News   Nov 29, 2024
Feds Match $758 Million Investments for New Line 2 Subway Trains
 680     0 
News   Nov 29, 2024
Looking Back on a Year of Construction at Amexon's Central Park
 287     0 
News   Nov 29, 2024
33-Storey St Catharines Tower Would Retain Masonic Temple
 607     1 

Downtown Brampton Flood Protection Project - Environmental Assessment

Article posted by the Brampton Board of Trade:

This Summer’s Historic Rainfall is a Reminder That We Need Resilient Infrastructure​

From the CEO, Jaipaul Massey-Singh:
Two weeks ago I was standing in the rain on the platform at the Brampton Innovation District GO platform, waiting to catch an 11:48 AM train into Toronto for a meeting on the day of the big storm that hit our region. The station was packed as is usual, even for a non rush-hour train, and passengers were trying their best to stay dry despite the increasing rainfall. 11:48 and no train, but an announcement it would be 5 minutes delayed…then 10 minutes delayed…then 17 minutes delayed…and ultimately at 12:15 we were advised that no train was coming and that subsequent trains had been cancelled as well due to tracks being washed out.

Inconvenient to be sure, but I was able to walk back to the BBOT office and join my meeting remotely. However that’s was not an option for many of the thousands who utilize the Kitchener line daily to travel to and from Brampton for work and school – as much as we talk about macroeconomic influences and access to skilled individuals, weather is increasingly becoming a factor in our economy.

Regardless of where one stands on the causes and projected impacts of climate change, the increasing unpredictability, frequency and intensity of weather-related events is undeniable, with what were once considered 100 year storms now events that occur within a decade. How is Brampton poised to respond to such events? Can we keep people and goods moving?

The City’s Downtown Brampton Flood Mitigation Project is an initiative to better prepare our downtown to respond and recover in the event of major rainfall and storms by implementing a number of measures including widening and deepening existing floodways as well as new stormwater management facilities. Commonly known as Riverwalk, the project will also include realignment of roadways, new trails and bike lanes, the improvement of bridges, and the implementation of other features to enhance ecological and natural features to make the area more pedestrian friendly and usable similar to successful urban waterfront projects in other cities 

To date, development of our downtown has been limited due to the Special Policy Area (SPA) designation from the provincial government that restricts what is allowable within a floodplain. This designation is intended to balance the need for urban development with the necessity of protecting life and property from flood risks and was established because of downtown Brampton’s proximity to the Etobicoke Creek. As a result however, major infrastructure projects cannot be undertaken, which in turn has limited economic opportunity, residential intensification, transit expansion, and other priorities that our city needs to support its growth.

The overall impact of the project therefore is to not simply eliminate flood risk but also to unlock the potential of the downtown by removing the SPA designation, with projections from the city indicating the impact would be:
  • A 7.7:1 return on investment
  • An increase of 23,800 new jobs
  • $1.4B of GDP impact
  • 12,000 fulltime years of employment
  • 9M square feet of new residential and non-residential development
The overall cost of the project is projected at $107M, which includes design and construction. The Riverwalk is currently funded for up to $38.8 M of costs by the Government of Canada under the Disaster Mitigation Adaptation Fund, with the remainder of the project costs funded by the City. The City continues to advocate for and explore other sources of funding to reduce the City portion of the Riverwalk’s cost, specifically for the province to match the federal contribution amount.
The project is currently in the detailed design stage, with key milestones for development of the plan and commencement of work on schedule for this fall and next spring respectively. Given the nature of the finding from the federal government timelines for development are clear with a 2028 completion committed to. The Brampton Board of Trade has had the opportunity to engage with city staff and council members on the Riverwalk project and strongly endorses this project, believing it to be an appropriate use of resources and recognizing the transformative effect it will have in our downtown by facilitating more housing, better integrated transit, as well as major infrastructure projects such as the Centre for Innovation that have been held back due to the SPA.
Further, we support the City’s efforts to secure funding from the province in support of this project for the following reasons:
  • Although the City is prepared to fully fund the balance of the Riverwalk not covered by federal funding, the almost $70M required will put a burden on our ratepayers; either in the form of a tax increase to support the costs associated with the project or in the form of other services or infrastructure the city cannot afford to deliver.
  • As detailed in the recent Metamorphosis Report and discussed at our State of the Region luncheon Peel region has been historically underfunded by the province to the tune of $858M. Although not all those dollars are allocated to Brampton or for infrastructure projects, it’s a stark example of how local residents have needed to make up for funding gaps at the expense of being able to invest those dollars to address other community needs.
  • The removal of the SPA does not only benefit Brampton directly, but also Ontario broadly by allowing us to meet provincially set housing targets and enhance the livability of one of the fastest growing cities in Ontario
The Brampton Riverwalk Project is a reminder that weather and natural disasters are increasingly relevant to our economic development outlook. The province has adopted ambitious housing goals and there are massive transportation infrastructure projects coming through the pipeline, but these projects rely on the resilience of our infrastructure. Though it may not be as exciting as housing or transit, disaster mitigation and adaptation needs to be prioritized as we prepare to put shovels in the ground for these major projects. Cities, and ultimately ratepayers, cannot be left to foot the bill for future proofing our communities lest we risk compromising our economic health. We urge the province and feds to continue to proactively support municipalities in preparing for extreme weather events.
Click to expand...
 
I think I dislike the name "Brampton Innovation District GO" even more than "Vaughan Metropolitan Centre".
 
Interesting that the BBOT wants the SPA designation lifted by the province but isn’t (here) suggesting Queens Park front up any money to make the enabling project happen - just feds and local tax rolls.
 
Dan416 said:
I think I dislike the name "Brampton Innovation District GO" even more than "Vaughan Metropolitan Centre".
Click to expand...
I completely agree. I had no issues with it being called Downtown Brampton. There's nothing innovative about buildings being torn down when the plan for Downtown Brampton hasn't even been realized yet. They have a bunch of "ideas" and "solutions" and things they want to do to make Downtown Brampton appeal to everyone, but they're still in the process of tearing down buildings. Just recently, they started looking for a demolition team to tear down 30 Main Street North to 60 Main Street North.
 
The GO station name is being grounded with the Centre For Innovation and Rogers impending move there as an anchor tenant.
I still think the worst name is an LRT line after Mississauga Transit Nimby Hazel McCallion running up to Brampton.
 
Received this email today. Here's the City's page with the addendum and here is the PDF.

The Downtown Brampton Flood Protection Project Municipal Class EA was completed by TRCA and the City of Brampton in September 2020. During the EA, the City worked with CN Rail to achieve a workable solution for the CN crossing of Etobicoke Creek in the south end of the study area. However, this alternative resulted in the disturbance and removal of grave sites from the adjacent St Mary’s Roman Catholic Cemetery, for which detailed discussions with Roman Catholic Cemeteries and the Bereavement Association of Ontario would be required to understand these impacts and seek to minimize them. During the detailed design phase following the EA, further discussions have been held with CN, Metrolinx, Catholic Cemeteries & Funeral Services (owners of St. Mary's Roman Catholic Cemetery), and the Bereavement Association of Ontario. As a result of these discussions, additional alternatives for the CN crossing of Etobicoke Creek were assessed. This addendum documents the choice of a new preferred alternative for the CN rail crossing only.

This addendum is available for review for 30 days until 30 November 2024. Please see the attached Notice of Addendum for additional information.
Click to expand...

From the attachment:

1730419257556.png



The addendum is available for review at the online locations below:

Home

Downtown Brampton lies within the Etobicoke Creek floodplain. Provincial policies around hazard management restrict the type and amount of development that can occur there today.
www.brampton.ca www.brampton.ca

[Update: it's actually not posted on TRCA's website so see the City's link above]

trca.ca

Downtown Brampton Flood Protection Project Environmental Assessment

TRCA, on behalf of and in cooperation with City of Brampton, has commenced the Downtown Brampton Flood Protection Project Environmental Assessment (DBFP EA).
trca.ca trca.ca

1730419288837.png

1730419312740.png
 
Last edited:
Bringing forward the impact of this decision.
Previous solution involved relocating several graves within the same abandoned church yard, no impact on existing houses or the existing play ground.
New solution involves purchasing and destroying someone's house and removing the play ground but leaving the graves where they are.

I understand that Catholic Cemeteries & Funeral Services and the Bereavement Association of Ontario have a mission to protect grave sites but should it be allowed to override the needs of living people?

How can these be the correct priorities?
 
urbancog said:
Bringing forward the impact of this decision.
Previous solution involved relocating several graves within the same abandoned church yard, no impact on existing houses or the existing play ground.
New solution involves purchasing and destroying someone's house and removing the play ground but leaving the graves where they are.

I understand that Catholic Cemeteries & Funeral Services and the Bereavement Association of Ontario have a mission to protect grave sites but should it be allowed to override the needs of living people?

How can these be the correct priorities?
Click to expand...
This really becomes a trolley problem. You pick one or the other. Which one would be the right one to pick? What decisions aren't being looked at that aren't these two?
 
urbancog said:
Bringing forward the impact of this decision.
Previous solution involved relocating several graves within the same abandoned church yard, no impact on existing houses or the existing play ground.
New solution involves purchasing and destroying someone's house and removing the play ground but leaving the graves where they are.

I understand that Catholic Cemeteries & Funeral Services and the Bereavement Association of Ontario have a mission to protect grave sites but should it be allowed to override the needs of living people?

How can these be the correct priorities?
Click to expand...
You make a fundamental error, the reason for the redesign is not for the dead, but rather so that the living can know where their dead are buried. The issue is that the records for St. Mary's Cemetery are substantially incomplete, and that there are many unmarked graves. What this means is that functionally in order so that the living may know where their dead are buried, not just dozens of graves must be moved, but the entire cemetery, at enormous public expense. Buying and moving the house are much cheaper than moving an entire cemetery.

JJTheJetPln said:
This really becomes a trolley problem. You pick one or the other. Which one would be the right one to pick? What decisions aren't being looked at that aren't these two?
Click to expand...
There are other options considered, one is building an entirely new bridge for CN, which CN has indicated it would vigorously oppose, at enormous public expense, and a fourth is don't do the flood control projects and the downtown remains as is.
 
Wm Perkins Bull said:
You make a fundamental error, the reason for the redesign is not for the dead, but rather so that the living can know where their dead are buried.
Click to expand...

I appreciate that there is law and custom on such.

I'll grant, that as someone who is not religious or superstitious, I've never felt the need to accord cemeteries a special place (and I have relatives buried in them). That's not to suggest I want to develop them, but I'll admit to having considered whether we would be better off if they were public parks.

I'm not meaning to be insensitive to anyone's feelings, I get that especially for those who have lost someone recently, its a highly emotional event. But at the end of the day, most people buried in cemeteries have never had their grave visited by a single person alive today.

I haven't the faintest clue where my great grandparents are buried (in one case it would be somewhere in Quebec, and the other in Scotland I assume). I cant' say it would bother me if their bodies were moved or cremated.

I could identify the cemeteries where my grandparents were buried........but have never visited the graves; I visited them and spoke to them in hospital before they passed; I now remember them fondly, but don't associate that with a grave site.

****

You may be entirely correct on the costs of complying with the law as written. I'm not convinced the law is correct.

I also wonder why some are so sensitive when they see a tombstone or a burial mound, yet feel apparently nothing as children at St.Paul's elementary in downtown Toronto play every recess on a paved lot over unmarked graves of the victims of cholera........... and while others park their cars over the dead beside Metropolitan United Church, where unmarked graves were paved over.

As a society, we seem remarkably inconsistent in what we accept in such circumstances.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top