|
September
2001 Newsletter
The
City's Plan to "Fix" the Creek
The
City is attempting to justify its valley tree cutting plans
as an environmentally positive action. They are claiming
that the majority of the proposed cutting (1800 trees) is
necessary in order to reduce erosion in Red Hill Creek by
re-routing the creek bed. What are the facts?
- The
City has refused to release its plans for re-location
of the creek, either to the public or the or to
the appropriate regulatory agencies.
- The
partial map released in March 2000 shows that the
entire creek is to be re-located between the Bruce
Trail bridge and the TH&B railway.
- The
most severe erosion problems in the creek have all
been caused by previous human attempts to control
or re-route the creek.
- The
other major cause of erosion in the creek has been
development in the watershed which has replaced
natural areas with pavement, buildings and other
impervious surfaces.
- It
is well known that trees and other natural vegetation
prevent erosion problems.
- There
are significant problems in Red Hill Creek which
the City has left to fester unattended for many
years
|
(1)
The City has refused to release its plans for re-location
of the creek, either to the public or the or to the appropriate
regulatory agencies.
We
know in general that the City plans to re-locate seven kilometres
of the creek as part of its expressway plans. This plan
was one of the main reasons for the initiation of the federal
environmental assessment in June 1998. The City applied
for a Fisheries Permit in July 1998 but did not submit their
detailed plans or their background studies related to the
creek re-location. A federal document titled "Re: Red
Hill Creek" and dated August 13, 1998 noted:
"On
July 25, DFO received an incomplete application for work
affecting fish habitat. In many places where detailed
information was requested on the application form, the
proponent specified that 'information not available at
this time'. Although the documents include basic information
about the 're-alignment of the creek itself (the essential
part of the plan)', the data provided is definitely insufficient
to allow determination of impact. DFO is examining the
entire application along with the 'draft' documents and
will officially request additional information in the
near future."
A
second federal document, dated March 18, 1999 contains the
following statement:
"Between
August 1998 and February 1999, Fisheries and Oceans requested
additional information from the proponent on four occasions.
The Region has recently stated that it is not yet in a
position to provide the requested information, nor to
provide an anticipated timeframe for the submission of
the information."
This
failure to present detailed plans for the stream re-location
made it impossible for the federal government to complete
the screening assessment. Instead, the decision was made
to move to a Panel Review. The letter from the Fisheries
Minister asking for this Panel Review stated,
"that
the Regional Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth has been
less than forthcoming with information necessary, at least
from a fish habitat standpoint, to complete the screening."
In
March 2000, the City attempted to expropriate a private
property in the valley. At the expropriation hearing, they
presented a map of the proposed relocation of the creek
between the Bruce Trail bridge and the TH&B railway.
However, they refused to provide any information on how
they arrived at this plan or why it was a good idea. As
a result, the hearing officer refused to allow the expropriation
to proceed.
(2)
The partial map released in March 2000 shows that the entire
creek is to be re-located between the Bruce Trail bridge
and the TH&B railway.
Starting
from the Bruce Trail bridge, the new creek goes along the
foot of the escarpment and emerges in the middle of the
fairway for hole 11 of the King's Forest Golf Course. This
first section is currently mature hardwood forest. This
is where the City estimates that 1800 trees will be cut
down. After crossing the fairway of the 11th hole, the new
creek crosses portions of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th and 13th
holes. It then crosses the paved valley trail four times
upstream of Rosedale Arena. Below Rosedale Arena it passes
directly through all four baseball diamonds and goes along
the base of the west wall of the valley just below Charlotte
and Dundonald Streets. The entire area north of the extension
of Greenhill Avenue is designated as a "stormwater
detention area". At no point does the new creek follow
the bed of the existing creek.
The
400 metre portion of the creek between the Bruce Trail bridge
and the golf course is stable channel that has apparently
not moved for hundreds of years. Erosion problems are occurring
in the golf course portion of the stream, largely as a result
of attempts made by the city to channelize the creek using
gabion baskets and concrete structures.
(3)
The most severe erosion problems in the creek have all been
caused by previous human attempts to control or re-route
the creek. The most dramatic examples have been caused by
the installation of concrete channels at King Street and
Queenston Road.
This
is obvious to the casual observer, but it is also the view
of consultants hired by the City in 1997 to evaluate erosion
problems in the creek. Here are some of the comments from
that 1997 report:
"This
study concluded that all of the erosion control structures
in this reach [golf course] have either generated enhanced
downstream or upstream rates erosion rates of the bed
and/or bank of the creek. Also, all of the erosion control
structures in this reach have either failed to mitigate
stream bank erosion or are beginning to be undermined."
"In
the cases of the concrete channel at Queenston Road and
the gabion baskets in the golf course area, both of these
areas have transferred higher stream energy downstream
from reduced roughness of the bed and banks of the channel
and modified the velocity distribution of the stream.
The results are enhanced erosion downstream with rates
of bank erosion exceeding one metre per year in the case
of downstream of Queenston Road. Other than these few
localized areas, erosion to these reaches has remained
relatively low at 'typical' erosion rates of centimetres
per year."
"In
more recent times (last 20 years) much of the channel
migration has been initiated from channel re-alignment
or erosion control structures which have failed."
(4) The other major cause of erosion in the creek has
been development in the watershed, which has replaced natural
areas with pavement, buildings and other impervious surfaces.
This causes much higher flows during rainstorms, significantly
increasing erosion in the creek.
This
is the source of erosion problems in nearly all urban creeks.
Most of the development in the upper and lower watersheds
of Red Hill Creek has occurred in the last 50 years. Many
municipalities require new subdivisions to build stormwater
ponds and other facilities to prevent increases in runoff.
Hamilton has been very backward in this area. The study
quoted above stated:
"The
earliest set of air photos used are believed to be from
1948... the significant observations are as follows: generally
the system appeared to be in balance as there were not
signs of excessive sedimentation or erosion."
"Over
the period of record [1978 on] ... the frequency of bankfull
discharges have increased from approximately twice per
year to five to six times per year."
"This
is a consequence to changes in the overland flow as discussed
in the hydrology report by Phillips P+E (1997) where the
percentage of impervious area has increased from approximately
50% to 90% for the entire watershed over the same time
period."
(5)
It is well known that trees and other natural vegetation
prevent erosion problems.
This
is also confirmed in the 1997 City study. It noted the following
conclusions from a 1995 City study:
"The
results of this study concluded that for the Red Hill
Creek reach studied, the present state of the stream is
relatively stable but is strongly dependent upon vegetative
control of tree root masses along the stream banks. Removal
of the vegetation in this reach would dramatically increase
the rates of stream channel erosion with the current meander
pattern."
The 1997 study found that erosion rates below Queenston
Road and beyond the influence of the concrete channel were
relatively low. It noted:
"The
governing reason for the low erosion rates under the changing
watershed hydrology from urbanization is by vegetative
control of the banks. It has therefore been identified
that under the current stream morphology configuration
(i.e. meander pattern) the vegetation in these areas must
persist along the banks of the stream to maintain the
stability of the channel."
"The
most contrasting velocities are for the vegetated and
non-vegetated threshold velocities for stream bank erosion
in the clay materials. Under non-vegetated or sparsely
vegetated conditions (short grasses), significant stream
bank erosion can be initiated in velocities ranging between
0.5 - 0.75 m/s [metres per second] which is well below
bankfull velocity and would likely relate to a discharge
frequency between 15-20 times per year. Conversely, densely
vegetated banks with tree masses can withstand velocities
much higher than bankfull discharge (2.5 - 3.0 m/s) before
predominant erosion would likely ensue. This implies that
as long as Red Hill Creek maintains a sufficient flood
plan to maintain a velocity distribution to that of bankfull
discharge under high flows, a densely vegetated stream
channel should be maintained or enhanced to mitigate bank
erosion for this particular type of geology."
"Long-term
stability of the creeks are strongly dependent upon large
woody debris as vegetative control against stream bank
erosion."
(6)
There are significant problems in Red Hill Creek, which
the City has left to fester unattended for many years.
Indeed,
virtually all the problems in the creek are caused by actions
or inactions by the City.
In
the 1950s, the City began flushing its combined sewer system
into the creek. Combined sewer overflows (which carry a
combination of rainwater and raw sewage) now exist at Greenhill,
Lawrence, Queenston and Melvin. A plan to prevent these
overflows was adopted by all levels of government in 1992
as part of the Hamilton Harbour Remedial Action Plan. The
City has not implemented the plan. Instead they have tied
the implementation to the expressway, promising to fix the
sewage problems only when they construct the roadway.
In
the 1960s, the City installed a trunk sewer line down the
middle of the valley. Parts of the creek were re-routed
to accommodate this sewer line, and concrete pads were put
into the creek bed wherever the line crosses the creek.
The concrete pads have all caused severe erosion. There
are also odour problems associated with this sewer line.
In
the 1970s, the City built King's Forest Golf Course, over
the objections of the Hamilton Region Conservation Authority.
Concrete and other structures were put in place to keep
the creek from affecting the golf course. All of the bridges
have since been washed out at least once, with the most
recent collapse taking place in 1999. Remedial work done
in this area in 2000 has already begun to erode.
In
the late 1980s, the City installed a Combined Sewer Overflow
tank at Greenhill Avenue. Immediately, local residents were
assaulted with foul odours. Despite repeated protests, the
odour situation has never been corrected. In addition, massive
overflows of combined sewage and stormwater continue to
occur about 25 times a year. A continuous flow of raw sewage
has occurred from this pipe for several years resulting
in extremely high e-coli bacterial counts in a pond immediately
downstream of the pipe. The overflow pipe is in the centre
of eight heavily-used baseball diamonds whose users are
frequently subjected to extreme odours.
The
City's "solution" to this problem was first to
ignore it, then to install a chain link fence and warning
signs around the pipe and overflow area (the fence is now
gone), and then to occasionally pump out the contaminated
pond (this no longer occurs). Several months ago City officials
claimed to have found the source of the leak but nothing
has been done to fix it. The City is now proposing to build
a second retention tank to supplement the existing one.
Citizen demands that the City promise to eliminate the odour
problem have been rejected.
In
1990-91, the City installed a 220 metre concrete channel
at Queenston Road, and a smaller one at King Street as part
of the preparations for the expressway. It quickly became
apparent that the channels were blocking the spawning run
of Chinook Salmon and other fish in the creek. All agencies,
including the City, have admitted there is a major problem
here since 1993. The City says it will fix the problem when
it builds the expressway. Each year, citizens rescue the
migrating salmon and carry them past the obstructions. As
noted above, both these channels have created enormous erosion
problems immediately downstream.
In
the 1990s, citizen investigations conducted under the direction
of Dr. George Sorger of McMaster repeatedly found fecal
contamination in a string of pipes flowing into the creek.
In one case, the Ministry of the Environment successfully
prosecuted a City employee. However, all of the pipes remain
contaminated. The City has taken no action to clean them
up.
CONCLUSION
The
City's claim that they are trying to "fix" the
creek is highly suspect, but impossible to fully evaluate
until all the relevant studies and documents are made public.
The claim made on August 21 that the tree cutting south
of the golf course would be necessary even if the expressway
were not constructed is also highly suspect, especially
since the City's only obvious interest in the valley is
as an expressway corridor. The obvious solution is for the
City to publicly release all its plans and ASK the federal
government to conduct a full environmental assessment of
these plans and the accompanying expressway project. Of
course, the opposite is the current course of the City,
which has spent over $4 million trying to prevent a federal
environmental assessment.
Finally,
we should put the "plans to fix the creek" in
context. City staff stated earlier this year that we are
$2 billion behind in maintenance of the water and sewer
system. It will cost at least another $300 million to complete
the 1992 plans to stop raw sewage flows to the creeks and
harbour. We were told three years ago that the western interceptor
trunk sewer line handling all of lower Hamilton and Dundas'
sewage is in bad shape and needs to be replaced. Even the
plans for stopping raw sewage flows into Red Hill Creek
are on hold because of a lack of money. More than $60 million
in City capital projects was dropped from this year's budget
because of a lack of funds. One of these was the twinning
of the drop shaft at Greenhill that is supposed to end more
than ten years of foul odours in the Rosedale neighbourhood.
This list could go on and on.
A
significant part of the problems facing the City stem from
the fact that both Council and staff seem incapable of setting
reasonable spending priorities. In this case, scarce funds
and staff time that should have been directed at fixing
our water and sewer systems have been redirected in an ill
conceived scheme to reduce erosion by clearcutting.
|
