HomeMy WebLinkAboutINS-12-033 - 2011 Stormwater Management Annual Audit Report and Policy1
Staff Report
KI~rCx~.~T~R Infras~rucrure 5ervrces nepari°ment www.kifthenerca
REPORT TO: Community & Infrastructure Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: September 10, 2012
SUBMITTED BY: Hans Gross, P.Eng., Interim Director of Engineering
Services (519-741-2416)
PREPARED BY: Nick Gollan, C.E.T., Manager, Stormwater Utility
(519-741-2422), and
Samaresh Das, Ph.D, P.Eng., Design & Construction
Project Manager (519-741-3400 ext.3173)
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: August 29, 2012
REPORT NO.: INS 12-033
SUBJECT: 2011 SWM ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT -
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT POLICY
RECOMMENDATION:
That the 2011 SWM Annual Audit Report, prepared by Aquafor Beech and City staff be
received and endorsed by Council, and further,
That staff continue to review the Stormwater Management Policy I-1135, dated December
10, 2001 and present recommendations to Council on or before December 31, 2013.
BACKGROUND:
In 1999, the City of Kitchener commenced a study to prepare a Stormwater Management
(SWM) Policy, which would assess existing approaches to stormwater management, investigate
options for modifying the current approach and create aCity-wide policy for SWM. The final
report of the SWM Policy was approved at Council on December 10, 2001 and subsequently
filed as a Schedule'B' Environmental Assessment under the MEA Class EA.
As part of the SWM Policy, an annual audit report is to be completed each year to summarize
the practices carried out to date in each of the categories included in the City-wide plan, namely:
• The development or site plan applications for the year and associated SWM fees
collected.
• The SWM facilities that have been constructed (or are in the process of being
constructed) over the last year. This includes new ponds, retrofitting of existing SWM
facilities and the installation of oil/grit separator units (OGS).
• Stream rehabilitation works that have been carried out or are underway.
A steering committee made up of the City of Kitchener, Grand River Conservation Authority
(GRCA), the Region of Waterloo and the City's consultant, Aquafor Beech has completed the
10-1
2011 annual stormwater management audit. This report provides details on the results of the
monitoring and provides specific recommendations for the future.
REPORT:
The focus of the 2011 report will be on the following areas:
a) Work Completed with SWM Redevelopment/Infill Charge (Cash-in-Lieu)
b) Cash-in-Lieu Fee
c) 2011 SWM Audit Recommendations
a) Work Completed with SWM Redevelopment/Infill Charge (Cash-in-Lieu)
The purpose of the annual audit report is to indicate whether or not the SWM measures provide
the necessary water quantity control and water quality treatment of stormwater resulting from
infill/redevelopment sites. The audit is completed in conjunction with a review of the capital
budget and an assessment of the following year's budget. The review lists the redevelopment
and infill drainage area for which SWM Redevelopment/Infill charge (Cash-in-Lieu) has been
collected, the drainage area serviced by the facilities built, and the drainage area serviced by
creek rehabilitation works.
At the end of year 2011 the total drainage area serviced by SWM works was 171.40 ha
compared with 125.33 ha drainage area for which City of Kitchener collected Cash-in-Lieu.
In 2011, the city collected $281,525.40 from cash-in-lieu charges and has spent $100,000.00 in
stormwater management improvements by installing oil and grit separators (OGS). The
drainage serviced by SWM retrofit/OGS is still larger than the cash-in-lieu drainage area
ensuring a net gain in stormwater improvements. Overall this demonstrates an environmental
benefit to the community as a result of the sustained effort to complete SWM retrofits and the
implementation of other best management practices (BMP).
b) Cash-in-Lieu Fee
The SWM Redevelopment/Infill charges (Cash-in-Lieu) applies to all redevelopment and infill
sites that cannot connect to existing quality control facilities and it is to be used toward the
construction/retrofit of SWM facilities.
The 2011 cash-in-lieu fee was $31,056/ha made effective in March 2011. As ratified by Council
on January 19, 2012, the 2012 cash-in-lieu fee was increased to $38,820/ha based on inflation
and actual costs of stormwater management facilities. A flat fee of 10% of the current SWM
charge ($3,882/ha) is to be charged for all sites less than 0.1 ha.
c) 2011 SWM Audit Recommendations
A number of actions were identified in the 2011 audit to further the comprehensiveness of the
City of Kitchener SWM Audit monitoring program and guide future stormwater management and
development policies:
10-2
1. Continue the consistent water quality monitoring approach in 2012. The 2012
SWM Audit monitoring program will consist of five wet weather sampling events, five
dry weather sampling events, and one melt/wet weather sampling event for six (6)
sample sites. Sampling sites for 2012 will be reduced from seven (7) sites to six (6)
sampling sites, in order to accommodate the inclusion of winter sampling of a melt
event. A seventh (7t") site will continue to be monitored at site HS1 (Henry Sturm),
immediately upstream of Victoria Park Lake as part of the ongoing monitoring for the
Victoria Park Lake Improvements and will be incorporated into the 2012 SWM Audit
report.
2. Monitor the same water quality parameters so that data can be compared to
previous years' results. Sampling parameters will remain unchanged from the 2011
program, to ensure consistency with the 2010 program. Additional water quality
parameters (pH, temperature, DO and conductivity) will also be collected as part of the
2012 program.
Relocate monitoring station in Schneider Creek to Strasburg Creek so that
monitoring results are not adversely affected by scheduled rehabilitation work
in Schneider Creek. Continuous flow and temperature monitoring will continue at
Kolb 1 (KD1). While, continuous flow, temperature monitors and water quality
sampling will be discontinued at Schneider Creek 5 (SC5) for 2012. An additional
continuous flow and temperature monitoring equipment relocation is recommended for
Strasburg 13 (SB13). This addition can be considered an element of a pre-
construction monitoring program and will aid in the completion of detailed design and
modeling for the interconnecting stream channel segments which have yet to be
completed.
3. Consider incorporating water quality monitoring into all reconstruction projects
that could affect underground and aboveground stormwater infrastructure.
Water quality monitoring is recommended for future relevant detailed design,
construction, development and restoration projects (including Capital Works projects)
within the City of Kitchener that have the potential to impact the City's stormwater
infrastructure and surface water systems. This monitoring will include both pre and
post construction and be aligned with the current monitoring protocols.
4. Develop a water quality database where all monitoring data from development
and reconstruction projects will be stored. The steering committee recommends
that a centralized monitoring database be established in order to store monitoring
results from previous SWM audits dating back to 2002. Additionally, it would also
serve as a repository for stormwater monitoring data from new development/re-
development taking place within the City limits. The GRCA has developed a database
for the entire Grand River watershed and has agreed to share their software, at no
cost, with the City. This sharing of information further demonstrates the partnership
between the City of Kitchener and GRCA striving to protect and enhance the
sourcewater important to our community.
10-3
5. Continue the review of the Stormwater Management Policy to recommend
changes back to Council at the end of 2013. In April 2011, staff requested direction
from Council to review the Stormwater Management Policy I-1135 and report back to
Council prior to December 31, 2011. This objective was not met in 2011, due to other
competing priorities, specifically the Victoria Park Lake Improvements and the
development of the Stormwater Credit Policy. As such it is recommended that staff
continue to work on the policy review and report back to Council with
recommendations on or before December 31, 2013.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
On March 15, 2012 the 2011 monitoring results were presented to the Environmental
Committee and a copy of the final monitoring technical memorandum was circulated for
information to committee members on August 20, 2012.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Community Priority -Environment
"Continue to show leadership in the development of an environmentally sustainable community. "
The City continues to ensure effective implementation of the stormwater management facilities
in a sustainable and optimized manner in order to protect the environment and source water.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The SWM Redevelopment/Infill fee (Cash-in-Lieu) is being deposited into account 57500075
WTBI-SWM CERTIFICATION-DEPOSIT.
• $281,525.40 in SWM fee contributions have been collected in 2011 from 14
development locations, with a combined site area of 9.2 ha.
* The reporting cycle for the 2011 SWM Audit is January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011.
In 2012, the city has planned to spend $100,000 to install a water quality device funded by the
cash-in-lieu account.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
Copies of the final documents have been forwarded to members of the Steering Committee
(City of Kitchener, GRCA and the Region of Waterloo). A final copy of the report is available for
review in the Council Office.
CONCLUSION:
2011 was the 10t" year that the City's Stormwater Management Policy I-1135 has been in effect.
The results from the 2011 SWM Audit Monitoring Program are provided in the attached
Technical Memo.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Jim Witmer, Interim Deputy CAO
Infrastructure Services Department
Appendix A: Stormwater Management Audit: 2011 Monitoring -Technical Memorandum
10-4
~R
~ ~ "~~4
'~-
- "' ~~~..
~° ;.,
~ ~,~~
o ~`r ~~
z_
e~~,
~~ ~`~
r, ~ ~ ~:-~
10-5
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................
2.0 Bacl<ground .....................................................................
3.0 Kitchener SWM Audit Monitoring Methodologies ...........
3.1 Site Selection ...............................................................
3.2 Constituent Sampling Methodologies ..........................
3.3 Biological Sampling Methodologies .............................
3.3.1 Invertebrate Sampling and Analysis Methodology
3.3.2 Fish Sampling and Analysis Methodology .............
3.4 Physical Sampling Methodology ..................................
3.4.1 Flow & Temperature Monitoring Methodology....
4.0 Water Quality Constituent Results ..................................
4.1 Chloride ......................................................................
4.2 E.Coli ...........................................................................
4.3 Nitrate .........................................................................
4.4 Phosphorus .................................................................
4.5 Metals .........................................................................
4.6 Total Suspended Solid .................................................
4.7 Dissolved Oxygen ........................................................
4.8 pH ...............................................................................
4.9 Conductivity ................................................................
5.0 Physical Monitoring Results .............................................
5.1 Temperature Monitoring .............................................
5.2 Flow Monitoring ..........................................................
6.0 Biological Sampling Results .............................................
6.3 Benthic Invertebrate Community: 2011 .......................
6.4 Fish Community: 2011 .................................................
6.5 Biological Monitoring Summary ...................................
7.0 Summary .........................................................................
8.0 Recommendations ..........................................................
Appendix A: Detailed Methodologies
Appendix B: Water Quality Constituent Summary Tables and Field Sheets
Appendix C: Historical Trends Analysis: Summary Tables and Figures
Appendix D: Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP) field sheets, data summaries, site photos,
permits, and habitat summaries
Appendix E: Benthic Analysis Summary, Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network (OBBN) field sheets and
Taxa List
Appendix F: Flow Monitoring Field Sheets and Continuous Flow Monitoring Data
Appendix G: Region of Waterloo Lab Results
Appendix H: Stantec Pre-Construction Water Quality Monitoring Program Victoria Park Lake
Improvement Project Kitchener, Ontario
Appendix I -References
10-6
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWM Audit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
1.0 Introduction
In 2001, the City of Kitchener completed the Kitchener Stormwater Policy Development Study which was
developed to provide a Master Stormwater Management Plan that would guide the future location,
design and implementation of Stormwater measures throughout the City of Kitchener. As part of the
overall plan, acity-wide monitoring program was recommended to ensure that the implementation plan
is proceeding and that the elements are performing adequately.
2.0 Background
The city-wide monitoring plan was developed and initiated in 2002 by AECOM as part of the SWM plan
to provide a process for evaluating the effectiveness of the SWM approach. This monitoring program
focused on surface water quality (chemical and bacteriological) and invertebrate and fish community
sampling (biological) to identify and monitor the impact of the SWM Policy Implementation on stream
water quality. The monitoring program also included continuous temperature and flow monitoring
components to provide greater context for the chemical and biological monitoring data.
The following technical memo includes a summary of the 2011 monitoring results and comparisons with
previous monitoring data, analysis of potential trends for those monitoring stations with eight years or
more of data, and recommendations for subsequent years of monitoring. The 2011 monitoring program
was developed from the recommendations contained within the 2010 Stormwater Audit and is intended
to build upon the monitoring data collected from 2002 through to 2010. Details of the 2011 monitoring
program are summarized in subsequent sections.
3.0 Kitchener SWM Audit Monitoring Methodologies
The 2011 monitoring locations and methodology was selected based primarily upon recommendations
made in the 2010 SWM Audit report and includes chemical and biological grab sampling, benthic
invertebrate sampling and fish community surveys, and continuous temperature and flow monitoring.
Appendix A provides further details of the analyses and sampling methodologies used throughout the
2011 monitoring program.
3.1 Site Selection
The sites monitored as part of the 2011 SWM Audit program were selected based upon the
recommendations for future monitoring locations (2011-2015) contained within the 2010 Stormwater
Audit and are summarized in Table 3-1. The recommended sampling program for 2011 included 5 core
stations (Henry Sturm 1 (HS1), Kolb 1 (KD1), Montgomery 1 (MG1), Strasburg 2 (SB2) and Schneider 2
(SC2)) for the purpose of undertaking trend analysis for sites with greater than eight years of existing
data. Four additional stations (Sandrocl< 2 (SR2), Strasburg 13 (SB13), Schneider 5 (SC5) and Schneider 1
(SC1), most of which were sampled in previous years, were added to provide information on how
retrofits and rehabilitation works are impacting Stormwater quality.
2
10-7
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
Table 3-1: Recommended 2011-2015 SWM Audit Monitoring Locations (AECOM, 2010)
Station Tributary 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Years Sampled 2002-2010
Core Stations
H51 Henry Sturm Greenway x x x x x 9 (All years)
KD1* Kolb Creek x x x x 9 (All years)
MG1* Montgomery Creek x x x x x 8 (All years but 2007)
SB2* Strasburg Creek x x x x x 7 (All years but 2004 and 2010)
SC2* Schneider Creek x x x 7 (All years but 2007 and 2010)
Non-core Stat ions
SR2* Sandrock Greenway x x x 3 (2008-2010)
SB13* Strasburg Creek
(North Branch) x
i x ~ x x 3 (2008-2010)
IW
(1 or 3) Idlewood Creel< x x x x IW1(2004-2006),
IW3(2007 & 2010)
SM1 Shoemaker Creek x x 1 (2010)
Additional Stations
SC5* Schneider Creek Added following the removal of HS1 From the 2011 Monitoring Program
*Actually sampled during 2011 SWM Audit Monitoring Program
Per the 2010 recommendations, all site locations were included in the 2011 monitoring program with
the exception of Henry Sturm 1 (HS1). Monitoring of Henry Sturm 1 (HS1) and former SWM Audit site
WD1 was conducted by Stantec as part of the ongoing Victoria Parl< Lake Rehabilitation project.
Sampling results and methodologies for Henry Sturm 1 (HS1) (referred to as V1 in Stantec memo) and
WD1 were submitted to the City of Kitchener as part of a memo entitled Pre-Construction Water Quality
Monitoring Program Victoria Park Lake Improvement Project Kitchener, Ontario (Stantec, January 2,
2012) and is provided as Appendix H. The following SWM Audit Monitoring memo incorporates the
data collected at HS1 by Stantec in the historical trend data table provided in Appendix C.
In place of Henry Sturm 1 (HS1), a seventh monitoring location, Schneider Creek at Manitou Drive
(Schneider 5 (SC5)) was selected for inclusion in the 2011 monitoring program. The Schneider 5 (SC5)
monitoring location was selected as a considerable amount of stormwater management improvement
works within the Schneider Creek watershed (upstream of this location) were planned. All site
selections and non-selections were discussed and approved with the City of Kitchener and the
Monitoring Committee which included representatives of the GRCA and Region of Waterloo. Figure 3-
1provides an overview of the SWM Audit monitoring programs and site locations which have been
monitored from 2002-2011. Figure 3-2 demonstrates the 2011 SWM Audit monitoring sites including
those monitored by Stantec and GRCA.
As mentioned in the 2010 SWM Audit monitoring report (AECOM, 2010), the City of Kitchener's
monitoring program began to include and report on monitoring results collected from other
government water quality monitoring programs outside of the City's stormwater monitoring program in
2008 including data from the Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network (PWQMN), GRCA, & Region
of Waterloo. In 2011, data from the PWQMN station 16018413002 (SC1) and GRCA's monitoring of Blair
Creek (66811, BL1, BL3, BL4, BLS, BL6, BL7, BBB-F6, BL1(Trib) BL2(Trib), & BL3(Trib)) was collected in
3
10-8
City of Kitchener
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program
Technical Memorandum -Final
June 18`h, 2012
addition to the location identified in Table 3-1. Contrary to previous monitoring reports, the Blair Creel<
data was not included in the 2011 reporting process. For further information regarding the 2011 Blair
Creek monitoring results please contact the City of Kitchener or GRCA.
10-9
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ o_
mn a
F U
_ m ~ ~ ~~ ~
~m W F~ U ~J
~ ~ ~, ~,m RR ~~ M W Z ~ ® m
~ _ ~ ~~ ~~ m~ = g a ~
sm
~ ~ ° ~ `~ `gym - ~" ~ ~~~ ~Z N 7
~ M _ mm' _m -~ N Y Z ~ ar N Q
m ~ Q ~ ~ ~m ~~'~ ~ ~~~ y ~~ `~~ N E LL Z ~ ~ O ly!
~' ~ - - o o°o oom SSA - yy m ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~
[[]] Z
> ~ Y~YY ~ YY- - YYm ~ -- Nro
m ~ O
x x x> a xmi~~ a xi~i~~ xio~i~ a ~~~am~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ r`_„
E E e G~ m E E e G~ m E E d~ u E E d~~~ o E E LL ~ o ~ Q ~
_ _ E a" _ _ E a " __E F __ E oad __ ~ ad O Q O ~~`.
r E _ p E Opt E o O E o E o E (/J
S ~ m Q S m Q 8 ~ ro O te ro Q O ~ ro~ Q
N N U N N N c
G
O
O Q
~ ~ r
__ (Q L L ~ Q
~ ~ i O ~ ~ 3 U ~
a r ~ ~ J 00 00 ° W (~
m ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~=w~~ ~ C m m
o ~ ~ ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ r Q Q C7 C7 C7 Q ~ cn
a N N~ ~ ~ mm mm m" W O
on ~ ~ -
.~
~~~mN ~ ~m ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ J ~
o s
~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~e s
~ EE LL E.ELL E.ELL E.ELL EE@ ~ m _
7 m 1° ~ in in ~ in in ~ in in ~ ~° in E _
Q a s 6 a a S a a S a a S a a d
j O E o_ F O E o_E ~ c of O r o_E O Eo
VI N um N umr NUm~ NUm~ NUm
~ ~~
s ~ ~
~ ~ ~: ~ '#
~ ~ 3~~~ ~ ~ I w.:~ '~ m
~ I~ r ~ ~ • 1.~~ I ~ I z"
I
~..~ ~ 3~i~ ~ • ~ 1
~ ~, , ~a ~ ~~' ~~s~ III a#~
Y\ ~ Y ~ r ~ e-_ ~,
1 ( d~ { a ~~ ~ I ,~' ~~' -- ~ ~ f' ® 1 (,, ~4 m
1 -~a~U ~.t~P~ 5~y' ~« f.
~ ' >- ~ (. E2 ., Y ~' y r O ~'C ~ 1~ a
~ ~ fig, ~ E ~ '. a~ '., ~ ~ ~-~:~ ~~ 1 l C i J m IJ ~
~J ~' RNER~ f1f ,, ~v O/V, m m ~
~ w I ~ y
~ w Id
y i m r
w `~ ~ ~ I~.. i .. Ro~~.. _..\ I .,-., a~,Y/, ~. ~ , v ~~ _ c°~~~ l ~ ~ N ~ t tO_ i.' ~m
(7 1 ~ U Y / ~ it ~.1
., 1 ~_ o. ~~~ER ~ r I ~ U X`~ ~ y. y d ~ i Y ~C i~ m :~
k ~_• .ate I~"~ ~ ~ ~ ~: ~~ ''~°o ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ d a, ~~1' ~ ~m
i i ~ rG+~ ~' lC ~ ~ T g ~ ~ U I ~ LL ~ - 'c U ~ ~ - a i~ m ~I 'm
1 ~ ~' \ _ o Z~: 1 - '" /.' v~F z' ~1 I ~ cry I
U_ ~- l ~ iv ( r01
_ } ~ 4
11 `\ N ~ p~
1 ~~IrU~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ;.,c'i .- ~I I/~'J~ //Crr+li i ~- ?s SJ 1
~ _ ~ F% .., ~~ ' i4ryr1 L~~;;`,~y~~'~t i U N - { l~ L L ~"p/ °,~, v7 m ~ v ~~ ~c
+~l.. ` 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ `. a~i 3 ~ ~- y ~ ~-'I op
~~ V i y 1 1 ~,i i ~I m~i ( J
~ ~~t <>~~~ ~q ~ < ~ C7 r~ai ~ °
~ 44 ~ III ¢ ?~ i ~ ~ °T~ ~ ~ a
c ~ k
i!~ ' ~ ,~ ~ ~ ®> '.~ 1~`, •~ ~~~~ 1 y ~m~( ~ :I~,. N ~ C. ~ ~I~ ids I. ~
~/ ~ i 3 ~ ~ ~ - as NvwnvR a3ROSii_
y~0 ~ r ~_,,'~` :,~',. a•,~;'-~mr31Y~ ~~;I 11 i-~i Ili , I~ ~b~ f
~~ ~ ~ m iF11.~ U' ~--~ ~r o
~l _- ~ Y \ `x .---~-,N c~ ~ 1~p d - 1"~I~ ~ _ - y ~~Ll~~z
4q .~ 1 ~ ,~J Y ?~ ~v,a >'~ ~l V~, ~6
~ o~.~ ro r c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
- ~.~ 3'~ , `~ c da~ ~ ~ II z 1
~ ~ G i~ ~~ 1 ~ ~ i ~.~r.~~TRU55LER'R~°~-`TRUSSL'ER`R~'
~ o
~ ~ E
~ .~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~h~~j > ~,,,,,
> 1'~~~ '~' II ", ~'
~ ~ ~~ F
4 " ~ ,:_:ems
~: ~
F L V J D
m
d
O. L m ~LL~ Q ~;.
U
fn r m ~~ .-. M Z F O Z mJ
a m °¢ C7 ¢ ~ W W IY O ~
N m' 3 3 ~ ~~ _~ a ~ W
C `m ? LL LL ~ Q ~~ ~ ~- W (~ N v a N O
V U' Z rip} o ~
~ ? ~ ~ ~ ~ U c7 T ~ ~' `~ N ~ LLZIY WJW N Q
O m m m m m ~ _ m ~ ~ ~ Q~ ~ (7 J Z
o ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ Q c? L a ~~ Y za
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ F ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~
'o O v v v v v v v v~~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ Q I_ Z
m C o 0 0 0 0 0 ~ E d E E -O -O O N~ 0 O ~ ~ ',
y is O o 0 0 0 0 0 °~ °~ ~ m m 0 0 ~~
~ 3~ m m m m m m U v a~~ m m a' Q
o ~- f ~.
~ ...
"`s
~ ~ ~` .~~~i~e 1
® '~ ro ~'i7 ~ w ~
f ~ ! yo I ^~ m
/ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~- tiffs y
j~~l.~~~i ~ ~~~~ j ~~~-~ 1 ~
~ I >.A v • s
~ • ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~p,OKNER BLVN ~ bl ~.(/
I ~
1 ~ ,l
K \/ r ,.
T \
1 Y~~t TJ ~ T%~ ~ 1 V ~~ LL
1 iL ~ ~- ~ ftg0_ ~ ~ 1 ~ (J * m
' O~~-r ;~z ~~ y -t` ~2 ~ ~ )' N k~f~ H fFa
tiff ~ ~ ,. N ~ ~ ~`~ ( ~ ~ °' . < v ~ d ~~ ~~ ~~ i i4 ,1 m m
~ m ~~ Noon ,+ .~ )~' ~ _ 1 ~ ~ ;- ~U ~ ~ ~~ ~ i- raa Hpa~-
~~,~~ aE ~~ ~ ~~y ~ Us i $
w : oe= ~ xa % ~ - > n -
~ ~ P ~ I I _
U• o~+' y ~ ,{ i ~~~oN s s~ r y ~~~,E~ ~ ~~G~~~,, oo~RZ PNO P~E~ ~Ne~oJ it ~ Y m~ ` ~l? ~N T ~~M$ ~ ~Im ~ 1
1 `' y j ~ + ~ y, ~ ~ ~ "~!~~ ~ o ER~P~s - ~i i ~ -N ~,\ ~Y 1 '- .- U -1
1 JU ~ ~` w. ti~sd >.~~i ~ ~ d aM,l'j~ I ~ i U -~_. A sty"~ 1
! I 4r ; ~ - a .~ m„ io U ~ I~~~ ~ ; h i ~~,r ~ ~ 1
1 ~P ~P~,~~~St~ `y~ ssy .,~ HGHIPNO RDE /~J~ NL~ ~I d ~~I \Cy"" ~~~
I T C
~~ ~
1 k ~2'; f ) gyp. ~~ ~ ~
~ ~ G/ i ~, ~0~. ~ ~~-~ F ~l.l,. ~ C 1~m ~~ ~ m ~ J '( r- III '_-o w
I d/ E ~r 3 ~ N~ ~~ ~~~~f `~k(~ o~ ~~~~j / ~f t ~-" a ~TIJ ~ i. I ~"s --- i
Y=
d 1 ~ I ~-
i4 .'~~ u. ' i Jf~. ~ \1~ iii v7 i ~ 1
I -t ,~ ( U' ~ ~ ~ ~
Iq _ i ~ a'f -_- ~L ~ ~~ 1 ~ ~ ~ V o 1
a ~ - = m o `~ ,', y or3 ~{c~ ~J~~CC^^ 'erg` i
g i o e Nt i L y ~ ~\~ r%pl ~
r~
I y
/~ 1\~ h
~ ~ ~ ~ N yrJ ~ ~~~
C ,\. ( s;-=~ ~__~ I fry
--~ ~ s, a'~~~~ ~ ~ /i,~ Ras
3~ s
w c z 3~a~i~f ~ ~ ~t~sR~
.®
w, ~ c}~_' ~ OC9d~' ~jr
s
~, Fem. ~ r'++``r
1 ~ ° s ~.sP
~ ''~ _ ~.
O~
~I
HO
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
3.2 Constituent Sampling Methodologies
The constituent sampling program included the collection of water quality grab samples during both wet
and dry weather conditions for both chemical and bacteriological analysis. The 2011 monitoring
program included five (5) wet and five (5) dry weather sampling events. Through consultation with the
City of Kitchener, one of the five wet events was revised to a wet/melt event in order to evaluate the
water quality of the watercourses during amid-winter thaw. The dates and conditions during the wet
and dry sampling events are presented in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2: Dates and Conditions of Sampling Events
Type Chemistry and Bacterial
Sampling Date Daily Average Air
Temperature (°C)* Amount of Rain in Previous 24
hours (Wet) or Last Rain (Dry)*
Dry July 18, 2011 25.9 14 days
August 10, 2011 17.8 1 day
September 26, 2011 19.6 2 days
October 7, 2011 13.8 4 days
November 1, 2011 6.7 6 days
Wet September 19, 2011 12.2 18.8 mm
September 23, 2011 13.4 9.2 mm
October 20, 2011 8.5 48.2 mm
November 23, 2011 2.8 15.3 mm
Wet/Melt January 23, 2012 7.3 5.8 mm
nvironment Canada Data: Kitchener/Waterloo Station
Per the recommendations of the 2010 SWM Audit (AECOM, 2010), the following list of parameters Table
3-3 were analyzed. In addition, in-situ temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity were
conducted at the time of sampling. For further details regarding the sampling methodologies and
equipment used during 2011 water quality monitoring program refer to Appendix A.
Table 3-3: Water Quality Parameters Sampling & Sampling Procedure
Parameters Sampling Procedure/Type
Chloride Grab
E.coli Grab
Nitrate Grab
Copper Grab
Lead Grab
Zinc Grab
Total and Dissolved Phosphorous Grab
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Grab
Hardness (as CaCO3) Grab
Additional Water Quality Parameters Sampled
pH Field Measurement
Temperature Field Measurement
Dissolved Oxygen Field Measurement
Conductivity Field Measurement
7
10 - 12
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
All water quality grab samples collected in 2011 were submitted to the Region of Waterloo Laboratory
for analysis. Table A-1 of Appendix A provides a summary of the analytical methods used. For original
laboratory reports and chain of custodies refer to Appendix G.
3.3 Biological Sampling Methodologies
As part of the 2011 sampling program, both benthic macroinvertebrate and fish sampling were
conducted at the same seven (7) sites where water quality sampling was undertaken as shown in Figure
3-2. Sampling dates are summarized in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4: Dates of Sampling at Biological Stations
Station Invertebrate Sampling
Date Fish Sampling Date
KD1 August 15, 2011 September 21, 2011
MG1 August 15, 2011 September 21, 2011
SR2 August 15, 2011 September 28, 2011
SC2 August 11, 2011 September 22, 2011
SC5 August 15, 2011 September 22, 2011
SB2 August 11, 2011 September 19, 2011
SB13 August 11, 2011 September 28, 2011
Sampling stations were established using the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP), Version 8,
2010 (Stanfield, 2010). OSAP contains a series of standardized methodologies, including identification of
sites, and evaluating benthic macroinvertebrates and fish communities in wadeable streams. OSAP
modules are designed to be conducted individually or in combination, providing standardized methods
that ensure data repeatability which is essential for long-term monitoring.
Sites were established using OSAP Section 1: Modules 1 and 2 (Defining Site Boundaries and Key
Identifiers; Screening Level Site Documentation). OSAP sites are based on riffle-pool sequences, and the
location was documented so that the upstream and downstream boundaries can be found in future
years.
3.3.1 Invertebrate Sampling and Analysis Methodology
Samples were collected using the travelling I<icl< and sweep method, following the Ontario Benthos
Biomonitoring Network Protocol (OBBN) (Jones, 2007) which is identical to the Ontario Stream
Assessment Protocol (OSAP) Transect Travelling Kicl< and Sweep Survey (Stanfield, 2010). This method is
detailed in Appendix A. A complete list of taxa and OBBN field sheets are located in Appendix E.
Metrics were calculated to better understand the composition and changes in the invertebrate
communities over time. In addition to richness (e.g., total number of taxa) and composition metrics
(e.g., % Diptera), macroinvertebrates can also be classified according to:
• functional feeding groups (e.g., % Collector-Filterers, % Scrapers, % Shredders)
8
10 - 13
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
• habit/behavior characteristics (e.g., % Clingers)
Functional feeding groups provide an indication of food web relationships. Habitat and behavior
characteristics indicate the functionality of the organism (e.g., the way it moves or searches for food).
(Barbour et al, 1999)
The samples were analyzed using a multimetric approach to summarize the condition of the
watercourse using the following indices (details of these indices are found in Appendix A):
• Taxa Richness
• %EPT
• #EPT Taxa
• % Oligochaeta
• % Diptera
• % Chironomidae
• % Collector-filterer
• %Collector-Gatherer
• % Scraper
• % Shredder
• % Clinger
• Shannon's Diversity Index
• Hilsenhoff's Biotic Index
3.3.2 Fish Sampling and Analysis Methodology
A Single Pass Backpack Electrofishing Survey was conducted at each station using OSAP Section 3:
Module 1. This approach is used to produce a comprehensive fish species within a site, characterizing
the fish community and providing a qualitative assessment of species abundance (Stanfield, 2010).
Species, number of fish captured, weights, and range of total length were recorded. OSAP field sheets,
Data Summaries and Authorization to Collect Fish for Scientific Purposes are located in Appendix D.
Further details of the methodologies utilized during the 2011 fish surveys are available in Appendix A.
3.4 Physical Sampling Methodology
Physical water quality measurements included both single discrete flow measurements (taken at the
time of chemical sampling at all stations) and continuous flow and temperature recordings. The
following section provides additional detail with respect to flow and temperature monitoring. Further
details regarding the sampling methodologies and equipment used during 2011 water quality
monitoring program refer to Appendix A.
3.4.1 Flow & Temperature Monitoring Methodology
Continuous water level and temperature loggers were installed at monitoring stations Kolb 1 (KD1) and
Schneider 5 (SC5) on August 5" 2011. HOBO U20 water level loggers (pressure transducer) were installed
along the channel bed to record varying water levels and temperatures. A third reference logger was
9
10 - 14
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
installed at the Kolb (KD1) locations which recorded relative changes in barometric pressure and
ambient air temperature. Temperature and water levels were recorded in 15 minutes intervals.
During water quality sampling events, single discrete flow measurements were collected to develop
relationships between channel flow and depth (i.e. rating curves). See Section 5.2 -Flow Monitoring for
single discrete flow measurements and rating curve results. Rating curves were required to translate
the continuous water level data to corresponding flow rates. Field sheet of the single-discrete flow
monitoring are available in Appendix B.
4.0 Water Quality Constituent Results
The following section summarizes the monitoring results for the water quality constituents sampled
during the 2011 SWM Audit Monitoring Program. Results for the 2011 chemical and bacteriological
sampling program are summarized in Figure 4-1 to Figure 4-12. Summary tables of the water quality
results and field sheets are provided in Appendix B.
Stations with 8 years or more of data were compared with historical averages for wet and dry sampling
events. Stations with 8 years or more of data included stations Henry Sturm 1 (HS1), Schneider 2 (SC2),
Strasburg 2 (SB2), Kolb 1 (KD1), and Montgomery 1 (MG1). Averages for most parameters (with the
exception of E.coli) represent the arithmetic mean. E.coli averages are calculated using the geometric
mean as stated in the PWQO. Historical trends for each parameter sampled are provided in Appendix C.
10
10 - 15
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
4.1 Chloride
In general, measured chloride concentrations were higher during dry events compared to wet events
with the exception of the melt/wet event conducted on January 23, 2012 (Figure 4-1). Chloride
concentrations during the melt event were 4 to 18 times greater than concentrations observed during
wet and dry sampling events. Annual averages for all sites ranged from 255 mg/L to 614 mg/L which
were above CWQG guidelines with the exception of Strasburg 2 (SB2) and Schneider 1 (SC1). Strasburg 2
(SB2) and Schneider 1 (SC1) average concentrations ranged from 62 mg/L to 195 mg/L.
Over the past 9 years, stations Henry Sturm 1 (HS1), Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 2 (SC2) demonstrate
steadily increasing trends towards the Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guidelines standard of 250mg/L.
Montgomery 1 (MG1) and Strasburg 2 (SB2) demonstrate neutral trends for chlorides; the trend for
Montgomery 1 (MG1) has consistently exceeded CWQG guidelines while Strasburg 2 (SB2) has not.
10,000
E 1,000
s
.r
CWQG = 250mg/L
^ •
co
oa ~-'
~
• ^
O
k'
~ . ~
J ~
100 • •
~
0J
•
•
•
fi; • • •
~
.O
• • • • •
•
s
U
10 ;
1
I<D1 MG1 5613 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1
Stations
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt Dry CWQG
Figure 4-1: 2011 SWMAudit Chloride Concentration (mg/L) Results
11
10 - 16
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
4.2 E.Coli
E.coli concentrations during wet weather flows were generally higher than those sampled during dry
events (Figure 4-2). Stations Montgomery 1 (MG1), Schneider 5 (SC5), Sandrocl< 2 (SR2) and Schneider 1
(SC1) exceeded the PWQO recreational water quality guideline published by the Ontario Ministry of
Health for E.coli during every event collected throughout the 2011 monitoring program. On occasion,
E.coli concentrations at stations Strasburg 13 (SB13), Kolb 1 (KD1), Strasburg 2 (SB2), and Schneider 2
(SC2) were below the PWQO. Annual averages for all sites were above PWQO ranging from 288
CFU/100mLto 1250 CFU/100mL.
Historical trends for all five (5) stations demonstrate average E.coli concentrations which exceed the
PWQO recreational water quality guidelines from 2002 - 2011; however, no definitive trends were
established. During dry events, historical averages demonstrate decreasing E.coli concentrations for
stations Schneider 2 (SC2), Henry Sturm 1 (HS1), and Strasburg 2 (SB2).
PWQO = 100 CFU/mL
Detection Limit= 10 CFU/100mL
100,000
U_
.~ 10,000
s
.r
oa
0
J
~ 1,000
LL
U
O
O
-- 100
C
O
r
r
C
v
c 10
O
U
1
Figure 4-2: 2011 SWMAudit E.coli Concentration (1000FU/m L) Results
12
10 - 17
I<D1 M G1 5613 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1 HS1
Stations
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt Dry Lab Detection Limit PWQO
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
4.3 Nitrate
Generally, nitrate concentrations collected during dry weather events were higher compared to wet
weather events (Figure 4-3). With no PWQO guidelines for nitrates the Canadian Council of Ministers of
the Environment guidelines were applied which uses a water quality guideline for nitrate of 2.9 mg/L
(for protection of freshwater aquatic life). The CCME guideline was exceeded at stations Kolb 1 (KD1),
Sandrock 2 (SR2) and Montgomery 1 (MG1) during the course of the 2011 monitoring program.
Exceedances of the CCME guideline were limited to a single occurrence at station Sandrock 2 (SR2). All
remaining stations did not exceed the CCME guidelines during the 2011 monitoring program. Annual
averages for nitrate concentrations were below the CCME guideline for all sites except Kolb 1 (KD1) and
Montgomery 1 (MG1). Average concentrations for Kolb 1 (KD1) and Montgomery 1 (MG1) were 3.3
mg/Land 2.4 mg/L, respectively.
Historically, Kolb 1 (KD1) and Montgomery 1 (MG1) have been consistently above the CCME guideline
concentration during dry weather sampling; however, results from the past three years demonstrate
decreasing trends for both stations. Kolb 1 (KD1) annual average concentration for nitrate has been
consistently above the CCME guideline with the exception of 2003 and 2006 averages which were
slightly below 2.9mg/L. Montgomery 1 (MG1) annual average concentrations from 2002-2005 were
above the CCME guideline but have since decreased below the 2.9mg/Land continue to demonstrate a
decreasing trend. Remain stations demonstrate neutral trends for average nitrate concentrations which
are below CCME guidelines.
6.0
CWQG = 2.9mg/L
Lab Detection Limit = 0.1mg/L
5.0
4.0 •
•
E • •
Z 3
0
.
v
.r • •
i •
i+
z 2.0
•
^
~ Ir
1
0 • • •
. • -
• • • ~ .,
•
~ • i • _
0.0 -
I<D1 MG1 5613 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1 HS1
Stations
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt Dry CWQG Lab Detection Limit
Figure 4-3: 2011 SWMAudit Nitrate Concentration (mg/L) Results
13
10 - 18
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
4.4 Phosphorus
Total Phosohorus
Monitoring results for total phosphorus demonstrated that wet weather concentrations were generally
higher than dry weather concentrations (Figure 4-4). For several stations, concentrations of total
phosphorus were the highest during melt/wet events. Provincial Water Quality Objective interim
guidelines were used to evaluate the water quality at each station. According to the PWQO excessive
plant growth in rivers and streams is likely to be eliminated at a total phosphorus concentration below
0.03mg/L. All stations fluctuated above and below the aforementioned guideline with the exception of
Strasburg 13 (SB13) and Sandrock 2 (SR2) which exceeded the PWQO guideline for every sample
collected. Annual averages were above PWQO for all sites; the highest of which was recorded at
Sandrock 2 (SR2) (Average concentration range: 0.032 mg/L to 0.146 mg/L).
Historical total phosphorus concentrations for all five sites (Henry Sturm 1 (HS1), Schneider 2 (SC2),
Strasburg 2 (SB2), Kolb 1 (KD1), and Montgomery 1 (MG1)) demonstrate steady trends fluctuating
between 0.01mg/Land 0.13mg/L.
0.60
0.50 F
0.40
oa
E
z
PWQO = 0.03mg/L
Lab Detection Limit = 0.01mg/L
3 ~
0 0.30 +
s
a A
0
a ^
~ 0.20 +
0
^
! • +
0
10 - +
.
2 s + :
~,
a s
T'
fi
v
~
u
0.00 .
I<D1 MG1 5613 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1 HS1
Stations
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt PWQO Lab Detection Limit Dry
Figure 4-4: 2011 SWMAudit Total Phosphorus Concentration (mg/L) Results
14
10 - 19
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
Dissolved Phosphorus
Generally, measured concentrations of dissolved phosphorus during wet weather events were
marginally higher than dry weather events (Figure 4-5). Stations Strasburg 2 (SB2) and Schneider 1 (SC1)
did not exceed the PWQO of 0.03mg/L for any sample collected during the monitoring program.
Average dissolved phosphorus concentrations for all stations were above the PWQO except for
Schneider 1 (SC1), Schneider 2 (SC2), and Strasburg 2 (SB2) which ranged from 0.01 mg/L to 0.023 mg/L.
Average concentrations for stations which exceeded the PWQO ranged from 0.033 mg/L to 0.105mg/L;
station Sandrock 2 (SR2) demonstrated the highest average dissolved phosphorus concentration.
Dissolved phosphorus concentrations at stations Henry Sturm 1 (HS1), Schneider 2 (SC2), and
Montgomery 1 (MG1) demonstrate increasing trends since 2002. Concentrations in 2002 ranged from
Omg/L - 0.004mg/L and have increased to 0.023mg/L - 0.034mg/L. Station Strasburg 2 (SB2)
demonstrates a neutral trend below the PWQO ranging from 0.019 - 0.026mg/L since 2005; however in
2002 and 2003 dissolve phosphorus was not detected. Kolb 1 (KD1) demonstrates a dissolved
phosphorus concentration trend which fluctuates between 0.024mg/L - 0.043mg/L.
PWQO = 0.03mg/L
0.30
0.25
J
~ 0.20
N
3
s
a
c 0.15
s
a
v
0 0.10
0
0.05
0.00
Lab Detection Limit= 0.01mg/L
Stations
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt Dry PWQO Lab Detection Limit
Figure 4-5: 2011 SWMAudit Dissolved Phosphorus Concentration (mg/L) Results
15
10 - 20
KD1 MG1 SB13 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
4.5 Metals
Zinc
In general, wet weather zinc concentrations, especially during significant rainfall events, were higher
than dry weather concentrations (Figure 4-6). Zinc concentrations measured at Schneider 2 (SC2),
Sandrock 2 (SR2) and Montgomery 1 (MG1) were the highest during the melt/wet event. All stations
sampling during the 2011 SWM Audit Monitoring Program had average zinc concentrations which
exceeded the PWQO with the exception of Schneider 1 (SC1). Average zinc concentrations ranged from
0.029 mg/L to 0.084mg/L.
Historical zinc concentration averages for all five stations have fluctuated above and below PWQO with
the exception of Henry Sturm 1 (HS1) which has exponentially increased since 2005.
0.35
0.30
0.25
J •
0.20
c ~ •
IV ,~
0.15
J •
0.10 •
0.05
A 2 ~ •
0.00
I<D1 MG1 SB13 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1
Stations
• Wet ® Wet/Melt ~ Dry PWQO Lab Detection Limit
Figure 4-6: 2011 SWM Audit Zinc Concentration (mg/L) Results
16
^
PWQO = 0.030mg/L
Lab Detection Limit= 0.005mg/L
• ^
•
•
•
r
10 - 21
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
Co er
Copper concentrations measured at the various stations were generally highest during wet weather
event especially during the melt event (Figure 4-7). Highest copper concentrations for sites
Montgomery 1 (MG1), Strasburg 13 (SB13), Schneider 2 (SC2), and Schneider 5 (SC5) were measured
during the melt event captured on January 23, 2012. Average copper concentrations for stations
Montgomery 1 (MG1), Schneider 2 (SC2), Schneider 1 (SC1), Schneider 5 (SC5), and Sandrock 2 (SR2)
exceeded the PWQO and ranged from 0.006 mg/L to 0.014 mg/L; Sandrock 2 (SR2) had the highest
annual average concentration. Kolb 1 (KD1) and Strasburg 2 (SB2) copper concentrations did not exceed
PWQO guidelines for any events sampled during the 2011 monitoring program. Strasburg 13 (SB13)
average concentration was below the PWQO (0.004 mg/L).
Generally, all five sites demonstrate neutral historical trends for copper concentrations. Henry Sturm 1
(HS1), Schneider 2 (SC2), and Montgomery 1 (MG1) average copper concentration trends fluctuate
marginally above and below PWQO guidelines. Historical averages for stations Strasburg 2 (SB2) and
Kolb 1 (KD1) have been consistently below PWQO guidelines with the exception of two exceedances
occurring in 2004 and 2006 at stations Kolb 1 (KD1) and Strasburg 2 (SB2), respectively.
0.060
PWQO = 0.005mg/L
Lab Detection Limit = 0.001mg/L
0.050 ~
^
0.040
J
a 0.030 ~ ~
a
0
U
0.020
^
•
0.010
i ~ ~ ~ ±'~
0.000 ~°
I<D1 MG1 5613 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1
Stations
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt Dry PWQO Lab Detection Limit
Figure 4-7: 2011 SWMAudit Copper Concentration (mg/L) Results
17
10 - 22
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
Lead
PWQO guidelines for lead concentrations range from 0.005mg/L - 0.025mg/L depending on the
alkalinity as CaCO3. In 2011, samples collected ranged in alkalinity from 93mg/L - 550mg/L with the
exception of one occurrence on September 26, 2011 where the alkalinity at station Montgomery 1
(MG1) was 1mg/L. The PWQO guideline for lead when alkalinity concentrations are less than 20mg/L is
0.005mg/L. Lead concentrations collected at station Montgomery 1 (MG1) on September 26, 2011
where less than 0.001mg/L and met PQWO guidelines. The PWQO guideline for lead when alkalinity
concentrations are greater than 80mg/L is 0.025mg/L. No sites exceeded PWQO guidelines for lead
concentrations in 2011 except for station Schneider 2 (SC2) which exceeded 0.025mg/L during the
January 23, 2011 melt event (Figure 4-8).
Historical lead concentration trends for each station are generally neutral and have never exceeded the
PWQO guideline of 0.025mg/L. Historical lead concentrations at stations Schneider 2 (SC2), Henry
Sturm 1 (HS1), and Montgomery 1 (MG1) Strasburg 2 (SB2) have exceeded the lower limit (0.005mg/L)
of the PWQO guideline for a number of occasions from 2002 - 2011.
0.040
0.035
0.030
0.025
J
0.020
f0
0J
J
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.000
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt PWQO Lab Detection Limit Dry
Figure 4-8: 2011 SWMAudit Lead Concentration (mg/L) Results
18
10 - 23
I<D1 MG1 5613 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1
Stations
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
4.6 Total Suspended Solid
Generally, total suspended solid concentrations were higher during wet events compared to dry events
(Figure 4-9). Highest TSS concentrations were collected at stations Schneider 2 (SC2), Montgomery 1
(MG1), Schneider 5 (SC5), and Sandrock 2 (SR2) during the January 23, 2011 melt event. TSS
concentrations measured at stations Kolb 1 (KD1), Henry Sturm 1 (HS1) and Strasburg 2 (SB2) never
exceeded the CCME guideline. Average TSS concentrations for all stations ranged from 8.3 mg/L to 106
m g/ L.
The 2011 total suspended solid concentrations were generally similar to historical trends. Historical dry
weather averages were below 25mg/L from 2002-2011 for all stations with the exception of a Schneider
2 (SC2) which exceeded the CCME guideline in 2005. On average, Kolb 1 (KD1), Montgomery 1 (MG1),
Henry Sturm 1 (HS1) and Strasburg 2 (SB2) trends have fluctuated around the CCME guideline ranging
from 1.5 mg/L - 53.4 mg/L; however, since 2007 Henry Sturm 1 (HS1) total suspended average has
increased ranging from 14.4 mg/L - 92.1 mg/L. Station Schneider 2 (SC2) demonstrates historical total
suspended solid concentrations which are consistently above the CCME guidelines.
1,000
CCME = 25mg/L
~ Lab Detection Limit = 3.Omg/L
^
U ~ ~
~~ ~
•~ 100
^
~
oa ~
0
J
J
~
~
~ .
~ ~ ~
H
~ ~ ~ ~
10 ~ •
.-. i
~ r ~
1 ~
I<D1 MG1 SB13 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1 HS1
Stations
• Wet ~ Wet/Melt ~ Dry CCME Guideline Lab Detection Limit
Figure 4-9: 2011 SWMAudit Total Suspended Solid Concentration (mg/L) Results
19
10 - 24
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
4.7 Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved oxygen concentrations should not fall below the values specified in the PWQO guidelines for
cold and warm water biota. According to the Grand River Fisheries Management Plan (OMNR and GRCA
1998) and 2010 targets, stations Kolb 1 (KD1), Strasburg 13 (SB13), and Strasburg 2 (SB2) shall aim to
achieve cold water biota PWQO guidelines and Schneider 5 (SC5), Sandrock 2 (SR2), Schneider 2 (SC2),
Schneider 1 (SC1), and Montgomery 1 (MG1) shall achieve warm water biota PWQO guidelines. On
average, PWQO guidelines for warm and cold water biota range from 5mg/L - 6 mg/L. Only station
Strasburg 13 (SB13) did not meet PWQO dissolved oxygen concentrations for individual samples
collected during various wet weather events. All other sites demonstrated dissolved oxygen levels
above PWQO guidelines. Figure 4-10 demonstrates the dissolved oxygen concentrations for the relative
monitoring stations.
Average PWQO: 5mg/L Warm Water
6mg/L Cold Water
16
14 F
n
12 ~
~
c
° ~.
10
7 ~ _ ay ~ ^
H ~~ ~
... ~ ~ ~ ~
c = ^
8
0J ~
Op
T
x • •
O 6
v
~ i
4
2
0 ~
I<D1 MG1 SB13 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1 HS1
Stations
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt Dry
Figure 4-10: 2011 SWMAudit Dissolved Oxygen Levels (% Sat.) Results
20
10 - 25
City of Kitchener
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program
Technical Memorandum -Final
June 18`h, 2012
4.8 pH
pH values were generally higher during dry and melt sampling events compared to the wet events
(Figure 4-11). Average pH values for all stations were within PWQO guidelines (6.5 - 8.5). All pH
measurements conducted during the 2011 monitoring program did not exceed the upper limit of the
PWQO guideline. On occasion, stations Montgomery 1 (MG1), Schneider 2 (SC2), Strasburg 13 (SB13),
Strasburg 2 (SB2), and Sandrocl< 2 (SR2) fell below the PWQO guidelines.
14
12
10
8
x
a
6
4
2
0
Stations
• Wet ® Wet/Melt .~ Dry PWQO
Figure 4-11: 2011 SWMAudit pH Results
21
10 - 26
I<D1 M G1 SB13 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1 HS1
City of Kitchener
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program
Technical Memorandum -Final
June 18`h, 2012
4.9 Conductivity
Conductivity measurments conducted during dry sampling event were generally higher than wet events
with the exception of the melt event. Average conductivity ranged from 638 - 2104 µS/cm during dry
and wet weather events and ranged from 1128 - 8000 µS/cm during the melt event. Conductivity levels
for all sites sampled during the January 23, 2011 melt event were highest recorded for all stations with
the expection of Schneider Creek 1 (SC1). Figure 4-12 demonstrates the conductivity results for the
2011 monitoring program.
9,000
8,000
7,000
~.. 6,000
E
U
~ 5,000
T
a+
4,000
U
3
c 3,000
U
2,000
1,000
0
Stations
• Wet ^ Wet/Melt % Dry
Figure 4-12: 2011 SWMAudit Conductivity (µS/cm) Results
5.0 Physical Monitoring Results
The following sections summarize the physical monitoring conducted during the 2011 SWM Audit
Monitoring Program including single discrete flow measurements and continuous flow and temperature
monitoring. Results for the 2011 physical sampling program are summarized in Figures 5-1 to 5-6.
Summary tables of the continuous flow and temperature data and single discrete flow estimation field
sheets are demonstrated in Appendix F.
22
10 - 27
I<D1 MG1 5613 SB2 SC2 SC5 SR2 SC1
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWM Audit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
5.1 Temperature Monitoring
Continuous temperature monitoring was completed at stations Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5) as
part of the 2011 Kitchener SWM Audit. Figure 5-1 demonstrates the continuous temperature
monitoring for stations Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5). Results show that temperature ranges for
Kolb 1 (KD1) during the summer to mid-fall months were upwards of 5°C cooler than Schneider 5 (SC5)
temperatures. By mid-fall, temperatures of the two watercourses converge to within a couple of
degrees from each other. Refer to Appendix F for tabular results.
45
40
35
30
U
25
v
3 20
r
to
fl. 15
~ 10
5
0
-5
10
Air Temperature Water Temperature(KD1) Water Temperature(SCS)
Figure 5-1: 2011 SWM Audit Continuous Temperature (°C) Results
The Grand River Fisheries Management Plan provides descriptions of the fish communities to be
expected within various watercourses throughout the City of Kitchener and Grand River watershed.
Such descriptions provide gerneral insight of the thermal regimes required to support fish communities
within their respective watercourses.
Under the Grand River Fisheries Management Plan (OMNR and GRCA 1998), Schneider Creek is
described as a mixed water system and current targets aim to achieve instream water temperatures
which support warmwater fisheries. Kolb Creek was not listed in the Plan; however, current targets
23
10 - 28
~6/0~/ZOZZ ~5/o8/~~ZZ 2q/o9/Z~ZZ Z4/j~/2pZZ 23/ZZ/~~ZZ Z3/~z/~~Z1
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18rh, 2012
suggest that Kolb Creek (KD1) should be achieving water temperatures which would support coolwater
fisheries.
A method developed by Stoneman and Jones (1996) and revised by Chu (2009) was utilized to classify
the Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5) sites into Coldwater, coolwater, or warmwater areas based on
their maximum air and water temperatures in the summer. The methodology uses single
measurements of daily maximum air temperature (>24.5°C) and water temperatures between 16:00 hrs
and 18:00 hrs and July 1 and August 31 plotted on a nomogram to approximate the thermal
classification of each site (Chu, 2009). It should be noted that continuous temperature monitoring did
not commence until August 5th 2011. Thermal regime classifications were estimated based upon
available data sets.
Figure 5-2 demonstrates the respective thermal regimes found in Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5)
during the 2011 continuous temperature monitoring. The Kolb Creek site (KD1) had the coolest range
of temperatures with measurements ranging between Coldwater and coolwater classifications.
Measurements collected at Schneider 5 (SC5) were warmer compared to Kolb 1 (KD1). Continuous
temperature measurements at Schneider 5 (SC5) suggest a coolwater thermal regime.
31 i~
stC~
3Q CI
~ .tin
4
tb
E -;, n
'~S. n
x
~ ;'
~n n
7317
1 ~ 73
ins: a~, ~r n ~~ n ~.n ar;n ~~ r. inn
74 E1
;1 r.
~^ ^ ~ ~ ~
^ ~ -
• ~ _
~ ~ ~ +w ~
'# +~} # +M
~' ~
~,~~...
M1lmimum Dnil4 ~~ ~ern~e rtti rf ~`cl~
#KOt'-reek 7 ,KGsj
^ 5th~n~c~j~r Cars 1111
F~- L'ddw~icrfic~imea
I {~..I.~n,~lxr "nr~lrrrk
I~~i- `tVarmK~a~tcrwcg~mc:
Figure 5-2: Thermogram of Maximum Daily Air Temperature and Water Temperatures Collected
Continuously at Monitoring Locations Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5)
24
10 - 29
City of Kitchener
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program
Technical Memorandum -Final
June 18`h, 2012
5.2 Flow Monitoring
Single discrete flow measurements and corresponding flow depths were recorded during water quality
sampling. Flow-depth relationships (i.e. rating curves) for Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5) were
developed based on the recorded water levels and single discrete flow measurements. Figure 5-3 and 5-
4demonstrate the rating curves developed for Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5).
y = 2.3705x - 0.1895
RZ = 0.8834
0.600
0.500
M 0.400
3
~ 0.300
LL
0.200
0.100
0.000
0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Depth (m)
0.25 0.3
Figure 5-3: 2011 KD1 Flow (m3/s) versus Depth (m) Relationship
25
10-30
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
y = 12.767x - 3.7911
RZ = 0.9793
4.000
3.500
3.000
M
£ 2.500
3
_° 2.000
LL
1.500
1.000
0.500
0.000
0.00
0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
Depth (m)
Figure 5-4: 2011 Schneider 5 (SC5) Flow (m3/s) versus Depth (m) Relationship
The continuous water level data collected at stations Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5) was translated
from water levels to flow rates by utilizing the relative flow versus depth relationships. Figures 5-5 and
5-6 demonstrate the continuous flows measured at Kolb 1 (KD1) and Schneider 5 (SC5), respectively.
Continuous flow data collected at station Kolb 1 (KD1) demonstrates a more naturalized surface flow
distribution compared to Schneider 5 (SC5). Runoff events conveyed by Kolb 1 (KD1) demonstrate
defined rising and falling limbs which occur over a prolonged time periods. These characteristics are
common with undeveloped catchment areas which reduce runoff volumes by encouraging infiltration.
Station Schneider 5 (SC5) demonstrates an urbanized flow regime described by the "flashiness" of each
major flow events. This flashiness is a result of the upstream urban areas with impervious surfaces
which prevent infiltration and increase runoff (Cech, 2005).
The following figures demonstrate that wet sampling events were primarily obtained during the rising
limbs of the event flow hydrograph and dry event sampling occurred during prolonged periods of
relatively low runoff. Sampling events not included in the following figures were either conducted prior
to the installation of the continuous water level loggers or after Nov. 23, 2011, at which time the loggers
were inoperative due to vandalism (the Kolb 1 (KD1) logger recording barometric pressure and ambient
air temperature fluctuations was lost due to vandalism). On December 23, 2011, the loggers were
revisited and evaluated for maintenance. With no barometric pressure data, water levels could not be
normalized for changes in atmospheric pressure. November 23, 2011 was the last time barometric
26
10-31
City of Kitchener
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program
Technical Memorandum -Final
June 18`h, 2012
pressure data was downloaded. Water level data collected after this date was not included in the
results as it could not be normalized.
z.s
z.o
,~ 1.5
m
3
0
LL 1.0
0.5
0.0
,Z6/O,/2O~.7 OS/O~/~O'I,7 2S/O~j2O~.7 ,74/O9/~O1Z 04/~O/~O'~,7 24/ZO/~OII ,7~,/~~/~O'~,Z O~,/Z~i~OII
Date
I<D1 Continuous Flow (m3/s) i Dry Weather Sampling Events Wet Weather Sampling Events
Figure 5-5: 2011 SWMAudit Kolb 1 (KD1) Continuous Flow Monitoring (m3/s) Results
27
10-32
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
18.0
16.0
14.0
12.0
^. 10.0
m
~ 8.0
3
~ 6.0
LL
4.0
2.0
0.0
,76/O,/~OI.7 OS/O~/~OI7 ~s/O~i20z7 ,74/09/017 04/~O/~OI7 ~4/~O/~OI.7 ,7~,/~~/~OI7 O~,/Z~i20~7
Date
-SCS Continuous Flow (m3/s) ^ Dry Weather Sampling Events Wet Weather Sampling Events
Figure 5-6: 2011 SWMAudit Schneider 5 (SC5) Continuous Flow Monitoring (m3/s) Results
6.0 Biological Sampling Results
The following section summarizes the result for the benthic invertebrate and fish community monitoring
conducting during the 2011 monitoring program. Results for the 2011 biological sampling program are
summarized in Tables 6-1 and 6-2. Refer to Appendix D and E for full results of the fish surveys and
benthic invertebrate sampling including field sheets.
6.3 Benthic Invertebrate Community: 2011
Table 6-1 summarizes the metrics of the organisms collected at the sample sites. Given that it is difficult
to determine specific thresholds for the number or percentage of organisms for each metric that should
be found in an unimpaired stream sample, the samples were compared to each other, by stream, and to
the second five year report card (See Table 6-3).
There are known differences in the way the indices respond to human disturbance/habitat degradation
(Jones, 2007). For Taxa richness, %EPT, #EPT taxa, % Scraper, % Shredder, % Clinger, Shannon Index
and Evenness, a larger value implies a healthy biological community and low values imply reduced
health (Jones, 2007) (Barbour et al, 2009). For % Oligochaeta, % Chironomidae, % Dominants and FBI, a
lower value implies a healthier community (Jones, 2007, Barbour et al, 2009). However, there is no
"target value" for any of these indices since there are no reference sites in this study. Therefore, results
can only determine which sites had higher or lower values compared to other sites and determine site
changes over time.
28
10-33
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
In the case of %Collector-filterer, %Collector-gatherer, % Predator and %Diptera, the normal range is
unknown for the streams in this study (critical values lie at both extremes) (Jones, 2007, Barbour et al,
2009). Therefore, these metrics were not used as an indication of better water quality between sites.
They are useful to note habitat differences and changes in habitat quality over time which suggests a
change in water quality.
Table 6-1: 2011 Benthic Invertebrate Metrics
INDEX KOLB MONTGOMERY STRASBURG SCHNEIDER SANDROCK
KD1 MG1 SB2 SB13 SC2 SC5 SR2
Total Number of Organisms 251.0 323.0 307.0 352.0 321.0 371.0 318.0
Taxa Richness 27.0 28.0 44.0 35.0 30.0 37.0
Oligochaeta 3.2 14.9 2.0 6.5 9.7 4.0
Diptera 7.6 79.0 54.7 2.8 36.8 20.2 45.9
Chironomidae 5.2 76.8 51.5 2.3 33.0 18.9 40.6
EPT 15.1 0.9 35.2 9.4 28.0 45.6 13.5
EPT Taxa 3.0 1.0 8.0 3.0 7.0 4.0 4.0
collector-filterer 14.7 1.6 17.3 6.0 31.5 46.1 5.7
collector-gatherer 68.1 75.9 81.4 87.5 47.4 36.7 77.7
Scraper 15.1 31.6 4.6 26.8 11.9 13.5
Shredder 2.0 13.6 14.3 0.6 17.1 8.4 10.4
Clinger 32.3 18.3 61.6 14.5 74.8 64.7 29.9
Shannon Index 2.0 2.3 3.1 1.2 2.8 2.2 2.9
Hilsenhoff Biotic Index 6.4 6.8 5.6 7.7 5.9 6.2 7.4
Indicates best water quality
Indicates second best water quality
The 2011 invertebrate samples provided a species list similar to previous years and contained 88 taxa.
There were eighteen (18) new taxa added to the list in 2011. Most of these were represented by only 1
or 2 specimens. None were unexpected in Ontario streams. All samples contained more than 300
invertebrates with the exception of Kolb 1 (KD1), which had 251. The following paragraphs provided
brief summaries of the benthic community conditions at the various 2011 monitoring sites. Refer to
Appendix E for the complete summary of the 2011 benthic analysis.
In 2011, Strasburg 2 (SB2) scored best in the most metrics indicating that it has the highest quality
habitat for benthic invertebrates, and therefore good water quality. Samples contained a lower number
of tolerant taxa and a high percentage and number of intolerant taxa compared to the other sites.
Strasburg 2 (SB2) samples also had the highest number and diversity of taxa.
Strasburg 13 (SB13) scored lowest in the most metrics which suggests that out of the seven sites, it has
the lowest water quality. It had low taxa richness, low diversity, low percentages of intolerant taxa, and
a high number of generalized feeders which suggests low quality habitat. Montgomery 1 (MG1) also
scored low in many indices, as a result of having a high composition by tolerant organisms and very few
intolerant taxa.
Schneider 5 (SC5) samples contained the most intolerant taxa, indicating that very high quality habitat
(and high water quality) exists at this site. Schneider 2 (SC2) samples had the highest percentage of
shredders and clingers, which may also suggesting high quality habitat.
29
10-34
City of Kitchener Technical Memorandum -Final
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program June 18`h, 2012
Kolb 1 (KD1) had few tolerant and a moderate number of intolerant organisms, compared to other sites.
Sandrocl< 2 (SR2) had a much higher percentage of tolerant organisms, but was the second most diverse
sample. The presence of intolerant taxa at these two sites suggests that there is at least some good
quality habitat.
6.4 Fish Community: 2011
The 2011 fish sampling provided a species list similar to past monitoring years (Table 6-2), with 11
species captured. One new species was added to the Kitchener SWM Audit record this year: Salvelinus
fontinalis (Brook Trout, a species which is very sensitive to pollution), captured at SB2 within the
constructed riffle-pool area just downstream of the former dam. This species has been captured at this
location in other studies, but has not been detected during previous SWM Audit sampling. Similar to the
benthic analysis, SB2 scored best in the most indices.
KD1 yielded the greatest number of species (7), while at SR2 only two species were captured.
According to OSAP data summaries, SB2 had the greatest density offish. SB13 had the lowest density of
fish. SB2 also has the greatest biomass of fish, and SR2 had the smallest biomass. 97.7% of SR2's fish
were pollution tolerant species.
Species captured at KDI and MG1 were generally coolwater species that have an intermediate tolerance
of disturbance (pollution, turbidity, and other habitat changes). SR2 yielded warmwater, tolerant-
intermediate species
Most species captured at SB13 were coolwater species with an intermediate tolerance. SB2 had mostly
coolwater species with the exception of S. fontinalis and C. bairdii which are Coldwater. S. fontinalis was
the only intolerant species of fish captured in 2011. This supports the benthic analysis, suggesting water
quality at Strasburg Creel< increases moving downstream. The presence of Coldwater species at SB2 also
shows that water temperature likely increases moving downstream.
Fish species captured at SC2 and SC5 were mostly coolwater, with intermediate tolerance.
6.5 Biological Monitoring Summary
Overall, the number and type of fish species were similar to previous year, with the exception of S.
fontinalis captured at SB2. The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (a benthic invertebrate index) may suggest
improvement in water quality (specifically, a decrease in organic pollution) at KD1, SB2 and SC2.
However, these results could be misleading for reasons described below.
In past years, minimal indices were used to compare results between monitoring years. For benthics,
the Hilsenhoff Biotic Index and #EPT were concentrated upon. For the fish community, the number of
fish species was used as well as discussion of presence/absence of species. See relative comparisons
between the 2011 monitoring results and the second five year report card in Table 6-3.
Characterizing biological communities using limited approaches typically results in weak correlations
being made between annual data sets because different stressors impact benthic and fish communities
30
10-35
City of Kitchener
2011 SWMAudit Monitoring Program
Technical Memorandum -Final
June 18`h, 2012
in different ways. Each index summarizes a specific aspect of biological condition and may not respond
to all stressors (TRCA, 2009). For example, using only taxa richness may suggest an impact, but won't
indicate the type of disturbance. A biotic index (e.g, Hilsenhoff) can suggest an impact from a specific
disturbance, but gives no indication of whether other stressors are also having an effect on the
biological community (OSAP, 2007)
When several indices are calculated and compared, as they were in 2011, the pattern of "hits and
misses" is a fingerprint that can imply particular stressors. Continuing to analyze fish and benthic data in
this way during future monitoring years will provide much more meaningful results.
31
10-36
U
H M M ~ N
Vf ~ ~ ~ ~ N
a--I
c~c
G
r,
~
~
M
in
.--I
O
M
W
m
c
G
Z m ~ N ~
O H
_
H
a
N
m
H
.--I
lD
~
lD
I~
N
N
~
H
~
c-I
a--I
~
Y
.--I
~
01
lD
01
.--I ~
.--I
~ W
Z ~
O
~
tD
O
O
~
~
~
00
~
~
00
® ~--I N N N N N N M M M
v v v v v v v
~
U
C +'
~
c6 +~
O c0
~ +~
O c0
~ c0
~ c0
~ c0
~ c0
~ +~
O c0
~
i
0J ~
~ ~
~ Cv
C ~
~ Cv
C Cv
C Cv
C Cv
C Cv
C ~
~ Cv
C
~ ~ ~ 4J ~ 4J 4J 4J 4J 4J ~ 4J
C C C C C C C
L
L L
~ L
~
L
L
L
L L
~
L
L
~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0J
s v
~ °C ~
v
o
v ~
~ ~
~
0
v
0
v
0
v
0
v
~
o
v ~
v
~ ~ ~
v
- U ~
~
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
~
~~ p E E E E E E E E E E E
Vr ~
~ O
v O
v O
v O
v O
v O
v O
v O
v O
v O
v O
v
a
++
L
~
U
3
3 U
~
~ U
~
~
~
Y ~
~
i L
v C
Q
~
Z
C ~
~ 7
VI ~
O
O O ~
O
4J O i
4J
~ ~ 4J
N L
U 1~ ~
O~
O v
i
C c6
~ VI
~ Y
O
~ 4J
±+
~ C C
O
G y C
n3 c
L
L G ~ O
n3 C
W O
O Y
~
~ ~ Y
m U Q
C
C C 4J
~
~
> m . U ~ ++ ~ +
+
0J
fl. U m J
H
~
LL
U
w ~
H H
~ a H ~
~ ~
~ ~ y
~J
a ~ y
~J H
a ~ y
~, y
~ . y Q1
>. ~
~ U ~
H ~
~ ~ ,-'
U
Y a
= y
y ~
O ~ ~
a
C~ N •~ ~O N Q a Q~ U +~-~ U a O U O v ~ O H i -O
Z ~ O ~ ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ m U v ~ N '~ ~
a
O
~ 0
~ 0
M o
O r'
~ °•
000 '.'''
~
O
O
~
~
~
n
O n
~
c-I ~
N
~ O o0
ip
rn O
~ O
ri O
®
m
M
~
O
M
I~
I~
O
O ~
~ N
~
N O
~
M
~ O
iD ~
o0 ~
ri
N
~
~
O
~
m
~
m
M
~ ~
N n
n
01 ~
~ ~
01
.-I N
O
M lD
M
.-I
00
~ O
^ ~
~ O
~ ~
N ~
~ ~
Lfl
rv~
O
O
~ ~ ~
4J 4J ~
7
Q
U
~
N
LL
N
4J
U
Q
(n
N
4J
U
Q
(n
~
U
Q
N
}.+ 7
Q
U
~
N
LL ~
Q
~
U
~
N
O
L
4J O
L
4J C
~
~
~
L
4J O
a-'
NC
~ O
7
z 7
z ~
o o 7
z ~
~ w
10-37
T
7
++
N
f6
OJ
LA
C
O
u
N
N
N
t
++
OJ
L
a
O
u
L
O
u
C
f6
u
.~
O
O
m
0
N
M
tO
OJ
f6
H
~ ~
r,
O
N ~ o
•~ ~
N ~
N
~ ~
Vf 'a i T ~ T i
C f0 ~ O i O
O ~ 3
y of a-+
N ~ ~
~
H
a--I
~"~ p
O ~
'
N
~ co
~
Lfl
H ~ ~ ~
'a i T v v
C f0 ~
~ ~ H a-+
O Q
Z a-+
O Q
Z
~ ~
v
y
~
~
~ ~
~
O ~ •~
~
N
N
H ~
'a i T 01 T i
C f0 ~ O i O
O ~ 3
y of a-+
iD ~ ~
`~
H
.1
p
M O
O
N d
M
a--I
m ~
H 'a i T iD T i
c co ~ O o
~
o~ 3
y of +~
N _
~~o
~
H
a-i L
a-i
o ~ '~
~
N
N
00
H ~
'a i T 01 T i
c co ~ O o
~
o~ 3
~ H +~
,n _
~~o
H
~ ~
.1
O ~ o
•~ ~
N ~
a--I
C7
-a i T iD T i
C f0 ~ O i O
O ~ 3
y of a-+
M ~ ~
~
H
l" ~ L
l"I ~ '~
L
L
N .
a--I
C f0 -a
~ ~ 3
H
~
~ i O
•~ O
~ ~
H lf1
Z _
f6 i ~
O ~
~ ^ v
=
H o
a
~
o
m e z = cn
v
(B
7
L
a~
10-38
7.0 Summary
Table 7-1 summarizes the 2011 SWM Audit monitoring results including those collected for HS1
completed as part of the Victoria Lake Rehabilitation Pre-construction Monitoring Program. All annual
averages are provided in the water quality summary tables located in Appendix B.
Table 7-1: Summary of 2011 SWM Audit Monitoring Results.
Site Summary and Conclusions
ALL Annual averages for Total Phosphorus, Zinc, and E.coli were above their respective guidelines for all
sites. Average pH and Dissolved Oxygen levels met PWQO
Kolb 1 (KD1): Annual averages for Chloride and Nitrate were above guidelines. Site yielded the greatest number of
species suggesting higher habitat quality; however, was rated poor for water quality based on benthic
communities. Observed improvements in HBI rating for benthic. Indicators suggest that I<D1 had
moderate water quality.
Montgomery Annual averages for all water quality constituents sampled were above respective guidelines except for
1 (MG1) Lead. Benthic community represents poor water quality. Previous HBI ratings for benthic communities
demonstrate no improvements. Indicators suggest that MG1 had poor water quality.
Strasburg 2 No guideline exceedances for any sampled parameter except for Total Phosphorus, Zinc, and E.coli.
(SB2) Best benthic results indicating the highest quality habitat for benthic invertebrates. SB2 had the
greatest density of fish and greatest biomass of fish (Captured Salvelinus fontinalis (Brook Trout, a
species which is very sensitive to pollution)) Indicators suggest that SB2 had the best water quality.
Strasburg 13 Annual averages for Total Suspended Solids, Chloride, and Dissolved Phosphorus were above their
(SB13) respective guidelines. Benthic communities were the poorest indicating poor water quality and had the
lowest density offish and smallest biomass. Lower HBI rating compared to previous years. Indicators
suggest that SB13 had the poorest water quality.
Schneider 2 Annual averages for Total Suspended Solids, Chloride, and Copper were above their respective
(SC2) guidelines. Only site to exceed PWQO for lead during melt event. Benthic communities indicating high
quality habitat. Fish communities had low densities offish and small biomass. Observed improvements
in HBI rating for benthic. Indicators suggest that SC2 had fairly poor water quality.
Schneider 5 Annual averages for Total Suspended Solids, Chloride, Dissolved Phosphorus, and Copper were above
(SC5) their respective guidelines. Benthic communities indicating very high quality habitat. Fish communities
had low densities offish and small biomass. Indicators suggest that SC5 had fairly poor water quality.
Sandrock 2 Annual averages for Total Suspended Solids, Chloride, Dissolved Phosphorus, and Copper were above
(SR2) their respective guidelines. Benthic communities indicating good quality habitat. Fish pollution was
97% tolerant species suggesting poor water quality. Indicators suggest that SR2 had poor water quality.
Schneider 1 Annual averages for Total Suspended Solids and Copper were above their respective guidelines.
(SC1) Indicators suggest that SC1 had moderate water quality.
Henry Sturm 2011 H51 monitoring was completed as part of the Victoria Lal<e Rehabilitation Pre-construction
1 (HS1) Monitoring. Annual average for Total Phosphorus was above its respective guideline. Only a variety of
SWM Audit constituents sampled and fish and benthic monitoring were not completed.
10-39
8.0 Recommendations
Building on the recommendations for 2011-2015 contained within the City Wide Stormwater
Management Plan Annual Audit Report (2010) and the results of the 2011 SWM Audit Program the
following seven (7) recommendations have been developed. These recommendations further the
comprehensiveness of the City of Kitchener SWM Audit monitoring program and guide future
stormwater management and development policies:
1. To build on the results of the 2011 sampling program, the sampling sites for 2012 should be
reduced from seven (7) sites to six (6) sampling sites in order to add a sampling event to
accommodate the inclusion of winter sampling of a melt event.
2. The 2012 SWM Audit monitoring program shall consist of five wet weather sampling events,
five dry weather sampling events, and one melt/wet weather sampling event for six (6) sites.
Wet samples shall aim to be collected during the rising limb of a significant storm event
(typically greater than 10mm) and dry sampling shall be limited to days without rain events
and shall not be conducted within 48 hours of a significant storm event.
3. Sampling parameters should remain unchanged from the 2011 program, as listed in the Table
8-1 below. To ensure consistency with the 2011 program, all water quality grab samples to
be collected in 2012 should be submitted to the Region of Waterloo Laboratory for analysis.
Additional water quality field parameters (pH, temperature, DO and conductivity) shall also be
collected as part of the 2012 program.
Table 8-1: 2012 Water Quality Parameters Sampling & Sampling Procedure
Parameters Sampling Procedure/Type
Chloride Grab
E.coli Grab
Nitrate Grab
Copper Grab
Lead Grab
Zinc Grab
Total and Dissolved Phosphorous Grab
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Grab
Hardness (as CaCO3) Grab
Additional Water Quality Parameters Sampled
pH Field Measurement
Temperature Field Measurement
Dissolved Oxygen Field Measurement
Conductivity Field Measurement
10-40
4. Recommended sampling locations for 2012 were selected based on the following criteria:
• The previous recommendations of the 2010 SWM Audit (see Table 3-1) which identified
sites to be sampled from 2011-2015;
• The identification of 'poor performers' in the 2011 program which were classified as
sites consistently producing analytical water quality results below PWQO and other
regulatory standards. Continual monitoring of such sites was encouraged in order to
build historical trends and provide a set of baseline conditions which could be
compared with in order to quantify any improvements as a result of natural occurrence
or stormwater management and stream restoration measures introduced to the
upstream drainage network; and
• The co-ordination of monitoring sites linked to future stormwater pond retrofits
prioritized through the City of Kitchener stormwater Management Facility Retrofit,
Class EA and Preliminary Design Brief (Aquafor Beech, 2010).
• Maintaining core stations to build upon existing data sets and historical trending
All recommended sampling locations (Table 8-2) were vetted through discussions with the SWM
Audit Monitoring Committee.
Table 8-2: Recommended 2012 SWM Audit Monitoring Locations and Rationale for Site Selection
Recommended Sampling
Locations for 2012 Rationale for Selection
1. Kolb Creel< 1 (KD1) 2010 SWM Audit -Core station recommended for inclusion in 2012 to
continue to build on historical data sets and trends.
Ongoing Class EA and preliminary design is currently underway upstream of
this location (Forfar Ave to Lackner Blvd).
2. Strasburg 2 (SB2) 2010 SWM Audit -Core station recommended for inclusion in 2012 to
continue to build on historical data sets and trends.
Previous construction works were recently completed upstream of SB2 as
part of the Wards and Brigadoon Rehabilitation Project. Ongoing monitoring
is recommended in order to assess effectiveness of the project and to
coincide with the ongoing post-construction monitoring program.
3. Strasburg 13 (SB13) 2010 SWM Audit- non-Core station recommended for inclusion in 2012.
A Class Environmental Assessment and detailed designs for three (3) on-line
ponds were recently complete in 2011 for the North Branch of Strasburg
Creek and future construction activities are anticipated. Monitoring of
existing drainage network may verify future hydrologic modelling,
characterize baseline conditions, and help guide the detailed design of the
interconnecting channels which have yet to be completed.
Identified as a 'poor performer' in the 2011 program, indicators suggest that
SB13 had poor water quality in 2011. Ongoing study is recommended.
10-41
4. Montgomery 1 2010 SWM Audit -Core station recommended for inclusion in 2012 to
(MG1) continue to build on historical data sets and trends.
5. Sandrock 2 (SR2) Identified as a 'poor performer' in the 2011 program, indicators suggest that
SR2 had poor water quality in 2011. Ongoing study is recommended.
6. Henry Sturm 3 (HS3) Located on the Henry Sturm Greenway at Fisher-Hallman Road and Fenwick
Court, HS3 is downstream of both a recently completed pond retrofit in
2010 (Pond 22 - Westmount Road) and the no. 1 prioritized pond retrofit
(Pond 30-Resurrection Dr.) as identified in the City of Kitchener
Stormwater Management Facility Retrofit, Class EA and Preliminary Design
Brief (Aquafor Beech, 2010). Future construction of Pond 30 is anticipated
as all necessary approvals (MOE and GRCA) were obtained as part of the
Pond 22 retrofit. The 2012 monitoring will serve as:
• An evaluation as to the effectiveness and impact of the Pond 22
retrofit compared to previously collected results in 2003 & 2007.
• Baseline, preconstruction monitoring of Pond 30 into assess the
effectiveness and impact of the future retrofit.
2011 Sampling Locations
Not Recommended for Rationale
2012
1. Schneider Creek 2 Sampling location SC2 is located directly upstream of station SC1. With no
(SC2) major inflowing tributaries between the two stations and vastly similar
drainage areas, water quality results collected at the two stations were
deemed directly comparable. Water quality results collected at SC1 will
provide a strong representation of the water quality at SC2.
Water quality at SC1 will be collect by GRCA during 2012, which will
characterize this section of Schneider Creek including station SC2.
2. Schneider Creek 5 Channel restoration works located upstream of site location scheduled for
(SC5) construction in 2012. Disturbance as a result of construction is anticipated
to impact water quality and continuous flow monitoring at SC5.
5. Continuous flow and temperature monitoring should continue at Kolb 1 (KD1). Continuous
flow, temperature monitoring and water quality sampling should be discontinued at
Schneider Creek 5 (SC5) for 2012 as creek remediation works are anticipated in that period
and are expected to result in un-representative in-stream results. As part of the remediation
works, a monitoring program specific to the project will be implemented.
Continuous flow and temperature monitoring equipment relocation is recommended for
Strasburg 13 (SB13). A 2010 SWM Audit non-core station, Strasburg 13 (SB13) on the North
Branch of Strasburg creek, was identified as a 'poor water quality performer' in the 2011
SWM Audit and was identified as a 'major' opportunity for riparian and channel rehabilitation
with only minor constraints inhibiting that rehabilitation. The 2001 policy concluded that the
3.4km of channel represented a "high" priority for rehabilitation, ranking 8th within the City
wide evaluation. A Class Environmental Assessment and detailed designs for three (3) on-line
10-42
ponds were recently completed for the North Branch in 2011 entitled Municipal Class EA,
Schedule B: Strasburg Creel< (North Branch) Ponds 65, 66 and 61 (Aquafor Beech, 2011) and
future construction activities are anticipated. The addition of continuous flow and
temperature monitoring at this location can be considered an element of apre-construction
monitoring program and will aid in the completion of detailed design and modeling for the
interconnecting stream channel segments which have yet to be completed.
6. The 2012 results from the system-wide monitoring efforts undertaken by the GRCA on behalf
of the City of Kitchener shall be included and analyzed in the 2012 SWM Audit report.
7. To enhance the coverage and available data sets of the overall City SWM Audit program and
database, water quality monitoring is recommended for inclusion as part of all future relevant
detailed design, construction, development and restoration projects (including Capital Works
projects) within the City of Kitchener that have the potential to impact the City's stormwater
infrastructure and surface water systems. In this regard, general recommendations include:
a. Sampled parameters and frequencies should be in conformance with the most current
SWM Audit sampling program and should include as a minimum the eight (8) grab
sample parameters and four (4) additional field parameter as listed in Table 8.1.
Sampling should included at least 6 or more wet weather sampling events, and an equal
amount of dry weather sampling events.
b. Monitoring shall be conducted both pre-construction and post-construction.
c. Monitoring shall be undertaken in such a manner to ensure a co-ordinated City wide
approach, consistent with completed studies (watershed/sub-watershed studies and
Master Drainage plans), the SWM Audit and other City policies and documents including
the City of Kitchener stormwater Management Policy Development and the City of
Kitchener Development Manual.
d. Results shall be incorporated into the annual City of Kitchener Audit Report and water
quality database to provide a current and up-to-date data set which can be utilized to
evaluate the performance of implemented stormwater management measures and
water quality improvements within City of Kitchener watercourses.
10-43