23 July 2007

 

the good earth -- a collage

Gentle reader, this blog is dedicated to those brave spirits who will be appearing as delegates at the City of Waterloo Council meeting tonight.

The blog begins and ends with photo on right of bald eagle sculpture adjacent to Sandhills Road in Wilmot Township. A wonderful drive if you should like to see the actual Waterloo Moraine landscape barely touched by settlement/development/growth.

RR is offering up this photo in the spirit of passing to you a symbolic eagle feather-- for you to hold mentally tonight as you speak. In aboriginal traditions, the person who is holding the eagle feather will be given the power to speak eloquently and forcefully. Remember when the Meech Lake Accord was supposedly a done deal? Well, one aboriginal legislator in Manitoba held on to that eagle feather and accomplished the impossible-- Meech Lake was shelved!
Best wishes! and Meegwetch!


First photo on left is of Bethel Road, Wilmot Township located in the Waterloo Moraine with upland woodlots still intact.

"In the late 1980s, Waterloo's northwest urban boundaries stopped at Beechwood. Facing growth pressures, planners looked to the west side, prompting developers to buy family farms in the area as investments. But plans to redesignate the west side from "rural" to "urban" stalled because of opposition. The council of the day put off any decision to redesignate the lands. Developers took the delay to the Ontario Municipal Board. City negotiations with developers, along with a 1992 board ruling, redesignated much of the land for urban growth. A decade later, the province outlawed the practice of developers launching appeals when councils refused to change urban boundaries." (1)

Second photo of Wilmot Twp upland woodlot with associated wetland is good indication of the Waterloo Moraine landscape prior to settlement.

“As I know that you are always ready to expose any hardship of the settlers in the bush, I take the liberty of writing a few lines to you, enquiring whether it is fair for one man to take up more than 200 acres of land in Minto, for speculation, and whether it is right for a man who lives in Elora to hold nearly 3,000 acres under different names–but which he really holds himself for the purpose of speculating on it.”-- letter to editor by a Minto settler, published in Elora Backwoodsman, 5 October 1854 (2)

Third photo is of Huron Road, Wilmot Township which dates to 1828 and was built to promote the settlement of the Huron Tract by the Canada Company.

“The Government of Ontario, and the people of Ontario, need to understand that our
environmental problems are not just regional problems, they are also global problems, and our solutions are not just regional solutions, they are global solutions....We have an obligation to be responsible global citizens.” (3)

"New York is instructive in another way. With rising growth and demand, plans were made to upgrade water supply and treatment facilities at projected costs of hundreds of millions of dollars. This high price tag led to studies into the cost of agreements for protective land use practices in the Upper Hudson Valley, the long-time source of the city's water supply. All this led to new agreements with rural landowners and a decision to go with the traditional sources, saving vast sums for the city and its people." (4)

Fourth photo of subdivision grading operations showing how much of the original till is being removed from the Waterloo moraine to prepare for a new subdivision.

“Development involves wholesale grading of the site. Removal of topsoil, severe erosion during construction, compaction by heavy equipment, and filling of depressions. ....With these practices, the infiltration rate of urban soils actually approaches those of impervious surfaces.” (5)

“The dry summer conditions we have been experiencing in Waterloo make it difficult for young trees to establish and thrive....” The trees in your immediate community may not survivew without the assistance of your household.” (6)

Fifth photo of Huron Road subdivision in Kitchener's south west corner undergoing grading comparable to that proposed in Waterloo's north west corner. Far right reveals the height of the Waterloo moraine before removal of the till cap.

“Low-density automobile dependent development is a leading cause of imperviousness. Transportation-related hard surfaces account for 80% of the total imperviousness in suburban areas.” (5)

Next photo provides closeup of the rich topsoil** being removed and carted away from the site.

"To need water to produce a product and make a buck is not the same as needing that water to drink, to wash in or to grow your food. The requirements of commerce just don't matter as much as the requirements of life itself. Nestle's stake in the local water supply pales in comparison to the stake that the people of the Grand River watershed downstream, in Cambridge, Brantford and the Six Nations, for instance, have in it." (8)



Elsewhere in Kitchener there are more grading operations-- also consuming more of the Waterloo Moraine. This one is immediately adjacent to the ecologically sensitive cold-water Strassburg Creek.

"What Brenda said, both then and now,
Is hardly worth a fussing row.
It's politics, the truth in flight
So fast it never looks quite right.....
The time for planning less moraine-y,
Decades past, was no more brainy:
Candidates let truth go missing
When their work is baby-kissing.
While we grieve such filigree
The 'dozers steal towards Wellesley." (9)

Last photo of Sandhills Road, Wilmot Township gives splendid current example of Waterloo Moraine lands still in pristine condition.

"I believe in upholding reverence for all life.
I believe that humanity has
a responsibility to the
earth and
to the life that we share our experience with." (10)


Sources: (1) Tamsin McMahon, Moraine public meeting tonight, The Record 23 Jul 07; (2)Clifford M. Harrison, A History of Minto Township (1978); (3)Ken Ogilvie, Air Water and Soil Quality, report by Neptis; (4)Gordon Nelson, Waterloo moraine is too valuable to be developed, The Record 23 Jul 07; (5)Natural Resources Defence Council, 2002. Environmental Characteristics of Smart Growth, quoted by Ken Ogilvie, Air Water and Soil Quality, report by Neptis; (6)“Local trees in distress– please help,” public notice by City of Waterloo Jul 07; (8)Public water needs matter the most, editorial The Record 13 Jul 07; (9)Kirk Zurell*, "What Brenda Said,"  appears on gentle reader Michael’s* blog here: http://onekeypress.ca/node/22;
(10)Michelle Gardner-Quinn,” This I believe’...university student paper. Michelle was kidnapped, brutally
raped, and strangled to death two days after she submitted this paper available here
http://www.michellesearthfound.org/

Notes: * Thank you Kirk and Michael for sharing. Good luck Michael with your blog!
** apparently this truckload of topsoil would cover one acre of land to the depth of a half an inch only. RR must confess that she foolishly purchased bags of "black earth" at Rona to topdress her lawn. The black earth turned out to be peatmoss moistened-- which once applied dried up and blew away with the wind.

All photos copyright to Sandamara Images 2006.


Labels:


# posted by ramblingrose @ 2:37 PM 1 Comments Links to this post

21 July 2007

 

casuistry?


Casuistry as defined by Gage Canadian Dictionary:
1. the act or process of deciding questions of right and wrong in regard to conduct;
2. clever but false reasoning.

The issue of who has approval over the three developments in Waterloo's west side is hinging on two key words and concepts: who has technical or political decision-making authority and accountability in this instance?

Sometimes words can confuse more than they clarify.^^ Cf. the following items:

At a recent Waterloo Council meeting, the newly-elected Council considered, voted on and passed the following motion:
1) That Council request staff from the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to present Region of Waterloo Planning, Housing and Community Services, Community Planning, Report No. P-07-084 "Planning Summary for Draft Plan of Subdivision Applications 30T-97024 (Vista Hills), 30T-05402 (Greyerbiehl) and 30T-05403 (Clair Creek Meadows)", to Waterloo City Council at the Council meeting to be held on Monday, July 23, 2007;
2) that Council confirm the report will be presented for Council's information and to allow members of Council an opportunity to ask questions of clarification with regard to the content of the report;
3) that Council confirm that final approval of Draft Plan of Subdivision Applications 30T-97024 (Vista Hills), 30T-05402 (Greyerbiehl) and 30T-05403 (Clair Creek Meadows)" is under the jurisdiction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, however, if new professionally-substantiated technical information related to the subject lands and the proposed subdivision applications is presented, that information could be forwarded to the Region's Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services for consideration;
4) that Council acknowledge that Plan of Subdivision Applications 30T-97024 (Vista Hills), 30T-05402 (Greyerbiehl) and 30T-05403 (Clair Creek Meadows) were supported by Waterloo City Council through City of Waterloo Staff Report No. DS06-16, approved on July 17, 2006;
5) that given the widespread community interest in this issue, Council allow delegations to speak for a maximum of five minutes* on this issue on Monday, July 23, 2007 to afford all interested citizens an opportunity to address Council in a timely manner.

and

cf. p. 38 of Regional Report P-07-084: "Should Regional Council wish to re-assume subdivision approval authority for the subject applications, it may pass a by-law to do so; however, Regional staff is unaware of any instance over the past 30 years when Council has taken such action."

but cf. also p. 4 of same report: "In 1996, the Planning act was amended to make the Region of Waterloo the Approval Authority for subdivision applications in the City of Waterloo." **

"Is this development something that could be classified as smart growth?
The answer is no.
This development will be another bedroom community
with people travelling elsewhere to work and where every household will need at least two cars.
In 2007, with the hard evidence of climate change around us,
this subdivision is a big step backward.
At a time when we should slim down our carbon footprint,
these subdivisions will increase it." (1) ***

"For our regional government to abdicate responsibility
to an overburdened and overworked bureaucracy is unacceptable." (2)

"I have to impress on people how important it is that they read this report.****
We want people to get back to us.
This is about open dialogue.
Is there something you're still concerned about
and
what do we need to address?"(3)
"This council can still vote to reject.
They can make further requests for the region to look at the alternatives.
This all within the power of this council." (3)


Notes:

^^ Correction to previous blog will be made re issue of conflict of interest: the spouse of the principal in PEIL is the legal landholder of the Vista Hills lands to be developed per 1992 OMB report ===> has a conflict of interest been avoided thus?

*5 minute speech = 750 word written text;

** "A local council decision to reverse the approval of the subdivision plan would just throw the political hot potato back into the laps of regional council, which still might have the ultimate say on the proposal....regional council was content to leave that decision in the hands of the planning commissioner in the first place. -- [ cf. post "muddy waters" of 04 Jul 07 in this blog]-- Especially with the hundreds of thousands of dollars that it would cost regional council to countermand its own planning department, and with the knowledge the developers already have to make a case to the OMB about excessive delays in the approval process." (3) =====> Regional Council is footing the bill for the OMB hearing into the Laurel Creek ESL designation passed last year.

***Estimated CO2 emissions resulting from travel in the GTA expressed as grams/person/day: 1, 710 in core and 5,200 in the outer suburbs (4) = a three-fold increase!

****RR has now twice read the report; please see comments below in blog on "impervious cover"].

 Sources: (1) Emil Frind, We must make the best of a bad situation," The Record 19 Jul 07; (2) David Wellhauser,"Development's approval is a political failure," letter to editor, The Record 20 Jul 07; (3) Bob Vrabanac, "Mayor rethinks west-side development," Waterloo Chronicle 11 Jul 07; (4) Ken Ogilvie, Air Water and Soil Quality, Neptis Foundation 2003.

Labels:


# posted by ramblingrose @ 3:29 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
 

impervious surfaces: theory and practice

Impervious surfaces are usually developed or compacted surfaces that do not allow water to be absorbed by soils.

Notes: * Waterloo West Side developments i.e. Vista Hills, Greyerbiehl, Clair Creek Meadows total 132.58 ha total area to be developed; of which 30.8 ha allocated to open and/or parkland space + 30.53 ha landscaping on lots (estimate only based on 30% figure cited in Regional Planners technical report) = 71.25 impervious surfaces of these three developments. Hence, 71.25 ha of 132.58 ha total would equal 53.7% impervious cover added to the Clair Creek subwatershed.***** Note: RR does not know if planned roads and parking areas within this subdivision are included in the 30% landscaped figure cited; if they are not, then the impervious cover would be appreciably higher. None of the reports reference "the level of imperviousness in the stream watershed." The latest Laurel Creek watershed monitoring report showed a significant decline in the Clair Creek water quality downstream of the other west side subdivisions that have been built since the 1992 OMB ruling. Note also EEAC's concern with the "narrow waist" of ESPA 19 at the point where the Clair Creek Channel is located.

** cf. p. 18 of Regional Report P-07-084: "The sensitivity analysis illustrates that impervious cover limits are more appropriately applied at the watershed/subwatershed scale rather than for individual subdivisions."====> are these subdivisions not part of watershed/subwatershed? why bother doing watershed-based planning and studies?
& cf. also p. 19 of the same report: "PPS requires planning authorities....to protect, approve or restore the quality and quantity of water through land use planning and site approval processes. For the subject lands, this mandate is achieved through........in accordance with the policies and technical recommendations of the Laurel Creek Watershed Study.....and the management plans completed for subwatershed 313/309 (Planning Initiatives***, 1996).

***This firm is also the developer of Vista Hills.====> oops note this correction: ^^ the spouse of the principal in PEIL is the legal landholder of the Vista Hills lands to be developed per 1992 OMB report ===> has a conflict of interest been avoided thus? (RR offers up apologies as she does not know how to do strikethroughs to show this change. Sorry) ****** Planning Initiatives also completed the required EIS cf. p. 28 of Regional Report P-07-084: " Presently, Jefferson Salamanders are not known to occur in ESPA 19; wildlife inventory work completed as part of the EIS prepared for the Clair Creek Meadows/Greyerbiehl lands occurred outside of amphibian breeding season and did not find Jefferson Salamanders. (====> how convenient!) Notwithstanding this, potentially suitable habitat for this and other salamander species does exist in this area." ===> why not put moratorium on lands until a survey has been taken during breeding season & so demonstrate due diligence to comply with provincial/mational legislation concerning endangered species?

****cf. P. 23 of Regional Report P-07-084: "The biggest impacts the Region sees to water levels in the water supply aquifers are related to the Region's own pumping and prolonged periods of drought-like weather conditions."

***** cf. p. 28 of Regional Report P-07-084: "existing pre-development erosion of Clair Creek." ====> hence, the sedimentation downstream requiring the costly rehabilitation of Clair Creek and Clair Lake occurring now? why make one problem worse?

****** cf. 39 of Regional Report P-07-084 re conflict of interest: "For these professionals, a fundamental principle of practice is that they must provide independent professional judgment/services and shall not undertake any work where a direct or indirect conflict of interests exists, is perceivable, or is anticipated to exist."

Labels: ,


# posted by ramblingrose @ 1:17 PM 0 Comments Links to this post
 

gone with the wind?





"









[Historically} when development occurred,
level farmland with good soils provided the best sites for development.
The very resource that attracted settlement, is ultimately being consumed by it."--Margaret Walton


Today's photos, gentle reader, are of 1) Baden farm in 2004 that has been replaced with a new subdivision as allowed by the ROPP to extend Baden's settlement area (thus encouraging another bedroom community immediately adjacent to City of Kitchener (L); and 2) old Order Mennonite farm near Hawkesville, Wellesley Township under the protection of ROPP policies creating a firm countryside line to contain urban sprawl. These photos were chosen to draw attention to the trend that sees the southwestern Ontario countryside losing thousands of acres of prime farmland each year. This issue is the subject of Margaret Walton's report, Agriculture in the Central Ontario Zone, Neptis Foundation 2003 (1. Herewith, a brief summary:
  1. "Prime agricultural lands, Classes 1, 2, and 3 and specialty croplands, are a very limited resource in Canada. Only 5% of the Canadian land mass is made up of prime land. Only 0.5% of it is Class 1. The Central Ontario Zone is fortunate to contain a significant portion of this very limited resource. Unfortunately, it occurs in one of the fastest-growing regions of the country."
  2. "The prime agricultural land is located where development pressures are greatest. The area around Kitchener-Waterloo, Hamilton, and the urban centres along Lake Ontario are almost exclusively Class 1 land."
  3. "Agricultural land varies considerably in quality. The ability to produce certain crops successfully is
    based on many location-specific factors. Once the location is lost, the ability to produce is also lost."
  4. "The nature of the agricultural land base in the Central Ontario Zone combined with some of the best
    climate, water supply, and growing season in Canada, justifies long-term protection of the resource."
  5. "Ontario has a good agricultural resource base supported by a sufficient supply of water, a world-
    class work force, modern technology, environmental controls, and an infrastructure to manage the
    product. The food produced in Ontario is of the highest quality, grown by a sophisticated work force under controls that are transparent and in the public interest. It would be shortsighted to let this
    industry decline and rely on imported food supplies* that may not be of the same quality and are not
    within the control of Canadians."
  6. "The fact that Canada is a world leader in agriculture, producing safe food using environmentally
    sound techniques, is not common knowledge.".........."The ability to feed one’s own population is critical to the independence of any state."
  7. "Canada’s agricultural industry is one of the best in the world, supported by good land, abundant
    water and an educated, advanced work force."
  8. "Canadian farmers... have access to sustainable sources of water. If you look at any of the major agricultural regions in the world that currently depend on irrigation, and depend on groundwater for that irrigation, you find that farmers are pumping more water out than nature is putting back in. As a result water tables are dropping steadily beneath the land."
  9. "Agricultural land is a limited resource that, once lost, cannot be replaced. Therefore the obvious
    response to this issue is that protection of agricultural land should have highest priority."......."Once a farm operator goes out of production, few can afford to get back in."
  10. "A report recently completed by IBI Group predicts that approximately 1,069 square kilometres of
    land will be consumed by urban development in the zone over the next 30 years. Of this area, 92%
    or 987 sq km of it is prime land; 69% or 733 sq km is Class 1 land." ...."You can build a house almost anywhere; you cannot grow a peach anywhere."
  11. "High quality agricultural land is a non-renewable, limited resource that deserves the same level of
    ongoing protection as natural heritage features and aggregate reserves."
  12. Notes: *"Subsidies for agriculture in other countries skew the marketplace, making foreign products cheaper than Canadian products."

Sources: (1) available at website: www.neptis.org

Labels:


# posted by ramblingrose @ 10:10 AM 1 Comments Links to this post

12 July 2007

 

where there's a will...












...there's a way? Not always.

Just recently Rambling Rose was chatting with Nyle, whose dream to preserve the family's homestead (photo above) was about to be realized. He was most enthusiastic about the restoration of the exterior fieldstone bricks with recessed mortar and the additions of a summer kitchen and verandahs-- noting that the front verandah wall would likely be plastered. Nyle was looking forward to the OHA Part IV designation ceremony and his chance the correct the historical record: although most recently owned by Eby descendants (Nyle's father's family), this house was built by the Donnenwerths (his mother's ancestors). How devastating to be called to witness one's cherished dreams go up in smoke!

"In November, it took two days and $500,000 to lift the building off its foundation and onto a
wheeled bed. Crews moved all 440 tonnes of it 75 metres to a new site on Bleams Road, between Trussler and Fischer-Hallman roads. All that work went up in smoke in a matter of hours. The empty house had an estimated value of $200,000.Restored, the house was to have become a family home and serve as the centrepiece of Eby Estates, the name of the future 400-home subdivision on the former Eby property. Structural engineers will now determine whether the house can still be used." (1) Still waiting to be assessed is the damage to the stone and the
concrete due to the heat of the fire. Police deem this a suspicious blaze and are investigating.

Sometimes even the terms of a will and an outright gift/legacy aren't even respected-- as is the case with the McNally Lands located in the Laurel Creek Headwaters Environmentally Sensitive Landscape in Waterloo.

"McNally planted thousands of trees and tended to his 24 hectares of rolling, verdant forest in northwest Waterloo. Before he died in September at 84, McNally sold his land to the city to save it from the developments springing up around him. He hoped it would one day become a public park with his house and buildings serving as an educational centre for school groups. But where McNally saw a public paradise, vandals saw a free-for-all. They burned down his barn. They cut down his trees, killed his geese and broke his windows...Vandalism has become such a regular occurrence on McNally's lands that police informed the city it will no longer respond to the complaints and false alarms on the property. Now the city has voted to spend as much as $30,000 to demolish McNally's buildings. What was once a man's rural oasis has become a suburban safety hazard and an insurance risk. McNally's buildings won't be torn down for a few weeks. The city doesn't expect to know what it will do with the open fields for at least a year, but that will depend on the needs of the growing subdivisions on Waterloo's west side**, said Greg Romanick, the city's manager of recreation and leisure services. McNally's extensive wooded areas will be left in their natural state, he added." (2)

Elsewhere there are reports of graffitti having to be removed from a national historic site, the Doon Pioneer Memorial Tower. As well, an historic barn in the Upper Doon Heritage District in Kitchener was recently covered with graffiti and the owner's prize-winning geese were killed. The new Huron Road/ Old Mill Drive parkette has been "furnished" with huge glacial erratics for hikers to sit on-- benches would have been vandalized. Why bother? Waterloo Councillor Scian, a teacher, notes that the value of the McNally buildings and lands seems to be lost on the neighbourhood youth behind much of the damage. "It's just so heartbreaking that this is coming from our own community." (2)

Interesting co-incidence that each of these four heritage sites are immediately adjacent to new subdivisions. There's the loss of built and natural heritage to be mourned. Even more important is the underlying issue of alienated youth who do not connect with or value their immediate neighbourhood!

** Note that phrase "depends on the needs of the growing subdivisions" as "needs" can be open to interpretation.

Photos copyright Sandamara Images 2002-06 clockwise L to R: (1) Leap of Faith sculpture by Ruth Abernathy at Wilmot Centre--dedicated to our youth and our future; (2) Amish Mennonite homestead in Mornington Twp.- when the grandmother observed RR photographing the horses beside the fence, she signalled her grandson who with one whistle sent the horses to the barn; (3) getting the Eby house ready for the $500,000 move down the hill; (4) the Eby/Donnerwerth Mennonite Georgian fieldstone farmhouse dating 1856; (5) same house overlooking City of Kitchener-- set on the hilltop that is said to have been the second highest point of land in the Region of Waterloo; (6) the Tilt barn in Upper Doon Heritage District, Kitchener ON.

“Old buildings provide a charm that is priceless.
If they are destroyed,
they cannot be rebuilt
–ever.” (3)

Sources: (1)JENNIFER MACMILLAN,"CRUEL BLOW FOR PRESERVATION EFFORT," The Record 10 Jul 07; (2) TAMSIN MCMAHON ,"Vandals run wild at cottage," The Record 09 Jul 07; (3) Record editorial “saving buildings in city cores” --date not noted.

Labels: ,


# posted by ramblingrose @ 11:48 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

06 July 2007

 

who will save the Wilmot Line? (reprise)

Photo: The Wilmot Line, one of the original settlement roads built over 200 years ago, appears on old maps as the only area road stretching straight from Lake Erie to well north of this area. Gentle reader, since first posing the question, "Who will save the Wilmot Line?" in La Grande Riviere blog, much has happened. The Region of Waterloo unanimously approved the protection of the Laurel Creek Headwaters Environmentally Sensitive Landscape (ESL) and that portion of the Wilmot Line running through the ESL is to remain a scenic gravel road. However, the Laurel Creek Headwaters ESL designation is currently under review by the OMB.

Adjacent to the ESL area are the three contentious subdivision proposals discussed in the previous blog. RR previously blogged about the relationship of these subdivisions to the Waterloo Moraine and the Laurel ESL thus: "The Waterloo Moraine covers 40,000 acres/ 16, 187.4 ha of which a large portion is already urbanized. These three new developments will urbanize a further 127.68 acres/ 51.7 ha of which 15.2 acres or 11.9% intrude on ESPA lands." (1) Since 2005, the developers have agreed to enhance the protection of the lands intruding into the ESL area and those enhancements are discussed in the Region's technical review.(2) As well, public pressure has resulted in many changes to the proposed developments over the years.

Still unresolved are questions involving the impact on quantity and quality of groundwater supplies and in particular, the proposed third pipe (Clean Water Collection System) that according to the technical review is supposed to actually increase the infiltration rate into the regional aquifers. All in all, this complicated issue has involved more than 15 years' of ongoing public consultation with still more to come. What was assumed to have been a done deal* in advance of last week's Regional Council's consideration of the the technical review report continues to be a political hot potato as this issue is being returned to City of Waterloo Council to vote on at a Council meeting to be held on 23 July 2007.** If Waterloo Council votes to approve the subdivisions, the green public opposing them would have to appeal that decision to the OMB. If, however, Waterloo Council does not approve the following scenario lies ahead per Record:
"If city council should rescind its support for the development, what happens next? Regional solicitor Debra Arnold said yesterday that a No vote by city council would put the contentious plan back in the laps of regional councillors. (===> all of whom ducked the issue in advance of last year's municipal election by delegating responsibility to staff to conduct a technical review. Ironical? Fitting?)The regional planning commissioner would no longer have the authority to approve the plans if city council backed out, she said. It was incorrectly reported in yesterday's Record that there would be no need for the region to approve the plan if city council rejected it. Meanwhile, the developers of the planned three subdivisions have been in a legal position for over a year to take the matter to the Ontario Municipal Board, but as yet have chosen not to do so. Going to this provincial body that adjudicates over contested planning issues would be a last resort, said Larry Masseo, vice-president of Activa Holdings, one of the main developers of the west side project." (4)

There appear to be several key issues that still need to be addressed:
a) the cumulative impact of these three subdivisions on the entire Laurel Creek sub-watershed/ Grand River watershed system as the infiltration ponds are to be located at a point where Clair Creek (Laurel tributary) is permeable and the water table is vulnerable. Although planning decisions are to be made based on sub-watershed studies, RR finds little mention of the overall cumulative impact of all the subdivisions within a particular watershed. The most recent Laurel Creek watershed monitoring report shows a significant decline of water quality downstream of Clair Creek and even Clair Creek already needs rehabilitation-- as does Columbia Lake farther downstream.** Ultimately this is an issue of sustainability. We need to ask how much development can a creek sustain?

b) the subwatershed studies and scoped Environmental Impact Statements which have been prepared by a firm that stands to directly benefit from these subdivisions, i.e. the principal in PEIL is also a principal in the Vista Hills proposal. Not having had access to either of these studies but conversant with the adjacent Owens study, RR would guess that the EIS will propose mitigation measures (these too are covered in the technical review by Regional Staff) but would like to note that the word "mitigation" is in itself an acknowledgment that there will be a negative impact on the environment. As well, RR copies for you from previous research the following: "The outcome of an EIS is usually the approval of some form of development, with conditions attached as to specifically how and where it can occur in relation to the greenbelt feature. ..Rather than determining whether a proposed undertaking is environmentally acceptable or not, an EIS has increasingly become a tool for determining the type and extent of mitigation required to permit a development to proceed... (Although a specific physical feature is
afforded protection from development), its actual function becomes impaired over time. ..The effects of a major change in adjacent land use on a greenlands feature are rarely measured or monitored following construction. –Greenlands in Central Ontario, 9-10. (4)

Next installment-- 23rd July 2007 City of Waterloo Council Chambers. Homework: some heavy technical reading has been prescribed for Mayor Halloran.***

Notes: * the done deal per Record editorial: "Even during that campaign, there were smart voices explaining why the subdivisions should proceed, but Halloran wouldn't listen. An Ontario Municipal Board decision essentially gave the subdivisions the green light in 1992.(===>RR has read the 1992 OMB decision which appeared contingent on the Region's evaluating the cluster of environmentally sensitive lands in that area. RR will need to reread the document to see if the OMB approved these subdivisions and would suggest her readers do likewise.)The developers then downsized their proposals and tried to respect environmentally sensitive lands. Meanwhile, reports done by city staff and released before the election concluded the development could go ahead." (3): ** lest City of Kitchener residents complacently shrug their shoulders, RR would like to remind them that the ultimate solution to water quality in Victoria Park Lake will require an environmental assessment of the entire Schneider Creek watershed and that the sedimentation that is part of this year's water quality issue results from development upstream; ***Poor Brenda Halloran is caught in the d**** if you, and d****** if you don t trap: one day she takes the Record s advice to have her Council vote on the issue and the next day she is taken to task for following their advice per this editorial: That she opposed the projects without having done her homework speaks to the weakness of her original case. That she is now better informed likely explains her sudden about-face and her statement that she feels "comfortable'' with development plans that are "heading in the right direction.''....Should the city rescind approval, there is a real possibility that the developers could plead their case before the Ontario Municipal Board. This would drag the city of Waterloo --and Waterloo taxpayers -- into costly litigation the city would almost certainly lose. (3)
====. lessons learned a) the press is at best a fickle mistress that will love you and leave you at a moment s notice; b) it s all about the story and all classic narratives require a hero(ine) and villain(ness)........and lol, stuff that RR used to preach in her literature and media classes!

Apologies: reboot required to fix the typos as keyboard is behaving rather oddly right now.



Sources: (1)Who will save the Wilmot Line? March 27, 2005 http://grandriver.blogspot.com/2005_03_01_archive.htmll; (2) for link to the full report, scroll down to previous blog; (3)"The education of Mayor Halloran," editorial, The Record Friday, July 06, 2007; (4)FRANCES BARRICK,
Moraine project's future unclear," The Record Friday, July 06, 2007; (4) posted to www.grandriver.blogspot.com on Saturday, March 26, 2005, Currently at Risk in the Region of Waterloo. The entire sequence of moraine-related blogs can be accessed at this link: http://grandriver.blogspot.com/2005_03_01_archive.html

Labels: ,


# posted by ramblingrose @ 1:52 PM 1 Comments Links to this post

04 July 2007

 

muddy waters





Last Friday, the local rag informed us that "the region has cleared the way for three contentious developments that will see as many as 4,500 new residents living on the moraine in the northwest corner of Waterloo" (1)

After that, the rag moved the political puck back into play with its editorial suggesting that "the new council of the City of Waterloo ... comment and respond to the staff report at a public meeting, if it so wisely chooses." (2)

In a rather neat shifting of responsibility and public accountability, the rag cited as accepted practice? policy? "the convention by which the local municipality, working closely with the region and with public input, effectively makes the political decision on subdivision approvals. At the end of the day, the region's role is more technical, whereby regional council can delegate final approval to a single bureaucrat whose role is chiefly to ensure that the subdivision plans comply with provincial and regional legislation and policies. Under this protocol, public accountability falls largely on the shoulders of the elected city politicians. ...Waterloo Mayor Brenda Halloran expressed "grave concerns" during November's municipal election campaign." (2)

Deftly now, political responsibility has been transferred to the shoulders of the newest kid on the regional block thus: " She [i.e. Halloran] could even ask the region to withhold final approval of the subdivisions until city councillors have one last chance to comment. What's at issue are not just the merits or demerits of the proposed subdivisions. This is also about principle and accountability and the vexing issue of leaving the final decision up to one unelected official." (2) Today's news report proclaims, "gotcha Brenda" as even Mayor Halloran passes the buck thus: "Halloran said she didn't have access to city reports or information on the history of the proposed development when she was running for mayor...she said she has a better understanding of the proposal and of the concessions the city managed to get from the developer, which include buffer zones around environmentally sensitive lands, lower density requirements and a new piping system to filter water from rooftops into the ground. She added that the plans have been endorsed by other local and provincial agencies." (3)

Ah yes, the previous City of Waterloo Council struggled with that decision* and finally assured themselves that the central issue of impact of these developments on the quality and quantity of groundwater was a regional responsibility. Ergo, regional government would have to make that political decision. Region intercepted that puck and by means of a special by-law transferred that responsibility to staff to conduct a technical review of the proposed subdivisions. Today's Council Report regarding staff report P-07-084 asserts that "Draft approval is not a political decision but a decision based on a technical review of the conditions," and then shifts the political puck back to any parties challenging the conclusions reached in that report thus,"Draft approvals are appealable to the Ontario Municipal Board."

Council will be reviewing Report P-07-084** tonight at 7:00 in Regional Council Chambers, Frederick Street, Kitchener.
"In an ideal world, would this development occur?
I would have to say no, it wouldn't,
but given the practicalities of the ruling that occurred in 1992,
I think the region and the city have done the best they can."
--Sean Strickland, Regional Councillor


Notes: * in advance of the 2006 Council meeting, the Record urged approval of those subdivisions. And now a year later, is calling for a review of same? ** Although RR has read the report once thus far, RR requires more time to sift the grain from the chaff. Report is available at this link:

http://www.region.waterloo.on.ca/web/region.nsf/8ef02c0fded0c82a85256e590071a3ce/2B50E337C70BFE9A852573090058715D/$file/P-07-084.pdf?openelement

Justification for staff approving decision is here:

http://www.region.waterloo.on.ca/web/region.nsf/8ef02c0fded0c82a85256e590071a3ce/2B50E337C70BFE9A852573090058715D/$file/MEMO.pdf?openelement


Photos copyright Sandamara Images 2002-06 L to R clockwise, the vanishing rural landscape: Berlett Road red barn adjacent to proposed developments; Erbsville Road farm replaced by similar subdivisions; typical rolling Waterloo moraine topography; typical moraine wetland.

Sources: (1) TAMSIN MCMAHON AND PHILIP JALSEVAC, "Region clears way for west side subdivisions, " The Record 29 Jun 07; (2)"City should review west-side plans," Record editorial 03 Jul 07; (3) TAMSIN MCMAHON, "Mayor's development flip-flop," The Record 04 Jul 07.

Labels:


# posted by ramblingrose @ 1:52 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]