate an intensification strategy for Clarington. The Discussion Paper set out the context for intensification. It describes the drivers of intensification, identifies opportunities and constraints for intensification, completes a capacity analysis, and concludes with recommendations for an intensification strategy and proposed Official Plan policy directions. The paper concludes that the Municipality needs to provide incentives for intensification and that we have the land supply within the existing Urban Boundaries to accommodate a total of 9960 intensification residential units, 61 % more than our target. 4.3.5 Growth Management Discussion Paper Staff and the consulting team are currently finalizing the Growth Management Discussion Paper. The Discussion Paper explores how and where Clarington should continue to grow. It examines historical growth patterns, current development plans, infill and intensification opportunities and infrastructure opportunities and constraints. The paper also examines the implications of the Growth Plan and ROPA 128. This information has led to the creation of three development scenarios. The development scenarios define how and where Clarington's urban development should occur. Staff expect to release the Paper in February 2012. The Official Plan policy implications contained in this discussion paper and those in the Intensification Discussion Paper will be the subject of several public consultation meetings to be held in Courtice, Bowmanville and Newcastle in March. 4.3.6 Draft Official Plan Amendment The background studies and Discussion Papers will lead to an amendment to the Clarington Official Plan. We anticipate the draft Amendment will be released in the third quarter of 2012. 8 -34 REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 4.4 Planning for the Countryside Page 8 The Countryside Discussion Paper is under preparation ,by staff and it will evaluate the effectiveness of rural and agricultural Official Plan policies in achieving the goals and objectives identified. A major part of the review is ensuring that the Clarington Official Plan is in conformity with the Greenbelt Plan. Clarington's rural area plays a significant role in supporting: • Protection of agricultural land for food and crop production; • A continuous major open space system for natural heritage conservation and recreation; • Hamlets and Rural settlements; and • The aggregate resource industry. Clarington's rural area comprises 70% of our land base and houses approximately 18% of our population, but it also is the home of one of our top economic producers; the predominance of good soils, proximity to markets and growing season supports a prosperous agricultural industry. The Countryside Discussion Paper is anticipated to be released in the third quarter of 2012. 4.5 Planning for Sustainability and Healthy Communities 4.5.1 Natural Heritage System The Clarington Official Plan has very strong policies regarding protection of the natural heritage system including wetlands. Proposed Official Plan Amendment 80 (Staff report PSD- 030 -11) was developed to place the lands identified as Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) by the Ministry of Natural Resources into Environmental Protection Area designations, and to update the natural heritage features information of the Plan to accurately reflect the location of PSWs. Following the public meeting in April, 2011, a session was held with a group of concerned residents. Since that time, staff has re- evaluated the proposed PSW amendment in the context of the entire Official Plan Review and determined that any refinements to the natural heritage system to include the PSWs should be made through the Greenbelt Conformity exercise. Staff have amended the Official Plan Review Work Plan such that, the Natural Heritage System will include a discussion paper and public input before recommending Official Plan changes. Staff is coordinating this process with Staff from both Conservation Authorities. The Natural Heritage Discussion Paper to be released later this year, will provide an overview of natural heritage system planning including how to define a system and why protection is important. The role of the Conservation Authorities as the provider of 8 -35 REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 Page 9 Natural Heritage information, the Provincial Policy framework and the interrelations to the Regional and Municipal Official Plans will be also discussed. The Paper will discuss proposed changes contemplated to existing Clarington Official Plan policies and /or mapping. 4.5.2 Parks, Open Space and Trails Masterplan Public expectations for an accessible public open space are increasing. The Masterplan will review the existing policy context and framework for the provision of parkland and trails and provide recommendations to modify the existing Official Plan policies. The Masterplan will guide the strategic provision and use of public parkland and open space and the development of trails within the Municipality for the next 20 years. There are four possible phases to the project. The first and second are the policy review and recommendations that will dovetail with the Official Plan Review that is underway and the third is the policy recommendations for the OP amendment. It is possible that a future fourth phase could be incorporated if deemed necessary by Engineering, Operations and Community Services. It would address in more detail issues related to specific parks and trails providing recommendations for their improvement through change in use, refurbishment and maintenance practices. This work has not commenced. It is anticipated to commence mid - year, after the completion of other phases of the Official Plan Review. 4.5.3 Integrated Sustainability Local Action Plan Funding has been set aside to develop an Integrated Sustainability Local Action Plan. This work would likely follow the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Partners in Climate Protection process. It is a five step process and can be applied on the corporate or community level. It could build on some of the work that was done by the Living Green Committee but has more of a scientific basis by establishing baseline conditions and setting targets for greenhouse gas emissions. This element of the work program has not been scheduled yet. It would commence later as time and resources permit. 5. SPECIAL STUDIES 5.1 Robinson /Tooley Watershed Study The Robinson and Tooley Watersheds are two small watersheds in Courtice with headwaters in the Lake Iroquois Beach. By virtue of their size, smaller watersheds are especially vulnerable to the effects of changing land use and the impact of development. REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 Page 10 Although initially not part of the Work Plan, it has been important to undertake this background work to provide a basis for site specific studies, specifically the Courtice Main Street Study and the Courtice Employment Lands Study. The Robinson and Tooley Creeks Watershed Management Plan was endorsed by the CLOCA Board of Directors on January 17, 2011. It will be presented to the General Purpose and Administration meeting on January 23, 2012. As with the other watershed plans that have been prepared, staff are recommending that the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watershed Plan be referred to the Official Plan review for implementation. 5.2 Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan The Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan is one of the Special Projects in the Official Plan Review. The purpose of this project is to create a comprehensive Secondary Plan and implementing Zoning By -law for the properties fronting onto Durham Highway 2 between Townline Road in the west to the Courtice Urban Boundary in the east. The Secondary Plan policies will reflect the new Provincial growth management and intensification targets. Preparation of the Secondary Plan began with background research, the identification of opportunities and constraints and a visioning session with the Public in July, 2009. Phase two explored possible development options with the public workshop and an open house that resulted in the Master Development Plan. The Master Development Plan was adopted in principle by Council in September 2010. CLOCA initiated the preparation of the Harmony, Farewell and Black Creeks Watershed Plan in 2010. The details from the 'Existing Conditions Report' has informed the preparation. of the Secondary Plan, and Zoning by -law for the Courtice Main Street and Study. Staff has been preparing a Secondary Plan and Zoning By -law that will be presented to the community at an Open House in March, 2012. The Secondary Plan and Zoning By- law need to reflect the findings of the Watershed Plans that have recently concluded. The completed watershed plans were not available at the time of finalizing the Master Development Plan in mid 2010. It is anticipated that a recommendation will be presented to Council and the public in May or June of 2012. 5.3 Courtice Employment Lands Secondary Plan The employment lands located in Courtice are considered some of the best in Durham Region due to their accessibility to Highway 401. This Study is examining the lands on the north side of Highway 401. It excludes the Energy Business Park which already has a Secondary Plan in place. This location will be further enhanced with the. proposed Highway 401 -407 Link and future GO Train Station and the future trunk sewer that will bisect the lands, addressing a long time servicing concern. In addition, the expansion and refurbishment of 8 -37 REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 11 Darlington Nuclear Station and the developing Clarington Energy Business Park makes this area highly attractive for the development. Given the infrastructure investment planned for the area, it will be important to update and refine the vision for the area. The work program will develop the land use and transportation policies in greater detail, including road alignments, ultimately leading to a Secondary Plan, Zoning By -law Amendment and Urban Design 'policies. This work has not commenced to date. Staff negotiated with Dillon to remove this item from their work program and it is planned to retender this component later in 2012, using the funds originally assigned to this project. 6. CHANGES TO THE WORK PROGRAM In summary,, the following changes have been made to the Work Plan. • Provincially Significant Wetlands (contained in proposed Amendment 80) Provincially Significant Wetlands were initially advanced to be considered separately from. the other components of implementing the Greenbelt Plan and Provincial Policy Statements. This was done to address issues in the Hancock Neighbourhood surrounding development applications. However, as a result of broader concerns of rural residents, Council directed staff to hold a Town Hall meeting on the issue. Staff held discussions with the key residents, former and current staff members of the Ministry of Natural Resources and staff from both Conservation Authorities in preparation for such a larger meeting. It is now proposed that the issue of Provincially Significant Wetlands be considered under the Natural Heritage component so that all of the proposed changes will be known and a broader education component can be undertaken. CLOCA and GRCA staff have agreed partner in this project and prepare the Discussion Paper and policy amendments. Proposed Amendment 80 would be scoped down to include only lands within the Hancock Neighbourhood and the revised amendment would be considered in conjunction with the Hancock Neighbourhood Design Plan Update. Staff will advise the residents who expressed an interest in the wetlands amendment of the revised approach subsequent to Council's consideration of this report. • Courtice Employment Area Although this project was originally part of the contract with Dillon, this work is being retendered approximately mid -year 2012. REPORT NO.: PSD- 008 -12 Page 12 • Courtice Main Street The work initially included only the preparation of a Secondary Plan for the Courtice Main Street Area. Staff have broadened the scope of work (undertaken by staff) to include the zoning amendment, so that the Official Plan and Zoning will be updated concurrently. • Countryside If staff resource permit, it would be desirable to prepare the Countryside rezoning amendment to follow in close sequence to the Official Plan amendment that will implement the Greenbelt Plan and Countryside. This work would commence in 2013. 7. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable 8. CONCLUSION 8.1 To date, through the Official Plan Review, we have released 6 discussion papers, held 15 open houses, and 3 statutory public meetings. All information has been available electronically from the Official Plan review website at www.claringon.net /ourplan, and all of the Discussion Papers, in hard copy, at the Libraries. 8.2 In 2012, major steps will be completed towards updating the Clarington Official Plan including: • Several proposed amendments; • The release of further Discussion Papers; and • Numerous open houses and public meetings. 8.3 The updated Official Plan will guide development in Clarington for the next 20 years. It will also provide a solid foundation for long term financial and infrastructure planning. The Official Plan will set the framework so that development respects our environment, supports job creation, and enhances the character of our communities. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development X Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington X Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan 5tatf Contact: Carlos Salazar /Lisa Backus List of interested parties - available upon request from the Clerk's Department. 1. Leading the Way REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report EGD- 004 -12 File #: Subject MONTHLY REPORT ON BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY FOR DECEMBER, 2011. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD- 004 -12 be received for information. Submitted by:�;�Cn j A. S. Cannella, C.E.T. Director of Engineering Services ASC /bb Reviewed by: 6 oskw Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -1824 9 -1 REPORT NO.: EGD- 004 -12 1. BACKGROUND PAGE 2 1.1 With respect to the Building Permit Activity for the month of DECEMBER 2011, Staff wish to highlight the following statistics for the information of Committee and Council. MONTH OF DECEMBER 2011 2010 BUILDING CATEGORY NUMBER OF PERMITS VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION NUMBER OF PERMITS VALUE OF - CONSTRUCTION % CHANGE OF VALUE 2011 -2010 Residential 181 $54,603,936 49 $9,419,523 479.7% Industrial 0 $0 1 $5,000 N/A Government 0 $0 0 $0 N/A Commercial 5 $7,745,000 3 $790,000 880.4% Institutional 0 $0 1 $14,600 N/A Agricultural 0 $0 1 $42,905 _ N/A Demolition 1 $0 0 $0 N/A TOTAL 187 $62,348,936 55 $10,272,028 507.0% YEAR TO DATE 2011 1 2010 BUILDING CATEGORY NUMBER OF PERMITS VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION NUMBER OF PERMITS VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION % CHANGE OF VALUE 2011 -2010 Residential 1,037 $237,405,670 856 $155,007,174 53.2% Industrial 15 $53,971,838 6 $2,107,125 2,461.4% Government 6 $486,000 8 $2,562,900 -81.0% Commercial 61 $28,226,799 52 $27,361,659 3.2% Institutional 21 $4,355,200 28 $12,700,440 -65.7% Agricultural 16 $2,856,216 28 $3,448,139 -17.2% Demolition 32 $0 64 $0 N/A TOTAL 1,188 $327,301,723 1,042 $203,187,437 61.1% 9 -2 REPORT NO.: EGD- 004 -12 PAGE 3 1.2 With respect to building permit activities (over $250,000) and large residential building permit activities, the details are provided as follows: Owner / Applicant Construction Type Location Value ASPEN HEIGHTS II LTD Condominium Building (Bldg 1 SIDNEY LANE, BOWMANVILLE $5,742,400 A) ASPEN HEIGHTS II LTD Condominium Building (Bldg 5 SIDNEY LANE, BOWMANVILLE $5,632,000 B) 1804603 ONTARIO INC. Interior Alterations - Freshco 680 LONGWORTH AVENUE, $6,850,000 BOWMANVILLE TOM ORDANIS Alteration to Dental Office 1,425 HIGHWAY 2, COURTICE $250,000 1 HARTWELL BOWMANVILLE INC Alteration to Dental Office 9 HARTWELL AV, BOWMANVILLE $500,000 9 -3 REPORT NO,: EGD- 004 -12 PAGE 4 The following is a comparison of the types of dwelling units issued for the month of "DECEMBER and "YEAR TO DATE ". Dwelling Unit Type "DECEMBER" 2011 83 Apartment - 36% ' 111 Single Detached 12 '. 49 Townhouse -°_ 5% U Single Detached 111 22 t.iSemi- Detached 22 Semi - Detached 1.2 Townhouse 12 10% R Apartment 83 Dwelling Unit Type "YEAR TO DATE 2011" 89 Apartment 10% 137 �..� Townhouse. . 527 16% ' Single �i. Detached j' 61% 110 Semi - Detached U Single Detached 527 13% t.l Semi - Detached 110 Townhouse 137 13 Apartment 89 The following is a historical comparison of the building permits issued for the month of "DECEMBER" and' "YEAR TO DATE" for a three year period. Historical Data for Month of "DECEMBER" $60,00 0,000 $50,00 0,000 $40,00 0,000 $30,00 0,000 $20,00 0,000 $10,00 0,000 — — Historical Data "YEAR i'® DATE" $300,000,000 H $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $0 2011 2010 2009 Value $327,301,723 $203,187,437 $132,165,301 IM 0,000 — — $0 2011 2 2010 2 2009 Value $ $62,348,836 $ $10,205,014 $ $10,728,448 $300,000,000 H $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $0 2011 2010 2009 Value $327,301,723 $203,187,437 $132,165,301 IM REPORT NO.: EGD- 004 -12 PAGE 5 PERMIT FEES PERMIT REVENUES 2011 December Year to Date $ 385,942 1 $ 2,190,053 INSPECTION SERVICES 2010 December Year to Date $ 68,796 $ 1,455,121 NUMBER OF NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS 2011 2010 December Year to Date December Year to Date Building Inspections 389 6,078 380 5,663 Plumbing & Heating Inspections 493 7,045 351 5,734 Pool Enclosure Inspections 1 66 0 90 TOTAL 883 13,189 731 11,487 NUMBER OF NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS 9 -5 2011 2010 December Year to Date December Year to Date Single Detached 111 527' 20 347 Semi - Detached 22 110 8 114 Townhouse 12 137 0 111 Apartments 83 89 0 21 TOTAL 228 863 28 593 9 -5 REPORT NO.: EGD- 004 -12 RESIDENTIAL UNITS HISTORICAL COMPARISON PAGE 6 YEAR: AREA 2011 (to end of December) 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 Bowmanville 360 282 98 340 451 609 307 587 468 345 312 Courtice 312 236 113 134 82 126 241 173 180 133 129 Newcastle 165 37 24 60 77 84 202 191 123 131 76 Wilmot Creek 5 8 9 30 16 15 15 . 25 29 38 24 Orono 1 1 0 2 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 Darlington 5 8 6 10 6 7 .14 15 13 17 47 Clarke 8 6 11 5 11 12 13 10 16 15 9 Burketon 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 Enfield 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Enniskillen 0 3 2 0 0 1 ,1 1 0 2 5 Hampton 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 1 1 Haydon 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kendal 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 2 Kirby 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leskard 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Maple Grove 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Mitchell Corners 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 Newtonville 3 7 5 7 2 2 4 5 3 3 0 Solina 1 1 5 0 6 3 3 3 3 1 1 Tyrone 1 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 3 9 3 TOTALS 863 593 274 593 655 861 802 1 1,015 - 843 701 609 REPORT NO.: EGD- 004 -12 2. CONCURRENCE - Not Applicable CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN - Not Applicable Staff Contact: Rick Pigeon, Chief Building Official PAGE 7 9 -7 Ciarbgton REPORT EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: JANUARY 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law#: Report#: ESD- 001 -12 File #: Subiect: MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT - NOVEMBER 2011 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report ESD- 001 -12 be received for information. \✓ l t ed b : Reviewed b : Submit y Y ord W_ eir, Director of Emergency Services GW /tw Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1 C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 11-1 REPORT NO.: ESD - 001 -12 1. BACKGROUND PAGE 2 Report ESD- 001 -12 covers the month of October and is intended to provide Council with relevant, timely information on the activity of the Emergency and Fire Services Department. 2. COMMENTS The Department responded to 265 calls during this period and recorded total fire losses of $239,000. Attachment # 1 provides a monthly station response summary, description of call types, a call type summary, a dollar loss summary, an enforcement summary and a public education summary. 3. CONCURRENCE — Not'Applicable CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Mark Berney, Deputy Fire Chief Attachments: Attachment 1 — Activity Report — November 11 -2 Attachment # 1 to Report ESD- 001 -12 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES ACTIVITY REPORT REPORT PERIOD: November 1, 2011 00:00:00hrs - November 30, 2011 23:59:59hrs STATION RESPONSE, SUMMARY STATION 1 STATION 2 STATION 3 STATION 4 STATION 5 THIS Bowmanville Newcastle Orono Courtice Enniskillen MONTH TH IS 134 38 13 70 10 265 MONTH TO DATE 1645 349 207 815 139 3155 DESCRIPTION OF CALL TYPES Fire and Explosions: Instance or destructive and uncontrolled burning involving structures, vehicles and open area fires, including explosion of combustible solids, liquids or gasses which may or may not have resulted in a dollar loss or an explosion or rupture as a result of pressure, no fire Outdoor, No Loss Fires: Uncontrolled fires, outdoors, that did not result in a loss, injury or fatality and is not suspected to be caused by arson, vandalism or children playing Pre Fire Conditions: Incidents with no fire that involve heat or potential pre fire conditions e.g. pot on stove, cooking - smoke or steam, lightening, fireworks Burning (controlled): Complaint call related to outdoor controlled burning, authorized or unauthorized. Fire Department did not take suppression action. False Fire Call: Alarm activation or fire call that when investigated, is determined to be as a result of equipment failure, malicious /prank, perceived emergency, accidental activation of alarm by a person CO (carbon monoxide) False Call: a call where it is determined that the detection equipment malfunctioned or there was a perceived emergency - no CO leak Public Hazard Call: Includes a response for spills and leaks of a hazardous product such as natural gas, propane, refrigerant, miscellaneous /unknown, gasoline or fuel, toxic chemical, radio - active material, power lines down or arcing, bomb, explosive removal standby, CO (carbon monoxide) or other public hazard. Rescue Call: a call for a person in danger due to their proximity to the occurrence and who is unable to self evacuate and is assisted by Fire Department personnel i.e. vehicle accident, building collapse, commercial /ind,ustrial accident, home /residential accident, persons trapped in elevator, water rescue or water /ice rescue. Medical /Resuscitator Call: Includes a response to a patient(s) suffering from asphyxia, respiratory condition, convulsions, epileptic, diabetic seizure, electric shock, traumatic shock, heart attack, stroke, drug related, cuts, abrasions, fractures, burns, person fainted, nausea and pre - hospital care such as administering oxygen, CPR, defibrillation, or first aid. Other Response: Assistance to other Fire Departments, calls'cancelled on route, non fire incidents where an illegal grow operation or drug operation was discovered. 1'1 -3 DOLLAR LOSS SUMMARY 2011 2010 THIS TO DATE PERIOD $239,000 $3,611,351 11 -4 SAME TODATE PERIOD $376,250 $4,282,360 THIS PERIOD TO DATE SAME PERIOD TO DATE TOTALS 265 3155 281 2953 FIRES 8 88 5 126 OUTDOOR; NO LOSS FIRES 3 66 4 39 NON FIRE CALLS 254 3001 272 2788 Burning (controlled) 9 90 7 110 CO False calls 8 170 12 181 False. fire calls 29 294 23 265 Medical /resuscitator calls 139 1663 136 1516 Other response calls 17 208 24 220 Pre fire conditions /no fire calls 7 52 4 45 Public hazard calls 9 130 18 110 Rescue calls 36 394 48 341 DOLLAR LOSS SUMMARY 2011 2010 THIS TO DATE PERIOD $239,000 $3,611,351 11 -4 SAME TODATE PERIOD $376,250 $4,282,360 THIS ACTIVITY TODATE PERIOD SAM E TO DATE PERIOD FIRE INSPECTIONS 19 254 7 209 COMPLAINT INSPECTIONS 10 110 21 102 FIRE SAFETY PLAN REVIEW 3 42 7 23 PLANS REVIEW 14 103 13 108 SITE VISIT/ 2 42 0 39 SAFETY LECTURES 6 83 0 11 144 APPROVAL /PERMIT 8 0 4 ALARM FOR LIFE PROGRAM 0 453 0 594 RESIDENTIAL VISITS PART 1 SMOKE ALARM 0 0 0 1 TICKETS ISSUED PART 3 FIRE CODE 0 3 0 0 CHARGES FIRE INVESTIGATION 2 28 1 10 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY 2010 2009 ACTIVITY THIS PERIOD TODATE SAME PERIOD TODATE STATION TOURS 10 32 7 45 SCHOOL VISITS 2 13 18 40 FIRE SAFETY HOUSE VISITS 0 12 0 4 PUBLIC EVENTS 2 42 0 39 SAFETY LECTURES 12 49 0 21 FIRE EXTINGUISHER TRAINING 2 8 0 4 11 -5 Attachment # 1 to Report ESD- 001 -12 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES ACTIVITY REPORT FIRE TRUCK VISITS Cr7 PERCENTAGE OF TIME THIS MONTH FULL TIME PUMPER TRUCKS WERE STAFF WITH 4 OR MORE FIREFIGHTERS 71% PROPERTY CLASS REPORT Number of incidents Estimated Loss GROUP A ASSEMBLY ie Arena, Day Care Centre, School 0 GROUP B CARE and DETENTION ie Care Facility, Group Home, Hospital 0 GROUP C RESIDENTIAL ie Residential Dwellings, Hotel /Motel, 5 $211,000 GROUP D BUSINESS and Personal Services ie Bank, Post Office, Laundry 0 GROUP E Mercantile ie Department Store, Restaurant, Supermarket, 0 GROUP F Industrial ie Generating Station, Service Station, Manufacturing 1 $3,000 Structures /Properties not classified by O.B.C. ie Barn, Grass, Deck 0 Vehicles 2 $25,000 TOTALS 8 $239,000 11 -6 Clarftwn REPORT EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: JANUARY 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: ESD- 002 -12 File #: Subject: MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT - DECEMBER 2011 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report ESD- 002 -12 be received for information. Submitted by: GW /tw .> c Reviewed by: Gord Weir, Director of Emergency Services ') f�"A_0_ — a–), Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 11 -7 REPORT NO.: ESD- 002 -12 1. BACKGROUND PAGE 2 Report ESD- 002 -12 covers the month of October and is intended to provide Council with relevant, timely information on the activity of the Emergency and Fire Services Department. 2. COMMENTS The Department responded to 319 calls during this period and recorded total fire losses of $1,211,900. Attachment # 1 provides a monthly station response summary, description of call types, a call type summary, a dollar loss summary, an enforcement summary and a public education summary. 3. CONCURRENCE — Not Applicable CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Mark Berney, Deputy Fire Chief Attachments: Attachment 1 —Activity Report - December 11 -8 Attachment # 1 to Report ESD- 002 -12 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES ACTIVITY REPORT REPORT PERIOD: DECEMBER 1,2011 00:00:00hrs - DECEMBER 31, 2011 23:59:59hrs STATION RESPONSE: SUMMARY STATION 1 STATION 2 STATION 3 STATION 4 STATION 5 THIS Bowmanville Newcastle Orono Courtice Enniskillen MONTH THIS 170 33 19 81 16 319 MONTH TO DATE 1815 382 226 896 155 3474 .DESCRIPTION OF CALL TYPES ,. - Fire and Explosions: Instance or destructive and uncontrolled burning involving structures, vehicles and open area fires, including explosion of combustible solids, liquids or gasses which may or may not have resulted in a dollar loss or an explosion or rupture as a result of pressure, no fire Outdoor, No Loss Fires: Uncontrolled fires, outdoors, that did not result in a loss, injury or fatality and is not suspected to be caused by arson, vandalism or children playing Pre Fire Conditions: Incidents with no fire that involve heat or potential pre fire conditions e.g. pot on stove, cooking - smoke or steam, lightening, fireworks Burning (controlled): Complaint call related to outdoor controlled burning, authorized or unauthorized. Fire Department did not take suppression action. False Fire Call: Alarm activation or fire call that when investigated, is determined to be as a result of equipment failure, malicious /prank, perceived emergency, accidental activation of alarm by a person CO (carbon monoxide) False Call: a call where it is determined that the detection equipment malfunctioned or there was a perceived emergency - no CO leak Public Hazard Call: Includes a response for spills and leaks of a hazardous product such as natural gas, propane, refrigerant, miscellaneous /unknown, gasoline or fuel, toxic chemical, radio - active material, power lines down or arcing, bomb, explosive removal standby, CO (carbon monoxide) or other public hazard. Rescue Call: a call for a person in danger due to their proximity to the occurrence and who is unable to self evacuate and is assisted by Fire Department personnel i.e. vehicle accident, building collapse, commercial /industrial accident, home /residential accident, persons trapped in elevator, water rescue or water /ice rescue. Medical /Resuscitator Call: Includes a response to a patient(s) suffering from asphyxia, respiratory condition, convulsions, epileptic, diabetic seizure, electric shock, traumatic shock, heart attack, stroke, drug related, cuts, abrasions, fractures, burns, person fainted, nausea and pre - hospital care such as administering oxygen, CPR, defibrillation, or first aid. Other Response: Assistance to other Fire Departments, calls cancelled on route, non fire incidents where an illegal grow operation or drug operation was discovered. 11 -9 Attachment # 1 to Report ESD- 002 -12 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES ACTIVITY REPORT CALL TYPE SUMMARY 2011 2010 THIS PERIOD TO DATE SAME PERIOD TO DATE :TOTALS _ - 319 3474 319 3272 :FIRES_ 12 100 5 131 OUTDOOR, NO -LOSS FIRES 6 72 1 40 NON FIRE CALLS 301 3302 313 3101 Burning (controlled) 0 90 1 111 CO False calls 25 195 21 202 False fire calls 33 327 34 299 Medical /resuscitator calls 142 1805 167 1683 Other response calls 31 239 18 238 Pre fire conditions /no fire calls Public hazard calls Rescue calls 11 -10 7 1 59 5 1 50 16 146 21 131 47 441 46 387 DOLLAR LOSS SUMMARY 2011 2010 THIS TO DAT E PERIOD $1,211,900 $4,823,251 SAME TO DATE PERIOD $512,200 $4,794,560 THIS ACTIVITY TODATE PERIOD SAME TODATE PERIOD FIRE INSPECTIONS 19 273 9 218 COMPLAINT INSPECTIONS 10 120 11 113 FIRE SAFETY PLAN REVIEW 2 44 1 24 PLANS REVIEW 0 103 2 110 SITE VISIT/ 7 90 5 149 APPROVAL /PERMIT ALARM FOR LIFE PROGRAM 0 453 0 594 RESIDENTIAL VISITS PART 1 SMOKE ALARM 0 0 0 1 TICKETS ISSUED PART 3 FIRE CODE 0 3 0 0 CHARGES FIRE INVESTIGATION 5 33 6 16 PUBLIC EDUCATION SUMMARY,,,,, 2010 2009 THIS ACTIVITY TODATE PERIOD STATION TOURS 0 32 SCHOOL VISITS 0 13 FIRE SAFETY HOUSE VISITS 0 12 PUBLIC EVENTS 1 43 SAFETY LECTURES 2 51 FIRE EXTINGUISHER 0 8 TRAINING SAME TODATE PERIOD 2 47 3 43 0 4 2 41 2 23 2 6 11 -11 SAME TODATE PERIOD 2 47 3 43 0 4 2 41 2 23 2 6 11 -11 11 -11 Attachment # 1 to Report ESD- 002 -12 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES ACTIVITY REPORT FIRE TRUCK VISITS 0 I 6 I 0 4 PERCENTAGE OF TIME THIS MONTH FULL TIME PUMPER TRUCKS WERE STAFF WITH 4 OR MORE FIREFIGHTERS 73/° PROPERTY CLASS REPORT ." ' GROUP A ASSEMBLY ie Arena, Day Care Centre, School 0 GROUP B CARE and DETENTION ie Care Facility, Group Home, Hospital 0 GROUP C RESIDENTIAL ie Residential Dwelings, Hotel /Motel, 5 $322,500 GROUP D BUSINESS and Personal Services ie Bank, Post Office, Laundry 0 GROUP E Mercantile ie Department Store, Restaurant, Supermarket, 0 GROUP F Industrial ie Generating Station, Service Station, Manufacturing 0 $871,000 Structures /Properties not classified by O.B.C. ie Barn, Grass, Deck 4 Vehicles 4 $23,400 TOTALS 13 $1,216,900 11 -12 Clarftwn REPORT COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: CSD= 001 -12 File #: Subject: NEWCASTLE & DISTRICT RECREATION COMPLEX — CONCESSION OPERATION EXPRESSION OF INTEREST TO PRIVATE SECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CSD- p01 -12 be received for information. Submitted by: JPC /ga Reviewed by: Jr,kiph P. Caruana Tervices ector, Community Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 12 -1 REPORT NO.: CSD- 001 -12 1.0 BACKGROUND PAGE 2 1.1 At the October 3, 2011 Council meeting, Resolution #GPA- 578 -11 was approved. This directed staff to re -issue the Expression of Interest for the concession operation at the Newcastle & District Recreation Complex and open it up to private sector service providers. 2.0 EXPRESSION OF INTEREST PROCESS 2.1 The Request for Expressions of Interest was advertised on the Municipality's website. The ad was placed on the website on November 3, 2011 and several local firms were advised by fax and email of the bid opportunity. 2.2 According to download records, two catering firms and one equipment supplier downloaded the document. No bids were received. 3.0 COMMENTS 3.1 With the resulting lack of interest from both community organizations and the private sector to operate a concession in this facility, staff will work with our vending machine operator to expand the products offered in this facility to best serve our patrons. 3.2 The Manager of Purchasing has been consulted during the preparation of this report and provided the overview of the Expression of Interest process. 3.3 The department will continue to monitor the food and beverage needs of the patrons of this facility. Should the needs change in the future that warrant re- visiting this issue or should an alternate use of this space arise, staff will bring this back to Council for consideration. 4.0 CONCURRENCE: Not applicable CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: George Acorn, Facilities Manager 12 -2 Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law#: Report#: CLD- 002 -12 File #: ANIMAL SERVICES QUARTERLY REPORT — OCTOBER — DECEMBER 2011 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD- 002 -12 be received, and 2. THAT a copy of report CLD- 002 -12 be forwarded to the Animal Alliance of Canada. Submitted by PLB /CAG Reviewed by: Pa ti . Ba e Municipal Clerk Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 13 -1 REPORT NO.: CLD- 002 -12 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND Animal Services activities are report to Council on a quarterly basis. The attachment to this report summarizes the activities and revenues pertaining to Animal Services for the months October to December, 2011, as recorded by staff as at the time this report was prepared. 2. COMMENTS As was previously reported in the Animal Services third quarter report, we continued to experience an unusually high degree of staff absenteeism due to medical issues during this final quarter, and as such, we have been required to reduce our hours of operation. Operating at a skeletal staff compliment over this time period continued our reduction in service level standards over the same quarter in 2010, which is reflected in our year- end statistics. We have returned to our full compliment in January 2011 and therefore our service levels should return to normal. 3. CONCURRENCE - Not applicable. 4. CONCLUSION Animal Services continues to strive to maintain service levels for the residents of Clarington. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Anne Greentree, Deputy Clerk Attachments: Attachment 1: Quarterly & Year -end Statistics Interested Parties: Ms. Liz White, Animal Alliance of Canada 13 -2 Attachment 1 4th Quarter & YTD Statistics 2011 Dispatch Summary Issue Types Total By GIL Code 4th P _ - Description P o t 1 1 1 2011 1 1 100 -19- 190 - 30705 - 6400 - Animal Service 19 1030.00 29 $1,635.00 97 4985.00 127 $6,610.00 Impound /Surrender Fee 100 -19- 190 - 30715 -6401 — Animal Trap Rentals 0 0 3 $38.08 6 104.72 5 $57.12 100 -00- 000 - 00000 -6506 —Cash Over /Short 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 $(98.02) Account 100 -21- 000 - 00000 -6506 — Finance Charges 0 0 0 0 1 25.00 0 0 after NSF 100 -19- 130 - 30641 -6400 — Licences Paid after 0 0 0 0 0 0 NSF 0 0 100 -19- 190 - 00000 -7162 — Vet Services — 0 0 0 0 1 73.11 3 $374.53 Repayment for Expenses 100-19-190-00000-7180 —Spay /Neuter Rebate 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 $50.00 100 -19- 190 - 30720 - 6400 - Disposal of Animals 3 293.00 3 $280.00 11 974.00 21 $1,374.65 100 -19- 190 - 35525 -6500 - Dog /Cat Licences 135 8353.50 588 $12,681.00 1 4363 106562.00 F5145 T$115,595.00 523 -00- 000 - 00000 -6760 -.Donations 20 1277.00 9 $954.00 60 3660.64 34 $4,249.00 100 -00- 000 - 02033 -2003 - GST 0 0 1 $1.50 0 0 101 $470.03 100 -19- 130 - 35520 -6500 — Other Licences - 0 0 0 0 12 1300.00 131 $1,493.24 Kennel 100 -00- 000 - 02034 -2003 — PST /HST 73 981.32 63 $671.40 186 2413.42 98 $739.77 100 -19- 190 -30710 -6400 - Sale of Animals 70 7051.77 58 $4,876.06 169 16706.84 212 $19,389.56 100 -19- 00000 -7250 — Commissions Expense 13 326.00 31 1164.00 Totals 333 19312.59 754 $21,137.04 1 4937 137968.73 1 5881 $150,304.88 13 -3 Shelter Statistics - Ou Adopl Adopt Adopt Adopt Adopt Adopt Bite C DOA DOA• Eutha Eutha Eutha Intern Rectal Reder Relea Stolen Transf Unass Unass WildlifE Other Total Attachment 1 4th Quarter & YTD Statistics 2011 by Animal Type .,d 6 5 8 j 13 -�- 0 0 - -.0 0 —Y° 32 3 44 - 29 -� 2° °�i I� 5 2� _ -0� I ° -� T• 1._- 91 10 1 471 :d Offsite- p 0 1 01 0 �I -_ -- _ :d Offsite(Altered) O _ -0 j 0 3 I OT 0 i 01 - -� 0, - -- —� - 3 1; 21 j 27 42 ;d Offsite(Unaltered) 0 1 0 0, 5 0 0 ! 0 6[ _ 6 11 22 ;d Unaltered - -- - -- ! 3 r- - I 41 0 18 _— i 0 0[ - _� '- 0 _ I �...__ 25 I 21 1 57 v- -J . _ 74 uarantine (Home) 0 0 0 0 0 u I I 0- 0 �- 01 0- 1 -- - - -- 0�- 0 -- 10 -- - - OT` 0 -0 __ -_ j - ° i 4� 1_ 34 — --- 1 Final Disposition 0 0 0 0 0` 0 0 _----- -1 -- 0 O I 2 _.44.� 3 iasia In Field O I O I 01 0[ 01 0' 0� 0; 1 f 1' 0 51 71 - 1 25'i - sized b Offsite Vet 0 0 O i 01 _ _ 0; 01 sized y 0 0 - - - - -� 2 0 -- 0 1 0 I 0 2 1 3 14 16 j--- 0 0 0 0 0- T O — 0 0 -_- 01 - 0 0! ned 27 0 F 3 ] 01 01 01 01 301 41�- 1551 1691 __-._ iption (Offsite) - -- -- - - -- -- 0 -� 0 u0 �- - - �- _ { - - - - ed -- __ 0[ p 0 r - T 2 f -- - 3 r - -- -. 0 l __ OT - - --- 5 r -- - -- o 8-1 - - I 1 I - - -- - -- sr Out 3 ! 2 -- f 4 3 0 r O [ - - -0 12 -- 2 t_ 37 21 sted Death __._ - j- 0 _- -__ -_� 0 0 ^:..= _j -_.0 r 0 of f 0! 0 1' 3 I Y 10i sted Death - In Foster - -- —_ —_T_ 0 -- 0 0 0 0 �' 0 I _.'�Q 0 0' 01 01 �0 - -0 r Released 01- -- - -0_;_ O iO - 1 o � o fI_� I 1.. o- �---- _- �.o�o I - ° - - - °! - - -- +--- - - - - -- ° 1 OT _--1 — 0 l 0; 0, 01 0 r - -- -- O T I - -- 0 i 42 -- 11 — - 37 �- - 44 -- 03 -� 0 0 - - 134 1191 4491" 49 517 Note: due to staffing constraints some of the third quarter entries were entered during the fourth quarter. 13 -4 Attachment 1 4th Quarter & YTD Statistics 2011 Shelter Statistics - Identification Comparison nml f4. i utter 2A ?#hurter— Z�1�_YTp iYTp peg Sty a . �� 3tra"f� #�I fatray Stray 'Tta Tta! ; Tot'1 a (�41t1 fDji �No >ID!),W3th'= {alt s. 24111 2t1�1� 0 119 j�Le_. 0 27 40 41 0 t: Animals cY Number of Days 0 4352 1154 2460 0 346 0 8312 rC N Average 0 161 28 60 0 31 0 Number of 0 34 45 27 0 8 0 114 Animals �a o Total Length of Stay 13 -5 m 11 0 119 Number of 0 27 40 41 0 t: Animals cY Number of Days 0 4352 1154 2460 0 346 0 8312 rC N Average 0 161 28 60 0 31 0 Number of 0 34 45 27 0 8 0 114 Animals �a o Number of,Days 0 4549 148 2448 0 75 0 7220 s r' v N Average 0 133 3 90 0 9 0 Number of 1 129 167 87 0 17 0 401 Animals Number of Days 0 16572 1963 4848 0 367 0 23750 Average 0 128 11 55 0 21 0 Number of 0 139 205 86 0 25 1 456 Animals CD a c Number of Days 0 12898 1475 6473 0 480 31 21357 N Avera e 0 92 7 75 0 19 31 13 -5 w I rn Shelter Statistics - Incoming (including transfers) 4th Quarter 2011 Attachment 1 4th Quarter & YTD Statistics 2011 YTD 2011 .. ,0 Dog TA— $6 i -- 0 l �0 1 0 I 8 0 f � I 0 74 I 0 !T 0 1 1717 PuPPY 3 O j p p i p p T " I 2 o U r - ! Cat 1 11 j 0 01 28 ;Kitten 1 ' 0 OI 3j 0 1 0 ! .1 _! 0 � 1 OE I 12 I 01 9 0 � _ 01 841 0� 0 ! 137 20 68 Oj 0 ! 102 ! f ^Mamma --�—-- 0 f— —0 —__...0 `O --- O —�0� 0_.F 0.�__.. _-� -- —�--_..1 -4.0_ —.......OT 1 I 01 1 I I I q ! ;Total 101 I 0 1 i 32 E 1 i 1 - 2 1 30 91 221 2291 0 1 - 0 429 Attachment 1 4th Quarter & YTD Statistics 2011 4th Quarter 2010 Dog_. _..._._i _ 21 ` 0 :puppy^ 4 0 0 0 _= 91 _ Z r �— 0 f i 22 = - - -- ----o ---- 0 [ 45 I 00 I Puppy -I 0 0^ 0' 0 0 5 3 0 vi 8 Cat 3 I_ I 1 ` I " I 9 2 OT _ � 01 Kitten 1 �" " 1 0 0 r 13 1 _ .11 0 � 01 181 18 1 Total _� 25� 3! I �4 4 ' I �� 5? 3I 1 ��- � 01 0 1 — - --- -92.1 YTD 2010 miffing Dog 100 2 1 9 0 90 3 0 0 205 :puppy^ 4 0 0 0 _= 91 11 1 10 0 0 34 Cat ^, -23� 31T 4 11 - -0 -- 98 2 29 07 165 Kitten 11 31 23 42- 36 I 88r -- 7o--- 0 �_—_OT____ I _ 3 Bird (wildlife) 0 1 0 ----F- 0 1- 0�� - - - - -0 f - -0� 01 1 Mammal OT4.1 —._�� 0�� —_ o _ =J FN_� 41 Rabbit` - 0j OF 0�----- -0Ij- j. 0I 10 �� 1 -�- Total - -- _ -� 128 F 411 61 22 I -_ -- - 45 I 2881 �r -13 r) �0I 1 ° I � .-_. - -0 _54 Animal Bite /Attack & OTR Summary Detail 4th Quarter 2011 4th Quarter 2010 YTD 2011 YTD 2010 Dog Bites Reported 9 1 20 11 Dog Attacks Reported 11 2 29 23 OTRs Issued 9 2 23 21 3 -7 Clarington MUNICIPAL REPORT CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: CLD- 003 -12 File #: Subiect: LOCAL LOOK BACK PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD- 003 -12 be received; 2. THAT the Municipality of Clarington endorse the Local Look Back Project in principle only; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in CLD- 003 -12 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by: ie Municipal Clerk Olt Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 13 -8 REPORT NO.: CLD- 003 -12 1. BACKGROUND PAGE 2 At the Council meeting of December 19, 2011, Council referred correspondence and a delegation from Rosemary McConkey regarding the Local Look Back Project to staff to report back in January 2012. The Local Look Back Project is being advertised as an opportunity for young people to connect with members of their municipal government and share a local look back at how their communities have evolved. The competition would be open to grade 7 and 8 students in Durham Region, who would be invited to write a 500 word essay /speech describing the origins of their school and what their community was like at the time their school was built. The essay submission deadline would be May 1, 2012. 2. MUNICIPAL INVOLVEMENT At the time of Ms. McConkey's first contact with the Municipality, her requet to Members of Council was to meet with the selected students and their families in Clarington Council Chambers sometime in May, at a date and time Council decides, and listen to their speeches and provide the winning student with an award (which could be perhaps a one -year free family members to a Clarington community centre). On January 5, 2012, Ms. McConkey forwarded an email outlining the following specific request of Council 1. A commitment.to host a Clarington Local Look Back event finale in Clarington Council Chambers sometime in May, 2012; 2. Name the date and time in May decided on by Council members for the Clarington Local Look Back event finale and post it on the Municipality's website with details about the essay /speech competition; 3. Name one or two Council members as the 'point to' person(s) for the Clarington Local Look Back project who will respond to media questions /interviews and emcee the event finale; 4. Decide how many Members of Council will be involved in the Clarington Local Look Back event finale in May, i.e. whether all Members of Council will be participating, or a minimum of three Council members, who will listen to and help adjudicate the student speeches; 5. Decide on the number of student speeches to be presented in total; 6. Prepare and issue a predetermined number of `Clarington Certificates of Participation' to present to representatives of the top participating schools at the May event; 13 -9 REPORT NO.: CLD- 003 -12 PAGE 3 7. Determine the prize to be awarded to the student who has presented the best essay /speech overall (example: a one year family membership at one of Clarington's community centres). Prizes will vary between Durham municipalities. Each municipality will promote the prize it will be awarding the competition winner on its website and in any media releases and flyers distributed to the schools and /or libraries. The decision about naming the winner will be reserved, and the winner's name will be made public a short time following the May event finale (and possibly be invited to repeat their speech to Durham Region Council in June), although the top participating schools may be recognized at the May event finale as in paragraph 6 above (that is, those schools that submitted the greatest number of high quality essays). Selection of the overall winning student will be made by a minimum of three Members of Council who listened to the speeches and any other adjudicator(s) Council may want to involve in the judging. 8. After the May.1 st submission deadline, issue formal invitations with RSVP requests to the May event finale in Clarington's Council Chambers to the students who have been selected to represent their school and include invitations to the selected student's families, teachers and principal, local school board superintendents /trustees as well as issue a Media Release in advance; 9. Encourage any interested local heritage /library/community groups to assist in whatever capacity Clarington Council may consider beneficial, ie, displays of local heritage memorabilia and /or offering refreshments; and 10. Design and print flyers that incorporate Clarington's logo and other information specific to Clarington (such as the prize being awarded, the Municipality's address and event finale date) into the standard flyer format. 3. PROJECT SUPPORT In order to garner support for her project, Ms. McConkey has contacted each of the area municipalities and each school board. As of the writing of this report, the following are the responses received: City of Oshawa — Endorsed in principle only Town of Whitby — The Operations Committee referred the request to staff for review. Committee had concerns with the time commitment for staff and Council, and felt that the speeches should be at the schools and it should be a school driven process. 13 -10 REPORT NO.: CLD- 003 -12 PAGE 4 Town of Ajax — Staff are recommending that the Town provide limited support for this year only, as follows: Having at least three Council members-attend an evening of speeches that will last no more than two hours, presenting participation certificates and selecting a winner. If sufficient Council members are unable to volunteer, a suitable panel will be made up of members of the Heritage Advisory Committee, prominent citizens familiar with the Town's history, etc.; 2. The Town will modify the flyer to make it Ajax- specific and provide 150 copies for distribution to the schools and posted in Town and other public facilities, on their website, etc.; 3. The Town will compile an invite list and send out invites for the final speaking event; and 4. The Town will determine an appropriate prize for the winner. City of Pickering — Council asked to have correspondence brought back with detailed information on how the project would work. The correspondence will be presented at the January 23`d meeting. Township of Uxbridge Hoping that Ms. McConkey will make a deputation regarding the project. Township of Brock — Council supports the concept by way of hosting the awards but Ms. McConkey's requests are to be referred back to her for implementation. Region of Durham — Rosemary McConkey appeared as a delegation at the Health & Social Services Committee meeting of November 24, 2011 and then to the December 14, 2011 Regional Council meeting. Questions were asked of the delegation, but no further action was taken. Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board — Forwarding the information to the individual schools and letting each school decide if they wish to take part. Peterborough Victoria Northumberland Clarington Catholic District School Board — Will not be participating in the project. Durham District School Board — Support of the project as it has a literacy focus. Durham Catholic District School Board — Support of the project, ie, circulating flyers through their courier system. 4. CONCURRENCE - Not applicable 13 -11 REPORT NO.: CLD- 003 -12 5. CONCLUSION PAGE 5 Given the amount of time and resources required to implement the project which is not one of the Municipality's core functions, the fact that no funds have been allocated in the 2012 budget and the fact that the school boards with jurisdiction within the Municipality (the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board and the Peterborough Victoria Northumberland Clarington Catholic District School Board) have not fully endorsed the project, it is recommended that the Municipality of Clarington support the project in principle, but not participate in the project this year. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Patti Barrie, Municipal Clerk List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Rosemary McConkey 13 -12 Clarftwn REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: COD - 002 -12 File #: Subiect: PROCESS FOLLOWED FOR SURVEYS: STRATEGIC PLAN & MEDIA HABITS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report COD - 002 -12 be received for information; and 2. . THAT all interested parties listed in Report COD - 002 -12 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: ze a Director of Corporate Services MM /gj Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 14 -1 REPORT NO.: COD - 002 -12 1. BACKGROUND PAGE 2 At the December 5 2011 meeting Council passed the following resolution: "THAT Correspondence Item D -2 from Jim Richards and the delegation of Ron Collis, be referred to staff for a report outlining details of the process followed for the undertaking of the Strategic Plan Survey and the Media Habits Survey, if they were the sole sourced or tendered and the associated costs." 2. INFORMATION REQUESTED: The following questions were raised in the correspondence received from Mr. Richards, and /or in his delegation to Council: 1. What was the stated purpose of each of these polls? 2. What were the final results of these polls? 3. Will these findings be acted upon? 4. How much money was spent on each of these polls? 5. What budget paid for these polls? 6. Did Council as a whole vote to source these polls? 7. Did the contracts go out for bids, or were they single- sourced? 8. Who made that decision? 9. Who authorized these expenditures? 10. Did the Mayor declare a conflict? 3. RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS: A. STRATEGIC PLAN SURVEY 1. The purpose of the Strategic Plan survey was outlined and approved by report CAO- 002 -11 Municipality of Clarington — Strategic Plan (attachment #1), and followed up with the status of the draft strategic plan in CAO- 003 -11 Municipality of Clarington — Draft Strategic Plan (attachment #2). Report CAO- 002 -11 notes: "A public opinion survey company will be engaged to develop a series of questions and to seek the views and opinions from these external stakeholders." 2. The results of the polls were referenced in the CAD's final report which adopted the Strategic Plan, CAO- 004 -11 Municipality of Clarington — Final Draft Strategic Plan (attachment #3). That report identified that the citizen survey results from Collis & Reed Research was helpful in laying the foundation in the formulation of the framework of the Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan was attached to the report and it was approved by Council on June 20, 2011. 3. The findings of the survey formed the basis of the Strategic Plan, approved by Council on June 20, 2011. The specific recommendations contained within the plan and are subject to Council approval through the annual budget exercise, or by resolution of Council on an individual basis. 14 -2 REPORT NO.: COD - 002 -12 PAGE 3 4. The Strategic Plan survey estimated cost was approved in CAO- 002 -11 at approximately $15- 20,000. The final cost of this survey was $7,000 plus HST. 5. Report CAO- 002 -11 section 6, identified the funding source as the Professional Fee Reserve Account. Also the CAO verbally advised Council in the discussion on report CAO- 002 -11, that the Professional Fees Reserve Account would fund the cost identified in the report. 6. Council approved the undertaking of the survey in approval of CAO- 002 -11, and endorsed the undertaking and results in subsequent reports CAO- 003 -11 and CAO- 004 -11. 7. The survey did not require competitive bids. The Purchasing By -law provides the following related to Consulting and Professional Services: Section 73 "Where it is estimated that the Cost of Consulting and Professional Services will be less than $30,000 and funds are allocated in the approved budget, the Department may obtain the services, provided that if the requested services are engineering or related services referred to in the AECOM agreement, the Director of Engineering Services shall be consulted before the services are purchased." Section 74 "Where it is estimated that the Cost of Consulting and Professional Services will be more than $30,000, and funds are allocated in the approved budget, the Purchasing Manager shall issue an RFP and, in consultation with the Department Head, shall submit a report to Committee providing a list of Bid amounts received with a recommendation for award." 8. The decision to contract with Collis -Reed was made by the CAO after consideration of the local expertise and community knowledge, as permitted under the Purchasing By -law, and approved by Council through CAO- 002 -11. 9. The expenditures were authorized with the approval of CAO- 002 -11 which specified the funding source as the Professional Fee Reserve Account. 10. The Mayor's pecuniary interest with respect to Report CAO- 002 -11 was noted in the January 24 GPA minutes as follows: Mayor Foster declared a pecuniary interest with respect to Report CAO- 002-11 as he has a close personal relationship with a principal of one of the companies which may be considered to contract for work on the Plan. Mayor Foster left the room and did not participate in discussions and voting on this matter. Deputy Mayor Novak chaired this portion of the agenda. Resolution #GPA- 049 -11 Moved by Councillor Traill, seconded by Councillor Woo That Report CAO- 002 -11 be received; and That Council endorse the Strategic Planning Process as provided for in Report CAO- 002 -11. At the January 31 Council meeting, it was noted as follows: Mayor Foster stated a pecuniary interest with respect to Item #14 of Report #1 as he has a close personal relationship with a principal of one of the companies which may be considered to contract for work on the 14 -3 REPORT NO.: COD - 002 -12 PAGE 4 Strategic Plan and left the Council Chambers during discussion and voting on this item. Deputy Mayor Novak chaired this portion of the meeting. Item #14 Resolution #C- 059 -11 Moved by Councillor Woo, seconded by Councillor Hooper That Report CAO- 002 -11 be received; and That the Strategic Planning Process as provided for in Report CAO -002- 11 be endorsed. MITROMMI-11 B. MEDIA HABITS SURVEY The purpose of the Media Habits survey was to gain insight as to where Clarington residents get their news. This is useful in determining how municipal advertising dollars are spent as well as identifying the most reliable method of communicating with our target audience (residents, businesses, tourists, etc.).. 2. The survey results are still being analyzed although preliminary results suggest : • Men watch television slightly less than women • People who are 51 years of age and older still get their news by reading newspapers • People who are 50 years of age and younger get their news via the internet • Majority of people who indicated they listened to the radio did so between 5:00 to 9:00 AM. 3. The final results and conclusions from the survey will be used in the developing and formulating the corporate communications strategy and plan that is underway, as one of the goals identified in the Strategic Priority: Connecting Clarington. 4. The cost of the Media Habits survey was $3,800 plus HST and approximately $500 for promotion of the survey opportunity, through post cards and advertisement. 5. The Communications & Tourism budget under Corporate Services, paid for the survey; Design account for the survey; Printing account for the post card promotion of the survey; and Advertising account for the advertising and promotion. 6. In approval of the Strategic Plan through report CAO- 004 -11 Council as a whole endorsed the principle of a survey as identified under the Connecting Clarington goal to improve communication (page 10 of the Strategic Plan). 14 -4 REPORT NO.: COD- 002 -12 PAGE 5 7. As noted under item 7 above, the survey did not require competitive bids in accordance with the provisions of the Purchasing By -law. 8. Consistent with practice and the Purchasing By -law provisions, the decision to contract Collis -Reed was made by the Manager of Communications & Tourism after consideration of the community data /intelligence residing with the local firm. 9. The authorization was within the approval authority of the Manger of Communications & Tourism. 10. The Mayor was not involved in the decision of service provider for the Media Habits survey. 4. CONCURRENCE - Not applicable 5. CONCLUSION The surveys above were undertaken in accordance with Municipal practice, budget, and policy, with approvals by Council as appropriate. It is recommended that the report be received for information. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: x Promoting economic development x Maintaining financial stability x Connecting Clarington x Promoting green initiatives x Investing in infrastructure x Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Marie Marano, Director of Corporate Services Attachments: Attachment 1 - Report CAO- 002 -11 Municipality of Clarington — Strategic Plan Attachment 2 - Report CAO- 003 -11 Municipality of Clarington — Draft Strategic Plan Attachment 3 - Report CAO- 004 -11 Municipality of Clarington — Final Draft Strategic Plan 14 -5 REPORT NO.: COD - 002 -12 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's. decision: Jim Richards, Ron Collis, Collis -Reed 14 -6 PAGE 6 II • Lead :ng the Way ATTACHMENT #1 REPORT CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Meeting: GPA Date: January 24, 2011 Resolution #: Report #: CAO -002 -11 File#: Subiect: MUNICIPALITY OF. CLARINGTON . STRATEGIC PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS: 1" That Report CAO- 002 -11 be received; and By -law#: N/A 2. That Council endorse the Strategic Planning Process as provided for in Report CAO- 002 -11. (� Submitted by: -~- ,- Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0720 14 -7 REPORT NO.: CAO- 002 -11 REPORT: 1. What is Strategic Planning? PAGE 2 Strategic planning is essentially the process of determining a municipality's long term vision and goals, which lay the foundation. for the development of an action plan to implement these goals. 2. Why do a Strategic Plan? There are many, reasons for developing such a Plan. The reasons that are more relevant to local government include: a) Developing a collective vision — particularly critical as we expect Clarington to continue to grow b) Planning for the Future — our future will involve changes and a strategic planning process can identify both the internal and external forces influencing changes c) Maximizing resources — as a management tool, a strategic plan provides a useful framework to enable effective resource deployment d) Establishing a framework for other plans — the Strategic plan will be the umbrella document that guides the development of other plans such as the Official Plan, community plans, capital work plan, departmental master plan, etc. e) Communicating priorities — citizens benefit from understanding the municipality's priorities and decisions as articulated through its vision and goals 3. What was the past experience of Strategic Planning in Clarington? a) The first Strategic /Business Plan for Clarington was initiated and completed shortly after the new Council was elected in 2001. Subsequent Plans were developed coinciding with every new term of council in 2004- and in 2007. b) In the development of each of the past three strategic/Business plans, the planning process as well as the facilitation was led by the GAO. The process was entirely internal and the Plan was jointly developed by Council members and senior management staff. 4. What are the basic steps involved in developing 'a new Strategic Plan for the Municipality? The following six step process is generally used by local government in the planning process involved in the development of a Municipal Strategic Plan. The process is streamlined with emphasis on producing the Plan in a: relatively short time frame. The six steps are: Step 1 Obtain input from citizens Step 2 Develop a vision and a mission statement 14 -8 REPORT NO.: CAO -002 -11 Step 3 Develop strategic goals and objectives Step 4 Develop strategic initiatives Step 5 Develop an action plan to implement the strategic initiatives Step 6 Develop a follow up system to track and /or measure performance PAGE 3 5. Who would be involved in the development of the strategic planning exercise, and what is the time frame related to each step? Step 1 — Obtain Input from the Citizens This involves seeking input from the citizens. A public opinion survey company will be engaged to develop a series of questions, and to seek the views and opinions from these external stakeholders. The results will be analyzed,and will serve as valuable information prior to the commencement of the next step. This is a critical step, without which the subsequent works on the strategic plan could run the risk of a total or partial disconnect with the views of the citizens. Estimated timeline: Completion by early March Steps 2 — 4 All members of council, CAO and department heads will devote at least one full day brainstorming session to develop the Strategic Plan. The session will be facilitated by an external facilitator who will also be charged with the responsibility of gathering, synthesizing the information developed through the brainstorming session and to develop the mission statement, goals and strategic initiatives. Estimated timeline: Session is scheduled for March 10th, 2011 at the Courtice Community Complex. The draft Strategic Plan will be completed within four (4) weeks of the session. Steps 5 - 6 The same facilitator will lead the department heads to draft an Action Plan in order to implement the proposed strategic initiatives. This involves a one day session to be held on April 13, 2011.. Estimated timeline: The Strategic Plan and accompanying Action Plan will be submitted to Council by end of April, 2011. 14 -9 REPORT NO.: CAO- 002 -11 6. What is the cost of developing the Strategic Plan? PAGE 4 The cost of the citizen survey, facilitation and completion of the Plan will be approximately $15- 20,000. As this is a one -time cost, funds will be drawn from the Professional Fee Reserve Account and therefore would not affect the annual operating budget. Conclusion The CAO will coordinate the works of all those involved and ensure that the Strategic Plan will be completed in a timely fashion. 14 -10 ATTACHMENT #2 'REPORT L~Wax CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Meeting: SPECIAL GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION Date: May 25, 2011 Report M CAO -003 -11 Resolution #: C PA "3 ?6 -1 r File #: By -law#: NIA Subject: MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON r- DRAFT STRATEGIC PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That Report CAO -003 -11 be received; and 2. That the Draft Strategic Plan be approved subject to any changes that may be made by the Committee. Submitted by.CJ Franklin Wu, M.A.O.M Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (906)623 -3379 F (906)623 -0720 14 -11 REPORT NO.: CAO- 003 -11 REPORT: PAGE 2 1. On February 1, 2011, Council approved proceeding with the preparation of a Strategic Plan. As part of the process, Council and Senior Staff attended a brainstorming session on March 10, 2011. With the assistance of a professional facilitator, the group was able to develop a draft mission statement and identify several priorities. 2. in accordance to the process established in Report CAO -002 -11, the facilitator led the Department Heads to elaborate on the priorities which consist of developing a set of objectives related to each priority. Strategies and /or actions were identified to implement each objective. The aforementioned works took two full days on April 13th, 2011 and May 4t", 2011. 3. The result was the completion of a draft document with sufficient details suitable for review and further discussion by Council Members. A copy of the draft document was provided to Members of Council earlier under separate cover. Our May 25th meeting will be facilitated by Mr. Peter Spratt. , 4. Subject to any change that Members of Council may desire and agree to by the majority of Council Members, Mr. Spratt will incorporate the changes to produce the final document for Council's approval. 14 -12 ATTACHMENT #3 • Leadang the Way REPORT CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION Date: ,tune 13, 2011 Resolution #: dPAM �Y37 -11 By -law#: NIA Report M CAO- 004 -11 File#: Subject: MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON - FINAL DRAFT STRATEGIC PLAN' RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That Report CAO -004 -11 be received; , 2. That the Final Draft of the Strategic Plan be approved; and 3. That the CAO provide an annual status report on the progress of the implementation of the Strategic Plan commencing in mid 20.12. Submitted b c) tom. Y Franklin Wu, M.A.O.M. Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0720 14 -13 REPORT NO.: CAO -004 -11 REPORT: 1. Background PAGE 2 1.1 On February 1, 2011, Council approved proceeding with the preparation of a Strategic Plan and endorsed a process leading to the completion of the Plan. The intent of this initiative is to provide a- road map to guide the b.usiness decisions of the Municipality for the duration of the present term of Council. 1.2 The development of the Strategic Plan includes two key components.'-The first component involved engaging Collis and Reed Research to conduct a citizen survey. The results were helpful in laying the foundation in the formulation of the framework of the Strategic Plan. 1.3 The second component involved a series of four separate full day workshops facilitated by Mr. Peter Spratt of ROGG Consultant. The first workshop was attended by all members of council and senior staff. At the conclusion of the workshop, the participants agreed on the Vision of the Plan, developed a draft Mission Statement, and most important of all, identified several key initiatives: 1.4 Senior Staff then attended two workshops to develop the goals for each initiative as well as identify the strategic actions that are necessary to implement the goals. As economic development was identified as the top initiative, the Executive Director of the Clarington Board of Trade was invited to the workshop. 1.5 The fourth and last workshop was held on May 25 when the participants of the first workshop reassembled. The purpose was to review the details of all the strategic actions drafted by the senior staff. The facilitator guided everyone through the review. process and incorporated the changes suggested by the group. The result is the Final Draft which is appended to this report. 14 -14 REPORT NO.: CAO- 004 -11 2. Comments PAGE 3 2.1 A significant amount of time and effort has gone into the preparation of the Strategic Plan. Judging by the active participation by all, it was a very positive experience as evidenced by the collaboration and frank discussion at the workshops. 2.2 Now that we know what we desire to do, the next step. would involve the implementation of the various strategic actions as per the timeline identified. This next, step represents a significant challenge to the Municipality as it would ultimately test the commitment and willingness to make the Plan work. 2.3 A Strategic Plan is not a static document. It must be reviewed regularly and be flexible to reflect those unforeseen circumstances that may hamper its implementation. In this regard, it is suggested that the Plan be reviewed annually through a progress or status report so that changes to the strategic actions can be made if necessary. 3. Rolling Out the Plan 3.1 The appended Final Draft contains the information that are necessary for Council to approve, but is not quite ready for publication. The content of the Final Draft would need to be type set, properly formatted, and be printed professionally. Our staff in the Communication and Marketing Division will undertake this task. Our goal is to have the Plan printed and roll it out around mid -July. 14 -15 .p I rn 7W 0 Ciffi Leading the Way COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN: 2011 - 2014 RQCG global eomultants.- .local "penenr.r- Final Draft June 3, 2011 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 Introduction: The Municipality of Clarington has embarked upon the development of a Community Strategic Plan (CSP). The purpose of this plan is to provide strategic direction and a road map for Council and Staff in setting and addressing Clarington's priorities over the next four years and beyond. Process '1. Collis & Reed Research Inc. gathered input on priorities for Clarington through community consultation conducted in February 2011, (separate report). 2. Members of Council and Senior Staff were interviewed to identify expectations and confirm key deliverables within the CSP, (March 1 -8, 2011) 3. Workshop #1: Council & Senior Staff reviewed and modified Clarington's current Mission, Vision, and reached consensus on Strategic Priorities, (March 10, 2011) 4. Workshop #2: Senior Staff identified Goals in alignment with the Strategic Priorities, (April 13, 2011) 5. Workshop #3: Senior Staff developed Strategies to address the Goals, (May 4, 2011) 6. Workshop #4: Council & Senior Staff reached consensus on the Mission, and reviewed and modified the draft Plan of Action: Goals, Measures & Strategies; (May 25, 2011) ROCG� - 2 - j MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON co COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 Mission... our primary, daily focus, what the community expects of us. "Committed to leadership, respect, and the delivery of quality services" (Reached by consensus, May 25, 2019) Vision ...identifying our hopes and dreams for the future of our community. "Building a sustainable, creative, caring community" (Reached by consensus, March 10, 2011) Guiding Principles... how we will conduct business, principles for decision- making Guiding principles tend to be unique to different departments. Agreement was reached that individual departments will continue to establish their own guiding principles for purposes of decision - making. (Existing practice confirmed by consensus, March 10, 2011) ROCG -3- MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 Strategic Priorities... where we need to focus our energy and resources FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 Council and Senior Staff identified the following emerging themes as priorities for the next four years and beyond. R( Promoting economic development Ef Maintaining financial stability Q Connecting Clarington Q Promoting green initiatives Q Investing in infrastructure 0 Showcasing our community Plan of Action ... how we will address these priorities Goals, measures & strategies C:�p ROCG� -4- 4I MUNICIPALITY OF CLARI.NGTON oN COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 Strategic Priority: Promote Economic Development Goals -, -d 1. Expedite business / industrial park development Serviced land inventory • Building permits: number and square footage. Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 1.1 Collaborate with Region to expedite servicing of Engineering Future budget implications: (e.g. Ongoing industrial parks, including the science & technology servicing study) park and the energy park Political champions: Council & partners in senior level government 1.2 Investigate alternative methods of- financing Finance Not identified at this time 2011 services in industrial parks 1.3 Complete EA study for Baseline Road Engineering Capital budget 2012 1.4 Encourage public /private partnerships to front -end Municipality Not identified at this time Ongoing the costs -of servicing strategically selected parcels CBOT of land to relieve the pressure on the inventory of shovel -ready sites 1.5 Ease processing of industrial development Planning Not identified at this time Ongoing applications ROCG -5- MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 Strategic Priority: Promote Economic Development Goals 2. Attract new businesses and retain existing businesses to . Property assessment: proportion residential vs non - improve / increase non - residential assessment growth and residential (ratio, percent) employment opportunities • Number of jobs created • Consultation • Regular progress reporting by CBOT Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 2.1 Create a small business advisory committee to CBOT Not identified at this time 2011 focus on small'business development 2.2 Develop a handbook to support small business Planning Not identified at this time 2011 development 2.3 Enhance pre - consultation process to be more Planning Not identified at this time 2011 - effective in communicating and educating businesses in development requirements 2.4 Ensure positive messaging is reaching our Municipality Not identified at this time 2011 stakeholders 2.5 Undertake a review of municipal processes and Planning Additional staff & operating budget 2012 regulations to identify opportunities to streamline development application process 2.6 Explore the feasibility of a business development CAO Additional staff 2013 facilitator position to assist businesses in working through the municipality's processes 2.7 Continue the relationship with the CBOT for the Municipality Not identified at this time Ongoing provision of economic development services on behalf of the Municipality 4 1 - ROCG - 6 - N "` .p I N N MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 2.8 Continue to investigate incentives for new Finance Not identified at this time Ongoing development 2.9 Enhance and expand use of community CBOT & Not identified at this time Ongoing ambassadors to promote economic development Municipality 2.10 Explore BIA initiatives for downtown Municipality Project dependent Ongoing redevelopment such as community improvement plans 2.11 Improve appearance of existing industrial areas Municipality Project dependent Ongoing ROCG -7- MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 Strategic • Stability Goals -• 1. Achieve tax rate stability Annual tax rate fluctuation Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility ''Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 1.1 Build awareness around reasonable expectations to Municipality Not identified at this time Ongoing match service level wishes 1.2 Examine the feasibility to establish a 'policy limiting Finance Not identified at this time 2012 rate variances 1.3 Define and establish service levels by category and All Departments 2012 function (e.g. fire fighting services, snow removal services, etc.) 1.4 Establish policies, procedures and rationalization for Finance Additional staff 2013 changes to levels of services -" ROCG� - $ - N W MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FwA, nRAPr It iniF gni l -g •" • Goals -• 2. Expand and consolidate asset replacement strategy • Completion of an Asset Condition Assessment • Prioritized plan of replacement Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? When? 2.1 Complete corporate wide building condition survey; All Departments Operating budget (technology) Ongoing include age, replacement cost, expected operational hen? 3.1 Formalize borrowing practices in policy Finance life span, risk assessment 2011 3.2 Develop funding guidelines for replenishing reserve Finance 2.2 Prioritize corporate wide asset inventory Finance Not identified at this time 2012 replacement 2.3 Provide adequate funding for asset replacement; Council Capital & operating budgets 2013 annual funding allocation -: .. Goals - -. 3. Develop policies for long -term financial health Development of two policies /guidelines: 1. Reserve funds management 2. Debt management Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 3.1 Formalize borrowing practices in policy Finance Not identified at this time 2011 3.2 Develop funding guidelines for replenishing reserve Finance Not identified at this time 2013 funds ROCG -9- MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 1. Improve communication Citizen, business and staff feedback (surveys, cards) • Comments received from blog / website postings Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 1.1 Develop a comprehensive, proactive Corporate Additional staff and /or external 2011 -2013 communication strategy including all forms of Services resources media, technology, and community engagement 1.2 Encourage and support staff in becoming All Departments Not identified at this time Ongoing ambassadors for the Municipality (i.e. re- establish and enhance programs such as High Five and Customer Services Program) 1.3 Conduct regular update of community data. Ensure Corporate Not identified at this time Ongoing data collected and communicated is timely, Services accurate and accessible 1.4 Ensure two -way communication is enhancing Corporate Operating budget 2012 understanding of issues, proposed solutions, and Services accomplishments ROCG� C3'1 4 I P N rn MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 1. Reduce the Municipality's energy consumption Regular reporting • Dedicated resources • # of buildings retrofitted • Energy savings and consumption data Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 1.1 Prioritize and communicate Energy Management Energy Not identified at this time Underway Plan recommendations and suggest implementation Management process Committee 1.2 Develop financing strategy to ensure Finance Project dependent Ongoing recommendations are corporately supported and . implemented 1.3 Develop LEED policy for municipal buildings Energy Not identified at this time 2012 Management Committee ROCG MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 2. Create a culture of `going green' . Citizen survey • Waste diversion • Transit use, including carpooling • Energy .consumption data • LEED certified building permits • Changes to carbon footprint • Number of hybrid / alternative fuel vehicles Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 2.1 Continue Green Committee for Clarington Planning Additional staff resources & operating 2011 -2012 budget 2.2 Develop municipal buildings waste reduction Community Operating budget (green bins) 2011 program Services & Operations 2.3 Develop community participation programs Operations Additional staff resources Ongoing 2.4 Collaborate with Region of Durham climate change CAO Additional staff resources 2011 initiatives 2.5 Involve all staff in development of corporate green CAO Additional staff resources 2013 culture and then encourage promotion by all ROCG -12- v MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON N COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011-2014 FINAI DRAFT- gn11 -• ic f-rionty. investing in infrastructure Goals _• 1. Expand and integrate transportation network Levels of service • Kilometers of trails added • Continuous kilometers of trails Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 1.1 Improve traffic management by updating and Engineering Capital budget 2012 expanding traffic data collection 1.2 Develop a comprehensive transportation master Engineering ' Capital budget 2012 plan that reviews all modes of transportation (i.e. vehicular, cycling, pedestrian) on our roads, sidewalks, and trails (including multi -lane paths) 1.3 Implement transportation master plan Engineering Capital & operating budgets (external 2013 resources) Strategic • • in Infrastructure Goals _• 2. Review existing waterfront land acquisition strategy Project specific metrics: • Tax levy support • Number of properties • Acreage / hectares acquired • Length of shoreline acquired Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 2.1 Review and update current land acquisition Planning Operating budget 2012 strategy, including transition plan L2.2 Explore availability of appropriate funding Finance Operating budget 2012 ROCG -13- MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 Strategic Priority: Goals- -• C 3. Advocate, influence, and lobby senior levels of government Project specific metrics: to invest in infrastructure programs Number of projects / programs awarded • $ Value of projects/ programs awarded Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility I Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 3.1 Promote Provincial investment in Hwy 407 Council Not identified at this time Ongoing extension 3.2 Promote Provincial investment in GO extension Council Not identified at this time Ongoing . 3.3 Promote Provincial investment in Hwy 401 corridor Council Not identified at this time Ongoing and interchange improvements 3.4Advocate for further Provincial & Federal Council Not identified at this time Ongoing infrastructure funding and gas tax funding 3.5 Promote Regional investment in roads, transit, Council Not identified at this time Ongoing sanitary sewer, and municipal water infrastructure ROCG -14- N co �. MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011-2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 • • • in Infrastructure Goals 4. Develop waterfront parks Project specific metrics: • Number of parks developed • Acreage / hectares developed Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 4.1 Build West Beach park Engineering Capital & operating budgets 2011 4.2 Develop comprehensive strategy for park Engineering Capital & operating budgets 2012 implementation, including provisions for funding of new parks 4.3 Develop conceptual plans with public participation Engineering Capital & operating budgets 2013 4.4 Build Bond Head park Engineering Capital & operating budgets 2014 4.5 Pursue P3 and /or senior government funding Engineering Future budget implications Ongoing opportunities for waterfront park development 4.6 Determine future status of dredging Bowmanville Legal Not identified at this time Ongoing Creek ROCG -15- MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: .TUNE 3. 2011 -• • rity: Showcasing Community Goals -• 1. Promote Clarington as a tourism destination . Visitation stats (e.g. $'s spent / revenue) • Web visits / impressions • Brochure consignment Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start ho will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 1.1 Prepare a comprehensive, long -term tourism Corporate Operating budget f community / 2013 marketing strategy / master plan Services business partners 1.2 Continue to promote special events with community Corporate BIAs, community groups, private Ongoing & tourism partners Services & sector donations Operations .� ROCG -��- W MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON C0 COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 N FINAL DRAFT' It INF 7(11 Strategic • rity: Showcasing Community Goals 2. Improve the visual appearance of the Municipality. Measured . Gateway enhancements completed • Complaints received • Ratings from 1St Impressions Program • Number of partnerships (e.g. Pitch -In) • Number of new programs introduced • Citizen surveys Strategies: (How will we achieve these goals ?) 2.1 Improve appearance of all Municipal buildings. Responsibility ho will lead? Operations & Community Additional Resources hat will it take to accomplish this? Capital budget Start When? 2011 Services 2.2 Explore opportunities for boulevard /median beautification and maintenance work with Operations Capital & operating budgets 2012 community partners 2.3 Create gateways for each urban area Engineering Capital & operating budgets Ongoing 2.4 Improve road -side environment through by -law enforcement Clerks Capital & operating budgets Ongoing 2.5 Continue to support and enhance Clarington Blooms Corporate Services Not identified at this time Ongoing 2.6 Explore opportunities to enhance uniform banner Operations Operating budget Ongoing ngoing ROCG -17- MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2011 -2014 FINAL DRAFT: JUNE 3, 2011 ROCG -18- w Goals _d 3. Promote our heritage (historical, cultural, agricultural, etc.) . Publications produced & distributed • Web visits / impressions • Feedback via social media • -Special events • Participation levels Strategies: (How will.we achieve these goals ?) Responsibility Additional Resources Start I will lead? hat will it take to accomplish this? hen? 3.1 Explore possibility of `Buy Local' program for . CBOT Not identified at this time 2011 agricultural produce 3.2 Establish a position on Camp 30 Planning Not identified at this time 2012 3.3 Facilitate all BIAs working together on Clarington - Council / BIA Not identified at this time Ongoing wide initiatives liaison 3.4 Continue to assist local groups to apply for senior- Engineering & Not identified at this time Ongoing . level government grants Operations 3.5 Continue to support and promote cultural initiatives Community Not identified at this time Ongoing (e.g. Doors Open) Services & Corporate Services ROCG -18- w Environment A=COM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Prepared by: AECOM 300—300 Town Centre Boulevard 905 477 8400 tel Markham, ON, Canada L3R 5Z6 905 477 1456 fax www.aecom.com Project Number: 60119359-112956 Date: December, 2011 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Statement of Qualifications and Limitations The attached Report (the "Report") has been prepared by AECOM Canada Ltd. ("Consultant") for the benefit of the client ("Client") in accordance with the agreement between Consultant and Client, including the scope of work detailed therein (the "Agreement"). The information, data, recommendations and conclusions contained in the Report (collectively, the "Information"): • is subject to the scope, schedule, and other constraints and limitations in the Agreement and the qualifications contained in the Report (the "Limitations") • represents Consultant's professional judgement in light of the Limitations and industry standards for the preparation of similar reports • may be based on information provided to Consultant which has not been independently verified • has not been updated since the date of issuance of the Report and its accuracy is limited to the time period and circumstances in which it was collected, processed, made or issued • must be read as a whole and sections thereof should not be read out of such context • was prepared for the specific purposes described in the Report and the Agreement • in the case of subsurface, environmental or geotechnical conditions, may be based on limited testing and on the assumption that such conditions are uniform and not variable either geographically or over time Consultant shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy and completeness of information that was provided to it and has no obligation to update such information. Consultant accepts no responsibility for any events or circumstances that may have occurred since the date on which the Report was prepared and, in the case of subsurface, environmental or geotechnical conditions, is not responsible for any variability in such conditions, geographically or over time. Consultant agrees that the Report represents its professional judgement as described above and that the Information has been prepared for the specific purpose and use described in the Report and the Agreement, but Consultant makes no other representations, or any guarantees or warranties whatsoever, whether express or implied, with respect to the Report, the Information or any part thereof. The Report is to be treated as confidential and may not be used or relied upon by third parties, except: • as agreed in writing by Consultant and Client • as required by-law • for use by governmental reviewing agencies Consultant accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to parties other than Client who may obtain access to the Report or the Information for any injury, loss or damage suffered by such parties arising from their use of, reliance upon, or decisions or actions based on the Report or any of the Information ("improper use of the Report"), except to the extent those parties have obtained the prior written consent of Consultant to use and rely upon the Report and the Information. Any damages arising from improper use of the Report or parts thereof shall be borne by the party making such use. This Statement of Qualifications and Limitations is attached to and forms part of the Report and any use of the Report is subject to the terms hereof. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 2 AXOMAECOM 300—300 Town Centre Boulevard 905 477 8400 tel Markham,ON,Canada L3R 5Z6 905 477 1456 fax www.aecom.com December 1, 2011 Ms. Faye Langmaid Manager of Special Projects Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 Dear Ms. Langmaid: Project No: 60119359-112956 Regarding: Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan We are pleased to provide you with the Final Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan. Please let me know if you have any questions, concerns or comments. Sincerely, AECOM Canada Ltd. Jason Cole Robin Frizzell, M.Sc., P.Geo Hydrogeologist Senior Hydrogeologist JC:mm Encl. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D- AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Distribution List #of Hard Copies PDF Required Association/Company Name 2 Yes Municipality of Clarington 2 Yes AECOM Canada Ltd. 1 Yes Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Revision Log Revision# Revised By Date Issue/Revision Description 1 Clarington March 2011 Working Draft Version. General edits. Consistency with municipal policies. 2 Clarington April 2011 Final Draft. Review from Clarington. 3 Clarington May 2011 Revised Final Draft. Review from Clarington focusing on Section 6. 4 Clarington/CLOCA July 2011 Final review from Clarington. Comments from CLOCA. 5 CLOCA/MNR/Local Nov 2011 Final comments from CLOCA. Comments from MNR. Comments and input from Stakeholders local stakeholders. 6 Clarington Dec 2011 Final—issued. AECOM Signatures Report Prepared By: Jason Cole, M.Sc., P.Geo Bryan Valve, B.A., GISGC Sean Spisani, B.Sc., ERPG Report Reviewed By: Rob Frizzell, M.Sc., P.Geo. NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D- AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Table of Contents Statement of Qualifications and Limitations Letter of Transmittal Distribution List page 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 About Watershed Management........................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Vision for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds........................................................... 2 2. Watershed Management.............................................................................................................. 5 2.1 The Watershed Planning Process....................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Development of a Watershed Management Plan................................................................................ 8 2.3 Participation....................................................................................................................................... 11 3. Applicable Planning Initiatives ................................................................................................. 12 4. Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds: Existing Conditions...................................20 4.1 Robinson Creek Watershed: Existing Conditions.............................................................................. 20 4.1.1 Study Area............................................................................................................................ 20 4.1.2 Climate.................................................................................................................................. 20 4.1.3 Physiography and Geology .................................................................................................. 22 4.1.4 Groundwater......................................................................................................................... 26 4.1.5 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat............................................................................................... 26 4.1.6 Terrestrial Natural Heritage .................................................................................................. 35 4.1.7 Land Cover........................................................................................................................... 37 4.1.8 Summary of Positive Attributes and Opportunities for Improvement ................................... 39 4.2 Tooley Creek Watershed: Existing Conditions.................................................................................. 41 4.2.1 Study Area............................................................................................................................ 41 4.2.2 Climate.................................................................................................................................. 41 4.2.3 Physiography and Geology .................................................................................................. 41 4.2.4 Groundwater......................................................................................................................... 44 4.2.5 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat............................................................................................... 44 4.2.6 Terrestrial Natural Heritage .................................................................................................. 53 4.2.7 Land Cover........................................................................................................................... 56 4.2.8 Summary of Positive Attributes and Opportunities for Improvement ................................... 57 5. Analysis and Evaluation of Management Scenario.................................................................59 5.1 Watershed Constraints...................................................................................................................... 59 5.2 Setting Targets .................................................................................................................................. 60 5.2.1 Discussion on Setting Targets.............................................................................................. 62 5.3 Natural Heritage System.................................................................................................................... 63 5.3.1 Functional Natural Heritage System..................................................................................... 64 5.3.1.1 Identification of Core and Linkage Areas ........................................................... 64 5.3.2 Targeted Natural Heritage System....................................................................................... 66 5.4 Water Budget and High Volume Recharge Areas............................................................................. 68 5.4.1 Water Budget........................................................................................................................ 68 5.4.2 High Volume Recharge Areas.............................................................................................. 70 NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D- AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 5.5 Imperviousness.................................................................................................................................. 77 5.6 Surface Water Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 82 5.6.1 Robinson Creek—Surface Water Analysis Summary.......................................................... 82 5.6.2 Tooley Creek—Surface Water Analysis Summary.............................................................. 83 5.7 Environmental Constraints................................................................................................................. 83 6. Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Recommendations.................85 6.1 Groundwater Quantity........................................................................................................................ 85 6.1.1 Groundwater Quantity— Issues and Opportunities for Improvement................................... 85 6.1.2 Groundwater Quantity- Management Recommendations................................................... 86 6.1.3 Groundwater Quantity—Monitoring...................................................................................... 90 6.2 Groundwater Quality.......................................................................................................................... 90 6.2.1 Groundwater Quality—Issues and Opportunities for Improvement..................................... 91 6.2.2 Groundwater Quality—Management Recommendations .................................................... 91 6.2.3 Groundwater Quality—Monitoring........................................................................................ 95 6.3 Surface Water Quantity ..................................................................................................................... 95 6.3.1 Surface Water Quantity and Control —Issues and Opportunities for Improvement............. 95 6.3.2 Surface Water Quantity—Management Recommendations................................................ 96 6.3.3 Surface Water Quantity and Control—Monitoring.............................................................. 101 6.4 Surface Water Quality...................................................................................................................... 102 6.4.1 Surface Water Quality— Issues and Opportunities for Improvement................................. 102 6.4.2 Surface Water Quality—Management Recommendations................................................ 103 6.4.3 Surface Water Quality—Monitoring.................................................................................... 105 6.5 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat.......................................................................................................... 107 6.5.1 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat—Issues and Opportunities for Improvement..................... 107 6.5.2 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat—Management Recommendations.................................... 108 6.5.3 Fish and Aquatic Habitat— Monitoring................................................................................ 111 6.6 Terrestrial Natural Heritage ............................................................................................................. 112 6.6.1 Terrestrial Natural Heritage— Issues and Opportunities for Improvement......................... 112 6.6.2 Terrestrial Natural Heritage—Management Recommendations........................................ 113 6.6.3 Terrestrial Natural Heritage—Monitoring ........................................................................... 117 7. Watershed Management Plan Implementation ...................................................................... 118 8. Closure ..................................................................................................................................... 120 9. References ............................................................................................................................... 121 10. Glossary of Terms ................................................................................................................... 123 NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D- AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan List of Figures Figure 1.1 Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds........................................................................................ 3 Figure 1.2 Clarington Official Plan 2007 Land use with ROPA 128 Additions............................................................ 4 Figure 2.1 Watershed Management Phases and Planning Steps .............................................................................. 6 Figure 2.2 Watershed Management Planning steps for the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watersheds...................... 7 Figure 4.1 Robinson Creek Watershed..................................................................................................................... 21 Figure4.2 Physiographic Regions ............................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 4.3 Robinson Creek Watershed Surficial Geology......................................................................................... 24 Figure 4.4 Geological Cross-Section......................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 4.5 Robinson Creek Equipotential Map.......................................................................................................... 27 Figure 4.6 Robinson Creek Watershed Groundwater Recharge Areas.................................................................... 28 Figure 4.7 Robinson Creek Watershed Groundwater Discharge Areas ................................................................... 29 Figure 4.8 Robinson Creek Watershed Strahler Stream Order................................................................................ 30 Figure 4.9 Robinson Creek Watershed Instream Barriers ........................................................................................ 32 Figure 4.10 Robinson Creek Watershed Fishery and Habitat Assessment................................................................ 34 Figure 4.11 Robinson Creek Watershed Vegetation Communities............................................................................. 36 Figure 4.12 Robinson Creek Watershed Wildlife Features......................................................................................... 38 Figure 4.13 Robinson Creek Watershed - Existing Land Cover................................................................................. 39 Figure 4.14 Tooley Creek Watershed ......................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 4.15 Tooley Creek Watershed Surficial Geology............................................................................................. 43 Figure 4.16 Tooley Creek Equipotential Map.............................................................................................................. 45 Figure 4.17 Tooley Creek Watershed Groundwater Recharge Areas ........................................................................ 46 Figure 4.18 Tooley Creek Watershed Groundwater Discharge Areas........................................................................ 47 Figure 4.19 Tooley Creek Watershed Strahler Stream Order..................................................................................... 48 Figure 4.20 Tooley Creek Watershed Instream Barriers............................................................................................. 50 Figure 4.21 Tooley Creek Watershed Fisheries & Habitat Assessment..................................................................... 51 Figure 4.22 Tooley Creek Vegetation Communities ................................................................................................... 54 Figure 4.23 Tooley Creek Watershed Wildlife Features ............................................................................................. 55 Figure 4.24 Tooley Creek Watershed -Existing Land Cover..................................................................................... 57 Figure 5.1 Natural Heritage System.......................................................................................................................... 67 Figure 5.2 Robinson Creek Recharge....................................................................................................................... 71 Figure 5.3 Robinson Creek Runoff............................................................................................................................ 72 Figure 5.4 Tooley Creek Recharge ........................................................................................................................... 73 Figure5.5 Tooley Creek Runoff................................................................................................................................ 74 Figure 5.6 Robinson Creek High Volume Recharge................................................................................................. 75 Figure 5.7 Tooley Creek High Volume Recharge...................................................................................................... 76 Figure 5.8 Robinson Creek Watershed Existing Imperviousness............................................................................. 78 Figure 5.9 Robinson Creek Watershed Future Imperviousness ............................................................................... 79 Figure 5.10 Tooley Creek Watershed Existing Imperviousness ................................................................................. 80 Figure 5.11 Tooley Creek Watershed Future Imperviousness.................................................................................... 81 Figure 5.12 Environmental Constraints....................................................................................................................... 84 Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan List of Tables Table 4.1 Comparison of Precipitation Climate Normals to Observed Conditions .................................................. 22 Table 4.2 Known Fish Community Composition — Robinson Creek Watershed...................................................... 31 Table 4.3 Stream Temperature Monitoring within Robinson Creek......................................................................... 33 Table 4.4 Robinson Creek Surface Water Quality................................................................................................... 33 Table 4.5 Known Fish Community Composition —Tooley Creek Watershed.......................................................... 49 Table 4.6 Stream Temperature Monitoring within Tooley Creek ............................................................................. 52 Table 4.7 Tooley Creek Surface Water Quality........................................................................................................ 52 Table 5.1 Watershed Management Targets for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds .................... 60 Table 5.2 Natural Cover Calculations for FNHS and TNHS Scenarios ................................................................... 66 Table 5.3 NHS Attributes Considered During Professional Edits ............................................................................ 68 Table5.4 Water Budget Summary........................................................................................................................... 69 Table 5.5 Imperviousness Scenarios for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds............................... 77 Appendices Appendix A. Surface Water Analysis Report for Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D- AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 1 . Introduction The Municipality of Clarington retained AECOM to conduct an Existing Conditions Study and prepare a Watershed Management Plan for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds are under the jurisdiction of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) who were consulted on and involved with completion of this project. This Watershed Study will be the basis for a Courtice Employment Lands Secondary Plan, which is one of the special studies to be undertaken as part of the Clarington Official Plan review, which is currently being conducted. Section 4.3.1 of the Clarington Official Plan identifies the mandate to "undertake multi-stakeholder watershed planning studies in order to protect the integrity of ecological and hydrological functions and to establish priorities for the preparation of watershed plans". The Existing Conditions Study for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds was completed in August 2010 and provides a detailed assessment of the current state of the watersheds by examining policy and land use, hydrology and hydraulics, groundwater quantity and quality, aquatic species and habitat, surface water quantity and quality, and terrestrial natural heritage. The Existing Conditions Report documents the existing or baseline conditions of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds and provides the scientific basis for preparing a Watershed Management Plan. Section 20.2.3 of the Clarington Official Plan requires that a subwatershed plan (or in this case, a watershed plan) be prepared prior to municipal approval of a draft plan of a subdivision. This report, the Watershed Management Plan, is intended to form the basis for any Environmental Impact Study (EIS) undertaken in support of development in either the Robinson Creek or Tooley Creek Watershed. Additionally, the objectives and recommendations in this Watershed Management Plan will be incorporated into the Clarington Official Plan. The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds are located entirely within the Municipality of Clarington, in the Regional Municipality of Durham (Figure 1.1). The headwaters for both watersheds fall within an area known as the Iroquois Plain physiographic region, which is located to the south of the Oak Ridges Moraine physiographic region and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Planning Boundary. As such, watershed management and planning within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds are not bound by the policies and regulations set forth in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act (O. Reg 140/02). It is recognized, that many of the policies and regulations outlined in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act would benefit these watersheds and have been adopted where applicable. Both the Robinson Creek and the Tooley Creek Watersheds are considered urban watersheds. As shown on Figure 1.2, with the exception of the northeast corner of the Tooley Creek Watershed, which falls within land designated as Greenbelt (the reader is referred to Section 3 for a description of the Greenbelt Plan), the majority land area of these watersheds has been identified in the Places to Grow Act and the Growing Durham Study, to be converted from their existing land use of primarily agriculture to future employment and living areas by 2031. Bloor Street and Courtice Road have been designated as Higher Order Growth Corridors. Also of consequence to future growth and development in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, is the Regional Amendment to the Official Plan 128 (ROPA 128), which was adopted by Durham Regional Council on June 3, 2009 and was submitted to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) for approval in July 2009. A draft decision on ROPA 128 dated March 2010 provided by MMAH recommended the removal of the Courtice Employment Area from the future land use forecasts. This area encompasses the land on the east side of Courtice Road, north of Baseline Road, south of Highway 2 and west of the Future 407 East Durham Link. At the time this report was completed, the ROPA 128 lands were under appeal. Therefore, to conservatively assess the impact of future growth scenarios on the natural environmental, the Watershed Management Planning recommendations provided in this report have assumed that the Courtice Employment Lands will be part of future development in the watersheds. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 1.1 About Watershed Management A watershed study and associated watershed management plan provide the background information needed for integration of watershed information into the Official Planning or Secondary Planning process. The planning boundary considered within a watershed management plan is the entire extent of a given watershed. According to Water Management on a Watershed Basis: Implementing an Ecosystem Approach (MOEE, 1993), "the boundaries of a watershed provide the natural limits for managing these interactions and the subsequent state of the environment and the resources within." A watershed is defined by topographical land boundaries, where all water that falls on the land surface will drain to a particular point, such as a river, stream, or lake. The health of the natural resources within a watershed is influenced by the health of the lands that water flows through. Interactions between human activities on the land are reflected in this process and in the present day conditions observed in the water and the natural environment. X.3•s A comprehensive watershed plan balances ecological protection with land development opportunities; with the goal to protect, and maintain a healthy ecosystem, both in human terms, and in terms of the natural NO environment, as well as encourage development. It should also provide an implementation framework for 'a "' r¢ ? 3 establishing planning targets and objectives, and setting forth a plan to see the targets and objectives established. Finally, a watershed plan should include a monitoring program to ensure that targets defined in the watershed management plan are met. The goal of this study is to develop a Watershed Management Plan for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds and provide detailed technical recommendations that promote sustainable use of the watersheds that can be implemented and adopted into the official plan in support of future development. 1.2 Vision for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan provides a `vision' for how the watersheds should look in order to manage future growth scenarios, and sustain and/or improve the natural environment. This watershed management plan will define what areas are appropriate for preservation, protection, enhancement, or rehabilitation, to satisfy our vision for the watersheds. Our vision for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is: "To maintain and enhance the health and quality of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds and their ecosystems, by developing a strategy to minimize and mitigate impacts associated with future growth in the watersheds" NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 2 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Le d ., Kawartha La— CLOCA Bounday d _ O Robison Greek Wat shed 1 wdey Cm_`Wxerslud oak Ridges Moraine Boundary l wined a Benneh Greek o Uxhr dge QBOwn II.Greek Granberry • = Q Gad rg—Creek Farewell Lrd G k n + l Q Prime Geek 0 Robinon Creek per Creek 1DA 0-i i rro Ov g t t. .'apgr c7ReJr_ OTooley creek i,- ` .arhara aRCk. _ J � � �•. i• �� W rd RreR W h i 6.1 FFmgA LlmeR, :Cl86R -�rr. ' -i - '' - DadNg 11gs Ide CiwR g§ i 5 - rR CfaeR rooKy CrRaR ��� �, g L V 4brbcu Cfeot` I 1I - Coas[a! o on �• i - �� •'Cranberry' neca�urmb peen c.l, veeNra rbeynev Plm Rabin—Creek and . .,�? ^••i„ Tooiey Creek Watersheds '•� � rw>.xmn °s .v_S•� Rarneonsag l+-COM Rip.1.1 Figure 1.1 Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Nw1411_Final-Wat...hed_Man-Plan.DO 3 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan r, .. " 1 J 1�� i�\Il. +['IVY' ���:Y ••�J � � -.y , a- A - f gt< _ I` 3 F •� � y E R r �•°"�•'�iO�e•°'�' �Rndn—Creel WatersME E.,for.-fer•3 F•:'=.• - C3 ro Y Creel YYa!altetl Fines UZ-R[-E=_":_ uaevied vtoi • q ® G—A ngrkril J. • •`STT wa InEiatrla Clarington Cll-lAgt om"P*-.20 Gna Nawrs Rt� . Space Official Plan 2007 • �:3g+ln-,!uaW)—d - UJrl lydus I l_�1n[Y WxQu Q. page€.Pvpet W., �. 77i'W—d ",£;g:specla sway Areas s itiv.�n.Una Clarington Official Ptah•2007- 'nrrn Cede Land Ox Uma,RftwM m a,am Pan ' ny pp ��'•++//''��jj.. ® cnra Ity art wa:emm!Green.ay P7Z�r OM Fig—12 Figure 1.2 Clarington Official Plan 2007 Land use Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 4 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 2. Watershed Management 2.1 The Watershed Planning Process Watershed based management was first introduced in Ontario in June 1993 in the document, Watershed Management on a Watershed Basis:Implementing an Ecosystem Approach (MOEE and MNR, 1993). Since then, a number of technical documents have been produced that provide technical guidance on the completion of watershed management planning, including, but certainly not limited to: • Watershed Management in Ontario:Lessons Learned and Best Practices, by Conservation Ontario, 2003; • Watershed Planning from Recommendations to Municipal Policies:A Guidance Document. Interim Version. Prepared for the York, Peel, Durham, Toronto Groundwater Study Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition (YPDT CAMC), by Ogilvie, Ogilvie and Company and Anthony Usher Planning Consultant, 2005; and • A Work Plan to Fulfill the Watershed Planning Requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Regulation, by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, and the Region of York, 2003. Each of these documents was relied upon for the preparation of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan. The rationale behind the watershed scale approach was to use the hydrologic cycle as the system that integrates physical, chemical, and biological processes of the ecosystem. The watershed provides a convenient boundary that can be understood by the public and can easily be incorporated into regional and municipal planning documents. As shown in Figure 2.1, Conservation Ontario (2003) outlines four distinct phases of watershed management planning: 1. Plan: Identify issues and objectives for the watershed, outline targets and goals for the watershed, evaluate existing information and alternatives and make specific recommendations in the form of Watershed or Sub-Watershed Management Plan. 2. Implement: Use policy, programs, projects, and actions to put in place the recommendations made during the planning phase. 3. Monitor and Report: Establish monitoring to measure the progress of reaching the goals, objectives, and targets set for the watershed or sub-watershed, and communicate the progress to decision makers and to the public. 4. Review, Evaluate and Update: Regularly review the watershed management plan, evaluate the success/failure of recommendations, and update the plan if changes are needed to address deficiencies or future scenarios. The `Plan' phase of watershed planning can be further described according to eight specific steps that AECOM, the Municipality of Clarington and CLOCA undertook to create this Watershed Management Plan (Figure 2.2). Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 5 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan REVIEW and EVALUATE A40NiTf5R aad PLAN WATERSHED PLANNING STEPS REPc7RT 1)Scoping IMPLEMENT 2)Characterize the watershed system 3)Set goals,objectives and working targets 4)Develop management alternatives 5)Evaluate management alternatives 6)Select preferred managementalternative 7)Finalize Targets (Conservation Ontario 2003) g)Develop implementation and monitoring plan Figure 2.1 Watershed Management Phases and Planning Steps It is important to recognize the importance of community involvement at critical stages of the watershed planning process. As described in A Work Plan to Fulfill the Watershed Planning Requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Regulation (2003), completion of the `Plan' phase of a watershed management plan should be completed in three stages: 1. Characterize the watershed (i.e., establish existing conditions); 2. Analyze and Evaluate alternative land use scenarios for land use and water management; and 3. Develop a watershed management plan. Characterization of the watershed requires technical input from a variety of specialized environmental, ecological, and engineering disciplines to establish baseline conditions of the following: • Groundwater quality and quantity; • Aquatic species and habitat; • Water budget; • Terrestrial Natural Heritage; and • Hydrology and hydraulics; • Land use planning. • Surface water quality and quantity; The characterization stage for the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watersheds was completed between 2009 and 2010 by AECOM. The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek— Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report(AECOM, 2010), describes in detail the existing conditions of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds and forms the basis for making scientifically sound management recommendations and decisions for the watersheds. A summary of the existing conditions for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is presented in Section 4. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 6 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Sc oping Existing pdttt'ono --y Community Involve ent Or Develop 5-1 snd Evaluate Management ens Community invofvemte Select Preferred �,` agement V �'ptlon Prepare Final Watsrshad PIS Approval Hof Watarrhed I Plan Figure 2.2 Watershed Management Planning steps for the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watersheds Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Docx 7 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Analyze and Evaluate Alternative Scenarios Analysis and evaluation of alternative land use scenarios for water and land management were undertaken as part of this report based upon the existing conditions and included current and future land use scenarios, as outlined in the Clarington Official Plan. These features were assessed, and management scenarios and approaches were established that include the following: • A Targeted Natural Heritage System (TNHS); • A Water Budget and the identification of High Volume Recharge Areas (HVRA); • Current and Future levels of Imperviousness; and • Existing and Future Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modelling and Hazard Analysis. A technically preferred management scenario was selected from the analysis and evaluation of the above scenarios. Management recommendations through policy implementation actions are addressed at this stage. This work is presented and described in detail in Section 5. Development The final stage, development of a watershed management plan, is completed once the watershed has been characterized and the preferred management scenario has been selected. The watershed management plan builds upon the current and future plans for the watershed and presents specific watershed planning recommendations that are designed to guide development and conservation within the watershed boundaries. Due to the complexity of making watershed management recommendations, this work is further described, in detail, in Section 2.2. 2.2 Development of a Watershed Management Plan Recommendations made in a Watershed Management Plan, need to be made based upon sound technical information and to be effective, must be implemented and adopted into official plans. These are the specific recommendations that are designed to be consistent with the overall vision for the watershed., It is recognized that all municipalities need to be flexible to the different situations that occur in different parts of their jurisdiction. { b � Management Recommendations made in this Report are specifically tailored to best fit the needs of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Some recommendations will only be appropriate or justifiable for these specific watersheds and the Municipality of Clarington may wish to limit their application appropriately. However, in circumstances where policies are applicable outside of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, the Municipality is encouraged to find ways to adopt those recommendations in general. Management Recommendations are made based on the watershed components identified in the Existing Conditions Report and the Evaluation of Management Alternatives, and include the following: • Groundwater Quantity • Surface Water Quality • Groundwater Quality • Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat • Surface Water Quantity • Terrestrial Natural Heritage NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 8 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Using the watershed components listed above, issues and opportunities for improvement within the watersheds were identified. Based upon the identified issues and opportunities, goals, objectives, and management actions, were developed, evaluated, and specific recommendations were made to maintain or enhance the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. The following describes this process. Identify Issues and Opportunities . Issues and opportunities for improvement were identified based upon the results of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek— Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report(AECOM, 2010), input from the Municipality of Clarington, CLOCA, and the public. Issues and opportunities for improvement were determined for each of the watershed components (i.e., groundwater quantity, surface water quality, etc.) and can be defined as general or specific functions or actions that need to be maintained or enhanced to promote the future health and quality of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. The identification of issues and opportunities at the early stage of this study was important to explore opportunities for maintaining and enhancing the natural features, functions, processes and linkages within the watersheds. Management `targets' within the Province of Ontario have been defined by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Canada (Environment Canada, 2005), which provide objectives such as: • Maintenance and enhancement of riparian corridors and linkages to improve surface water quality, aquatic conveyance and wildlife movement; • Identification of Core Natural Areas and Linkages; • Protection of significant aquatic and terrestrial habitat; • Protection of important groundwater recharge and discharge areas; • Identification of and mitigation of point-source and non-point source pollutants; • Specific stormwater management criteria and levels of water quality/quantity treatment; and • Flood hazard analysis and prevention. All natural environment features are interconnected within the watershed. This means that some issues and opportunities for improvement will overlap between the different disciplines. For example, maintaining groundwater quality will not only improve the health of aquifers and water resources, but will also help maintain surface water quality because the two systems are inherently interconnected, through groundwater discharge to surface features such as streams and wetlands. Management Goals are designed to address the issues and opportunities for improvement that have been identified within a watershed. A Management Goal begins as a goal statement (i.e., Protect Aquatic Habitat and Species), that is used to identify a management outcome that would maintain or enhance the natural environment and can be implemented through a watershed management plan. Each watershed component (i.e., surface water quality or groundwater quantity) will have a unique set of management goals. • I Objectives are designed to specifically address the Management Goals for each of the watershed components and are designed to achieve the desired management outcome. For example, if the Management Goal is to `protect and enhance groundwater quantity', an Objective may be to `maintain or enhance groundwater recharge within the watershed.' Objectives are set so that targets (such as groundwater recharge rates) can be established to measure the success of the management goals. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 9 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Recommended Management Actions integrate science into action though municipal regulations and planning, and community involvement. For each of the Goals and Objectives, a set of Management Actions are presented to address policy, regulation, community based strategies, monitoring and procedures for implementation. By putting in place each of the recommended Management Actions presented, the watershed management goals and objective should be fulfilled, and the overall vision for the watershed should be achieved. The following management actions are used to determine the overall management strategy for the watersheds: Regulation and Policy Initiatives These Management Actions involve the use of legislation and regulations to achieve the intended watershed goals, objectives and targets. For the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, these actions would be carried out through official plans and secondary plans from the Municipality of Clarington or by regulations, policy and programs implemented by CLOCA. Community Education and Stewardship These Management Actions are volunteer based and are generally completed in conjunction with an established agency. Educational and stewardship programs can provide both technical and financial assistance and/or incentives to a land owner or community group to manage the land in a more environmentally sustainable manor. There are many agencies based federally, provincially, regionally, and locally that are working to improve the health of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. It should be understood that programs and funding sources evolve overtime to meet need and economic constraints. Just a few of these agencies and programs are listed below: • Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) - Land Stewardship Program (http://www.cloca.com/stewardship/Stewardship`/`20Brochure.pd Clean Water Stewardship Program (http://www.cloca.com/stewardship/stew cwp.php); • Source Water Protection and the Ontario Drinking Water Stewardship Program (http://www.sourcewaterprotection.on.ca/qrants stewardship.html) • Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH) - Community Stream Steward Program (http://www.ofah.org/streamsteward/); • Durham Land Stewardship Council; • Conservation Ontario; • Trout Unlimited Canada; • Ontario Wildlife Foundation; and • Environmental Farm Plan (EFP). Land Acquisition and Dedication Although policies can be put in place by various levels of government and conservation authorities to protect natural features and landowners can be assisted and educated on the importance of protecting valued features, land acquisition and/or dedication provides the best long term protection and management options for some areas. Various levels of government and conservation authorities already participate in land acquisition and dedication to achieve protection and restoration targets, and provide opportunities for public open space. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 10 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Monitoring and Reporting In order to assess the benefits of each management action, regular monitoring is required both before and after the management action has been put in place. The Municipality, the public, and stakeholder groups should know if the management efforts are functioning as planned. If they are not, further action may need to be taken to determine possible explanations and improvements. The results of the monitoring must be communicated to local decision makers and the community, whether the management actions were successful or unsuccessful. 2.3 Participation A key element in watershed planning and watershed management involves partnerships between regions, municipalities, conservation authorities, public agencies, local communities, stakeholders and the public, to share in the responsibility for maintaining and improving the health of the watershed. The list of stakeholders asked to provide comment on draft versions of the existing conditions report and the watershed management plan include CLOCA, MOE, MNR, Darlington Provincial Park, and the Region of Durham. AECOM, in co-operation with the Municipality of Clarington and CLOCA, completed two Public Information Centre (PIC) meetings in 2010 and 2011 as part of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan project. PIC #1 PIC#1 was held on June 25, 2010 at the South Courtice Area at 1595 Prestonvale Road in Courtice. The results of the existing conditions field investigations were presented at this meeting and the community was given an opportunity review the information and provide comments. Recommendations for moving forward with developing and evaluating management options were presented and feedback from the community obtained prior to moving forward with the next steps. PIC#2 PIC#2 was held on February 24, 2010, at the Courtice Community Complex at 2950 Courtice Road in Courtice. The focus of this PIC was to present the technically preferred management scenarios related to the targeted natural heritage system, the water balance, imperviousness, and future hazard analysis. Members of the public, community �- groups and other stakeholders provided feedback and suggestions on the preferred management scenarios and how they will affect the overall watershed management strategy. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 11 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 3. Applicable Planning Initiatives An effective watershed management plan is able to integrate the ideas, concerns, and priorities of federal, provincial, and municipal government, conservation authorities and other stakeholders. The Management Plan must be able to fit within the current policy framework and provide the basis for making future management decisions. This section provides a detailed summary of applicable planning initiatives, starting with the most general and far reaching, and ending with local policy initiatives. The recommendations provided in this plan are consistent with the following listed planning initiatives. Climate Change The consideration of climate change at the local, regional and global scale has been extensively studied (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005) and must be considered when undertaking planning processes such as a watershed management plan. Climate change, as defined by McCarthy et al. (2006) is considered to be any change in climate over time whether due to natural variability or anthropogenic activity. Within Canada, the effects of climate change are already being observed. In many provinces, including Ontario, phenomena such as rising atmospheric temperatures, loss of biodiversity and changing water levels are being observed (Fischlin et al. 2007). By preserving and enhancing the existing habitat and functions of the natural environment in the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watersheds, these ecosystems will be better equipped to adapt to predicted and unforeseen stressors as a result of climate change. With the potential stressors in mind, appropriate considerations and potential scenarios must be considered throughout the watershed management planning process for Robinson and Tooley Creek. Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act provides for the protection of drinking water at its source. The legislation sets the basic framework for communities to follow in developing an approach to protect their water resources by identifying and assessing risks, developing source protection plans, and implementing these plans. Its intention is to protect water at the source, using science based assessment report and protection plans. The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) has recently released a Proposed Assessment Report (July, 2010) on the Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Area, which includes the areas covered by the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. This report includes an assessment of the threats, conditions and issues for municipal water intake zones, wellhead protection areas, significant groundwater recharge and discharge areas, and highly vulnerable aquifers. If the results of this assessment show that an activity poses a significant risk to a drinking water source, the approved protection plan may restrict or limit certain activities in that area through regulatory requirements or approvals, zoning by-laws, official plan amendments, education or voluntary initiatives. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement The Great Lake Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA), was instated in 1972, and renewed in 1978, between Canada and the United States. This agreement makes specific commitments for both Canada and the United States to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem and includes a number of objectives and guidelines to achieve these goals. In 1987, a Protocol was signed to amend the 1978 Agreement. The goal of these new protocols was to strengthen the commitments outlined in 1978 and to increase the accountability of the two countries. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 12 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan With respect to this study, the most significant portion of the GLWQA is Annex 13, "Pollution from Non-Point Sources". Annex 13 outlines programs and measures for the abatement and reduction on non-point sources of pollution from land use activities. "The Parties (Canada and the United States), in conjunction with State and Provincial Governments, shall: a) Identify land-based activities contribution to water quality problems described in Remedial Action Plans for Areas of Concern, or in Lakewide Management Plans including, but not limited to, phosphorus and Critical Pollutants;and b) Develop and implement watershed management plans, consistent with the objectives and schedules for individual Remedial Action Plans or Lakewide Management Plans, on priority hydrologic units to reduce non-point source inputs. Such watershed plans shall include a description of priority areas, intergovernmental agreements, implementation schedules, and programs and other measures to fulfill the purpose of this Annex and the General and Specific Objectives of this Agreement. Such measures shall include provisions for regulation of non-point sources of pollution." In June 2009, the Governments of Canada and the United States announced that they would be updating the GLWQA to strengthen the watershed management language. Provincial Policy Statement The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) issued under the authority of Section 3 of the Planning Act and came into effect on March 1, 2005. The PPS has a strong focus on the long-term prosperity and environmental health of Ontario. It states that natural features and areas shall be protected for the long-term. This policy prescribes the extent to which natural features are protected when development is proposed. The PPS includes social and economic components and should be read in its entirety. Although the PPS is provincial legislation, it is implemented by the Municipality of Clarington through their Official Plan. The PPS supports improved land use planning and management, which contributes to a more effective and efficient land use planning system. Section 1.2.1 of the PPS states: A co-ordinated, integrated and comprehensive approach should be used when dealing with planning matters within municipalities, or which cross lower, single and/or upper-tier municipal boundaries, including: a. Managing and/or promoting growth and development, b. Managing natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral, and cultural heritage and archaeological resources; c. Infrastructure, public service facilities and waste management systems; d. Ecosystem, shoreline and watershed related issues; e. Natural and human-made hazards;and f. Population, housing and employment projections, based on regional market areas." The PPS provides direction on the protection of the Natural Heritage System by not permitting development and site alteration in a number of circumstances: "2.1.3 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in: a. significant habitat of endangered species and threatened species; b. significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E; and c. significant coastal wetlands. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 13 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 2.1.4 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in: a. significant wetlands in the Canadian Shield north of Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E; b. significant woodlands south and east of the Canadian Shield; c. significant valleylands south and east of the Canadian Shield, d. significant wildlife habitat;and e. significant areas of natural and scientific interest unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions. 2.1.5 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in fish habitat except in accordance with provincial and federal requirements. 2.1.6 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the natural heritage features and areas identified in policies 2.1.3, 2.1.4 and 2.1.5 unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or on their ecological functions." The PPS also provides direction on protection and enhancement of water and water resources. Section 2.2 Water, subsection 2.2.1 states that: "Planning authorities shall protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of water by: a. using the watershed as the ecologically meaningful scale for planning; b. minimizing potential negative impacts, including cross jurisdictional and cross-watershed impacts; c. identifying surface water features, groundwater features, hydrologic functions and natural heritage features and areas which are necessary for the ecological and hydrological integrity of the watershed; d. implementing necessary restrictions on development and site alteration to: 1. protect all municipal drinking water supplies and designated vulnerable areas; and 2. protect, improve or restore vulnerable surface and groundwater, sensitive surface water features and sensitive groundwater features, and their hydrologic functions. e. Maintaining linkages and related functions among surface water features, groundwater features, hydrologic functions and natural heritage features and areas; f. Promoting efficient and sustainable use of water resources, including practices for water conservation and sustaining water quality;and g. Ensuring stormwater management practices minimize stormwater volumes and contaminant loads, and maintain or increase the extent of vegetative and pervious surfaces." Section 3.1 Natural Hazards of the PPS addresses the importance of flooding and erosion impacts on public safety, property, and environmental protection. This section of the PPS supports management actions and recommendations which reference the applicability of O.Reg 42/06 "Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses". Section 3.1.1 of the PPS states that: "Development shall generally be directed to areas outside of: a. hazardous lands adjacent to the shorelines of the Great Lakes- St. Lawrence River System and large inland lakes which are impacted by flooding hazards, erosion hazards and/or dynamic beach hazards; b, hazardous lands adjacent to river, stream and small inland lake systems which are impacted by flooding hazards and/or erosion hazards;and c. hazardous sites." Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 14 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds do not originate within the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) and are not included within the ORM planning boundary, and therefore the mandates set out in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) do not apply to these watersheds. However, this document provides a detailed framework for completing and implementing land use and resource management planning initiatives that can be applicable even outside of their intended area. Section 24 (3) of the ORMCP speaks to watershed planning and states that: (3) A watershed plan shall include, as a minimum, a. A water budget and conservation plan as set out in section 25; b. Land and water use and management strategies; c. A framework for implementation, which may include more detailed implementation plans for smaller geographic areas, such as subwatershed plans, or for specific subject matter, such as environmental management plans; d. And environmental monitoring plan; e. Provisions requiring the use of environmental management practices and programs, such as programs to prevent pollution, reduce the use of pesticides and manage the use of road salt; and f. Criteria for evaluating the protection of water quantity and quality, hydrological features, and hydrogeological functions. The Greenbelt Plan Ontario's Greenbelt is 1.8 million acres of provincially protected green space, farmland, communities, forests, wetlands, and watersheds. The Greenbelt covers lands south of the Oak Ridges Moraine, surrounding Clarington's urban boundaries. The Greenbelt Plan contains policies for providing permanent agricultural and environmental protection as well as providing for a wide range of recreation, tourism and cultural opportunities in the area. The Greenbelt Plan encompasses lands within the Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP) and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, while building upon the foundation of ecological protection provided by these two Plans. The Protected Countryside is comprised of an Agricultural System and a Natural System, together with a number of settlement areas and is intended to improve linkages among these areas and surrounding systems. The Natural System identifies lands that support both natural heritage and hydrologic features and functions. The Natural System policies protect areas of natural heritage, hydrologic and/or landform features, which are often functionally inter-related and which collectively support biodiversity and overall ecological integrity. This Natural System comprises a Natural Heritage System and a Water Resource System that often coincides given ecological linkages between terrestrial and water based functions. The Natural Heritage System includes areas of the Protected Countryside with the highest concentration of the most sensitive and/or significant natural features and functions. The Water Resource System is made up of both ground and surface water features and their associated functions, which provide the water resources necessary to sustain healthy aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and human water consumption. Roughly 38.2 ha of the Tooley Creek Watershed area is within the Greenbelt (3.3% of the watershed). The area of Greenbelt within the Tooley Creek Watershed extends from Highway 2 to the northern limit of the watershed, within which there are Greenbelt designations of Protected Countryside and Natural Heritage System. The Greenbelt does not extent into the Robinson Creek Watershed. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 15 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Lake Ontario Shoreline A Lake Ontario shoreline management plan was completed in 1990 by Sandwell Swan Wooster Incorporated for CLOCA, Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) and Lower Trent Region Conservation Authority (LRCA). This report provided development objectives in relation to land use, hazards, erosion limit setbacks, and management. Durham Region Official Plan Durham Region's Official Plan (Office Consolidation 2008) is the overarching policy document guiding land use within the Region. These policies implement provincial legislation and provide planning context to lower tier municipalities. It should be noted that portions of the two watershed areas are within the Urban System and Rural System of the Regional Official Plan. Within the Urban Systems, sections 8.1.5 and 8.1.6 state: To protect key natural heritage or hydrologic features and functions located within or outside of Urban Areas from the impacts of urbanization." AND "To integrate nature into the urban fabric of the Region." The Regional Official Plan defines a Greenlands System for which it prescribes goals and general policies (Section 10 of the Official Plan). Section 10.2.3 states: "The Greenlands System includes areas with the highest concentration of sensitive and/or significant natural features and functions. These areas are to be managed as a connected and integrated natural heritage system recognizing the functional inter-relationships between them. The main features of the Greenlands System, particularly the Oak Ridges Moraine, valley systems and the Waterfronts, shall be protected for their special natural and scenic features, their roles as predominant landscape elements in the Region and the recreational opportunities they facilitate. Further, linking the waterfronts with the Oak Ridges Moraine through the connecting valley systems shall be a primary objective of the continuous Greenlands System, as is linking of the valley systems themselves. The Greenlands System also contains agricultural and agricultural-related and secondary uses which shall be protected as integral components of the System." Growing Durham In July 2007, Durham Region initiated a "Growing Durham Study,"which built on the Region's Official Plan review work and provides comprehensive analysis of the implications of growth in the Region, including a review and evaluation of alternate growth scenarios. The recently completed Study addresses Growth Plan population and employment forecasts to 2031. Regional Official Plan Amendment 128 Regional Official Plan Amendment (ROPA) 128 was adopted by the Durham Regional Council on June 3, 2009. This adopted amendment contains many policies that will help the Region achieve its targeted growth plan looking towards the year 2031. This amendment includes guidance on policies and targets for urban densities and corridors, residential and employment lands, infrastructure and transit, and will promote intensification. On March 12, 2010, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) issued a statement regarding the Growing Durham Study and ROPA 128 that outlines key concerns about the amendment. The primary concern is that the land budget overestimates the amount of land needed to accommodate the growth forecast for the Region. MMAH proposed draft modifications to ROPA 128 that effectively removed the employment lands in the Tooley Creek Watershed. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 16 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan On October 27, 2010 MMAH issued its Final Decision on ROPA 128. The decision includes a refusal to expand the Courtice Urban boundary and the redesignation of lands from Prime Agricultural Area to Employment Area in the Tooley Creek Watershed. The primary concern from MMAH is that the Region's land budget calculations overestimates the amount of land needed to accommodate the growth forecast for the Region. The Municipality of Clarington has appealed this aspect of MMAH's decision to the Ontario Municipal Board in November 2011. Other aspects of ROPA 128 have been appealed by other parties. Municipality of Clarington Official Plan The Municipality of Clarington's Official Plan includes land use planning policies to address conformity with both provincial and regional policies. Policies within municipal official plans are typically more detailed to better reflect local conditions and growth patterns. Section 4 of the Official Plan describes Clarington's Natural Environmental and Resource Management Policies. The goals and objectives of this section are outlined in Sections 4.1 and 4.2, and state that: "4.1 Goals 4.1.1 To enhance the natural heritage system and its ecological integrity. 4.1.2 To promote responsible stewardship of the natural heritage system and wise use of the natural resources in order to provide long term and sustainable environmental, economic, and social benefits. 4.2 Objectives 4.2.1 To achieve in the public interest, an appropriate balance between the protection of the Municipality's natural heritage system and the management of its natural resources. 4.2.2 To protect natural heritage features and functions from incompatible development. 4.2.3 To enhance ecological processes, biodiversity and connections within the natural heritage system. 4.2.4 To protect residents from natural and man-made hazards. 4.2.5 To recognize and protect the Oak Ridges Moraine for its unique landform characteristics, its significant function of groundwater recharge and discharge, its significant natural heritage features and their ecological functions, and its significant aggregate resources. 4.2.6 To recognize and protect the Lake Iroquois Beach for its significant function of groundwater recharge and discharge, its significant natural heritage features and their ecological functions, and its aggregate resources. 4.2.7 To recognize the Lake Ontario Waterfront as a dynamic and distinctive element of the Municipality's environment. 4.2.8 To protect and enhance the Ganaraska Forest and the Long Sault Forest and to provide for an appropriate natural corridor between them. 4.2.9 To minimize light pollution from existing and new development" Section 4.4 of the Official Plan, defines and describes Clarington's Natural Heritage System. The Municipality's Natural Heritage System is comprised of natural heritage features together with their ecological functions. Secondary Plans This Watershed Study will be the basis for a Courtice Employment Lands Secondary Plan. This study is one of the special studies to be undertaken as part of the Clarington Official Plan review. Within the Robinson Creek and Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 17 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Tooley Creek Watersheds, the Municipality of Clarington has two Secondary Plans that provide specific details and clarifications on applicable policies for those areas. The two Secondary Plans are: 1. The Southwest Courtice Secondary Plan; and 2. The Clarington Energy Business Park Secondary Plan. The Southwest Courtice Secondary Plan covers an area in the western portion of the Robinson Creek Watershed to the west of Prestonvale Road. This area has been designated as urban residential and is required as part of the 20 year supply of land. The Clarington Energy Business Park Secondary Plan covers an area south of Highway 401 and north of the CN rail corridor, between Courtice Road and Solina Road. This area has been identified for prestige employment uses and the overall goal of the Secondary Plan is to guide growth and development in this area. Approximately half of the area covered by this Secondary Plan is within the Tooley Creek Watershed. Darlington Provincial Park Management of Darlington Provincial Park is legislated under the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act, 2006. The purpose of this Act is to: "Permanently protect a system of provincial parks and conservation reserves that includes ecosystems that are representative of all of Ontario's natural regions, protects provincially significant elements of Ontario's natural and cultural heritage, maintains biodiversity and provides opportunities for compatible, ecologically sustainable recreation." All provincial parks in Ontario were established with the following objectives in mind: 1. "To permanently protect representative ecosystems, biodiversity and provincially significant elements of Ontario's natural and cultural heritage and to manage these areas to ensure that ecological integrity is maintained; 2. To provide opportunities for ecologically sustainable outdoor recreation opportunities and encourage associated economic benefits; 3. To provide opportunities for residents of Ontario and visitors to increase their knowledge and appreciation of Ontario's natural and cultural heritage;and 4. To facilitate scientific research and to provide points of reference to support monitoring of ecological change on the broader landscape." Darlington Provincial Park is considered a "recreational class park", where the objective of the park is to provide a wide variety of outdoor recreation opportunities in natural surroundings. 407 East Environmental Assessment The proposed extension of Highway 407 through Durham Region was incorporated into regional and municipal Official Plans in the 1990s. Since then, planning decisions related to land use and transportation in the Greater Golden Horseshoe have included the 407 corridor as part of future existing conditions. The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) in consultation with Durham Region, its constituents and surrounding municipalities, undertook an individual Environmental Assessment (EA) study to address the long-term transportation needs in the Region of Durham and surrounding area. The EA was initiated in January 2005, after approval of the Terms of Reference by the Minister of the Environment. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 18 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan The proposed 407 East corridor, identified through the EA process includes a transportation corridor, consisting of a highway and a transitway, and the associated support facilities. The transportation corridor includes: • Mainline section from Brock Road to Highway 35/115; • Two north-south freeway links connecting the proposed 407 extension to Highway 401, one in Whitby (West Durham Link) and the other in Clarington (East Durham Link); • Protection of a dedicated transitway corridor. The 407 East Durham Link crosses through the eastern portion of the Tooley Creek Watershed from north of Highway 2 to Highway 401, between Hancock and Solina Roads. The 407 East Environment Assessment was submitted in August, 2009 to the Ontario Minister of the Environment and was approved in June 2010. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Report for 407 East was approved in July 2011 by the Honourable Peter Kent, Minister of the Environment. Based on an announcements in 2011 by the Ontario Government, the 407 East will be built in two phases. This first phase will run from Brock Road in the west to Harmony Road in the east, and include the West Durham Link. The targeted date for the completion of this phase is 2015. The second phase will bring the 407 East into the Municipality of Clarington. The second phase, which may include sub-phases will run from Harmony Road in the west to Highway 35/115 in the east and include the East Durham Link. The targeted date for the completion of this phase is 2020. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 19 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 4. Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds: Existing Conditions The following is a summary of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek—Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report completed by AECOM in September 2010. The reader is referred to the Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, 2010) for complete documentation on the state of the watersheds. It is important to note that recent hydrologic and hydraulic modelling completed by CLOCA has shown that the watershed boundaries for both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds differ from the previously accepted watershed boundaries used in the Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, 2010). To account for these changes and to present the most up-to-date state of the watersheds, figures originally presented in the Existing Conditions Report, have been modified and included in the Watershed Management Plan Report. In a few cases, the changes to the watershed boundaries have resulted in changes to the conclusions presented in the Existing Conditions Report. For example,the water budget results and the percentage of natural and naturalized cover have required recalculation due to the changes in the surface area and land use of the watersheds. A revised water budget is presented in Section 5.3 for both watersheds. Where the results presented herein differ from results previously presented in the Existing Conditions Report, data contained in this Watershed Management Plan shall supersede the data in the Existing Conditions Report. 4.1 Robinson Creek Watershed: Existing Conditions 4.1.1 Study Area The Robinson Creek Watershed is located in the Regional Municipality of Durham, entirely within the local Municipality of Clarington, and is under the jurisdiction of CLOCA (Figure 4.1). It is one of the smallest watersheds within the jurisdiction of the Municipality of Clarington, measuring approximately 594 ha in size. The headwaters of Robinson Creek originate to the north of Bloor Street. A defined stream channel for Robinson Creek is first observed beginning near Trulls Road, just north of Sandringham Drive in the community of Courtice. Robinson Creek drains into Lake Ontario through a portion of the Provincially Significant McLaughlin Bay Wetland Complex and Darlington Provincial Park. Land use throughout the Robinson Creek Watershed is dominated by agricultural and urban residential land use, with relatively small proportions of natural and naturalized cover. The watershed is quickly becoming more urbanized with areas associated with the community of Courtice, dominating the landscape along the northern and western limits of the watershed. Development along the Highway 401 corridor is also expected in increase in the future. 4.1.2 Climate Climate and precipitation normals between 1971 and 2000 were obtained from Environment Canada's Bowmanville Mostert Meteorological Station, which is considered the most representative climate station for the Robinson Creek Watershed with available long-term historical data (Table 4.1). Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 20 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan SVblect Arez {:' j p r 4f� y x a1� � y iffi V Jr• ?.. �..:> .�`` +-1 �,���r-� ►/SIB. . _ r� nr i E4d,Fr��• L--�` - Ba�mappinu rmm QEEaia Miresln o(Naurel Rmume OMOPhab9�aPhY 2D]5 Legend Q Robinson Creek Watershed Robusu,C..x BPa wmay C-1, Railway v�r.ranaa Managmam Rao � � -----Intermittent Stream Robinson Creek —Permanent Stream Watershed o rs ,so- goo Aso ew Waterbody Segment F.1-NYP11 Wetland Area,Permanent Fenix A6nD11 se VTA2mn1IN,NPD BR TM1a dnxnB Nn ewn Preea.d le•ENe u.e1PEtdA'e•kern urnn eyaHrd P.eM1e eee M.�cw.n�ai�.di.�4 a%rew�re0 W ie.+„ (�. ate, wIv aNY g vrd eMal raxieningagvrvsa.AELQMeccega �_-II■ mblly,antl Jonas anY Eali!Iry Mrateenec b arq parry rscuna mu®vmymnm wM. Figurn 4.1 ,.Ey om.am[Enpnpdaoa.9nrnxtia+n�iwEC¢srmaumm.viw�eawa,Etismarare.�swa.w..iaw1 Figure 4.1 Robinson Creek Watershed Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 21 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Table 4.1 Comparison of Precipitation Climate Normals to Observed Conditions Air Temperature Climate Normals Precipitation Climate Normals (1971 -2000)1 (1971 -2000)1 Date Maximum Minimum Mean Date Rain Snowz Total January -1.9 -10.7 -6.3 January 33.1 30.0 63.1 February -0.9 -9.7 -5.3 February 30.8 16.4 46.3 March 4.0 -4.9 -0.5 March 46.3 13.5 60.7 April 10.9 1.1 6.0 April 70.0 2.9 72.9 May 17.8 6.6 12.2 May 73.7 0.0 73.7 June 22.8 11.3 17.1 June 81.5 0.0 81.5 July 25.5 14.0 19.8 July 63.7 0.0 63.7 August 24.5 13.2 18.9 August 81.0 0.0 81.0 September 20.2 9.2 14.7 September 90.5 0.0 90.5 October 13.4 3.4 8.4 October 67.8 0.1 67.9 November 6.9 -0.7 3.1 November 77.9 6.1 84.0 December 1.2 -6.6 -2.7 iDecember 47.4 24.2 71.6 Total jTotal 764.6 93.2 867.9 Notes: 1. Source:www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/climatenormals 2. 1 cm of snow equals 1 mm of precipitation 4.1.3 Physiography and Geology The Robinson Creek Watershed is located within the Iroquois Plain physiographic region (Figure 4.2), which is a gently sloping lowland area extending from the edge of the till plain of the South Slope region (located to the north of the study area) down to Lake Ontario (Chapman and Putnam, 1984). The geology of the Robinson Creek Watershed consists of Quaternary sediments that overlie Ordovician bedrock of the Blue Mountain Formation, locally referred to as the Whitby Formation (Figures 4.3 and 4.4). The primary soil within the watershed is a stony, sandy, silty till fi known as the Newmarket Till (the upper soil layer on the photograph to the left is Newmarket Till). This unit is very dense and restricts groundwater flow and infiltration. The remaining surficial soils in the r watershed are part of the Iroquois Plain, which consists of shallow lake deposits of fine sand, silt and clay. These glaciolacustrine deposits were formed by glacial melt water discharging into glacial Lake Iroquois during the last glacial period. The shoreline of Lake Iroquois is �r l characterized by raised sand and gravel beach deposits and is ' r considered a significant natural feature. The Lake Iroquois Shoreline is not present within the Robinson Creek Watershed, although it can be found to the north and east of the watershed. Within the watershed, fine sand deposits were deposited close to the former shoreline, with subsequent deposits of silts and clays being deposited farther south (closer to present day Lake Ontario as show in the lower soil layer on the photograph to the left). Fine sand deposits can be found in the northern portion of the watershed near Trulls Road, where a defined stream channel for Robinson Creek is first observed. Newmarket Till soils dominate remaining surface area of the watershed, with portions of Robinson Creek valley containing glaciolacustrine silts and clays. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D- 22 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Legand Y o CLOCA B—dary YC"-JI w J reh]'I a s o . - Raan�ncreek>nm��hed .: ... Todey C—k wa6 hed 3 J i•( p' r J "` •:'r Physiography Geology Regions S - -3d,Oak Fames M—im 31,Peted—uh DruNin Field -,� -az-9-M Sbpe J.f J r_J rcj e 41,.Imquds Plain ;1 -e•' t .`, IV r W 711 .- ry auged ue� • . '''III ':�? =••t Physiographic Regions '•1 ,r r.u�mn °s. .v.S•� .:.�y rryeneonng A_COM Figure 4.2 Physiographic Regions Nw1411_F-I Wat...hed_Man_Plan.DO 23 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan � '..4,.- -" - . � •'fitr,, TC-'AP1 aM�4- KC-IVY P4 Rr'.M P1 Newmarket Till Eayr -BVgOV RC-MP5 I Recreation center a f P Fine Textured Glaciolacustrine %he Silt a CI!y RC-Mrz as B Gr9e§Rpn s I eases`"e R°ad s P rngtnn P.P.We°a d o£ J S+ 676060 6776 fiT8660 419606 Legend Monitors ©Lake Iroquois Shoreline k°rrnsm creek ano roaep' pNoane r 8 Groundwater Monitor Nest Surficial Geology waeBneaMane3memaxe,n�.,e� 6 Mini-Piezometer 20:Organic deposits Robinson Creek Q Robinson Creek Watershed 19:Modem alluvial deposits Watershed Railway (Salt,Sand and Gravel) Surficial Geology Intermittent Stream ®14b:Littoral-foreshore deposits(Sand) rs.om 9c:Foreshore-basinal deposits(Silt and Sand) una zoro nu.w.o m Perm.vent Stream Waterbody Segment Sa:Massive-well laminated(Silt and Clay) o Wetland Area,Permanent 5b:Storte-poor,carbonate-derived silty to sandy till(Newmarket Till) AZCO � 4 Figure 4. �o�.nw�ten.,..m,ix�moxK,�egxwwnrx.rm�s,.'m�m,rnxseavm��smAie.,m,e.,,am «r«�aea�a�,er Figure 4.3 Robinson Creek Watershed Surficial Geology Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man PIan.Docx 24 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan � LegaTW - Neim�nu oe. er nwa„ra N,.m,nx�Tai Tnomamx r sm s omrxoo� eearo<. agD A(Worth) _ .&(South) xro ]50 S � —. 150 —Onginei Gmurq d QQ 100 � ---� � tar a1 Wdapto Surr.,�pmai�gdPo�o mo0x- 0 � D 0 e000 4000 co01, e00D 10000 12oc0 ta00D ul000 1000 'NOOOIn >�xr.x9rrx�P..dbw� �aEx.x .mi.iseswrarxmq �aY.9�,M r'EmN.erm.�w.aws.arx.ww�.xr.�+ r...aN 4s.r,ECw mr.�w.e.r..x a•+..n unxn CROSS SECTION ALONG OSHAWA-CLARINGTON TOWNLINE °- A=COM 3 4 Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan S Geological Cross-Section xwow*,.aom -TE T��DxF 80119358 Fabruary2011 4_.4 Figure 4.4 Geological Cross-Section Nw1411—Final—Wat...hed_Man—Plan.DO 25 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 4.1.4 Groundwater Groundwater flow in the Robinson Creek Watershed is controlled by the thick deposits of the Newmarket Till Aquitard present within the watershed (Figure 4.3). This unit is very dense and restricts groundwater flow and infiltration. Groundwater flow in the watershed generally follows surface topography and flows from north to south, with minor components bending towards discharge areas in the Robinson Creek valley (Figure 4.5). A small portion of the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer is present in the northern portion of the watershed. The high permeability of the sandy near shore deposits of the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer provides a pathway for local groundwater recharge and discharge. The water table is typically near surface because the low permeability of the underlying Newmarket Till Aquitard restricts drainage of groundwater to depth. Areas covered by these sandy soils provide a potentially important groundwater recharge and discharge function that contributes to stream flow in Robinson Creek. These potentially important groundwater recharge areas are presented on Figure 4.6, and generally coincide with the area covered by the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer. A quantitative analysis of groundwater recharge areas is presented in Section 5.4.2. The Robinson Creek Watershed does not contain any confined aquifers that are part of the Oak Ridges Moraine. The southern extent of the major regional aquifer units from the Oak Ridges Moraine, such as the Thorncliffe Aquifer and the Oak Ridges Moraine Aquifer, pinch out to the north of the Robinson Creek Watershed (YPDT-CAMC Technical Report#01-06) (Figure 4.4). These aquifer units do not contribute to groundwater flow or groundwater discharge in the watershed. It is therefore likely that any groundwater discharge occurring in Robinson Creek and its tributaries is derived locally, rather than from deep regional groundwater flow. Important groundwater discharge areas were delineated through visual observations of seeps and are presented on Figure 4.7. These important groundwater features generally coincide with wetlands, watercourses and observed groundwater springs and seeps. There are no municipal supply wells or other large watertakings located in the Robinson Creek Watershed. Based upon a search of the Ministry of the Environment's Permit To Take Water Database, there are no significant groundwater or surface water users in the watershed. Domestic water users have traditionally utilized groundwater for potable water use, obtaining water from lenses within the Newmarket Till or from bedrock aquifers. With increasing urban development in the watershed, current domestic well users could obtain water from municipal systems that derive water from Lake Ontario. 4.1.5 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Specific indicators of aquatic habitat condition and health were documented for the Robinson Creek Watershed in relation to the local environment including: Strahler stream order, instream barriers to fish migration that contribute to isolation of habitats or populations, riparian vegetation, thermal regimes and land use/cover. In addition to these environmental indicators and conditions, fish species, fish locations, and benthic invertebrate composition and distribution was also documented. Robinson Creek flows for approximately 6.7 km (north to south) before out letting into Lake Ontario at the south end of Darlington Provincial Park. Figure 4.8 shows stream order classifications within the Robinson Creek Watershed. Stream order provides a method of grouping streams of a similar size, depth and flow, as well as suggesting a level of sensitivity a watercourse may have to disturbance or development. In general, as stream order increases, so does watercourse depth and width. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 26 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan s �' r� C� w m � 8p �r f -_ -------------- AI ®>a�P Baaemappnu,mm Rdava Minah o(Naurel Reavrxa OMOPM1abgrePM1Y 2D]5 Legend Equipotential Lines cress—TPmay C-1. WakraM1ed Maragmart P6n ll a MOE Water Wells and Static Groundwater Level wa Q Robinson Creek Watershed Robinson Creek Equipotential Map Fwrvarr�o�l e 108 280 b0 fi80 800 nryeci fi0119359 ,S,WO VTM 2mn1TN,NPD 83 TM1a dnxnB M1ea enen Pmaartd IrB�e ua e1PEtdA'e rJertt urnn eyaHN parties eee eye en4e mOWiex AXOM mbfi„y,anaeon sam�da'ilh.d�auow c�fa FigU(o 4.5 PECCMa®a 3.w o�me maaN.�wm.,m�rnssamosrwiwBSCS�.w,vow.w��nxa�sei�-,�sucww.�a,.i.�a Figure 4.5 Robinson Creek Equipotential Map Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man PIan.Docx 27 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan �H9 t'R p'yfu.+• �y� �` a 1`�E gyp + N 'r. dt T Ttrsr \` Y.. .A 14 a w .,_ .d" co rk v ,r .nn r• ov4�c�r�J�.i - lrenr.rr.rrr�. Baaemappinu rmm QEEaia Minaa>'ar Naurel Reacarsea OMOPM1ab9�aPM1Y 2D]5 tA9elld Q Robinson Creek Watershed Rabmsan c—aPdr ay c— Wakrs M1ed MznagrraM Pkn Important Groundwater Recharge Areas Robinson Creek >rr Railway Watershed --Intermittent Stream Groundwater Recharge Permanent Stream Areas o as ism wo tso eoo cenmanraon r.rs,oao Waierbody Segment FfOj°4Y 8P1193� unu zo•EnrrN,NID SS 0 Weiland Area,Permanent rra ara..Ea NK Nwn omoa�aa m•a,a r.arnECaah aam uaa eyarem rams., w lva bygvrarrneMal raximirg ageraaa.AEL6M eccaga f�1M mbil„y,ana don sam ida'uh�+irauoa. camya App Figur04.6 PECCMaam iw o�„c mia9;.�wm.�rrnssamosrwiwBSCenmv�w.w�rnxa�sei.-,.s.�rx:m..�.,v..aa Figure 4.6 Robinson Creek Watershed Groundwater Recharge Areas Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 28 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 7�T71 TS +l_ Al Recreation Center i 3 +r aaad c�s m� n r ad —4 °4 l � — t,aar r>aar,e ®>ewo Baaemapunu rmm Qaava Mirealr o(Naurel Re¢ame Legend o.napnnegmrnr zms Modelled Groundwater Seepage Indicating Plant 3pecies Q Discharge Areas(CLOCA) ® Marsh Mangold(Caki palustds) EM Robinson creek Watershed a°uasma creel and 3may c"I. Nfabsin one Creek Pkn Water-class(Nasturtium officlnale) �-y—�Railway Robinson Creek wa Upwards Hydraulic Gradients: ---- Intermittent Stream Watershed Y" Groundwater Mondors —Permanent Stream Groundwater Discharge e Mini-piezumeter Waterbody Segment Areas o s +so- 30o so coo Visual Seepage Observations Welland A—,Permanent Fanm+rv2o„ +5,�0 Pf0i94Y 60119359 u31n z°,n+rN,NPD S, Spring rna ama NK N.an omoa,aa rn•a,a r.alnECaah sent Seepage e mar a�iea nerarem aama., Soil Type w lvvea bygvrvmneMal raximirg a9ardes.AEL6k eccega �I m60„y,ana eon sam rAa'ilh�au�m camr Organic Soil M Figure4.7 PECCMaw +.w om.amc mww�.+*m.��rnssamosrwiwBSCenmv�w.w�+nxaasei.-,�n.a.�aei Figure 4.7 Robinson Creek Watershed Groundwater Discharge Areas Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man PIan.Docx 29 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan wo-r; � ,�, o ;� �r r v� r•- a, _ c .Ma r k�; e LA,LM mri�r 0—ph-g Imm tMrx+c M'meM of Nnurel Rewvr�a R 9 R> Legend Strahler Stream Order Puhvso on�and,��Cree6 1 Waters M1ea Maca9mera P6n N " . Robinson Creek 2 Watershed 3 Strahler Stream Order o ,s tsa 30o aso Boa �'Rahway Fah—u 2011 unu zo,n,rN.NSn s, Q Robinson Creek Watershed rra arnrr..aNKewn onn�na m•u,er.ntnECaah xan< Waterbody Segment awn eyarem rama., Wetland Area,Permanent AZCOM mbll„Y,antl Bonn:arty FAa'llh.Malao>n r.b arty Famr PECG.raw®vmYtenm Frgurc 6.6 'Mm om.mm[M.Wo r�mam�itxssam�suw�esv�'.vnxiew.m�erwa,rtxireirsrsh.nAia...R.w� Figure 4.8 Robinson Creek Watershed Strahler Stream Order Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 30 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Riparian vegetation cover varies greatly between each of the stream orders along Robinson Creek. Maintaining adequate riparian cover around a watercourse will improve surface water quality by reducing sedimentation. Riparian vegetation also functions to provide allochthonous inputs into streams such as leaf and woody debris, which creates habitat cover and provides shade cover over streams contributing to the buffering of water temperatures. Environment Canada guidelines state that 75% of a stream length should be buffered by 30 m of riparian cover to maintain a healthy state (EC, 2004). Within the Robinson Creek Watershed approximately 72% of first order streams lack sufficient riparian vegetation. The majority of second order stream reaches within the Robinson Creek Watershed are surrounded by large naturalized riparian buffers that are relatively undisturbed from development or local agriculture. In total approximately 70% of second order streams maintain adequate riparian buffer vegetation. The majority of the third order stream reaches within the Robinson Creek Watershed also maintain adequate riparian vegetation with roughly 79% of the main branch containing good riparian cover. Two barriers to fish passage were identified along the length of Robinson Creek. The first impediment to fish migration is located at the railway crossing of Robinson Creek upstream of Baseline Road (Figure 4.9). The second barrier to fish movement is located on the south side of Bloor Street and is associated with a perched culvert. Fish community sampling for Robinson Creek was completed in June and August/September 2009 as part of the Existing Conditions Report. Eleven (11) known species, representing seven families were identified (Table 4.2). Of the 11 fish species caught, Blacknose Dace (Rhinichthys atratulus), Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculauts) and Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas), where the most common species captured, and were all captured in similar proportions within Robinson Creek. These fish species represent a warm to coolwater community and are each widespread in their southern Ontario distribution. AECOM captured young-of-the-year Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), which is a Coldwater species, at station R2, suggesting that the railway crossing north of Baseline Road is not a significant barrier to rainbow trout migration (Figure 4.11). Although Rainbow Trout where captured in September 2009, they represented less than 1% of all fish captured. These data are consistent with CLOCA reports confirming young-of-the-year rainbow trout in Robinson Creek in 2003, however, it should also be noted that CLOCA was not able to capture migratory species from the same areas in 2008 and 2009. The confirmed occurrence of rainbow trout, both in 2009 (AECOM) and 2003 (CLOCA) suggests that limited runs of migratory rainbow trout exist in the watershed, and furthermore, the middle reaches of the watershed provide tolerable, cool to cold water conditions for Coldwater fish species, such as a rainbow trout. Table 4.2 Known Fish Community Composition — Robinson Creek Watershed Abundance Thermal COSEWIC COSSARO Family Common Name Scientific Name (% of total Class Status Status captured) Catostomidae White Sucker Catostomus commersoni <1% Cool NAR NAR Centrarchidae Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus 3% Warm NAR NAR Cyprinidae Fathead Minnow Pimephales notatus 36% Warm NAR NAR Creek Chub Semotilus atromacu/auts 25% Cool NAR NAR Blacknose Dace Rhinichthys atratu/us 30% Cool NAR NAR Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae <1% Cool NAR NAR Northern Redbelly Dace Phoximus eos 3% Cool/Warm NAR NAR Gasterosteidae Brook Stickleback Cu/aea inconstans 2% Cool NAR NAR Percidae Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum <1% Cool NAR NAR Salmonidae Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss <1% Cold NAR NAR Cyprinodontidae Banded Killifish Fundulus diaphanus <1% Cool NAR NAR NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 31 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Perches Culvert .ate 1,ry1 t Y 5 � T '+ 1. p pn.� G) •mil r: ,��':�...�, �tiF lti ne¢oad linpetllment to Migration !:�.,fig,,.. • gase. la^y�� oaTlsna.°`•rr�O 5'a`h Kaaa� ' > ReremeppnR ham Oman°MnaW a NeYml Revunxs tlnaoPM1en�AMn2005 Legend rmamarta Greek antl Taalay L1eek Instream Barrier Wrlershetl Manapnent PNn l — Railway Robinson Creek .{y. Watershed T Q Robinson Creek Watershed Instream Barriers 0 15 ,54 goo ,5o ed ----- Intermittent Stream eareary4on t1S0o0 Prol�t 8Q 114359 unm z�aa nn.Nno m Permanent Stream a.a.:,�a has sass P.aPw mina aaa arn>•caN'a�nan Waterbody Segment ro�mrhmea'rea, Wetland Area,Permanent aro�:eti a�aaa,a�,a.�o :" �.aE�oMap,a A�C©M raapom•dlhn aM dame aTy laaiky Malsoarc;to arty oa•ry nm motin® WeECCN'a FigUY9-0.9 Ns o�..erea n+:wa;.a�a°.,ml�ussammwa.rass,.;r+s�avap�.a�m.mzaeme.,.a�a,sse..°a.°.,.A Figure 4.9 Robinson Creek Watershed Instream Barriers NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 32 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan The presence of cool and Coldwater species within the watershed also speaks to the thermal regime of the watershed as displayed in Table 4.3. Stream temperatures collected between July and August 2009 (temperature locations shown on Figure 4.10) indicate that the thermal regime is generally coolwater rather than warmwater (as shown in the Ministry of Natural Resources database), and supports a coolwater thermal classification for Robinson Creek. AECOM's conclusion is consistent with CLOCA's thermal data collected between 2005 and 2009, and generally matches the thermal class of the fish community, with the exception of the presence of rainbow trout; which are most often associated with Coldwater systems. Table 4.3 Stream Temperature Monitoring within Robinson Creek Days within Mean Daily Temperature Range Temperature Lethal Limit for Min Temp Max Temp Period of Record Cold Cool Warm Classification Logger Location (<190C) (19-250C) (>25°C) Rainbow Trout (°C) (°C) (>260C) RC-WT2(MP2) July 12-August 31,2009 8 42 1 0 16.2 25.1 Coolwater RC-WT3(MP3) July 12-August 31,2009 21 30 0 0 15.7 23.8 Coolwater Currently, and historically, the fish community within the Robinson Creek Watershed contains a range of warm to cold water fish species that are typical of an urban fish community. With the exception of rainbow trout, the fish community of Robinson Creek is typical of a coolwater system with the distribution of species primarily dependant on flow regime within the watershed and less on water temperatures. To this end, flow regime within Robinson Creek is a primary factor of fish species distribution and habitat potential. Seasonal fish habitat within intermittent reaches of Robinson Creek does exist within some of the first and second order stream reaches but the majority of permanent fish habitat exists within the second and third order stream reaches. The surface water quality in Robinson Creek is reflective of an urbanized watershed. Field parameters and chemical results are presented in Table 4.4. Concentrations of total phosphorus that exceed Provincial Water Quality Objective (PWQO) standards were found at each monitoring station during all monitoring events in the summer of 2009 (sampling locations shown on Figure 4.10). Chloride, total ammonia, and total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations were generally elevated. These results suggest that some non-point source contaminants such as road salt, agricultural fertilizers and septic systems have impacted the water quality in Robinson Creek. Table 4.4 Robinson Creek Surface Water Quality Parameters Units PWQO June 24-25/09 August 24/09 September 3/09 I R1 R2 R3 R1* R2* R3* R4 R5 Water Temperature °C 21.1 23.4 19.6 14 16.7 16.8 17.7 20.1 pH 6.5-8.5 7.77 7.85 7.56 8.25 7.95 8.21 8.04 8.04 Conductivity NS/cm 637 610 664 625 586 736 894 600 Total Ammonia mg/L 0.08 0.22 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.07 Un-ionized Ammonia mg/L 0.02 0.002 0.005 0.008 NA NA NA NA 0.003 Total Phosphorus mg/L 0.03 0.076 0.064 0.037 0.050 0.058 0.11 0.048 0.067 TSS mg/L - 34 27 17 17 21 61 23 61 Chloride mg/L 150- 88 84 74 95 88 54 180 130 BOD mg/L - I ND ND ND I ND ND ND ND ND Notes: `water temperature,pH and conductivity collected on September 4, 2009 "Currently there is no PWQO for chloride, however. 150 mg/L is used as a protection of freshwater biota criteria by the Toronto Region Conservation Authority, Ontario MOE-Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch and the BC Ministry of the Environment ND=Not Detectable NA=Not Available, due to missing data required for calculation Bold numbers are above their respective PWQO Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 33 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan y rsi - a. f t g r` 10" q� r A C ua� PC YT2 ' G ° r ' t u. {- I-�9i°n park e�000 sa�maPPno rim arcar.xun.or mua�rai Raaa�a Legend 0MOPM1abgrePM1Y 2D]5 IdigratoryFistrSpecles —Rahway 0 Rainbow Trout,June 2009 ---- Intermittent Stream ace:o caexanar arrreak t7arerearsped Manag¢em PNNn ll ® Rainbow Trout, 'apt 2009 Permanent Stream Ko0ln3on l.reeN w � w White Sucker,June 2009 Waterbody Segment Watershed r� White Sucker,Sept 2009 _�Wetland Area,Permanent Fishery and Habitat a, Water Temperature o rs ,so- sgoo,o ad aso eoa Assessment Stream Type$Thermal FahuryMonitoring Station Assessment Pr'q-I 1 e unu zo,n vw,nwm ® Fisheries&Habitat Assesment ---- Intermittent.No data rra a,...,a eK ewn Pnoa�aa m•u,a r.nrnr:caah rtan< CLOCA Sample Locations am a.c..11 I—diae nsm man arar maem.., ----Intermittent,Unassigned Habitat Assesment alt.,dd. m.�.111ra.�...nFCau.��.gs * Permanent,No data ��a, mb�l„Y,ana aonas am�Aa'rih�.�owar.ro am cant m ma rec«,raa.are�wa�e.aaa..,a. Q Robinson Creek Watershed Permanent,Coolwa}er riguraa.t iw o�mc rcAaom.�",x�e,morr�.ne�sw�'.er�w.�m..m„nx�raei.-.s,asas..w� Figure 4.10 Robinson Creek Watershed Fishery and Habitat Assessment Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Doex 34 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 4.1.6 Terrestrial Natural Heritage The Robinson Creek watershed is located along the north shore of Lake Ontario within Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Site District 6-13. The site district is further divided by Chapman and Putnam (1984) into the Iroquois Plain and the Oak Ridges Moraine South Slope physiographic regions. The watershed occurs below the South Slope and historic Lake Iroquois shoreline, and is entirely located within the Lake Iroquois Plain physiographic region. The Iroquois Plain is an east-west trending feature that consists of sandy to silty deposits. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) (1984) found approximately five to ten percent of Site District 6-13 to be in relatively natural and undisturbed state. The most common remnant natural features include shoreline bluffs and beaches, rivermouth marshes, stream valleys and riparian corridors, and isolated upland forests. Urban residential development has been approved in the watershed, particularly in the northwest (i.e., west of Prestonvale Road and north of Bloor). Findings presented in the Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report (AECOM 2010) indicate that that 19.6% of the watershed supports natural and naturalized cover (Figure 4.13), including all or parts of the following designated natural areas: • McLaughlin Bay Wetland Provincially Significant Wetland (located in part in the Robinson watershed at the mouth of the Robinson Creek); • Darlington Provincial Park (along the shore of Lake Ontario, partly within the Robinson watershed); and • The Robinson Creek Valley Environmentally Sensitive Area (occurs entirely with the Robinson watershed). Young deciduous forest and thicket communities are the most common vegetation community types, with Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) abundant throughout (Figure 4.11). Common associates include, American Elm (Ulmus americana) and Manitoba Maple (Acernegundo); the latter is particularly common in lowlands and floodplains. Mid- age and mature forest cover is rare in the watershed. Where these communities do occur, Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) forms associations with White Ash (Fraxinus americana), Red Oak (Quercus rubra), American Beech (Fagus grandifolia), and/or Eastern Hemlock (Tsuga canadensis). Coniferous and mixed forests comprise a relatively small component of forest cover, with White Pine (Pinus strobus), Red Pine (Pinus resinosa) and White Spruce (Picea glauca) occurring in upland situations (commonly as remnant plantations), and Eastern White Cedar (Thuja occidentalis) occurring in the floodplains. Upland meadows occur throughout the watershed, particularly as abandoned agriculture fields. These meadows are typically dominated by varying degrees of cool-season grasses, Canada Goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), Heath Aster (Asterericoides) and New England Aster (Asternovae- angliae). Deciduous swamp communities are the most common wetland types, with Green Ash and Swamp Maple (Acer freemanii) abundant throughout treed types, and Red-osier Dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) and Willow species (Salix sp.)dominating the thicket swamps. Marsh communities are present in smaller portions, with Reed-canary Grass (Phalarus aurundinacea) and forb meadow marshes the most common types, followed by shallow Cattail (Typha sp.) marshes. Seepage wetlands are rare, and are generally associated with areas where stream valleys have exposed shallow localized groundwater flow, predominately along the main branches of the Robinson Creek valley. 193 species of vascular plants are known to occur within the Robinson Creek Watershed (AECOM 2010). Forty-six of the species indentified are non-native occurrences, representing approximately 24% of all species recorded. The high proportion of non-native species is largely attributed to the fragmented nature of the vegetation throughout the watershed, which is typical of southern Ontario. Eleven species are considered regionally significant (uncommon to rare in Durham Region according to Varga et al., 2000). Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 35 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan pt.�? r sM >+T P*e 40, +I, 4 a z. Vegetation Community Class Aquatic System Open Water Community Class '- — - i.rU'n P d�-au,la- Terrestrial—Cultural Communities Agricultural Community Class - o Constructed Community Class ; Terrestrial-Natural and Naturalized Communities Bluff Community Class III Forest Community Class • _ Meadow Community Class Woodland Community Class Shoreline Community Cfass Thicket Community Class Wetland System Marsh Community Class Swamp Community Class a+r•.m.1.vw xm nominn Creek aattl Todfr CreM .a.M1atl lAa m¢nt Pi.n Legend Robinson Creek " ` Q Rabinsor Creek Watershed Watershed Vegetation Communities —Railway Intermittent Stream r`°..`ry2011 1 t500© PrgBC1601193% u.r i„e„k weo� Permanent Stream w p w Wat-bcidy Segment Wetland Area,Permanent A /+OM Fgure 4.ti r.om.�r m•memo-.�..,1me.�w..wPSm...m.a.�wimwo-.+.,wa+.�.�. Figure 4.11 Robinson Creek Watershed Vegetation Communities Aw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 36 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Fifty-five breeding bird species were recorded in the Robinson Creek Watershed as part of the Existing Conditions study (Figure 4.12). This number is relatively low given the size of the watershed; however, it reflects the low quality of habitat available. The most frequently observed bird species are those that are common in southern Ontario typical of edges, shrub habitats and disturbed areas. The most abundant species recorded include: Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata), House Wren (Troglodytes aedon), Gray Catbird (Dumetella carolinensis), Yellow Warbler (Dendroica petechia), Northern Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia), Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), and American Goldfinch (Cardeulis tristis). Negligible numbers of area-sensitive forest bird species were recorded; i.e., five individuals of three forest area-sensitive species were recorded: White- breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), Black-throated Green Warbler (Dendroica virens) and Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea). A few grassland or open land area-sensitive species were recorded in the watershed; however, only Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis)was recorded in any significant numbers. Darlington Provincial Park is a very important migrant stop-over location for songbirds in particular, but also for shorebirds and waterfowl. The Darlington Provincial Park Checklist of Birds (T. Hoar 1997) lists the 264 bird species which have occurred in the park. (Note that only half the park is within the watershed.) The majority of these would have been observed during migration seasons, including some species that have probably only been observed once or twice. Species at Risk are those species with status under the Federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) and/or the Provincial Endangered Species Act. Species at Risk are identified federally by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), and provincially by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO). Five Species at Risk are known to occur with the Robinson watershed (AECOM 2010): • Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus); • Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii); • Snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentine); • Milksnake (Lampropeltis triangulum triangulum); and • Butternut (Juglans cinerea). 4.1.7 Land Cover Land use and land cover in the Robinson Creek Watershed has changed significantly over the past few decades. The focus of the land use has changed from agriculture to urban residential. Figure 4.13 presents an overview of the land use found within the watershed based upon the results of the Existing Conditions Study conducted in 2009/2010 and is based upon municipal land use designations and ELC polygon mapping. All land uses have been simplified into broad land use categories to focus on the various aspects of the natural heritage system. Although the full break down of land use is not presented, they have been grouped into the same classes used for hydrologic modelling of the watershed: • Development Urban Residential, Rural Residential, Industrial and Commercial,Town Centre and Transportation and Utility; • Natural Heritage Woodlots and Forest, Lakes and Wetlands, Meadows and Grasslands, Savannah and Thicket, and Darlington Provincial Park; • Agriculture Agricultural Facility, Crop Field, and Pasture; and • Greenspace Community Parks, Stormwater Management Facilities, and Waterfront Greenway. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 37 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan r a '5TG N t P g chow 1� •y- .� -...-z —.._ 0 '...+• i) lir�i9 anP kH`o oil--"- i Code Species 'I GRNH Green Heron - - GWTE Green-winged Teal - GADW Gadwall - ,+'NDN-- WBNU White-breasted Nuthatch _cRN BGGN Blue-gray Gnatcatcher BTGN Black-throated Greer Warbler CCSP Clay-calored Sparrow OROR 10rchard Oriole ®>emo e.amaPPmu lan,arcato kNre.kr mkau4 R— Legend OMOPM1abgrePM1Y 2D]5 0 Bank Swallow Colony Core Areas Rahkmm�Creek antl Tmley Creek Forest Area-sensilve Species 17 Robinson Creek Watershed walaren�a manasanarn P6n ws Regionally Scarce,Rare or Railway Robinson Creek very Rare Species --Intermittent Stream Watershed Wildlife Features 4;=*�Landscape Corridor Permanent Stream o rs rso- goo aso ew ��Loral Corridor Weterbody Segment Fahre N Oil r.rs,wo olasl wll- unlzo,nvw,nwm ®Under Development nWelEa rid Area,Permanent Pr rna ara..,asaaawn PnPaaaan- qa nrnr:caah nran< ®Potential Amphibian Breeding Habitat uaa erarem ram.., a Musa Mao...a�am.l raw�n.�na,ea�...n>:cau a�reMs � . Interior Forest /"Z`O7I, mbll„y,aria eon sam rAa'ilh•+I,auow camye FigUY64.1Y PECCMaaw m,ao�'caewe •`"�rnssamorrwiw�ssM++rmm.vawmrmainx�srma,.mM1rrarrs.a.a.n<.a� Figure 4.12 Robinson Creek Watershed Wildlife Features Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 38 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Green Space 3.6% Forest and Woodlot 6.3% Total Natural Heritage Cover= "...a, Meadow 4.0% 19.6% Thicket 6.0% Wetland/Swamp 3.3% Other<0.1% Development 46.7% Agriculture 30.0% Figure 4.13 Robinson Creek Watershed — Existing Land Cover The total natural heritage cover for the watershed, including natural and naturalized cover, but not including manmade green space such as stormwater management facilities, is 19.6%. This falls short of the 30%target that is recommended for a healthy watershed (EC, 2005). Lands classified as wetland and swamp habitat make up 3.3% of land use in the watershed, which again falls short of the recommended 10% guideline (EC, 2005). The Robinson Creek Watershed does not currently contain any interior forest habitat or core areas (Figure 4.12). The majority of the higher quality forest habitat is found within the Robinson Creek valley lands and within Darlington Provincial Park. 4.1.8 Summary of Positive Attributes and Opportunities for Improvement As part of watershed management planning, it is important to recognize both the positive and negative attributes of a watershed. Although the Robinson Creek Watershed is mostly an urban watershed, some very positive results on the health of the watershed were documented in the Existing Conditions Study. Conversely, the same study highlighted a number of areas that could be improved to help create a healthier watershed and build a resiliency into the natural heritage system to protect against future stresses such as climate change. The Robinson Creek Watershed has many positive attributes including: • Groundwater discharge is sufficient to sustain baseflow in all but the driest years and thermally buffer stream temperatures; • The rate of groundwater use in the watershed is low and it expected to decline in the future; • Robinson Creek hosts a variety of healthy warm to cold water fish communities; • The thermal regime and stream flow in Robinson Creek is sufficient to sustain a population of rainbow trout, which is a cold water species, and provides rainbow trout habitat; NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 39 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan • Valley lands throughout the watershed are moderately well vegetated and provide a local north-south wildlife corridor; • The majority of 2nd and 3rd order reaches of Robinson Creek have adequate riparian cover; • A portion of the McLaughlin Bay Provincially Significant Wetland is found in the watershed; and • Darlington Provincial Park and the Lake Ontario Shoreline provide an important stop-over for migrant song birds, as well as shorebirds and waterfowl. However, several areas of concern were identified in the watershed where opportunities for improvement exist, including: • Natural and naturalized cover in the watershed make up 19.6% of the land cover, which is below target guidelines; • Wetland communities only make up 3.3 % of the watershed, which is below target guidelines; • A poorly developed forest bird and marsh breeding bird community; • A lack of interior forest habitat; • Wildlife connectivity in the watershed is limited and poorly developed; • Water quality indicators in Robinson Creek show that water quality is poor and reflects the urban nature of the watershed; • Imperviousness is expected to increase in the watershed with increasing urban development; • A potential reduction in groundwater recharge due to increased imperviousness; and • A flooding spill over hazard land occurs over Highway 401 for the 100-year uncontrolled storm event. It is the purpose of this watershed management plan to maintain what is good about the watershed and provide opportunities to improve some of the negative attributes that have been identified. By understanding the positive and negative attributes of the Robinson Creek Watershed, specific management recommendations can be made to improve the health of the watershed. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 40 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 4.2 Tooley Creek Watershed: Existing Conditions 4.2.1 Study Area The Tooley Creek Watershed is located in the Regional Municipality of Durham, entirely within the local Municipality of Clarington, and is under the jurisdiction of CLOCA (Figure 4.14). Along with the Robinson Creek Watershed, it is one of the smallest watersheds within the jurisdiction of the Municipality of Clarington, measuring approximately 1,157 ha in size. The Tooley Creek Watershed originates near the Lake Iroquois Shoreline at Nash Road, and outlets into Lake Ontario through the Tooley Creek Coastal Marsh. Erodible, high bluffs are found along the Lake Ontario shoreline, between the mouths of Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek. A portion of the Tooley Creek Watershed north of Highway 2 falls within the Greenbelt (refer to Section 3 for a description of the Greenbelt Plan) and contains a portion of the Provincially Significant Maple Grove Wetland Complex. Existing land use within the Tooley Creek Watershed is predominately agricultural with some rural residential use. The community of Courtice lies at the northwestern edge of the watershed and is the primary source of development pressure. Land use throughout the Tooley Creek Watershed is dominated by agricultural land use, with relatively small proportions of other land uses. 4.2.2 Climate Climate and precipitation normals between 1971 and 2000 were obtained from Environment Canada's Bowmanville Mostert Meteorological Station, which is considered the most representative climate station for the Tooley Creek Watershed with available long-term historical data (Table 4.1). 4.2.3 Physiography and Geology The Tooley Creek Watershed is located within Iroquois Plain physiographic region (Figure 4.1), which is a gently sloping lowland area extending from the edge of the till plain of the South Slope region (located to the north of the study area) down to Lake Ontario (Chapman and Putnam, 1984). It is important to note that this feature is an extensive east to west feature extending from Burlington to Trenton, and hosts many interesting natural heritage features that rely on shallow groundwater conditions. Much of it has been developed and the remnants provide pathways for wildlife movement. The Tooley Creek Watershed hosts an undeveloped portion of this unique geologic feature, something the Robinson Creek Watershed does not. The geology of the Tooley Creek Watershed consists of Quaternary sediments that overlie Palaeozoic aged limestone and shale of the Blue Mountain and Lindsay formations (Figures 4.3 and 4.15). The primary quaternary soil within the watershed is a stony, sandy, silty till known as the Newmarket Till. This unit is very dense and restricts groundwater flow and infiltration. The remaining surficial soils in the watershed are part of the Iroquois Plain, which consists of shallow lake deposits of fine sand, silt and clay. These glaciolacustrine deposits were formed by glacial melt water discharging into Glacial Lake Iroquois during the last glacial period. The shoreline of Lake Iroquois is characterized by raised sand and gravel beach deposits and can be found in the northern portion of the watershed (Figure 4.15), although the effect on the landscape and topography are minor relative to other parts in the region where the shoreline is strongly pronounced. Within the watershed, fine sand deposits were deposited close to the former shoreline, with subsequent deposits of silts and clays being deposited farther south (closer to present day Lake Ontario). Newmarket Till is the dominant surficial material within the watershed, with deposits of fine sand of the Iroquois Plain are present at the headwaters of Tooley Creek Watershed near Highway 2. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 41 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan ir t Sublegt r q � V•lt� � 4 Y'�77...a- X�4.vi'. "�` }, t y AG 4 a it M oP � ✓r9 //.{ I ' L 1�. II Ra°cl_ G4 R°ad.� �• �'�.:..x _� sgx''-.Ro. r. lade r,°,°R.n �mq pan q oo c_ n,n.r•,aruw�.,A�r:P�.. Legend QTe ley Creek Watershed Ane�su,ereax aqa Tgmay coq°� Railway wa�arenaa M:negmmrt Pb° r{y. -----Intermittent Stream Tooley Creek 7 —Permanent Stream Watershed q ra,.q Yqc eso wq Waterbody Segment Febuarr 2011 0 Wetland Area,Permanent Fmta�711— unazo,nrm�nws rra ara�q eK ewn o�aoama r�u,a r.n,nECaah xaM unn eyarem rama., AXOM mbii„y9ana eon sam�da'ilh�aaca� camYe Fig°red-76 PECCMa ma 3.w q�mc m.!aa ...,m��.n�amosrwrcgsm+m.nvm.va�mvma�nxcesmiwa�wti..� Figure 4.14 Tooley Creek Watershed NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 42 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan - f Nag1'Ro»d Vriols Pial / W t91 hic Region i Tc-MP«a \/ TC-BH1 -fops $ �/ / d } `\ IroquoisPl/aiq Sh�w Aquifer "x a Lake Iroquois Shorline raBNi` Sand and G ravel Deposits - �j Newmarket Till Tc�'doPS S+d 1� +4\ 1(:M V1 c Fine Textured ' Glai trine Silt H&cl Y TC-M P2 L 9 Ran ^ aad Read _ �' SautnScNlr,eR . B�gItRR�p� N III � Ka -_. .. L'A.(Hl—l' Baa9mappinP imm QEE®ia Mlrsaty er Naurel Rea,��me Legend OMOPhab9mPhY 2D]5 Monitors Surficial Geology 9 Groundwater Monitor Nest 20:Organic deposits R Ta ,cress Watershed MarvagmeE,P6n w{ys a Mlni-Piezometer 19:Modern alluvial deposits Toolay Creek Q Tooley Creek Watershed -(Silt,Sand and Gravel) Watershed —Railway ®14b:Littoral-foreshore deposits(Sand} Surficial Geology m 0 9h:Littoral-foreshore deposits(Sand and Gravel) o loo ma -n0o eoo 000 ---- Intermittent Stream FeOwarraal, ,:eo,000 permanent Stream 9a Foreshore-basinal deposits(Sift and Clay) Proieabone. uTM ZOEa,rN,NSn s, 8a:Massive-well laminated(Silt and Clay) rha ara..EaNKN.en omdamern-u,ar.nlnECaasaam Waterhody Segment n e„Hro aama, 54:Stone-poor,carbonate-derived silty e mar a�e.em��oae�e ee ne�r B4�4 nw-. Wefland Area,Permanent to Sandy till(Newmarket Till) w lvvea m bybgil„vyr,vanmanaeoMn a l sraaxm im liArga'uahga�+niiian uo.Aw E L6M eccecagga y ©Lake Iroquois Shorellre ` ` Y M Fieuro 4.75 rECCMaaw ,.w o�e,c m.�m+i.�nma*�rnssamorrwiwBSCenmv¢.w.w��nxmrmiws.ir...w�a.noe1 Figure 4.15 Tooley Creek Watershed Surficial Geology Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Docx 43 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 4.2.4 Groundwater Similarly to the Robinson Creek Watershed, groundwater flow in the Tooley Creek Watershed is controlled by the thick deposits of Newmarket Till present at surface (Figure 4.15). This unit is very dense and restricts groundwater flow and infiltration. Groundwater flow in the watershed generally follows surface topography and flows from north to south, with minor components bending towards discharge areas in Tooley Creek (Figure 4.16). The northern portion of the watershed hosts a portion of the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer. The high permeability of the sandy near shore deposits of the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer provides a pathway for local groundwater recharge and discharge. Areas covered by these sandy soils provide a potentially important groundwater recharge and discharge function that contributes to stream flow and temperature buffering in Tooley Creek. These potentially important groundwater recharge areas are presented on Figure 4.17, and coincide with the area covered by the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer. A quantitative analysis of groundwater recharge areas is presented in Section 5.4.2. The Tooley Creek Watershed does not contain any confined aquifers that are part of the Oak Ridges Moraine. The southern extent of the major regional aquifer units from the Oak Ridges Moraine, such as the Thorncliffe Aquifer and the Oak Ridges Moraine Aquifer, pinch out to the north of the Tooley Creek Watershed (YPDT-CAMC Technical Report#01-06) (Figure 4.3). These aquifer units do not contribute to groundwater flow or groundwater discharge in the watershed. It is therefore likely that any groundwater discharge occurring in Tooley Creek and its tributaries is derived locally, rather than from deep regional groundwater flow. Significant groundwater discharge areas were delineated through visual observations of seeps and are presented on Figure 4.18. These important groundwater features generally coincide with wetlands, watercourses and observed groundwater springs and seeps. Groundwater quality in the Tooley Creek Watershed can be described as hard with high concentrations of anions and cations such as calcium, magnesium, sodium, and bicarbonate, which is typical for southern Ontario groundwater. Concentrations of nitrate and sodium are elevated in the groundwater of the unconfined Lake Iroquois Shallow Aquifer, but are still at levels below Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS). These elevated concentrations reflect the unconfined nature of the aquifer and the use of road salt and fertilizers in the area. There are no municipal supply wells or other large water takings located in the Tooley Creek Watershed. Based upon a search of the Ministry of the Environment's Permit To Take Water Database, there are no significant groundwater or surface water users in the watershed. Domestic water users have traditionally utilized groundwater for potable water use, obtaining water from the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer, lenses within the Newmarket Till or from bedrock aquifers. With increasing urban development in the watershed, current domestic well users could obtain water from municipal systems that derive water from Lake Ontario. 4.2.5 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Specific indicators of aquatic habitat condition and health where documented for the Tooley Creek Watershed in relation to the local environment including: Strahler stream order, instream barriers to fish migration that contribute to isolation of habitats or populations, riparian vegetation, thermal regimes and land use/cover. In addition to these environmental indicators and conditions, fish species, fish locations, and benthic invertebrate composition and distribution was also documented. Tooley Creek flows for approximately 15.7 km (north to southeast) before out letting into Lake Ontario. Figure 4.19 shows stream order classifications within the Tooley Creek Watershed. Stream order provides a method of grouping streams of a similar size, depth and flow, as well as suggesting a level of sensitivity a watercourse may have to disturbance or development. In general, as stream order increases, so does watercourse depth and width. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 44 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan IAO y, 'r s C ' Syr"fit y 4_ c � g 4 h rs.. n • ��o ..�a` v � � 1M mad r s _ r .A LuAe Oxrrtniu sr8o0o e]BOgo Ra�meppnq ham Uaano MnsW dNaYial R�urtes OAM1OPM1eMreMY2005 Legend —Equipotentdal Lines aoM—creexa�arua,yc.aax wa�sned M�agmarc Raa ar PAC1L Water Wells and Static Groundwater Level Tooley Creek Watershed Tooley Creek Equipotential Map o iao mo aao eoo wo Febmayao�t i:zamo Fro(scceoir�ass unmzons.nn.Naom anV:,ra tine amp P�PY<a mime�.s arnECCUS�nan ro.w+rtmoaa� �4 m rew��a q i.w aro•e cr�. iraN�a �y.�m.;...sFCOw�acis A=COM nnpo�.reop,.�a m�s:mix„ar.,na.oa,...wam oo.ry nti madras mle drax ur aECpa's ®marao FigYr84.18 m�n�a�"eu:a�u.cm.��iussemmwi�.ncassesvrtmm+.oa_nuw�nxssaw�raFOn'�•.a+aa Figure 4.16 Tooley Creek Equipotential Map Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 45 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan �� BIBAhO � �y- ✓BOOR. � ._ G9-"]0 s Z N k n t ' �. .}' - 1� P a fin:•.. .r.'c �r •� �. }' , �,2 1 ✓ } V •- 3 o NP G 33. P a B L9 "p .. pond � � SoVtM1S"(�ICe R�* t l.iakr Ilnrurin Ba�mappinP imm QEE®ia Mln+aty er Naurel Rearnae OM"Phab9mPhY 2D]5 Legend Rohnawa CreeN and Tmlay(:aerak wem—Mana,--, yyy Tooley Creek Watershed Tooley Creek w�}r Important Groundwater RechargeAreas Watershed 7 Railway Groundwater Recharge m Areas o Eoo mo -mo eoo am -----Intermittent Stream FAnm.,n,zo„ Permanent Stream Frol�t�1193� m1A2mn1iN,NPDS Tra ara..EaeKewn Pm"ame m-u,ar.nBnECaa�saam �Waterbody Segment s Wetland Area•Permanent A=COM mbil„y,ana eon sam�da'uh,+i,auow camya Fieure 4.t7 rECCMa ma !aoi.�>...am,nx55pmosFwneBSWe'n,nuewwmvma,nimimieiew+.a.ia..w1 Figure 4.17 Tooley Creek Watershed Groundwater Recharge Areas Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 46 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan t�,y�+ fi>pIXla� n v - N✓r c Ems, �.] 11 � � ti q M G1�d X11� t} •Ah�"'r f .1 C - w �.• a" Wct 4and Complex rp 'r - _ r# TG MP TC,AP5 `q G G I l a4 \ n' s. vp Y s�oaJ C,1)5 r g r Lrskc Dururra OMOpYObgrepYy 2W,�e MimeM Of Naurel Resurxs Legend Seepage Indicating Plant Species =Modelled Groundwater Discharge Am s(CLOCA) c- ® Marsh Marigold(Calthaa palust-s Q T-I.y Creek Watershed warer W maraagmem Pan N ! . Upwards Hydraulic Gradients: Railway Tooley Creek Groundwater Monitors Intermittenlstream Watershed Groundwater Discharge 6 Mini-piemmeter Permanent Stream Areas o loo ma -ngo eoo am Visual Seepage Observations i Weterbody Segment F.i,.ayzo,l Spring Wedand Area,Permanent PrOlx160n- uruzo,e,rw,uPDS, Saepage rra araa..Y YK awn pnpa.ae rn-a,a r.nlnECaah xa,n �ppnaga,.�a,ama., Soil Type wA a,�us.uyyo...wamai rexle,rlrgagardw.nFCaMapraga -Organic SoilVI� mbii„y,an°eonesam lAa'ilh�aaca ar,,o any camA ` M PECaav w Fig�rc d-t B m�iwao�zaM'mw -•�,rnssamorr:wiwescenmv¢.w.w�.�a,nxazermi.ro.may.uq Figure 4.18 Tooley Creek Watershed Groundwater Discharge Areas NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 47 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan t `. - �,sl� � 9.f� .. a •k eA a. 4. o. s Z f \F r P B1 1 �x m "A 16 y d Gl}as'R. mO - - gooetn5er, - - '�v' Gt9asR . xy _ ' 1 p�r1 9n4 ake tNi,"n.; Ba�mappinu imm QEE®ia NNmwy o(Naurel Rearnae OMOPhab9�aPhY 2D]5 Legend Strahler Stream Order Watershed Ma"agme„P6n l -t Tooley Creek .{y. 2 Watehed 7 Strahler Strersam Order m 3 0 100 IDa 430 Bd0 aN Fel„uary20t, Railway PrgBCr wnsasv unu zoEa vN.N.,n s, Q Tooley Creek Watershed rra ara..Ea NK ewe Pmdww,e•u,e r.etnr:caa�s es,n una NV,rdm aama., Waterbody Segment mai�„r,waeo" Wetland Area,Permanent F�gurea.rs rECU,raa.a 1R0m"'g`,a q.'°'som.�,nx�amosr„w,eBws�.er,>�w.�,a,.m„nxa�smixse.n,oa-.�,.er Figure 4.19 Tooley Creek Watershed Strahler Stream Order NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 48 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Riparian vegetation cover varies greatly between each of the stream orders along Tooley Creek. Maintaining adequate riparian cover around a watercourse will improve surface water quality by reducing sedimentation. Riparian vegetation also functions to provide allochthonous inputs into streams such as leaf and woody debris, which creates habitat cover and provides shade cover over streams contributing to the buffering of water temperatures. Environment Canada guidelines state that 75% of a stream length should be buffered by 30 m of riparian cover to maintain a healthy state (EC, 2004). Within the Tooley Creek Watershed the majority of the first order streams maintain riparian vegetated areas composed of forested cover or at a minimum naturalised scrublands. In total approximately 65% of first order streams maintain some/adequate riparian vegetation. The majority of second order stream reaches within the Tooley Creek Watershed are also surrounded by large naturalised riparian buffers that are relatively undisturbed from development or local agriculture. In total approximately 84% of second order streams maintain some/adequate riparian vegetation. Although many upstream portions of the third order reaches (main branch) of Tooley Creek maintain adequate riparian vegetation, far less of the lower section of the watershed (near Lake Ontario) contains adequate riparian cover. In these areas Tooley Creek flows through pasture fields where riparian cover has been depleted by unrestricted cattle access to the creek. From the confluence of the two primary second order tributaries to the outlet into Lake Ontario Tooley Creek maintains intact riparian cover for about half of its length, with remaining areas possessing degraded riparian habitat or lacking such features altogether. Three barriers to fish passage were identified along the length of Tooley Creek (Figure 4.20). The first impediment to fish migration is located at the first railway crossing of Tooley Creek is located south of Highway 401. The second barrier to fish movement is located at the second railway crossing located north of Baseline Road, east of Courtice Road. The third and primary impediment to fish migration is a closed bottom box culvert located at the downstream end of the Highway 401 underpass, which is a box culvert that is perched by approximately 0.45 m. Fish community sampling for the Tooley Creek Watershed was completed in June and August/September 2009 as part of the Existing Conditions Report (Figure 4.21). Thirteen (13) known species, representing six families were identified (Table 4.5). Of the 13 fish species caught, Blacknose Dace (Rhinichthys atratulus) was by far the most common, consisting of 61% of all fish captured. Blacknose Dace is a warmwater fish species that is highly tolerant to environmental change and perturbation and is widespread in their southern Ontario distribution. The other most common fish species were Brook Stickleback (Culaea inconstans), Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculauts) and Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas), all of which represent a warm to coolwater community and are widespread in their southern Ontario distribution. Table 4.5 Known Fish Community Composition —Tooley Creek Watershed Abundance Thermal COSEWIC COSSARO Family Common Name Scientific Name (%of total Class Status Status captured) Catostomidae White Sucker Catostomus commersoni 1% Cool NAR NAR Centrarchidae Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus <1% Warm NAR NAR Cyprinidae Fathead Minnow Pimephales promelas 8% Warm NAR NAR Creek Chub Semotilus atromaculauts 13% Cool NAR NAR Blacknose Dace Rhinichthys atratulus 61% Cool NAR NAR Northern Redbelly Dace Phoximus eos <1% Cool/Warm NAR NAR Bluntnose Minnow Pimephales notatus <1% Warm NAR NAR Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae <1% Cool NAR NAR Common Shiner Luxilus cornutus <1% Warm NAR NAR Gasterosteidae Brook Stickleback Culaea inconstans 14% Cool NAR NAR Threespine Stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus <1% Cool NAR NAR Percidae Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum <1% Cool NAR NAR Salmonidae Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss 1% 1 Cold I NAR NAR NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 49 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 1 aamo n »shy o _ Perched Underpass a �ryfi , tr t 2 o Tt F • �S "fin'', Impediment to Migratian _ i. at d 5 C��ios pope _. eRuzd - .. ad �p G� d _ - EnreUTte�".lu M.yratcn o- gas. 4. 9 OMOPM1abgrePM1Y 20]5 Legend Rakimm�Creek antl Tcday Creek Instream Barrier Watershed Marvagmei,Plan l Tooley Creek .{y. RaINvay Watershed 7 Q Tooley Creek Watershed Instream Barriers Intermittent Stream F+GUan2011 Permanent Stream PirOjw 60nease NIA2me1iN,NPDS rha are...e M1K a.en PnPa.+e tw+,a r.ntnr:caah nram Waterhody Segment Wetland Area,Permanent wlwvea bygvrvmneMal raximirg a0erdn.AEL6M eccega COM` mb0„Yanaevn sam YAa'ilh�+kauow eels Ip'7i[`[Y■M Fi9Ure420 PECpFVw �rzv�s[a��IM�mmn�i.,x55pmor�wncesWe'nn�ucwwmvma,�timiMMiunmssnr.�aci Figure 4.20 Tooley Creek Watershed Instream Barriers NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 50 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan . . G` '1 .r�. qs, sow 4 - Ss9 00 - J 3414x' F �jt A ��Stt i njf " d . F . } t OM ' ° PWn Barereaaunu fmm momma Mim®YV mkamei Reau�wa Legend OMOPM1abgrePM1Y 2we MigmtoryFlsh$pe!l Intennitt-Istntan R info-T.A J-2009 - Pemrarerrt SVeem Ruhkiym�nr Creek and Tw�9rerty Creak Ranbow Troot,Sept2009 Waterbody Segmem w IpD�By fB@KFge White Sucker,June 2009 Wetland Area,Permanent JY\ a Mt.S-kar,sept200G Stream Type&Thermal Watershed Water Temperature Assessment Fisheries$Habitat Monitoring Statical o loo mu9 n,I ZOlr-:emAOlo,rw No,nsn e oso, wo B! e --IIInntemnittent.Coldwater er Asse smen5 9 t es&Hailt ASemant Fanuary2p11 CLOCA Smpl66am6 termitent,No daa Pml° 9 n[emittnt lJnassgned rra ara..raM1Kewe Pna.�.e to-u,eu.elnr:caaertmr H�ilat Assesment Perma mNn data uan eymm�ame., Permarerrt er,C-'i " QToNey Creek Watarehad ` `wA a f�us.bY9orvmneMal rre�.r.�,o,9.sa...n>:cau.cc.gs —Permanent,Coldwater YII�� e.ar�„r:ea eoe:.m l.noh�.nwo.r c. Rehvay PECpfv w Fi9Vre 6 21 'Vm°m.mm[A&rm+i.dim.��rnssamosr=wiwesatia�rmm.viwmrmrinxaesTmixease..nim Figure 4.21 Tooley Creek Watershed Fisheries & Habitat Assessment Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 51 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), which is a Coldwater species, represented only 1% of all fish captured, and was only captured in the lower reaches of Tooley Creek, south of the railway crossing barrier north of Baseline Road. The presence of rainbow trout within the lower reaches of the watershed demonstrates tolerable, coolwater conditions in this section of the creek, even though it lacks adequate riparian cover. However, more importantly, the occurrence of rainbow trout, in 2009, 2003, and 1997 indicates that limited runs of migratory rainbow trout have occurred throughout the watershed. Stream temperature data collected between July and August 2009 indicates that the thermal regime can be classified as coolwater (Table 4.6). This result is consistent with CLOCA's thermal data collected between 2005 and 2009, and generally matches the thermal class of the fish community, with the exception of rainbow trout. The upper reaches of Tooley Creek were deemed to be a Coldwater system due to significant groundwater inputs from the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer and the Maple Grove Wetland Complex. The upper reaches have not been thermally characterized previously and therefore, a multi-year sampling approach is needed to gain an accurate picture of this system on a year-to-year basis. Table 4.6 Stream Temperature Monitoring within Tooley Creek Days within Mean Daily Temperature Range Temperature Lethal Limit for Min Temp Max Temp Logger Location Period of Record Cold Cool Warm Rainbow Trout (°C) (IC) Classification (<19 CJ (19-25,C) (>25 CJ (>26°C) TC-WT3(MP1) July 10—August 31,2009 52 1 0 0 12.8 19.9 Coldwater TC-WT2(MP2) July 10—August 31,2009 41 12 0 0 14.7 21.2 Coolwater TC-WT1 (MP3) July 10—August 31,2009 43 10 0 + 0 14.3 20.9 Coolwater TC-WT4(M P5) July 10—August 31,2009 51 2 0 0 13.8 19.2 Coldwater In general, the species assemblage in Tooley Creek is typical of a warm to cold water urban fish community. The fish community present is primarily composed of generalist species that are not highly dependent on specific habitat requirements for spawning or life history processes. With the exception of rainbow trout, which are moderately sensitive to increased water temperatures for habitat suitability, the fish community is typical of warm/cool water conditions, the distribution of which is primarily dependant on flow regime within the watershed and to a lesser extent water temperatures. The surface water quality in Tooley Creek is reflective of an urbanized watershed. Field parameters and chemical results are presented in Table 4.7. Concentrations of total phosphorus that exceed PWQO standards were found at each monitoring station during monitoring events in the summer of 2009, with the exception of Station T1 in June 2009 (Figure 4.21). Chloride, concentrations are elevated at Station T1, but are generally low at the other sampling locations. These results suggest that agricultural non-point source contaminants are impacting the surface water quality in Tooley Creek. Table 4.7 Tooley Creek Surface Water Quality June 25/09 August 24109 Parameters Units f0.020.002 1 T2 T5 T1* T2* T5* Water Temperature °C .5 19 14.9 20.6 15.1 11.5 pH - 6.5-8.5 2 7.83 7.56 7.85 7.92 7.92 Conductivity NS/cm 7 577 472 662 610 292 Total Ammonia mg/L 9 0.21 0.16 0.07 0.11 0.05 Un-ionized Ammonia mg/L 02 0.003 0.002 NA NA NA Total Phos horus mg/L 27 0.038 0.31 0.036 0.068 0.051 TSS mg/L 2 80 4 2 5 Chloride mg/L 0 50 45 120 33 53 BOD mg/L D ND ND ND ND ND Notes: *water temperature,pH and conductivity collected on September 4. 2009 —Currently there is no PWQO for chloride,however, 150 mg/L is used as a protection of freshwater biota criteria by the Toronto Region Conservation Authority, Ontario MOE-Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch and the BC Ministry of the Environment ND=Not Detectable NA=Not Available,due to missing data required for calculation Bold numbers are above their respective PWQO Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 52 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 4.2.6 Terrestrial Natural Heritage The Tooley Creek watershed is located along the north shore of Lake Ontario within Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Site District 6-13. The site district is further divided by Chapman and Putnam (1984) into the Iroquois Plain and the Oak Ridges Moraine South Slope physiographic regions. The watershed occurs below the South Slope and historic Lake Iroquois shoreline, and is entirely located within the Lake Iroquois Plain physiographic region. The Iroquois Plain is an east-west trending feature that consists of sandy to silty deposits. OMNR (1984) found approximately five to ten percent of Site District 6-13 to be in relatively natural and undisturbed state. The most common remnant natural features include shoreline bluffs and beaches, rivermouth marshes, stream valleys and riparian corridors, and isolated upland forests. Urban residential development has encroached on the watershed, particularly from the northwest (i.e., west of the Bloor Street—Courtice Road intersection). Findings presented in the Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report (AECOM 2010) indicate that that 17% of the watershed supports natural and naturalized cover (Figure 4.23), including all or parts of the following designated natural areas: • Maple Grove Provincially Significant Wetland (the western portion occurs within the headwaters of the Tooley Creek watershed); • Tooley Creek Coastal Wetland (located at the mouth of Tooley Creek); • Darlington Provincial Park (a small portion occurs in the Tooley watershed, south of Highway 401 and west of Down Road); and • The Tooley Creek Valley Environmentally Sensitive Area (occurs entirely with the Tooley watershed). Young deciduous forest and thicket communities are the most common vegetation community types, with Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) abundant throughout (Figure 4.22). Common associates include, American Elm (Ulmus americana) and Manitoba Maple (Acernegundo); the latter is particularly common in lowlands and floodplains. Mid- age and mature forest cover is rare in the watershed. Where these communities do occur, Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) forms associations with White Ash (Fraxinus americana), Red Oak (Quercus rubra), American Beech (Fagus grandifolia), and/or Eastern Hemlock (Tsuga canadensis). Coniferous and mixed forests comprise a relatively small component of forest cover, with White Pine (Pinus strobus), Red Pine (Pinus resinosa) and White Spruce (Picea glauca) occurring in upland situations (commonly as remnant plantations), and Eastern White Cedar (Thuja occidentalis) occurring in the floodplains. Upland meadows occur throughout the watershed, particularly as abandoned agriculture fields. These meadows are typically dominated by varying degrees of cool-season grasses, Canada Goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), Heath Aster (Aster ericoides) and New England Aster (Aster novae- angliae). Deciduous swamp communities are the most common wetland types, with Green Ash and Swamp Maple (Acer freemanii) abundant throughout treed types, and Red-osier Dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) and Willow species (Salix sp.)dominating the thicket swamps. Marsh communities are present in smaller portions, with Reed-canary Grass (Phalarus aurundinacea) and forb meadow marshes the most common types, followed by shallow Cattail (Typha sp.) marshes. Seepage wetlands are rare, and are generally associated with areas where stream valleys have exposed shallow localized groundwater flow, predominately along the main branches of the Tooley Creek valley. 212 species of vascular plants are known to occur within the Tooley Creek Watershed (AECOM 2010). Forty-eight of the species indentified are non-native occurrences, representing approximately 23% of all species recorded. The high proportion of non-native species is largely attributed to the fragmented nature of the vegetation throughout the watershed, which is typical of southern Ontario. Seventeen species are considered regionally significant (uncommon to rare in Durham Region according to Varga et al., 2000). Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 53 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Vegetation Community Class _ - Aquatic System I Open Water Community Class •+r _ $ Terrestrial-Cultural Communities Agricultural Community Class t:•,'- F. ', _ Constructed Community Class Terrestrial-Natural and f Naturalized Communities - • 11 ', Bluff Community Class 9 y ye' e i Forest Community Class 1 Meadow Cwnmunity Class Wbotlland Community Class +r a r n"t' Shoreline Community Class Thicket Community Class Wetland System _ - Marsh Community Class Swamp Community Class - L V1 O a � , o u+ ti.. o ' + : �>Axx Ra w C�.N Txan C� Y&Iaa Mnupnem PW, Tooley Creek 1' Vegetation Communities Legend Rahvay F�a:T 2011 ,m00o Intermittent Stream Proper ealleasa yr zo.,zx xw.® permanent Stream WatertMdy Segment Welland Area,Permanent w— /�� Figure4.?2 Figure 4.22 Tooley Creek Vegetation Communities Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Docx 54 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan °s Code Species w + BBCU Black-billed Cuckoo eAww RBWD Red-bellied Woodpecker S �Rw HAWO Hairy Woodpecker PIWO Pileated Woodpecker vEE vl§ -tr EER �f WBNU White-breasted Nuthatch Piwo-a EABL Eastern Bluebird a VEER Veery A NOMO Northern Mockinghird t'y l P AMRE-1 BAWW Black-and-white Warbler AMRE American Redstart ;''- - S OVEN Ovenbird - Z CAWA ICa,,ada Warbler DROR Orchard Oriole WBN } 5 v" z p DROP 4 4. as rk'Rnad s/emp ae�meppnq ham Uaano MnsW dNaYialR�u,ces Legend nAM1OPM1eMrePhY 2005 it Bank Swalbw Colony Interior Forest Forest Area-sensitive Species AMRE Core Areas �w snkaM dTO OW Q Tooley Creek Watershed Tooloy Creek /L Species at Risk �—Railway Watershed Regionally Scarce,Rere or PIWo Int—ttent Stream Wildlife Features Very Rare Specles Permanent Stream o iao mo aao eoo wo 4t::1 Landscape Conridor - Fe.'e I rt +:zamo Waterbody Segment no�scceo,tsass unazona.nn.Naom ()Local Corridor �Wetland Area.Permanent anV:,aa lae.amaP�aPYaa m.ma�aa arnEecresrnan ®Compost Facility Potential Amphlbian Breeding Habitat �e�.t ea:eWirea M i.. ar�•e crr�. .i,a.�aoy,saaaan.secoMaol: ®Known Amphlbian Breeding Habitat A.'�/'��1•I poa.,aory,aaa mm�s am+.a,arm,aeo,�a m any oa r'7�SrrOM nti madras m'ie d,ax reECaNs Figar842a Ns omaa.:e m:warm.�,�ussva+mvi�.renswi..ago.wma.*�,w,nxssnwiwmur.F.Y.,:.ar Figure 4.23 Tooley Creek Watershed Wildlife Features Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 55 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Seventy-two breeding bird species were recorded in the Tooley Creek Watershed as part of the Existing Conditions study (Figure 4.23). The most frequently observed bird species are those that are common in southern Ontario typical of edges, shrub habitats and disturbed areas. The most abundant species recorded included: Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata), House Wren (Troglodytes aedon), Gray Catbird (Dumetella carolinensis), Yellow Warbler (Dendroica petechia), Northern Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodic), Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), and American Goldfinch (Cardeulis tristis). The forest bird community is poorly developed in the Tooley Creek Watershed due to the very small and patchy amount of forest remaining, with notable exceptions including the northeast portion of the watershed (north of Highway 2 and east of Hancock Road), and in the forest north of the compost facility on Hancock Road. Numerous area-sensitive forest bird species were recorded in the northeast portion of the watershed (manly Warblers and Veery species), including three species that are considered regionally rare. A few grassland or open land area- sensitive species were recorded in the watershed; however, only Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis) was recorded in any significant numbers. Species at Risk are those species with status under the Federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) and/or the Provincial Endangered Species Act. Species at Risk are identified federally by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), and provincially by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO). Three Species at Risk are known to occur with the Robinson watershed (AECOM 2010): • Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus); • Canada Warbler (Wilsonia canadensis); and • Butternut (Juglans cinerea). 4.2.7 Land Cover Similar to the Robinson Creek Watershed, land use and land cover in the Tooley Creek Watershed has changed significantly over the past few decades. The focus of the land use is still agricultural with increasing mixed development. Figure 4.24 presents an overview of the land use found within the watershed based upon the results of the Existing Conditions Study conducted in 2009/2010 and is based upon municipal land use designations and ELC polygon mapping. All land uses have been simplified into broad land use categories to focus on the various aspects of the natural heritage system. Although the full break down of land use is not presented, they have been grouped into the same classes as where used for hydrologic modelling of the watershed: • Development Urban Residential, Rural Residential, Industrial and Commercial (including the compost facility off Hancock Road), and Transportation and Utility; • Natural Heritage Woodlots and Forest, Lakes and Wetlands, Meadows and Grasslands, Savannah and Thicket, and Darlington Provincial Park; • Agriculture Agricultural Facility, Crop Field, and Pasture; and • Greenspace Community Parks, Greenbelt Lands and Waterfront Greenway. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 56 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Green Space 3.3% Total Natural Forest and Woodlot 9.2% Heritage Cover= 17.3 Meadow 1.3% Thicket 3.3% Wetland 3.4% Other<0.1% Development 30.8% Agriculture 48.6% Figure 4.24 Tooley Creek Watershed —Existing Land Cover The total natural heritage cover for the watershed, including natural and naturalized cover is 17.3%. Forest cover within the watershed is 9.3%, which falls short of the 30% target that is recommended for a healthy watershed (EC, 2005). Lands classified as wetland and swamp habitat make up 3.4% of land use in the watershed, which again falls short of the recommended 10% guideline (EC, 2005). The Tooley Creek Watershed contains some areas of interior forest habitat and core areas in the extreme northern portion of the watershed in the Maple Grove Wetland Complex (Figure 4.23). This Provincially Significant Wetland is mainly located outside of the Tooley Creek Watershed boundaries, but still contributes an important habitat and connectivity function for the watershed. A forested area located on both the east and west side of Hancock Road, north of Baseline Road exhibits many properties of a core area, but is slightly too small to be classified as such. 4.2.8 Summary of Positive Attributes and Opportunities for Improvement As part of watershed management planning, it is important to recognize both the positive and negative attributes of a watershed. Although the Tooley Creek Watershed is currently dominated by agriculture and development, some very positive results on the health of the watershed were documented in the Existing Conditions Study. Conversely, the same study highlighted a number of areas that could be improved to help create a healthier watershed and build a resiliency into the natural heritage system to protect against future stresses such as climate change. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 57 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan The Tooley Creek Watershed has many positive attributes including: • The Lake Iroquois Shoreline and the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer are present in the northern portion of the watershed and are important sources of groundwater recharge; • The Provincially Significant Maple Grove Wetland Complex is located in the northern portion of the watershed and positively contributes to the overall health of the watershed; • Groundwater discharge is sufficient to sustain baseflow and thermally buffer stream temperatures; • The rate of groundwater use in the watershed is low and is expected to decline in the future; • Tooley Creek hosts a variety of healthy warm to cold water fish communities; • The thermal regime and stream flow in Tooley Creek is sufficient to sustain a population of rainbow trout, which is a cold water species, and provides rainbow trout habitat; • Many of the 1St order streams originate on the Iroquois Plain and are classified as Coldwater; • Valley lands through the middle portion of the watershed are moderately well vegetated and provide a local north-south wildlife corridor; • Much of Tooley Creek has adequate riparian cover; and • Darlington Provincial Park and the Lake Ontario Shoreline provide an important stop-over for migrant song birds, as well as shorebirds and waterfowl. However, several areas of concern were identified in the watershed where opportunities for improvement exist, including: • Natural and naturalized cover in the watershed make up 17.3% of the land cover, which is below target guidelines; • Wetland communities only make up 3.4 % of the watershed, which is below target guidelines; • Forest cover only makes up 9.3 % of the watershed, which is below target guidelines; • A poorly developed forest bird and marsh breeding bird community; • Only minor areas of interior forest habitat is present in the watershed; • Wildlife connectivity in the watershed is limited and poorly developed; • Significant barriers to fish passage exist that limit runs of migratory fish species; • Riparian cover along Tooley Creek south of Highway 401 is marginal; • Water quality indicators in Tooley Creek show that water quality is poor and reflects the urban nature of the watershed; • Imperviousness is expected to increase in the watershed with increasing urban development; and • A potential reduction in groundwater recharge due to increased imperviousness. It is the intent of this watershed management plan to maintain what is good about the watershed and provide opportunities to improve some of the negative attributes that were identified. By understanding the positive and negative attributes of the Tooley Creek Watershed, specific management recommendations can be made to improve the health of the watershed. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 58 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 5. Analysis and Evaluation of Management Scenario Based upon our understanding of the watershed functions and attributes, analysis and evaluation of management targets, integrating management with natural heritage scenarios, were completed. These features were assessed, and management scenarios and approaches were established that include the following: • A Targeted Natural Heritage System (TNHS); • A Water Budget and the identification of High Volume Recharge Areas (HVRA); • Current and Future Levels of Imperviousness; and • Existing and Future Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modelling and Hazard Analysis. A technically preferred management scenario was selected from analysis and evaluation of the above management approaches and is presented in Section 5.7. 5.1 Watershed Constraints Referencing the existing conditions, areas of constraint due to physical, geographical, and ecological parameters were identified so that watershed management targets and scenarios could be targeted to protect the key features of the watershed in order to build a natural resiliency to the ecosystem. Constraints specifically refer to features of the watersheds that will affect the long-term management of the watersheds and those features that limit the effectiveness of particular management actions or targets. Constraints have been defined and quantified where feasible. These constraints to the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds will serve as important considerations in establishing goals, objectives, management actions and watershed targets. The primary constraints to watershed management within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds include: • The small size of the watersheds will limit the extent of ecological restoration that is practical within the watersheds; • Limits on groundwater recharge rates caused by the predominance of low permeability till soils found at surface; • Limits on baseflow and cold groundwater inputs due to small groundwater recharge areas; • The urban nature of the watersheds limits wildlife connectivity and ecological diversity in the watersheds; • Limits on the biotic diversity and vulnerability due to the limited extent of natural areas and extensive human development; • Future land use needs in the watersheds; however, many potential impacts caused by development can be mitigated; • The presence of Highway 401 in the south and the future 407 East Link to the East; and • The uncertainty of climate change. It was identified in the Existing Conditions Report that no significant regional aquifers provide a source of groundwater discharge to Robinson or Tooley Creek and that all groundwater found in the watersheds most likely was derived from within the watersheds (i.e., no groundwater flow between watersheds). With the exception of the small area covered by the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer in the northern portion of the Tooley Creek Watershed, there does not appear to be much stream flow derived from groundwater discharge due to the presence of low permeability soils. This limits the practicality of trying to artificially increase groundwater recharge in most areas of the watersheds. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 59 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Due to the low amount of groundwater recharge, baseflow conditions in the creeks are low. This means that neither Robinson Creek nor Tooley Creek can be nominated for a complete restoration of a Coldwater fishery, however opportunity exists to improve fish habitat and enhance riparian cover, protecting headwater areas, and controlling stormwater flows. The low proportion of natural areas (including minimal core habitat/interior forest habitat) throughout both watersheds limits the resiliency of the existing natural system. Functionality of the system is further constrained by poorly established corridors between the existing natural areas. The watershed planning processes presents the opportunity to identify the existing (or functional) natural heritage system, and identify priority areas for enhancement to improve the functions and resiliency of the natural areas. 5.2 Setting Targets With the above opportunities and constraints in mind, the document, How Much Habitat is Enough?A Framework for Guiding Habitat Rehabilitation in Great Lakes Area of Concern, produced by Environment Canada in 2005 (herein referred to as AOC Guidelines), was the key reference document used for setting watershed management targets for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. The targets outlined in this document are based upon the best scientific information available and are meant to guide watershed management decisions, but are not meant to dictate what must be done. The AOC Guidelines are meant to be adaptable for all watersheds regardless of their size, current habitat quality, future stresses or other constraints. The targets that are set for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds will be specifically applicable to these watersheds. Only targets that are reasonably or practically achievable will be recommended, as it is the intention of this Watershed Management Plan to be implemented in its entirety. Using the AOC Guidelines as a starting point for habitat restoration and imperviousness targets for development, and taking into consideration the small, urbanized nature of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, the following watershed management targets are recommended (Table 5.1). Table 5.1 Watershed Management Targets for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Management Parameter Existing Condition Proposed Future Management Target Target Type Wetland Habitat Percentage of Watershed • Robinson Creek—3.3% • Robinson Creek->6%wetland habitat Comprised of Wetlands • Tooley Creek— 3.4% • Tooley Creek->6%wetland habitat Wetland Type • Both the Robinson Creek Watershed and • Rehabilitation activities should focus on the Tooley Creek Watershed only have rehabilitation of swamp and marsh habitats swamp and marsh habitat Wetland Location • Robinson Creek—wetland communities are • Robison Creek—historic and remnant generally found within the Robison Creek marsh and swamp wetland habitats should Valley and north of Bloor St. A small be enhanced throughout within the portion of the McLaughlin Bay Wetland Robinson Creek Watershed,particularly Complex is found near the outlet to Lake within the Targeted Natural Heritage Ontario System • Tooley Creek—wetland communities are • Tooley Creek—historic and remnant marsh predominantly found in the Maple Grove and swamp wetland habitats should be Wetland Complex. Small, isolated wetland enhanced throughout the Tooley Creek habitat can be found along some of the 1 st Watershed, particularly within the Targeted order streams and within the Tooley Creek Natural Heritage System Valley NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 60 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Table 5.1 Watershed Management Targets for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Management Target Type Parameter Existing Condition Proposed Future Management Target Size and Shape • Robinson Creek—most wetlands are small • Rehabilitation activities should focus on and irregularly shaped,although there is a creating large, regularly shaped wetland high density of wetland community types in habitat where appropriate. Ultimately the Robison Creek Valley, north and south wetland shape is dictated by soil moisture of Bloor St. and site hydrology; however feature shape • Tooley Creek—most wetlands found within can be enhanced by restoring protected the Maple Grove Wetland Complex are zones large and well shaped. Wetland communities found outside this area are generally small and irregularly shaped Riparian Habitat Percentage of Stream • Robinson Creek—53%of the stream length • Robinson Creek—at least 75%of stream Length Naturally maintains adequate riparian cover on either length should have a 30 m wide vegetated Vegetated side of the wetted width and is composed of buffer on either side of the wetted width of forested cover or naturalized scrublands the tributary • Tooley Creek—65%of the stream length • Tooley Creek—at least 75%of stream maintains adequate riparian cover on either length should have a 30 m wide vegetated side of the wetted width and is composed of buffer on either side of the wetted width of forested cover or naturalized scrublands the tributary Surface Water Total Suspended • Robinson Creek—TSS is often found • TSS concentrations should be maintained Sediments(TSS) above 25 mg/L(existing conditions range— below 25 mg/L during most times of the 17-61 mg/L) year for both Robinson Creek and Tooley • Tooley Creek—TSS is generally found Creek(AOC Guidelines) below 25 mg/L(existing conditions range— 2—80 mg/L) Surface Water Quality • Robinson Creek—Surface water quality • Surface water quality for both Robinson generally meets PWQO standards with the Creek and Tooley Creek should meet exception of phosphorus PWQO standards during most times of the • Tooley Creek — Surface water quality year generally meets PWQO standards with the exception of phosphorus Imperviousness Impervious Surfaces • Robinson Creek—Current imperviousness • Impervious surfaces should be kept to a in the watershed is 21% minimum and all opportunities to increase • Tooley Creek—Current imperviousness in infiltration should be explored. Natural the watershed is 13% vegetation should be maintained,and where possible improved or restored • Shall endeavour to keep imperviousness at or below current levels. Natural Heritage Natural and Naturalized • Robinson Creek—19.6%of the watershed • Robinson Creek—30%of the watershed System Cover contains natural or naturalized cover should contain natural or naturalized cover • Tooley Creek—17.3%of the watershed as part of the Natural Heritage System contains natural or naturalized cover • Tooley Creek—30%of the watershed should contain natural or naturalized cover as part of the Natural Heritage System Percent Forest Cover • Robinson Creek—6.3%of the watershed is • Robinson Creek—minimum 100%increase currently under forest cover in forest cover • Tooley Creek—9.3%of the watershed is • Tooley Creek—minimum 100%increase in currently under forest cover forest cover Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 61 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Core Areas and Interior • Robinson Creek—no core areas or interior • Robinson Creek-at least one forest patch Forest forest habitat that contains interior forest habitat that is • Tooley Creek-<1%of the watershed are 100 m from the edge. At least one forest core areas. No interior forest habitat in the patch that is>25 ha in size watershed • Tooley Creek-at least one forest patch that contains interior forest habitat that is 100 m from the edge.At least one forest patch that is>25 ha in size Size and Shape of • Robinson Creek—forest shapes tend to be • Rehabilitation activities should focus on Forest Patches linear following the creek valley creating large,square or circular shaped • Tooley Creek—forest shapes tend to be linear forest habitats and connecting large, following the creek valley. Some significant disconnected forest patches. square shaped forest habitat is present near Hancock Rd.and north of Bloor St. Corridors • Robinson Creek—the watershed is poorly • Robinson Creek—create a continuous N-S connected. Limited N-S connectivity along corridor between Highway 401 and Bloor the creek valley and E-W connectivity in St. Corridors should be designed to Darlington Provincial Park facilitate species movement and should be • Tooley Creek—the watershed is poorly at least 60 m wide. Create opportunities for connected. Limited N-S connectivity along an E-W corridor connection to the Tooley the creek valley and E-W connectivity in the Creek Watershed Maple Grove Wetland Complex • Tooley Creek-create a continuous N-S corridor between Highway 401 and Highway 2. Corridors should be designed to facilitate species movement and should be at least 60 m wide. Create opportunities for an E-W corridor connection to the Robinson Creek Watershed • Lake Ontario Shore—create a continuous E-W corridor along the shoreline to create wildlife and habitat corridor. Watershed Cover Type • Robinson Creek—young deciduous forest • Rehabilitation activities should be and Forest Diversity cover and thicket communities dominate in representative of the forest cover type the watershed. Middle-aged and mature typical of the Great Lakes—St. Lawrence forest communities are rare Forest Region and diversity of species • Tooley Creek—young deciduous forest found within this ecoregion cover and thicket communities dominate in the watershed. Middle-aged and mature forest communities are rare 5.2.1 Discussion on Setting Targets The following is a brief discussion on the rationale behind setting the target criteria for the Management of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, especially for targets that differ from the AOC Guidelines. Constrains identified in Section 5.1 are the critical factor that limit the use of the AOC Guidelines, which in some cases may not be applicable to the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. It is important to realize that land use change through development and urbanization will have the greatest impact on the future health of the watershed. Currently,the Robinson Creek Watershed has 19.6% natural or naturalized cover and the Tooley Creek Watershed has 17.3% natural or naturalized cover. The AOC Guidelines recommend that 30% forest cover is needed to maintain a healthy watershed. It is recognized that both the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watersheds are small, predominantly urban watersheds, and that reaching a 30% forest cover target through land use policy planning is likely to be unachievable. It will also take away valuable land for other restoration activities such as rehabilitation of wetlands. For these reasons,the goal of future policy and planning initiatives related to the natural environment will be focused on increasing natural cover, not just forest cover, and building a resilient natural heritage system that can be sustained and thrive through future pressures such as development and climate change. This will Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Dou 62 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan be achieved by maintaining the current natural conditions and completing targeted enhancements to specific areas that will have the greatest overall benefit for the watersheds. Certainly opportunities for Clarington to meet and exceed AOC targets exist elsewhere in their jurisdiction, particularly within ORM and Greenbelt planning areas. Similarly, AOC Guideline targets of`at least one 200 ha forest patch which is a minimum of 500 m wide' cannot be reasonably achieved in either the Robinson Creek or Tooley Creek Watershed. The area of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds are 592 ha and 1157 ha, respectively. Therefore, one 200 ha patch would take up 34% of the land area in the Robinson Creek Watershed and 17% of the land area in the Tooley Creek Watershed. Dedicating a space this large in either watershed is not consistent with the need to have 6% of the land area wetland habitat, have a diversity of habitat types (i.e., meadows and thickets), and achieve future development targets for the region as outlined in the Places to Grow Act. The same rationale applies to other AOC Guidelines such as `greater than 10% of the watershed having forest cover 100 m from the edge and 5% of the watershed having forest cover 200 m from the edge'. Targets set as part of this management plan to create at least one forest patch that is a minimum 25 ha in size (i.e., a 500 m by 500 m patch) and has interior forest habitat with forest cover 100 m from the edge, is considered reasonable and achievable. This improvement will greatly improve forest habitat for birds and wildlife, and increase species diversity within both watersheds. Wetland habitat loss and degradation has been significant in southern Ontario and within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Wetlands provide important habitat, help improve surface water quality, help maintain baseflow and reduce storm flows. The AOC Guidelines suggest 10% wetland cover for a watershed and 6% wetland cover for a sub-watershed, to maintain watershed or sub-watershed health. Currently, the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds have 3.4% and 3.3% wetland habitat, respectively, which is below the AOC Guidelines for a watershed or sub-watershed. Given the small size of both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, the criteria for wetland cover target for a sub-watershed areas (of 6%) was considered more reasonable and achievable than the 10% watershed target. Increasing riparian vegetation, especially on 1St order streams in both watersheds is expected to have a number of benefits such as cooler water temperatures, reduced nutrients and suspended solids, and will help support fish communities and maintain good water quality. The entire length of both Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek should be buffered by a 30 m vegetated area on both sides of the creek. AOC Guidelines suggest that less than 10% of an urbanized watershed should be impervious. Achieving this target in the Robinson Creek or the Tooley Creek Watershed is not possible, as the current level of imperviousness in both watersheds exceeds this amount. The primary goal in these urban or future urban watersheds is to avoid peak flows, enhance riparian vegetation, and to minimize imperviousness surfaces through the use of such measures as permeable pavements and disconnecting roof downspouts. 5.3 Natural Heritage System Natural heritage system (NHS) is an ecologically based delineation of natural heritage components, including features, functions and linkages (OMNR 2009). The natural heritage components are delineated or connected as a system to provide long term ecological functions, as described by Provincial Policy Statement (PPS; MMAH 2005; Section 6.0): "Natural Heritage System...means a system made up of natural heritage features and areas, linked by natural corridors which are necessary to maintain biological and geological diversity, natural functions, viable populations of indigenous species and ecosystems. These systems can include lands that have been restored and areas with the potential to be restored to a natural state." The NHS was developed for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds in two parts, an approach that is consistent with methodologies established in other watersheds within CLOCA jurisdiction (CLOCA 2009) and is supported by other Municipalities (e.g., Oshawa) and Conservation Authorities (Ganaraska Region Conservation Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Dou 63 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Authority) in the region. The first part of the NHS is referred to as the Functional Natural Heritage System (FNHS) and includes a number of core and linkage components, based primarily on the existing natural heritage mapping produced for Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report (AECOM 2010). The second part of the NHS indentifies the Targeted Natural Heritage System (TNHS), by establishing protection and restoration opportunities required to support and enhance the existing natural heritage components. A diagrammatic summary is presented below of the process for determining a Targeted Natural Heritage System. Cover Natural Heritage Functional Natural Heritage System Q e-W-1-I TO 1 _4 - L (Existing OP) Targeted Natural System Enhancement Areas 5.3.1 Functional Natural Heritage System The FNHS is the first part of the NHS and was established from Ecological Land Classification (ELC) mapping as a series of valued shape files (i.e., GIS polygons) using ESRI ArcGIS 9.3. The core and linkage components were derived primarily from ELC mapping produced for all natural and naturalized areas of the watersheds as part of the Watershed Plan study (AECOM 2010). Ecological Land Classification is the provincial standard for classifying vegetation communities in Ontario. Investigations classified vegetation communities to the Vegetation Type where possible according to the ELC protocols (Lee et al. 1998), using the draft 2nd updated hierarchy community descriptions (OMNR, 2008). Other sources of data include the following list of secondary source information: • Ministry of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) —Natural Area Records; • Ministry of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) —Sensitive Species Records; • MNR Wetland Evaluations; • MNR Life Science Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) in Site District 6-13 report; • Durham Region Coastal Wetlands Study; • CLOCA's Environmental Sensitivity Mapping Project; • CLOCA's baseline Ecological Land Classification mapping; • Documentation prepared in support of the 407 East Environmental Assessment (EA); • Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Natural Resource Values Systems (NRVIS) mapping; • Biological Inventories of Darlington Provincial Park; and • DigitalOrthoimagery. Criteria used to establish the core and linkage areas are provided below. 5.3.1.1 Identification of Core and Linkage Areas Core areas are the building blocks of natural heritage systems, and generally include large areas of natural habitat and/or hydrological function. In areas where natural cover is not contiguous, core areas support higher percentage density of natural cover than other parts of the landscape, and should be capable of providing and sustaining ecological functions (OMNR 2009). NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 64 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan The linkage components (or linkage corridors) of natural heritage systems serve to connect core areas. Landscape theory identifies a number of benefits resulting from corridor functions, including increased local species richness and biodiversity, greater immigration and movement opportunities for individuals, and greater likelihood of seed dispersal and exchange of other genetic material between populations. Areas of natural cover best serve this purpose; however, agricultural lands or parklands can provide some linkage functions. Orientation and configuration of a linkage should be designed to lead wildlife to suitable habitats so that wildlife is not funnelled to inhospitable areas (e.g., highways, urban areas) (OMNR 2009). Linkages operate at varying scales, and are generally classified into three types as follows (CLOCA 2011): • Regional Linkage Major movement corridors that connect a number of watersheds at a large landscape scale, such as the Oak Ridges Moraine and the provincial Greenbelt planning area. • Landscape Linkage Major movement routes within the watersheds that connect core areas and are at least 100 m in width. • Local Linkage Minor movement routes within the watershed that are at least 60 m in width. Criteria used in the selection of core and linkage areas were based on guidance provided by the OMNR (2009) and CLOCA (2011). The following features are identified as core areas: • Natural heritage features and areas as defined by the PPS (MMAH 2005). These features include significant wetlands, significant coastal wetlands, fish habitat, significant woodlands, significant valleylands, significant habitat of endangered species and threatened species, significant wildlife habitat, and significant areas of natural and scientific interest. • Wetlands and Woodlands 0.5 ha in area or greater. Consistent with the CLOCA (2011) approach, all wetlands and woodlands meeting the minimum mappable unit (at a scale of 1:10,000) recommended by Lee et al. (2001) are identified as core areas. This includes all natural and naturalized classifications (as per OMNR 2008), except Meadow (ME) Community Classes (ME communities were treated separately as described below). • High Quality Meadow(ME) Communities 0.5 ha in area of greater. ME communities are generally not included because they can be replicated using relatively simple restoration measures (compared to other advanced community types such as thickets and woodlands). However, ME units were reviewed individually and included as core area if they were valued by the Landscape Analysis Model (LAM; as described in the next Section) and professional knowledge of the site (i.e., the ME unit was interspersed with other community types and/or supported relatively high native biodiversity). If the LAM determined the NHS was better served by reallocating an ME unit to a higher priority area, the ME was not retained as a core area. • Important hydrological features. According to the PPS (MMAH 2005), core areas include remnant wetland features 0.5 ha or greater that do not fall within natural and naturalized ELC classifications (as per OMNR 2008), including potential wetlands in Agriculture (AG) Community Classes. • Riparian Corridors. A 30 m buffer is applied to the wetted edge of each side of all watercourses, as recommended by the Central Lake Ontario Fisheries Management Plan (McNeice, J., and N. Meade, 2007). Additionally, if lands that would otherwise meet the criteria for core areas were found to be highly disturbed, generally through human activity, professional judgement was used to assess the degree of perturbation and determine if the area should be included or excluded from the core areas. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 65 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan The FNHS for the Robinson and Tooley Watersheds is identified in Figure 5.1. 5.3.2 Targeted Natural Heritage System The TNHS is the second part of the NHS and is defined from the PPS definition for natural heritage system which includes areas with the potential to be restored or enhanced. These parts are often referred to as "enhancement areas". Such lands may be agricultural, semi-natural or less intensively managed areas that contribute to the long- term ecological functions, or areas that are ideally located for purposes of restoring or improving habitats and natural connections (OMNR 2009). These types of areas were added to the NHS using a GIS model (i.e., the Landscape Analysis Model) based on the CLOCA (2011; section 2.1) approach to identify the TNHS. This is accomplished through a multi-step process as follows: • Evaluate current habitat patch characteristics using landscape metrics (i.e.,the Landscape Analysis Model); • Determine target condition of natural cover; • Produce a target system design model to achieve the target; • Test the target system using the Landscape Analysis Model; and • Complete professional edits to supplement model output TNHS. Environment Canada (2004) recommends that at least 30% of each watershed should be in forest cover. Given a number of factors, including existing natural cover, planning objectives identified for the watersheds, and opportunities to improve targets in Greenbelt and ORM planning areas elsewhere in the Municipality of Clarington, the 30% forest cover target was deemed unrealistic. Rather, a 30% cover of natural vegetation (all community types in the terrestrial and wetland system as described by ELC) was established as the target. This represents an approximate increase in natural cover of approximately 12.0%, as detailed in Table 5.2 below. The TNHS for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is identified in Figure 5.2. Table 5.2 Natural Cover Calculations for FNHS and TNHS Scenarios Total Area Existing Natural Cover FNHS(ha) TNHS(ha) ha ha % ha % ha % Robinson Creek Watershed 593.6 116.5 19.6 125.8 21.2 183.0 30.8 Tooley Creek Watershed 1157.0 199.6 17.3 254.4 22.0 343.4 29.7 Total 1750.6 316.1 18.1 380.2 19.6 526.4 30.1 AECOM completed a number of professional edits (sometimes referred to as manual edits)to refine the model output using intimate knowledge of the analysis areas, including a review of Ecosite and Vegetative Type ELC data collected by AECOM staff as part of the Existing Conditions studies (AECOM 2010). This processes included meetings with the Municipality of Clarington (October 6, November 26, December 9, 2010) and CLOCA (October 6, 2010). Considerations at this stage included a number of natural attributes, including those identified in Table 5.3 below (adapted in part from Tables 3 and 4 of OMNR 2009). Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 66 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan G tTM � per. •�J W Fyj�y' OC t 5t1e� r � 0 `� Tooley -reek � � Robinson Creek , m °ad ID Y 6a5e4�e Rp3d _- o lake Ontario Basemapping from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Legend Orthoph°t°graphy 2010 Robinson Creek and Tooley,Creek Watersheds Watershed Flan _ N Targeted Natural Heritage System Natural E Functional Natural Hentage System W Heritage System R E e` Targeted Natural Heritage System a February 2011 - Project 60119359 E D 250 500 1000 acoM ,341DD UTAH Zone 17N,NAD 83 Figure 51 Figure 5.1 Natural Heritage System Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 67 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Table 5.3 NHS Attributes Considered During Professional Edits Attribute Core Areas • Size,Shape and Bulk • Interior Habitat • Rare Habitats and species • Sensitive and rare natural communities • Potential for connectivity • Existing Protection and/or Significance established • Potential to persist as a self-sustaining unit • Level of perturbation Linkage Areas • Connectivity between two or more core areas,or two or more areas of potential restoration • Scale of corridor;proximity to corridor dead-end • Ecological function; redundancy of function • Potential of corridor to persist as self-sustaining unit • Existing and potential stressors • Suitability of the path, i.e., likelihood of potential passage The professional edits identified a landscape scale corridor (100 m wide)to provide a connection between the Tooley and Robinson Watersheds, between Bloor Street and Baseline Road. The watershed boundary at this location corresponds with Trulls Road (Figure 5.1). Enhanced function of the connection could be achieved through road improvements (for example, implementation of wildlife crossing structures) and naturalization of the enhancement areas. Maintenance and enhancement of the corridor should be considered during design of future Trulls road improvement projects at this location, and at the site planning stage for development applications in the immediate area. 5.4 Water Budget and High Volume Recharge Areas For both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, the water budget completed as part of the Existing Conditions Report has been revised due to recent adjustments in the hydrological boundaries of the Watersheds. Additionally, the groundwater recharge rates and runoff volumes have been further characterized using a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) based analytical model, rather than the more simplified method developed by Bernard (1932) and accepted by the MOE (1995), that was used in the Existing Conditions Report. This GIS-based model was developed to be consistent with provincial direction provided by the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) in the draft Assessment Report: Guidance Module 7, Water Budget and Water Quantity Risk Assessment (MOE, 2006b) prepared for the provincial Source Water Protection program under the Clean Water Act. It is noted that the delineated boundaries are based on Ministry of Environment well records and geologic maps, and have not been confirmed by field data (e.g. boreholes and test pits). The values for groundwater recharge and surface runoff presented in this Report replace the values reported in the Existing Conditions Report due to changes in the boundaries for the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watersheds. The values for groundwater recharge and surface runoff may be updated by additional hydrogeologic studies and at the five year review of this Plan. 5.4.1 Water Budget A water budget is used to describe the movement of water in a watershed. The total precipitation accounts for the water that falls both as rainfall and as snow, and constitutes the total amount of water available in a watershed. A large portion of the precipitation (often up to 60%) is returned to the atmosphere by evaporation or plant transpiration. The combined process of evaporation and transpiration is called evapotranspiration (ET). The remaining water (-40%) comprises what is known as the water surplus. This is the water that is available to runoff to the stream system or infiltrate to the groundwater. The proportion of the water surplus that is infiltrated depends upon the characteristics of the soils in the watershed, the topography, the land use and the vegetative cover that is present. This concept is based upon the fact that Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 68 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan water will infiltrate more easily though flat lying, high permeability soils than it will through steep slopes or low permeability soils. Naturally vegetated cover accepts infiltration more readily than urban developments. Water that infiltrates into the ground recharges the water table. This water may continue to flow downwards towards deep aquifers or it may flow laterally towards river valleys and contribute cold water to the stream, (i.e., groundwater discharge). The travel time through the soil creates a long time lag (often ranging from weeks to many years) between when the water infiltrated and when it is exposed at surface again. Surface runoff generally coincides with rainfall events. As the surficial soil layers become saturated by rainfall, water may runoff to low lying areas. The amount of runoff depends on a large number of factors such as soils type, slope gradients, vegetative cover and the soil moisture prior to the rainfall. Runoff contributes water to stream flow at a much faster rate than groundwater will, and often at a much greater volume. The runoff water will have a temperature that mimics the air temperature and can be identified from groundwater in stream flow by a difference in temperature. Long term meteorological data from 1971 -2000 average was obtained from Environment Canada for the Bowmanville Mostert Meteorological Station (Environment Canada, 2011; Table 4.1), to be used to calculate the total precipitation and ET. The mean annual water surplus was calculated using the method described in Thornthwaite and Mather (1957), using a monthly time step and assuming a soil moisture of 150 mm. The soil moisture was estimated according to Thornthwaite and Mather, through analysis of soil type and vegetation in the watershed. The overall water surplus (the difference between the mean annual precipitation and ET) was then calculated and consists of the water available for runoff and infiltration. A summary of the monthly mean precipitation rate, average daily air temperature, actual evapotranspiration and the generated water balance surplus is presented in Table 5.4. The long term average annual mean precipitation at the Bowmanville Mostert Meteorological Station was 857.8 mm/yr. The mean annual evapotranspiration is calculated to be 547.4 mm/yr. The mean annual water surplus is therefore calculated to be the difference, which is 310.4.mm. Table 5.4 Water Budget Summary Month Mean Monthly Temperature Total Monthly Precipitation Actual Evapotranspiration2 Water Balance-Surplus (°C)' (mm)' (mm) (mm) January -6.3 63.1 0.0 63.1 February -5.3 46.3 0.0 46.3 March -0.5 60.7 0.0 60.7 April 6.0 72.9 32.2 40.7 May 12.2 73.7 76.7 -3.0 June 17.1 81.5 107.5 -26.0 July 19.8 63.7 108.7 -45.0 August 18.9 81.0 96.0 -15.0 September 14.7 90.5 76.4 14.1 October 8.4 67.9 38.5 29.4 November 3.1 84.0 11.4 72.6 December -2.7 71.6 0.0 71.6 Year(mmlyr) 1 857.8 547.4 310.4 Notes. 1. Data obtained from the 1971-2000 average at the Bowmanville Mostert Meteorological Station. 2. Evapotranspiration calculated using the Thornthwaite and Mather(1957)method. Based upon the mean annual water surplus calculated by the Thornthwaite and Mather (1957) method, groundwater recharge and surface water runoff rates were quantitatively calculated using a GIS-based analytical model. This model assumes that volumes for domestic and municipal groundwater takings are negligible, and that groundwater and/or surface water inflow from outside the watershed are also negligible. The model integrates watershed characteristics such as slope, aspect, elevation, soils, land use, and land cover over a 20 x 20 m grid to determine groundwater recharge rates and runoff volumes for the watershed. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D- 69 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Figures 5.2 and 5.3 present the modelled groundwater recharge rates and runoff for the Robinson Creek Watershed. Figures 5.4 and 5.5 present the modelled groundwater recharge rates and runoff for the Tooley Creek Watershed. 5.4.2 High Volume Recharge Areas The identification and delineation of areas that contribute `significantly'to groundwater recharge within a watershed is important for the protection and management of water resources. It is important to maintain groundwater recharge rates in significant groundwater recharge areas to ensure that groundwater levels are maintained, groundwater discharge rates to streams are maintained, and that sufficient groundwater supply is available for human uses. Based upon the results of the water balance modelling, High Volume Recharge Areas (HVRAs), within both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds have been identified. HVRAs have been quantitatively shown to be significant groundwater recharge areas within the watersheds, and will be treated as such in future land use scenarios. HVRAs were delineated based upon the methodology outlined by for the provincial Source Water Protection program under the Clean Water Act, Technical Bulletin: Delineation of Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas (2009), and are used by CLOCA in other local watersheds. HVRAs can be defined as the following: 1. An area where the predicted groundwater recharge rate is greater than the mean groundwater recharge rate for the watershed by a factor of 1.15 or more; or 2. An area where the volume of groundwater recharge is 55% or more of the volume determined by subtracting the annual evapotranspiration for the watershed from the annual precipitation for the watershed. 3. A HVRA must also have a hydrological connection to a surface water body or an aquifer that is a source of drinking water for a drinking water system. HVRAs have been delineated for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, based upon the above listed methodology, and are presented in Figures 5.6 and 5.7. Maintaining infiltration in these areas is critical to maintaining the overall health of the watersheds. Specific regulation and planning recommendations will be made to maintain the functionality of these significant areas. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 70 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Nn�oSa 1 t� z Black,CQk �_ r) y C O m i t � a u, °£ ?, $ o- �m 0 c7 ° C19as R°ad 0 1r0 ��9 .per r �ase\ine R°ad iohs ton-Parki7oad_ _ pa�iin9 _ - O o• Estimated average annual recharge in watershed 6.62 x 105m3 Lake Ontario m y Basemapping from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Legend Robinson Creek and Robinson Creek Watershed Tooley Creek watershed � Management Plan Recharge Robinson Creek <ioo Recharge � Q 100-125 Q 125-150 January 2011 a E y r Project 60119359 ?° m Q 150-175 0 200 400 800 175-200 1:25,000 >UTM Zone 1MONAD$3 200 AC0M Figure 5.2 i� Figure 5.2 Robinson Creek Recharge NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 71 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Back Creek i ry no o I Np 4 f Bx 4 fa� 6 �e11 G ,�� 0 d a i d6 A x r oa -o C�gas R d 0�r Road d- n UP Rase\i e - - IPA E d o ad sr� ---� 4ariin9ton Pam' o. Estimated average annual runoff - in watershed 11.79 x 105m3 Lake Ontario m y Basemapping from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Legend Robinson Creek and Robinson Creek Watershed Too ley Creek watershed � Management Plan n Runofl(m 0) Robinson Creek d W ! �`0- � -100-125 Runoff 125-150 January 2011 E a y® Project 66139359 M Q 150-175 0 200 400 800 175-200 UTM Zo:25MONAD$3 ->20-0 �W0M Figure 5.3 i� Figure 5.3 Robinson Creek Runoff NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 72 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan �a5�Road 4 01 � o G m 6 GOP tD �. Y i Q' Q. 0 6 �t°p1 gli t O � f p w� d � c 0 0 s ° °v o N 4 'p. Odi P ,,.+•fir d 1 ti. .: Ct9a5 R°� � South SeryVC¢Road 'po6i a etlne °ad F B � 0 m 07 d C". Un�tO^pa ,ROa N0 p o 0 as 3 01 Estimated average annual recharge in watershed 15.04 x 105m3 Lake onfarro m g` Basemapping from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Legend Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan g N Recharge(mm) Tooley Creek <10o d W � Recharge � Q 100-125 aE a Q 125-150 January 2011 y Project 60119359 150-175 0 250 500 1,000 175-200 °a�' UTM Zon1:30,000 NAD$3 �0 ACOM Figure 5.4 i� Figure 5.4 Tooley Creek Recharge NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 73 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan ¢oad � oL P $, 140 a d og 00� a z YF� 3 s ►__ f $� o da ,► r '.A* ° g G F M f y � + a oadR'adl � Gig eR Sodtt'Seiufcg a 61�s BaSettne Road `f o P ¢ � ^ O Pam R �arlingtO 1 o - y s Estimated average annual runoff in watershed 20.86 x 105m3 Lake Ontario y Basemapping from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Legend Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Toole Creek Watershed � Management nagemeent nt Plan n Runoffjmmj 0 Tooley Creek m � <100 b ,w too-125 Runoff e a a Q 125-150 January 2011 y a Project 60119359 m 150-175 o 250 500 1,000 Q 176-200 UTM 2one�1�NBNAD 83 >200 A MOM Figure 5.5 E� Figure 5.5 Tooley Creek Runoff Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 74 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Fad "a�` +� �" �:., .,•. r c t Bdaek Creek t'�! •.� °+' i P..- o s y b 4 G a . ..i fe r• i; � `, ,; ate• 0 4 0°1�tse°t�stt Ito°t sttg0t ,.` d a a• r m o — m¢ N Gt9as R°ad s ,rtl ton Park R°ad � `�� parlin9 1 t. ¢ Estimated average annual recharge ` in watershed 6.62 x 105m3 Lake Ontario m y Basemapping from Dntarw Ministry of NA-1 Resources Legend Orthophotogmphy: Robinson Creek and Robinson Creek Watershed Tooley Creek watershed ®Hg h volume Recharge A mas Management Plan E N Recharge(mm) Robinson Creek 9 We 0�Q00125 High Volume Recharge e January 2011 9 125-150 Project 60119359 ?' m 150-175 0 200 400 800 Q 175-200 1:25,aoo ->200 �COM Figure 5.6 UTM Zone 17N,NAD 83 Figure 5.6 Robinson Creek High Volume Recharge NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 75 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan y y ¢°ad , 0 40- ty0t.•u x`�%r °'- m a _ i. H�pnt Sit a s b i . G y,f •;i u 0 0 y v o- -i ci9a5 R°ad o ee.4toad $ ut PgTk� c � p 4 41P• H¢ _ 3 _ average verage annual recharge in watershed 15.04 x 1 D5m3 Lake Ontario Basemapping from Ontario Ministry of Natural#2esources Orthophotography: Legend Robinson Creek and ® High Volume Recharge Areas Tapley Creek Watershed Management Plan iz Tooley Creek Watershed" Toole Creek A Recharge(mm) Y W too High Volume Recharge Q 100-125 January 2011 a Q 125-150 Project 60119359 ?° m 150-175 0 250 500 1,000 175 a -200 �' so'aoo 1200 �CjO Figure 5.7 a r UTM Zone 17N,NAB 33 Figure 5.7 Tooley Creek High Volume Recharge Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 76 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 5.5 Imperviousness The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds are projected to experience a rapid increase in population, employment and infrastructure, between 2011 and 2031, in order to accommodate the regional growth centre of Clarington. Future infrastructure and growth projects such as the Highway 407 East Extension and the recent Regional Official Plan Amendment 128 (ROPA 128)', will further add to the urbanization of these watersheds. With this rapid change from primarily agricultural land use to urban land use, there will also be a significant increase in imperviousness. This change in imperviousness must be managed wisely or impacts such as increased runoff, channel erosion, downstream flooding, stream water quality impairment, reduced infiltration and loss of fish and wildlife habitat may occur. As part of this Watershed Management Plan, AECOM developed an analytical and GIS based model to determine the past, present and future amount of imperviousness in both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, based upon a number of future land use scenarios. This model is consistent with CLOCA's "Methodology of Imperviousness Analysis Modelling" (CLOCA, 2010), in that it uses the same land cover classifications, impervious values, and subwatershed land areas. Four land use scenarios were considered for the Imperviousness Analysis: • Past land use scenario, based on 1980 and 2005 land use for Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek, respectively; • Current land use scenario, based on December 2010 actual land use conditions (Figures 5.8 and 5.10); • Future scenario one, based on the Official Plan (2007 Consolidation) land use designations to 2031; and • Future scenario two, based on the Official Plan (2007 Consolidation) land use designation to 2031, including Highway 407 East Link and ROPA 128 lands, and with the addition of the Natural Heritage System (Figures 5.9 and 5.11). Table 5.5 presents the average level of imperviousness for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds based on the above listed four scenarios. Table 5.5 Imperviousness Scenarios for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Land Use Scenario Percent Imperviousness Robinson Creek Watershed Tooley Creek Watershed Past Land Use(1980—Robinson Creek;2005—Tooley Creek) 4% 12% Current Land Use(2011) 21% 13% Future Scenario#1 (2007 OP) 40% 13% Future Scenario#2(2007 OP+Hwy 407+ROPA 128+NHS) 36% 42% The increase in imperviousness over time reflects the increasing urbanization of the watersheds and highlights the need to manage the effects urbanization. The addition of a designated Natural Heritage System will reduce the overall imperviousness of the watersheds and will protect key hydrological areas, which is expected to help minimize the downstream effects of increased runoff, improve water quality and maintain infiltration. 1. At the time this report was completed, the ROPA 128 lands are under appeal from the Region of Durham and the Municipality of Clarington. Therefore, to conservatively assess the impact of future growth scenarios the Watershed Management Planning recommendations provided in this report have assumed that the Courtice Employment Lands (i.e., the ROPA 128 lands) will be part of future development in the watersheds. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 77 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 2R U1 .. a ; Fl 1111 IN U12 U8 us Vte w Ua x, Ua .p 6 1` +\\\` Ut - Co \i m V W1 y c1yay Kaz. WS C 9 LS 4 P4 Lu U .. zr Ll e �. W rA,".Y�" .11'4• .- +�m�a?ro+r'Aos Legend Q Robinson Creek Watershed Imperviousness(%) RAW Cr.M.k Tino"F,— ---Rahway Q 0-15 d Robinson Creek •i Y• Intermittent Stream 16-30 Watershed "f Permanent Stream 31-45 Existing Imperviousness b ]s isb �o .s° eo0 Waterbody Segment 46-66 Febw-2011 rssnbo = Wetland Area,Permanent 11 75 amiId6O11935a IITM Ewn 1]N,NAQ S >75 aaaid�.0 b°wwrean...s�p�M,wM"amM wa°wn h'>tim+q p aiarp.w .—EX.— A_COM Figure 5.B Figure 5.8 Robinson Creek Watershed Existing Imperviousness NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.[)— 78 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan � - �• �� .�y g�'\',,1 * R� n of +r f" i U9 >C^`. `A P rr� u9 ut9 - B+o t Scree: a east U3 spa Su o WI uz C a U9 .. W2 m"e t - c " K:t t L5 c,[ b IYpd� b r � , r � - a L1 11 5 L,rAr!1„C,rni, f141SU 89100 - .. Pnsema¢p^9 hw^pnM1eo MniNrY of WLnT Rea¢una OMO¢Aab.¢nphY.ID05 Legend Q Robinson Creek Watershed Imperviousness(%) e d M;,",�gme.,°Pa.” Railway Q 0-15 Robinson Creek Intermittent Stream �16-30 Unmitigated 2031 Permanent Stream -31-45 Imperviousness 0 9s tm soo ago mo Wateibody Segment -46-81) FPcrw zon Wetland Area,Permanent 61-75 Pmlecl fi0119�59 u*M Xans smq roue _175 xM maV'�da anad,raprodurod w nYeO own hV tlhrtd W�aea, r®araaagraW[ry AECOM ana h<Iwne,a¢nq¢inC ux mry AXOM aeomsiw�y�ww aeeaaem e�a�w.wwc�n.roany wm Fgurc 5.9 aa.nna.�rt.ecorn mwa..«rnen mwx wrcp,rmva�e�mn�nniasavo@ rrem�roes.wouw�rmu��mexa.nnaa�.ea,,.�nan..m Figure 5.9 Robinson Creek Watershed Future Imperviousness Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 79 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan � 1 rt rTt L �.•Y. US YA � f'+ ^� r ue a R A C a us WT G9as Road 4 Ua U3 R d �. n 1 5�tnserv'' W ! Ua m t + parlln9t��Vaar'Ruad A s o — u1 $ W1 _t L2 „ - P 4t• _ P L7 �- �--.� °r•1 . lnFe!helnni, b']8n]0 8]9000 X1000 BSS000 W eemappin0l�am C)11GL{a AaM.wa Nelwel Rewu�a M�ylroagrapM1Y:N05 Ro6mm�Cmak arM Todry Creek Legend Iabbnaad Manegmanl Flan Q Tooley Creek Watershed Imperviousness{%) Tooley Creek '"�• -µ—Railway 0 0-15 Watershed -----Intermittent Stream 16-30 Existing Imperviousness o rao an nm eca eoo Permanent Stream 31-45 FaOrua�y 2011 Projacl60119359 wmzmo+�rrnow � Waterhady Segment �46-60 rnda. ...e�Ame,.awr m.��aaemura.l �'Wetiand Area,Permanent -61-75 >75 ��av a�amme,wire, �®�me.c naom.��,a AXIM Figaro i.fe nuwarp�namaomo..nvi�+d�rtrw.alwaar oo aev wro m u+•..+a.ma,z.ECOm�:..r.«+w,�m..a.,s.m Grp m.w��+aa�x, ...r�a�.w.o.em�m,rr��armnb�nrwimra.,a„e,m.m Figure 5.10 Tooley Creek Watershed Existing Imperviousness Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 80 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan a p � us Ul ff F w ':,fPp of t . �« Y Z s w-,�"- Yf1 19a R Q WS` U3 �i Roaa- V M Road � Da,ltug'r�P o w I.rrRe lhrYnnrr 6]&dp Bi8000 9- 6giml 6B]Am BaaemevpM horn OnNnv Mn16hy N NaWN9 Reamurtw OMOgwcpr�M1Y 2m5 Legend R Wniarched Manegmem Pyrrak Q Toniey creek watershed Imperviousness(8/6) Tooley Creek . E Raitway 0 0-15 Watershed Q 18-30 Intermittent stream Unmitigated 2031 Imperviousness o ,maw m0 em aw Permanent Stream �31-45 FOmr,ary zOn r,a�a.,6o,iease 1.20404 Waterbody Segment -46-60 IRM Zy,a,]N,NAPb3 Wetland Area,Permanent 61-75 :a.axnerr<«ar wn€w"�°n°i maa .i"°m.�a0Wmrm wnw.. _>75 rpmne N Nw uN�r miry w re.an N ucaMa A rea(gm�iMT/�wW Uexpf arry'aWlky wArpNOa+w,tl•^Y wM anno.,e�nnemM..0�.smn rodeo Figure 5.11 ww�sesN��rn�ee0���.mesa.�xws0*Rw�^ah+rrAeera..rmr.�c.>�=rc..-..� av�xwir w..v�.N Figure 5.11 Tooley Creek Watershed Future Imperviousness NM4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 81 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Regulation and policy initiatives are considered to be the most effective method for managing imperviousness, minimizing the impact of development and protecting the natural environment. Specific regulation and policy recommendations are presented in Sections 6.3 and 6.4, and include recommendations such as: • The use of Low Impact Development (LID) technologies and methods; • Enhanced level stormwater management; • The use of technologies such as permeable pavements, soakaway pits, infiltration galleries, grassed swales or other technologies; • Maintaining groundwater recharge rates to pre-development levels in High Volume Recharge Areas; and • Maintaining and/or enhancing natural vegetation. 5.6 Surface Water Analysis As described in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Plan -Existing Conditions Report(AECOM 2010) both watersheds will be undergoing significant land use changes in the next 20 years as development proceeds. A recent hydrotechnical analysis (hydrology and hydraulics)was completed by CLOCA for both watersheds as part of their mandate to identify the Regulatory Floodplain. These analyses are contained in the following reports that were provided as Appendix A and Appendix B of the abovementioned Existing Conditions Report: • Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modelling for Tooley Creek— CLOCA 2008 • Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modelling for Robinson Creek— CLOCA 2010 Both CLOCA reports relied on the Clarington OP (2007 Consolidation) to identify future land use but did not capture the following additional changes that are currently being considered, including: • ROPA 128 lands (residential and employment) —Tooley Creek Watershed; • The Highway 407 East Extension and the East Durham Link to the 401 —Tooley Creek Watershed; • A Town Centre and increased Urban Residential lands— Robinson Creek Watershed; and • Natural Heritage System lands: composed of increased Significant Valley and Environmental Protection lands-Tooley Creek and Robinson Creek Watersheds. These changes are considered to be significant enough to warrant a reassessment of the hydrology and hydraulics of the Watersheds to identify potential negative or positive impacts of changing land use, and to determine mitigation strategies where needed. An updated Surface Water Analysis report is contained in Appendix A of this Watershed Management Plan, and is intended to provide the basis for determining watershed management recommendations. A brief summary of the Surface Water Analysis Report is presented herein. The reader is referred to Appendix A for additional details. 5.6.1 Robinson Creek —Surface Water Analysis Summary In general, the preservation and enhancement of the Natural Heritage System will maintain or improve the effects of storm flows in the watershed to at or below the levels predicted by CLOCA (CLOCA, 2010). As described in Appendix A, development of a Town Centre in the most northern part of the watershed, is expected to increase the likelihood of flooding to existing residential areas between Bushford Road and Sandringham Road for both minor and major flow events, including the Regulatory. The flooding hazard (floodplain) is defined in the MNR's Technical Guide—River and Stream Systems: as the greater of the flood resulting from Hurricane Hazel or the (uncontrolled) one hundred year flood. The Guideline also states that"stormwater management facilities may not be used to provide any reduction in flood flows. Mitigation of existing and future flooding though measures that may include structure controls, Low Impact Development and other source control strategies is recommended. While LID's and/or increasing or maintaining existing rates of infiltration help to mitigate impacts of increased stormwater volumes resulting from development, these measures will not provide relief for the Regulatory Event. Additionally, the Town Centre Lands are within an area identified as a High Volume Recharge Area (Figure 5.6). It was previously recommended that development in these lands should maintain pre-development groundwater infiltration Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 82 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan rates, post-development. Maintaining groundwater recharge in this area is expected to maintain or improve the results of the modelling presented in Appendix A. This area south of Highway#2 and East of Trulls Road (catchment U13) should be designated a Special Study Area and further investigation of planned development and mitigative measures, to promote recharge and reduce flooding, must be undertaken. Several crossings were identified as areas that should be considered for upgrading, due to their impact on the Regulatory Floodplain under both existing and future landuse conditions. These crossings include: • Highway 401 culverts; • CNR railway culvert south of Highway 401. Consideration should be given to upgrading these culverts during redevelopment or regular maintenance, but only after due consideration of downstream flood effects and impacts. 5.6.2 Tooley Creek —Surface Water Analysis Summary In general, the change from agricultural land use to employment land use increases the Regulatory Floodline in all reaches of Tooley Creek to levels greater than those shown in CLOCA, 2008. As described in Appendix A, the most significant flooding increase is behind the Highway 401 culvert crossing back towards Baseline Road. Upgrading of the Highway 401 culvert crossing should be considered during the construction of the Highway 407 East Link in the area. Model simulation results show that to control peak steam flows non-structural options should be considered for the watershed, including maintaining groundwater recharge rates at pre-development levels in High Volume Recharge Areas, Low Impact Development methods, and the use of end-of-pipe mitigation for downstream effects of peak surface water flows. A number of crossings were identified as areas that should be considered for upgrading, due to their impact to the Regulatory Floodplain under both existing and future Ianduse conditions. These crossings include: • Highway 401 culverts; • CP railway culvert north of Baseline Road; and • CNR railway culvert south of Highway 401. Consideration should be given to upgrading these culverts during redevelopment or regular maintenance, but only after due consideration of downstream flood effects and impacts. 5.7 Environmental Constraints As previously stated,the goal of this study is to develop a Watershed Management Plan for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds that promotes sustainable use of the watersheds and can be implemented and adopted into the Clarington Official Plan in support of future development. This goal includes defining how the watersheds should look in order to manage future growth scenarios, and sustain and/or improve the natural environment. Defining which areas are appropriate for preservation, protection, enhancement, or rehabilitation is a key element of this goal. Based upon the Opportunities and Constraints of the watersheds, the watershed targets, and the analysis and delineation of a Natural Heritage System, High Volume Recharge Areas, current and future levels of Imperviousness and Surface Water Analysis, an Environmental Constraints Map was developed (Figure 5.12). It is recommended that this figure be included in the Clarington Official Plan land use Schedule C to help guide development and environmental protection in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. This land use scenario must be used in conjunction with the other recommendations made in this report to minimize the effects of development in the watersheds. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 83 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan � h Y re r. f� _ � l J t - r. •t; r�s v 9 ) q x �rrr /5 ! p 1,� y• GA L Vic, � • I •. a �•yj - o.l�l,tiat.,nralw t Mnrt7'SM1SmI Rea�uz� — �»•.�++3eM1 ASS Legend Cooley Creek Watershed Natural Heritage System Robinson Creek Watershed Fu neti octal Natural ®nrx:lea irrs-wie.CreF'r _Heritage System +4a'c-sea 1✓urx�er"F.a� Q Special Study Area l Targeted Natural Environmental «d }e Railway /Heritage System Constraints Y Regional Floodline ICLOCAI High Volume Recharge Areas Intermittent Stream Lake Iroquois Beach ccc -2=tt ,; yp Permanent Stream Fe;t ertt.ss� Waterbody Segment Wetland Area.Permanent jj� . - A ZC Fiqurp 9.13 Figure 5.12 Environmental Constraints Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 84 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 6. Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Recommendations Owing to the similarities between the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, management recommendations will generally be made for both watersheds to avoid repetition. However, where differences exist between the two watersheds, watershed specific recommendations will be made. The majority of policy recommendations made in the management section will be implemented through 6.1 Groundwater Quantity Groundwater within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds supports vegetation, animals, and humans. People living in the rural areas obtain their drinking water from wells, and numerous businesses rely on groundwater for commercial and industrial use. Aquatic habitat, in both streams and wetlands, is dependent on specific groundwater conditions. Certain fish species require a consistent thermal regime,which is influenced by groundwater upwelling, and wetland vegetation can be highly sensitive to changes to the groundwater table. For these reasons an understanding of the groundwater system is fundamentally important to the overall health of a watershed. Both the Robinson Creek Watershed and the Tooley Creek Watersheds contain groundwater recharge areas as well as discharge areas commonly associated with wetlands and streams that are important on the watershed scale. Hydrogeologically sensitive areas are identified on the basis of surficial geology, groundwater recharge and discharge areas, watercourse characteristics, and the locations of wetlands and water wells. 6.1.1 Groundwater Quantity— Issues and Opportunities for Improvement The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek— Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report(AECOM 2010), documents the existing state of groundwater quantity in the Watersheds, and provides the necessary background information to identify potential issues and opportunities for improvement. A summary of the issues and opportunities related to groundwater quantity is outlined below. Issues and Opportunities Rationale for Improvement Groundwater Recharge Recharge is the term used to describe downward flowing groundwater,that is,from the ground surface towards the water table. Of all precipitation that reaches the ground surface,some is lost to evapotranspiration and some runs off the surface directly into streams.The remainder infiltrates into the ground. Recharge areas are important because they replenish the groundwater. Proper management of groundwater recharge areas within a watershed will ensure that sufficient water is available for human use and to sustain baseflow to aquatic resources. Groundwater recharge can be preserved by protecting key recharge areas and by maintaining pre-development groundwater infiltration rates throughout the watershed. Groundwater Discharge Groundwater discharge is where groundwater is"discharged"to surface,and is generally found where the water table intersects the ground surface or stream channel. Groundwater discharge is important for a variety of reasons. First, it sustains a minimum flow(baseflow)in streams,especially during the dry months of summer. Without groundwater contributions,streams in the watershed would dry up periodically throughout the year. Second, it moderates stream temperatures, particularly during hot summer days,and dampens stream temperature fluctuations. This helps support a variety of fish species that are sensitive to changes in water temperature. Maintaining groundwater discharge within a watershed through management will ensure that volumes and rates of groundwater inputs to streams and wetlands are maintained or enhanced. This will provide a direct benefit to aquatic species and habitat,as well as the terrestrial natural environment. Aquifers and Aquitards An aquifer is described as a rock or soil formation which is saturated and sufficiently permeable to transmit water readily. Examples of aquifer materials include sands and gravels. In contrast to an aquifer,an aquitard is a rock or soil formation that restricts groundwater movement. Examples of aquitard materials include silt,clay and till. Aquitards protect the integrity of the groundwater by restricting the movement of surficial contaminates. An aquifer that is protected by an aquitard is called a"confined aquifer". An aquifer that is not protected by an aquitard is called an"unconfined aquifer". Aquifers provide a source of potable water for many rural residences and transmit water to surface water bodies through groundwater discharge. Protection of these natural features will ensure that sufficient water is available to support human and natural functions. Permits To Take Water Permits to Take Water(PTTW)are issued by the Ministry of the Environment for any water taking that exceeds (PTTW) 50,000 L/day. It is recognised that no high volume water takings are currently active in the watershed,nor are Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 85 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Issues and Opportunities Rationale for Improvement any future large volume water takings likely. However,where water takings for construction dewatering or new industry are anticipated to exceed 50,000 L/day a permit must be obtained to ensure that water resources within the watershed are not stressed. Groundwater Wells Although the Robinson Creek and the Tooley Creek Watersheds are becoming increasingly urban and municipal water supply derived from Lake Ontario will become readily available,some residences may wish to maintain their reliance on well water. The groundwater system within the watershed should be managed to ensure that domestic water supply wells are not impacted by development and that they continue to function as a source of potable water. Additionally,groundwater wells that are no longer in use must be properly decommissioned as per Reg.903. Improperly decommissioned wells can create a direct path for surficial contaminates to enter deep aquifers that otherwise would have been considered protected by an overlying aquitard. 6.1.2 Groundwater Quantity - Management Recommendations Based upon the methodology outlined in Section 5, and the issues and opportunities listed above,the following Section presents the goals, objectives, and management alternatives that were developed and evaluated for the Robinson Creek Watershed relating to groundwater quantity. Specific management recommendations have been made that are designed to maintain and enhance groundwater quantity within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Objective 1a. Maintain and Enhance Groundwater Recharge and Discharge Areas within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Protect important groundwater features. Maintain or enhance groundwater recharge in High Volume Recharge Areas. Maintain or enhance groundwater discharge. Maintain or enhance the current water balance. Objective 1b. Minimize Changes to Groundwater Flow Patterns within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Maintain current groundwater flow regime including groundwater table elevation. Maintain or enhance groundwater discharge to surface water features. Objective 1c. Promote Sustainable Rates of Groundwater Use Within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Maintain sustainable groundwater use as it relates to hydrological, ecological and human functions. Objective 1d. Protect the Landscape Quality and the Important Groundwater Function of the Lake Iroquois Beach (Shoreline) Deposits Working Targets Maintain or enhance groundwater recharge along the Lake Iroquois Beach deposits. Maintain the character of the Lake Iroquois Shoreline landscape. Management Alternatives to Achieve Groundwater Quantity Objectives NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 86 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Regulation and Policy Atli- ap--ent Action 1.1 Restrict development and site alteration within and adjacent to important groundwater features. • Important groundwater features include, but are not limited to: seepage areas, springs, and groundwater fed streams. • Development and site alteration within important groundwater features is prohibited. • Development and site alteration adjacent to important groundwater features must maintain an undeveloped 30 m buffer to protect groundwater quantity. Fulfills Objective la Management Action 1.2 Restrict development and site alteration within and adjacent to High Volume Recharge Areas (HVRAs) to maintain groundwater recharge rates within these significant areas (see Figures 5.6 and 5.7). • Groundwater recharge rates should be maintained at pre-development rates in HVRAs. • Development and site alteration within a HVRA and within 120 m of a HVRA is restricted unless a water budget and hydrogeological evaluation is undertaken that demonstrates that: - Groundwater recharge rates and volumes will be maintained or enhanced post development through on-site mitigation efforts; - Groundwater discharge features or the groundwater flow regime that supports those features will not be affected; and - Best management practices related to groundwater recharge and stormwater management in urban areas are utilized, including the use of Low Impact Development (LID). Fulfills Objectives la, 1b, and 1 c Management Action 1.3 Encourage development to implement practices to manage rainfall `on-site'before it enters a storm sewer. • Implement a hierarchy of practices to maintain or enhance groundwater recharge, starting with `on-site', then `conveyance', and lastly `end of pipe'solutions, with priority given to on-site solutions. • The use of LID stormwater techniques is recommended. Fulfills Objective la Management Action 1.4 Map the location of important groundwater features and HVRAs, and include in municipal planning documents. Fulfills Objectives 1a, 1b, and 1c Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 87 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Management Action 1.5 Minimize alterations of groundwater flow patterns for subsurface development and site alteration. • Development and site alteration within HVRAs areas may be permitted only if: - Development and site alteration will not take place at a depth greater than 1 m above the seasonal high water table elevation, or - A hydrogeological evaluation is undertaken to the satisfaction of the municipality that demonstrates that groundwater flow alterations will be minimized and water table elevations will be maintained post development, or - Applicable approval requirements are fulfilled under the Aggregate Resources Act, Environmental Assessment Act, and/or Ontario Water Resources Act. Fulfills Objective lb Management Action 1.6 Continue to restrict development within areas that are not serviced by municipal sewage and water services. • In accordance with Clarington Official Plan Policy 11.8.1, all Employment Areas shall be developed on municipal water, sewer and roads designed to urban standards. Prior to the introduction of full municipal services, limited development on private services is permissible provided: - The use does not require water consumption in the production, manufacturing, refining or assembling process; - The applicant submits an engineering or hydrogeological report demonstrating that private services can be supported on site without impacting groundwater and soil conditions; - The applicant enters into a development agreement with the Municipality which includes, among other matters, the requirement to connect to future sanitary sewer and water supply services and the payment for the owner's share of installation and connection when such services are available. Fulfills Objective 1 c Management Action 1.7 Restrict development and site alteration on and adjacent to the Lake Iroquois Beach (Shoreline) within the Tooley Creek Watershed. • Development and site alteration on and within 120 m of the Lake Iroquois Beach shall endeavour to maintain the character of the landscape, minimize modifications to the natural contours and maintain groundwater recharge rates post development. • Development and site alteration on and within 120 m of the Lake Iroquois Beach is restricted unless a water budget and hydrogeological evaluation is completed that demonstrates: - Groundwater recharge rates and volumes will be maintained or enhanced post development; - Groundwater discharge features or the groundwater flow regime that supports those features will not be affected; and - Best management practices related to groundwater recharge in urban areas are utilized, such as special house and infrastructure design requirements, and construction. Fulfills Objective Id Mana,apment Action 1.8 Once approved, implement policies recommended in the Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Area Report created through the policies outlined in the Clean Water Act, 2006. Fudihs Objectives la, lb, Ic and Id NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 88 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Education and Stewardship Management Action 1.9 Continue to implement and support the CLOCA Land Stewardship Program, throughout the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, to encourage landowners to preserve, conserve, and enhance groundwater quality on their property, and provide financial and technical assistance in support of these programs. Fulfills Objectives la, 1b, 1 c and Id Management Action 1.10 Continue to implement and support the CLOCA Land Stewardship Program, throughout the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, to educate landowners regarding the natural history and benefits of preserving the character of the Lake Iroquois Beach deposits. Fulfills Objective Id Management Action 1.11 In partnership with CLOCA and other community groups, provide education and awareness to residents, landowners, and developers within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds through workshops, environmental education programs, and community events that convey the importance of protecting and enhancing groundwater resources within the watershed, including: • Continue to support groundwater orientated educational events such as the Durham Children's Groundwater Festival. • Provide easy access to information that local residents and landowners can use to make informed decisions about protecting and enhancing groundwater quantity within the watersheds. • Providing easy access to information that local residents and landowners can use to make informed decisions about protecting, maintaining and using their well and septic system. • Provide education and awareness of the importance of protecting the Lake Iroquois Beach deposits. Fulfills Objectives la, 1b, 1 c and Id Management Action 1.12 Continue to support education, stewardship and community programs that: • Enhance the quality and quantity of surface water and groundwater and increase groundwater recharge capacity. • Promote the creation of a continuous natural heritage system within the Watershed that takes into account the importance of hydrogeological functions. • Provide technical assistance and guidance for the Permit To Take Water application process. • Provide technical assistance and guidance for development of a water conservation program. • Promote sustainable use and preservation of groundwater resources. Fulfills Objectives la, 1b, 1 c and Id NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 89 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Land Acquisition and Dedication Management Action 1.13 Protect lands within HVRAs and groundwater discharge areas through land acquisition and/or dedication. • Land within HVRAs and groundwater discharge areas should be considered for acquisition by or dedication to a public authority to actively protect and enhance the natural environment. • Land along the Lake Iroquois Beach Shoreline should be considered for acquisition by or dedication to a public authority to actively protect and enhance this natural feature and to create recreational opportunities for the community. Fulfills Objectives la, 1b, 1 c and Id Management Action 1.14 Acquisition or dedication of valley lands as a condition of development approval • The Municipality of Clarington should continue to implement the practice of acquiring valley lands as a condition of development approval. This policy will continue to support active management of significant natural features and will help maintain and enhance groundwater discharge to surface water features. Fulfills Objectives 1a, 1b, and 1c 6.1.3 Groundwater Quantity— Monitoring A groundwater quantity monitoring program should be implemented in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. This groundwater monitoring program should be implemented in association with the other natural environment disciplines (i.e., ecology) to integrate the scientific data. Monitoring initiatives should focus on: • The maintenance of baseline recharge rates in HVRA; • The effectiveness of on-site stormwater management in maintaining groundwater recharge; • Interactions between surface water and groundwater, especially in wetlands and groundwater fed portions of Robinson and Tooley Creeks; • Baseflow monitoring of Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek; and • Groundwater level monitoring. It is recommended that consideration be given to integrating groundwater monitoring wells installed as part of site development activities, that are no longer in use, into the groundwater monitoring program and potentially into the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network. Permission from the well owner(s)will be needed to fulfill this recommendation. CLOCA is encouraged to lead the groundwater quantity monitoring program. 6.2 Groundwater Quality Groundwater quality within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is influenced by what we do on the surface and by the properties of the soils. As rainfall or snow melt moves over the land-surface or infiltrates into the ground, its chemistry (or quality) is changed by dissolving minerals from rocks or soil or from reacting with organic Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Dou 90 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan matter. The resulting groundwater then flows towards streams, wetlands, and aquifers, where it is needed to support aquatic organisms and relied upon as a source of drinking water. Human influences can negatively alter or contaminate the groundwater through point source contamination (e.g., spills or septic systems) or non-point source contamination (e.g., road salt or nutrient spreading). Protecting the quality of the groundwater in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is paramount to the overall health of the watershed. Presently, the groundwater quality in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is good. The groundwater quality can generally be described as hard, with high concentrations of anions and cations, such as calcium, magnesium, sodium and bicarbonate, typical of southern Ontario groundwater. However, shallow groundwater samples tend to contain concentrations of nitrate and sodium, likely derived from fertilizer spreading and road salt applications, respectively, at slightly elevated concentrations. 6.2.1 Groundwater Quality— Issues and Opportunities for Improvement The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek— Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report(AECOM 2010), further documents the existing state of groundwater quality in the Watersheds, and provides the necessary background information to identify potential issues and opportunities for improvement. A summary of the issues and opportunities related to groundwater quality is outlined below. Issues and Opportunities Rationale for Improvement Groundwater Recharge A groundwater recharge area is an area that is known to contain soils that allow infiltration more readily than Areas within other areas within a watershed. These areas are important because recharge helps replenish that water table and groundwater aquifers that are used for both ecological and human functions. If the groundwater quality in a groundwater recharge areas becomes impaired,this may affect groundwater quality in aquifers elsewhere in the watershed. Proper management of groundwater recharge areas will maintain and/or improve the groundwater quality within the watersheds. Improperly Installed or O.Reg 903 describes in detail how water wells should be constructed,documented,operated,and abandoned, Abandoned Wells and who is qualified to perform these actions. Improperly installed or abandoned wells provide a direct connection between the land surface and deeper aquifers that otherwise would be protected by an overlying aquitard. The number of improperly installed wells and abandoned wells within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is unknown. All improperly installed, poorly maintained,or abandoned wells should be upgraded or decommissioned to protect groundwater quality within the watershed. Improperly Maintained, Septic systems pose a risk to groundwater quality as they are a source of pollutants such as chloride, nitrate,and Installed or Abandoned bacteria. Improperly maintained, installed,or abandoned septic systems pose a greater risk to groundwater Septic Systems quality because they may contaminate private wells or aquifers. The number of improperly maintained, installed, or abandoned septic systems within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is unknown. The proper management and operation of septic systems will help maintain or enhance the groundwater quality within the watersheds. Non-Point Source Pollution The spreading of nutrients(chemical fertilizer or manure including biosolids)on the land-surface and the use of road salt can lead to groundwater contamination. Because the use of nutrients and road salt is essential, proper management of these applications is needed to protect groundwater quality within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Groundwater Wells Although the Robinson Creek and the Tooley Creek Watersheds is becoming increasingly urban and municipal water supply derived from Lake Ontario will become readily available,some residences may wish to maintain their reliance on well water. The groundwater system within the watershed should be managed to ensure that domestic water supply wells are not impacted by development and that they continue to function as a source of potable water. 6.2.2 Groundwater Quality— Management Recommendations Based upon the methodology outlined in Section 5, and the issues and opportunities listed above, the following Section presents the goals, objectives, and management alternatives that were developed and evaluated for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds relating to groundwater quality. Specific management recommendations have been made that are designed to maintain and enhance groundwater quality within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 91 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Objective 2a. Maintain and Enhance Groundwater Quality within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Protect important groundwater features and HVRAs Decommission abandoned wells and boreholes Rehabilitate improperly installed wells Require water and sewage services Objective 2b. Encourage the Implementation of Best Management Practices to Manage the Groundwater Quality within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Adopt best management practices within the watersheds Management Action 2.1 Restrict development and site alteration within and adjacent to HVRAs. • Development and site alteration within a HVRA and within 120 m of a HVRA is restricted unless a hydrogeological evaluation is undertaken that demonstrates that: - Groundwater quality will be maintained or enhanced post development; and - Best management practices related to groundwater recharge and stormwater management in urban areas are utilized, including LID. • The following uses as outlined in Section 4.5.9 of the Clarington Official Plan are prohibited in HVRAs to protect groundwater quality: - Generation and storage of hazardous waste or liquid industrial waste; - Waste disposal sites and facilities, organic soil conditioning sites, and snow storage and disposal facilities; - Underground and above-ground storage tanks that are not equipped with an approved secondary containment devise; and - Storage of contaminants listed in Schedule 3 to O. Reg 347 (1990). Fulfills Objectives 2a and 2b r'- Ensure that wells or boreholes are properly abandoned as a condition of development approval. '" • Development may be permitted only if the applicant ,- = r' demonstrates that all inactive wells or boreholes will or have been be decommissioned in accordance with the Ontario Water Resources Act(O.Reg 903). Fulfills Objective 2a ��`a• ;rti Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 92 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Management Action 2.3 Continue to restrict development within areas that are not serviced by municipal sewage and water services. • In accordance with Clarington Official Plan Policy 11.8.1, all Employment Areas shall be developed on municipal water, sewer and roads designed to urban standards. Prior to the introduction of full municipal services, limited development on private services is permissible provided: - The use does not require water consumption in the production, manufacturing, refining or assembling process; - The applicant submits an engineering or hydrogeological report demonstrating that private services can be supported on site without impacting groundwater and soil conditions; - The applicant enters into a development agreement with the Municipality which includes, among other matters, the requirement to connect to future sanitary sewer and water supply services and the payment for the owner's share of installation and connection when such services are available. Fulfills Objective 2a Management Action 2.4 Require private sewage system upgrading during property redevelopment • On a property that includes an individual on-site sewage service, such as a leaching bed, development that alters the leaching bed or the plumbing or the potential treatment volume, may be permitted only if the applicant demonstrates that the sewage system meets or will be upgraded to meet the Ontario Building Code. Fulfills Objective 2a Management Action 2.5 Continue to apply best management practices for road salt spreading within the watersheds. • Continue to implement policies and regulations that regulate the spreading of road salt through current best management practices. • The current road salt management plan should be re-evaluated to further regulate road salt spreading in HVRAs. Fulfills Objective 2b Management Action 2.6 Once approved, implement policies recommended in the Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Area Report created through the policies outlined in the Clean Water Act, 2006. Fulfills Objectives 2a and 2b Education and Stewardship Management Action 2.7 Continue to implement and support the CLOCA Land Stewardship Program, throughout the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, to encourage landowners to preserve, conserve, and enhance the groundwater quality on their property, and provide financial and technical assistance in support of these programs. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 93 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Fulfills Objectives 2a and 2b Management Action 2.8 In partnership with CLOCA and other community groups, provide education and awareness to residents, landowners, and developers within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds through workshops, environmental education programs, and community events that convey the importance of protecting and enhancing groundwater resources within the watershed, including: • Protecting and enhancing groundwater resources within the watershed. • Protecting groundwater quality and having clean drinking water. • Continuing to support groundwater orientated educational events such as the Durham Children's Groundwater Festival. • Providing easy access to information that local residents and landowners can use to make informed decisions about protecting, maintaining and using their well and septic system. • Promoting private water well testing in partnership with the Durham Regional Health Unit. Fulfills Objectives 2a and 21; Management Action 2.9 Continue to support education, stewardship and community programs that: • Enhance the quality and quantity of surface water and groundwater and increase the quality and quantity of groundwater recharge. • Educate the public on the need for clean drinking water. • Upgrade existing wells or decommission abandoned wells. • Educate the public on the risks to groundwater quality from improperly functioning septic systems. • Inspect, upgrade or repair septic systems. Fulfills Objectives 2a and 21: Land Acquisition and Dedication Management Action 2.10 Land within HVRAs should be considered for acquisition by or dedication to a public authority to actively protect and enhance the natural environment. Fulfills Objectives 2a and 2i NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 94 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 6.2.3 Groundwater Quality— Monitoring A groundwater quality monitoring program should be implemented in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. This groundwater monitoring program should be implemented in association with the other natural environment disciplines (i.e., surface water quality) to integrate the scientific data. Monitoring initiatives should focus on: • Groundwater quality monitoring, especially in HVRAs and along major transportation corridors; • Surface water quality monitoring; • Documenting the number and type of private water wells in the watersheds; • Monitoring the usage of road salt and implementation of BMPs related to road salt spreading; and • Monitoring the usage of agricultural fertilizers and the effect on groundwater and surface water quality. It is recommended that consideration be given to integrating groundwater monitoring wells as part of site development activities, that are no longer in use, be incorporated into the groundwater monitoring program and potentially become part of the Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network (permission from the well owners will be needed to fulfill this recommendation). CLOCA is encouraged to lead the groundwater quality monitoring program. 6.3 Surface Water Quantity Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek are two of the shortest watercourses within CLOCA's jurisdiction. Both watersheds are considered urban watersheds, with the Robinson Creek Watershed being more developed than the Tooley Creek Watershed. The headwaters of both creeks originate in the Iroquois Plain physiographic region and do not extend far enough northwards to be fed by the Oak Ridges Moraine. Robinson Creek is a third order stream with an overall length of approximately 6.7 km and drains an area of 578 ha. The level of imperviousness in the headwaters area is high owing to urban development in the area. As Robinson Creek flows southwards, the level of imperviousness decreases, and leads to a current overall imperviousness of 21% for the watershed. Tooley Creek is also a third order stream with an overall length of approximately 15.7 km and drains an area of 1,040 ha. The headwaters of Tooley Creek originate in the Maple Grove Wetland Complex, which has a low level of imperviousness. Urban development in the Tooley Creek Watershed is small compared to the Robinson Creek Watershed which is reflected in the overall level of imperviousness, which is currently at 13%. Surface water was analyzed from both a natural environment perspective (i.e., fisheries) and from a natural hazard perspective (i.e., flooding). Surface water flow provides fish habitat and spawning grounds, water for vegetation and animals and recreational opportunities. Hydrologic and hydraulic modelling provides information in creek flow patterns and how the watercourse will respond to the flow generated by a storm event. This analysis allows for natural hazard flood lines to be defined, which helps protect infrastructure, and public health and safety. 6.3.1 Surface Water Quantity and Control — Issues and Opportunities for Improvement The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek— Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report(AECOM 2010), documents the existing state of the surface water quantity in the Watersheds from a natural environment perspective. CLOCA produced the hydrologic and hydraulic modelling reports for the Watersheds, which are entitled, Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modelling for the Robinson Creek Watershed(CLOCA 2010) and Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modelling for the Tooley Creek Watershed(CLOCA 2007, revised 2008). NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 95 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan As part of this watershed management plan, the modelling completed by CLOCA was updated to account for various land use scenarios and future conditions, and is included in Appendix A. This report provides the necessary background information to identify potential issues and opportunities for improvement or surface water quantity. A summary of the issues and opportunities related to surface water quantity are outlined below. Issues and Opportunities Rationale for Improvement Natural Hazards The protection of people and property is paramount. Floodplains need to be defined based upon current and future land use scenarios to restrict new development within the floodplain. Current developments within the floodplain need to be identified and protected to avoid flood impacts. Barriers to flow(and by extension fish movement)need to be identified and redesigned to reduce the effects of flooding. CLOCA plays a key role in the protection of people and property in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds through the enforcement of O. Reg 42/06- Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses. Stormwater Management Management of stormwater flows is important to minimize extreme peak flows which can cause flooding. Especially in urban developments,where the level of imperviousness is high,stormwater needs to be controlled,from both a water quantity and water quality perspective. This will help protect stream channel geomorphology and maintain habitat of fish species. Local infiltration of stormwater is generally preferred over end-of-pipe solutions in areas were the soils are favourable for infiltration. This will help maintain groundwater recharge rates and help the overall water budget for the watersheds. Maintaining Baseflow Fish require minimum stream flows for passage, habitat and other life-cycle processes. Maintaining baseflow in Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek is imperative to protect and preserve sensitive fish species such as rainbow trout that were identified in both watercourses. Other aquatic,terrestrial and benthic organisms also rely on a minimum baseflow that needs to be maintained. Imperviousness Impervious land cover reduces infiltration, promotes runoff and increases storm and peak surface water flows. Each of these can lead to flooding hazards which risks public safety and property. Imperviousness also needs to be minimized in headwater areas from a stream response and baseflow perspective. Wetlands Wetland areas provide both quantity and quality control of surface water through water storage and retention. They work to naturally reduce peak flows. Existing wetland areas need to be protected and enhanced to help reduce flood risks and to help maintain the overall surface water health. 6.3.2 Surface Water Quantity— Management Recommendations Based upon the methodology outlined in Section 5, and the issues and opportunities listed above, the following Section presents the goals, objectives, and management alternatives that were developed and evaluated for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds relating to surface water quantity. Specific management recommendations have been made that are designed to maintain and enhance surface water quantity within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Objective 3a. Maintain and Enhance the Water Balance and Baseflow in Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Minimize impervious surfaces in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Maintain or enhance baseflow volumes. Maintain or enhance groundwater recharge rates. Objective 3b Maintain and Control the Level of Surface Water Flow, Storm-event Flows and Flood Hazard Protection for Future Development Working Targets Minimize imperviousness in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. 1 Apply stormwater management best management practises. 1 Control peak flows. 1 Maintain channel form and minimize erosion. • - • !� • • Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 96 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Regulation and Policy nn rya arise t.Action 3.1 Maintain development setbacks from Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek. • New development and site alteration within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds will be setback on both sides of the watercourse as defined by the larger of: - The Functional Natural Heritage System; - The top-of-bank based on a stable slope; - The Regulatory Flood Line; - 30 m on both sides of the wetted width of the tributary; - Meander belt allowance for unconfined systems; and - Hazard limit as defined by the MNR Natural Hazards Training Manual. Fulfills Objective 3a Miliarmn+ierht Action 3.2 Restrict development and site alteration within and adjacent to features that contribute to surface water flow. • Important features that contribute to surface water flow include, but are not limited to: seepage areas, springs, headwater areas, significant valley lands, and groundwater discharge areas. • Development and site alteration within features that contribute to surface water flow is prohibited. • Development and site alteration adjacent to important features that contribute to surface water flow must maintain an undeveloped 30 m buffer to protect natural stream flows. Fulfills Objective 3a Management Action 3,3 Minimize cumulative growth of impervious surfaces within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds • Impervious surfaces should be kept to a minimum and opportunities to increase infiltration should be explored prior to development approval. • Natural vegetation should be maintained during development, and where possible improved or restored. • Development may be permitted only if the development: - Minimizes impervious surfaces and where conditions permit, explores opportunities to increase infiltration, such as the use of: permeable pavements, soakaway pits, grassed swales or other technologies. - Maintains natural vegetation and where possible improves or restores vegetated areas. • The Municipality shall endeavour to keep imperviousness at or below the current levels for both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. During development review every effort to reduce the level of impervious surfaces will be explored. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 3L NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 97 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Management Action 3.4 Compensate off-site for hard surface effects • In developed portions and those areas of new development where planning policies encourage or mandate medium to high density urbanization, where it is not possible to maintain or enhance infiltration, off-site compensation that is satisfactory to the municipality may be utilized that includes, but is not limited to: - Target achievement through adjacent or abutting lots; and - Installation of downstream or downgradient surface water conveyance systems, such as ditching or exfiltration pipes. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 31; Management Action 3.5 Urban stormwater best management practices will continue to be required for new developments • All development will meet or exceed stormwater development standards set-out by the municipality and by CLOCA (see Technical Guidelines for Stormwater Management Submissions, CLOCA 2010). • The use of stormwater best management practices must be implemented for all new developments. • The use of Low Impact Development (LID) technologies is recommended for all new developments. • Alternative stormwater management designs and practices related to stormwater management should be explored for all new developments to minimize and attenuate runoff volumes and peak flow rates to pre-development levels. • Developments with a proposed imperviousness land area of 0.25 ha or more will only be permitted if quality treatment of stormwater is conducted. - For smaller developments, stormwater management facilities may not be practical, but source control, conveyance treatment or end-of-pipe solutions should still be examined to the satisfaction of the municipality and CLOCK • All new developments must provide stormwater control to maintain post-development flows to pre- development levels for the 1:2 through 1:100 year rainfall events. • Discharge of stormwater to a receiving watercourse must be outletted in a manner that does not adversely impact channel morphology or stream bank erosion. A geomorphological investigation should be conducted of the receiving branch of Robinson Creek or Tooley Creek to stormwater discharge to ensure that stream bank erosion is minimized. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 3b Management Action 3.6 IN Encourage development to implement practices to manage rainfall `on-site' o s s before it enters a storm sewer. ; • Implement a hierarchy of practices to maintain or enhance groundwater recharge, starting with `on-site', then `conveyance', and lastly `end of pipe' solutions, with priority given to on-site solutions. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 3b ` Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 98 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Management Action 3.7 Encourage public bodies or private landowners to upgrade perched or undersized culverts during redevelopment or regular maintenance. • In the Robinson Creek watershed, the following culverts should be upgraded or enlarged during redevelopment or maintenance to reduce potential flooding impacts and/or improve fish passage: - Highway 401 culverts. - CP railway culvert north of Baseline Road. - CNR railway culvert south of Highway 401. - Perched CSP culvert on the south side of Bloor Street. • In the Tooley Creek watershed, the following culverts should be upgraded or enlarged during redevelopment or maintenance to reduce potential flooding impacts and/or improve fish passage: - Highway 401 culverts. - CP railway culvert north of Baseline Road. - CNR railway culvert south of Highway 401. - Perched box culvert at the downstream end of the Highway 401 underpass. - Crushed CSP culvert where the eastern branch of Tooley Creek crosses Hancock Road. • Notify the owner(s) of the above listed crossings of the need to upgrade or enlarge during redevelopment or maintenance Fulfills Objective 3b Management Action 3.8 The use of online stormwater management ponds is not permitted in either the Robinson Creek or Tooley Creek Watersheds. Fulfills Objective 3b Management Action 3.9 Continue to enforce O. Reg 42106—Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses • CLOCA should continue to enforce the Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulations in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds for new developments and redevelopments. • The Municipality should continue to incorporate the requirements of O.Reg 42/06 - Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses, into development plans. • CLOCA and Municipal staff should continue to review development applications and plans to ensure that stormwater management controls are appropriate, peak flows will be minimized and erosion and sedimentation controls will be effective. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 3b NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 99 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Management Action 3.10 Restrict development and site alteration within and adjacent to HVRAs. • Development and site alteration within HVRAs and within 120 m of a HVRA is restricted unless a water budget and hydrogeological evaluation is undertaken that demonstrates that: - Groundwater quantity will be maintained or enhanced post development through the use of on- site mitigation measures; and - Best management practices related to groundwater recharge and stormwater management in urban areas are utilized, including LID. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 3b Education and Stewardship Management Action 3.11 Continue to implement and support the CLOCA Land Stewardship Program, throughout the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, to encourage landowners to preserve, conserve, and enhance surface water quantity and quality on their property, and provide financial and technical assistance in support of these programs. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 3b Management Action 3.12 In partnership with CLOCA and other community groups, provide education and awareness to residents, landowners, and developers within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds through workshops, environmental education programs, and community events that convey the importance of protecting and enhancing surface water resources within the watershed, including: • Provide easy access to information that local residents and landowners can use to make informed decisions about protecting surface water in the watersheds. • Provide an environmental awareness program to better educate the public on the importance of stormwater management and associated best management practices. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 3b Management Action 3.13 Continue to support education, stewardship, and community programs that: • Help reforest or revegetate the lands within the 30 m watercourse setback. • Enhance the quantity of surface water runoff and help control erosion. • Encourage stream bank restoration, particularly on private lands, that are currently devoid of adequate riparian cover. • Help to promote infiltration and reduce impervious surfaces. • Help increase riparian cover. • Encourage the implementation of best management practices related to stormwater management and control. • Help to manage or control storm flow events. Fulfills Objectives 3a and 3b NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 100 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Land Acquisition and Dedication Rhin a-ipmPnt Action 3„14 Acquisition or dedication of valley lands as a condition of development approval • The Municipality of Clarington should continue to implement the practice of acquiring valley lands as a condition of development approval. This policy will continue to support active management of significant natural features and will help maintain and enhance surface water quantity within the watersheds. Fulfills Objectives 3,i enri 3h 6.3.3 Surface Water Quantity and Control — Monitoring A surface water quantity monitoring program should be implemented in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. This surface water monitoring program should be implemented in association with the other natural environment disciplines (i.e., groundwater quantity) to integrate the scientific data. Monitoring initiatives should focus on: • Stream flow monitoring and bank erosion assessments should continue in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds to further characterize the surface water system; • Regular precipitation and stream flow monitoring to more accurately calibrate the potential flood hazard and define the floodplain in the watersheds; • Interactions between surface water and groundwater, especially in wetlands and groundwater fed portions of Robinson and Tooley Creeks; • Baseflow monitoring; and • Channel morphology and evolution. Consideration should be given to focusing more monitoring efforts on urban watersheds, such as Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek as they are under more immediate pressures from urbanization and development. CLOCA is encouraged to lead the surface water quantity monitoring program. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 101 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 6.4 Surface Water Quality Land use and land cover have the largest effect on surface water quality. Areas where runoff and stormwater are controlled, non-point source contaminates (e.g., road salt and fertilizer) are limited and adequate riparian cover exists, generally have high surface water quality. In areas where one or more of these things are missing, the potential exists for reduced water quality. Contaminates such as sediment, phosphorus, chloride and bacteria, can affect aquatic species and habitat, and degrade the overall quality of the water resource. The surface water quality of Robinson and Tooley creeks s ; also affects the water quality in Lake Ontario, which is the receiving water body for these creeks. Much of the Region's drinking water supply is derived from Lake 4 _ Ontario, so maintaining its health and integrity is _ 1 I paramount. . . Surface water in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds supports a variety of fish communities. The current land use in the watersheds is dominated by agriculture, which is generally responsible for non-point source contaminates such as nitrogen, phosphorus and bacteria. However, increasing urban development in the watersheds has the potential to increase concentrations of urban pollutants such as chloride and sediment in surface water bodies. Currently, the surface water quality in both the Robinson and Tooley Creek Watersheds is generally good (i.e., meets Provincial Water Quality Objectives), but contaminates such as chloride and phosphate were found to be above background levels. 6.4.1 Surface Water Quality— Issues and Opportunities for Improvement The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek— Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report(AECOM 2010), documents the existing state of surface water quality in the Watersheds, and provides the necessary background information to identify potential issues and opportunities for improvement. A summary of the issues and opportunities related to surface water quality is outlined below. Issues and Opportunities Rationale for Improvement Stormwater Management Land development projects have the potential to degrade surface water quality by increasing non-point source pollutants,such as sediment. The impacts of post-development stormwater runoff quality can adversely affect drinking water supplies, recreation,fish and other aquatic life,property values and other uses of lands and waters. These adverse impacts can be controlled and minimized through the use of stormwater management and through the regulation of stormwater runoff quality. Adequate Riparian Cover The presence of riparian buffers around watercourses not only provides important terrestrial habitat, but also helps to control surface runoff and improve surface water quality by slowing the flow of runoff and filtering out sediment. Specific sections of Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek that were identified in the Existing Conditions Report, lack adequate riparian cover to protect surface water quality. Integrating riparian cover into the overall watershed management plan by enforcing development setbacks can return these lands to their natural state and function. Non-Point Source Pollution The spreading of nutrients(chemical fertilizer or manure including biosolids)on the land-surface and the use of road salt on roadways can adversely impact surface water quality. These non-point source pollutants include bacteria,including E.coli,chloride, nitrate, heavy metals and sediment. Because the use of nutrients and road salt is essential, proper management of these applications is needed to protect surface water quality within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 102 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 6.4.2 Surface Water Quality— Management Recommendations Based upon the methodology outlined in Section 5, and the issues and opportunities listed above, the following Section presents the goals, objectives, and management alternatives that were developed and evaluated for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds relating to surface water quality. Specific management recommendations have been made that are designed to maintain and enhance surface water quality within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Objective 4a. Maintain and Enhance Surface Water Quality in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Maintain surface water quality through the use of effective storm water management. Maintain surface water quality parameters below the Provincial Water Quality Objective (PWQO) concentrations. Adopt best management practices for road salt spreading. Maintain surface water quality through the use of effective erosion and sedimentation control measures. Management Alternatives to Achieve Surface Water Quality Objectives Regulation and Policy Management Action 4.1 Continue to require enhanced level urban stormwater management new developments. • Enhanced level urban stormwater management controls will continue to be required for all new developments. • All development shall meet or exceed stormwater development standards set-out by the municipality and by CLOCA (see Technical Guidelines for Stormwater Management Submissions, CLOCA 2010). • The use of LID stormwater techniques is recommended for all new developments. • Alternative stormwater management designs and practices related to stormwater management should be explored for all new developments. • The removal of vegetation during construction shall be kept to a minimum. • All sediment that is eroded during construction shall be contained on site by the use of erosion and sedimentation control measures set-out by the municipality and by CLOCA. • For the purposes of stormwater management, a target of 80% of suspended solids, as a long-term average, shall be removed from stormwater prior to discharge to a receiving waterbody. • Where appropriate, the use of oil/grit separators shall be considered to enhance the effectiveness of stormwater management facilities as part of the treatment train. • Sub-surface stormwater cooling techniques should be explored for new developments to reduce the thermal impact of heated urban water on coolwater streams and Coldwater fish habitat. • Discharge of stormwater to the receiving watercourse must be outletted in a manner that does not adversely impact channel morphology or stream bank erosion. A geomorphological investigation should Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 103 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan be conducted of the receiving branch of Robinson Creek or Tooley Creek to stormwater discharge to ensure that stream bank erosion is minimized. Fulfills Objective 4a Management Action 4-2 Protect and restore vegetative setbacks along Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek. • New development and site alteration within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds will be setback from both sides of the watercourse as defined by the larger of: - The Functional Natural Heritage System; - The top-of-bank based on a stable slope; - The Regional Flood Line; - 30 m on both sides of the wetted width of the tributary; - Meander belt allowance for unconfined systems; and - Hazard limit as defined by the MNR Natural Hazards Training Manual. Fulfills Objective 4a Management Action 4.3 Implement policies recommended in the Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Area Report created through the policies outlined in the Clean Water Act, 2006. • At the time this Watershed Management Plan was created, the Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Area Report was completed in draft and had not been approved by CLOCA's Board of Directors. • A small portion of the southwestern Robinson Creek Watershed falls within the Intake Protection Zone (IPZ-2) for the Oshawa Water Treatment Plant (see Figure 5.3 of the Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Area report). When the Source Water Protection Report is approved, this area must be managed within the framework set out in the report and in the Clean Water Act. Fulfills Objective 4a Management Action 4.4 Continue to apply best management practices for road salt spreading in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. • Continue to implement policies and regulations that regulate the spreading of road salt through current best management practices by all road authorities (local, regional and provincial). Fulfills Objective 4a Education and Stewardship Management Action 4.F Continue to implement and support the CLOCA Land Stewardship Program, throughout the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds, to encourage landowners to preserve, conserve, and enhance surface water quality, and provide financial and technical assistance in support of these programs. Fulfills Objective 4a Management Action 4., In partnership with CLOCA and other community groups, provide education and awareness to residents, landowners, and developers within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds through workshops, environmental NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 104 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan education programs, and community events that convey the importance of protecting and enhancing surface water resources within the watershed, including: • Continue to provide services and funding to the Community Stream Steward Program, initiated by the Ontario Federation or Anglers and Hunters. • Provide easy access to information that local residents and landowners can use to make informed decisions about protecting surface water in the watersheds. • Provide an environmental awareness program to better educate the public on the important of best management practices in protecting surface water quality. Fulfills Objective 4a Management Action 4.7 Continue to support education, stewardship, and community programs that: • Assist with habitat restoration, reforestation, and buffer strip planting. • Help implement agricultural best management practices and farm land conservation. • Help to manage or control steam bank erosion. • Help increase riparian cover. Fulfills Objective 4a Land Acquisition and Dedication Management Action 4.8 Acquisition or dedication of valley lands as a condition of development approval • The Municipality of Clarington should continue to implement the practice of acquiring valley lands as a condition of development approval. This policy will continue to support active management of significant natural features and will help maintain and enhance surface water quality within the watersheds. Fulfills Objective 4a 6.4.3 Surface Water Quality— Monitoring An integrated surface water quality monitoring program should be implemented to test the effectiveness of stormwater management practices, best management practises related to road salt spreading and nutrient applications, and surface water quality, within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. This surface water monitoring program should be implemented in association with the other natural environment disciplines (i.e., fisheries and aquatic habitat)to integrate the scientific data. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 105 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Monitoring initiatives should focus on: • Monitoring the effectiveness and efficiency of the stormwater management ponds and other facilities; • Surface water quality sampling, especially along major transportation corridors and development areas; • Monitoring the usage of road salt and implementation of BMPs related to road salt spreading; and • Monitoring the usage of agricultural fertilizers and the effectiveness of agricultural BMPs. Consideration should be given to focusing more monitoring efforts on urban watersheds, such as Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek as they are under more immediate pressures from urbanization and development. It is recommended that a stormwater management infrastructure monitoring program be developed and implemented in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. CLOCA is encouraged to lead the surface water quality monitoring program. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 106 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 6.5 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watersheds have similar fisheries and aquatic habitat characteristics in that they generally support warm/cool water fish communities that are typical of surface water dominated streams. Common species include Blacknose Dace (Rhinichthys atratulus), Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculauts) and Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas). Both creeks have some groundwater contribution within their headwaters which is considered critical to the annual base flow regimes of the stream systems. These groundwater contributions create habitat that can support cold water fish species such as Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), which were found in small numbers in both creeks. Both Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek can be thermally classified as coolwater streams, where flow is • ' dominated by surface water inputs, although some of the upper 1St order stream lengths in Tooley Creek are considered Coldwater due to groundwater discharge. Biological water quality assessments show that water quality in both watersheds is impaired based upon the diversity of macro-invertebrate species and surface water quality chemical samples. In general, the fish species existing within Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek are generalists in their habitat requirements and are widespread in their southern Ontario distribution. However, the presence of rainbow trout in both Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek indicate that they are capable of supporting a Coldwater fish community, and therefore, should be managed as such. Watershed management priorities related to fish and aquatic habitat should focus on maintaining base flow, improving water quality and promoting measures to reduce stream temperatures. 6.5.1 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat— Issues and Opportunities for Improvement The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek— Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report(AECOM 2010), documents the existing state of fisheries and aquatic habitat in the Watersheds, and provides the necessary background information to identify potential issues and opportunities for improvement. A summary of the issues and opportunities related to fisheries and aquatic habitat is outlined below. Issues and Opportunities Rationale for Improvement Barriers to Fish Passage Instream barriers can affect water quality and habitat conditions within a watershed. In stream barriers can arise from a variety of causes including man-made devices such as water control structures(i.e.,dams,weirs and culverts)or natural obstacles such as log jams or debris weirs that prevent/deter/obstruct fish movement. The presence of barriers in watercourses can cause localized stress to fish throughout the year, but are particularly detrimental during spawning migrations or(in the case of the Robinson and Tooley Creek watersheds)during periods of low flow condition when migration upstream and downstream for fish is critical to finding adequate refuge habitat. Invasive Species No common invasive species were caught in either Robinson Creek or Tooley Creek during AECOM's 2009 fish sampling event. However,that does not preclude the fact that invasive species such as Round Goby or Zebra Mussels may be present in the watersheds due to their connection with Lake Ontario. Maintaining Baseflow Fish require minimum stream flows for passage, habitat and other life-cycle processes. Maintaining baseflow in Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek is imperative to protect and preserve sensitive fish species such as rainbow trout that were identified in both watercourses. Other aquatic,terrestrial and benthic organisms also rely on a minimum baseflow that needs to be maintained. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 107 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Issues and Opportunities Rationale for Improvement Adequate Riparian Cover Riparian vegetation serves as natural filtration for overland surface water flow and aids in minimizing sedimentation within streams. Riparian vegetation also functions to provide carbon and nutrient inputs into streams such as leaf and woody debris,which creates habitat cover and provides shade cover over streams contributing to the buffering of water temperatures. Specific sections of Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek that were identified in the Existing Conditions Report, lack adequate riparian cover to protect fish habitat. By integrating riparian cover into the overall watershed management plan by enforcing development setbacks,these lands can return to their natural state and function. Stream Temperature Currently, both Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek have a thermal regime capable of supporting warm to cold water fish communities. Maintaining suitable cold water conditions for cold water fish species such as rainbow trout will be critical to maintaining a healthy stream system. Promoting groundwater discharge, increasing riparian cover and providing thermal buffering from stormwater inputs are important mechanisms to reduce stream temperature fluctuations. Water Quality Water quality in both Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek is currently classified as impaired. Concentrations of non-point source pollutants such as phosphorus and chloride regularly exceed PWQO standards. Biological water quality indicators show that water quality in these watercourses is typical of urban watersheds. Studies have shown that elevated Total Suspended Solids above 25 mg/L can adversely affect aquatic habitat for invertebrates by filling in interstices of course stream substrate. Headwater Areas Headwater areas are typically sustained by groundwater inputs and provide a critical function in maintaining base flow. These reaches are generally colder than 3rd or 4th order stream lengths due to consistent groundwater inputs. Both Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek have headwater areas on the Iroquois Plain Shallow Aquifer, which is a significant groundwater recharge and discharge area. Maintaining the interactions between surface water and groundwater in headwater areas will contribute to cooling surface water temperatures and create a constant base flow regime. Urbanization The biggest threat to fish species and aquatic habitat is urbanization of the watersheds. Without proper management,urbanization can lead to increased surface water temperatures,lower water quality, higher peak flows, reduced base flow,and channelization/alteration of habitat. Management recommendations designed to mitigate the effects of urbanization are key to maintaining a healthy watershed. 6.5.2 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat— Management Recommendations Based upon the methodology outlined in Section 2, and the issues and opportunities listed above, the following Section presents the goals, objectives, and management alternatives that were developed and evaluated for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds relating to fisheries and aquatic habitat. Specific management recommendations have been made that are designed to maintain and enhance the quality and diversity of fish species and aquatic habitat within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Objective 5a. Protect and Enhance Existing Fish Habitat and Resident Fish Communities in Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Working Targets Protect headwater areas and baseflow. Maintain or decrease surface water temperatures. Maintain or improve surface water quality. Improve riparian vegetative cover. Objective 5b. Protect and Enhance Aquatic Habitat and Function Working Targets Protect headwater areas and baseflow Maintain or decrease surface water temperatures Maintain or improve surface water quality Improve riparian vegetative cover Protect existing feeding, breeding and rearing areas � . Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man PIan.Docx 108 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Regulation and Policy Management Action 5.1 r Protect and restore vegetative setbacks along Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek. • New development and site alteration within the Robinson q; Creek and Toole Creek Watersheds will be setback from Tooley �. both sides of the watercourse as defined by the larger of: - The Functional Natural Heritage System. - The top-of-bank based on a stable slope. - The Regional Flood Line. - 30 m on either side of the wetted width of the tributary. Fulfills Objectives 5a and 5b Management Action 5.2 Continue to apply best management practices for road salt spreading in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. • Implement policies and regulations that regulate the spreading of road salt through current best management practices by all road authorities (local, regional, provincial). Fulfills Objective 5b Management Action 5.3 Restrict development and site alteration within and adjacent to aquatic habitat. • Development within aquatic habitat is prohibited except development and site alteration permitted in accordance with Section 35 of the Federal Fisheries Act . • Development and site alteration adjacent to aquatic habitat must maintain an undeveloped 30 m buffer on both sides of the wetted width of the tributary to protect fish and aquatic habitat. Fulfills Objectives 5a and 5i; Management Action 5.4 Identify watercourse improvement projects to reduce bank erosion and sediment loading in Robinson and Tooley Creeks. • Identify areas of Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek where erosion stabilization would assist in reducing bank erosion and sediment loading. - Erosion improvement works should consider the fundamentals of natural channel design and biotechnical methods. Fulfills Objective 5b Management Action 5.5 Encourage public bodies or private landowners to upgrade perched or undersized culverts during redevelopment or regular maintenance. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 109 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan • In the Robinson Creek watershed, the following culverts should be upgraded or enlarged during redevelopment or maintenance to reduce potential flooding impacts and/or improve fish passage: - Highway 401 culverts. - CP railway culvert north of Baseline Road. - CNR railway culvert south of Highway 401. - Perched CSP culvert on the south side of Bloor Street. • In the Tooley Creek watershed, the following culverts should be upgraded or enlarged during redevelopment or maintenance to reduce potential flooding impacts and/or improve fish passage: - Highway 401 culverts. - CP railway culvert north of Baseline Road. - CNR railway culvert south of Highway 401. - Perched box culvert at the downstream end of the Highway 401 underpass. ` - Crushed CSP culvert where the eastern branch of Tooley Creek crosses Hancock Road. Fulfills Objectives 5a and 5L Education and Stewardship Management Action 5.6 Continue to implement and support the CLOCA Land Stewardship Program, throughout the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed, to encourage landowners to preserve, conserve, and enhance fish and aquatic habitat on their property, and provide financial and technical assistance in support of these programs. Fulfills Objectives 5a and 5L Management Action 5.7 In partnership with CLOCA and other community groups, provide education and awareness to residents, landowners, and developers within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds through workshops, environmental education programs, and community events that convey the importance of protecting and enhancing fish communities and habitat within the watershed. • Work with residents adjacent to either Robinson Creek or Tooley Creek to encourage: - Planting native riparian species along exposed sections of the creeks; and - Maintain buffers between mown lawns and the creek. • Work with the agricultural community to encourage erecting cattle fencing along the creeks to keep livestock away from the watercourse, especially south of Highway 401 in the Tooley Creek Watershed. This action is consistent with agricultural best management practices and the Nutrient Management Act. Encourage the planting of riparian vegetation between the cattle fencing and the creeks. Fulfills Objectives 5a and 51; Management Action 5.8 Continue to support education, stewardship and community programs that: • Promote the creation of a continuous natural heritage system within the Watersheds. • Increase riparian vegetation along Robinson and Tooley Creeks. • Work to reduce bank erosion and sediment loading to Robinson and Tooley Creeks. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 110 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Fulfills Objectives 5a and 5b Mananprnent Action 5.9 Reforestation/revegetation of continuous riparian vegetation buffer zone along watercourses. • Reforestation/revegetation of a 30 m riparian vegetation buffer along watercourses should be encouraged as part of community stewardship activities. - This will help to improve wildlife travel and fish habitat and is consistent with the targets set out in the Natural Heritage System. Fulfills Objectives 5a and t�ti Land Acquisition and Dedication Management Action 5.10 Acquisition or dedication of valley lands as a condition of development approval • The Municipality of Clarington should continue to implement the practice of acquiring valley lands as a condition of development approval. This policy will continue to support active management of significant natural features and will help maintain and enhance fish and aquatic habitat within the watersheds. Fulfills Objectives 5a and 5b 6.5.3 Fish and Aquatic Habitat— Monitoring Fisheries and aquatic habitat monitoring should continue to be conducted by CLOCA in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. More frequent monitoring may be necessary to assess the impacts of future development and the effectiveness of the Management Actions proposed in this report. This fish and aquatic habitat monitoring program should be implemented in association with the other natural environment disciplines (i.e., terrestrial natural heritage) to integrate the scientific data. Monitoring initiatives should focus on: • Species inventories and movement, especially of sensitive or migratory species, such as rainbow trout; • Spawning habitat surveys; • Monitoring of invasive species; • Riparian cover habitat assessments; • Stream flow and stream temperature monitoring; and • Surface water quality monitoring. It is recommended that permanent fish monitoring stations be designated in both Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek. CLOCA is encouraged to continue to lead the fish and aquatic habitat monitoring program. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 111 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 6.6 Terrestrial Natural Heritage Land use throughout the Robinson and Tooley Creek watersheds is dominated by urbanization and agricultural use, with relatively small proportions of natural and naturalized cover. The most common remnant natural features include shoreline bluffs and beaches, rivermouth marshes, stream valleys and riparian corridors, and isolated upland forests. It was found that 19.6% of the Robinson Creek Watershed and 17.3% of the Tooley Creek Watershed currently have natural or naturalized cover. Forest cover in the watersheds stands at 6.3 % and 9.3 % for Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek, respectively. The forest bird community, as a _. result, is poorly developed in both the Robinson Creek and 4 ` Tooley Creek watersheds due to the very small and patchy amount of remaining forest. The most frequently observed bird species are those that are common in southern Ontario typical of edges, shrub habitats and disturbed areas. Wetlands and amphibian breeding habitat in both watersheds have also been impacted by human disturbance. Species at risk were identified in both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Species at risk identified in the Robinson Creek Watershed include: Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii), Milksnake (Lampropeltis triangulum triangulum), and Butternut (Juglans cinerea). Species at risk identified in the Tooley Creek Watershed include: Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus), Canada Warbler (Wilsonia canadensis), and Butternut (Juglans cinerea). Presently, neither watershed has an appreciable amount of core habitat or interior forest habitat which limits the functionality of the natural heritage system as well as species diversity. It is important that a functional natural heritage system is protected to build a resiliency into the natural system to mitigate future impacts from development and climate change. As previously described in Section 5.3 and presented on Figure 5.1, the Natural Heritage System (NHS) for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds is made up of two components: the Function Natural Heritage System (FNHS) and the Targeted Natural Heritage System (TNHS). The FNHS is made up of Core Areas, that generally include existing areas of natural and/or hydrological function, and Linkage Areas, that serve to connect the Core Areas. These are the key building blocks of the NHS. The TNHS includes areas that have the potential to be restored to high functioning ecological habitats. These areas were defined using CLOCA's Landscape Analysis Model and the approach outlined in "Developing CLOCA's Ultimate Natural Heritage System: A Methodology" (CLOCA, 2011). 6.6.1 Terrestrial Natural Heritage— Issues and Opportunities for Improvement The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek— Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report(AECOM 2010), documents the existing state of the Terrestrial Natural Heritage System in the Watersheds, and provides the necessary background information to identify potential issues and opportunities for improvement. A summary of the issues and opportunities related to Terrestrial Natural Heritage is outlined below. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 112 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Issues and Opportunities Rationale for Improvement Core Areas and Interior The amount of forest cover,size of the forest patches,and the linkages to other forest patches will determine their Forest Habitat ability to support wildlife species such as mammals and forest interior birds. Presently, both the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds lack forest habitat that exhibit the functionality of a core area and the size for interior forest habitat. A priority for restoration of the natural heritage system in the watersheds is creating core and interior habitat,which will improve species diversity and improve the overall health and functionality of the natural heritage system. Connectivity and Movement corridors serve to increase local species richness and biodiversity, provide more immigration and Fragmentation movement opportunities for individuals among core natural areas,and provide greater likelihood of seed dispersal and exchange of other genetic material between populations. Presently, both the Robinson Creek Watershed and the Tooley Creek Watershed have poorly connected habitat. Major barriers include, Highway 401 and Lake Ontario to the south and urban development to the north and west. Local corridors exist within valley lands, but need to be larger in size to achieve their full potential. Invasive Species Several aggressive and problematic non-native invasive species occur throughout both watersheds including: White Swallow-wort(also known as Dog-Strangling Vine)(Cynanchum rossicum),Tartarian Honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica),Glossy Buckthorn(Rhamnus frangula), European Buckthron (R.cathartics), Garlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata), Flowering Rush(Butomus umbellatus),and Giant Hogweed(Heracleum mantegazzianum). Such species threaten the biodiversity of natural spaces by outcompeting and replacing native flora representation,and compromising habitat value to wildlife. Management efforts should give invasive flora species due consideration to provide control where appropriate and protect relatively un-invaded habitats. Species and Habitat Due to the limited amount of forest cover and extensive urbanization in the watersheds,the forest mammal and Diversity bird communities are poorly developed.Wetlands and amphibian breeding habitat in both watersheds have also been impacted by human disturbance. Young deciduous forest and thicket communities are the most common vegetation community types in both watersheds,with Green Ash(Fraxinus pennsylvanica)abundant throughout. Forest cover and interior habitat should be enhanced. Protection should be given to upland forest habitats due to their rarity in the watersheds. Management actions such as defining and protecting a natural heritage system will help to increase species and habitat diversity. Species at Risk Species at risk were identified in both watersheds. Their locations, numbers,and habitat requirements should be taken into consideration when targeting areas for protection or restoration. Wetlands Wetland habitat loss and degradation has been significant in southern Ontario. Wetlands provide essential habitat and also perform many water quality and quantity improvement functions. The Robinson Creek Watershed hosts a portion of the McLaughlin Bay Provincially Significant Wetland,and the Tooley Creek Watershed hosts a portion of the Maple Grove Provincially Significant Wetland Complex. Existing wetlands must be protected and made key targets for restoration. Opportunities to restore remnant wetlands should also be explored. Urbanization and The biggest threat to terrestrial habitat in the watersheds is development. Unmanaged development can result in Development a loss of habitat,fragmentation of forest patches and barriers to wildlife movement. By defining a natural heritage system within the watersheds,development and urbanization can be managed so as to protect significant terrestrial habitat. Management recommendations designed to mitigate the effects of urbanization are key to maintaining a healthy watershed. 6.6.2 Terrestrial Natural Heritage— Management Recommendations Based upon the methodology outlined in Section 2, and the issues and opportunities listed above, the following Section presents the goals, objectives, and management alternatives that were developed and evaluated for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds relating to Terrestrial Natural Heritage. Specific management recommendations have been made that are designed to maintain and enhance the quality and diversity of plant and wildlife species and habitat within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 113 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan Objective 6a. Protect and Enhance the Natural Heritage System in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Protection of a dedicated Natural Heritage System. Improvements to habitat size, shape, and functionality. Improved connectivity between habitat patches. The addition of core habitat and interior forest habitat. Objective 6b. Maintain and Enhance Native Vegetation Communities and Animal Species Diversity within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds Working Targets Improvements to habitat quality and functionality. Increase habitat type and distribution. An increase in rare, sensitive, or at risk species. A reduction in the distribution of invasive species. Objective 6c. Manage the Potential Impact of Future Urban Development Working Targets Protection of a Natural Heritage System. Encourage sustainable land use practises. Objectives Management Alternatives to Achieve Terrestrial Natural Heritage Regulation and Policy Management Action 6.1 Define and protect a Natural Heritage System (NHS) for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds as shown in Figure 5.1. • The NHS will consist of: - A Functional Natural Heritage System (FNHS) that defines the location of the existing natural features THIS AREA IS and watercourse buffers, and ENVIRONMENTAti_Li , - A Targeted Natural Heritage System (TNHS) that PROTECTED ,T DO NOT DIS`r 1188 defines key areas for"Enhancement", restoration or protection to improve the overall function of the t system. a - Together they form the Natural Heritage System (NHS). • A schedule representing the NHS should be incorporated into the Clarington Official Plan. • The Majority of the lands identified in the NHS (Figure 5.1) are already subject to one or more Official Plan designations that protect natural heritage features, including significant valleylands, woodlots and Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Dou 114 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan wetlands, and other lands identified as environmentally sensitive through the Provincial Policy Statement. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c Management Action 6.2 Create Natural Heritage System Policies for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. • Natural Heritage System policies should be developed to manage and protect the lands identified in Figure 5.1 as NHS. • The NHS policies should provide specific guidance and policies to direct environmental protection and urban w . development within the watersheds. _ • The NHS policies should balance urban land use needs with environmental protection and enhancement. rs • The Municipality of Clarington should work with CLOCAaf�.. to develop Natural Heritage System policies for the Watersheds. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c M--r+�rnent Action 6.3 Minimize the impact of development and site alteration on the Natural Heritage System and significant natural features. • Existing policies in the Clarington Official Plan shall continue to guide development activities within and adjacent to the NHS in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. • Development and site alteration within the FNHS portion of the NHS is prohibited to protect its ecological function. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c Manager"e"t Action 6. Net gains within the Natural Heritage System • Development and site alteration should not create a net loss of terrestrial habitat or land area defined as NHS (both FNHS and TNHS) within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. • All negotiations for alterations to the NHS shall only be contemplated during the applicable Secondary Planning Stage that encompasses the subject property within the Municipality of Clarington. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 115 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Management Action 6.F Support CLOCA's Invasive Species Management Strategy(2010) within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. • The goals and objectives from CLOCA's Invasive Species Management Strategy (2010) should be implemented to prevent, detect early, identify and remove invasive species within the watersheds, and to promote growth of native species. • This strategy will provide direction to local governments and community groups. Fulfills Objective 6b Education and Stewardship Management Action 6.6 Continue to implement and support the CLOCA Land Stewardship Program, throughout the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed, to encourage landowners to preserve, conserve, and enhance the natural environment on their property, and provide financial and technical assistance in support of these programs. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c Management Action 6., In partnership with CLOCA and other community groups, provide education and awareness to residents, landowners, and developers within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds through workshops, environmental education programs, and community events that increase awareness for terrestrial functions and features, including: • Increases awareness of the impacts of urban development on the natural environment. • Educate residents, landowners, and developers within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds on the benefits of sustainable land use practices. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c Management Action 6.8 Continue to support education, stewardship and community programs that: • Increase natural or naturalized cover in the watersheds. • Increase forest cover in the watersheds. • Increase riparian vegetation in the watersheds. • Encourage habitat diversity in the watersheds. • Plant native vegetation within the watersheds. • Prevent invasive species migration within the watersheds. • Encourage sustainable land use practices. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c Land Acquisition and Dedication Management Action 6.9 Acquisition of lands within the Natural Heritage System. • Lands within the NHS should be a priority for acquisition by the municipal government or conservation authority, for protection, revegetation/reforestation, and management. • This policy will support active management within the NHS and will help maintain and enhance important natural features. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 116 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan • Assess potential land acquisitions along the Highway 407 East Link as a potential compensation for natural heritage system losses resulting from the development of the 407 East Durham Link. • Target remnant parcels along Highway 407 East Link for inclusion into the Natural Heritage System. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c Minirmemplit.Acton 6.,10 Acquisition or dedication of valley lands as a condition of development approval • The Municipality of Clarington should continue to implement the practice of acquiring natural heritage system lands as a condition of development. This policy will support active management of significant natural features and will help maintain and enhance groundwater discharge to surface water features. Fulfills Objectives 6a, 6b, and 6c 6.6.3 Terrestrial Natural Heritage— Monitoring A terrestrial natural heritage monitoring program should be implemented in the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. This monitoring program should be implemented in association with the other natural environment disciplines (i.e., fish and aquatic habitat)to integrate the scientific data. Monitoring initiatives should focus on: • Monitoring the occurrences and distribution of species within the watersheds; - Bird and amphibian communities. - Species at risk. - Invasive species. • The effectiveness of reforestation/revegetation initiatives; • The effectiveness of introducing an east-west wildlife corridor between the Robinson Creek Watershed and the Tooley Creek Watershed; • The health of known butternut tree locations; • The size, distribution, and growth of riparian cover and wetland habitat; • Groundwater/surface water interactions within wetland and headwater areas; and • Monitoring of vegetation community conditions and changes. CLOCA is encouraged to lead the terrestrial natural heritage monitoring program. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 117 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan 7. Watershed Management Plan Implementation The goal of this study is to develop a Watershed Management Plan for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds that provides detailed technical recommendations to ensure sustainable use of the watersheds that can also be easily implemented and adopted into the Clarington and if applicable Durham Region Official Plans. It should be understood that where restrictions overlap the most restrictive policy typically applies. Consistent with the methodology for watershed management planning, outlined in Section 2.2, the Watershed Components, such as groundwater quality and terrestrial natural heritage, were documented, and Issues and Opportunities for Improvement for each watershed component were identified. Based upon the issues and opportunities for improvement, watershed management Goals and Objectives were identified, that were consistent with the vision for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. A series of Management Actions related to Regulation and Policy Initiatives, Community Education and Stewardship, Land Acquisition and Dedication, and Monitoring and Implementation, were recommended. It is these Management Actions that are the key to integrating science into action, to protect and restore the natural environment within the Watersheds, while encouraging future development. It is the intention, that each of the recommended Management Actions is implemented within the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds. Implementation of the Watershed Management Plan must be undertaken by local governments, conservation authorities, organizations and members of the community. To ensure that the Management Actions are being met, the following Implementation Actions are recommended: 1. Incorporate "Regulation and Policy Initiatives" into the Official Plan. The lead agency for each Regulation and Policy Initiative varies from component to component, but it is always either the Municipality of Clarington or the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. Community groups, other stakeholders, or individuals may wish to assist in the implementation of some Initiatives as appropriate. Some Regulation and Policy Initiatives may also be applicable for implementation by the Regional Municipality of Durham. The Municipality of Clarington is presently conducting an Official Plan review, so the timing of completion of this Watershed Management Plan could not be better. This Official Plan review will identify Secondary Planning Areas for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds which will further guide future development. It is recommended that Regulation and Policy Initiatives presented in this report, be implemented into the Official Plan of the Municipality of Clarington and used to create the Secondary Plans within the Watersheds. In addition, it is also recommended that the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority update its policies in accordance with the recommendations made in this Watershed Management Plan. 2. Secure Funding for Stewardship, Education and Land Acquisition and Dedication Management Actions. Both financial and in-kind funding is required to implement many stewardship, educational, and land acquisition and dedication actions. Funding responsibilities rest predominantly with either the Municipality of Clarington, CLOCA, or the development proponent. In some cases funding may be the responsibility of community groups or individual land owners. The Municipality of Clarington currently has a land acquisition strategy that may require updating in response to this study. In addition to the policies and procedures established in the Land Acquisition and Dedication Sections a list of some potential non-profit funders is listed in Section 2.2. 3. Monitor the Effects of Implementing the Plan. Monitoring is needed to ensure that the watershed management plan is achieving the goals and objectives related to each watershed component and that positive changes are being realized. Monitoring efforts are needed to determine the long-term effectiveness of each of the Management Actions implemented as part of this plan. CLOCA should continue be the primary agency responsible for environmental monitoring with the Watersheds. Potential exists to enlist the support of members of the local academic community (i.e., Durham College or Sir Sanford Fleming College) or private firms. It is recommended that monitoring focus on the Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 118 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watershed Management Plan watershed components studied for this management plan (groundwater quantity and quality, surface water quantity and quality, fisheries and aquatic habitat, and terrestrial natural heritage). 4. Timing for Implementation and Watershed Plan Review. The present time frame for implementation of the Management Actions outlined in the Watershed Management Plan coincides with the official plan review for Durham Region and the Municipality of Clarington. By incorporating the regulations and policy initiatives into the Official Plan, the Management Actions will be implemented on an ongoing basis. It is suggested that the recommended policies, educational and stewardship actions be implemented over the next five years. It is however understood that the effects of many Management Actions may take many years or decades to be realized (e.g., increase in forest cover through reforestation). Additionally, other political or social changes may occur in the coming years that may affect the policies outlined in this Plan. For these reasons, it is recommended that the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan be reviewed within a ten year timeframe. 5. Communication of Results and Reporting. It is important to communicate how the Plan has been implemented, the results of monitoring, and the benefits that were (or were not) achieved. Reporting of results should be made to members of the public, community groups, municipalities, and other stakeholders through community presentations, reports (research papers, watershed report cards, discipline specific reports), newsletters and other print materials. NwI4-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.D— 119 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 8. Closure The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek watersheds are small in size and will continue to be, under significant development pressure in the future. The creation the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan provides a solid foundation for making planning decisions that can support growth while maintaining and enhancing the watershed's health and integrity. It is the intention of this Watershed Management Plan to be implemented in its entirety. Watershed Goals, Objectives, Management Actions and Targets have been designed based upon the current and future needs of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds and the constraints that were identified. Protection of the existing natural features and functions is the first priority for the watersheds and should be undertaken before any of the other management actions. The Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watersheds offer special challenges for watershed management. However, by integrating good science into community action and municipal policy, the watersheds have the potential to support a functional and diverse ecosystem, while meeting the development goals in the area. AECOM is grateful for the assistance and advice provided by the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. Without their technical assistance and co-operation, completing many aspects of this study would not have been possible. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 120 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 9. References AECOM, 2010: Robinson Creek & Tooley Creek—Watershed Plan Existing Conditions Report. Prepared for the Municipality of Clarington. PN 60119359-112956. Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA), 2010: Methodology for Imperviousness Analysis Modelling. Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA), 2011: Developing CLOCA's Ultimate Natural Heritage System: A Methodology. Chapman, L.J. and D.F. Putman, 1984: The physiography of southern Ontario. Ontario Geological Survey, Special Vol. 2. Conservation Ontario, 2003: Watershed Management in Ontario: Lessons Learned and Best Practices. Newmarket, Ontario. Environment Canada, 2005: How Much Habitat Is Enough: A Framework for Guiding Habitat Rehabilitation in Great Lakes Areas of Concern, 2nd edition. Canadian Wildlife Service. Pp. 80. Environment Canada, 2009: Canadian Climate Normals or Averages 1971 —2000. Bowmanville Mostert Meteorological Station. Fischlin, A., G.F. Midgley, J.T. Price, R. Leemans, B. Gopal, C. Turley, M.D.A. Rounsevell, O.P. Dube, J. Tarazona, and A.A. Velichko. 2007: Ecosystems, their properties, goods, and services. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson (Eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p211-272. Hoar, T., 1997: Darlington Provincial Park Checklist of Birds. Lee, H.T., W.D. Bakowsky, J. Riley, J. Bowles, M. Puddister, P. Uhlig and S. McMurray, 1998: Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and its Application. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Southcentral Science Section, Science Development and Transfer Branch. SCSS Field Guide FG-02. McCarthy, J.J., O.F. Canziani, N.A. Leary, D.J. Dokken and K.S. White, eds., Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability; contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001). Available online at http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg2/index.htm Accessed March 2010. McNeice, J. and N. Meade, 2007: Central Lake Ontario Fisheries Watershed Management Plan. Draft Report prepared by Central Lake Ontario Conservation, Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. July, 2007. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005: Ecosystems and Human Well- Being: Biodiversity Synthesis. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Nov14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Dou 121 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2005: Provincial Policy Statement. Queen's Printer for Ontario. Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR), 1984: Provincially Significant McLaughlin Bay Wetland Complex Evaluation. Municipality of Clarington, 2007: Municipality of Clarington Official Plan. Municipality of Clarington. Ogilvie, Ogilvie and Company and Anthony Usher Planning Consultant, 2005: Watershed Planning from Recommendations to Municipal Policies: A Guidance Document. Interim Version. Prepared for the York, Peek, Durham, Toronto Groundwater Study Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition. Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 1993: Watershed Management on a Watershed Basis: Implementing an Ecosystem Approach. Queen's Printer for Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2006: A Proposed Modelling and Scenario-based Approach for Identifying Natural Heritage Systems in Southern Ontario: Discussion Paper. Queen's Printer for Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2008: Draft 2nd Approximation ELC Community Catalogue. Unpublished data. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2009: Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Working Draft for Environmental Registry. Second Edition May 21, 2009. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority and the Region of York, 2003. A Work Plan to Fulfill the Watershed Planning Requirements of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Regulation. Varga, et al., 2000: Distribution and Status of the Vascular Plants of the Greater Toronto Area. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 122 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan 10. Glossary of Terms Acquisition Any form of conveyance of title or interest in land. Agricultural Land uses As defined in the Provincial Policy Statement. Anthropogenic Disturbance Disturbance caused by human activity Anticipated Effect An effect that is deemed possible to result from the implementation of a particular alternative. Area of Natural and Scientific Areas of land and water containing natural landscapes or features which have been identified Interest(ANSI) as having values related to natural heritage protection, scientific study, or education. Depending on the features of particular areas,they may be referred to as life science or earth science sites. These areas vary in their level of significance and their vulnerability to environmental impacts. (NEC, 2003) Baseflow Streamflow that results from groundwater discharge seeping into a stream. Baseflow represents the stream flow comprised entirely of groundwater inputs(i.e., no surface water inputs). Best Management Practices A technique or methodology that, through experience or research, has been proven to (BMP) reliably lead to a desired result. After researching all known management methods, the selection and adaptation of the most suitable practices for achieving the desired outcome. Canker In relation to Butternut, canker is the reason for Butternut decline and current Endangered status. Butternut canker is widespread, hyper-virulent, and fatal. Canker vectors are rain, wind and insects. Typical symptoms are crown dieback, long linear fissure/cracks often with black discharge, epicormic branching, and loose/sunken areas of bark CLOCA Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Cold water species/habitat Aquatic species with a narrow thermal tolerance levels that are usually restricted to cold, highly oxygenated water. The water temperature range for these species is generally 10°C to 18°C. Conservation Authority A community-based environmental organization dedicated to restoring, developing and managing natural resources using the watershed as a management unit(Conservation Ontario, 2005) Core Area The building blocks of a natural heritage system; essential land units that support high habit and/or hydrological functions relative to other units in the analysis area; core areas meet criteria established in the Natural Heritage System methodologies. Corridor The naturally vegetated or potential revegetated areas that link or border natural areas and provide ecological functions such as habitat, passage, hydrological flow, connection or buffering from adjacent impacts COSEWIC status Status assigned by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada: • Extinct—A species that no longer exists. • Extirpated—A species no longer existing in the wild in Canada, but occurring elsewhere. • Endangered—A species facing imminent extirpation or extinction. • Threatened—A species likely to become endangered if limiting factors are not reversed. • Special Concern (formerly vulnerable)—A species that may become a threatened or an endangered species because of a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats. • Not At Risk—A species that has been evaluated and found to be not at risk of extinction given the current circumstances. Cultural Communities In terms of vegetation, a vegetation community originating from, or maintained by, anthropogenic(human modified) influences and culturally based disturbances; often containing a large proportion of non-native species (Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario[MNR, 1998]). Development For the purposes of this plan, development is the creation of a new lot, change in land use, the construction of large buildings or structures, and/or site alteration. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 123 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Edge Habitat The interface between a habitat patch and its surroundings- particularly forest. Edge habitats tend to be inhabited by both generalist species that can use many kinds of habitat and species that specialize in edges. Environmental Assessment The purpose of environmental assessment(EA) is to ensure that the environmental effects of a project receive due consideration before the proponent and responsible authorities take actions in connection with the project. It is a planning process that predicts, interprets and evaluates environmental effects, and identifies mitigation and environmental protection measures to reduce, eliminate or compensate for the environmental effects associated with a proposed undertaking. Ecological Land Classification The system for the consistent description, identification, classification and mapping of (ELC) ecological land units in Southern Ontario. Environmental Management An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) can be defined as "an environmental Plan (EMP) management tool used to ensure that undue or reasonably avoidable adverse impacts of the construction, operation and decommissioning of a project are prevented; and that the positive benefits of the projects are enhanced". EMPs are tools for ensuring that the management actions arising from Environmental Impact Assessment(EIA) processes are clearly defined and implemented through all phases of the project life-cycle. Environmental Reference for A Ministry of MTO document provides guidance to managing environmental impacts of Highway Design (ERD) transportation projects in transportation project design. Full citation: Environmental Reference for Highway Design, Section 1: Introduction, October 2006. Ministry of Transportation Ontario. Environmentally An Environmentally Significant/Sensitive Area is a natural area identified by a municipality or Significant/Sensitive Area Conservation Authority as fulfilling certain criteria for ecological significance or sensitivity. (ESA) Ephemeral Flow A stream that flows for short periods of time in the spring or in response to runoff events, and usually or insufficient duration to create a defined channel (e.g., field swale or gully) Fish Habitat "Spawning grounds and nursery, rearing,food supply and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes." (Fisheries Act, sec. 34(I)). Fish "includes(a) parts of fish: (b)shellfish, crustaceans, marine animals and any parts of shellfish, crustaceans or marine animals: and (c)the eggs, sperm, spawn, larvae, spat and juvenile stages of fish, shellfish, crustaceans and marine animals." (Fisheries Act, Sec. 2). Forest area-sensitive Area-sensitive breeding birds that require a relatively extensive forest habitat patch in which to successfully reproduce, or occur in higher densities in such patches. Floodplain The area, usually low lands adjoining a watercourse,which has been or may be subject to flooding hazards. Generalist species With reference to birds, "generalist' bird species occur in many different habitats, while habitat specialists will occur in only one or a few habitats. GRCA Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority Groundwater Subsurface water, or water stored in the pores, cracks, and crevices in the ground below the water table; water passing through, or standing in, soil and underlying strata and free to move by gravity. Groundwater Discharge Discharge areas are the opposite of recharge areas. They are the locations at which groundwater leaves the aquifer and flows to the surface. Groundwater discharge occurs where the water table or potentiometric surface intersects the land surface.Where this happens, springs or seeps are found. Springs and seeps may flow into fresh water bodies, such as lakes or streams, or they may flow into saltwater bodies Groundwater Recharge Recharge is the process by which groundwater is replenished. A recharge area is where water from precipitation is transmitted downward to an aquifer HADD Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction of fish habitat. Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 124 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Habitat Quality Categories Qualitative habitat quality categories were assigned as follows, based on the factors described above and professional judgement.All ratings were applied relative to others features within the Study Area: • Very High:exceptional quality; highly diverse habitat and species composition; many rare and/or sensitive habitats and species; large size; relatively undisturbed/less disturbed; • High:good species and habitat diversity; moderate to high numbers of rare species; typically low levels of anthropogenic disturbance; may have uncommon and/or specialized habitat elements. • Moderate:lower relative habitat and species diversity; lower relative numbers of rare species; typically smaller, more disturbed woodlands and/or cultural mosaics; • Low:common/tolerant habitats with limited species diversity and few or no rare/ specialized species; small, isolated, highly disturbed features. Headwaters The origins of streams or rivers. Impact A change brought about by a cause or agent and reflects a change in fish and/or fish habitat that has the potential to influence the productive capacity of fish habitat(see"effect" in RMF Guide). Impervious Surface A human-made surface that does not permit the infiltration of water, such as a rooftop, or a paved, non-permeable sidewalk, roadway, driveway or parking lot. Intermittent Flow A stream that flows for less than 9 consecutive months per year under average annual precipitation conditions, and are normally dry in May/June. It has a poorly defined channel. Interior Forest Habitat The habitat found deep within woodlands, away from the influence of edge effects. The interior sections of forest, generally 100 m or more in from the forest edge, are darker, cooler and moister, and less prone to disturbances from outside of the forest(both human and environmental). Lake Iroquois Shoreline The Glacial Lake Iroquois Shoreline Sediments are characterized by gravelly beach sediments along the former shoreline of the glacial lake. Nearshore glaciolacustrine deposits of sand and gravel overly the Newmarket Till and grade to the south into laminated silts and clays. The high permeability of the sandy Iroquois Shoreline deposits provides a pathway for local groundwater discharge that coincides with numerous wetlands and lowland stream headwaters. Landscape Connectivity The degree to which the landscape facilitates or impedes movement[of species, individuals and genetic material] among habitat patches. (Taylor et al. 1993). The degree to which key natural heritage features are connected to one another by links such as plant and animal movement corridors, hydrological and nutrient cycling, genetic transfer, and energy flows through food webs." (ORMCP, 2002) Low Impact Development(LID) Land engineering design approach to managing stormwater runoff through conservation and use of on-site natural features to protect water quality. This approach implements engineered small- scale hydrologic controls to replicate the pre-development hydrologic regime of watersheds through infiltrating,filtering,storing, evaporating, and detaining runoff close to its source. Mitigation Measure Action(s)that remove or alleviate to some degree the negative effects associated with the implementation of an alternative. Monitoring To keep track of systematically, usually for the purpose of collecting information; or to test or sample according to a schedule, typically using a system including measuring devices and standard observations. Net Gain An increase in the productive capacity of habitats for selected fisheries brought about by determined government and public efforts to conserve, restore and develop habitats. No Net Loss A working principle by which Fisheries and Oceans Canada strives to balance unavoidable habitat losses with habitat replacement on a project-by-project basis so that further reductions to Canada's fisheries resources due to habitat loss or damage may be prevented. Non-native A species, subspecies, or lower taxon introduced outside its normal past or present distribution; includes any part, gametes, seeds, eggs, or propagules of such species that Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 125 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan might survive and subsequently reproduce Oak Ridges Moraine The Oak Ridges Moraine is an irregular ridge of sandy hills stretching 160 km from the Trent River in the east to the Niagara Escarpment in the west and it generally found to the north of the proposed 407 Transportation Corridor. Openness Ratio A measure of the"tunnel effect" or"see-throughness" of a wildlife structure that may influence use by some species. OR is the cross-sectional area of the structure opening divided by the travel distance through (or under)the structure. Operation and Maintenance Refers to the operation and maintenance of the Transportation Corridor. Provincially Significant These are wetlands evaluated as provincially significant using the Ontario Wetlands Wetlands Evaluation system (OWES). Riparian Relating to, living, or located on the bank of a natural watercourse(such as a river) or sometimes of a lake or a tidewater. In the ELC, refers to aquatic communities adjacent to, or associated with, a river or stream as opposed to a lake or pond(cf. lacustrine) Riparian Vegetation Plant communities along the river margins characterized by hydrophilic plants Riparian Zone/Area The interface between land and a stream. Residual effect The remaining negative or positive effect of an alternative after the application of avoidance/ mitigation/compensation/enhancement measures. Road Ecology Group Championed by the Toronto Zoo, the ONTARIO ROAD ECOLOGY GROUP is comprised of government and non-government scientists, educators, and transportation planners. The Group's goal is to raise awareness about the threat of roads to biodiversity in Ontario, and to research and apply solutions. Site Alteration Means activities, such as grading, excavation and the placement of fill that would change the landform and natural vegetative characteristics of a site. Specialized and Sensitive The identification of areas of Specialized and Sensitive Wildlife Habitat(SSWH)was based Wildlife Habitat(SSWH) on a qualitative assessment based on the consideration of a number of factors including: breeding bird species richness/diversity, area-sensitive species, habitat diversity, species of conservation concern, amphibian breeding habitat and habitat continuity. Species at Risk Means an extirpated, endangered or threatened species or a species of special concern (Species at Risk Act(2002)/Species at Risk Act Registry Glossary(2003). Species Diversity Refers to the number of different species within an assemblage, ecological community, area or sample; also known as species richness. Species Richness Is the number of different species in a given area. Stormwater Management Stormwater management is the management of stormwater runoff, often using water retention facilities, to provide controlled release into receiving streams. Tableland A relatively flat upland area outside of valley land. Terrestrial Refers to an environment that is of, or on the ground, or to animals and plants living or growing on the ground(land). Specifically referring to habitats where the water table is rarely or briefly above the substrate surface and hydric soils have not developed. TRCA Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 126 AECOM Municipality of Clarington Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Watershed Management Plan Upland A general term for an area that is higher in elevation than the surrounding landscape (Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario (Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario[MNR, 1998]). Valleylands A natural area that occurs in a valley or other landform depression that has water flowing through or standing for some period of the year (Provincial Policy Statement[MMAH, 2005]). Vernal Pool A shallow natural or man-made depression in level ground where no permanent above ground outlet is present. These pools hold water seasonally and serve as nurseries for species such as frogs and salamanders. Warm water species/habitat Aquatic warm water habitat is classified as waters with temperatures above 25°C. Warm water species are tolerant to these conditions. Water Budget A summation of all water inputs and outputs from a given area over a period of time. Inputs and outputs include: groundwater flow, surface water flow, evaporation,transpiration, trans boundary flow, storage, interception, and infiltration. Watercourse A stream, river or channel in which a flow of water occurs, either continuously or intermittently, with some degree of regularity(Glossary of Drainage Terms[MTO, 1999]). Watercourse Crossing A culvert or bridge structure used to cross a water body(MTO/DFO/OMNR Protocol for Protecting Fish and Fish Habitat on Provincial Transportation Undertakings[2006]). Wetlands Lands that are seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water, as well as lands where the water table is close to or at the surface. In either case the presence of abundant water has caused the formation of hydric soils and has favoured the dominance of either hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants. The four major types of wetlands are swamps, marshes, bogs and fens. Periodically soaked or wet lands being used for agricultural purposes which no longer exhibit wetland characteristics are not considered to be wetlands for the purposes of this definition (Provincial Policy Statement[MMAH, 2005]). Nw14-11 Final Watershed Man Plan.Do 127 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 23, 2012 Resolution #: By -law #: Report#: FND- 003 -12 File #: Subject: LIST OF APPLICATIONS FOR CANCELLATION, REDUCTION, APPORTIONMENTS OR REFUND OF TAXES RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND- 003 -12 be received; and 2. THAT the attached list of applications for cancellation, reduction, apportionments or refund of taxes be approved. Submitted by: 1J� Reviewed by: Nancy T ylor, K, CA. Franklin Wu, Director of Finance/ Chief Administrative Officer Treasurer NT /MM /blm CORPORATION OF 7 . HE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET. BOWMANVIL.LE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905 - 623 -3379 15 -1 REPORT NO.: FND- 003 -12 1.0 BACKGROUND PAGE 2 1.1 Pursuant to Sections 354, 356, 357 and 358 of the Municipal Act, 2001, C25, a list of applications for cancellation, reduction, apportionments or refund of taxes is presented to Committee for its review and approval. 1.2 Section 357(3 & 4) indicates that the Council shall hear and dispose of every application not later than the 30th day of April in the year following the year in respect of which the application is made. The last day for making application for the previous year's tax reduction is the 28th day of February in the following year 1.3 More specifically, under Section 354, the Treasurer shall recommend to Council that outstanding taxes be stricken from the roll. To strike taxes from the roll it must be by reason of a decision under Section 357 or 358, or of a decision of a judge of any court that the taxes are uncollectible. 1.4 An application for a cancellation, reduction or refund may be made for one of the following reasons: • Ceased to be liable to be taxed at rate it was; • real property becomes exempt; • razed by fire, demolition or otherwise; • damaged by fire, demolition or otherwise (substantially unusable) • removal of a mobile unit; • sickness or extreme poverty; • gross or manifest clerical error; and • repairs /renovations preventing normal use of period of 3 months. 1.5 The 357 and the 358 process begins when an application is prepared by either the Regional Assessment Office or the Tax Department. The neighbourhood assessor will perform an on -site inspection of the property. The assessor will verify the reason for the application, the period of time for which the tax relief is claimed, and the amount and type of assessment that is affected. The application is then sent back to the Tax Department where the actual tax adjustment is calculated and the taxpayer's account adjusted. 1.6 Section 356, deals with severances or divisions into parcels. These parcels of land were taxed in blocks in the year(s) prior to severance /consolidation. Taxes are being apportioned to the individual properties which are now severed /consolidated. Therefore, tax amounts are removed from one roll number and applied to another roll number as determined by MPAC. 15 -2 REPORT NO.: FND- 003 -12 PAGE 3 2.0 CONCLUSION 2.1 The total amount of taxes to be written off, for September 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011, as shown in this report total $8,634.23. The total for the 2011 calendar year was $124,503.62. This total represents the Municipality's share only. For comparison, the values of taxes written off under Section 357 and 358 at December 31, 2010 was $37,970.53 for the municipal portion only. The increase for 2011 relates to specific properties that were addressed through Report FND- 020 -11 in September 2011 for court decisions in unique circumstances. 3.0 CONCURRENCE — not applicable CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: _ Promoting economic development X Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington _ Promoting green initiatives _ Investing in infrastructure _ Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: Nancy Taylor, B.B.A., C.A., Director of Finance/Treasurer Attachments: Attachment "A" - Write -Off Report September 1 to December 31, 2011 15 -3 Page 1 C7 M` 00 Write -Off Report 2011 For the Period of - September 1 - December 31, 2011 Council 2011 I Date Person(s) Taxes Adj/WTX Commercial Residential Year Reason Claimed by -P Ref. No. Industrial etc Farm Adjusted Applicant Applicant Number Municipal Managed Forest For Municipal 1 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 6 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 2 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 3 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 4 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 5 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation .6 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 7 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 8 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621. 0.00 2011 Severance/Consolidation 9 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 10 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance/Consolidation 11 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 12 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0621 0.00 2011 Severance/Consolidation 13 Sep -11 The Greater Toronto Transit WTX0622 2,668.21 0.00 2009 -2010 Class change from Industrial to Commercial 14 Sep -11 Clarington Municipality WTX0623 101.07 2011 Property became exempt 15 Sep -11 Brayley Darell WTX0623 366.55 2011 Fire, Demolition 16 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0623 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 17 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0623 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 18 Sep -11 Clarington Municipality WTX0623 29.03 2011 Property became exempt 19 Sep -11 Cupelli Luigi WTX0623-624 1,044.21 (720.35) 2009 - 2010 -2011 Class change from Commercial to Residential 20 Sep -11 Hariland Mihkel WTX0624 2,070.25 2009 -2010 Class change adding farm 21 Sep -11 Hariland Mihkel WTX0624 0.00 2009 -2010 Severance /Consolidation 22 Sep -11 Ramphal Jacqueline WTX0625 690.90 2011 Fire, Demolition 23 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0625 1,353.21 2011 Severance /Consolidation 24 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0626 0.00 2011 Severance/Consolidation 25 Sep -11 2231231 Ontario WTX0626 610.59 (489.13) 2011 Class change from Commercial to Residential 26 Sep -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0630 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 27 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0630 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 28 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 5 lots WTX0630 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation Total Page 1 of 3 4,323.01 3,401.53 Page 1 C7 M` 00 Page 2 Write -Off Report 2011 For the - Period of - September 1 - December 31, 2011 Cound12011 Date Person(s) Taxes Adj/WT'X Commercial Residential Year Reason Claimed by Ref. No. Industrial etc Farm Adjusted Applicant Applicant Number Municipal Managed Forest For Municipal Balance Forward from Page 1 4,323.01 3,401.53 29 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0630 - 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 30 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 6 lots WTX0630 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 31 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0630 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 32 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0630 0.00 2011 Severance/Consolidation 33 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 6 lots WTX0630 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 34 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0630 - 0.00 2,011 Severance /Consolidation 35 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 7 lots WTX0630 0.00 2011 Severance/Consolidation 36 Oct -11 2010785 Ontario Ltd WTX0631 709.25 0.00 2011 Fire, Demolotion etc... 37 Oct -11 Christian Holdings WTX0631 1,544.73 2011 Property became exempt 38 Oct -11 Clarington Municipality WTX0631 25.50 2011 Property became exempt 39 Oct -11 Clarington Municipality WTX0631 49.73 2011 Property became exempt 40 Oct -11 Clarington Municipality WTX0631 39.79 2011 Property became exempt 41 Oct -11 Clarington Municipality WTX0631 57.36 2011 Property became exempt 42 Oct -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0631 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 43 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 44 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 45 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 4 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 46 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 47 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 48 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 49 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 50 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 52 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 53 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance/Consolidation 54 Nov -11 Roll Severed to 2 lots WTX0637 0.00 2011 Severance /Consolidation 55 Dec -11 Reid Damian James WTX0638 168.51 (117.85) 2011 Class change from Commercial to Residential 56 Dec -11 Transportation Ministry WTX0638 (2,193.96) 2011 ceased to be taxed at rate 57 Dec -11 Ardis Trevor Adrian WTX0638 -639 571.42 2009 - 2010 -2011 MPAC Overcharge Clerical Error CTI - 01 Total Page 2 of 3 5,200.77 3,378.25 Page 2 Write -Off Report 2011 For the Period of - September 1 - December 31, 2011 Counci12011 Date Person(s) Taxes Adj/WTX Commercial I Residential Year Cn Ref. No. Industrial etc' Farm Adjusted Applicant Number Municipal Managed Forest For Municipal Balance Forward from Page 2 58 Dec -11 Clarington Municipality WTX0640 5,200.77 Reason Claimed by Applicant 3,378.25 55.21 2011 Property became exempt West Beach Total Page 3 of 3 5,200.77 ' 3,433.46 Grand Total To Be Written Off Not Including Minutes of Settlements, or ARB Decisions For the Period of September 1st, 2011 to December 31, 2011 8,634.23 Page 3 • MEMO Leading the Way CLERIC'S DEPARTMENT To: Mayor Foster and Members of Council From: Anne Greentree, Deputy Clerk Date: January 20, 2012 Subject: GENERAL PURPOSE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA —JANUARY 23, 2012 — UPDATE Please be advised of the following amendments to the GPA agenda for the meeting to be held on Monday, January 23, 2012: i 6. DELEGATIONS See attached Final List. (Attachment#1) In addition, please find attached (Attachment#2) information from Rosemary McConkey regarding her delegation. 7. PRESENTATIONS The following has been moved to the presentation section: a) Rob Frizzell, Manager Water and Natural Resources Group Markham, and Jason Cole, Hydrogeologist, AECOM, Regarding Report PSD-006-12, Watershed Management Plan for Robinson and Tooley Creeks 8. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT d) Please find attached (Attachment#3) replacement Page 11 of Report PSD-008-12. The second paragraph in Section 6 has been replaced. A ne Greentre uty Clerk AG/jeg cc: F. Wu, Chief Administrative Officer Department Heads CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 F 905-623-6506 Attachment #1 of Update Memo FINAL LIST OF DELEGATIONS GPA Meeting: January 23, 2012 (a) Hida Manns, Clarington Representative to the Durham Environmental Advisory Committee, Regarding the Durham Environmental Achievement Awards (b) Rosemary McConkey, Regarding Report CLD-003-12, Local Look Back Project (c) Brian Elston, Regarding Report PSD-006-12, Watershed Management Plan for Robinson and Tooley Creeks I I ATTACHMENT# TO Gallagher, June , i.'W d From: Rosemary McConkey Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:43 AM To: Gallagher, June; Barrie, Patti Subject: 201.2 Local Look Back project Attachments: DCDSB support letter.pdf; DDSB support letter.pdf; Metroland support.eml; radio station interviews.eml Categories: Red Category June and Patti, Thank you for the email and copy of the staff report. Yes, I would like to appear again as a delegation on the GPA agenda for Jan 20th. Could you please include this email and the attached support letters from both the Durham Public and Durham Catholic School Boards, and emails agreeing to promote the project from Metroland newspaper and CKDO radio station announcer Terry Johnston with correspondence/documents going to Pickering Council Monday night. Copied below are some points made by school principal Jasper Hoogendam in an encouraging email he sent me last week after he heard about the project from someone at the Town of Whitby: I think this Essay and Speech contest is an excellent educational opportunity for students. Our grade 7&8 classroom teachers are excited about it for several reasons: 1. The topic is relevant to the students 2. The venue clearly defines the audience they will be addressing 3. The students develop a greater appreciation for the community in which they live 4. The students are motivated to do some relevant research (consulting primary sources as researchers would call it.) Thanks Rosemary i o��O pIST1��C�,s Durham Catholic District School 774 0 January 12, 2012 j Rosemary McConkey Dear Rosemary: I am delighted to provide the Durham Catholic District School Board's support for the "Local Look Back" essay/speech competition. The contest provides our -� students with a great opportunity to learn more about the history of the community in which they live and may some day, serve. Congratulations on developing this wonderful opportunity to enhance the lives of our young students. We look forward to working with you and the various municipalities to make this inaugural competition a success. Yours truly, a Paul Pulla Director of Education P P/nw r i 650 Rossland Road West,Oshawa,Ontario UJ 7G4 Tel 905 576-6150 Tall Free 1 877 462,0722 www.dcdah,ca Paul Pulla 8,Sc„S.Ed„MSc,Ed, Director of Education /Secretary/Treasurer o`�.�g\CT scyo® '��rratitr `�rlru�aliar 7rrrim�- � �ar'7nma i 400 Taunton Road East December 5, 2011 Whitby, Ontario L 1R 2K6 Telephone:(905)6665500 Fax:(905)666-6474 www.durham,edu.on.ca Dear Rosemary: On behalf of the Durham District School Board, I would like to confirm our support for the "Local Look Back" essay/speech competition. The combination of history and literacy development through this contest provides an excellent educational opportunity for our students. The Board looks forward to working with you and with local municipalities on this innovative project. I Please contact my office if you require additional information. I Yours truly, Marlyn Beckett Director of Education MB:kdd 4 cc: Luigia Ayotte, Superintendent of Education/Program Services/ Staff Development t Mission Statement Students will be prepared to embrace challenges and inspired to create opportunities for their futures. •r_ _ r 5. r rv. l Gallagher, June From: Burghardt, Joanne Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 11:53 AM To: Cc: Johnston, Mike Subject: Local Look Back project Rosemary, further to our conversation this morning I can confirm that, while not a sponsor of the ' Local Look Back' project, Metroland will publish the winning local entry in each of our Durham community newspapers. Publication will be contingent on receiving a signed release from each student's parent agreeing to the publication of the entry AND the student's first and last name. Thanks and good luck with this project, Joanne Burghardt Editor-in-Chief Metroland Media Group Ltd. Durham Region/ Northumberland County Division "You were born to win, but to be a winner you must plan to win, prepare to win, and expect to win." - Zig Ziglar i http://www.twitter.com/Jbnewsdurham i http://www.ca.linkedin.com/in/joanneburghardt 865 Farewell St., Oshawa ON L1H7L5 * phone: +1-905-579-4400 #2247 * fax: +1-905-435-4710 i http://www.durhamregion,com i http://www.facebool<.com/newsdurham i http://www.twitter.com/newsdurham i http://www.northumberlandnews.com i http://www.twitter.com/north news "The Principles That Guide Us: Responsibility, Accuracy, Integrity, Independence, Respect, Fair Play" I i i i 1 � I i i Gallagher, June From: Terry Johnston Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 20114:13 AM To: _ Subject: RE: Local Look Back Good morning R, Your proposal was brought forward at our planning meeting & it was decided that we can offer a couple of interviews & our online calendars on both CKDO & KX96. These listings are also used for on-air reports that runn 3 times daily on both stations. Hope that might help a little. Sorry for the delay in responding, Terry Johnston CKDO'Mornings 107.7 FM& 1580 AM From: Terry Johnston Sent: November-15-11 4:07 AM To: Rosemary McConkey Subject: RE: Local Look Back Hey R, Great to hear from you...whew...glad I don't have to lose weight—but I'm sure that's coming in the new year! Sounds like you've put a lot of work into this...looks like a pretty good idea. I'll forward the info to our Promotions &Programming Departments to take a quick look &get back to you. Hope all is well & thanks for thinking of us to help promote the contest, Terry Johnston CKDO Mornings 107.7 FM& 1580 AM From: Rosemary McConkey a w� Sent: Monday, November 14, 20117:32 PM To: Terry Johnston Subject: Local Look Back Hi Terry, Hope all is well with you. I was wondering if you have time to call. I wanted to bounce an idea around with you. Don't worry, it's not about losing weight or fundraising... It's about something I am trying to organize that involves elementary school kids, their municipal politicians and local history...I've put together a draft website 1 i i that outlines better what's involved... When you have a minute perhaps you can check it out www.locallookback.com Naturally I am thinking of you and your radio station to help promote it... I am asking each of the municipalities to get involved and award a year's family membership at one of their community centres and do a judging event sometime in May. j I'm aiming to launch this initiative in January and in order to get going on it I'm making my first pitch at this Thursday's Oshawa Community Services Committee. So l was hoping to speak with you before that... I spoke with Tim Whittaker and Jillian Follert at Metroland and they are supportive. I've also talked with a couple administrators at the Durham Public and Separate School Boards, and a few councillors and staff members in Oshawa, Whitby and Ajax and everyone seems receptive to the idea...hope you will be too! Regards, Rosemary I 2 ATTACHMENT# YO R REPORT NO.: PSD-008-12 Page 11 Darlington Nuclear Station and the developing Caalington Energy Business Park makes this area highly attractive for the development. j i Given the infrastructure investment planned for the area, it will be important to update j and refine the vision for the'area. The work program will develop the land use and transportation policies in greater detail, including road alignments, ultimately leading to a Secondary Plan, Zoning By-law Amendment and Urban Design policies. This work has not commenced to date. Staff negotiated with Dillon to remove this item from their work program and it is planned to retender this component later in 2012, using the funds originally assigned to this project. 6. CHANGES TO THE WORK PROGRAM In summary, the following changes have been made to the Work Plan. ® Provincially Significant Wetlands (contained in proposed Amendment 80) Provincially Significant Wetlands were initially advanced to be considered separately from the other components of implementing the Greenbelt Plan and Provincial Policy Statements. This was done to address issues in the Hancock Neighbourhood surrounding development applications. However, as a result of broader concerns of rural residents, Council directed staff to hold a Town Hall meeting on the issue. Staff held discussions with the key residents, former and current staff members of the Ministry of Natural Resources and staff from both Conservation Authorities in preparation for such a larger meeting. It is now proposed that the issue of Provincially Significant Wetlands be considered under the Natural Heritage component so that all of the proposed changes will be known and a broader education component can be undertaken. CLOCA and GRCA staff have agreed partner in this project and prepare the Discussion Paper and policy amendments. Proposed Amendment 80 would be scoped down to include only lands within the Hancock Neighbourhood and the revised amendment would be considered in conjunction with the Hancock Neighbourhood Design Plan Update. Staff will advise the residents who expressed an interest in the wetlands amendment of the revised approach subsequent to Council's consideration of this report. ® Courtice Employment Area Although this project was originally part of the contract with Dillon, this work is being retendered approximately mid-year 2012. I I HAN DOUTS /C I RCULATI ONS APP1 *1cat*ion By:* Halloway Developments Ltd . and H H Propert*ies Inc D a Draft Plan of 6_ Condominium - Common Elements, and Revisions to Draft Plans of Subdivision 18T-87087 & 18T-89021 Property Location Map(Bowmanville)/ i V v a l r subject Site 4 / {L LLI�� "..�,� J U) JJ j FI V — �' �; 'I •'" © 41 r L u T (� a Lands Subject To Plan CC 2011-0002 DRAFT PLAN OF CONDOMINIUM REVISIONS TO DRAFT APPROVED PLANS OF SUBDIVISION 18T-87087&18T-89021 N Owner: Halloway Developments Ltd. ,/ and H&H Properties Inc. Proposal Location ,�� � • i� law' .. .-, �.9Y �� '�' AMA ggt77 ..p� ii#�tjjg# wed ntit R.�.1 F1lpr• � •.;,,� ��..'� rate - ti NIr= CC 2011-0002 Clarington Engineering Services has no objection to the two applications for Amendment to Subdivision Draft Approval or the application for Draft Approval of a Common Elements Plan of Condominium. ■ The application for Site Plan Approval needs further review, specifically, regarding: • Traffic, Entrances & Access • Noise Attenuation • Grading & Drainage and Stormwater Management • Parking and ■ Servicing Comments Cont*inued • 3 inquiries from neighbours received Draft Plan of Condominium and Plans of Subdivision t .N� ,. s ir I�� — � ,s �'" � '�' as ► li 'L — r - sip PAI M-6 IN UML f -q•I., �1 Durham Region Environmental Advisory Committee dt2vironmental Achievement Awards Hida Manns Kendal, Ont. DEAC representative Clarington JYDEAC • voluntary advisory committee of citizen members • provide advice on environmental planning matters • to . Regional Planning & Economic Development Committee • Regional Planning Staff ,%AActivities • Environmental Impact Studies prepared for various Regional Official Plan Amendment applications • Environmental Assessment studies being undertaken by the Region • Outreach Activities • Environmental Stewardship Workshop • EAC Symposium • Children's Nature Guide • Environmental Achievement Awards 0 1 0t" year Environmental Achievement Awards • Certificate of Merit (and picture taken) . Recognize and acknowledge environmental achievements . individuals and organizations . in the public, private and non-profit sectors . within Durham Region • 6 categories in memory of individuals AWARDS ame of award activity involved maintenance, protection, or • George A. Scott Stewardship Award preservation of the natural environment • Dr. J. Murray Speirs restoration of degraded natural environments Restoration Award fostering effective communications, • Irene Kock sharing knowledge, or exhibiting Education/Communication Award leadership in natural environment education • Jessica Markland m cooperative efforts to enhance the Partnerships Award environment involving public, community and private interests • Eric Krause Innovative m forward-thinking efforts to Plans/Policies/Initiatives Award encourage positive change with respect to the natural environment • Evylin Stroud m continually promote the protection Lifetime Achievement Award of the environment through small, but meaningful ways %Lyets applaud our efforts 2011: Evylin Stroud Lifetime Achievement Award — John Slater (Clarington) 2010: George A. Scott Stewardship Award — Eric and Jennifer Bowman, Bowmanview Farm 2010: Eric Krause Innovative Plans/Policies/Initiatives Award - Algoma Orchards Limited. (Clarington) 2009: Irene Kock Education/Communication Award — Samuel Wilmot Nature Area Management Advisory Committee (Clarington) 2008: Jessica Markland Partnership Award — Ontario Power Generation (Pickering and Darlington) (Pickering and Clarington) Deserving efforts n Clarington ? it • May 10, 2010 at the Regional Headquarters Awards Presentation • Nomination forms • Region of Durham Planning & Economic Development Department • Region's website ( www.durham.ca/deac). • Attached an electronic copy to the clerk • The deadline for submission is Monday, February 20th. • Nomination forms should be submitted to: Jonah Kelly Planning and Economic Development Department, Regional Municipality of Durham Box 623, 605 Rossland Road East Whitby, Ontario, LIN 6A3 Phone: 905-668-7711, Fax: 905-666-6208 Email: deac @durham.ca ENVIRONMENTAL ACHIEVEMENTA WARDS a W Environmental H Ativl""Cammlttee Nomination Form The Durham Environmental Advisory Committee (DEAC) is celebrating its 10t—" annual Environmental Achievement Awards! This annual awards program recognizes individual and collective efforts to promote, preserve and enhance Durham's natural environment. The deadline for nominations is Monday, February 20, 2012. The awards will be presented at a special DEAC meeting on Thursday, May 10, 2012. Name of Nominee First and Last Name (please print) Address Telephone Fax Email Name of Nominator First and Last Name (please print) Address Telephone Fax Email Award Category (check one only) George A. Scott Stewardship Award: This award is given to those whose efforts have helped maintain, protect and preserve our natural environment. Dr. J. Murray Speirs Restoration Award: This award commends the work of those whose efforts have helped to restore the natural environment. Irene Kock Education/Communication Award: This award is presented to those who foster effective communication, share knowledge, and exhibit leadership in helping others learn about the natural environment. Eric Krause Innovative Plans/Policies/Initiatives Award: This award is presented for forward-thinking and innovative efforts to encourage positive change with respect to the environment. Jessica Markland Partnership Award: This award recognizes the cooperative efforts of those who strive to enhance the environment by building partnerships with public, community and private interests. Evylin Stroud Lifetime Achievement Award: This award recognizes individuals who continually promote the protection of the environment, through small, but meaningful ways. ENVIRONMENTAL ACHIEVEMENTA WARDS a W Environmental H Ativlso'Cammlttee Nomination Form Criteria: Nominees will be judged on the impact of their accomplishments. For example: • Degree of innovativeness, originality or pioneering that has enhanced environmental protection and preservation; • Degree that contributions promote leadership in protecting the environment; • Size, scope and impact of accomplishments; • Degree that efforts promote educational opportunities for the public; • Degree that accomplishments influence positive change to the environment; • Short or long-term benefits to the environment. Description of Accomplishments: Attach a typed, two-page description of the nominee's accomplishments that addresses the following: • What was/is the project or activity? • What effect did the nominee have on the environment? (Please base your answer on benefits related to community awareness, environmental quality, technical contributions, etc.). • How was the program financed? • What geographical area(s) was covered by the accomplishment? • Have the nominee's accomplishments had a long-lasting effect on the environment or on environmental education and public awareness? • What benefits will be derived from the nominee's accomplishment? • Was this an original or pioneering effort in the field? Describe any unique or innovative aspects of the initiative, particularly any challenges overcome as part of the implementation, and any outstanding creativity involved. • What environmental need within the community did the nominee address? • What specific examples demonstrate the environmental impact or improvement? • Please provide a brief biography of the individual or group, highlighting their environmental activities. • What other pertinent information about this nominee would you like the judges to consider? In addition, one letter of support must accompany all nominations. This letter must be written by someone other than the nominator and should explain the impact of the nominee's actions, its environmental significance and its relevance in meeting a specific need. You may also include photographs and newspaper clippings supporting this nomination (please do not send videotapes). Materials submitted will not be returned. Nomination forms should be submitted, by Monday, February 20, 2011 to: Mr. Jonah Kelly, MCIP, RPP Planning and Economic Development Department, Regional Municipality of Durham Box 623, 4t" Floor, 605 Rossland Road East Whitby, Ontario, L1 N 6A3 Phone: 905-668-7711 Fax: 905-666-6208 Email: deac�ham.ca Gallagher, June From: Rosemary McConkey Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:43 AM To: Gallagher, June; Barrie, Patti Subject: 2012 Local Look Back project Attachments: DCDSB support letter.pdf; DDSB support letter.pdf; Metroland support.eml; radio station interviews.eml Categories: Red Category June and Patti, Thank you for the email and copy of the staff report. Yes, I would like to appear again as a delegation on the GPA agenda for Jan 20th. Could you please include this email and the attached support letters from both the Durham Public and Durham Catholic School Boards, and emails agreeing to promote the project from Metroland newspaper and CKDO radio station announcer Terry Johnston with correspondence/documents going to Pickering Council Monday night. Copied below are some points made by school principal Jasper Hoogendam in an encouraging email he sent me last week after he heard about the project from someone at the Town of Whitby: I think this Essay and Speech contest is an excellent educational opportunity for students. Our grade 7&8 classroom teachers are excited about it for several reasons: 1. The topic is relevant to the students 2. The venue clearly defines the audience they will be addressing 3. The students develop a greater appreciation for the corrimunity in which they live 4. The students are motivated to do some relevant research (consulting primary sources as researchers would call it.) Thanks Rosemary ��o�a olsrR�orsa y°o Durham Catholic District School Board t` January 12, 2012 Rosemary McConkey ge Dear Rosemary: I am delighted to provide the Durham Catholic District School Board's support for the "Local Look Back" essaylspeech competition. The contest provides our students with a great opportunity to learn more about the history of the community in which they live and may some day, serve. Congratulations on developing this wonderful opportunity to enhance the lives of our young students. ` We look forward to working with you and the various municipalities to make this inaugural competition a success. Yours truly, Paul Pulla Director of Education P Plnw 650 Rossland Road West,Oshawa,Ontario LiJ 704 Tel 905 578.8150 Toll Free 1 877 462.0722 wnvtirtAoft.ca Paul Pulla 9.5c„8.Ed.,Mo.Ed, Director of Education/Secretary/Treasurer ` O0 f 0 4 `(grratilr `�.1cahort Tnd�r/ �lfE tlfllr/E[lifEi 400 Taunton Road East � December 5, 2011 Whitby, Ontario L TR 210 Telephone:(905)666.5540 Fax:(905)666.6474 �rnvv.dtrrtram.edts.on.ca ' f 1 Dear Rosemary: I On behalf of the Durham District School Board, I would like to confirm our support j for the "Local Look Back" essay/speech competition. The combination of history and literacy development through this contest provides an excellent educational opportunity for our students. The Board looks forward to working with you and with local municipalities on this f innovative project. Please contact my office if you require additional information. Yours truly, i Martyn Beckett Director of Education i MB:kdd s cc: Luigia Ayotte, Superintendent of Education/Program Services/ Staff Development Mission Statement Sl000nts will bo proparod to ©mbraco challenges and rnspirP.d'to create opportunities for their f(do os. �c _,p ry 1A;1t� �fr3gc>t,�' ;}�, l,o r i, r f, ;.is➢ _ "C.r..:fi it; ' f _ '7) r .. 'E .?<Er Gallagher, June From: Burghardt, Joanne Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2092 11:53 AM To: Cc: Johnston, Mike Subject: Local took Back project Rosemary, further to our conversation this morning I can confirm that, while not a sponsor of the 'Local Look Back' project, Metroland will publish the winning local entry in each of our Durham community newspapers. Publication will be contingent on receiving a signed release from each student's parent agreeing to the publication of the entry AND the student's first and last name. Thanks and good luck with this project, Joanne Burghardt Editor-in-Chief Metroland Media Group Ltd. Durham Region/ Northumberland County Division "You were born to win, but to be a winner you must plan to win, prepare to win, and expect to win." - Zig Ziglar i htt : ww.twitter.com/Jbnewsdurham i htfip:/ www.ca.linkedin.coat/in/;ioanneburghardt 865 Farewell St., Oshawa ON L1H7L5 • phone: +1-905-579-4400 #2247 • fax: +1-905-435-4710 i http://www.durhamregion.coni i http://wtvw.faceboo,k.com/newsdurham i http://www.twitter.com/newsdurham i http://www.northumberlandnews.com i http:.f�www.twitter.com/north news "The Principles That Guide Us: Responsibility, Accuracy, Integrity, Independence, Respect, Fair Play" 7. Gallagher, June From: Terry Johnston Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 20114:13 AM To: _ Subject: RE: Local Look Back Good morning R, Your proposal was brought forward at our planning meeting &it was decided that we can offer a couple of interviews& our online calendars on both CKDO &KX96. These listings are also used for on-air reports that runn 3 times daily on both stations. Hope that might help a little. Sorry for the delay in responding, Terry Johnston CKDO Mornings 107.7 FM& 1580 AM From: Terry Johnston Sent: November-15-11 4:07 AM To: Rosemary McConkey Subject: RE: Local Look Back Hey R, Great to hear from you..,whew...glad I don't have to lose weight...but I'm sure that's coming in the new year! Sounds like you've put a lot of work into this...looks like a pretty good idea. I'll forward the info to our Promotions & Programming Departments to take a quick look&get back to you. Hope all is well &thanks for thinking of us to help promote the contest, 'ferry Johnston CKDO Mornings 107.7 FM& 1580 AM From: Rosemary McConkey Sent: Monday, November 14, 20117:32 PM To: Terry Johnston Subject: Local Look Back Hi Terry, Hope all is well with you. I was wondering if you have time to call. I wanted to bounce an idea around with you. Don't worry, it's not about losing weight or fundraising... It's about something I am trying to organize that involves elementary school kids, their municipal politicians and local history...I've put together a draft website that outlines better what's involved... When you have a minute perhaps you can check it out www.locallookback.com Naturally I am thinking of you and your radio station to help promote it... am asking each of the municipalities to get involved and award a year's family membership at one of their community centres and do a judging event sometime in May. I'm aiming to launch this initiative in January and in order to get going on it I'm making my first pitch at this Thursday's Oshawa Community Services Committee. So I was hoping to speak with you before that... I spoke with Tim Whittaker and Jillian Follert at Metroland and they are supportive. I've also talked with a couple administrators at the Durham Public and Separate School Boards, and a few councillors and staff members in Oshawa, Whitby and Ajax and everyone seems receptive to the idea...hope you will be too! Regards, Rosemary 2 Robinson Creek and Toole y Creek Watershed Management Plan Presented By: Jason Cole, M .Sc. , P.Geo Rob Frizzell , M .Sc. , P.Geo Municipality of Clarington Council Monday January 23 , 2012 j r ` Central -, - Lae Ontario ACOM R - Conservation What is a watershed p Ian ? • A management document that lays the framework for protecting and enhancing the natural environment, while guiding development within the watershed • Recommendations are based on scientific studies and community input • Durham Region and Clarington Official Plans include policies that recognize the importance of watershed planning • As part of the OP Review Clarington has undertaken this study • VVI , mp oymen an Is con ary an ^ p r c Central Lake Ontario COM Bpi www AConservation v , Fx� Lo 11' n E� �c ac Kawartha Lair s 9 z - r I , 8DW'Tdrl V.Vld,CiBek�•. f - - x FdreWe1F. _ - Robinson Creek ° . Iari g � Tooley Creek Whi G •. 'S �•° '.� - y ~ROw� n class crest - _ '-� ' -- ''y j' .coiaeu crevt �:�,C �-raf - ���,•'�, - •- _ r .fbaA '. Lake Ontario Central C111Il 3 Lake Ontario ACOM Cal■�■bW1i �Conservation LD `- ti 1 . Characterize the Watershed Set Targets and Evaluate Develop a Watershed Management Alternatives Management Plan ll ➢Set Natural Environment Targets ➢Establish Existing Conditions ➢Natural Heritage System g Y ➢Based on Existing Conditions • Groundwater Quantity/Quality • Based on existing natural environment and the Preferred Management • Surface Water Quantity/Quality features Alternative • Aquatic Species and Habitat • Enhancement scenarios based on • Terrestrial Natural Heritage CLOCA model ➢Specific Recommendations to ➢Water Budget Guide Development and • Land-use (Current and Future) Preserve the Natural • Based on methods used for Source Identify Water Protection Studies Environment • How the Watershed Functions Imperviousness • Opportunities for Improvement • Based on current and future land-use ➢Management Alternatives • Environmental Constraints ,,{ ,� • Central � � . l/1C1111■ n Lake Ontario Conservation aCOM R f + 7. -4- Existing Conditions ➢ Land-use dominated by urban residential and agriculture, with limited remaining •i natural environment features Headwaters located north of Bloor Street ➢Creek primarily supported by surface water runoff y ➢ Natural environment features concentrated f along riparian corridors and in wetland area north of Bloor St. tie Y Central _ Ga ingon SLake Ontario ACOM Cai■�■b Wii 1 Conservation S Y Existing Conditions - yy ) s ➢ Land-use dominated by urban residential a k - ;. and agriculture, with limited remaining natural environment features ➢ Headwaters located north of Hwy 2 in Maple Yy Grove Wetland PSW 3. ➢Creek south of Hwy 2 primarily supported by surface water runoff . � m .. o ➢ Natural environment features concentrated ,.r }. along riparian corridors and in Maple Grove Wetland 4n, d Central Lake Ontario F Clarin n 4 . Conservation AXOM Fi I � N Natural Heritage System Based on existing natural environment features and targeted enhancements ➢A� Includes Environmental Protection for a Natural Heritage System Water Budget Defined High Volume Recharge Areas (HVRA) Maintain pre-development infiltration rates post- development in HVRAs % Impervious Surfaces Enhanced stormwater control measures ➢ Minimize runoff using new and existing technologie,.� Central ?Lake Ontario 4. Garing.4on Conservation ACOM i I `�� �i `v r' �Ci I� � � C•�J �� 1�j , �(�J � �`,�i \�I � � � �1, � � _ I l�J ➢ Management Recommendations are made based on Existing Conditions and the Environmental Constraints. ➢ Set Management Goals ➢ Set Objectives to meet the Goals ➢ Identify Management Actions to achieve the Goals and Objectives ■ Regulation and Policy ■ Education and Stewardship ■ Land Dedication and Acquisition ■ Monitoring ; d Central _ l[ $Lake Ontario A COM �Wl[ Conservation I 1 �. II I . ILll�ll -U1'��.0 III ''vl,� � n 1p � GOAL — To Maintain and Enhance the Health, Quality, and Functionality of the Ecosystem Onjective — Protect and Enhance the Natural Heritage System Regulation and Policy ➢Define and Protect a Natural Heritage System within the Official Plan ➢Minimize the Impact of Development on Natural Heritage System • An Environmental Impact Study (EIS) will be required for development approval. ➢Negotiate Net Gains Education and Stewardship — Support programs that increase natural cover, forest cover, and riparian vegetation Land Dedication and Acquisition — Focus on NHS Lands Monitorin — To determine if objective is having desired effect , ' ,t 9. �• Central aari��ton " Lae Ontario ,a►=coM Conservation ➢ Watershed Management Plan was approved by CLOCA Board on Tuesday January 17, 2012. ;r ➢ Watershed Management Plan is provided to Municipality of Clarington Council to be referred to Staff for consideration during the OP Review r. process. A ,. ➢ The Watershed Management Plan will Y_ be used as the basis for development of Secondary Plans { Central ke Ontario A l �aClll n aC0M wCai■ ■bWll 1 Conservation QUESTIONS Presented by: Jason Cole and Rob Frizzell AECOM 300 Town Centre Blvd Markham , ON L3R 5Z6 Central .,. 'm'.'`• yl 1Take Ontario �COM x 11■ Conservation _