City of Waterloo - Laurel Creek

Watershed Monitoring Program

Municipal Monitoring Perspectives

GRCA Sediment Control Workshop- June 20, 2007

Discussion Items

• Program Background and Description

• System Monitoring Summary

• Development Monitoring Summary

• Observations/Lessons Learned
 Evolution of LCWMP
• 1990- Laurel Creek Watershed Study initiated

• 1993- Official Plan Amendment #16

• 1996- LCWMP Pilot Study

• 1997- Present- Ongoing Monitoring

• 2000- Present- Expansion of to other watersheds (RIM Park)

• 2002- City of Waterloo Environmental Strategic Plan

Corporate Strategic Plan

Environment First Philosophy

Environmental
Strategic
Plan

Environmental Directions

Planning Water Air Quality Energy and Environmental Greenspace

and Growth Resources Resources Awareness

Strategic Actions

Phase I Phase II Phase III

Implementation Further
Plans Study

Measurement
and Review
 Program Objectives
• Detect changes to the watershed
• Determine the effects of land use and best management
practices
• Promote partnerships between agencies, municipalities and
watershed residents

• Increase public awareness and stewardship

• Develop database for comparison and trend analysis.

Environmental Indicators
Water Quality Aquatic Habitat
Total Phosphorus
Suspended Solids Benthic Invertebrates
Dissolved Oxygen
Temperature
E. Coli

Terrestrial
Features
Hydrology Greenspace Size
Baseflow Greenspace Health
Storm Flow
Precipitation
 Monitoring Program

System ÍResponsibility of City of

Monitoring Waterloo

Development ÍResponsibility of Developer

Monitoring

Post Development ÍResponsibility of City of

Monitoring Waterloo

System Monitoring Stations

 System Monitoring

Purpose:
• Monitor overall health of watershed

• Establish long term baseline conditions

• Determine whether improvements or

degradations are happening within the
watershed

Impoundments

Urban Stormwater
Agriculture Development Area
 Cumulative TSS vs TP

TSS TP

500 500

450 450

400 400

350 350

300 300
TSS (mg/L)

TP (ug/L)

250 250

200 200

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
 Precipitation (mm) Precipitation (mm)

5/ 5/
1/

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
4/ 9
0 6 9
5/
8/
5/
11 9 9
/0
6 5/
15
/9
9
5/
18 5/
/0 22
6 /9
9
5/
5/ 29
25 /9
/0 9
6
6/
5/
99
6/
1/
0 6
6/
12
/9
9
6/ 6/
8/ 19
0 6
/9
9
6/
26
6/ /9
15 9
/0
6
7/
3/
99
6/
22 7/
/0 10
6 /9
9
7/
6/ 17
29 /9
/0 9
6
Precipitation

7/

Precipitation
24
/9
7/ 9
6/
0
TSS

6 7/

TSS
2006 TSS vs Rainfall
1999 TSS vs Rainfall

31
/9
9
7/
13 8/
/0 7/
6 99
8/
14
7/ /9
20 9
/0
6 8/
21
/9
7/ 9
27 8/
/0
6 28
/9
9

8/ 9/
3/ 4/
0 6
99
9/
11
/9
8/
10 9
/0
6 9/
18
/9
9
8/ 9/
17 25
/0
6 /9
9

0
0.0

20
40
60
80
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0

100
120
140
160
180
200
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
180.0
200.0

TSS (mg/L) TSS (mg/L)

 System Monitoring Summary

• 4 areas of concerns
– Agriculture
– Development areas
– Online impoundments
– Urban Stormwater
• Land development activities (i.e. topsoil removal/grading)
reflected in monitoring data
• Sediment loading also impacts on aquatic health (i.e. benthic
invertebrate data)

Development Monitoring
Purpose:
• To monitor site-specific conditions within
Subdivisions from 2 years prior to area grading and
for 2 years following substantial build-out.

• To provide data to update/supplement Subwatershed

studies and EIS Reports.

• To measure and confirm the effectiveness of

sediment/erosion control measures; buffers; SWM
ponds.
 Development Monitoring
Program components:
• Pre-, Post- and During Construction monitoring plans
established jointly with developers.

• Combination of qualitative and quantitative

observations and sampling.

• Variety of sampling approaches - grab sampling, data

loggers, photographs, field record keeping.

Development Monitoring
What have we observed?
• Obvious disturbances during development, typically
with a decline following build-out for water-related
parameters.
• That pre-development conditions often a contributing
problem - - esp. cultivated areas, lands cleared for
agriculture near intermittent watercourses.

• Larger magnitude, infrequent events present greatest

challenges for sediment & erosion control
 Laurelwood Basin E SWM Pond

INLET OUTLET
100
90

% Target Exceedance
80
70 TSS
60 TP
50 DO
40 Temp
30 Ecoli
20
10
0
1996 1998 2001 1996 1998 2001

Flow
Flowfrom
fromIntermittent
IntermittentStreams
Streams

Summer
Summer

Late Fall
Late Fall

Spring
Spring
 Clair
Clair Creek
Creek ––North
North Branch
Branch

Erosion
Erosionfrom
fromIntermittent
IntermittentStreams
Streams--
Clair Creek North Branch
Clair Creek North Branch
Weekly Sediment & Erosion Control Reports
Future
FutureSWM
SWMPonds
Pondsor
ortemporary
temporarysedimentation
sedimentationbasins?
basins?

Early
Early stabilization
stabilizationof
ofbuffers.
buffers.
 Development Monitoring
Other Observations & Outcomes
• Use of “local” data to enhance future subdivision
design work.
• Evolution of longer lead times for monitoring and use
of such information to enhance comprehensiveness of
EIS evaluations.

• Demonstrated need for early dedication of buffers &

established vegetative controls in advance of
conventional engineered measures.

Development Monitoring
Other Observations & Outcomes
• Difficulties in data collection - - sampling capability,
scarcity of data, “academic versus practical” use of
monitoring information
• Lag time between data collection, reporting - - less
useful for short term sediment & erosion control

• Weekly & event-based inspections are key

 Thank You
Denise McGoldrick – Public Works Services 519-747-8642
Ron Ormson – Development Services 519-747-8708

Municipal Monitoring Perspectives

GRCA Sediment Control Workshop- June 20, 2007