climate change report 2015 j 3 -...

The Regional Municipality of Durham

Corporate Services Department Leglslatlve Services

605 ROSSLAND RO. E. POBOX623 WHITBY ON L 1 N 6A3 CANADA

sos-66s-n11 1-8003721102 Fax: 905-6689963

www.dumam.ca

Matthew L Gaskell Commissioner of Corporate Sef\lices

#~e

~iiies

I January 22, 2015

f

I Mr. Brad wJodside, President Federation/of Canadian Municipalities .

24 Clairne Street Ottawa, ntario K1 N5P3

RE: OGRESS REPORT: COMMUNITY CLIMATE ADAPTATION PLAN, PHASE 1: ASSESSMENT (2015.J-3) (OUR FILE: C12-229)

Mr. Woodside, please be advised that the Joint Finance & Administration, Health & Social Services, Planning & Economic Development and Works Committees of Regional Council considered the above matter and at a meeting hetd on January 21, 2015 Council adopted the following recommendations of the Joint Committee, as amended:

"A) That Joint Report #2015-J-3 of the Director of Corporate Policy and Strategic Initiatives be endorsed;

B) That further work be undertaken on a Community Climate t Adaptation Plan consistent with the Next Steps outlined in Joint

Report #2015-J-3, subject to continued funding through the

annual budget process; and.

C) That a copy of Joint Report #2015-J-3 be sent to the lower tier municipalities, Durham Area MPs and MPPs, Federation of Canadian Municipalities, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario for their information.

Please find enclosed a copy of Joint Report #2015-J-3."

D. Bowen, AMCT Regional Clerk/Director of Legislative Services

DB/ct

Encl.

c: The Honourable C. Alexander, MP (Ajax/Pickering) P. Perkins, MP (Whitby/Oshawa)

Dr. C. Carrie, MP (Oshawa)

C. Chisu, MP (Pickering/Scarborough East) B. Devolin, MP (Haliburton/Kawartha Lakes/Brock) E. O'Toole, MP (Durham - Clarington/Scugog/Uxbridge) J. Dickson, MPP (Ajax/Pickering) C. Elliott, MPP (Whitby/Oshawa)

If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2009.

http:www.dumam.ca

Community Climate Adaptation Plan -2- Joint Report 2015-J-3 Phase 1: Assessment

G. Anderson, MPP (Durham) J . French, MPP (Oshawa) L. Scott, MPP (Haliburton/Kawartha Lakes/Brock)

T he Honourable T. MacCharles, MPP (Pickering/Scarborough East)

P. Vanini, Executive Director, Association of Municipalities of Ontario

M. de Rond, Town Clerk, Town of Ajax

T. Gettinby, CAO/Clerk, Township of Brock

)\/Greentree, Municipal Clerk, Municipality of Clarington

"8. Krane, Clerk, City of Oshawa

D. Shields, Clerk, City of Pickering C. Harris, Clerk, Township of Scugog D. Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge D. A. Wilcox, Town Clerk, Town of Whitby R.J. Clapp, Commissioner of Finance C. Curtis, Commissioner of Works H. Drouin, Commissioner of Social Services A. L Georgieff, Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development R.J. Kyle, Commissioner and Medical Officer of Health A .L. Georgieff, Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development C. Drimmie, Policy & Research Advisor, Office of the CAO

If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2539.

The Regional Municipality of Durham Report

To: The Joint Finance & Administration, Health & Social Services, Planning & Economic Development and Works Committee

From: Pauline Reid, Director of Corporate Policy and Strategic Initiatives

Report: #2015-J-3 Date: January 8 , 2 0 1 5

Subject:

Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan, Phase 1: Assessment

Recommendation:

THAT the Joint Finance & Administration, Health & Social Services, Planning & Economic Development and Works Committee recommends to Regional Council that Joint Report #2015-J-3 be received for information; and

THAT further work be undertaken on a Community Climate Adaptation Plan consistent with the Next Steps outlined in this report, subject to continued funding through the annual budget process; and

THAT Joint Report #2015-J-3 be sent to the lower tier municipalities for their information.

1. Purpose

1.1. The purpose of this report is to seek Committee and Council's approval of the Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan, Phase 1: Assessment.

(See Attachment 4)

2. Background

2.1. On September 13, 2013, the Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change

approved the development of a Community Climate Adaptation Plan, as a

complementary initiative to the Community Climate Change Local Action Plan,

approved in October 2012 which focuses on climate mitigation. The DRRCC

struck a Climate Adaptation Subcommittee to oversee this process and on

Report #2015-J-3 Page 2 of 5

October 11, 2013 it approved a strategy and work plan developed by the Subcommittee. The development of an adaptation plan had previously been included in the approved Work Plan for 2013, summarized in the 2013 DRRCC Annual Report (Report 2014-J-9) and included as part of the Work Plan for 2014.

2.2. The original goal of the subcommittee was to produce a draft Community Adaptation Plan by the fall of 2014; however this timeline proved to be overly ambitious and has been revised in favour of a more measured schedule, more in-depth research, greater stakeholder involvement in the process at several stages and an alignment with the terms of elected councils.

2.3. Thus, the initial 9 months of the process have focused on assessment of the impacts of a changing climate in Durham through a three step process:

1. Projection of future climate parameters in Durham Region for the period 2040 to 2049 (the SENES study);

2. Engagement of stakeholders through briefings on the results of the SEN ES study;

3. Creation of 7 Expert Task Forces to assess the impacts of the future climate parameters and identify those impacts that pose high and medium risks to the Durham community.

2.4. This Progress Report (Attachment 4) summarizes this process to date and presents, in particular, the results of the risk assessments undertaken by the Expert Task Forces. Next steps are proposed for the development of actions and programs by various responsible organizations to increase Durham's resilience to the coming climate changes.

3. Assessment Results

3.1. The study undertaken in late 2013 by SENES Consultants entitled Durham Region's Future Climate (2040 to 2049) provides projections of future climate conditions for all 8 municipalities in Durham Region for the decade of the 2040s compared with the past decade of 2000 to 2009. The full report is 200 pages in length and is condensed to a 15-page Summary document included as Appendix A to the attached Progress Report. The projections provided for temperature, precipitation and extreme weather (e.g. extreme rainfall, freezing rain, high winds, lightening, tornados) include both climate averages and weather extremes. They collectively suggest the future planning parameters for infrastructure design, operating conditions, health and social programs,

20


public safety, business continuity and economic development for the region.

3.2. The detailed results of the SENES study were presented during early 2014 to a range of stakeholders in Durham region including municipal councils and

officials, Regional departments, Conservation Authorities, local electrical utilities, agricultural sector representatives, businesses and business

associations.

3.3. Many of these stakeholder groups were requested to delegate experts from their staffs to participate in Expert Task Forces to assist in the interpretation of

the future climate data, to identify impacts and assess the risks associated with the impacts. The following Expert Task Forces reported in June 2014 with an assessment of the high and medium risks for Durham:

Flooding

Natural Environment

Buildings Electrical Sector

Human Health

Roads Food Security

The membership of the 7 Expert Task Forces is presented in Appendix B of the attached Progress Report.

3.4. Collectively the Task Forces identified:

71 impacts assessed as high risks 68 impacts assessed as medium risks

These risks are summarized in a table in the Executive Summary of the attached report and presented in more detail in Section 5: Analysis by Expert Task Forces.

3.5. While this work may be considered limited in terms of the timeframe covered, preliminary in terms of detailed, quantitative risk assessments and incomplete in terms of all the sectors possibly affected in Durham, it does represent a substantive first list of climate risks that need to be addressed by governments,

institutions, organizations and businesses with responsibility for the resilience,

health and safety of the Durham Region.

4. Budget Implications

4.1. It is far too early in the process to identify the costs of either the damages that

21


will be caused by changing climate in Durham or the costs of mitigating the damage through preventative and corrective measures and programs.

4.2. An idea of the magnitude of damages can be gained by referring to recent extreme weather events in Canadian municipalities:

$130 million in damages from the Goderich tornado of 2011;

Over $5 billion in damages from the southern Alberta floods of June 2013; $940 million in damages from the Toronto floods of July 2013.

4.3. The costs of building new infrastructure to higher standards, of upgrading selected existing infrastructure, of new health and social programs, of flood prevention, of heat wave mitigation are not yet known for Durham. Nor do we know accurately who will bear these costs or how they might be shared.

These cost estimates will be developed as part of the next steps in preparing plans and programs for Durham.

4.4. A National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE) report

on the costs of climate damage estimated that costs will reach $21 billion - 43 billion per year in Canada by 2050 and that every dollar spent now on adaptation will yield $9 to $38 worth of avoided damages in the future.

5. Next Steps

5.1. The attached Progress Report identifies the results of Phase 1: Assessment for the Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan. Assuming Council

renewal of the mandate of DRRCC and the Adaptation Subcommittee, three more phases are proposed:

Phase 2: Program Design - 2015;

Phase 3: Program Approvals and Funding - 2016, as part of the

business planning processes of responsible organizations;

Phase 4: Program Implementation -2017 and beyond, as part of the

operation of responsible organizations.

5.2. Relevant tasks.tor each phase are outlined in Section 7: Next Steps of the attached Progress Report. Each phase will be brought to the DRRCC for

approval before being presented to Regional Council.

6. Conclusion

6.1. Substantial progress has been made in the 9 months since initiation of a

22


Community Climate Adaptation Planning process. This phase of the work has focussed on assessment and has produced:

A projection of future climate and extreme weather parameters for Durham (the SENES study);

An informed and engaged set of stakeholder groups;

Identification of high and medium risk climate change impacts for Durham by a set of Expert Task Forces.

6.2. Authority is sought from Regional Council to continue the work into a full Adaptation Plan with recommended actions and potential programs to improve Durham's resilience to future climate conditions.

Pauline Reid Director of Corporate Policy and Strategic Initiatives

Attachments: 1. Direction Memorandum of October 2, 2014 2. Memorandum to DRRCC of September 12, 2014 3. Direction Memorandum of August 25, 2014 4. Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan, Phase 1

':. j

Attachment 1 to Report 2015-J- 3

Direction Memorandum

TO: The Finance &Administration, Health &Social Services, Planning &

Economic Development and Works Committees

FROM: N. Prasad, Committee Clerk Corporate Services - Legislative Services

DATE: October 2, 2014

RE: Direction as per minutes of:

QURHAM REGION ROUNQTABLE September 12. 2014 ITEM 5.Bl ON CLIMATE CHANGE

3. Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan, Phase 1: Assessment

A) Brian Kelly, Manager of Sustainability. Region of Durham

B. Kelly stated that the Progress Report summarizes the assessment of the impacts of the changing climate in Durham and presents the results of the risk assessments undertaken by the Expert Task Forces. He also stated that the Progress Report identifies the results of Phase 1: Assessment for the Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan and, assuming renewal of the mandate of the committee and the Adaptation Subcommittee, the following three phases are proposed:

Phase 2: Program Design - 2015 Phase 3: Program Approvals and Funding - 2016 Phase 4: Program Implementation - 2017 and beyond

Discussion ensued regarding the next steps of the Community Climate Adaptation Plan and budget restrictions, as well as concerns with respect to moving forward with the plan.

Moved by Councillor England, "That we recommend to the Joint Finance & Administration, Health & Social Services, Planning & Economic Development and Works Committee for approval and subsequent recommendation to Regional Council:

a) That the Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan, Phase 1: Assessment, be received for information; and

'. d ~,., i

b) That further work be undertaken on a Community Climate Adaptation Plan consistent with the Next Steps outlined in the Progress Report."

CARRIED AS AMENDED (See Following Motion)

Moved by Councillor England, "That part b) of the foregoing motion of Councillor England be amended by adding the following to the end of the sentence: contingent upon continued funding through the annual budget process."

CARRIED

The main motion of Councillor England was then put to a vote and CARRIED AS AMENDED.

/

Nela Prasad Committee Clerk

. . -~'.J

Attachment 2 to Report 2015-J-3

Memorandum

TO: Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change (DRRCC)

FROM: Pauline Reid, Director of Corporate Policy &Strategic Initiatives

DATE: September 12, 2014

RE: Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan, Phase 1: Assessment

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change recommends to the Joint Finance &Administration, Health and Social Services, Planning & Economic Development and Works Committee that this report be received for information; and

THAT further work be undertaken on a Community Climate Adaptation Plan consistent with the Next Steps outlined in the report.

REPORT:

1. PURPOSE

The purpose of this memo is to seek DRRCC's approval of the Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan, Phase 1: Assessment, as directed on August 25, 2014 (see attachment 1 ).

2. BACKGROUND

On September 13, 2013, the Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change approved the development of a Community Climate Adaptation Plan, as a complementary initiative to the Community Climate Change Local Action Plan, approved in October 2012 which focuses on climate mitigation. The DRRCC struck a Climate Adaptation Subcommittee to oversee this process and on October 11, 2013 it approved a strategy and work plan developed by the Subcommittee. The development of an adaptation plan had previously been included in the approved Work Plan for 2013, summarized in the 2013 DRRCC Annual Report (Report 2014-J-9) and included as part of the Work Plan for 2014.

The original goal of the Subcommittee was to produce a draft Community Adaptation Plan by the fall of 2014; however this timeline proved to be overly ambitious and has been revised in favour of a more measured schedule, more in-depth research, greater stakeholder involvement in the process at several stages and an alignment with the terms of elected councils.

Thus, the initial 9 months of the process have focused on assessment of the impacts of a changing climate in Durham through a three step process:

1. Projection of future climate parameters in Durham Region for the period 2040 to 2049 (the SENES study);

2. Engagement of stakeholders through briefings on the results of the SENES study;

3. Creation of 7 Expert Task Forces to assess the impacts of the future climate parameters and identify those impacts that pose high and medium risks to the Durham community.

This Progress Report summarizes this process to date and presents, in particular, the results of the risk assessments undertaken by the Expert Task Forces. Next steps are proposed for the development of actions and programs by various responsible organizations to increase Durham's resilience to the coming climate changes.

3. ASSESSMENT RESULTS

The study undertaken in late 2013 by SENES Consultants entitled Durham Region's Future Climate (2040 to 2049) provides projections of future climate conditions for all 8 municipalities in Durham Region for the decade of the 2040s compared with the past decade of 2000 to 2009. The full report is 200 pages in length and is condensed to a 15-page Summary document included as Appendix A to the attached Progress Report. The projections provided for temperature, precipitation and extreme weather (e.g. extreme rainfall, freezing rain, high winds, lightening, tornados) include both climate averages and weather extremes. They collectively suggest the future planning parameters for infrastructure design, operating conditions, health and social programs, public safety, business continuity and economic development for the region.

The detailed results of the SEN ES study were presented during early 2014 to a range of stakeholders in Durham region including municipal councils and officials, Regional departments, Conservation Authorities, local electrical

utilities, agricultural sector representatives, businesses and business associations.

Many of these stakeholder groups were requested to delegate experts from their staffs to participate in Expert Task Forces to assist in the interpretation of the future climate data, to identify impacts and assess the risks associated with the impacts. The following Expert Task Forces reported in June 2014 with an assessment of the high and medium risks for Durham:

Flooding

Natural Environment

Buildings

Electrical Sector

Human Health

Roads Food Security

The membership of the 7 Expert Task Forces is presented in Appendix B of the attached Progress Report.

Collectively the Task Forces identified:

71 impacts assessed as high risks

68 impacts assessed as medium risks

These risks are summarized in a table in the Executive Summary of the attached report and presented in more detail in Section 5: Analysis by Expert Task Forces.

While this work may be considered limited in terms of the timeframe covered, preliminary in terms of detailed, quantitative risk assessments and incomplete in terms of all the sectors possibly affected in Durham, it does represent a

substantive first list of climate risks that need to be addressed by governments, institutions, organizations and businesses with responsibility for the resilience, health and safety of the Durham Region.

4. BUDGET IMPLICATIONS

It is far too early in the process to identify the costs of either the damages that will be caused by changing climate in Durham or the costs of mitigating the damage through preventative and corrective measures and programs.

28

An idea of the magnitude of damages can be gained by referring to recent extreme weather events in Canadian municipalities:

$130 million in damages from the Goderich tornado of 2011; Over $5 billion in damages from the southern Alberta floods of June

2013;

$940 million in damages from the Toronto floods of July 2013.

The costs of building new infrastructure to higher standards, of upgrading selected existing infrastructure, of new health and social programs, of flood prevention, of heat wave mitigation are not yet known for Durham. Nor do we know accurately who will bear these costs or how they might be shared. These cost estimates will be developed as part of the next steps in preparing plans and programs for Durham.

A National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE) report on the costs of climate damage estimated that costs will reach $21 billion - 43 billion per year in Canada by 2050 and that every dollar spent now on adaptation will yield $9 to $38 worth of avoided damages in the future.

5. NEXT STEPS

The attached Progress Report identifies the results of Phase 1: Assessment for the Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan. Assuming Council renewal of the mandate of DRRCC and the Adaptation Subcommittee, three

more phases are proposed: Phase 2: Program Design -2015;

Phase 3: Program Approvals and Funding - 2016, as part of the

business planning processes of responsible organizations;

Phase 4: Program Implementation - 2017 and beyond, as part of the

operation of responsible organizations.

Relevant tasks for each phase are outlined in Section 7: Next Steps of the attached Progress Report. Each phase will be brought to the DRRCC for

approval before being presented to Regional Council.

, ,,.,'"J.

6. CONCLUSION

Substantial progress has been made in the 9 months since initiation of a Community Climate Adaptation Planning process. This phase of the work has focussed on assessment and has produced:

A projection of future climate and. extreme weather parameters for Durham (the SENES study);

An informed and engaged set of stakeholder groups; Identification of high and medium risk climate change impacts for

Durham by a set of Expert Task Forces.

Authority is sought from Regional Council to continue the work into a full Adaptation Plan with recommended actions and potential programs to improve Durham's resilience to future climate conditions.

Pauline Reid

Director of Corporate Policy &Strategic Initiatives,

Attachment 1: Direction Memorandum of August 25, 2014

Attachment 2: Progress Report; Community Climate Adaptation Plan, Phase 1:

Assessment

Attachment 3 to Report 2015-J-3

Direction Memorandum

TO: P. Reid, Director, Corporate Policy and Strategic Initiatives

FROM: N. Prasad, Committee Clerk, Corporate Services - Legislative Services

DATE: August 25, 2014

RE: Direction as per minutes of:

DURHAM REGION ROUNDTABLE June 13, 2014 ITEM 3.8)

ON CLIMATE CHANGE

3. Status Report and Next Steps on Development of Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan

B) Brian Kelly, Manager of Sustainability, Region of Durham

A background document entitled Climate Change: Implications for Cities was provided as Attachment #2 to the Agenda. B. Kelly advised that this document was provided to Committee for information purposes and will be available on the Region's website.

B. Kelly provided a Powerpoint presentation entitled Proposed Next Steps on Development of Durham Community Climate Adaptation Plan. A copy of the presentation was provided to Committee members via email.

Highlights of the presentation included:

Original Schedule o SENES study completed in December 2013 o Presented to stakeholders January to May 2014 o Task Forces analyse impacts and assess risks February

to May o Task Forces identify actions and Programs in May

(Design Workshop) o Prepare plan over summer to present to DRRCC in

September o Plan with proposed programs to Regional Council in

October 2014 for approval in principle (end of term) o Present proposed programs to new councils

"Service Excellence tor our Communities"

31

Revised Phasing and Schedule o Phase 1: Assessment - 2014 o Phase 2: Program Design - 2015 o Phase 3: Program Approval & Funding - 2016 o Phase 4: Implementation - 2017 onwards

Issues to Consider

Decisions on Process Design

B. Kelly requested that the Committee endorse the revised schedule as set out in the presentation regarding the work of the Climate Adaptation Sub-Committee and confirmed that the status report will be provided to the Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change Committee at its September meeting with the intention to present it to Regional Council on October 8, 2014.

Moved by Regional Chair Anderson, "THAT the proposed schedule for the Climate Adaptation Plan, including the proposed next steps be endorsed."

CARRIED

/

Nela Prasad Committee Clerk

c. B. Kelly, Manager of Sustainability, Office of the CAO

"Service Excellence tor our Communities"

32

Attachment 4 to _Report 2015-J-3

PROGRESS REPORT:

COMMUNITY CLIMATE ADAPTATION PLAN

PHASE1:ASSESSMENT

Prepared by:

The Climate Adaptation Subcommittee

Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change

September 3, 2014

33

Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan Phase 1 : Assessment

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................i

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................1

2. Background .................................................................................................................................3

3. Work of the Subcommittee .......................................................................................................6

4. Risk Analysis ...............................................................................................................................9

5. Analysis by Expert Task Forces .............................................................................................12

6. Interdependencies and Gaps .................................................................................................26

7. Next Steps .................................................................................................................................27

Appendices

A - Durham Region's Future Climate (2040-2049) Summary, by SENES Consultants

B - List of Expert Task Force Members

31

Progress Report: Community Climate Adaptation Plan Phase 1 : Assessment

Executive Summary

According to the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) AR 5; "Climate change, whether driven by natural or human forcing, can lead to changes in the likelihood of the occuff'ence or strength of extreme weather and climate events or both." IPCC concludes that the rate and extent of change to the Earth's climate is unprecedented in recent history. One has only to draw on personal experience or look to recent media stories to know that extreme weather events that overwhelm our infrastructure are occurring with increasing frequency.

The climate in Durham Region for the decade 2040 to 2049 is projected to become:

Warmer: 4 C average annual temperature increase, with 5.8C higher temperatures in winter and 2.6C higher in summer compared to the 2000 to 2009 decade, heat wave temperatures 7.1C higher than normal and Humidex readings exceeding the "dangerous" level;

Wetter: 50% increase in the one day maximum rainfall, 100% increase in days with more than 25 mm of rain, 72% more rain in July and 79% more in August, 217% more rain and 75% less snow in February; and

Wilder: more intense rainstorm events, including a 15% increase in the potential for violent storms and a 53% increase in the potential for tornados.

These are some the results of a climate modelling study undertaken by SENES Consultants for the Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change (DRRCC). These projections are for Whitby but there are similar projections for all eight municipalities in Durham Region. (See Appendix A for the Summary).

The range of potential impacts caused by these climate changes will be widespread and complex and may exceed the ability of Durham's physical infrastructure, health care, economic and social systems to cope with extreme weather in the medium term future (2040-2049)

The detailed results of the SEN ES study were presented to various stakeholders for their information and response. Municipal governments, regional departments, conservation authorities, electrical utilities, agricultural representatives and businesses

were engaged.

Seven Expert Task Forces were established among stakeholder groups to assess the implications of these climate changes in terms of the risks they pose to physical infrastructure, business continuity, government services, health and safety, the

High Risk Impacts Expert Task Force Area Medium Risk Impacts Flooding

major & minor system conveyance, storm water facilities, roads and transportation, sanitary services, erosion, pollution, electrical services, communication services, social services, EMS, police, fire, public use of floodplains

Urban flooding

social disruption, insurance, damage to private assets, business disruption

Riverine flooding

monitoring, forecasting,

response

Warning & emergency emergency communications, access for emergency vehicles existing mapping,

definition

Natural hazard

standards, methods, flood hazard policies and management, hazard reduction

Natural Environment changes to shallow aquifers, groundwater discharge and recharge areas

Groundwater quantity

changes to: insects or changes to abiotic features disease, species range, extreme events

Urban tree health

changes in base flows, extreme high flows changes to: stream erosion, Surface water quantity

seasonal flows changes in pathogen

conditions changes in: background Surface water quality

concentrations, nutrient concentrations

changes to: landscape level changes to habitat matrix connections, abiotic

Terrestrial habitat and succession

features of habitat

. ' Jv

environment, economy and social cohesion in Durham. The risks were identified, assessed and classified into high, medium and low risk categories based on the existing knowledge and judgement of the Expert Task Force members.

The identified high and medium risks are summarized below and are presented in greater detail in Chapter 5 of this report.

Expert Task Force Area High Risk Impacts Medium Risk Impacts changes to: species range and presence, insects and diseases, life historv traits

Terrestrial species

changes in: hydrology, changes to in-stream thermal regimes

Aquatic habitat habitat

changes in: trophic structures, species range and presence, alien invasive species and disease, life history traits

Aquatic species

Buildings failure of air conditioning backed-up drains/septic,

(new and existing) Public sector buildings

(AC), damage to exterior flood damage to service and rooftop equipment equipment, failure of

heating system, damage due to lightening, roof structure failure backed-up drains/septic,

buildings New residential

flood damage to service equipment, roof structure failure, damage to exterior and rooftop equipment, secondary interior damage, damage to adjacent buildings, damage to exterior and rooftop equipment backed-up drains/septic,

commercial and New industrial,

flood damage to service institutional (ICI) equipment, failure of AC, buildings collapse of light structures,

damage to adjacent buildings, secondary interior damage, roof structure failure damage to adjacent

buildings roof structure failure, Existing residential

buildings, heating system flood damage to service backed-up drains/septic,

failure, structural damage, equipment, AC failure, building devastation secondary interior damage, damage to exterior, collapse of light structures

' J.J f

Expert Task Force Area Existing ICI buildings

High Risk Impacts roof structure failure, backed-up drains/septic, flood damage to service equipment, AC failure, damage to exterior, secondary damage to interior

Electrical Sector

Medium Risk Impacts heating failure, structural damage, building devastation, collapse of light structures, damage to adjacent buildings

Extreme heat

Impact of heat on outside workers is yet to be assessed

Higher temperatures and longer growing season

Precipitation

*Impact of flooding on infrastructure is yet to be assessed

Freezing rain (ice storms)

Extreme winds

sag and annealing of wires - reduced asset life, accelerates challenges of ageing infrastructure

Vegetation management-longer growing season leading to damage and outaQe

sag and annealing of wires - phase to phase short, transmission and distribution outages

Infrastructure failure leading to outages (due to ice accretion and trees falling on lines) Outages caused by infrastructure damage

Extreme heat

Air quality Infectious Diseases

Contamination of Food and Water

Extreme weather events and natural hazards

Human Health heat related death and illness chronic exposure acute exposure

tick borne disease (e.g. Lyme disease), mosquito borne disease, rodent borne food borne illness, water borne illness extreme weather events and natural hazards

3U

Expert Task Force Area High Risk Impacts Medium Risk Impacts Roads

failure of culverts/bridges, bluff failure along storm sewers, and road

Extreme storm events waterfront, road failure

embankments through subsoil failure, and pavement structure failure

softening of asphalt, and buckling of pavement dearadation,

Extreme heat pavement/bridaes

deterioration of road reduction in the use of road salt (opportunity)

Fewer & less cold days

Food Security* soil erosion (crop production and rot)

Increased rainfall

crop destruction (reduced road flooding (interruption storms

Violent events and rain availability of local food, of food delivery, consumer crop flattening), falling access to food) branches and power outages (electricity outages and food storage, handling, processing, access to money and fuel)

water supply - quantity and Livestock (heat stroke, (averages and

Summer temperatures quality (reduction in crops increase in disease and

extremes) and availability, increased pests, bacteria in water food prices, health impacts) supply), dairy production

(no outdoor grazing or exercise), electricity brownouts (food spoilage, health and safetv) invasive species (increase

(averages and Winter temperatures

in local pests), reduction in extremes) snow cover (impacts

erosion and dormancy periods) heat stroke (people won't want to garden outside), mold (sooilaae)

Humidex

crops (increased food prices, availability of local and nutritious food)

*Note some of the impacts identified by the Food Security Task Force are related to impacts in

General

other sectors.

Accountability for risk mitigation rests largely with those agencies and organizations which have the authority to deliver the service in question and thus to take action to ensure continuity of service. In many cases, the issues identified fall within the risk

management mandates of those organizations and can be managed through normal business planning, once the magnitude of the risks are recognized.

This report constitutes the Assessment Phase of the process to produce a Community Climate Adaptation Plan. Subsequent Phases will identify potential corrective actions and programs to increase the resilience of the Durham community to the effects of climate change which the responsible agencies and organizations may wish to consider. In addition, possible processes to address the approval, funding and implementation of these programs are suggested.

1. Introduction

This document constitutes a report on Phase 1: Assessment of the process to develop a Community Climate Adaptation Plan for Durham and covers progress made over the 9-month period from September 2013 to June 2014.

Preparing the Durham community for the effects of a changing climate is an important and timely activity and one that requires the involvement and contributions of many stakeholders and agencies in the Durham community and beyond.

There have been a number of recent official reports on climate trends and adaptation which all point to the need for increased attention to Climate Adaptation including:

IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (reports of September 2013, March 2014 and April 2014)

US National Climate Assessment (May 2014) Canada's Sixth National Report on Climate Change (June 2014)

Climate Change: Implications for Cities, European Climate Foundation, ICLEI and University of Cambridge (May 2014)

Looking for Leadership, Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (July 2014)

For Durham, the implications of a changing climate include both local impacts which will directly affect us and national I international impacts which will affect us indirectly. The direct impacts will result from changes to Durham's climate and could include:

Localized flooding;

Violent storm damage; Various threats to human health and safety;

Ecosystem changes; Loss of electricity; Loss of transportation and communication services;

Changes to agricultural production.

The indirect impacts will be more economic and social in character and will result from the changing climate nationally and internationally. Such impacts could include:

Food shortages I higher prices due to crop and fisheries failures; Higher commodity and consumer product costs due to production and supply

chain disruption;

Higher taxes and insurance costs due to climate-related damages elsewhere (especially in Canada);

Global economic disruption due to the costs of storm damage, rising sea levels and the collapse of local economies around the world;

Population pressures due to migration and climate refugees.

This report addresses only the changes to local climate and extreme weather that are projected for the period 2040 to 2049 in Durham. It reports on the initial assessment of the resultant climate risks to Durham's physical infrastructure, business continuity, government services, health and safety, environment, economy and social cohesion in Durham.

Recognizing the potential impacts associated with changing climate enables us to proactively put processes and infrastructure in place to address these risks. It is recognized that society has a long record of managing the impacts of weather and climate related events, and that some adaptation measures are already underway. However, regardless of strategies to reduce the expected magnitude of climate change, adaptation measures will be required. Adaptation can reduce vulnerability, especially when it is integrated into key sector risk management strategies. Many of the strategies are anticipated to align with sound business planning and can likely be implemented either at low cost and/or high benefiUcost ratio.

2. Background

Community climate work in Durham is led by the Durham Region Roundtable on Climate Change (DRRCC), an advisory committee to Regional Council. In October 2012, Regional Council received Durham's climate mitigation plan, entitled From Vision to Action, Region of Durham Community Climate Change Local Action Plan 2012, and authorized further development of proposed mitigation programs.

In its meeting of September 13, 2013 the DRRCC authorized the development of a Community Climate Adaptation Plan for Durham and struck a Subcommittee on Climate Adaptation to lead this work. In the meeting of October 11, 2013 DRRCC approved a strategy and work plan. The subcommittee elected to approach the issue from a risk management standpoint. This approach has subsequently been adopted by numerous other organizations in Durham.

The goal of adaptation is to assess whether current programs and infrastructure design are sufficiently robust to continue to deliver desired results if subjected to the projected extremes of weather. By recognizing the potential risks today, appropriate strategic decisions can be made to ensure continued effectiveness.

Since the 1950s, many of the observed changes to the climate have been unprecedented when compared to previous time periods. For example, the average annual temperature in Canada has risen 1.5C between 1950 and 2010. Due to factors including the thermal inertia of oceans, natural feedback mechanisms such as the melting of permafrost resulting in the release of methane, and the long lifetimes of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the Earth's climate will continue to warm throughout the 21st century even if very significant reductions to carbon dioxide (C02) were made today.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that "Each of the last three decades have been successively warmer at the Earth's surface than any preceding decade since 1850. In the northern hemisphere, 1983-2012 was likely the warmest 30 year period of the last 1400 years". Further the IPCC projects that the likelihood of more frequent hot days and nights is likely (66-100% certainty) in the early 21st century (2016-2035) and virtually certain (99-100% certainty) in the late 21st century (2081-2100). It also projects that the increase in frequency, intensity and or amount of heavy precipitation is likely in the early 21st century and very likely (90-100% certainty) in the late 21st century.

The impacts of extreme weather are already being experienced. Climate change and extreme weather may:

affect an organization's ability to achieve its business objectives;

damage infrastructure;

' )1.J

pose a risk to societal wellbeing;

alter liability for infrastructure owners and developers;

impact capital and operating budgets in terms of loss of assets, reduced asset life;

loss of business, costs to respond, costs to repair and maintain; affect insurance premiums, and

impact natural systems and the ecosystems services that they provide to society.

Some recent examples of loss associated with extreme weather include:

July 2004 Peterborough flood - $100M in direct public & private property

damage;

2011 Goderich Tornado - $75 million in insured damage from the tornado, $130M total damage estimate from the tornado plus sustained rains;

2013 Calgary floods - $1. 7 48 in insured losses, damage costs could exceed $5 billion;

July 2013 Toronto - $940M in losses (Ontario's most costly natural disaster). Rainfall exceeded the monthly average by 70%, and the 1 in 100-year storm by 46%. An estimated 300,000 electrical customers were without power, some for as long as 36 hours; and

December 2013 ice storm - $200M worth of insured losses. Electrical customers were without power for as long as 72 hours during the dead of winter.

Tory's LLP, a major law firm, conducted an analysis on the subject of legal liability as a driver to climate change adaptation in infrastructure projects for the National Roundtable on the Environment and Economy, and concluded that: "the prospect of legal liability for those integrally connected with infrastructure ownership/development should be regarded as a significant driver of climate change adaptation".

Compliance with current codes, standards or guidelines related to infrastructure construction and management may not stand the test of time for organizations that choose to ignore evidence of increasing extreme weather events and climate change and therefore may not provide a shield from liability associated with infrastructure failure.

Recent quotes from the insurance industry reflect its position:

Don Forgeron, President and CEO of the Insurance Bureau of Canada, has stated that insurance companies will make decisions on what to do about insurance premiums in areas considered more at risk than previously believed.

Ronald Godin, the province's consumer advocate for insurance, stated that he feared homeowners could see significant increases in insurance in the future.

CEO Charles Brindamour, Intact Financial stated (Jan 2014), "As severe weather events become more extreme and frequent, we will continue to pursue our efforts to ensure that the protection we offer reflects our country's new climate reality, and that governments, consumers, businesses and all stakeholders pursue their efforts to better adapt to climate change."

The spate of severe weather disruptions across Canada in 2013 caused insurers to pay out a record $3.2 billion in claims. Damage inflicted by climate-related events has taken over from fire damage as the top source of insurance claims. In January 2014, Intact Insurance (one of Canada's largest property insurers) announced that it was raising premiums by as much as 15 to 20% to deal with the added costs of weather-related property damage.

What we can control is how much the climate warms (mitigation) and how we prepare for the risk (adaptation).

3. Work of the Subcommittee

Membership on the Subcommittee includes three community members, one member of Regional Council and Regional support staff. Community members are: Todd Hall (chair - contributing the perspective of climate change as a risk, electrical sector expertise), Daniel Hoornweg (contributing the perspective of UOIT, and Chief Risk Officer Ontario), Richard Gauder (contributing the perspective of local business). Councillor Jack Ballinger provides the perspective of Regional Council.

The following characteristics guide the work of the Subcommittee:

Comprehensive - should cover the entire Region of Durham;

Inclusive - should include all relevant stakeholders;

Science based -should be based on sound science;

Focused - should focus on the most likely and relevant climate impacts for the community of Durham and build upon but not repeat the activities of the Durham Region corporate adaptation plan (which already exists);

Informed by others' experience - should be guided by the adaptation experience of other leading jurisdictions in Canada and beyond (e.g. WeatherWise Partnership, ICLEI etc.);

Inter-related - should recognize the cross linkages and dependencies between sectors;

Revenue neutral - to the extent possible;

Business attraction - should consider how a more resilient Durham Region in the context of a resilient GTA could attract new businesses; and

Cognizant of overlaps - should consider measures that both mitigate and adapt to climate change.

The Subcommittee reports regularly to the DRRCC. The original deliverable was a proposed Community Climate Adaptation Plan to be presented in September 2014. This was subsequently recognised as overly ambitious and has been modified based on progress. The revised deliverable for fall 2014, as approved by the DRRCC, is this progress report.

The Subcommittee identified a series of three tasks to meet the DRRCC's overall

objective.

Task 1: To lay the groundwork for the Adaptation planning process. COMPLETE

SENES Consultants was commissioned to project future climate and weather extremes for the 2040-2049 timeframe using a process based on scientific principles and cascading credible models. The resulting projections are at a scale and interval that is acceptable for business planning purposes. The specific climate and extreme weather

46

criteria were selected based on experience gained from the City of Toronto and input from sector experts. The model projects parameters of temperature and precipitation with surrogates for lightning and combined parameters for tornadoes. Both climate and weather extremes were included. The model includes projections for all eight local municipalities in the Region of Durham. See Appendix A for the Summary of the SEN ES Report.

Task 2: Stakeholder Engagement Objective: COMPLETE

The objective was to identify key stakeholders; deliver presentations and proposals to these stakeholder groups to inform them of the Adaptation Planning Process and secure their interest and commitment to participate in the planning process.

The Subcommittee identified an extensive list of stakeholders in the Climate Change adaptation exercise. The majority of these stakeholders do not fall under the jurisdiction of municipal or regional governments. They are private enterprises or fall under provincial or federal jurisdiction. Different strategies may be necessary to ensure the involvement of key players. The strategy employed to date is to raise awareness thereby enabling them to make informed enterprise-based risk decisions. None of the organizations involved to date dispute the potential risks. Adaptation is prudent business management; there is little that is purely altruistic about it.

Task 3: Expert Task Forces' Assessment of Risk Phase 1 COMPLETE

This task was to identify and mobilise Expert Task Forces in areas of key vulnerabilities, and to facilitate their assessment of risk posed by the SEN ES projections.

The goal of the Expert Task Forces (ETFs) was to assess the SEN ES climate change projections in the context of the scope of their accountabilities and, where appropriate, identify corrective (or mitigative) actions. Ultimately we are seeking assurance that the nature of the projections is understood from a risk perspective, specifically risk to the continuity of business or the continued delivery of the service that falls within the accountability of the 'service' provider.

Examples of accountabilities for provision of service include:

The electrical sector is accountable for the continued provision of reliable

electrical service.

Conservation Authorities are charged with the responsibility of evaluating the potential impacts of riverine flooding and erosion within their watersheds and the implications in terms of infrastructure (e.g. culvert and bridge design, storm-water retention vs. infiltration), and policy e.g. flood plain development.

Each ETF considered both direct vulnerabilities and interdependencies between sectors, as well as the potential for plausible concurrent and synergistic events that

47

could elevate the consequence e.g. heat waves leading to greater demand on the electrical grid (cooling requirements) concurrent with diminished capacity to supply (heat also negatively affects electrical equipment performance).

No group exists in isolation. The nature of the risk and the nature of risk mitigation strategies (what we can do to reduce the risk) will cross the boundaries of the various Expert Task Forces.

4. Risk Analysis

Risk is simply the likelihood (probability or frequency) of an event (or impact) occurring multiplied by the consequence of the event. For each identified impact, the Expert Task Forces (ETF) rated the likelihood of the impact occurring, and rated the consequence or severity of the impact. Several different types of potential impact categories were considered, such as reputational, regulatory, environmental, health and safety, financial etc. To ensure consistency and comparability common risk rating criteria were provided to the ETFs.

Typically corporations, including municipal and regional governments, have well established risk treatment or enterprise risk management processes in place. Risk mitigation or control mechanisms should be considered when the assessed risk exceeds the individual's or organization's tolerance or risk appetite. Risk appetite is influenced by a variety of factors including stakeholder considerations. The goal is to manage the risk to within acceptable or tolerable levels.

The objective of the ETFs was to create an initial risk ranking of identified impacts. They were provided with direction in the form of guidance documents and templates to facilitate the identification, characterization and assessment of risk and to identify interdependencies. The diagram below illustrates that risks associated with climate change are a subset of greater risks to the enterprise.

Figure 1: Risk Treabnent - process of selecting & implementing measures to modify risk.

The expectation is that stakeholders will consider the potential implications of the changes and take preventative and corrective actions to ensure that the risk(s) associated with the projections are appropriately managed. The effective management of risk is and has always been the responsibility of those with the authority to manage the risk. Climate change is no different. It is simply a risk to be identified,

4 9

Accept the consequences Remove or reduce the risk and likelihood of a particular source and/or eliminate risk where mitigation is involvement in activities either impossible, not cost that lead to the possibility effective, or resources are of the risk being realized. better directed to other

higher profile risks.

Application of appropriate Shift burden of the risk

techniques to reduce the to another party e.g.

likelihood of an occurrence, 1.nsurance, Joint

its consequences, or both. Ventures.

characterized , assessed and managed. As the Adaptation Subcommittee identifies, in future Phases, risk mitigation strategies, adherence to the following guiding principles was expected:

where practical and cost-effective risks should be eliminated; where risks cannot be eliminated the residual risk should be controlled to an

acceptable level; consideration of alternative solutions; and meeting general industry practice.

Risks that exceed the acceptable or tolerance levels typically are managed using a variety of techniques. The goal is to manage the risk such that the residual risk is within acceptable/tolerable levels.

Figure 2: Techniques to Manage Risk

To successfully manage risk to acceptable levels, one must clearly understand the characteristics of the risk, which risk mitigation strategies will likely have the best chance of success, and the nature of the residual risk. One must also understand the stakeholders tolerance for risk in order to know when adequate controls have

been applied.

It should be noted that that those organizations with authority may elect to manage the risk as they see fit - which could include accepting the risk. The key is that informed

decisions must be made.

50

The responsibility for risk mitigation rests with those who have the accountability and authority. Raising awareness of the potential risks to their core mandate or business objectives typically will start a chain of events through which the risks will be controlled. It is anticipated that actions taken to control the risks will follow the organizations' established risk management processes. In this way required actions are monitored, controlled and resourced through the business planning process. While it takes time for the risk management strategies to be incorporated into business planning, this is seen as an effective approach provided that assurance that desired outcomes will be achieved.

51

5. Analysis by Expert Task Forces

In order to assess the implications of the climate projections for Durham in the 2040s provided by the SENES study, a number of Expert Task Forces (ETF) were created early in 2014. First, briefings were provided and requests for involvement made to relevant organizations and agencies in Durham including:

Local municipalities;

Regional departments;

Conservation authorities;

Local electrical distribution utilities; and

Local businesses and business associations.

As indicated by work undertaken by the WeatherWise Partnership in Toronto and in other jurisdictions, and based on feedback from stakeholders, the following set of seven ETFs was created in early 2014:

1. Flooding 2. Natural Environment 3. Buildings 4. Electricity Supply 5. Human Health 6. Roads 7. Food Security

The membership of the ETFs and the selected chairs for each are presented in Appendix B.

While largely self-governing, the ETFs were given a common mandate to:

Define the scope of their assessments; Identify vulnerabilities and likely impacts resulting from the climate projections in

the SENES report; and Undertake a risk analysis on each impact and classify it as high, medium or low

risk.

The ETF met individually over the spring period and came together in a Joint Task Force meeting on May 29, 2014 to compare their risk assessment results and discuss gaps, overlaps and interdependencies.

The following represents the high level results of the ETF assessments of risk. In most cases there is considerably more detail in the individual reports, which are available on request and will be put to productive use in subsequent phases of this work.

52

Each ETF report addresses scope, major assumptions and identifies the high and medium risk impacts of changing climate.

5.1 Flooding

As the amounts of precipitation and the intensity of rainfall increase in the future (particularly rain as opposed to snow) there is an increased likelihood that the capacity of watercourses, storm water management infrastructure and other systems will be exceeded resulting in flooding. Our storm water infrastructure was built and sized to handle historic levels of rainfall. It was not designed according to the increased amounts and extreme events that it is projected we will be subject to in the future.

Scope

There are several types of flooding:

Riverine flooding, where streams and rivers overflow their banks;

Overland urban flooding, where storm water flows exceed the capacity of the storm water system and flood over the land, sometimes entering buildings;

Basement backups resulting largely from storm water entering the sanitary sewer system and backing up into basements; and

Road washouts and other related events.

Major Assumptions

The Flooding Expert Task Force used a vulnerability assessment method to identify vulnerabilities. For each of the four areas of investigation the ETF identified services that had the potential to be impacted by the climate projections. All service areas moved to the risk assessment step. In the risk assessment, the likelihood of occurrence was the highest number; therefore the service area was determined to have a high risk if any of the impacts created a high score.

Risk Analysis Results

Urban Flooding HIGH

Major system conveyance

Minor system conveyance

Storm water management facilities

Electric services

Roads and transportation

Communications systems

Sanitary services

Social services

Erosion

53

Pollution EMS, Police, Fire

Public use of floodplain areas

Riverine Flooding HIGH

Social disruption

Insurance Damage to private assets

Business disruption

Warning and Emergency Response HIGH

Monitoring

Forecasting Emergency communications

Access for emergency vehicles

Natural Hazard Definition HIGH

Existing mapping

Standards

Methods Flood hazard policies

Flood hazard management

Flood hazard reduction

5.2 Natural Environment

As temperatures rise and precipitation regimes c~ange due to climate change, there will be numerous and complex impacts on the natural environment and the plants and animals that constitute various habitats. Some plants and animal species may become extinct, others may decline in numbers or shift ranges, some may prosper and expand. The various 'ecosystem services' upon which we depend will inevitably be altered.

Scope

Surface water (all water on the ground surface including overland runoff, quality and quantity)

Groundwater (all water underground including interflow, discharge and recharge areas, and artesian aquifer conditions, quality and quantity)

54

Terrestrial ecosystems (natural habitat as defined by Ecological Land Classification that includes forests/woodlands, wetlands and meadows up to the water's edge)

Aquatic ecosystems (flora, fauna (fish) and in-stream habitat associated with rivers and their tributaries, Lake Simcoe and inland lakes, estuaries, coastal marshes, lacustrine and riverine wetlands and the near shore area of Lake Ontario)

Urban forests (canopy cover in urban areas on public and private lands)

Major Assumptions

The risk ranking was purely based upon the expertise and judgement of the ETF members. There was limited time available to conduct a review of ecosystem vulnerabilities and risks from the scientific literature, and to collect other Durhamspecific information that could assist in the assessment. It should be recognized that natural environment components are complex systems and that their anticipated response to climate change impacts are likely particularly uncertain.

Many assumptions were made when considering climate change projections and perceived impacts on watershed components and sub-components. These assumptions were not standard across individual/agency assessments; however they were documented in the detailed report. In addition, all Natural Environment ETF members assumed that climate changes will be the main driver of the ecosystem response, with compounding effects (e.g. land-use change) as a secondary driver.

Each organization represented on the ETF completed its own risk assessment. Individual risk assessments were then consolidated in the final risk assessment using two criteria (see Natural Environment report for further detail). It is also important to note that assessing the natural environment in relation to projected climate changes was done in a geographic spatial scale and using local knowledge at that scale. This scale ranged from a conservation authority jurisdiction down to a specific property or community.

It is important to recognize that the risk assessment does not imply that the same level of risk will apply across the whole Region of Durham; the risk may only apply to a certain geographic scale. Individual assessments should be referred to for geographic specific information. In addition, when implementation of adaptive measures occurs, recommendations may not apply across the entire Region of Durham.


Surface water quality HIGH

Changes in background conditions e.g., pH, temp., etc.

r . JJ

MEDIUM Changes in pathogen and nutrient concentrations

Surface water quantity HIGH

Changes in stream erosion and extreme high flows

MEDIUM

Changes in base flow and seasonal flow regime

Terrestrial habitat HIGH

Changes in landscape level connections

Changes to abiotic features of habitat, e.g. soil moisture

MEDIUM

Changes to habitat matrix, diversity of habitat, and succession

Terrestrial species HIGH

Changes to species range and presence

Changes due to insects or disease, includes invasive species Changes in life history traits

Aquatic habitat HIGH

Changes in hydrology and thermal regimes

MEDIUM Changes to in-stream habitat

Aquatic species HIGH

Change in trophic structures Change to species range and presence Changes due to insects or disease (includes invasive species)

Changes in life history traits

Urban tree health HIGH

Changes due to extreme winds, insects or disease, includes invasive species

Changes to species range

56

MEDIUM Changes due to abiotic features e.g., increase chloride concentrations along

roads, soil moisture

Groundwater quantity MEDIUM

Changes in shallow aquifers

Changes to groundwater discharge and recharge areas

5.3 Buildings

The Ontario Building Code (OBC), which was first issued in 1975, sets out the technical requirements for the construction and/or renovation of buildings, and includes climatic design data within the OBC Supplementary Standard. The climatic design data within the OBC is based on research by Environment Canada and lists values pertinent to key municipalities within the Province. Buildings constructed over the past 35 years have been required to comply with the requirements of the OBC that were in effect at the time of construction.

Based on projections provided by the SENES Report, future weather conditions are expected to adversely change the intensity, duration, and frequency of rain, snow and wind loading within the Region of Durham, and increase the risk of extreme weather events such as heat waves, precipitation and related flooding. These conditions have the potential to impact the operation and structural integrity of buildings. As current OBC climatic data does not necessarily reflect projected long-term climatic conditions, and since the technical requirements of the OBC do not retroactively apply to existing buildings, there is limited legislative means to ensure that new and old buildings are adequately capable of sustaining the anticipated climatic loads.

Scope

A qualitative risk assessment was carried out on five building category types that were identified in initial Expert Task Force meetings, as follows:

Public sector government owned/operated facilities (new and existing)

New residential construction (including detached dwellings, townhomes and multi-storey apartments)

New private sector industrial/commercial/institutional (ICI) construction

Existing residential buildings.

Existing private sector industrial/commercial/institutional (ICI) construction

57

Major Assumptions

In consideration of the enormity of known and unknown variables that could impact this assessment, the following assumptions were made:

Existing residential and private buildings represent those constructed prior to 1997

New residential and private buildings represent those constructed after 1997 or any building that will be constructed in accordance with the current requirements of today's building code (2012 OBC)

This review does not consider illegally constructed buildings (i.e. buildings that were constructed without a valid building permit)

This review does not consider new or existing federally owned buildings This review considers the building and its components/systems within a property

boundary.


Based on a qualitative review of potential extreme climate conditions projected to impact Regional municipalities in the next four decades, the most significant impacts within existing buildings are:

Roof structure failure due to excessive ponding from intense and/or sustained rainfall.

Backed-up storm drainage, sewer & septic systems from intense and/or

sustained rainfall

Flood damage to service equipment and other building components (such as furnaces, water heaters, air conditioning, compressors, electrical wiring and control panels, insulation) due to extreme rainfall

Public Sector Owned/Operated Facilities (new and existing) HIGH

Failure of air conditioning Significant damage to building exterior and rooftop equipment

MEDIUM Backed-up building draining and septic system

Flood damage to service equipment and other building components

Failure of heating system

Secondary damage from extreme weather

Damage to building exterior due to lightning strikes

Significant damage to building exterior and rooftop equipment

Roof structure failure

58

New Residential Construction MEDIUM

Building causing damage to adjacent building Secondary damage to building interior components

Significant damage to building exterior and rooftop equipment Roof structure failure

Backed-up drainage and septic system

Flood damage to service equipment and other building components

New Private Sector Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Construction MEDIUM

Backed-up building draining and septic system

Flood damage to service equipment and other building components Failure of air conditioning

Collapse or complete removal of light structure with large surfaces (such as carports and signage)

Damage to adjacent buildings

Damage to exterior building elements


Secondary damage to building interior components

Damage to building finishes and outside equipment

Roof structure failure

Existing Residential Buildings HIGH

Roof structure failure Backed-up building drainage and septic system

Flood damage to service equipment and building components

Significant damage to weak buildings Air conditioning failure Significant damage to building exterior and rooftop equipment

Secondary damage to building interior Collapse or complete removal of light structures with large surface areas (such

as awnings, carports and signage)

MEDIUM Damage to adjacent buildings

Less airtight building envelopes and air conditioning and heating system failure

Significant structural damage

Complete building and property devastation

Damage to building exterior

Existing Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Buildings HIGH

Roof structure failure Backed-up building drainage and septic system

Flood damage to service equipment and other building components Air conditioning failure


Secondary damage to building interior

MEDIUM Damage to weak buildings

Less airtight building envelopes and air conditioning and heating system failure Significant structure damage

Complete building and property devastation

Collapse or complete removal of light structure with large surfaces (such as carports and signage)

Damage to adjacent buildings

Damage to building exterior

Damage to building finishes and outside equipment

Paths of travel impacted

5.4 Electrical Sector

Climate impacts on the function and reliability of the electrical transmission and distribution system (commonly called 'the grid') include the effects of extreme weather in terms of heat, extreme precipitation, high winds and freezing rain. The continuity of 'grid services' is very important to the resilience of many other related sectors of society.

Scope

The scope of this TF is grid resilience based on critical and vulnerable equipment, i.e. conductors and transformers.

Major Assumptions

To conduct the risk analysis, the status quo in terms of design and operational controls was assumed. This assumption was necessary but is not an accurate reflection of how the sector operates. Continual evolution of design and operational practices is the norm and will indeed be informed by this process.

60


Extreme Heat HIGH

Sag and annealing of wires - reduced asset life

Accelerates challenges of aging infrastructure

(Impact of heat on outside workers is yet to be assessed)

MEDIUM Sag and annealing of wires - phase to phase short Transmission and distribution outages

Temperature HIGH

Vegetation management - longer growing season leading to damage and outage

Precipitation (Impact of flooding on infrastructure is yet to be assessed)

Freezing rain MEDIUM

Infrastructure failure leading to outages (due to ice accretion and trees falling on lines)

5.5 Human Health

There is growing evidence to suggest that climate change is already affecting human health directly in numerous ways, and has the potential to exacerbate pre-existing health conditions. The most direct example is the increase in temperature contributing to a rise in the incidence of heat-related morbidity and mortality (Health Canada, 2008). There is also a host of indirect health impacts associated with climate change, such as alterations in seasonality that can shift vector-borne disease ranges.

Scope

The scope of this ETF is risks to individual health, cumulative impact on community and public health, and the continuity of business or delivery of health care services.

The TF utilized the Health Canada 2008 report Human Health in a Changing Climate: A Canadian Assessment of Vulnerabilities and Adaptive Capacity as a guiding document.

61

Climate risks and related health effects were reviewed in order to determine if the health impact categories, climate-related causes and projected/possible health effects identified therein were perceived by the ETF to be relevant to Durham region. The range of impacts identified in the Health Canada report including short-term direct impacts such as heat related morbidity and mortality, to longer-term impacts such as the implications related to the spread of insect borne disease

5.6 Roads

The road network in Durham consists of municipal, Regional and provincial roads and highways which were built generally to withstand the climate and weather conditions of the era in which they were constructed. With changes to temperature and precipitation these roads may not be resilient to future conditions.

Scope

The scope of this TF included the transportation network and supporting infrastructure within the region's road right-of-way including, but not limited to, the road itself, sidewalk, multiuse path and bikeways, boulevards, drainage structures (bridges, culverts, storm sewers and outfalls), curb and gutters, street lighting, roadside trees, traffic signals, sign posts, fire hydrants, guiderails, and underground infrastructure including watermains and sanitary sewers.

Major Assumptions

It was assumed, for the purpose of analysis, that there are no future changes to design, construction and maintenance of assets.


Extreme Storm Events HIGH

Impact to culverts and bridges (public safety, increased costs, property damage, economic loss)

Impact to storm sewers and outfalls (main breaks, road failures and flooding, sewer outfall washouts)

Impact to road embankment including shoulders (public health and safety, increased maintenance costs, road damage and closures)

MEDIUM Road failure through subsoil failure Pavement structure failure (in localized areas, water saturation and

freezing/heaving of road base, increase in maintenance costs) Failure of water front bluffs (erosion of escarpment I bluffs will continue;

possibly worsen)

Extreme Heat HIGH

Softening of asphalt (pavement rutting, road failure, increased maintenance costs)

Pavement structure degradation

3

MEDIUM Buckling of pavement and concrete structures (bridges)

Fewer and Less Cold Days HIGH

Premature road deterioration (increased maintenance costs, shortened assetlife, poor drainage)

MEDIUM

Reduction in use of road salt (opportunity; use may increase before it decreases)

5.7 Food Security

Climate impacts on food production are already being observed and include: sensitivity of crop yields to extreme temperatures, increased distribution of invasive weeds, decreased nutritional quality of food and increased global food prices. Adaptation measures for food security can reduce climate vulnerability, especially for low income populations. Measures include improving the efficiency of urban markets, promoting farmers' markets, investing in infrastructure and production technologies that can help moderate food prices.

Scope

This ETF incorporates the definition and mechanisms for food security as outlined in the Durham Region Food Charter (DRFC). The DRFC defines food security as, " ... a situation in which all community residents are able to obtain a safe, culturally acceptable, nutritionally adequate diet through a sustainable food system that maximizes community self-reliance and social justice, and the ability of the agricultural community to support this system." (Growing Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 128 (2009))

Major Assumptions

The Durham Region Food Charter outlines the comprehensive and integrated mechanisms that are needed for a sustainable local food system. These mechanisms include: incorporate food security principles into strategic regional and local policy documents, support local agricultural production, educate consumers, encourage local food procurement policies, influence sustainable resource management and identify climate change impacts and adaptation strategies for farmers and food production.

Note some of the impacts identified by the Food Security Task Force are related to impacts in other sectors.

64


Increased rainfall MEDIUM

Soil erosion (crop production and rot)

Violent events and rain storms HIGH

Crop destruction (reduced availability of local food, crop flattening) Falling branches and power outages (electricity outages and food storage,

handling, processing, access to money and fuel)

MEDIUM Road flooding (interruption of food delivery, consumer access to food)

Summer temperatures (averages and extremes) HIGH

Water supply - quantity and quality (reduction in crops and availability, increased food prices, health impacts)

MEDIUM Livestock (heat stroke, increase in disease and pests, bacteria in water

supply) Dairy production (no outdoor grazing or exercise) Electricity brownouts (food spoilage, health and safety)

Winter temperatures (averages and extremes) MEDIUM

Invasive species (increase in local pests) Reduction in snow cover (impacts erosion and dormancy periods)

Humidex MEDIUM

Heat stroke (people won't want to garden outside) Mold (spoilage)

General HIGH

Crops (increased food prices, availability of local and nutritious food)

65

6. Interdependencies and Gaps

In this first phase, seven key Expert Task Force groups were recruited. While a good start, these seven represent only a portion of the stakeholders and sectorial risk analyses that will be necessary to achieve the objective of a resilient region. The region of Durham is no more resilient than the weakest (most vulnerable) link, therefore all key stakeholders must be engaged in order to achieve that assurance that we seek. Subsequent work involving additional stakeholders is required and will build on the experience and lessons learned during this first phase.

The resilience of society to climate change and extreme weather is inexorably tied to the resilience of key service and infrastructure providers. Similarly, the resilience of the key infrastructure and service providers is dependent on one another. The web of interconnectivity is complex. An example which serves to illustrate how reliant sectors of society are on one another: a loss of electricity affects refrigeration, the ability to heat and cool, cook and refrigerate. Further, gas pumps will be inoperable, banks, ATMs and credit machines will be shut down, grocery stores and restaurants will be likewise shut down.

The ETFs have identified and communicated key interdependencies. The purpose is to ensure that those accountable for managing risk understand the requirements of those that they support. By identifying the organization that has the overarching responsibility we can ensure that the conclusions reached are consistent. Examples include:

while flooding affects transportation and electrical sectors, flood management is the responsibility of the conservation authorities, local municipalities and others,

while extreme heat projections affect all organizations with outside workers, the human health ETF took the lead to assess and communicate the implications.

66

7. Next Steps

Phase 1 - Assessment

Phase 1 of this process towards a Community Climate Adaptation Plan for Durham has been about Assessment:

assessing the future climate parameters in Durham,

assessing community and stakeholder interest in adaptation, and

assessing the risks that future climate conditions create for our infrastructure, public health and safety, economy, environment and society.

Now that the work of the Expert Task Forces has identified at least preliminary high and medium risk areas, the responsible agencies and the community at large are encouraged to turn their attention to measures and programs that will reduce the risks to within acceptable levels and improve community resilience to climate change. Along the way, we may find that such responses, together with our climate mitigation measures, have positive consequences in terms of our economy, the livability of our communities, our social cohesion and our attractiveness as a place for business investment.

In designing our adaptation responses, there are several principles and lessons that should be followed:

"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure": Wise investments now in correcting our infrastructure deficit and building for future climate and weather conditions will yield large benefits in the future.

Start with new infrastructure design: Investment in new buildings, roads, bridges, culverts and other infrastructure should follow leading-edge codes, standards and design criteria that account for future climate conditions, not last century's weather. Designing and building it right the first time is much more cost-effective than replacing or retrofitting it later.

Prioritize our needs for retrofit: We need to inventory our current stock of infrastructure (roads, culverts, buildings, urban forests, vulnerable populations etc.) and identify the most vulnerable sites for early investment.

Follow the responsibility trail: There are many organizations in our community that are already responsible (e.g. legally, economically) for our protection from harm. These organizations have the risk management systems and business planning processes to respond to increased risks from climate change.

Recognize the complexity: We have a complex web of government departments, organizations and agencies and a patchwork of policy instruments and regulations that can affect climate adaptation (see Table 1 for example). In

67

some cases the responsibility and control are clear and in others more difficult to identify.

Look for the synergies: Interdependencies and common interests can define a "community of interest" that can make progress on adaptation (for example home builders, home owners and the home insurance industry should all have a shared interest in improving the resilience of homes to extreme weather).

Look for help: The Durham community is not alone in this battle. Other communities, other levels of government and private interests have experience from which we can learn and in some cases financial resources to help.

Emphasize the positive: We are building a community that is more resilient to the future. That is positive and hopeful. We have the space, adequate fresh water, productive farmland, infrastructure, technical and management expertise and wealth to make Durham a very attractive place to live, work and play.

Stick to the plan: Climate change is irreversible for the foreseeable future. Climate adaptation measures and programs will be needed for the long haul, beginning early and strategically. We need to sustain the effort for a long time and fully implement important programs.

Phase 2: Program Design - 2015

Assuming that this report is received for information by Regional Council (and by extension municipal councils and other stakeholders) in the fall of 2014 and that further development of a Community Climate Adaptation Plan is authorized, the next step is to identify measures and design programs to address the risks identified in Phase 1. The responsibility for this phase rests partly with the Regional Municipality of Durham (whose DRRCC is leading and coordinating the effort) but also with a wide range of other levels of government and various agencies and organizations. Table 1, the Climate Adaptation Responsibility Matrix, demonstrates the range and complexity of this program responsibility area.

It is proposed to initiate this phase immediately after Regional Council endorsement in October 2014 of further work on the Community Climate Adaptation Plan. Possible tasks include:

Research on best practices in other comparable Canadian municipalities;

Reconstituting existing Expert Task Forces with staff having program expertise and responsibility;

Commissioning a climate projection for the period of 2020 to 2029 (to better inform short-term planning);

Working with standards setting agencies in Canada to upgrade the design

standards for infrastructure and adopting improved standards and codes;

68

Organization/Agency Responsibilities Comments Regional Municipality of Durham

Regional roads

water and sanitary sewer services public health policino emeroency medical services emergency response coordination broad-based land-use planning social services

Local Municipalities local roads storm water management fire and emen:1ency services site-plan and development control enforce building code leQislation recreation services and facilities urban forestry vegetation management

Conservation Authorities riverine flooding (prediction and control) site-plan control in flood plains

Recognition of the responsibility for program design in other agencies where they have sole or majority responsibility;

Reaching out to other stakeholders in Durham and the province to work with us; Risk analysis on other sectors such as agriculture, telecommunications, other

modes of transportation etc.;

Creation of a program design collaborative process;

Holding a Design Workshop when appropriate;

Creation of a proposed Community Plan with programs involving all "responsible" organizations;

Approval of the Community Adaptation Plan in principle by Regional Council, municipal councils and other "responsible" organizations

climate change report 2015 j 3 -...

Documents