News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 6.7K     0 
I'm hoping for alternative 4 but I think alternative 1 or 2 will win. Number 2 is the one most often described in the plans so if the choice is made not to do anything that is the option I expect to be chosen.
 
I'd love to see two outlets, one naturalized and one a more urban river lined by buildings. I wonder if that works from an environmental standpoint... Presumably it's better than what's there now.
 
The river and hence the harbour/lake water will be cleaner if all the water goes through the naturalized areas first. Is there enough of this happening before the river splits into a naturalized and urban one is the question.
 
Hurricane hazel all but nixed the chance of an urban river lined with buildings in Toronto (although structures emulating Prii's Nightmares on Elm Street could have a chance)
 
I think you're right, but that puzzles me. Countless cities all along the U.S. Eastern Seaboard have urban rivers, yet they face far more (and more severe) hurricanes than Hazel.
 
But aren't those rivers a lot wider? A 1ft rise in the lower Hudson is a lot more water than a 1ft rise in the Don. Also the watershed for most of the Don is urban whereas the watershed for the Delaware, Hudson, and others is much larger.
 
massive rivers like the hudson can cary lots of volume. look at all the huge ships that travel there. the river in manhattan is pretty much level with the sea (i assume) almost like a lake whereas the don and the humber slope down into the lake and their levels change.

one concern i have about making the mouth natural is will it trap water like a wetland? this may cause smell to linger i think. it's too bad that storm sewers drain into our rivers. all that gas and oil ends up there.
 
Naturalization works well. The base of the Rouge has a naturalized area before running under the CN tracks and something similar with a marsh is probably what should be expected for the Don Mouth. The smell isn't too bad at the Rouge usually because there is still decent waterflow. Only if the water completely stagnates will you see the algae bloom at full strength which causes the bad smell.
 
one concern i have about making the mouth natural is will it trap water like a wetland? this may cause smell to linger i think. it's too bad that storm sewers drain into our rivers. all that gas and oil ends up there

Here is one possible solution...

from www.globeandmail.com

Wetland project springs to life
Custom-made swamp will help clean water as it flows into Lake Ontario, mayor says
JEFF GRAY

Mayor David Miller hopped on a bulldozer yesterday to highlight Toronto's latest waterfront development project, but it isn't exactly a show-stopping tourist attraction: It's a swamp.

The city is creating a natural wetland just south of High Park, meant to use nature's own tricks to strip pollutants from water in the city's storm sewers before it seeps into Lake Ontario.

And Mr. Miller, eager to demonstrate that things are finally starting to happen on the city's long-neglected waterfront, told reporters the environmental project is evidence that progress is being made.

"This year marks the beginning of real action on the waterfront," the mayor said at the wetland site, which is due to be completed in 2007 but was still a field of frozen mud yesterday. ". . . Waterfront revitalization is happening and today is more evidence that change is under way."

He then listed other changes on the waterfront expected to take shape this year: the West Don Lands development, the Western Beaches Watercourse and the HT0 "urban beach park" near Harbourfront.

The 140-metre-long future wetland, located in Mr. Miller's old ward at Lake Shore Boulevard West and Colborne Lodge Drive, is one of four planned for the west end, and will make the water running out of the storm sewers and into the lake much cleaner, the mayor said.

Storm water runoff after a rainfall or snowfall heads from streets and sidewalks into sewers, picking up oil, grease, road salt and pet feces along the way. The water then flows directly into the lake, taking these pollutants with it. The result is that numerous beaches are deemed too polluted for swimming.

But Mr. Miller and city water officials say the $5.9-million project to create four wetlands will make a significant, measurable difference to water quality in the area, which is near Sunnyside Beach.

In the new system, storm water runoff would be channelled through an oil-and-grit separator before it flows into the new wetlands, where finer particles will be allowed to settle and other pollutants will be absorbed by plants. Even the sun's ultraviolet rays will help clean the water, which moves slowly along using only gravity.

The city is already using a similar process at facilities in Etobicoke and Scarborough, and other municipalities, especially in new developments, are putting in similar custom-made wetlands to deal with the water runoff problem.

The wetland project touted yesterday is part of a 25-year, $1-billion plan to help with water quality that spans Toronto's waterfront.

Kim Fry of the Toronto Environmental Alliance said the wetlands are a "good step in the right direction." But she said the city needs to do more to prevent pollutants from getting into the storm sewers in the first place.

"In some ways, it is a bit of a stopgap -- a necessary stopgap," Ms. Fry said.

One problem is the amount of pavement in the city, which is the real root of the storm water problem. Soil and natural vegetation simply absorb the water and eliminate runoff, but pavement is impermeable, and sends water burbling into the sewers.

Ms. Fry said the city needs to forbid people from paving parts of their front lawns to create parking spaces. She said this practice remains a major source of new pavement. "What we're doing is we're increasingly getting rid of the green spaces in the city that normally act as natural filters."

Ms. Fry also said the city should force homeowners to disconnect their eavestrough downspouts from the storm-sewer system. (The city runs a voluntary downspout disconnection program.)

Outlying municipalities north of Toronto should be coaxed into taking measures as well, she said, as their contaminated runoff also ends up in the Don and Humber Rivers that flow into the lake.
 
Ms. Fry also said the city should force homeowners to disconnect their eavestrough downspouts from the storm-sewer system. (The city runs a voluntary downspout disconnection program.)

do downspouts go to storm drains? i thought they were connected to sanitary? houses have both drain types? that seems costly for the builder since he has to run 2 services and one of them only gets used by the gutters.


if downspouts go to storm drains, i think it might actually be better for the environment since downspout water is relatively clean and would act to dilute the dirty street water that could contain alot of salt and other toxins before it reaches the river.

if the downspouts do drain into the sanitary, it's worse since some sewers are combined in older areas and when it rains hard, sanitary waste water will overflow into the storm water lines.
 
In the older parts of the city where sewers haven't been replaced for a while there is only a sanitary sewer which leads to issues in heavy rainfall because the treatment plants can't keep up. They have been taking measures to help address the issue with underground retention tanks. Water rates are rising significantly now every year to help rebuid old water pipes and sewers and that should lead to more storm sewer and sanitary sewer separation.
 
There's also the idea that the water should go into your lawns or natural lawns to avoid needing to waste water in watering it. Some projects collect water in buckets and use it for toilets, lawn watering, car washing and not drinking needs. Of course having a car on your lawn also promotes auto use, since more convenient space for cars means more car use overall, leading to more toxins, less vegetated areas to soak up toxins.

A person that has to walk 1 block to a car and is not sure if they will get their parking space back is more likely to walk 2 blocks to local store because it becomes competitive in terms of convenience. A person who has a guaranteed parking spot in front of their house is more likely to look for a place which offers convenient free parking and is less likely to use neighbourhood street retail. The parking spot in front of the house needs a driveway to access it, while an on street parking space does not.

An on-street parking space is full a used a greater percentage of the time than a dedicated home space. On -treet parking is shared, thus if you have 5 people over for your party they can find parking on the street, whereas if we need to maintain spaces for peak on-site parking for each dwelling we will be wasting a lot of land when it is not used.

The demand for on-street parking can be regulated by pricing. Currently it is drastically subsidized and so is overused. By not pricing parking accordingly we create the need for more parking spaces, more concrete & paving stones and less trees and vegetation = poor water quality, urban aesthetics, but happy car manufacturers.
 
Notice of Submission - Terms of Reference,
Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project

As part of the Don Mouth Naturalization and Port Lands Flood Protection Project planning process, a Terms of Reference (ToR) was recently submitted by Toronto and Region Conservation (TRCA) in coordination with the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC) to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) for formal review as required under the provincial Environmental Assessment Act. If approved, the ToR will serve as a benchmark for the preparation and review of the Environmental Assessment (EA) document for this undertaking.

The Don Mouth Naturalization and Flood Protection Project is intended to address the ecological dysfunction of the Don River Mouth as well as the high level of flood risk currently experienced in the Port Lands and South Riverdale areas.


As of May 6, 2006, you may inspect the ToR during normal business hours at the following locations:

Ministry of the Environment
Environmental Assessmen t & Approvals Branch
2 St. Clair Avenue West
Toronto, ON M4V 1L5
416-314-8001

Ministry of the Environment
Central Region Office
8th Flr
5775 Yonge St
North York ON M2M 4J1
416-326-6700

Toronto and Region Conservation
5 Shoreham Drive (Lobby)
Toronto, ON M3N 1S4
416-661-6600

Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation
207 Queens Quay West, Suite 822 (Lobby)
Toronto, ON M5J 1A7
416-214-1344

Toronto Reference Library
789 Yonge Street (2nd Floor Reference Desk)
Toronto, ON M4W 2G8
416-395-5577

Urban Affairs Library
55 John Street, Metro Hall
Toronto, ON M5V 3C6
416-397-7241

City of Toronto Clerk’s Office
(Works Committee Office)
10th Floor, West Tower, City Hall
100 Queen Street West
Toronto, ON M5H 2N2
416-392-8018


The ToR is available here

Your written comments regarding the ToR must be received prior to June 5, 2006. All comments should be submitted to:

Solange Desautels
Senior Project Coordinator
Environmental Assessment & Approvals Branch
Ministry of the Environment
2 St. Clair Avenue West
Toronto, ON M4V 1L5
(416) 314-8360

A copy of all comments will be forwarded to the proponent.
 

Back
Top