The Full Monty about Watergate in Kanata

by Paul Renaud on Sunday, December 11, 2011 at 6:23pm Scenario 11 describes existing conditions under a 100-year storm and Scenario 12 describes existing conditions under a July 2009 storm. The results are appalling: - The ndings indicate that there is considerably less storage capacity in both Kizell wetland (100,000 cubic metres less) and Beaver Pond (48,000 cubic metres less) than what was used to approve KNLs Phase 1-6 development in 2007. The report by AECOM shows that water will actually ow over Goulbourn Forced Road (GFR) and Beaver Pond Dam during a 100-yr storm event. - IBI, the engineering rm that did the analysis for KNL, by agreeing on Aug 15 to the ndings of the new report, appears to be tacitly admitting that their 2007 engineering model was bogus in claiming that there is 89,825 cubic metres of storage in Kizell Wetland when in fact there is a decit of 100,000. This seems to imply that the Minister of Environment (MoE) authorized Certicate of Approval (CofA) issued in 2007 for KNL Phases 1 6 was based on false or, at best, highly inaccurate data. - The inaccuracy of the CoA would have been caught had the City performed an EA as required at the time. However, the Citys engineer Guy Bourgon applied for the CofA without conrming the numbers and, when later challenged about the lack of EA, subsequently claimed without substantiation that one had been done previously. Yet there is no record of such an EA, nor is there any reference to it in any engineering study done in the South March Highlands (SMH). - Meanwhile, the new report by AECOM shows that the EXISTING conditions result in an outow from Kizell of 4.48 cubic metres /sec a number that is 4x faster than the 1.16 cubic metres/sec allowed in the CofA. According to the report, the source of the discrepancy seems to be due to the absence of on-site detention of storm water within 50 ha of Phases 1-6 and by the signicant lack of available storage in Kizell wetland. All subdivisions are supposed to have on-site water detention and KNL Phases 1 6 comes up short. - The inadequacy of proper water detention in Phases 1 6 means that, in the event of a 100-yr storm, water levels will rise to 93.53m in Kizell wetland, causing spillage toBOTH the Carp River and OVER GFR into Beaver Pond. - This outow into the Carp is not accounted for in any of the Carp River ood models which predict that the Carp River will only be 2 inches less in elevation during a

100-yr storm. If the Carp model is in error, (there are many questions about the adequacy of the modeling parameters used in them), there is little margin for error before the Carp spills into Kizell wetland and on down into Beaver Pond. - In 1985 Beaver Pond dam was designed to have an internal weir at 92.55 m and an emergency spill at 93.2m, meaning that it can regulate downstream water ow out of Beaver Pond and into Beaverbrooks Kizell Drain to 0.96 metres/sec as long as water elevation in Beaver Pond is less than 92.55 m. Anything over 92.55 m will cause an uncontrolled outow of water into Beaverbrook via Kizell Drain. - In addition to being a safety risk to motorists due to water owing over GFR, the extra water arriving in Beaver Pond, coupled with the fact that according to the report Beaver Pond is already at 98% capacity, in a 100-yr storm water levels will rise in Beaver Pond to 92.85 m, exceeding its design and causing an uncontrolled outow into Kizell Drain into Beaverbrook of 1.6 + 2.95 = 4.55 cubic metres per second (5 ft x 5 ft x 6.4 ft every second). - This violates the CofA by a factor of 4.7x and is incompatible with the safe maximum allowed ow in Kizell established by the 1999 Subwatershed Study. Flow rates higher than the maximum allowed will cause signicant erosion (which in turn causes many other problems) as well as aggravating ood hazards downstream. - It is essential that water levels never be allowed to increase because homes have been built over the years assuming that the City would not permit water levels to exceed a maximum level. Note that there is at least one home adjacent to Beaver Pond whose basement elevation is less than 92.85 m and that might be ooded during a 100-year storm event if water levels were to reach the predicted level. Possibly more homes may be at risk and the City should advise homeowners accordingly. - During the 9 months that the City has known about this hazard, it has done nothing to advise residents adjacent to Beaver Pond whose homes are in jeopardy. Nor has it done anything to protect the sanitary sewer system in the entire west end (serving all of Kanata, Carp, and Stittsville) from surcharging in the event of water entering the sanitary system via ooded basements. - To the contrary the City planning staff has worked to keep these facts from the public, choosing instead to meet only with IBI in what appears to be an attempt to modify the ndings of the draft report or to drop the EA investigation in favour of relying on the completely opaque subdivision approval process (as evidenced by the minutes of a meeting convened by John Moser last August that excluded the

participation of the City engineer responsible for the EA and simultaneously ignored public requests for information disclosure). - It is very telling to read in Appendix A that KNLs agents actually proposed that an EA was not necessary because a suitable stormwater strategy can be determined through the current development process. Presumably that would be the same process that has led us to the point where existing conditions are not compliant with either the CoA or the Subwatershed Study targets. A comparison of the draft and nal versions, however, shows that AECOM successfully resisted this attempt and that IBI in the end agreed with their ndings. - The City was only forced to release this information under an Access to Information request led by a supporter of the South March Highlands Carp River Conservation Inc. This is contrary to its obligations under the EA Act and regulations which requires public participation. According to the MoE website on the EA process, The EA program ensures that public concerns are heard. . Public consultation is mandatory and the public is encouraged to get involved in an EA process. - Storm Water Management (SWM) design in Ontario is only obligated to ensure that subdivisions are designed to handle a 100-year storm event. However, a higher amount of rainfall actually occurred in Ottawa during July 22 24, 2009. Note that the heaviest area of rainfall for the most part narrowly missed the South March Highlands. - Had that amount of rain fallen in the SMH, the AECOMs models show that the water levels would have risen in Kizell to the point where Kizell wetland would have spilled into the Carp River at a rate of 1.28 cubic metres per second. This cumulative effect will aggregate ood conditions in the Carp which are already made worse by development activities in Kanata West plus the building of TFD Extension in the oodplain of the Carp. - Aggravating ood conditions in the Carp River would affect both upstream as downstream areas including Bridlewood, Kanata West, Broughton Ridge, Richardson Ridge, the village of Carp, and all the riparian landowners in between Kanata and Carp. - Even though the City has known about this possibility of spill-over from Kizell since last March, after 9 months this has not been accounted for in the modelling done of the Carp River ordered by the Minister of the Environment. Instead the City decided this week to push ahead with Carp River Corridor development by publishing notice to nalize the zoning for the Carp River Corridor without including these results.

 - The Phase 1 report also clearly shows that a July 2009 equivalent storm occurring in the SMH under existing conditions will result in a water level of 93.03m in Beaver Pond, a number that is considerably higher than the ood elevation that it was designed for. The report documents that 17.50 cubic meters (618 cubic feet = 8 x 8 x 9.7 ft, roughly the size of a large garden shed) of water will spill over Beaver Pond dam every second during a rainfall that is comparable to what occurred elsewhere in Kanata-Carp in July 2009. - There are several homes in Kanata that are adjacent to Kizell Creek and Beaver Pond that have a basement elevation of less than 93m. The safety of those homes is now in jeopardy should another rainfall occur of equal or greater magnitude to the July 2009 storm. - The City may respond that it is only obligated to ensure that subdivisions are designed to withstand a 100-yr ood event. This would highlight the obvious gap in provincial regulations that should prevent the greater of either the 100-yr storm or the greatest storm that has ever occurred in the past from ooding peoples homes. Such a response would also fail to meet the test of common sense which would reasonably expect engineers to use all available knowledge in the design of public safety-related measures. - The AECOM report also shows, in addition to the problems with existing Phases 1 6, that future KNL Phase 9 development north of Beaver Pond is infeasible. Allowing Phase 9 to proceed means that a 100-yr storm would result in water levels in Beaver Pond of 93.1 m and create an uncontrolled ow of water gushing at 2.23 cubic metres per second down Kizell Drain into Beaverbrook. - A repeat of the July 2009 storm along with Phase 9 development would result in an even worse water level of 93.5 m and a 5.55 cubic metre outpouring. As a point of comparison, virtually all of the backyard elevations along Hansen are at 93.5 m. How is it possible for the citys senior staff to allow existing conditions to become worse? Could it be that planning staff have been playing fast and free with approvals based on piecemealed engineering models submitted by developers who have a vested interest in minimizing cost of SWM mitigation regardless of the consequences to other property owners downstream?

Why have homeowners who are at risk not been advised by the City staff whose salaries paid by their property taxes? What action is the Mayor taking to reign in outof-control development and to hold those accountable for it? It is incredible that the approvals process in City Hall is so broken as to allow this mess to be created in the rst place. The root of the problem appears to be with executive staff who allow piece meal development studies that ignore cumulative effects on surrounding areas to be approved. These are the same executives who have implemented an approvals process that appears to be designed to rubber-stamp development approvals as fast as possible - a broken process that the Mayor is trying to accelerate for developments that include green features. Messrs. Kirkpatrick and Moser need to be held accountable for what appears to be a signicant breach of their duty to serve the interest of the public. It is URGENT that the problem in the SMH gets resolved ASAP because we are talking about risk due to EXISTING CONDITIONS! - ALL KNL development must stop until this gets sorted out including the Phases 1-6 development that is currently proceeding on the south side of Kizell based on apparently false engineering data used to obtain its C of A. - The missing site-detention of storm water must be added to Phases 1-6 without impacting the PSW in Kizell since the subdivision must be brought into compliance with the CofA. This may mean reducing the developable area in Phases 1 6 but this does not impact the 40% agreement because compliance with provincial law is not subject to the terms of that agreement. - It is self-evident that all site alteration in Phases 7-9 (including further deforestation and stumping which reduces the ability of the forest to soak up water), must be halted until such time as KNL is able to present a SWM plan that demonstrates to the community that it is feasible. - Due to interaction between the Kizell and Carp water systems, the KNL, Broughton Ridge, and Richardson Ridge developments must also be added to the Carp River Corridor ood analysis and, in the interest of public safety, the MoE needs to order yet another hold on all development in Kanata West, Glen Cairn, and the SMH until the big picture is better understood. The above is yet another reason why developing the SMH is a bad idea. The SMH is a major inltration point for the Ottawa aquifer, the most densely bio-diverse area in

Ottawa, home to more than 20 documented species-at-risk, has unique geo-heritage value, and is of considerable cultural heritage value to the Algonquin First Nation. It is the source of the only two remaining cool-water streams left in the Greenbelt and these water-related issues have a direct impact on the NCCs riparian rights.