Share Cedar Creek Floodplain Study on FacebookShare Cedar Creek Floodplain Study on TwitterShare Cedar Creek Floodplain Study on LinkedinEmail Cedar Creek Floodplain Study link
A study to update the floodplain mapping and determine the appropriateness of a Two-Zone Policy Area for the portion of Cedar Creek between Cedarbrae Avenue and Albert Street.
The purpose of this study is to update the existing floodplain mapping for the portion of Cedar Creek between Cedarbrae Avenue and Albert Street, and determine the appropriateness of creating a Two-Zone Policy Area.
Currently, Cedar Creek is treated as a One-Zone Policy Area, which means development in the floodplain is very restricted. In a Two-Zone Policy Area, the floodplain is divided into two parts: the inner floodway (where the deepest andContinue reading
A study to update the floodplain mapping and determine the appropriateness of a Two-Zone Policy Area for the portion of Cedar Creek between Cedarbrae Avenue and Albert Street.
The purpose of this study is to update the existing floodplain mapping for the portion of Cedar Creek between Cedarbrae Avenue and Albert Street, and determine the appropriateness of creating a Two-Zone Policy Area.
Currently, Cedar Creek is treated as a One-Zone Policy Area, which means development in the floodplain is very restricted. In a Two-Zone Policy Area, the floodplain is divided into two parts: the inner floodway (where the deepest and fastest flows occur, and the most significant threat to life and property exists), and the outer flood fringe (where depths and velocities are less severe).
This Two-Zone approach identifies lands that can be safely developed. New development is generally prohibited in the floodway, but may be permitted in the flood fringe subject to certain requirements, including flood proofing and ensuring safe access during a flooding event.
This study will update the floodplain mapping and do a detailed analysis to determine the potential limits of a floodway and flood fringe, and where development could occur without increasing floodplain elevations or presenting a risk to life and property. This study will also consider flood reduction options. As is the case throughout the City of Waterloo and most municipalities in southern Ontario, the flooding standard used for this study is Hurricane Hazel. Hurricane Hazel was a storm that hit the Toronto area in October 1954 where over 28 cm (11 inches) of rain fell within 48 hours. *It is important to note this study is technical in nature – the study itself does not mean a development proposal or a change in land use.
This portion of Cedar Creek was chosen to study for two reasons. The first reason is that it was identified many years ago as having potential to be a Two-Zone Policy Area but needed the technical study to be completed to determine if it was appropriate. The second reason is that there are hydraulic constraints (i.e. culverts) at the upstream and downstream ends of the reach. These hydraulic constraints act as reasonable starting and stopping spots. The study area was then established around the creek to capture properties that have the potential to be directly or indirectly affected by the floodplain. For a more interactive map of the existing floodplain, you can use Grand River Conservation Authority’s Map Your Property tool.
When ready, the draft results of the study will be posted to this page. A Public Information Centre will also be held to present the draft results of the study. Subscribe to receive updates as they become available.
Advisory Notes:
This study is being undertaken at the request of a landowner within the study area, in accordance with the existing policy framework, and is being funded by that landowner. The City and Grand River Conservation Authority are the review and approval authorities of the study.
The results of this study may lead to amendments to the City of Waterloo’s Official Plan and Zoning By-law, as well as the Grand River Conservation Authority’s regulated area mapping for Ontario Regulation 41/24, Conservation Authorities Act.
You need to be signed in to comment in this Guest Book. Click here to Sign In or Register to get involved
Hello. I opposed any change to the floodplain. I am a resident of Cedarvale Cres. My property is across the street from Heasley Park. My property is the last house included in this secondary white area. I have lived here since 1970. I feel that this will unjustly raise my taxes in the proposed larger floodzone. Is there planned development to the top part of the park on Cedarvale? Is this about the property that was levelled at the corner of Old Albert St and Quiet St? The creek barely has water in it now. Your feet would barely get wet as it trickles by. Even in a storm it only gets a foot deep. You should be more worried about why the water levels have dried up in the creek in the last decade.The creek was already moved almost a kilometer in some places when the original neighborhoods were developed in the 1960's. What ares are flooding that this study is necessary, or is this an exercise in pleasing developers? When Albert McCormick arena was first built it was a swamp around it, but slowly over the years the parking lot got bigger and the swamp dried up. Where is the creek flooding? I agree with Jeff about the wildlife in the area as well. More development is not needed here.
WaryDan
2 months ago
Thank you Jeff for your question. This led to Robyn answering in the vague broad strokes I've come to expect from city staff. The 30 metre buffer only exists on paper. Residents who abut the creek continue to use city property as an extension of their own. Allowing more development will likely not change anything. The approved high density development on Quiet Place is a prime example of developers getting their zoning change and doing nothing. Any changes to the flood plain policy will just result in more empty lots zoned for housing that never materializes in the city of Waterloo. Opening more land for development in Waterloo won't make developers build anything. My question is does the landowner who is paying for this study own empty land or will this lead to a request for zoning change to existing housing. Perhaps some people will be evicted from affordable housing.
62enviro
2 months ago
Thanks very much for your question, Jeff. The purpose of the study is to update the floodplain mapping in the area and evaluate the potential for applying a Two-Zone approach. Two-Zone Policy Areas are areas where urban uses currently exist and where there is potential for further intensification with no adverse effects on flood flows. In other words, the intent of a Two-Zone approach is to identify lands that could be safely developed. In terms of what “development” means, it is defined as the creation of a new lot, a change in land use, or the construction of buildings and structures, requiring approval under the Planning Act. It is important to note, however, that this study is technical in nature – the study itself does not constitute a development proposal or a change in land use. If a landowner wants to pursue development on their property, they would need to follow the applicable planning process. For example, if a landowner wanted to change the land use designation that applies to their property, they would need to apply for an Official Plan Amendment. In terms of whether this study would result in changes to Cedar Creek, the study itself will not modify the creek. The creek is a designated feature in the City’s Official Plan and the existing policies that seek a 30 metre protective buffer around it will continue to apply. As part of the study, flood reduction options will be considered and that could include culvert upgrades or channel improvements. If there are options that could significantly reduce flood flows and extents, those may be recommended for further exploration.
Robyn McMullen
2 months ago
Hello, I am a resident in the floodplain of Cedar Creek that is under study. I would like to know more about the purpose of this possible flip to a Two-Zone Policy. Is it so that we can have more highrises or other densification-type developments in this area? I'm not sure what "development" here refers to. I wouldn't want to see condos here. They've already altered much of the Waterloo core in sometimes negative ways, while not solving the housing crisis (since they're mostly made by out of town developers and bought by out of town investors--it's like a cycle of distant rich people all churning up our cities, with all the profit going only to them while we suffer all the consequences). Plus, even though the Ion runs through here and we have to deal with it, there is no actual Ion station nearby to appeal to anyone who moves into a local condo.
Also, is this likely to result in further modifications to Cedar Creek? Already in my area it is rather sad, diverted into an artificial channel that runs along Albert that is not conducive to its natural biodiversity. And the Ion tracks near McCormick Community Centre destroyed significant toad spawning habitat along the Creek, among other impacts.
The floodplain is the area near a river or creek that may experience flooding from significant rain or snowmelt. Computer models and information from real life events are used by engineers to map the limits of the floodplain based on provincial guidelines. In addition to the guidelines that set out how floodplains are mapped, there are policies that set out if, where, and how development can happen within the floodplain. The purpose of these policies is to protect life and property from flooding. These policies are implemented through the City’s Official Plan and Zoning By-law as well as through the Grand River Conservation Authority’s policies and permitting processes.
In a Two-Zone Policy area, the floodplain looks like this:
City-owned lands and study area
There are a number of City-owned properties in the study area that are part of the trail and parkland network as shown below. This study will not change how those lands are used.
Hello.
I opposed any change to the floodplain. I am a resident of Cedarvale Cres. My property is across the street from Heasley Park. My property is the last house included in this secondary white area. I have lived here since 1970. I feel that this will unjustly raise my taxes in the proposed larger floodzone. Is there planned development to the top part of the park on Cedarvale? Is this about the property that was levelled at the corner of Old Albert St and Quiet St? The creek barely has water in it now. Your feet would barely get wet as it trickles by. Even in a storm it only gets a foot deep. You should be more worried about why the water levels have dried up in the creek in the last decade.The creek was already moved almost a kilometer in some places when the original neighborhoods were developed in the 1960's. What ares are flooding that this study is necessary, or is this an exercise in pleasing developers? When Albert McCormick arena was first built it was a swamp around it, but slowly over the years the parking lot got bigger and the swamp dried up. Where is the creek flooding? I agree with Jeff about the wildlife in the area as well. More development is not needed here.
Thank you Jeff for your question. This led to Robyn answering in the vague broad strokes I've come to expect from city staff. The 30 metre buffer only exists on paper. Residents who abut the creek continue to use city property as an extension of their own. Allowing more development will likely not change anything. The approved high density development on Quiet Place is a prime example of developers getting their zoning change and doing nothing. Any changes to the flood plain policy will just result in more empty lots zoned for housing that never materializes in the city of Waterloo. Opening more land for development in Waterloo won't make developers build anything.
My question is does the landowner who is paying for this study own empty land or will this lead to a request for zoning change to existing housing. Perhaps some people will be evicted from affordable housing.
Thanks very much for your question, Jeff. The purpose of the study is to update the floodplain mapping in the area and evaluate the potential for applying a Two-Zone approach. Two-Zone Policy Areas are areas where urban uses currently exist and where there is potential for further intensification with no adverse effects on flood flows. In other words, the intent of a Two-Zone approach is to identify lands that could be safely developed. In terms of what “development” means, it is defined as the creation of a new lot, a change in land use, or the construction of buildings and structures, requiring approval under the Planning Act. It is important to note, however, that this study is technical in nature – the study itself does not constitute a development proposal or a change in land use. If a landowner wants to pursue development on their property, they would need to follow the applicable planning process. For example, if a landowner wanted to change the land use designation that applies to their property, they would need to apply for an Official Plan Amendment. In terms of whether this study would result in changes to Cedar Creek, the study itself will not modify the creek. The creek is a designated feature in the City’s Official Plan and the existing policies that seek a 30 metre protective buffer around it will continue to apply. As part of the study, flood reduction options will be considered and that could include culvert upgrades or channel improvements. If there are options that could significantly reduce flood flows and extents, those may be recommended for further exploration.
Hello, I am a resident in the floodplain of Cedar Creek that is under study. I would like to know more about the purpose of this possible flip to a Two-Zone Policy. Is it so that we can have more highrises or other densification-type developments in this area? I'm not sure what "development" here refers to. I wouldn't want to see condos here. They've already altered much of the Waterloo core in sometimes negative ways, while not solving the housing crisis (since they're mostly made by out of town developers and bought by out of town investors--it's like a cycle of distant rich people all churning up our cities, with all the profit going only to them while we suffer all the consequences). Plus, even though the Ion runs through here and we have to deal with it, there is no actual Ion station nearby to appeal to anyone who moves into a local condo.
Also, is this likely to result in further modifications to Cedar Creek? Already in my area it is rather sad, diverted into an artificial channel that runs along Albert that is not conducive to its natural biodiversity. And the Ion tracks near McCormick Community Centre destroyed significant toad spawning habitat along the Creek, among other impacts.