GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT ENVIRONMENT AND PARKS ...€¦ · November 8, 2013 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT . ENVIRONMENT AND PARKS COMMITTEE . REGULAR MEETING . Thursday,

November 8, 2013

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT

ENVIRONMENT AND PARKS COMMITTEE

REGULAR MEETING

Thursday, November 14, 2013 9:00 a.m.

2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.

A G E N D A1

1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 November 14, 2013 Regular Meeting Agenda That the Environment and Parks Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for November 14, 2013 as circulated.

2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 October 10, 2013 Regular Meeting Minutes

That the Environment and Parks Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held October 10, 2013 as circulated.

3. DELEGATIONS

3.1 Dave Cumming, Chair BCGEU Local 1003, Operational Services (BCGEU) Subject: To reaffirm Metro Vancouver's support for maintaining the AirCare

Program by endorsing the BCGEU document, Renewing Our Commitment to Clean Air in BC.

4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS

No items presented. 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

PARKS

1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable.

EP - 1 -

Environment and Parks Committee Regular Agenda November 14, 2013 Agenda Page 2 of 4

5.1 Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013

Designated Speaker: Gudrun Jensen, Division Manager, Operations Services, Regional Parks Planning, Policy and Environment Department

That the Board: a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver

Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013”; and

b) Reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013”.

5.2 Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013

Designated Speaker: Gudrun Jensen, Division Manager, Operations Services, Regional Parks Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Board: a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver

Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013”; and

b) Reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013”.

5.3 Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013

Designated Speaker: Gudrun Jensen, Division Manager, Operations Services, Regional Parks Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Board: a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver

Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013”; and

b) Reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013”.

5.4 Matsqui Trail Regional Park - Riverfront Erosion

Designated Speaker: Wendy DaDalt, Division Manager, Parks East Area Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Board send a letter to the Province supporting City of Abbotsford requests presented in its correspondence dated October 15, 2013 from Mayor Bruce Banman to the Honourable Steve Thomson and Honourable Suzanne Anton that the Province consider and review the gravel deposits in the vicinity of Abbotsford and provide funding to the City of Abbotsford, as the local dyking authority, for mitigation works on the new erosion arc in Matsqui Trail Regional Park.

EP - 2 -


5.5 Colony Farm Regional Park – Kwantlen Polytechnic University Withdrawal of Proposal for Teaching Farm Designated Speaker: Frieda Schade, Division Manager, Parks Central Area Planning, Policy and Environment Department

That the Board write a letter to Kwantlen Polytechnic University thanking them for their interest in Colony Farm Regional Park.

5.6 Manager’s Report - Parks Designated Speaker: Mitch Sokalski, Director, Regional Parks Planning, Policy and Environment Department

That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated October 29, 2013, titled “Manager’s Report - Parks”.

ENVIRONMENT 5.7 Update on Kinder Morgan Canada, Westridge Marine Terminal Expansion Designated Speaker:

Roger Quan, Director, Air Quality and Environment Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the GVRD Board write to Kinder Morgan Canada and the National Energy Board indicating its concurrence with the concerns raised in the September 30, 2013 letter from the Village of Belcarra to Kinder Morgan Canada regarding the preliminary design of the Westridge Marine Terminal, and requesting that these issues be addressed during the National Energy Board review process, consistent with the “list of issues” identified.

5.8 Letter of Request for Continuation of LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program Designated Speakers:

Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner Erik Blair, Planning Data Analyst Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Board: a) send a letter to the B.C. Minister of Energy and Mines requesting continued

funding of the LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program in 2014/15; and b) forward a copy of this report to the Mayor and Council of each member

municipality for their consideration in making a similar request.

5.9 Update on Electric Vehicle Charging Station Deployment Designated Speakers: Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner Erik Blair, Planning Data Analyst Planning, Policy and Environment Department

That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated October 22, 2013, titled “Update on Electric Vehicle Charging Station Deployment”.

EP - 3 -


5.10 Monitoring Air Quality and Coal Dust

Designated Speaker: Ken Reid, Superintendent of Environmental Sampling and Monitoring Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated November 5, 2013, titled “Monitoring Air Quality and Coal Dust”.

5.11 Manager’s Report - Environment Designated Speaker: Roger Quan, Director, Air Quality and Environment Planning, Policy and Environment Department That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated November 7, 2013, titled “Manager’s Report – Environment”.

6. INFORMATION ITEMS

6.1 Summary of Parks Events a) Calendar - November 2013. b) Calendar - December 2013. c) Calendar - January 2014.

7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.

8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING

That the Environment and Parks Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for November 14, 2013 pursuant to the Community Charter provision, Section 90 (1) (d) as follows: “90 (1) A part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being

considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (d) the security of the property of the regional district”.

9. ADJOURNMENT/TERMINATION

That the Environment and Parks Committee conclude its regular meeting of November 14, 2013.

Membership: Deal, Heather (C) – Vancouver Martin, Gayle (VC) – Langley City Banman, Bruce - Abbotsford Dhaliwal, Sav – Burnaby Dueck, Judy - Maple Ridge

Hodge, Craig – Coquitlam Little, Mike - North Vancouver District Long, Bob – Langley Township Penner, Darrell – Port Coquitlam

Steele, Barbara – Surrey Steves, Harold – Richmond Stone, Andrew – Bowen Island Walters, Deb – Pitt Meadows

EP - 4 -

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the GVRD Environment and Parks Committee held on Thursday, October 10, 2013 Page 1 of 10

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT ENVIRONMENT AND PARKS COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Environment and Parks Committee held at 9:02 a.m. on Thursday, October 10, 2013 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia. PRESENT: Chair, Director Heather Deal, Vancouver Vice Chair, Director Gayle Martin, Langley City (departed at 10:50 a.m.) Director Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Councillor Judy Dueck, Maple Ridge Councillor Craig Hodge, Coquitlam Councillor Mike Little, North Vancouver District Director Bob Long, Langley Township Councillor Darrell Penner, Port Coquitlam Director Barbara Steele, Surrey Director Harold Steves, Richmond Director Andrew Stone, Bowen Island ABSENT: Director Bruce Banman, Abbotsford Director Deb Walters, Pitt Meadows STAFF: Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/General Manager,

Planning, Policy and Environment Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer Janis Knaupp, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services,

Corporate Services Roger Quan, Director, Air Quality and Environment, Planning, Policy and Environment Mitch Sokalski, Director, Regional Parks, Planning, Policy and Environment 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 October 10, 2013 Regular Meeting Agenda It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for October 10, 2013 as circulated.

CARRIED

2.1

EP - 5 -


2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 September 12, 2013 Regular Meeting Minutes It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held September 12, 2013 as circulated.

CARRIED 3. DELEGATIONS No items presented. 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS

4.1 Garry Dawson, Vice-President, Technical Services, TI Corp Garry Dawson, TI Corp., provided members with a presentation regarding the Colony Farm’s Awards for Habitat Enhancement highlighting: award-winning design and implementation; fish returns; collaboration; partnerships with First Nations and Metro Vancouver; award details; and newly constructed Beaver Loop channel and berm and Spirea channel at Surrey Bend project. Request of Staff Staff was requested to provide the Environment and Parks Committee with an annual update on the TI Corp post-construction monitoring program for habitat enhancement at Colony Farm Regional Park. Presentation material titled “Colony Farm Habitat Enhancement” is retained with the October 10, 2013 Environment and Parks Committee agenda.

5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

PARKS 5.1 2014 Budget – Regional Parks

Report dated September 30, 2013 from Mitch Sokalski, Director, Regional Parks, Planning, Policy and Environment, presenting the 2014 Regional Parks budget and business plan for consideration by the Environment and Parks Committee.

Members suggested consideration be given to: • Including long-term project success in the budgeting process and

highlighting performance indicators • Including year-to-year actual expenditures; highlighting program changes

and budget impact • Identifying Board priorities and how to fund them

EP - 6 -


• Discussing if differentiating Metro Vancouver from municipal and provincial parks in the marketing strategy is a top priority and measurable against performance indicators

It was MOVED and SECONDED

That the Environment and Parks Committee endorse the 2014 Regional Parks Budget and Business Plan as presented at its meeting of October 10, 2013, and forward them to the October 18, 2013 Special Joint Finance Committee for information and to the October 30, 2013 Metro Vancouver Board Budget Workshop for consideration.

CARRIED

5.2 Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area - Canpotex Potash Export Terminal Wetland Habitat Compensation Plan Funding Potential for Research Strategy Report dated September 20, 2013 from Markus Merkens, Parks West Area Natural Resource Management Specialist, Planning, Policy and Environment, seeking Board endorsement for the negotiation of a Memorandum of Understanding between Canpotex, Prince Rupert Port Authority, Environment Canada, Corporation of Delta and Metro Vancouver, covering the use of Habitat Compensation Funds to support bog research in the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area.

Discussion ensued about the need to consider: • Whether project compensation funding is truly offsetting the impact that

resulted in the funding being available • Metro Vancouver’s role in the process for accepting funds and the actual

cost of impact versus amount of compensation Request of Staff Staff was requested to report back to the Environment and Parks Committee on: the process for considering compensation funding, Metro Vancouver’s role and engagement and in the process, and details of the environmental impacts which resulted in compensation funding being available from Canpotex Potash Export Terminal. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board authorize staff to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding with Canpotex, Prince Rupert Port Authority, Environment Canada and Corporation of Delta related to the receipt and allocation of habitat compensation funds to conduct research in the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area.

CARRIED

EP - 7 -


5.3 Lower Mainland Green Team Funding Request Report dated September 20, 2013, from Mitch Sokalski, Director, Regional Parks,

Planning, Policy and Environment, responding to direction from the Environment and Parks Committee at its meeting of July 11, 2013, to review a request from the Lower Mainland Green Team (LMGT) for funding in the amount of $35,000 per year for three years (2014-2016), for a total request of $105,000.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board: a) decline the funding request from the Lower Mainland Green Team, and b) support continued collaboration between Metro Vancouver, the Lower

Mainland Green Team and Pacific Parklands Foundation to advance common goals for fostering active citizen engagement in environmental and park stewardship initiatives.

CARRIED

5.4 Colony Farm Regional Park - Sheep Paddocks Trail Alignment Analysis Report dated September 19, 2013 from Frieda Schade, Parks Central Area Division Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment, informing the Environment and Parks Committee on the findings of the Sheep Paddocks Trail Alignment Analysis and seeking endorsement to engage the public on the possible route options to replace the Sheep Paddocks Trail in Colony Farm Regional Park.

Members were provided a presentation regarding the consultant’s analysis of design options highlighting: design criteria and analysis considered; route options; segment B1 – Northern River Alignment; Option 1 recommendation; details of segment 1A and 2B; and Option 2 alternative including segments 2A and 2B.

Presentation material titled “Colony Farm: Sheep Paddocks Trail Route Options” is retained with the October 10, 2013 Environment and Parks Committee agenda.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee: a) authorize staff to solicit public input on all route options for a new Sheep

Paddocks Trail; and b) report back to the Environment and Parks Committee on a preferred route.

CARRIED

5.5 Port Metro Vancouver Habitat Banking Program Report dated September 24, 2013 from Mitch Sokalski, Director, Regional Parks,

and Markus Merkens, Parks West Area Natural Resource Management Specialist Planning, Policy and Environment, responding to September 12, 2013 request from the Environment and Parks Committee for information on Port Metro

EP - 8 -


Vancouver’s Habitat Banking Program and the extent of Metro Vancouver’s jurisdiction related to marine wetland habitat areas. Comments were offered about the need to clarify Metro Vancouver’s jurisdiction around a portion of land located within Sturgeon Banks west of the dike. Request of Staff Staff was requested to report back on Metro Vancouver’s jurisdiction related to Sturgeon Banks, as it relates to Port Metro Vancouver’s Habitat Banking Program.

5.6 2012 – 2013 Metro Vancouver Regional Parks Visitor Use Summary

Report dated September 19, 2013 from Frieda Schade, Parks Central Area Division Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment, updating the Environment and Parks Committee about 2012 visitor use of Regional Parks, explaining possible influences or fluctuations in the statistics and providing preliminary information for visitor use during the first eight months of 2013 (January through August).

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated September 19, 2013, titled “2012 - 2013 Metro Vancouver Regional Parks Visitor Use Summary”.

CARRIED Director Steele absent at the vote.

5.7 Deas Island Regional Park – Massey Tunnel – Replacement Bridge

Announcement Report dated September 24, 2013 from Mitch Sokalski, Director, Regional Parks, Planning, Policy and Environment, updating the Environment and Parks Committee on the recent announcement by the Premier of British Columbia that the Massey Tunnel will be replaced with a bridge, with start of construction planned for 2017.

Discussion ensued about: • The need for a comprehensive analysis of environmental impacts, including

red-listed foreshore species from dredging due to increased tanker traffic, mitigation/compensation opportunities and traffic considerations

• Including greenhouse gas emissions and loss of parkland as part of performance measures

• Referencing the Board’s opposition to increased coal shipments out of Fraser Surrey Docks

EP - 9 -


Members were informed that staff will obtain further project details and report back to both the Environment and Parks, and Transportation Committees.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee: a) receive for information the report dated September 24, 2013, titled “Deas

Island Regional Park – Massey Tunnel – Replacement Bridge Announcement”;

b) direct staff to report back with a comprehensive analysis of potential impacts to the environment and regional parks, including potential dredging activities associated with tanker traffic, from the Massey Tunnel – Replacement Bridge Announcement; and

c) forward the report to the Board for information. CARRIED

10:50 a.m. Director Martin departed the meeting.

5.8 Manager’s Report – Parks Report dated September 19, 2013 from Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment, updating the Environment and Parks Committee on: the Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan - Parks; Country Celebration; Music in The Park; and River’s Day Celebrations. Members were informed that staff will report back with further details of Kwantlen Polytechnic University’s withdrawal from the Colony Farm agriculture project. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated September 19, 2013, titled “Manager’s Report - Parks”.

CARRIED

ENVIRONMENT 5.9 2014 Budget – Air Quality and Environment

Report dated September 29, 2013 from Roger Quan, Director, Air Quality and Environment, Planning, Policy and Environment, presenting the 2014 Air Quality and Environment budget and business plans for consideration by the Environment and Parks Committee.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee endorse the 2014 Air Quality and Environment Budget and Business Plan as presented at its meeting of October 10, 2013, and forward both to the October 18, 2013 Special Joint

EP - 10 -


Finance Committee for information and to the October 30 Metro Vancouver Board Budget Workshop for consideration.

CARRIED

5.10 Greater Vancouver Regional District Air Quality Management Bylaw No. 1082, 2008 – Staff Appointments

Report dated October 1, 2013 from Ray Robb, Regulation and Enforcement Division Manager, Corporate Services, updating staff appointments under the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Regional District Air Quality Management Bylaw No. 1082, 2008. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board, pursuant to the Environmental Management Act and Greater Vancouver Regional District Air Quality Management Bylaw No. 1082, 2008 appoint Corey Pinder and Lynne Bosquet as Officers.

CARRIED 5.11 Greater Vancouver Regional District Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Amending Bylaw No. 1190, 2013

Report dated September 16, 2013 from Ray Robb, Regulation and Enforcement Division Manager, Corporate Services, recommending adoption of “Greater Vancouver Regional District (“GVRD”) Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Amending Bylaw No. 1190, 2013” (the Bylaw). The Bylaw amends the requirements for biomass projects authorized by “GVRD Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Bylaw No. 1087, 2008”. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board: a) introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver

Regional District Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Amending Bylaw No. 1190, 2013”; and

b) reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Regional District Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Amending Bylaw No. 1190, 2013”.

CARRIED

5.12 Assessment of the Appropriateness of the Requirements of the Agricultural Boilers Emission Regulation Bylaw No. 1098, 2008 Report dated September 19, 2013 from Ray Robb, Regulation and Enforcement Division Manager, Corporate Services, reporting to the Board on the results of an assessment of the appropriateness of the requirements of “Greater Vancouver Regional District Agricultural Boilers Emission Regulation Bylaw No. 1098, 2008”.

EP - 11 -


It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board receive for information the report dated September 19, 2013, titled “Assessment of the Appropriateness of the Requirements of the Agricultural Boilers Emission Regulation Bylaw No. 1098, 2008”.

CARRIED

5.13 Draft Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory Subregional Profiles Report dated September 19, 2013 from Erin Embley, Regional Planner, Planning, Policy and Environment, providing the Board information about Metro Vancouver’s ecosystems as derived from the Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory (SEI).

Members were provided a presentation about the new SEI on-line viewer highlighting: initial view; sub-regional pages; system legend; labeling and descriptions of codes provided; other features available; ecosystem options for map viewing; imagery/streetmap; watercourses; parks and protected areas; and availability on the Metro Vancouver website.

Presentation material titled “Sensitive Ecosystems Inventory (SEI) Web Viewer”

is retained with the October 10, 2013 Environment and Parks Committee agenda.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Board receive for information the report dated September 19, 2013, titled “Draft Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory Subregional Profiles“.

CARRIED

5.14 Manager’s Report - Environment Report dated September 19, 2013 from Delia Laglagaron, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer/General Manager, Planning, Policy and Environment, updating the Environment and Parks Committee on: Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan - Environment; Regional Green Infrastructure Network Update; and Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project Definition.

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated September 19, 2013, titled “Manager’s Report – Environment”.

CARRIED 6. INFORMATION ITEMS

Members considered Items 6. 2 and 6.3 and the need to understand alignment with Metro Vancouver’s policies.

EP - 12 -


It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee: a) refer to staff the Information Items 6.2 Burrard Inlet Marine Environment, and 6.3

Westridge Marine Terminal – Preliminary Design, as presented in the October 10, 2013 agenda, to staff, to report back with an analysis of alignment with Metro Vancouver policy; and

b) inform the Board of the Committee’s direction to staff. CARRIED

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the following Information Items. 6.1 Summary of Parks Events – Calendar October 2013. 6.2 Burrard Inlet Marine Environment – Correspondence dated September 16, 2013 from Mayor Ralph Drew, Village of Belcarra addressed to Margaret Mears, Environmental Lead, Kinder Morgan Canada. 6.3 Westridge Marine Terminal – Preliminary Design – Correspondence dated

September 30, 2013 from Mayor Ralph Drew, Village of Belcarra addressed to Ian Anderson, President, Kinder Morgan Canada.

6.4 Press Releases and Headline Statements on IPCC 5th Assessment Report 6.4 a Headline Statements from the Summary for Policy Makers - IPCC 5th Assessment Report. 6.4 b Human influence on climate clear, IPCC report say - IPCC Press Release. 6.4 c British Columbia should prepare for a different climate future - Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, Media Release.

CARRIED 7. OTHER BUSINESS No items presented.

8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for October 10, 2013 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e), (g) and (i) as follows: “90 (1) A part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being

considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or

improvements, if the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district;

(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district; and (i) the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege,

including communications necessary for that purpose.” CARRIED

EP - 13 -


9. ADJOURNMENT/TERMINATION

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Environment and Parks Committee adjourn its regular meeting of October 10, 2013.

CARRIED (Time: 11:11 a.m.)

____________________________ ____________________________ Janis Knaupp, Heather Deal, Chair Assistant to Regional Committees 7921909 FINAL

EP - 14 -

2-Page Advance Presentation Summary Metro Vancouver Environment Committee, November 14, 2013 Submitted by BC Government and Service Employees' Union, November 6, 2013

Subject of Presentation: To reaffirm Metro Vancouver's support for maintaining the AirCare program by endorsing the BCGEU document, Renewing Our Commitment to Clean Air in BC. Please review the full 6-page document at http://www.bcgeu.ca/campaigns_and_issues/save_aircare

Action for Metro Vancouver Environment Committee: To endorse and sign on to the BCGEU document, Renewing Our Commitment to Clean Air in BC;

To make a recommendation to the GVRD Board that they endorse and sign on to the BCGEU document, Renewing Our Commitment to Clean Air in BC.

Summary of BCGEU research document, Renewing Our Commitment to Clean Air in BC AirCare helps everyone breathe easier

AirCare provides measurable benefits to public health, especially for young children, seniors, and people with respiratory problems, and reduces the risk of cancer, respiratory diseases and premature births.

Light-duty vehicles are the largest source of smog-forming pollutants and greatest contributor to ground-level ozone—which has significantly increased since 2006.

Scrapping light-vehicle testing will negatively affect air quality and the environment, and increase healthcare costs.

Ending AirCare will result in more pollution

Approximately 12% of vehicles fail AirCare each year. Most owners get their vehicles maintained or repaired before taking the test— but many would not repair their vehicles if AirCare testing was not required.

New vehicles have better emissions controls than they used to, but all cars eventually break down with age and mileage, and when they do, they can produce harmful emissions. AirCare is the program that detects those malfunctioning vehicles and compels their owners to make the necessary repairs.

Decision to scrap light-duty vehicle testing makes no sense

AirCare is the most cost-effective way of reducing harmful vehicle emissions and removing pollutants from the atmosphere—responsible for a 28% reduction in vehicle emissions since 1992.

Without AirCare, government has no way to ensure that the 500,000 vehicles that AirCare tests every year will be properly maintained.

Around 11% of the half million vehicles tested fail every year. What is not known is how many vehicles are repaired or serviced prior to receiving a test.

The government cancelled the program without any opportunity for public consultation or evidence offered that would justify cancelling this highly effective program.

Research recommended the program continue until 2020. Ending AirCare will cost our economy millions of dollars and hundreds of jobs.

AirCare creates $56 million a year for BC’s economy from AirCare-related repairs and new vehicle sales. 100 AirCare workers perform “green jobs” and are proud of their part in reducing our environmental footprint.

So far, Renewing Our Commitment to Clean Air in BC has been endorsed by the Asthma Society of Canada, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, the Sierra Club of BC, Environmental Youth Alliance, the Hospital Employees' Union, and the Canadian Office & Professional Employees Union Local 378. We are working on endorsements from other health and environmental organizations.

EP - 15 -

http://www.bcgeu.ca/campaigns_and_issues/save_aircare

GStanese

Text Box

3.1

Recent UBC study on traffic pollution and health UBC study: Traffic-related air pollution and health: a Canadian perspective on scientific evidence and potential exposure-mitigation strategies (Brauer M, Reynolds C, Hystad P), March 2012. This extensive study can be found here: http://hdl.handle.net/2429/41542 Page 60 "…Emissions control devices deteriorate as vehicles age, and engine malfunctions can cause tailpipe pollutant emissions to increase by orders of magnitude. Therefore it is desirable to identify means of controlling emissions from the in-use fleet in addition to implementing emissions standards for new vehicles. Approaches to achieve this include implementing inspection and maintenance programs at the provincial or regional level, retrofitting older vehicles with treatment devices…" Page 61 "In addition to vehicle age, it has been consistently found that the majority of emissions are from a small fraction of malfunctioning vehicles… When implemented correctly, Inspection and Maintenance programs can be an effective way of identifying those high-emitters…"

Recent media coverage of links between air pollution and lung cancer Air pollution causes cancer – WHO (CBC, The National, October 17, 2013) http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Health/ID/2412724455/ Air pollution causes lung cancer (CBC, October 17, 2013) http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/air-pollution-causes-lung-cancer-who-agency-decides-1.2100862 Pollution Nine Times Deadlier Than Crashes (Vancouver Sun, October 21, 2013) http://www.vancouversun.com/health/pollution+nine+times+deadlier+than+crashes+study+finds/9061897/story.html Exhaust near elementary schools concerns UBC researchers (CBC, October 21, 2013) http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/story/1.2128490

Action to Take The GVRD Board and the Environment Committee have supported the continuation of AirCare in the past, most recently with two motions in June 2012. We would like to propose the following motions today:

To endorse and sign on to the BCGEU document, Renewing Our Commitment to Clean Air in BC;

To make a recommendation to the GVRD Board that they endorse and sign on to the BCGEU document, Renewing Our Commitment to Clean Air in BC.

Questions?

EP - 16 -

http://hdl.handle.net/2429/41542

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Health/ID/2412724455/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/air-pollution-causes-lung-cancer-who-agency-decides-1.2100862

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/pollution+nine+times+deadlier+than+crashes+study+finds/9061897/story.html

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/story/1.2128490

GStanese

Text Box

8021606

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Gudrun Jensen, Division Manager, Operations Services, Regional Parks

Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: October 15, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw

Number 1192, 2013 RECOMMENDATION That the Board: a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Regional District

Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013”; and b) Reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks

Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013”. PURPOSE To authorize amendments to “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional (GVRD) Parks Regulation Bylaw Number 1177, 2012”. BACKGROUND This GVRD bylaw is specific to regional parks. The bylaw covers safe public use of regional parks, protects park resources, and defines acceptable public conduct, park officer enforcement powers, and establishes the fees and charges for the use of regional parks facilities. The bylaw is amended from time to time to improve operational implementation. Fees and charges are reviewed annually and amended as required to match market conditions and offset administrative and operating costs. The fees for regional park services, programs and facilities rentals are priced to reflect fair market value. BYLAW AMENDMENTS Regulatory The GVRD Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw is structured to lay out prohibitions. The Regional Parks Director has broad powers to regulate park use through a permit system, allowing activities that would otherwise contravene the prohibitions set out in the Regulation Bylaw. Proposed regulatory amendments include: • Clarifying delegation of authority to Park Manager from the Board, and for issuing park

permits and charging fees;

5.1

EP - 17 -

Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013 Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 3 • More fully integrating and embedding into the body of the bylaw the substantive sections in

the old fees and charges schedule, into: o Definitions o General Fees o Commercial Use and Private Event Park Permits o Cancellations, Changes, Refunds and Exemptions;

• Requiring an animal owner to carry a leash; • Potentially allowing use of motor assisted cycles; • Adding that no person may remove park property; • Specifying the need to comply with a park officer order; • Redefining a dangerous device so that the bylaw is complementary to criminal firearms

legislation; and • Minor housekeeping changes. Companion Notice of Bylaw Violation and Dispute Adjudication and Ticket Information Utilization amending bylaws complement regulatory changes proposed in the Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw. Fees and Charges Proposed fees and charges amendments in Schedule A of the Parks Regulation Bylaw include: • Fees for picnic shelters and open fields increase an average of 3% to reflect market

conditions. • The hourly rate for use of Cammidge House increases from $60 to $62 per hour (3%), and the

fee for use of Minnekhada Lodge increases from $75 to $80 per hour (7%). These increases help to offset increased operating costs and also maintain pricing in line with that offered by other jurisdictions and the private sector for similar facilities.

• Private event park permits increase an average 3% base fee to recover administrative costs. • Fees for commercial use park permits and associated fees increase an average of 4.5% to

recover administrative costs. Fees considered already reflective of market conditions are not changed (e.g., camping, parking, interpretation programs). ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board:

a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013”; and

b) Reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013”.

2. That the Board provide comments on the proposed amendments and request staff to incorporate these comments into a revised amending bylaw.

EP - 18 -

Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013 Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013

Page 3 of 3 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The proposed fee increases will result in a minor increase in annual revenue of $7,000, provided that facility use remains at 2013 levels. The financial implications of regulatory amendments are negligible. Notice of Bylaw Violation (NBV) and Municipal Ticket Information (MTI) ticketing fines associated with the Parks Regulation Bylaw are not intended to comprise a stable revenue stream but do help to offset costs for in-house NBV disputes adjudication and MTI court disputes. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw was significantly re-written in 2012. These proposed bylaw amendments are largely housekeeping adjustments after one year’s implementation, and to adjust fees and charges to market conditions. Metro Vancouver continues to require the ability to manage and enforce acceptable public use on regional park land and the ability to charge appropriate fees for the use of facilities to help offset operating costs. Staff recommends Alternative 1. Attachment: Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013 (Doc. #7920454). 7920635

EP - 19 -

________________________________________________________________________________ Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013 Page 1 of 16

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT BYLAW NUMBER 1192, 2013

A Bylaw to Amend Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw Number

1177, 2012 WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District has adopted “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw Number 1177, 2012”, a bylaw to establish rules and regulations for the management, maintenance, operation, enforcement, control, and use of regional parks and property in regional parks; and

WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District wishes to amend “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw Number 1177, 2012”;

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows: 1. “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw Number 1177, 2012” is

hereby amended as follows: (a) The full text of the recitals is deleted and replaced with the following:

“Whereas: A. By Supplementary Letters Patent dated January 13, 1972 and bylaws adopted pursuant

to the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 323 the Greater Vancouver Regional District operates the service of regional parks in areas outside and within the regional district;

B. The Local Government Act authorizes the Greater Vancouver Regional District to, by

bylaw, impose fees and charges payable in respect of a service of the regional district and the use of regional district property and to, by bylaw, regulate and prohibit in relation to a regional district service;

C. It is deemed desirable to establish rules and regulations for the management,

maintenance, operation, enforcement, control, and use of regional parks and property in regional parks; and

D. The Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District has designated the

Director of Regional Parks as the Park Manager and has delegated to the Park Manager, the administrative powers of the Regional District relating to the management and use of regional parks and regional park property;

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District in open

meeting duly assembled enacts as follows:”

5.1 Attachment

EP - 20 -


(b) The following definitions are added to section 1.3 in alphabetical order:

““adult” means a person 19 years of age or older but under the age of 65; “child” means a person between 3 and 14 years of age; “dangerous device” means any device that is dangerous, potentially dangerous or otherwise harmful to persons, natural park features, regional park property, or animals and includes but is not limited to: a knife, sword, slingshot, bow, cross-bow, rifle, shotgun, handgun, spring gun or other device that propels a projectile by means of an explosion, compressed gas or spring; “day” or “day use” means the period of time during which the regional park is open according to the posted notice designating the hours of operation or as otherwise designated in a park permit; “interpretive program” means an activity, program or event that is partly or wholly sponsored and organized by the GVRD and is either made available to the public or private groups on a pre-registration or drop-in basis; “late checkout” means every hour or portion thereof, that use of a regional park facility or occupation of regional park property continues, after the expiry of the rental period in a park use permit; “night” or “overnight” means the period of time during which the regional park is closed according to the posted notice designating the hours of operation or as otherwise designated in the permit;

“park interpreter” means a Metro Vancouver staff member or contractor who provides education on regional parks and for regional park events, services and interpretive programs; “permittee” means a person who is issued a park permit under this bylaw; “private event” means an activity or event that is privately organized and is not open to the public; “private group” means a group of more than one person that is pre-registered to participate in an interpretive program not open to the public; “regional park event” means an event that is sponsored and organized by regional parks staff and either made available to the public or private groups on a pre-registration or drop-in basis;

EP - 21 -


“regional park facility” means a facility located within a regional park; “senior” means a person 65 years of age or older; “small group” means a total of no more than 6 persons in a group consisting of:

(a) up to 2 adults and up to 4 persons who are 18 years of age or under; or

(b) 1 adult and up to 5 persons who are 18 years of age or under; “weekday” means Monday to Friday excluding holidays; “weekend” means Saturday and Sunday; “youth” means a person between 15 and 18 years of age; “youth group” means a group of persons consisting of:

(a) youths or children; and (b) a maximum of 1 adult for every 4 youths or children; and,”;

(c) The definition of “organized activity” in section 1.3 is deleted and replaced by the

following: ““organized activity” includes any sports, golf, war games, geocaching, role play and other games and physical activities that are organized as a tournament, series, competition, challenge, or other similar manner of contest;”;

(d) Section 1.7 is added as follows:

“1.7 In this bylaw, singular number words include the plural and vice versa. Where applicable, male gender words include the female gender and vice versa and either include the neuter.”;

(e) Section 1.8 is added as follows:

“1.8 Schedule “A” to this bylaw sets out fees established by the park manager for certain regional parks services and park permits and the park manager may, from time to time, establish additional fees payable for regional parks services or park permits.”;

(f) Section 2.4 is deleted and replaced by the following: “If a park officer believes that a young person has contravened or is contravening this bylaw, a park permit, or a GVRD Policy, the park officer may order the parent of the young

EP - 22 -


person, or any person whom the park officer believes is responsible for the young person, to do anything necessary or reasonable to stop the contravention or prevent another contravention.”;

(g) Section 2.5(c) is amended by replacing the period with a semi-colon;

(h) Section 2.5(d) is added as follows:

“(d) comply with any order issued by a park officer pursuant to this bylaw.”;

(i) Section 3.4 is deleted and replaced by the following: “No person shall: (a) cut, trim, dig up, excavate, deface, remove, damage, log or prune any natural park

features, or engage in any other similar activity that is harmful or potentially harmful to natural park features;

(b) construct, clear, or otherwise create trails or pathways, or modify, damage, move, or otherwise change trails or pathways that have been designated by posted notice;

(c) damage, deface, vandalize, tamper with, or destroy regional park property;

(d) build, place, erect, or install any permanent or temporary buildings, structures, improvements, facilities, or temporary shelter;

(e) place, store, use, manufacture, deposit, or release, or cause, permit or allow the placing, storing, using, manufacturing or releasing of any contaminant in, on, or under a regional park, regional park property, or natural park feature; or

(f) remove regional park property.”;

(j) Section 3.5 is deleted and replaced by the following: “No person shall possess or consume liquor within a regional park unless such possession and consumption is pursuant to and in compliance with: (a) a licence issued under the Liquor Control and Licensing Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 267 (as

amended); and

(b) a park permit.”;

(k) Section 4.1 is deleted and replaced by the following:

EP - 23 -


“No person shall act or engage in disorderly, dangerous, violent, lewd, sexual, or offensive conduct, or act or engage in any conduct or activity that may be dangerous, potentially dangerous, or otherwise harmful to persons, natural park features, regional park property, or animals.”;

(l) Section 4.2 is deleted and replaced by the following: “No person shall possess, use or discharge any dangerous device while in a regional park.”;

(m) Section 4.4 is deleted and replaced by the following: “No person shall: (a) make or cause any noise or amplified sound; or

(b) use or operate any equipment, machinery, motor assisted cycle, or motor vehicle, in a manner that causes a disturbance or potential disturbance to the peace, enjoyment, or comfort of other persons or animals, or in a manner that is dangerous or potentially dangerous, or is otherwise harmful or disturbing to persons, natural park features, regional park property, or animals.”;

(n) Section 8.3 is deleted and replaced by the following: “No owner shall cause, permit, or allow an animal to engage in any conduct that is dangerous, harmful, injurious, or potentially dangerous, harmful or injurious to persons, natural park features, regional park property, or other animals.”;

(o) Section 8.15 is added as follows: “8.15 An owner of an animal must carry a leash for the animal at all times while in a regional park.”;

(p) Section 9.4 is deleted and replaced by the following: “No person shall use or operate watercraft in a manner that is dangerous or potentially dangerous to persons, natural park features, regional park property, or animals, or in a manner that obstructs or interferes with the use of a regional park or regional park property by other persons.”;

(q) Section 10.2 is deleted and replaced by the following: “No person shall use or operate a motor vehicle in a regional park except on and within a roadway or parking lot.”;

EP - 24 -


(r) A new section 10.3 is inserted as follows after section 10.2, and the subsequent clauses in Part 10 are accordingly re-numbered: “No person shall use or operate a motor assisted cycle in a regional park except: (a) on and within a roadway or parking lot; or (b) on a trail or greenway designated by posted notice as allowing that activity.”;

(s) The re-numbered section 10.5 is deleted and replaced by the following:

“Where a posted notice requires payment for parking, no person shall park a motor vehicle without obtaining a parking permit.”;

(t) The re-numbered section 10.6 is deleted and replaced by the following: “No person shall park a motor assisted cycle or motor vehicle: (a) anywhere other than in a location designated by posted notice for parking;

(b) anywhere prohibited by posted notice for parking;

(c) overnight, or leave the motor assisted cycle or motor vehicle in a regional park

when it is closed according to the posted notice designating the hours of operation;

(d) anywhere designated by posted notice as parking for persons with disabilities except with a valid disabled persons’ parking permit issued under the B.C. Motor Vehicle Act that is displayed on the motor assisted cycle or motor vehicle; or

(e) anywhere designated by posted notice as service or emergency vehicle parking.”;

(u) A new “Part 12 – General Fees” is inserted as follows after “Part 11 – Commercial Activities”, and the subsequent Parts are re-numbered:

“Part 12 – General Fees 12.1 The park manager may impose fees for interpretive programs and events. 12.2 The following persons are exempt from payment of fees for regional park

interpretive programs and events available to the public:

(a) persons under 3 years of age;

(b) one attendant that is required to assist a person with a disability;

EP - 25 -


(c) a person who provides proof of paid fare for travel by public transportation to an interpretive program or regional park event that is made available to the public on a drop-in basis.

12.3 The park manager may impose fees for tent rentals from GVRD, which may include

set-up and take-down costs as set out in section 1.1 of Schedule “A”.

12.4 The park manager may impose fees for a park permit for persons possessing, serving or consuming liquor as set out in section 1.2 of Schedule “A”.

12.5 The park manager may impose fees for parking as set out in section 1.3 of Schedule “A”.

12.6 The park manager may offer and charge a fee for general liability insurance in connection with a park permit for the use of a regional park facility or regional park property.”;

(v) The re-numbered “Part 13 – Park Permits” is deleted and replaced with the following:

“Part 13 – Park Permits

Park Permit Authority and General Park Permit Conditions 13.1 Without limiting section 1.6 of this bylaw and notwithstanding the general

prohibitions in this bylaw, the park manager may provide for a system of park permits to regulate any use, conduct, or activities in a regional park or the use or occupation of regional park property, including doing any one or more of the following:

(a) establishing terms and conditions of, or terms and conditions that must be

met for, obtaining, continuing to hold, or renewing a park permit;

(b) providing for the granting, refusal, suspension or cancellation of park permits;

(c) providing for the effective periods of park permits;

(d) limiting the number of park permits that may be issued, having regard to the nature of the regional park, preservation of natural park features, the impact of the use, conduct, or activity on the use and enjoyment of the regional park or regional park property, and any other factors the park manager deems reasonable;

(e) providing for temporary exclusive use or occupation of a regional park, regional park property, or portions thereof, which may include the

EP - 26 -


temporary closure of a regional park, regional park property or portions thereof; and

(f) such other uses, conduct or activities that the park manager deems reasonable.

13.2 Notwithstanding the general prohibitions in this bylaw, the park manager may issue a park permit in respect of any use, conduct, or activities in a regional park or the use or occupation of regional park property.

13.3 A permittee shall: (a) pay the fees and charges for the park permit plus applicable taxes unless

otherwise specified as tax included; and

(b) comply with the terms and conditions in the park permit.

13.4 A permittee shall comply with all, laws, enactments, bylaws, and regulations, and obtain any permits and approvals from federal, provincial, local government, and regulatory authorities applicable to the use, conduct or activity for which the park permit is issued.

13.5 The park manager may require a deposit to be paid as security for costs, expenses, losses or damages GVRD incurs arising out of or in connection with a park permit.

13.6 It is a term of all park permits that neither GVRD, nor any of its elected or appointed officers, employees, servants, agents, contractors, licensees or representatives, accepts or assumes any responsibility or liability for any claims, demands, proceedings, actions, suits, costs, expenses, fines, losses or damages in respect to death, injury, loss or damage to persons or property, however and whenever caused, arising out of or in connection with a park permit. The person who is issued the park permit shall indemnify and save harmless GVRD, and its elected and appointed officials, directors, officers, employees, servants, contractors, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, proceedings, actions, suits, costs, expenses, fines, losses or damages arising, directly or indirectly, in connection with the park permit.

Commercial Use Park Permits

13.7 A person who carries on a business, trade, profession, commercial activity or

occupation, including activities on a non-profit basis, within a regional park or on regional park property must apply to the park manager for a commercial use park permit.

EP - 27 -


13.8 A person applying for a commercial use park permit must submit an application to the park manager together with the initial application fee in section 2.1 of Schedule “A”.

13.9 The annual commercial use park permit fee for activities not listed in section 2.1 of

Schedule “A” shall be determined by the park manager and in any case shall be no less than the amount listed for general commercial activities.

13.10 A permittee must pay the annual fee for a commercial use park permit for each

year that such permit is held.

13.11 A commercial use permittee may be responsible for the additional, specialized fees in section 2.2 of Schedule “A”, if such fees are determined by the park manager to apply to the commercial activities set out in the park permit.

Regional Park Facility Park Permits

13.12 A person seeking temporary exclusive use and occupation of a regional park facility

must apply to the park manager for a regional park facility park permit.

13.13 The fees payable for a regional park facility park permit are set out in section 3.0 of Schedule “A”.

13.14 A permittee will be charged for cleaning fees in the event the regional park facility

is not left in the condition in which it was provided.

Private Event Park Permits 13.15 A person seeking temporary, exclusive use and occupation of a regional park facility

for a private event must apply to the park manager for a private event park permit, if the private event is intended to involve any of the following: (a) more than 50 persons in attendance, whether as participants or spectators;

(b) building, placing, erecting, or installing any permanent or temporary

buildings, structures, improvements, facilities, or shelters;

(c) making or causing any noise or amplified sound;

(d) the use or operation of any equipment;

(e) exclusive use or occupation of a regional park, regional park property, or portions thereof, or the closure of a regional park, regional park property or portions thereof;

EP - 28 -


(f) possessing, serving or consuming liquor;

(g) a monetary charge to participants or spectators; or

(h) taking place when the regional park or regional park property is closed. 13.16 The fees payable for a private event park permit are as set out in section 4.0 of

Schedule “A”.

13.17 GVRD may impose fees in addition to those specified in section 4.0 of Schedule “A” to recover actual costs or lost revenue in connection with a private event.”;

(w) A new “Part 14 – Cancellations, Changes, Refunds, and Exemptions” is inserted to follow

“Part 13 – Park Permits” and the subsequent “Part 15 – Offences and Severability” is accordingly re-numbered:

“Part 14 – Cancellations, Changes, Refunds, and Exemptions 14.1 Fees paid under this bylaw, unless otherwise stated, are non-refundable. 14.2 Upon cancellation of a park permit, the permittee will be charged according to the

notification period in section 5.0 of Schedule “A” to this bylaw.

14.3 A person who provides GVRD with 4 to 7 days notice cancelling a public interpretive program may apply to have the fee paid as a credit towards an interpretive program within the same calendar year.

14.4 A person may apply in writing to the park manager for a refund of all or a portion of a fee or charge if the person establishes, in the discretion of the park manager, that the person: (a) no longer requires the service for which the fee or charge was paid; or

(b) no longer undertakes the use or activity for which a park permit was

required. 14.5 A person is eligible for an exemption from payment of the private event park

permit fee in section 4.0 of Schedule “A” if all of the following are satisfied: (a) a private event coordinator is not paid to organize the private event; (b) the purpose of the private event is to fundraise for a charity registered in

Canada; and, (c) the net proceeds fundraised from the event will be donated to that charity.

EP - 29 -


14.6 A person who is eligible for the exemption in section 14.5 must submit any

information and records that the park manager deems necessary to evaluate the exemption.

14.7 Any person, public educational institution or GVRD member municipality may be eligible for an exemption from payment of designated fees or charges if their use, conduct, or activities in a regional park or in respect of regional park property is considered by the park manager to result in a substantial net benefit to the community or any aspect of the community, which determination is in the discretion of the park manager.”;

(x) Schedule A is deleted and replaced by the attached Schedule A.

2. This bylaw shall be cited as “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Amending Bylaw Number 1192, 2013”.

READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this _______day of ___________________, 2013. RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this _______day of ___________________, 2013.

__________________________________ Greg Moore, Chair

__________________________________ Paulette A. Vetleson, Corporate Officer

EP - 30 -


SCHEDULE A

Section 1.0 GENERAL FEES

1.1

Tent Rental Fees Tent size Fee, per day 6.09m x 6.09m (20' x 20') $795 6.09m x 9.14m (20' x 30') $965

1.2

Liquor Permits Number of Persons Fee, per day 1 to 199 persons $105 200 - 299 persons $155 300 - 999 persons $210 1000 or more persons $315

1.3

Parking Permits

Regional Park Location Fee, per hour Fee, per day Pacific Spirit Fraser Lot $1.50 $7.50

Section 2.0 COMMERCIAL USE PARK PERMIT FEES

2.1

Commercial Use Permit Initial Application and Annual Fees

Fee

Initial commercial use permit application fee $105 Annual commercial use permit fee for general commercial activities $105 Annual commercial use permit fee for bicycle tours $207 Annual commercial use permit fee for guided equestrian rides $207 Commercial use permit fee for dog walking, up to 4 dogs $450 Commercial use permit fee for dog walking, more than 4 dogs $750

EP - 31 -


Section 2.0 COMMERCIAL USE PARK PERMIT FEES (Continued)

2.2

Commercial Use Permit Specialized Fees

Fees

Locker storage of commercial-use related equipment at Wreck Beach, where the maximum rental period permitted is April 1 to September 30 of each year

$100 per bin per rental period (non-refundable)

Replacement key for locker storage at Wreck Beach

$15 per replacement

Commercial use permittee vest $35 per vest Effective up to and including December 31, 2013, for buses and other motor vehicles that enter Capilano River Regional Park (via Capilano Park Road) in connection with a commercial use

24 or fewer seats: $25 per vehicle per day

25 seats or more: $43 per vehicle per day

Effective January 1, 2014, the following are the fees payable for a park permit for buses and other motor vehicles that enter a regional park in connection with a commercial use

11 or fewer seats: $15 per vehicle per day or $600 annually per vehicle 12 to 24 seats: $25 per vehicle per day or $850 annually per vehicle 25 seats or more: $43 per vehicle per day or $1,250 annually per vehicle

Section 3.0 REGIONAL PARK FACILITY PARK PERMIT FEES

3.1

Outdoor Facilities

Regional Park Facility

Fee on weekends and holidays, per

day

Fee on weekdays, per

day

Picnic Shelters

Aldergrove Blacktail Picnic Shelter $140 $67 Belcarra Belcarra 1 Picnic Shelter $140 $67 Belcarra Belcarra 2 Picnic Shelter $140 $67 Boundary Bay Boundary Bay 1 Picnic Shelter $140 $67 Boundary Bay Boundary Bay 2 Picnic Shelter $140 $67 Campbell Valley Old Orchard Picnic Shelter $140 $67 Crippen Crippen 1 Picnic Shelter $67 $67 Crippen Crippen 2 Picnic Shelter $67 $67 Crippen Crippen 3 Picnic Shelter $67 $67 Deas Island Deas Picnic Shelter $140 $67 Deas Island Muskrat Meadows Picnic Shelter $140 $67 Derby Reach Marpole Picnic Shelter $140 $67

EP - 32 -


Section 3.0 REGIONAL PARK FACILITY PARK PERMIT FEES

3.1

Outdoor Facilities (Continued)

Fields

Aldergrove Aldergrove Bowl $105 $105 Aldergrove Sedge Field $83 $83 Boundary Bay Centennial Beach Field $83 $83 Campbell Valley Little River Bowl $83 $83 Campbell Valley Little River Field $83 $83 Campbell Valley Rowlatt Farm Field $105 $105 Campbell Valley Rowlatt Farm Enhanced Field (with

access to electrical power and washrooms)

$260 $260

Campbell Valley Picnic Terrace $83 $83 Capilano River Cleveland Dam Field $83 $83 Crippen Middle Field $83 $83 Crippen Snug Cove Field $83 $83 Crippen Snug Cove Ball Diamond $83 $83 Deas Island Fisher's Field $83 $83 Lynn Headwaters Lynn Headwaters Field $83 $83 Pacific Spirit Plains of Abraham $83 $83

Miscellaneous Outdoor Facilities

Belcarra Belcarra Wharf Reserved Mooring $75, per hour $75, per hour Campbell Valley Campbell Downs Equestrian Centre $140 $140 Campbell Valley Equestrian Centre Overflow Parking Lot $83 $83 Campbell Valley MacLean Pond $25 $25

Campsites

Fee, per night Youth group fee, per night

Campbell Valley Camp Coyote Group Camp $200 $100 Deas Island Muskrat Meadows Group Camp $200 $100 Tynehead Raven's Nest Group Camp $200 $100

Seniors/Persons with disabilities

fee, per night Derby Reach Edgewater Bar Campground Site $24 $21

EP - 33 -


Section 3.0 REGIONAL PARK FACILITY PARK PERMIT FEES (Continued)

3.2

Indoor Facilities Fee Youth group fee Capilano River Camp Capilano Overnight rental $1,000, per

night $420, per night

Day use, from 9am to 5pm

$500, per day $210, per day

Late checkout $200, per hour $200, per hour Lifeguarding service

$35, per hour $35, per hour

Cleaning service $25, per hour $25, per hour Boundary Bay Cammidge

House Facility rental $62, per hour n/a Tent or Over Occupancy Limit

$250, per day n/a

Late checkout $200, per hour n/a Deas Island Inverholme

Schoolhouse Facility rental $50, per hour n/a

Minnekhada Minnekhada Lodge

Facility rental $80, per hour n/a Late checkout $200, per hour n/a

Lynn Headwaters BC Mills House Facility rental $15, per hour n/a

4.0 PRIVATE EVENT PARK PERMIT FEES

Event Description

Number of Participants & Spectators Fee

Simple event Up to 300 persons $257, per day Complex event 301 to 500 persons $385, per day Large event Over 500 persons $515, per day Camping outside of designated campsites

n/a $6 per person, per night

EP - 34 -


5.0 SECURITY DEPOSITS AND CANCELLATION FEES

5.1

Security Deposits

Park Permit Facility Security Deposit Commercial Use Permit $105 Facility Reservation Permit Rowlatt Farm Enhanced Field (with

access to electrical power and washrooms)

$500

Facility Reservation Permit Camp Capilano $200 Facility Reservation Permit Cammidge House $500 Facility Reservation Permit Inverholme Schoolhouse $500 Facility Reservation Permit Minnekhada Lodge $500 Facility Reservation Permit BC Mills House $200

5.2

Cancellation Fees

Park Permit Cancellation Notification Period Fee Outdoor Facilities, See Schedule A section 3.1

More than 2 months prior to the rental date

$25

2 months or less prior to the rental date

100% of fee paid

Indoor Facilities, See Schedule A section 3.2

More than 6 months prior to the rental date

50% of security deposit

6 months or less prior to the rental date

100% of security deposit

Private Events, See Schedule A section 4.0

More than 2 months prior to the event date

$25

2 months or less prior to the event date

100% of fee paid

Private Group, See Part 12 section12.1

At least 14 days prior to the program date

$25

Fewer than 14 days prior to the program date

100% of fee paid

7920454

EP - 35 -


Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: October 15, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and

Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013 RECOMMENDATION That the Board: a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Regional District

Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013”; and


PURPOSE To authorize amendments to “Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Bylaw Number 1117, 2010”. BACKGROUND The Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Bylaw enables Metro Vancouver to enforce compliance with its regulatory bylaws. Compliance with Metro Vancouver’s regulatory bylaws is primarily promoted through non-punitive means such as education, advisories and warnings. However, in some cases and for some offences, punitive measures are warranted, and the use of Notices of Bylaw Violation (NBVs) is an effective and complementary alternative to other ticketing and legal options. BYLAW AMENDMENTS The amending bylaw proposed replaces Schedule A which designates violations under various GVRD regulatory bylaws which may be dealt with by Notice of Bylaw Violation. The regulatory bylaws affected are the Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw, the Air Quality Management Bylaw and its emission regulations, and including the Non-Road Diesel Engine Emission Regulation Bylaw. Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw To reflect recent amendments offence phrases are added (“Failure to Obey Order”, “Failure to Obey Posted Notice”, “Removing Park Property” and “Unauthorized Use of Motor Assisted Cycle”), and offences in sections 10 and 13 are re-numbered. For legal clarity, “Possessing Firearm” is replaced with “Possessing Dangerous Device” and “Possessing or Consuming Liquor” is removed.

5.2

EP - 36 -

Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013 Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 2

Air Quality Management and Regulation Bylaws The language in many of the offences is modified for legal clarity and conciseness. In some cases bylaw amendments have resulted in new offences and in others offences have been combined to eliminate redundancies. Additionally, offences for the Non-Road Diesel Engine Emission Regulation Bylaw have been added for the first time. A list of the changes to the air quality management and regulation bylaws is attached. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board:

a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013”; and



FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The financial implications of these amendments are negligible. NBV ticket fines are not intended to comprise a stable revenue stream but do help to offset costs for in-house adjudication of NBV disputes and Municipal Ticket Information (MTI) court disputes. NBV fines are based on risk to Metro Vancouver objectives with the maximum fine ($500) assigned to those with the greatest potential loss. The NBV fines are half those of the MTI fine for the corresponding offence. Together, these ticketing bylaws form a graduated fine regime available when punitive enforcement is necessary. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Amendments to the Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Bylaw follow from amendments made to Metro Vancouver regulatory bylaws which may be enforced using NBVs. Staff recommends Alternative 1, which is reflected in the report recommendation. The proposed amending bylaw provides a current NBV offence and fine schedule for Metro Vancouver regulatory bylaws. Metro Vancouver continues to require the ability to issue NBVs as they provide an administrative ticketing alternative where disputes are screened, heard and resolved in-house through the adjudication process instead of Provincial Court. Attachments: 1. Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute

Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013 (Doc. #7922295). 2. Air Quality Management and Regulation Bylaws Amendments List for GVRD Notice of Bylaw

Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013 (Doc. #7946619).

7920456

EP - 37 -

________________________________________________________________________ Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013 Page 1 of 9


A Bylaw to Amend Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation

Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Bylaw Number 1117, 2010 WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District has adopted “Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Bylaw Number 1117, 2010”, a bylaw respecting the enforcement of Notices of Bylaw Violation and establishing a Bylaw Violation Dispute Adjudication System; and

WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District wishes to amend “Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Bylaw Number 1117, 2010”;

NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows: 1. “Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Notice of Bylaw Violation

Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Number 1117, 2010” is hereby amended as follows:

a) Schedule A is deleted in its entirety and replaced by the attached Schedule A.

2. This bylaw shall be cited as “Greater Vancouver Regional District Notice of Bylaw

Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013”. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this ___day of __________________, 2013. RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this ___day of _________________, 2013.

__________________________________ Greg Moore, Chair


5.2 Attachment 1

EP - 38 -


Schedule A

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5 Column 6 Section Authorized Words or Expressions Discounted

Penalty Penalty Late

Payment Penalty

Compliance Agreement Available

GVRD Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw Number 1177, 2012 (amended) 2.5 Failure to Assist Park Officer $190 $250 $310 No

2.5(d) Failure to Obey Order $190 $250 $310 No 2.6 Obstruction of Park Officer $375 $500 $500 No 2.7 Misleading Park Officer $190 $250 $310 No 3.1 Failure to Obey Bylaw $375 $500 $500 No 3.2 Failure to Obey Posted Notice $190 $250 $310 No 3.3 In Park When Closed $190 $250 $310 Yes 3.4 Destroying or Damaging Park

Property $375 $500 $500 No

3.4(d) Unauthorized Structure $95 $125 $155 No 3.4(f) Removing Park Property $375 $500 $500 No

3.6 Interfering with Park Permit $190 $250 $310 No 3.7 Inadequate Supervision of Young

Person $95 $125 $155 No

4.1 Dangerous or Offensive Conduct $375 $500 $500 No 4.2 Possessing Dangerous Device $375 $500 $500 No 4.3 Defecating or Urinating Where

Not Allowed $95 $125 $155 No

4.4 Undue Noise or Disturbance $190 $250 $310 No 5.1 Off Road or Trail $375 $500 $500 No 5.2 Obstructing Road or Trail $375 $500 $500 No 5.3 Unauthorized Group Gathering $95 $125 $155 No 5.4 Unauthorized Activity $95 $125 $155 No 6.1 Smoking $375 $500 $500 No 6.2 Discarding Burning Substance $375 $500 $500 No 6.3 Use of Flame-Producing Device

Where Not Allowed $375 $500 $500 No

6.4 Open Fire $375 $500 $500 No 6.5 Fireworks $375 $500 $500 No 7.2 Depositing Waste $375 $500 $500 No 7.4 Littering $95 $125 $155 No 8.1 Animal Not Under Control $95 $125 $155 No 8.2 Disorderly Animal $95 $125 $155 No 8.3 Dangerous Animal $375 $500 $500 No 8.4 Unleashed Animal $190 $250 $310 Yes 8.6 Dog Feces Left $95 $125 $155 No

EP - 39 -


Schedule A



Payment Penalty


GVRD Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw Number 1177, 2012 (amended) (continued) 8.7 Dog Where Not Allowed $190 $250 $310 No 8.8 Dog Not Leashed Near Horse $190 $250 $310 No

8.10 Horse Where Not Allowed $190 $250 $310 No 8.11 Disturbing An Animal $190 $250 $310 No 8.13 Feeding An Animal $95 $125 $155 No 8.14 Abandoning An Animal $95 $125 $155 No 9.1 Swimming Where Not Allowed $190 $250 $310 No 9.2 Tampering with Float or Lifesaving

Device $375 $500 $500 No

9.3 Mooring Where Not Allowed $375 $500 $500 No 10.2 Unauthorized Use of Motor

Vehicle $375 $500 $500 No

10.3 Unauthorized Use of Motor Assisted Cycle

$95 $125 $155 No

10.4 All-Terrain Vehicle or Motorized Device

$190 $250 $310 No

10.5 Parking Without Permit $95 $125 $155 No 10.6 Unauthorized Parking $95 $125 $155 No 10.8 Cleaning or Repairing Vehicle $95 $125 $155 No 11.1 Commercial Activity Without

Permit $375 $500 $500 Yes

13.3(a) Failure to Pay Permit Fees or Charges

$190 $250 $310 No

13.3(b) Failure to Comply With Permit $375 $500 $500 No GVRD Air Quality Management Bylaw Number 1082, 2008

8 Burning unauthorized fuel in residential fireplace or stove

$95 $125 $155 Yes

8 Improper use of residential fireplace or stove.

$95 $125 $155 Yes

11(4) Violation of permit monitoring requirement

$190 $250 $310 Yes

11(5) Violation of permit record keeping or reporting requirement

$95 $125 $155 Yes

13 Violation of approval monitoring requirement

$190 $250 $310 Yes

EP - 40 -


Schedule A



Payment Penalty


GVRD Air Quality Management Bylaw Number 1082, 2008 (continued) 13 Violation of approval record

keeping or reporting requirement

$95 $125 $155 Yes

31 Removing, tampering with or interfering with monitoring equipment

$375 $500 $500 No

33 Failure to provide reasonable access

$290 $375 $460 Yes

Concrete and Concrete Products Industries Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1084, 2008 7 Failure to register $190 $250 $310 Yes 8 Failure to pay registration fee $190 $250 $310 Yes

10 Failure to pay annual fee $190 $250 $310 Yes 11(2) Fugitive dust visible beyond plant

boundary $190 $250 $310 Yes

14 Failure to report or take corrective action for an emergency or like condition

$290 $375 $460 Yes

15 Improperly equipped storage silo $190 $250 $310 Yes 16 Ineffective fabric filter system

during cement or flyash unloading

$375 $500 $500 Yes

18 Ineffective fabric filter systems during concrete batching operations

$190 $250 $310 Yes

19 Ineffective fabric filter system during drying, mixing or bagging operations

$375 $500 $500 Yes

21 Failure to minimize fugitive dust from active operations

$190 $250 $310 Yes

24 Failure to keep records $95 $125 $155 Yes 25 Failure to retain or produce

records $95 $125 $140 Yes

EP - 41 -


Schedule A



Payment Penalty


Gasoline Distribution Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1085, 2008 7 Failure to register $190 $250 $310 Yes 8 Failure to pay registration fees $190 $250 $310 Yes

10 Failure to pay annual fees –terminal or bulk plant

$190 $250 $310 Yes

11 Failure to pay annual fees – fuel transfer vehicle

$190 $250 $310 Yes

12 Failure to pay annual fee – service station

$190 $250 $310 Yes

Gasoline Distribution Terminals 17 Gasoline transfer without vapour

balancing system $375 $500 $500 Yes

18 Improper gasoline transfer at a distribution terminal

$375 $500 $500 Yes

20 Interfering with vapour recovery system through scheduled maintenance

$190 $250 $310 Yes

21 Failure to notify of inoperative vapour recovery system

$190 $250 $310 Yes

22 Failure to provide employees or operators with written procedures or training

$95 $125 $155 Yes

23 Failure to report control works malfunction

$190 $250 $310 Yes

26 Failure to keep records $95 $125 $155 Yes 27 Failure to retain or produce records $95 $125 $155 Yes

27(4) Failure to submit annual report $95 $125 $155 Yes Bulk Plants

29 Gasoline storage tank not equipped with adequate vapour balancing system

$375 $500 $500 Yes

32 Failure to provide employees or operators with written procedures or training

$95 $125 $155 Yes



36(4) Failure to submit annual report $95 $125 $155 Yes

EP - 42 -


Schedule A



Payment Penalty


Gasoline Distribution Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1085, 2008 (continued) Fuel Transfer Vehicles

38 Fuel transfer vehicle not equipped with adequate vapour recovery system

$375 $500 $500 Yes



45(4) Failure to submit annual report $95 $125 $155 Yes Service Stations

47 Inadequate vapour controls or equipment for submerged filling of storage tanks

$290 $375 $460 Yes

51 Failure to retain records $95 $125 $155 Yes 52 Failure to produce records $95 $125 $155 Yes

Automotive Refinishing Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1086, 2008 7 Failure to register $190 $250 $310 Yes 8 Failure to pay registration fee $190 $250 $310 Yes

10 Failure to pay annual fees $190 $250 $310 Yes 14(2) Failure to post or maintain spray

gun operating parameters $95 $125 $155 Yes

20(1) Failure to certify technician(s) $190 $250 $310 Yes 20(2) Failure to post or maintain

technician certification $95 $125 $155 Yes



Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1087, 2008 6 Failure to register - natural gas or

propane fuelled boilers $190 $250 $310 Yes

7 Failure to register - biomass fuelled boilers

$190 $250 $310 Yes

10 Failure to pay registration fee $190 $250 $310 Yes 12 Failure to pay annual fees $190 $250 $310 Yes 18 Unauthorized bypass of control

works $375 $500 $500 Yes

28 Unauthorized emission stack less than 20 meters high

$190 $250 $310 Yes

EP - 43 -


Schedule A



Payment Penalty


Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1087, 2008 (continued) 31 Failure to conduct emission

testing as required $190 $250 $310 Yes

31(6) Emission testing without required notice

$95 $125 $155 Yes

33 Failure to comply with emission testing methodology

$190 $250 $310 Yes

34 Failure to keep records $95 $125 $155 Yes 35 Failure to retain records $95 $125 $155 Yes 36 Failure to produce records $95 $125 $155 Yes

37(1) Failure to submit emission exceedance results within 5 days of testing

$190 $250 $310 Yes

37(2) Failure to submit emission testing results within 60 days of testing

$95 $125 $155 Yes

Agricultural Boilers Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1098, 2008 6 Failure to register - natural gas or

propane boiler $190 $250 $310 Yes

7 Failure to register - biomass boiler

$190 $250 $310 Yes

10 Failure to pay registration fee $190 $250 $310 Yes 12 Failure to pay annual fees $190 $250 $310 Yes 23 Emission limits exceeded –

biomass boiler $375 $500 $500 Yes

26 Unauthorized emission stack less than 15 meters high

$190 $250 $310 Yes

30 Failure to conduct emission testing as required

$190 $250 $310 Yes

32 Failure to comply with emission testing methodology

$190 $250 $310 Yes

32 Emission testing without required notice.

$95 $125 $155 Yes

33 Failure to keep records $95 $125 $155 Yes 34 Failure to retain records $95 $125 $155 Yes 35 Failure to produce records $95 $125 $155 Yes 36 Failure to submit emission

testing results $95 $125 $155 Yes

EP - 44 -


Schedule A



Payment Penalty


Greater Vancouver Regional District Electoral Area A Zoning Bylaw Number 1144, 2011 201(1) Use land or building contrary to

bylaw $190 $250 $310 No

Greater Vancouver Regional District Electoral Area A Building Administration Bylaw Number 1043, 2006

107(2) Obstruct Building Official $190 $250 $310 No 109(3) Fail to stop work $375 $500 $500 No 201(1) Construction without a permit $375 $500 $500 No 201(2) Occupy without approval $190 $250 $310 No 201(3) Submit false information $190 $250 $310 No 201(4) Tamper with posted notice $190 $250 $310 No 201(5) Work contrary to approved plans $190 $250 $310 No 210(1) Fail to post building permit $190 $250 $310 No

Greater Vancouver Regional District Electoral Areas “B” and “C” Unsightly Premises Bylaw Number 583, 1987

2(a) Untidy Property $190 $250 $310 No 2(b) Unsightly Property $190 $250 $310 No 2(c) Rubbish or Offensive Matter

Accumulating Around Property $190 $250 $310 No

3(b) Failure To Remove Accumulated Rubbish

$375 $500 $500 No

Greater Vancouver Regional District Non-Road Diesel Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1161, 2012

13 Failure to register $190 $250 $310 Yes 14 Obstruction by an operator $95 $125 $155 Yes 18 Operation of engine without Tier

label $95 $125 $155 Yes

19 Failure to display registration number or Tier label during operation

$95 $125 $155 Yes

21 Failure to keep low-use engine records

$95 $125 $155 Yes

22 Failure to comply with records requirements

$95 $125 $155 Yes

32 Operating a prohibited Tier 0 engine

$375 $500 $500 Yes

33 Operating a prohibited Tier 1 engine

$375 $500 $500 Yes

EP - 45 -


Schedule A



Payment Penalty


Greater Vancouver Regional District Non-Road Diesel Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1161, 2012 (continued)

35 Unauthorized engine idling $190 $250 $310 Yes 37 Failure to submit anti idling

procedure $95 $125 $155 Yes

7922295

EP - 46 -

Air Quality Management and Regulation Bylaws Proposed Amendments List for GVRD Notice of Bylaw Violation Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication

Amending Bylaw Number 1193, 2013 ` GVRD Air Quality Management Bylaw Number 1082, 2008: a) “Failure to facilitate access for inspections or tests” is removed and replaced with “Failure to

provide reasonable access”. b) “Burning unauthorized fuel in residential fireplace or stove” and “Improper use of residential

fireplace or stove” are added. c) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. GVRD Concrete and Concrete Products Industries Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1084, 2008: a) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. b) “Failure to register” section number is corrected. GVRD Gasoline Distribution Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1085, 2008 (as amended): a) “Failure to provide employees or operators with written procedures or training” and “Failure to

submit annual report” for sections 27(4), 36(4), 45(4) are added. b) “Failure to employ submerged fill” and “Failure to keep records” are removed. c) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. d) “Failure to register” section number is corrected. GVRD Automotive Refinishing Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1086, 2008: a) “Failure to properly store VOC containing materials” is removed. b) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. c) “Failure to register” section number is corrected. GVRD Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1087, 2008 (as amended): a) “Emission testing without required notice” is added. b) “Failure to record the quantity and duration of standby fuel use” and “Exceeding the total use

of standby fuels” are removed. c) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. GVRD Agricultural Boilers Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1098, 2008 (as amended): a) “Failure to pay annual fees”, “Emission testing without required notice”, “Failure to produce

records” and “Failure to submit emission testing results” are added. b) “Failure to conduct emission tests for biomass fuelled boilers and process heaters” and “Failure

to conduct emission tests for manufactured wood fuelled boilers and process heaters” are removed.

c) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. d) “Failure to retain records” section number is corrected. GVRD Non-Road Diesel Engine Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1161, 2012: a) All offences are added for the first time. 7946619

5.2 Attachment 2

EP - 47 -


Planning, Policy and Environment Department

Date: October 15, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending

Bylaw Number 1194, 2013 RECOMMENDATION That the Board: a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Regional District

Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013”; and b) Reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information

Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013”. PURPOSE To authorize amendments to “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw Number 1050, 2006”. BACKGROUND The Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw enables Metro Vancouver to enforce compliance with its regulatory bylaws. Compliance with Metro Vancouver’s regulatory bylaws is primarily promoted through non-punitive means such as education, advisories and warnings. However, in some cases and for some offences, punitive measures are warranted, and the use of Municipal Ticket Informations (MTIs) is an effective and complementary alternative to other ticketing and legal options. BYLAW AMENDMENTS The proposed amending bylaw would replace eight Schedules which designate ticketing violations and fines under various GVRD regulatory bylaws which may be dealt with by Municipal Ticket Informations. These regulatory bylaws include the Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw, the GVRD Air Quality Management Bylaw and its emission regulations, and including the GVRD Non-Road Diesel Engine Emission Regulation Bylaw. Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw To reflect recent amendments offence phrases are added (“Failure to Obey Order”, “Failure to Obey Posted Notice”, “Removing Park Property” and “Unauthorized Use of Motor Assisted Cycle”), and offences in sections 10 and 13 are re-numbered. For legal clarity, “Possessing Firearm” is replaced with “Possessing Dangerous Device” and “Possessing or Consuming Liquor” is removed.

5.3

EP - 48 -

Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013 Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 2

Air Quality Management and Regulation Bylaws The language in many of the offences is modified for legal clarity and conciseness. In some cases, bylaw amendments have resulted in new offences and in others offences have been combined to eliminate redundancies. A list of the changes to the air quality management and regulation bylaws is attached. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board:

a) Introduce and give first, second and third reading to “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013”; and

b) Reconsider, pass and finally adopt “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013”.


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The financial implications of these amendments are negligible. MTI ticket fines are not intended to comprise a stable revenue stream but do help to offset costs for MTI court disputes and in-house adjudication of Notice of Bylaw Violation (NBV) disputes. MTI fines are based on risk to Metro Vancouver objectives with the maximum fine ($1000) assigned to those with the greatest potential loss. The MTI fines are twice those of the NBV fine for the corresponding offence. Together, these ticketing bylaws form a graduated fine regime available when punitive enforcement is necessary. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Amendments to the Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw follow from amendments made to Metro Vancouver regulatory bylaws which may be enforced using MTIs. Staff recommends Alternative 1. The proposed amending bylaw provides a current MTI offence and fine schedule for Metro Vancouver regulatory bylaws. Metro Vancouver continues to require the ability to issue MTIs as they provide an escalated ticketing alternative for more egregious bylaw contraventions. Attachments: 1. Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number

1194, 2013 (Doc. #7920455). 2. Air Quality Management and Regulation Bylaws Proposed Amendments List for GVRD Ticket

Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013 (Doc. #7944644). 7920636

EP - 49 -

______________________________________________________________________ Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013 Page 1 of 11


A Bylaw to Amend Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw

Number 1050, 2006 WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District has adopted “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw Number 1050, 2006”, a bylaw to designate those bylaws for which the municipal ticket information may be used as a means of bylaw enforcement; and WHEREAS the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District wishes to amend “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw Number 1050, 2006”; NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the Greater Vancouver Regional District, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows: 1. “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw Number 1050,

2006” is hereby amended as follows:

a) Schedules B, C, D, E, F, G, H and K are deleted in their entirety and replaced by the attached Schedules B, C, D, E, F, G, H and K.

2. This bylaw shall be cited as “Greater Vancouver Regional District Ticket Information

Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013”. READ A FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD TIME this ___day of __________________, 2013. RECONSIDERED, PASSED AND FINALLY ADOPTED this ___day of _________________, 2013.

__________________________________ Greg Moore, Chair


5.3 Attachment 1

EP - 50 -


Schedule B

Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw Number 1177, 2012 (amended)

Column 1

Authorized Words or Expressions Column 2 Section

Column 3 Fine

Failure to Assist Park Officer 2.5 $500 Failure to Obey Order 2.5(d) $500 Obstruction of Park Officer 2.6 $1000 Misleading Park Officer 2.7 $500 Failure to Obey Bylaw 3.1 $1000 Failure to Obey Posted Notice 3.2 $500 In Park When Closed 3.3 $500 Destroying or Damaging Park Property 3.4 $1000 Unauthorized Structure 3.4(d) $250 Removing Park Property 3.4(f) $500 Interfering with Park Permit 3.6 $500 Inadequate Supervision of Young Person 3.7 $250 Dangerous or Offensive Conduct 4.1 $1000 Possessing Dangerous Device 4.2 $1000 Defecating or Urinating Where Not Allowed 4.3 $250 Undue Noise or Disturbance 4.4 $500 Off Road or Trail 5.1 $1000 Obstructing Road or Trail 5.2 $1000 Unauthorized Group Gathering 5.3 $250 Unauthorized Activity 5.4 $250 Smoking 6.1 $1000 Discarding Burning Substance 6.2 $1000 Use of Flame-Producing Device Where Not Allowed 6.3 $1000 Open Fire 6.4 $1000 Fireworks 6.5 $1000 Depositing Waste 7.2 $1000 Littering 7.4 $250 Animal Not Under Control 8.1 $250 Disorderly Animal 8.2 $250 Dangerous Animal 8.3 $1000 Unleashed Animal 8.4 $500 Dog Feces Left 8.6 $250 Dog Where Not Allowed 8.7 $500 Dog Not Leashed Near Horse 8.8 $500

EP - 51 -


Schedule B (Continued) Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Parks Regulation Bylaw Number 1177, 2012

(amended) Horse Where Not Allowed 8.10 $500 Disturbing An Animal 8.11 $500 Feeding An Animal 8.13 $250 Abandoning An Animal 8.14 $250 Swimming Where Not Allowed 9.1 $500 Tampering with Float or Lifesaving Device 9.2 $1000 Mooring Where Not Allowed 9.3 $1000 Unauthorized Use of Motor Vehicle 10.2 $1000 Unauthorized Use of Motor Assisted Cycle 10.3 $250 All-Terrain Vehicle or Motorized Device 10.4 $500 Parking Without Permit 10.5 $250 Unauthorized Parking 10.6 $250 Cleaning or Repairing Vehicle 10.8 $250 Commercial Activity Without Permit 11.1 $1000 Failure to Pay Permit Fees or Charges 13.3(a) $500 Failure to Comply With Permit 13.3(b) $1000

EP - 52 -


Schedule C

Greater Vancouver Regional District Air Quality Management Bylaw Number 1082, 2008

Column 1 Authorized Words or Expressions

Column 2 Section

Column 3 Fine

1. Discharge of air contaminant 5 $1000 2. Disposal of waste by incineration or burning 6 $1000 3. Burning unauthorized fuel in residential fireplace or stove 8 $250 4. Improper use of residential fireplace or stove. 8 $250 5. Violation of permit discharge limit or restriction 11(1) $1000 6. Violation of permit works requirement 11(2) $1000 7. Violation of permit monitoring requirement 11(4) $500 8. Violation of permit record keeping or reporting requirement 11(5) Min. $250

Max. $500 9. Violation of approval discharge limit or restriction 13 $1000 10. Violation of approval works requirement 13 $1000 11. Violation of approval monitoring requirement 13 $500 12. Violation of approval record keeping or reporting

requirement 13 Min. $250

Max. $500 13. Discharging air contaminants while permit or approval is

suspended 21 (1) (a) $1000

14. Discharging air contaminants while permit or approval is cancelled

21 (1) (b) $1000

15. Failure to provide information as ordered 27 (1) $1000 16. Violation of pollution prevention order 28 (1) $1000 17. Violation of pollution abatement order 29 (1) $1000 18. Removing, tampering with or interfering with monitoring

equipment 31 $1000

19. Failure to provide reasonable access 33 $750

EP - 53 -


Schedule D Greater Vancouver Regional District Concrete and Concrete Products Industries Emission

Regulation Bylaw Number 1084, 2008

Column 1 Authorized Words or Expressions

Column 2 Section

Column 3 Fine

1. Failure to register 7 $500 2. Failure to pay registration fee 8 $500 3. Failure to pay annual fee 10 $500 4. Fugitive dust exceeds 20% opacity 11 (1) $500 5. Fugitive dust visible beyond plant boundary 11 (2) $500 6. Failure to report or take corrective action for an emergency

or like condition 14 $750

7. Improperly equipped storage silo 15 $500 8. Ineffective fabric filter system during cement or flyash

unloading 16 $1000

9. Fabric filter cleaning cycle not conducted daily 17 $500 10. Ineffective fabric filter systems during concrete batching

operations 18 $500

11. Ineffective fabric filter system during drying, mixing or bagging operations

19 $1000

12. Air contaminant discharge from fabric filter system exceeds 5% opacity

20 $1000

13. Failure to minimize fugitive dust from active operations 21 $500 14. Failure to keep records 24 $250 15. Failure to retain or produce records 25 $250

EP - 54 -


Schedule E

Greater Vancouver Regional District Gasoline Distribution Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1085, 2008 (amended)

Column 1


Column 3 Fine

1. Failure to register 7 $500 2. Failure to pay registration fee 8 $500 3. Failure to pay annual fees –terminal or bulk plant 10 $500 4. Failure to pay annual fees – fuel transfer vehicle 11 $500 5. Failure to pay annual fee – service station 12 $500 6. Failure to take corrective action or minimize discharge

during breakdown or malfunction 13 $750

Gasoline Distribution Terminals 7. Failure to use, equip or maintain a vapour recovery system 16 $500 8. Gasoline transfer without vapour balancing system 17 $1000 9. Improper gasoline transfer at a distribution terminal 18 $1000 10. improper vapour recovery system at a distribution terminal 19 $750 11. Interfering with vapour recovery system through scheduled

maintenance 20 $500

12. Failure to notify of inoperative vapour recovery system 21 $500 13. Failure to provide employees or operators with written

procedures or training 22 $250

14. Failure to report control works malfunction 23 $500 15. Failure to annually test vapour recovery system 25 $500 16. Failure to keep records 26 $250 17. Failure to retain or produce records 27 $250 18. Failure to submit annual report 27(4) $250 Bulk Plants 19. Gasoline storage tank not equipped with adequate vapour

balancing system 29 $1000

20. Improper gasoline transfer at a bulk plant. 31 $1000 21. Failure to provide employees or operators with written


22. Failure to biennially test vapour balancing system 34 $500 23. Failure to keep records 35 $250 24. Failure to retain or produce records 36 $250 25. Failure to submit annual report 36(4) $250

EP - 55 -


Schedule E (Continued)

Greater Vancouver Regional District Gasoline Distribution Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1085, 2008 (amended)

Fuel Transfer Vehicles 26. Fuel transfer vehicle not equipped with adequate vapour

recovery system 38 $1000

27. Gasoline transfer without vapour balancing system 39 $1000 28. Improper gasoline transfer to or from fuel transfer vehicle 40 $750 29. Failure to provide employees or operators with written


30. Failure to annually test fuel transfer vehicle 43 $500 31. Failure to keep records 44 $250 32. Failure to retain or produce records 45 $250 33. Failure to submit annual report 45(4) $250 Service Stations 34. Inadequate vapour controls or equipment for submerged

filling of storage tanks 47 $750

35. Improper gasoline transfer at a service station 48 $750 36. Failure to retain records 51 $250 37. Failure to produce records 52 $250

EP - 56 -


Schedule F

Greater Vancouver Regional District Automotive Refinishing Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1086, 2008

Column 1


Column 3 Fine

1. Failure to register 7 $500 2. Failure to pay registration fee 8 $500 3. Failure to pay annual fees 10 $500 4. Discharge of air contaminants exceeding 0% opacity 12 (1) $500 5. Air contaminants deposited beyond premises 12 (2) $1000 6. Discharge of air contaminants causing odour beyond

premises 12 (3) $500

7. Using automotive refinishing products exceeding the maximum specified VOC content

13 $250

8. Spray coating without use of adequate spray gun or alternate spray system

14 (1) $500

9. Failure to post or maintain spray gun operating parameters 14 (2) $250 10. Spray coating outside of spray booth or without adequate

ventilation 15 $750

11. Improper ventilation stack discharge system 17 $500 12. Spray application equipment not cleaned or maintained as

required 18 $250

13. Failure to employ air contaminant or VOC management practices

19 $250

14. Failure to certify technician(s) 20 (1) $500 15. Failure to post or maintain technician certification 20 (2) $250 16. Failure to keep records 21 $250 17. Failure to retain or produce records 22 $250

EP - 57 -


Schedule G

Greater Vancouver Regional District Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1087, 2008 (amended)

Column 1


Column 3 Fine

1. Failure to register - natural gas or propane fuelled boilers 6 $500 2. Failure to register - biomass fuelled boilers 7 $500 3. Failure to pay registration fee 10 $500 4. Failure to pay annual fees 12 $500 5. Unauthorized bypass of control works 18 $1000 6. Failure to take corrective action upon emergency or like

conditions 19 $1000

7. Failure to notify or take remedial action upon emergency or like conditions

20 $500

8. Biomass fuel management plan not submitted 21(1) $500 9. Biomass fuel management plan not followed 21(2) $500 10. Emission limits exceeded – natural gas or propane 24 $1000 11. Emission limits exceeded – biomass 25 $1000 12. Unauthorized use of standby fuel 26 Min $250

Max $1000 13. Improper emission stack 27 $500 14. Unauthorized emission stack less than 20 metres high 28 $500 15. Failure to conduct dispersion modelling as required 29 $500 16. Failure to conduct emission testing as required 31 $500 17. Emission testing without required notice 31(6) $250 18. Failure to comply with emission testing requirements 32 $500 19. Failure to comply with emission testing methodology 33 $500 20. Failure to keep records 34 $250 21. Failure to retain records 35 $250 22. Failure to produce records 36 $250 23. Failure to submit emission exceedance results within 5 days

of testing 37(1) $500

24. Failure to submit emission testing results within 60 days of testing

37(2) $250

25. CEMS not properly installed, operated or maintained 38 $500

26. Failure to conduct biennial boiler performance tune-up 40 $500

EP - 58 -


Schedule H

Greater Vancouver Regional District Agricultural Boilers Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1098, 2008 (amended)

Column 1


Column 3 Fine

1. Failure to register - natural gas or propane boiler 6 $500 2. Failure to register - biomass boiler 7 $500 3. Failure to pay registration fee 10 $500 4. Failure to pay annual fees 12 $500 5. Unauthorized bypass of control works 16 $1000 6. Failure to take corrective action upon emergency or like

conditions 17 $1000

7. Failure to notify or take remedial action upon emergency or like conditions

18 $500

8. Biomass not properly stored or handled 19 $500 9. Emission limits exceeded – natural gas or propane boiler 22 $1000 10. Emission limits exceeded – biomass boiler 23 $1000 11. Unauthorized use of standby fuel 24 Min $250

Max $1000 12. Improper emission stack 25 $500 13. Unauthorized emission stack less than 15 meters high 26 $500 14. Failure to conduct emission testing as required 30 $500 15. Failure to comply with emission testing requirements 31 $500 16. Failure to comply with emission testing methodology 32 $500 17. Emission testing without required notice 32 $250 18. Failure to keep records 33 $250 19. Failure to retain records 34 $250 20. Failure to produce records 35 $250 21. Failure to submit emission testing results 36 $250

EP - 59 -


Schedule K

Greater Vancouver Regional District Non-Road Diesel Engine Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1161, 2012

Column 1


Column 3 Fine

1. Discharge of air contaminant 6 $1000 2. Failure to register 13 $500 3. Obstruction by an operator 14 $250 4. Operation of engine without Tier label 18 $250 5. Failure to display registration number or Tier label during

operation 19 $250

6. Failure to keep low-use engine records 21 $250 7. Failure to comply with records requirements 22 $250 8. Unauthorized alteration of emission reduction measure 29 $500 9. Operating a prohibited Tier 0 engine 32 $1000 10. Operating a prohibited Tier 1 engine 33 $1000 11. Unauthorized operation of non-road diesel engine 34 $1000 12. Unauthorized engine idling 35 $500 13. Failure to submit anti idling procedure 37 $250

7920455

EP - 60 -

Air Quality Management and Regulation Bylaws Proposed Amendments List for GVRD Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw Number 1194, 2013

Schedule C - GVRD Air Quality Management Bylaw Number 1082, 2008: a) “Failure to facilitate access for inspections or tests” is removed. b) “Burning unauthorized fuel in residential fireplace or stove” and “Improper use of residential

fireplace or stove” replace the original phrase for legal clarity. c) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. Schedule D - GVRD Concrete and Concrete Products Industries Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1084, 2008: a) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. b) “Failure to register” section number is corrected. Schedule E - GVRD Gasoline Distribution Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1085, 2008 (as amended): a) “Failure to provide employees or operators with written procedures or training” and “Failure to

submit annual report” for sections 27(4), 36(4), 45(4) are added. b) “Failure to employ submerged fill” and “Failure to keep records” are removed. c) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. d) “Failure to register” section number is corrected. Schedule F - GVRD Automotive Refinishing Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1086, 2008: a) “Failure to discharge stack gases at a minimum velocity of 15 m/s” and “Failure to employ proper

organic gun wash solvents” are removed. b) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. c) “Failure to register” section number is corrected. Schedule G - GVRD Boilers and Process Heaters Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1087, 2008 (as amended): a) “Biomass fuel management plan not submitted” and “Biomass fuel management plan not followed”,

“Emission testing without required notice”, “Failure to produce records”, “Failure to submit emission exceedance results within 5 days of testing”, “CEMS not properly installed, operated or maintained”, “Failure to conduct biennial boiler performance tune-up” are added.

b) “Emissions exceed an opacity of 10% during the use of standby fuel”, “Failure to record the quantity and duration of standby fuel use”, “Exceeding the total use of standby fuels” are removed.

c) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. Schedule H - GVRD Agricultural Boilers Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1098, 2008 (as amended): a) “Failure to take corrective action upon emergency or like conditions”, “Failure to produce records”,

“Failure to submit emission testing results” are added. b) “Emissions exceed an opacity of 10% during the use of standby fuel”, “Failure to record the quantity

and duration of standby fuel use”, “Exceeding the total use of standby fuels”, “Failure to conduct emission tests for biomass fuelled boilers and process heaters”, “Failure to conduct emission tests for manufactured wood fuelled boilers and process heaters” are removed.

c) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity. d) “Failure to retain records” section number is corrected.

Schedule K - GVRD Non-Road Diesel Engine Emission Regulation Bylaw Number 1161, 2012: a) “Failure to comply with opacity and idling restrictions”, “Failure to comply with Tier 0 registration and

labeling requirements” and “Failure to comply with Tier 1 registration and labeling requirements” are removed.

b) Phrases describing the offences under most sections are re-written for clarity.

7944644

5.3 Attachment 2

EP - 61 -

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Wendy DaDalt, Division Manager, Parks East Area

Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: November 4, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Matsqui Trail Regional Park - Riverfront Erosion RECOMMENDATION That the Board send a letter to the Province supporting City of Abbotsford requests presented in its correspondence dated October 15, 2013 from Mayor Bruce Banman to the Honourable Steve Thomson and Honourable Suzanne Anton that the Province consider and review the gravel deposits in the vicinity of Abbotsford and provide funding to the City of Abbotsford, as the local dyking authority, for mitigation works on the new erosion arc in Matsqui Trail Regional Park. PURPOSE To convey the Board’s support for the City of Abbotsford’s request for assistance from the Province with reviewing changes to the gravel deposits in the Fraser River fronting Abbotsford and funding to immediately mitigate erosion arcs in Matsqui Trail Regional Park. BACKGROUND The Matsqui Trail Regional Park Management Plan was adopted by the Board in January 2013. It identified erosion as a threat to the park land base east of Walter’s Road comprising Metro Vancouver fee simple property and Statutory Right of Way from the City of Abbotsford and provided strategies for handling related risk (Attachment 1). Three large erosion arcs, formed in 1997, are eroding valuable parkland but are distant from the dyke. In spring 2013, monitoring of the shoreline after freshet revealed a new arc formed upstream only 30 metres from the toe of the dyke (Attachment 2). In July, the City and Metro Vancouver Regional Parks engaged Northwest Hydraulics Consultants (NHC) to assess the arc. DISCUSSION The NHC assessment of the new arc site indicates that notable gravel and sand aggradation occurred in the middle of the Fraser River from Sumas Bar to Matsqui Bend at the Hatzic Lake outflow. Notable scour and bed lowering also occurred along the south bank of the River within 30 metres of the base of the Abbotsford dyke. The assessment indicates that the bank erosion in this reach is largely due to these factors. There is no immediate danger to the dyke at this time of year; however, NHC recommends erosion protection measures be implemented to protect the dyke from future erosion before the 2014 freshet. City of Abbotsford as the local dyking authority has written to the Province seeking assistance in reviewing the gravel bars at this location and ongoing riverbank erosion; and funding for immediate mitigation of the new arc (Attachment 3).

5.4

EP - 62 -

Matsqui Trail Regional Park - Riverfront Erosion Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 3 NHC forecast in 2011 the potential for 11 ha of parkland to be lost before the three arcs might stabilize in fifty years. Study of the newly formed arc and state of the river channel by NHC in 2013 changes this forecast. NHC indicates that it is likely that the toe of the slope was substantially eroded and scoured by the more severe 2012 freshet (20-year event) and the new arc is expected to enlarge by upstream and downstream extension. Further scour, bank undermining, and bank retreat is expected to continue occurring along the south bank upstream of Beharrel Road. While losing any land is highly undesirable the cost and effectiveness of intervention options can be evaluated and rationalized against the impacts on the park program and function. The Park Plan illustrated how the park could adapt to various erosion mitigation scenarios including no action. The formation of new arcs upstream close to the dyke was not forecast. The dyke is the backbone of the park and creates the 11 km Matsqui Trail corridor, route of the Trans Canada Trail and Experience the Fraser’s Canyon to Coast Trail. The stability of the dyke is of immense social and economic importance and integral to national and local trail networks. The Matsqui Trail Management Plan has a strategy “to collaborate with the City of Abbotsford, First Nations, regulatory agencies and interested parties to explore options to limit erosion and preserve land”. Metro Vancouver and Abbotsford have collaborated on investigating the current erosion arc. The findings indicate an accelerating concern for the integrity of the south bank of the river in proximity of the toe of the dyke. Large scale river dynamics and flood protection solutions require the involvement of senior governments. Priority mitigation of local erosion in Matsqui Trail Regional Park to protect the toe of the dyke would also preserve Metro Vancouver parkland. If action is not taken until a threat is imminent additional costs may be incurred by a number of agencies and the product may not best support park values. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board send a letter to the Province supporting City of Abbotsford requests presented

in its correspondence dated October 15, 2013 from Mayor Bruce Banman to the Honorable Steve Thomson and Honorable Suzanne Anton that the Province consider and review the gravel deposits in the vicinity of Abbotsford and provide funding to the City of Abbotsford, as the local dyking authority, for mitigation works on the new erosion arc in Matsqui Trail Regional Park.

2. That the Board provide alternate direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS A letter of support from Metro Vancouver Board to the Province does not commit Metro Vancouver to funding mitigation works. Funds have not been allocated for erosion mitigation in the regional parks capital budget for Matsqui Trail Regional Park. OTHER IMPLICATIONS Shoreline works in the Fraser River require approval from several regulatory agencies, particularly Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Ministry of Forests, Land and Natural Resource Operations, and Transport Canada; and referral to First Nations. As mitigation works for the new arc would be

EP - 63 -

Matsqui Trail Regional Park - Riverfront Erosion Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013

Page 3 of 3 placed on Metro Vancouver-owned parkland we would be an active participant in applications and ensuring compliance with any permits and commitments. Review of longer-term conditions of this reach of the Fraser River and possible strategies for addressing erosion on the south bank could involve trade-offs between competing social and environmental values. Senior levels of government need to lead these processes and responses. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The report provides an update on erosion concerns along Matsqui Trail Regional Park and the City of Abbotsford dyke. Timely action is required to stabilize the new erosion arc in Matsqui Trail Regional Park before the 2014 freshet to protect the integrity of the City of Abbotsford dyke. A broader review of the changing channel morphology of this reach of the Fraser River and ongoing erosion are also necessary to investigate longer-term responses. This will also help to preserve Metro Vancouver parkland and the continuity of national and local trail corridors. As flood protection is the responsibility of the Province staff recommend Alternative 1. Attachments: 1. Matsqui Trail Regional Park Management Plan Excerpt Erosion Strategy (pp 31-33)

(Doc. #7965783). 2. Erosion Arc Locations (Doc. #7966104). 3. Letter dated October 15, 2013 from Mayor Bruce Banman, City of Abbotsford to Honourable

Steve Thomson and Honourable Suzanne Anton (Doc. #7966069). 7966807

EP - 64 -

Management Plan MATSQUI TRAIL RegIonAL PARk 31

A number of key issues were identified during the management planning process. The additional research, engagement and resultant strategy to address these issues are presented in this chapter.

6.1 erosion

The majority of MTRP shoreline has been rip-rapped for erosion and flood protection at various intervals since the dyke was constructed in 1948. The river is generally considered stable west of Walters Street, however the corridor from Walters Street to Page Road (Area A and B) is threatened by erosion (see context map below). City of Abbotsford owns ‘Area A’ foreshore (Metro Vancouver SRW

for park use), and Metro Vancouver owns ‘Area B’ with the exception of an 8 ha private property. City of Abbotsford is responsible for operation and maintenance of the dyke and maintains the bank protection as a first line of defense for the dyke.

The Area ‘A’ corridor is characterized by a narrow riparian strip with an unstable bank and loose riprap material. City of Abbotsford Engineering considers the dyke vulnerable to erosion in this area and is planning to enhance bank protection in the future pendingenvironmentalapprovalandFirstNationreview. The existing MTRP Riverfront Trail in this area could be affected by continued erosion or rip-rap improvement work.

6.0 key issues

Context map - Erosion Zones

EP - 65 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.4 Attachment 1

32 Management Plan MATSQUI TRAIL RegIonAL PARk

The Area ‘B’ corridor includes a wider foreshore area with a riverbank characterized by trees growing on top of previously placed riprap. Sections of the bank have eroded and many of the trees are undermined with some falling into the channel.

Three erosion arcs formed here in 1997 and have since grown in size. The arcs are caused by the Hatzic Lake outflow on the north side of the river which pushes the flow against the south banks, scouring and eroding the silty-sandy soil. A consultant study concluded that over the next 50 years the erosions arcs will grow and eventually joinbeforetheshorelinefinallystabilizes.Upto11 ha of land could be lost to erosion over this period(NorthwestHydraulicConsultants,2011).Given the distance from river bank to the dyke, the City of Abbotsford does not consider this erosion to be a threat to the stability of the dyke.

A hydraulic engineer consultant report on the erosion arcs identified mitigation options and challenges. The consultant concluded the mitigation option with the best chance of success, least environmental impact and most benefits to the park would involve constructing a rock- filled trench 30 m back from the existing top of bank then allowing the river to erode back to the trench. Riparian habitat would also be established for the added erosion protection of a dense root mass(NorthwestHydraulicConsultants,2011).

erosion arcs

(NorthwestHydraulicConsultants,2011)

‘Area B’ Erosion Arcs - Predicted Limit of South Bank Erosion (50 years) EP - 66 -

Management Plan MATSQUI TRAIL RegIonAL PARk 33

Keychallengestoadvancingmitigationoptionsinclude the high cost of initial installation, annual maintenance, efficacy over time, fast flowing river corridor,FirstNationtraditionalfishery,highqualitysturgeon and salmon habitat, in-stream work and environmental approvals.

The program and concept (see page 54) for ‘Area B’includestheFraserRiverNatureTrail,habitatcreation and continued farm license agreements. The landbase required for this program is flexible and it could be implemented with, or without continued erosion. Further dialogue with City of Abbotsford, regulatory agencies, interested parties and subject experts is required to determine next steps in addressing erosion.

sTRATeGy:

1. Metro Vancouver will continue to work collaboratively with the City of Abbotsford, First Nations,regulatoryagenciesandinterestedparties to explore options to limit erosion and preserve land.

2. Metro Vancouver will adaptively manage the erosion arcs, monitoring for changes in conditions and the effectiveness of mitigation work.Newinformationandmitigationoptionswill be considered as they become available.

3. In areas threatened by erosion, Metro Vancouver will invest in limited basic infrastructure and will adapt existing infrastructure to be more resilient.

4. Below are some basic principles to guide park management and development in areas threatened by erosion in advance of and/or complimentary to additional mitigation options which may be pursued. :

a. Realign existing riverfront trails to avoid future washouts. Convert existing adhoc trails to a ‘nature trail’ standard (where appropriate).

b. Explore low cost and environmentally sensitive options to reduce erosion including log booms or chains in the erosion arcs to limit the scouring effect.

c. Set back new trails from erosion areas (proposedFraserRiverNatureTrail).

d. Create riparian and wetland habitat to increase root mass to help protect against future erosion while providing conservation value and an enhanced park experience.

Log booms or chains in erosion arcs Habitat creation

Strategic trail access Limited investment in areas threatened by erosion

EP - 67 -

GStanese

Text Box

7965783

Figure 1: Location of recent bank erosion upstream of Beharrel Road

EP - 68 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.4 Attachment 2

GStanese

Text Box

7966104

EP - 69 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.4 Attachment 3

EP - 70 -

EP - 71 -

EP - 72 -

GStanese

Text Box

EP - 73 -

EP - 74 -

GStanese

Text Box

EP - 75 -

EP - 76 -

EP - 77 -

GStanese

Text Box

7966069

GStanese

Text Box

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Frieda Schade, Division Manager, Parks Central Area Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: October 21, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Colony Farm Regional Park – Kwantlen Polytechnic University Withdrawal of

Proposal for Teaching Farm RECOMMENDATION That the Board write a letter to Kwantlen Polytechnic University thanking them for their interest in Colony Farm Regional Park. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the proposed Kwantlen Polytechnic University (KPU) teaching farm at Colony Farm Regional Park. BACKGROUND At the May 24, 2013 meeting, the Board “authorized staff to execute a license agreement with Kwantlen Polytechnic University for a teaching farm at Colony Farm Regional Park”. DISCUSSION A license agreement between Metro Vancouver and Kwantlen Polytechnic University (KPU) for use of 5.8 hectares of Colony Farm Regional Park was signed in July 2013. In August, Metro Vancouver provided an update in writing to the Kwikwetlem First Nation on several projects in the park including the teaching farm, offering to come and make a presentation or discuss these projects with them. There was no response. An open house for the public was held on September 7th, 2013 and that generated positive feedback on the project. KPU representatives met with the Kwikwetlem First Nation in early September to outline the teaching and demonstration farm project. The Kwikwetlem First Nation responded by writing a letter to Kwantlen Polytechnic University opposing the project (Attachment). Farming is an approved land use at Colony Farm Regional Park based on the Colony Farm Land Use Plan. The area of the park under license agreement to KPU was recently farmed from 2000-2003. KPU has communicated verbally with Metro Vancouver that they will withdraw from this project. A letter is expected. The license will therefore be terminated. Metro Vancouver will communicate this change in status to others as required. At this time KPU has no alternate site for their teaching farm.

5.5

EP - 78 -

Colony Farm Regional Park – Kwantlen Polytechnic University Withdrawal of Proposal for Teaching Farm Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 2 ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board write a letter to Kwantlen Polytechnic University thanking them for their

interest in Colony Farm Regional Park. 2. That the Board provide staff with alternate direction. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The terms of the license agreement was that Metro Vancouver would not receive financial consideration for the first 5 years – so this termination will have no financial implications. OTHER IMPLICATIONS A project in its very preliminary stages to rehabilitate the Bunkhouse, an unused heritage building on site, to accommodate KPUs’ classroom will now be dropped. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The proposal by Kwantlen Polytechnic University to develop a teaching and demonstration farm at Colony Farm Regional Park has been withdrawn due to stated opposition to the project by the Kwikwetlem First Nation. Metro Vancouver will update municipal staff, park association and community groups as necessary about this change in status. Staff recommend Alternative 1. Attachment: Letter dated September 27, 2013 from Kent Mullinix, Director, Institute for Sustainable Food Systems, Kwantlen Polytechnic University addressed to Chief Ron Giesbrecht, Kwikwetlem First Nation in response to the letter dated September 24, 2013 (Doc. #7957935). 7963211

EP - 79 -

MAILING ADDRESS

12666–72 Ave, Surrey, BC

Canada V3W 2M8

T 604.599.2100 kpu.ca

September 27, 2013

Chief Ron Giesbrecht

Kwikwetlem First Nation

2-65 Colony Farm Road

Coquitlam, B.C. V3C 5X9

Dear Chief Giesbrecht,

I received your September 24, 2013 letter today and wanted to acknowledge its receipt. Thank you for

considering our inquiry regarding establishment of a Kwantlen Polytechnic University Sustainable Agriculture

Teaching and Research Farm at Colony Farm Park and your prompt and clear response to our request.

Of course we are extremely disappointed but fully understand the basis for and respect the position of the

Kwikwetlem Nation government and people. Be assured, per your request and as I told Councillor Hulbert in

our meeting, without the full support of the Kwikwetlem Nation we will not pursue development of our

Teaching and Research Farm on Colony Farm lands any further.

The Sustainable Agriculture program and Institute for Sustainable Food Systems at Kwantlen Polytechnic

University is dedicated to advancing sustainable agriculture and food systems as an integral element of

community vitality and sustainability. We are committed to supporting diverse food system and community

predilections and know that First Nations perspective can and should significantly inform our work to achieve

human sustainability. Teaching and Research Farm aside, in the meeting with Councillor Hulbert we spoke of

ways that we could work with the Kwikwetlem First Nation people at Colony Farm to advance community

food security and sustainability. This is something we would very much like to do and I hope we can pursue in

the very near future.

Thank you again for your thoughtful consideration.

Best wishes,

Kent Mullinix, PhD. - Director

Institute for Sustainable Food Systems

Kwantlen Polytechnic University

Cc:

Lesley Giroday, Kwikwetlem Legal Counsel

EP - 80 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.5 Attachment

MAILING ADDRESS

12666–72 Ave, Surrey, BC

Canada V3W 2M8

T 604.599.2100 kpu.ca

Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer, Metro Vancouver

Delia Laglagaron, Deputy CAO, Metro Vancouver

Ernie Daykin, Chair- Metro Vancouver Aboriginal Relations Committee

Dr. Elizabeth Worobec, Dean-Faculty of Science and Horticulture, Kwantlen Polytechnic University

Dr. Alan Davis, President, Kwantlen Polytechnic University

EP - 81 -

EP - 82 -

GStanese

Text Box

7957935

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Mitch Sokalski, Director, Regional Parks

Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: October 29, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Manager’s Report - Parks RECOMMENDATION That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated October 29, 2013, titled “Manager’s Report - Parks”. Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan - Parks Attachment 1 to this report sets out the Committee’s Workplan for 2013 - Parks. The matrix is updated to include new issues that arise, items requested by the Committee, and changes in the schedule. Items highlighted in bold identify completed work program elements. Pacific Spirit Regional Park – Commercial Dog Walking Permit Revisions In 2002, Metro Vancouver (MV) made a number of changes to address a sharp increase in the number of park incidents involving dogs, a permitting system for commercial dog walking was also introduced. In the past few years, the number of commercial dog walking permits issued in the Park has grown from less than 10 to over 20 permits; concurrently there has been a significant increase in dog-related incidents. Based on the large increase in the number of commercial dog walkers, and the increase in incidents and complaints, staff undertook a review of the commercial dog walking permits. Staff reviewed MV’s terms and conditions against industry standards with a goal of reducing the number of dog-related incidents and impacts on the Park. Staff held two meetings to gather input from permit holders. The permit holders also participated in a written survey about proposed changes to the permit terms and conditions. Based on the review the following changes will be included in the 2014 commercial dog walking permits: marked vests will be worn by dog handlers to assist in identifying permit holders; the number of dogs per handler will be reduced from eight to six; and the number of off-leash dogs per handler will be reduced from three to two. Staff will continue to monitor the commercial dog walking permits to ensure public safety and enjoyment and protection of park resources. Pacific Spirit Regional Park – Point Grey Slide On October 12, 2013, a slide occurred on Point Grey cliffs above Wreck Beach. The incident was reported by local media over that weekend, and while fortunately there were no injuries to people, there are some impacts to the natural resources in the area. Staff has engaged geotechnical engineers to assess the site conditions in the immediate area of the slide in order to ensure public safety and resource protection. Public access to the site is limited by fencing and warning signs, however the area is popular and keeping people out of the cliff area is an ongoing challenge.

5.6

EP - 83 -

Manager’s Report – Parks Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 4 There are a number of causes for cliff erosion including people scrambling along the surface or digging into the cliffs, ocean waves hitting the toe of slope, wintertime surface freeze and thaw, toppling of trees and heavy rains. In 2002, the University of British Columbia, Metro Vancouver and Musqueam First Nation worked with the community and beach users to develop the UBC/Pacific Spirit Regional Park Cliff Erosion Management Plan. This plan provides the framework for future decisions about any mitigation work on the cliffs. Staff will report out to the Committee at a future meeting once the geotechnical assessments are complete and a determination on next steps is formulated. Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area - Canpotex Potash Export Terminal Wetland Habitat Compensation Plan Funding Potential for Research Strategy Update At their October meeting, the Environment and Parks Committee considered the attached report (Attachment 2) and requested that staff provide additional information specific to the compensation funding process for the Cantopex Export Terminal facility and commented on the need for a screening tool for staff to apply in evaluating and recommending acceptance of compensation funds or projects. A comprehensive impact assessment for the Canpotex Export Facility on Ridley Island just South of Prince Rupert proposed by the Prince Rupert Port Authority (PRPA) was conducted upon which a Table of Commitments (TOC) has been developed. The review determined that 69 ha of wetland are contained within the footprint of the proposed development including 52.6 ha of bog. The TOC recognizes the impact to wetlands and includes measures to offset these. A Wetland Habitat Compensation Plan developed for the project outlines these measures which include the securement, restoration and/or creation of wetlands as well as funding research on bog restoration. The overall intent of the Compensation Plan is to replace lost wetland function at a ratio of 2:1. The Compensation Plan commits to restoring, creating or securing 72 ha of coastal wetland near the Prince Rupert site. The Butze Rapids Interpretive Trail has been identified as an area that can be used to restore 3 ha of wetland. Sites for additional compensation have yet to be determined and the PRPA is working closely with agencies to meet the requirement. Research at the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area (BBECA) is intended to offset the balance (66 ha) by developing the knowledge base required to restore wetland function to the BBECA. Ultimately, these studies would facilitate restoration of more wetlands. Metro Vancouver was not involved in determining the compensation requirements for the Canpotex facility. MV was approached after the BBECA was identified as the most appropriate location to fulfill the research components of the Wetlands Compensation Plan and after determination of funding levels. Staff will develop a more comprehensive screening tool for compensation proposals and include that information in future staff reports. Crippen Regional Park - Bowen Agriculture Alliance Bowen Agriculture Alliance (BAA) is a non-profit society on Bowen Island which has talked to park staff over the past year about ways to raise the profile of agriculture on Bowen. BAA has recently submitted a concept for agriculture education and demonstration farming in a two acre area of Killarney Meadows of Crippen Regional Park. This land is in the Agricultural Land Reserve. They envision opportunities to enhance the local food system, to share agricultural knowledge and to build community. Historically, Killarney Meadows was part of the much larger Terminal Farm which

EP - 84 -

Manager’s Report – Parks Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013

Page 3 of 4 operated between 1910 and 1920, and part of the Union Steamship Company Estates between 1920 and 1950, used for horse stables in the later years. Park staff will discuss the concept with BAA representatives and with municipal planning staff. High groundwater table, poor drainage and risk of flooding are the key limitations to agricultural productivity in Killarney Meadows. Park staff will report back to Committee in 2014. Experience the Fraser Update On October 15, 2013 the Co-chairs of the Experience the Fraser (ETF) Political Steering Committee (PSC) met with provincial MLA representative Marc Dalton and guest MLA Simon Gibson to exchange updates on the initiative and discuss upcoming priorities. Staff delivered a short presentation similar to the update given to the Environment and Parks Committee at their October 2013 meeting. Everyone supported the progress on staff work items including planning for the North Arm extension, wayfinding signing system, and the ETF exhibit at the Fraser River Discovery Centre and stated that they look forward to future details on infrastructure projects. Staff were reminded to keep updated information on the “readiness” status of projects identified as part of the ETF Foundational Program to facilitate ongoing advancement of ETF as opportunities arise. MLA Dalton offered to look into provincial progress on a dyke access protocol to help advance trail projects. MLA Dalton was asked to confirm with the Premier’s office provincial appointments of two representatives to the PSC. Opportunities for ETF updates to provincial and federal government and opposition caucuses will be investigated for the first quarter of 2014. The timing for a full PSC meeting was deemed to be February 2014; ideally the PSC would meet quarterly.

Lower Brunette – Fraser Brunette Greenway Construction Update The missing link in the Brunette Fraser Greenway between Cumberland and Spruce streets in New Westminster is now complete. Five hundred and fifty (550) linear meters of greenway has been added to the Sapperton section of the Greenway. The project was identified as a priority in the Ecological Health Action Plan and has reclaimed a stretch of river for public use and wildlife habitat. The work included cleaning up the river and improving habitat with the removal of 18 loads of concrete, 4 tonnes of scrap metal, 2 tonnes of plastic and other garbage, invasive plant species such as broom, Japanese knotweed and Himalayan blackberry and the recycling of 7 tonnes of wood waste. Asphalt and garbage was removed to make room for over 1100 native trees and shrubs to provide food and shelter for wildlife. Surrey Bend Habitat Enhancement Transportation Investment Corporation (TI Corp) has completed habitat enhancement work at Surrey Bend Regional Park. Approximately two kilometers of salmon habitat channels were constructed. In addition, over 38,000 native tree and shrubs were planted and the excavated material from the channels will form the base for raised trails through area. TI Corp. constructed two new bridges, preload for a park entry road and removed invasive plant species. Construction of park facilities by Metro Vancouver will start next year. Detailed design of the park facilities such as entry road, bike path, parking, trails, picnic area, washrooms and other amenities is now underway.

EP - 85 -

Manager’s Report – Parks Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 4 of 4 Deas Island Regional Park – Massey Tunnel – Replacement Bridge Announcement Update At its October 10, 2013 meeting, the Environment and Parks Committee received a report titled “Deas Island Regional Park – Massey Tunnel – Replacement Bridge Announcement” and directed staff to report back with a comprehensive analysis of potential impacts to the environment and regional parks, including potential dredging activities associated with tanker traffic, from the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project. This issue was also discussed by the Transportation Committee at its meeting of October 9, 2013. At its October 25, 2013 meeting, the Board adopted a recommendation to:

“That the Board: a) request the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure to demonstrate how the project

scope, design, and performance of the proposed bridge to replace the George Massey Tunnel takes into careful consideration the effects on the implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, and Regional Transportation Strategy, and that measures be included to support, and not detract from, regional objectives.

b) request the TransLink Board provide Metro Vancouver with technical analysis and commentary on the potential transportation and emissions implications of expanding transportation capacity on the George Massey Tunnel corridor and effects with proximate Fraser River watercrossings, including tolling and non-tolling scenarios, and the degree of consistency and support the proposed bridge would have on the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, the Regional Transportation Strategy, and Regional Goods Movement Strategy.

c) direct staff to investigate in relation to the George Massey Tunnel replacement project the following:

i. the business plan; ii. the role of the port; iii. the balance of phase 2 of the Gateway Program; iv. the potential for an LRT d) request the Corporation of Delta and other municipalities to provide Metro Vancouver with

technical analysis and commentary on the work they have done on the matter”. Staff will work to obtain technical information from the B.C. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, TransLink, Delta and other agencies with respect to potential impacts on the environment and regional parks, and will report back to the Environment and Parks Committee with a comprehensive analysis. Attachments: 1. Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan – Parks (Doc. #7956979). 2. Report dated September 20, 2013, titled “Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area - Canpotex

Potash Export Terminal Wetland Habitat Compensation Plan Funding Potential for Research Strategy” (Doc. #7963044).

7956973

EP - 86 -

Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan Parks

1st Quarter Priorities • 2013 Committee orientation • Adopt Matsqui Trail Park Management Plan. • Develop best management practices for trail placement, construction and

maintenance for Regional Parks (context sensitivity zoning) • Identify new sources of funding for land acquisition and capital projects • Secure funds in partnership with Pacific Parklands Foundation for Kanaka Creek

Watershed Stewardship Centre facilities

2nd Quarter Priorities

• Expand on Zero Waste pilot projects in regional parks through increased recycling

and use of organic waste • Expand mapping for the iParks Navigator “app” to include municipal content

3rd Quarter Priorities • Augment habitat at Boundary Bay Regional Park • Plan and design Sheep Paddocks Trail at Colony Farm Regional Park • Plan and design facilities upgrades at Camp Capilano • Amend Experience the Fraser Concept Plan to incorporate detailed mapping of the

North Arm of the Fraser River • Conduct Board approved Parks Service Review.

5.6 Attachment 1

EP - 87 -

Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan - Parks Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 2

4th Quarter Priorities • Review 2014 Programs and Priorities • Adopt Regional Parks Master Plan including an updated strategy for land acquisition

(completion deferred pending outcomes of Parks Service Review) • Advance implementation of Experience the Fraser with projects at Matsqui Trail,

Surrey Bend and Kanaka Creek Regional Parks • Initiate new landscaping at Centennial Beach and construct new facilities at Colony

Farm Regional Parks • Secure funds in partnership with Pacific Parklands Foundation for Phase 2 of the

Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre facilities

Note: Bold – completed items; Italics – new items 7956979

EP - 88 -

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Markus Merkens, Parks West Area Natural Resource Management Specialist Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: September 20, 2013 Meeting Date: October 10, 2013 Subject: Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area - Canpotex Potash Export Terminal

Wetland Habitat Compensation Plan Funding Potential for Research Strategy RECOMMENDATION That the Board authorize staff to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding with Canpotex, Prince Rupert Port Authority, Environment Canada and Corporation of Delta related to the receipt and allocation of habitat compensation funds to conduct research in the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area. PURPOSE To obtain Board endorsement for the negotiation of a Memorandum of Understanding between Canpotex, Prince Rupert Port Authority, Environment Canada, Corporation of Delta and Metro Vancouver covering the use of Habitat Compensation Funds to support bog research. BACKGROUND Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area Management and Research The 2007 Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area (BBECA) Management Plan guides restoration and ongoing management of the Bog. Metro Vancouver (MV) is responsible for overall management, and Corporation of Delta (CoD) has responsibilities for hydrology and wildfire management. The scientific objectives of the plan are: “to return Burns Bog to an ecological condition shaped by raised bog processes, buffered from disruptive or disturbing processes on the adjacent landscape, over a timeframe of 100 years. Achieve this ecological condition by maintaining characteristic ecological processes, structure and biota interacting over time, while recognizing the directional forces of urbanization, adjacent land uses and climate change”. Rigorous science plays a major role in ensuring that the objectives of the BBECA Management Plan are being met. To this end, a Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) was established in 2005 to ensure that the best science of the day is being considered in the ongoing management of BBECA. The overall purpose of SAP is to provide expert advice on specific management issues related to the Bog and to guide the technical work that is required. In particular, members are to ensure that ecological integrity takes precedence in all land management practices. A Research Strategy, developed with input from SAP, and endorsed by the Board, February 2010, provides a framework under which long term scientific studies will provide knowledge and information critical for effective and fiscally responsible long term adaptive management of the Bog

5.2

EP - 25

For In

formati

on Only

EP - 89 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.6 Attachment 2

Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area - Canpotex Potash Export Terminal Wetland Habitat Compensation Plan Funding Potential for Research Strategy Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: October 10, 2013 Page 2 of 3 resources to realize these goals (Attachment 1). The strategy lays out principles and approaches and identifies priorities for research conducted in the Bog. Research priorities are established by knowledge gaps and issues most critical to meeting the overall management goals. The research priorities remain flexible to allow adaptation to opportunities and to incorporate recommendations resulting from ongoing research results. DISCUSSION Funding BBECA Research Using Habitat Compensation Funds Canpotex Terminals Ltd. and Prince Rupert Port Authority (PRPA) are proposing the construction of a potash export facility and associated transportation infrastructure which would result in the unavoidable loss of wetlands on Ridley Island in Prince Rupert, BC. Canpotex and PRPA have developed a Comprehensive Habitat Compensation Program to offset lost wetland values associated with the development. This Program includes “Bog Restoration and Management Research benefitting 2,000 ha of bog ecosystems through funding the immediate research priorities of the Burns Bog Management Plan”. MV staff was made aware of this Compensation Program in July 2013. Since then, in house Counsel for PRPA has contacted MV staff to initiate the first steps in the development of a MOU relating to the transfer of $195,000 to support bog research. Benefits of Habitat Compensation Funds There is opportunity to fund a significant amount of work associated with the BBECA Research Strategy using these Compensation Program funds. BBECA research priorities listed within the Canpotex Compensation Program include collection of LiDAR data, and flow monitoring and quantification of hydrological water balance parameters important to guiding restoration of BBECA. Next Steps Canpotex and PRPA has asked for MV and CoD to develop and submit a proposal outlining specific research projects to be funded through the Canpotex Compensation Program with an explanation of how the proposed work meets the overall intent of the Compensation Plan. Staff is developing a proposal that will reflect the current research priorities relating to the development of a water balance model. The proposal will be reviewed by Environment Canada which has final say on project approval. Continued transfer of information and discussion over the following weeks and months will lay out the funding process, identification of research priorities, establishment of responsibilities and obligations, timelines as well as monitoring and reporting requirements. MV staff will work with PRPA and CoD to assemble all related material and assist in the development of the MOU. Both MV and CoD will be signatories to the MOU. MV will act as the recipient of the compensation funds and direct the funds to projects identified in the research plan. Staff from MV and CoD will manage specific sub projects based on area of research and connection with management responsibilities. All research conducted under the MOU will be reviewed by SAP prior to project initiation and over the course of the research. It is anticipated that the funds will be expended over a four year period.

EP - 26

For In

formati

on Only

EP - 90 -

Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area - Canpotex Potash Export Terminal Wetland Habitat Compensation Plan Funding Potential for Research Strategy

Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: October 10, 2013 Page 3 of 3

At their September, 23, 2013 meeting, CoD Council approved the recommendation contained within a staff report (Attachment 2) authorizing their staff to negotiate a MOU regarding the use and distribution of the Canpotex compensation funds. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board authorize staff to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding with Canpotex,

Prince Rupert Port Authority, Environment Canada, and Corporation of Delta related to the receipt and allocation of habitat compensation funds to conduct research in the Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area.

2. That the Board take no further action.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Should the Board approve Alternative 1, the development of the MOU will provide $195,000 of external funding for required research on the hydrological and ecological function of peatlands within BBECA. Some staff time will need to be assigned to the process and implementation of the projects outlined in the final MOU; these costs are covered within existing MV budget. Although the research projects would have eventually been completed under the BBECA Research Strategy, the sudden influx of funding would expedite the research and therefore require more concentrated staff time investment as the individual projects roll out under the MOU. Should the Board approve Alternative 2, MV will lose this opportunity to use external funds to expedite important research identified within the BBECA Scientific Research Strategy. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The habitat compensation program funds would support a significant amount of research identified within the BBECA Research Strategy. The development of a MOU between MV and the PRPA for the expenditure of a $195,000 is a program requirement. The research will immediately contribute to the population of a water balance model parameters for BBECA and provide guidance to management strategies that may expedite ecological recovery of peatlands within BBECA. Staff supports actions outlined in Alternative 1. Attachments: 1. Burns Bog Ecological Conservancy Area Scientific Research Strategy (February 2010) (Doc. #7738152). 2. Corporation of Delta Staff Report on Funds Designated for Burns Bog Research (Doc. #7881283). 7736400

EP - 27

For In

formati

on Only

EP - 91 -

GStanese

Text Box

7963044

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Roger Quan, Director, Air Quality and Environment

Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: November 7, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Update on Kinder Morgan Canada, Westridge Marine Terminal Expansion RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board write to Kinder Morgan Canada and the National Energy Board indicating its concurrence with the concerns raised in the September 30, 2013 letter from the Village of Belcarra to Kinder Morgan Canada regarding the preliminary design of the Westridge Marine Terminal, and requesting that these issues be addressed during the National Energy Board review process, consistent with the “list of issues” identified. PURPOSE To provide information on the Kinder Morgan Canada Westridge Marine Terminal, as directed by the Environment and Parks Committee and GVRD Board, and a proposed course of action to support requests made by the Village of Belcarra. BACKGROUND At its October 10, 2013 meeting, the Environment and Parks Committee received the attached correspondence (Attachments 1, 2, and 3) between Mayor Ralph Drew, Village of Belcarra, and Kinder Morgan Canada (KMC), related to the KMC Westridge Marine Terminal. Staff was requested to report back to the Committee with an analysis of the proposed expansion of the terminal and its alignment with Metro Vancouver policy. The GVRD Board was informed of the Committee’s direction to staff at the October 25 meeting, and supported the referral of the issue back to staff for analysis. Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion and Westridge Marine Terminal The KMC Westridge Marine Terminal is part of the larger Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion project, which proposes to expand the existing 1,150-kilometre Trans Mountain pipeline system between Edmonton, Alberta and Burnaby, BC. The project would twin the existing pipeline, with approximately 981 km of new pipeline, as well as new and modified facilities including pump stations and tanks along the route. It would increase the nominal capacity of the pipeline system from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels per day. On the west coast, and within Metro Vancouver, the terminus of the pipeline system is the existing Westridge Marine Terminal, which would be expanded, including new tanker loading facilities. DISCUSSION On September 25, 2013, KMC released information on the conceptual design of the Westridge Marine Terminal. The KMC website describes the expansion proposal as including:

• a new dock complex with three berths;

5.7

EP - 92 -

Update on Kinder Morgan Canada, Westridge Marine Terminal Expansion Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 3

• loading capacity to go from one Aframax-size vessel to the ability to load three Aframax-size tankers;

• two additional new 30-inch delivery lines to be built from the Burnaby Terminal to the Westridge Marine Terminal;

• an extension of the marine foreshore further into the water to accommodate new equipment;

• an odour abatement system, two new vapour recovery units and one new vapour combustion unit;

• a storm water run off collection and treatment system; and • a new fire protection system.

Correspondence Between the Village of Belcarra and Kinder Morgan Canada Since June of 2013, there has been a series of correspondence between the Village of Belcarra and KMC, on this issue. On September 16, Mayor Drew wrote regarding the Burrard Inlet Marine Environment and communicated that the public now expects a higher standard of environmental care, beyond the practice to “minimize harm” or “compensate for loss”, to a new ethic of “preserve, protect and enhance” (Attachment 1). Kinder Morgan’s response is included as Attachment 2. With the release of information on the conceptual design of the expanded marine terminal on September 25, Mayor Drew submitted the attached letter dated September 30, 2013 (Attachment 3), outlining key considerations related to tanker disturbances, oil containment, the expanded footprint of the terminal, and legacy enhancements. Regulatory Process At this point the proponent is in the pre-application phase with the National Energy Board (NEB) having filed a Project Description in May 2013. While this filing initiates certain pre-application activities, it does not yet constitute a formal application under the National Energy Board Act. It provides preliminary information to the NEB, and initiates preparatory processes in anticipation of an application at a later date. It is expected that Trans Mountain will file its Facilities Application with the NEB in late 2013. On July 29, 2013, the NEB released its “list of issues”, which identifies the topics that will be considered during the review process for the Trans Mountain Expansion Project. Of note from an environmental impact perspective are the following:

• The potential environmental and socio-economic effects of the proposed project, including any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the project.

• The potential environmental and socio-economic effects of marine shipping activities that would result from the proposed Project, including the potential effects of accidents or malfunctions that may occur.

• The suitability of the design of the proposed project. • Potential impacts of the project on landowners and land use. • Contingency planning for spills, accidents or malfunctions, during construction and

operation of the project. • Safety and security during construction of the proposed project and operation of the

project, including emergency response planning and third-party damage prevention.

EP - 93 -

Update on Kinder Morgan Canada, Westridge Marine Terminal Expansion Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013

Page 3 of 3 Subsequent to the GVRD Board discussion on October 25, two additional letters (Attachments 4 and 5) were received regarding a post-mortem analysis of the oil spill into Burrard Inlet that occurred in 2007 due to the rupture of a Kinder Morgan pipeline. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board write to Kinder Morgan Canada and the National Energy Board

indicating its concurrence with the concerns raised in the September 30, 2013 letter from the Village of Belcarra to Kinder Morgan Canada regarding the preliminary design of the Westridge Marine Terminal, and requesting that these issues be addressed during the National Energy Board review process, consistent with the “list of issues” identified.

2. That the GVRD Board receive this report for information and take no further action at this time.

3. That the Environment and Parks Committee provide alternate direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Metro Vancouver staff are currently involved in the review process for the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion project and the Westridge Marine Terminal. Work resulting from Alternative 1 can be accommodated within existing budgets. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion project is in the pre-application phase of a review process with the National Energy Board. The review process will be based on a list of issues and topics, which include assessment of environmental impacts and mitigation measures and commitments for both the construction phase and ongoing operation. The Village of Belcarra has identified a number of issues for consideration with respect to expansion of the Westridge Marine Terminal. Alternative 1, which is recommended, seeks to support the concerns raised by the Village of Belcarra, and request that these concerns be addressed during the project review process by Kinder Morgan Canada and the National Energy Board. Attachments: 1. Burrard Inlet Marine Environment - Correspondence dated September 16, 2013 from Mayor

Ralph Drew, Village of Belcarra addressed to Margaret Mears, Environmental Lead, Kinder Morgan Canada (Doc. #7941367).

2. Burrard Inlet Marine Environment - Correspondence dated October 9, 2013 from Margaret Mears, Environment Lead, Kinder Morgan Canada addressed to Mayor Ralph Drew, Village of Belcarra (Doc. #7992563).

3. Westridge Marine Terminal – Preliminary Design - Correspondence dated September 30, 2013 from Mayor Ralph Drew, Village of Belcarra addressed to Ian Anderson, President, Kinder Morgan Canada (Doc. #7941371).

4. Correspondence dated October 20, 2013 from Michael Davies, Director, Marine Development, Kinder Morgan Canada addressed to Mayor Ralph Drew, Village of Belcarra. 5. Post-Mortem on the 2007 Oil Spill Response – Correspondence dated October 31, 2013 from Mayor Ralph Drew, Village of Belcarra addressed to Michael Davies, Director, Marine Development, Kinder Morgan Canada (Doc. #8003077). 7992948

EP - 94 -

September 16, 2013. Kinder Morgan Canada 2844 Bainbridge Avenue P.O. Box 84028 Burnaby, BC, V5A 4T9 Attention: Margaret Mears, Environmental Lead, TMEP Dear Ms. Mears,

Re: Burrard Inlet Marine Environment This has reference to your September 10th response to Belcarra Council’s letter of August 29th regarding the study of the marine environment in the vicinity of the Westridge Marine Terminal (WMT) on Burrard Inlet. While we appreciate your response to our specific questions regarding some of the unique aspects of Burrard Inlet’s marine environment, additional context needs to be provided to this dialogue. Paradigm Shift The public now expects a higher standard of environmental “best practices” than those deemed acceptable during the late 20th-century. Indeed, today it is no longer sufficient to just “minimize harm” or “compensate for loss”. Current 21st-century environmental “best practices” are founded on the ethics of “preserve, protect and enhance”. In today’s paradigm corporations need to demonstrate leadership in both environmental ethics and environmental stewardship. Social License This paradigm shift means that public support (“social license”) is dependent upon demonstrating commitment to the ethics of “preserve, protect and enhance” beyond the basic regulatory requirements to “minimize harm” or “compensate for loss”. The environment is a public asset, and the public expects corporations to “walk the talk” and demonstrate commitment through action on enhancement initiatives beyond those required by regulation. Herring Spawn A case in point is the return of herring spawn to the eastern portion of Burrard Inlet which is vitally important to Burrard Inlet’s marine ecosystem. This should be viewed by KMC as an opportunity to sponsor research regarding measures to protect and enhance this small stock. KMC should also give consideration to participating in the Northshore Wetlands Partnership to enhance other herring stocks in Burrard Inlet.

…page two

EP - 95 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.7 Attachment 1

Margaret Mears, Environmental Lead, TMEP September 16th, 2013. Kinder Morgan Canada Page two, continued Squid Spawn We were all surprised to learn that, for the first time in many years, there has been a spawn of squid in eastern Burrard Inlet. Since these fast growing molluscs are a significant food fish for salmon, and since little is known about the presence of squid in Burrard Inlet, this also should be viewed by KMC as an opportunity to sponsor research regarding the habitat requirements of this species. Legacy Enhancements Kinder Morgan Canada has a unique opportunity to create important legacy enhancements to the Burrard Inlet marine environment, and some suggestions would be the following: On-going research relationships with Metro Vancouver’s post-secondary institutions and the

Vancouver Aquarium regarding the study and protection of the Burrard Inlet marine environment. KMC needs to be working with, and supporting, the local educational and research communities to ensure a thorough knowledge and understanding of the health and unique aspects of the Burrard Inlet marine environment.

Construction of a sub-tidal rock reef within or directly adjacent to the eastern Burrard Inlet Rockfish Conservation Area (RCA) to create much needed habitat for rockfish conservation.

Given the tremendous ecological value of eelgrass habitat, another important legacy would be the creation of additional eelgrass habitat in areas outside of the WMT footprint.

We trust that the foregoing will be considered as useful context to the dialogue regarding the Burrard Inlet marine environment. As always, Kinder Morgan’s response to the foregoing would be appreciated by all of the communities located around Burrard Inlet. Sincerely,

Ralph Drew, Mayor Village of Belcarra RED/ cc: Ian Anderson, President, Kinder Morgan Canada Greg Toth, Senior Project Director, TMEP, Kinder Morgan Canada Mike Davies, Director, Marine Development, Kinder Morgan Canada Lexa Hobenshield, Manager, External Relations, Kinder Morgan Canada Robin Silvester, President and CEO, Port Metro Vancouver

Darrell Desjardin, Director, Sustainable Development, Port Metro Vancouver Laura Strand, Manager, Aboriginal Affairs, Port Metro Vancouver Naomi Horsford, Manager, Community Affairs, Port Metro Vancouver Environment and Parks Committee, Metro Vancouver

Burrard Inlet Mayors and Councils

EP - 96 -

GStanese

Text Box

7852837

Trans Mountain Expansion Project

Email: [email protected] | Phone: 1.866.514.6700 | Website: www.transmountain.com | @TransMtn

October 9, 2013

Mayor Ralph Drew Village of Belcarra 4084 Bedwell Bay Road Belcarra, BC V3H 4P8

RE: Burrard Inlet Marine Environment

Dear Mayor Drew,

Thank you for your letter dated September 16, 2013 providing additional context about Burrard Inlet’s Marine Environment. We appreciate the insights and recommendations you have shared.

As described in our letter to you dated September 10, 2013, as part of our submission of the Section 52 facilities application to the National Energy Board later this year, we are completing an Environmental Socio Economic Assessment (ESA) which will detail an assessment of our anticipated impacts on the local marine environment from the construction and operations of our proposed project. This includes the area of the Inlet where upgrades to Westridge Marine Terminal will be constructed. We are also providing information on the potential impacts of increased marine shipping.

An environmental protection plan is being developed for the Westridge Marine Terminal as part of the proposed expansion project which will include detailed mitigation plans for the construction phase and ongoing operations. As you suggest and have discussed with our team, expectations today are for best practices to include local enhancements of current environmental conditions. As you know we support this view and we will continue to involve local marine expertise and local communities in the identification and design of the program.

In 2007, we took a proactive approach with the construction of the Anchor Loop expansion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline through Jasper National Park and Mt Robson Provincial Park. Working with park users, environmental groups and local regulators, the project has left many environmental legacies. Kinder Morgan Canada won an environmental award for the project for outstanding environmental leadership and excellence. Legacy initiatives included improvement of

2844 Bainbridge Avenue, PO Box 84028, Bainbridge, Burnaby, BC, V5A 4T9 CANADA

EP - 97 -

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.transmountain.com/

GStanese

Text Box

5.7 Attachment 2

aquatic connectivity, reclaiming pre-existing gravel pits developed by others with native vegetation, biodiversity and sustainability measures included extensive vegetation management for invasive species, collection of local genotypes of plant material to propagate for restoration, new data collection on park species, in collaboration with the University of Alberta the project developed seed mixes which the parks can use in the future, inventory of over 3,000 recovered archeological artifacts and an environmental legacy fund that continues to identify and invest in opportunities to improve the ecological integrity (and public enjoyment) of the parks today.

Building on the success of Anchor Loop, we will continue to meet with local stakeholders, First

Nations and regulators over the next few years throughout the regulatory review and as our

project design is refined so we can identify opportunities to preserve, protect and enhance the

environment. Your suggestions are helpful and we will include them for consideration in our

assessment work as we consider future opportunities.

If you have further questions or concerns please do not hesitate to contact me to discuss further at your convenience.

Sincerely,

Trans Mountain Pipeline L. P.

Margaret Mears Trans Mountain Expansion Project Environment Lead

cc: Ian Anderson, President, Kinder Morgan Canada

Mike Davies, Director, Marine Development, Kinder Morgan Canada

Lexa Hobenshield, Manager, External Relations, Kinder Morgan Canada



EP - 98 -

GStanese

Text Box

7992563

September 30, 2013. Kinder Morgan Canada 2844 Bainbridge Avenue P.O. Box 84028 Burnaby, BC, V5A 4T9 Attention: Ian Anderson, President, Kinder Morgan Canada Dear Mr. Anderson,

Re: Westridge Marine Terminal – Preliminary Design This has reference to KMC’s September 25th release of the preliminary design of the Westridge Marine Terminal (WMT) on Burrard Inlet. While we appreciate KMC’s response to some of the questions regarding the proposed expansion of the WMT on Burrard Inlet, there are key considerations with the WMT proposal that have not been addressed by Kinder Morgan (KMC). Tanker Disturbances The TransMountain Expansion Project (TMEP) proposes a five-fold increase in the number of tanker shipments from the WMT, from the current one tanker per week to an estimated five tankers per week. The single greatest source of complaint from residents in proximity of the WMT is the bright lights and noise from the tankers using the anchorages east of the Second Narrows. Since the tankers are KMC’s clients, how does KMC propose to minimize and/or mitigate the bright lights and noise from on-board the vessels both at anchor and at dock? Oil Containment Booms While it is both a Port Metro Vancouver (PMV) requirement and KMC’s policy to deploy oil containment booms around all tankers berthed at the WMT docks, there is no mention as to the technology and efficacy of the containment booms proposed for the expanded WMT facility. One of the “lessons learned” from the 2007 oil spill was that the type of containment boom utilized during the 2007 event was not appropriate for the water conditions encountered in Central Burrard Inlet. There are different types of oil spill containment booms, and containment boom technology has also evolved since 2007. Does KMC intend to utilize the “best available technology” for the new oil containment booms at its expanded WMT facility?

…page two

EP - 99 -

http://talk.transmountain.com/document/show/458

GStanese

Text Box

5.7 Attachment 3

Ian Anderson, President September 30th, 2013. Kinder Morgan Canada Page two, continued Terminal Footprint The proposed expansion of the WMT involves tripling the size of the facility’s footprint on Burrard Inlet accompanied by a significant encroachment into Burrard Inlet. The proposed increase in the size of terminal has consequences for both Burrard Inlet itself and the communities surrounding Burrard Inlet, but KMC’s proposal does not mention recompense for tripling its encroachment. What does KMC intend to “give back” to Burrard Inlet and its neighbours surrounding the WMT? Legacy Enhancements Today it is no longer sufficient to just “minimize harm” or “compensate for loss”. Current environmental “best practices” are founded on the ethics of “preserve, protect and enhance”. The environment is a public asset, and the public expects that projects such as the WMT expansion provide environmental enhancements beyond the basic regulatory requirements. In our letter of September 16th we provided KMC with some practical examples legacy enhancements. However, KMC has only referenced the basic regulatory requirement of “habitat compensation for habitat loss in the marine environment” without acknowledging the public expectation of “habitat enhancement”. Does KMC intend to provide habitat enhancement of the Burrard Inlet marine environment beyond merely “compensation for loss”? We trust that the foregoing will be given fullsome consideration during subsequent planning of the proposed WMT expansion project. As always, Kinder Morgan’s response to the foregoing would be appreciated by all of the communities located around Burrard Inlet. Sincerely,

Ralph Drew, Mayor Village of Belcarra RED/ cc: Greg Toth, Senior Project Director, TMEP, Kinder Morgan Canada Mike Davies, Director, Marine Development, Kinder Morgan Canada Lexa Hobenshield, Manager, External Relations, Kinder Morgan Canada Robin Silvester, President and CEO, Port Metro Vancouver

Darrell Desjardin, Director, Sustainable Development, Port Metro Vancouver Laura Strand, Manager, Aboriginal Affairs, Port Metro Vancouver Naomi Horsford, Manager, Community Affairs, Port Metro Vancouver Environment and Parks Committee, Metro Vancouver


EP - 100 -

GStanese

Text Box

7908061


Email: [email protected] | Phone: 1.866.514.6700 | Website: www.transmountain.com | @TransMtn


October 20, 2013

Ralph DrewMayor, Village of Belcarra4084 Bedwell Bay RoadBelcarra, BC V3H 4P8

Dear Mayor Drew,

Thank you for your letter of July 29, 2013 requesting additional information about post mortemassessments of the 2007 Third Party Strike to our pipeline resulting in the Inlet Drive release.

Applying lessons learned as part of continuous improvement is a critical part of any emergencyresponse. After the 2007 Inlet Drive Oil Spill, several post-incident reviews were completed:

Transportation Safety Board (TSB)The TSB completed a review of the incident, determined findings and summarized safety actionstaken. Findings from the report are outlined in this letter below. The review is available on theTSB’s website at http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/pipeline/2007/p07h0040/p07h0040.pdf:

National Energy Board (NEB)In response to this incident, the NEB took the following actions:

1. Sessions were organized for all those who took part in the emergency response and thepost-remediation monitoring and clean-up to discuss what worked and what did not, andto discuss enhancements to future emergency responses.

2. A multi-agency stakeholder group was established with the NEB as lead agency to shareinformation during site remediation work.

3. An audit of Kinder Morgan Canada’s (KMC’s) integrity programs including our damageprevention program took take place in early 2009.

KMC fully participated in these sessions. As the review was led by the NEB, any request forinformation would need to be directed to them. The NEB can be reached at 1.800.899.1265 [email protected].

EP - 101 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.7 Attachment 4



Kinder Morgan Canada (KMC)KMC completed its own review of the incident. Key outcomes from our review and otherimportant emergency response developments are provided below:

1. Pipeline Protection DepartmentIn 2008, KMC implemented a pipeline protection department whose sole responsibility isto protect the pipeline and facilities. This department’s responsibilities include:

Public awareness

Pipeline and associated facilities markings

Issuing permits for safe work around pipeline and associated facilities

Responds to BC and AB One Calls

Aerial and ground patrols

2. Collection of Benchmark DataOne of the steps taken since this incident has been to collect environmental dataimportant to any future emergency response in Burrard Inlet. As part of the long-termmonitoring program, changes to level of contaminants were assessed in the marineenvironment, including the evaluation of potential effects on marine organisms.

3. Non Mechanical Spill Response Techniques Pre-approvalsEarlier this year (2013), KMC made a submission to the Federal Expert Tanker SafetyPanel; the full report can be found athttp://www.transmountain.com/uploads/pages/1373407780-TransMountain_Submission-to-the-Tanker-Safety-Expert-Panel_June-21--2013.pdf. As part of this submission, KMCrequested the Panel consider recommending conditional pre-approvals of nonmechanical marine spill response techniques. These techniques include use ofdispersants and beach cleaning agents, as well as in-situ burning. Such pre-approvalwould ensure that these techniques could be employed quickly when they are deemedappropriate to minimize environmental harm.

Western Canada Marine Response Corporation (WCMRC)As you are aware, WCMRC is the marine spill response organization certified by TransportCanada to meet the requirements of the Canada Shipping Act. The Act requires all large vesselsand oil handling facilities to have an arrangement for spill response as a condition of operating inCanadian waters.

WCMRC also provides response services on contract to KMC; which was the case for the InletDrive spill.

EP - 102 -



The Inlet Drive spill was not a ship or terminal based spill. Rather, it was a land based spill thatreached Burrard inlet through a number of pathways, primarily storm drains. These pathwayswere not all obvious in the early stages of the response. Some sources were from the shorelinewhile others were from storm drain outfalls on the ocean floor.

WCMRC conducted its own post-incident review following the spill. KMC is not aware of anyfindings that indicate that the booms used during the 2007 event were inappropriate for the wateror shoreline conditions. While some oil eluded capture early in the response primarily becauseof the nature and diversity of the pathways and some oil did escape the booms during operation,aerial photographs taken during the response show that the booms were effective in containingthe majority of the oil.

It is unfortunate if the strategy for dealing with fugitive oil may have appeared uncoordinatedwhen it was in fact structured and managed through an Incident Command System responseorganization. Air flights were conducted daily to seek and track fugitive oil and teams weredispatched to assess affected shorelines. Their recommendations formed the basis for dailyincident action plans for both the water and shoreline clean up teams.

In addition to conducting post incident reviews, WCMRC conducts benchmarking with otherorganizations and continually monitors the industry to identify best practices and equipmentinnovations. We understand that WCMRC has offered to provide a tour of their operations andan introduction to their organization for the Belcarra Mayor and Council. We believe this wouldbe an effective way to understand their capabilities and ask questions.

Further ImprovementsAs part of the work and studies being undertaken for the proposed Trans Mountain ExpansionProject KMC is updating and enhancing the Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Technique(SCAT) information gathered during the Inlet Drive spill. This information will be incorporatedinto Trans Mountain’s Emergency Response Plans and provided to WCMRC. WCMRC will usethe information as part of a demonstration project for a new Geographic Information System(GIS) for Geographic Response plans. Building on existing geographic plans and informationmaintained by WCMRC, this system will use the area surrounding Belcarra to demonstrate alarger system proposed for the Salish Sea. Use of a dedicated GIS system is a best practiceidentified in other jurisdictions. KMC is providing SCAT information and other resources todevelop a more effective system in BC.

EP - 103 -



In response to concerns identified through our public engagement for the proposed expansionproject, KMC is working with WCMRC to identify enhancements to the existing spill responsecapacity mandated by Transport Canada. Through our engagement we have heard concern forboth response capacity and response times; and as part of our NEB application for the proposedexpansion project (anticipated to be filed in late 2013) we are developing a plan to address theseand other issues that may arise from the provincial or federal reviews on tanker safety.

I trust this information is helpful. Please contact Lexa Hobenshield at 604.809.9869 [email protected] should you wish to discuss further.

Sincerely,

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY

Michael Davies

.cc Kevin Gardner, WCMRCLexa Hobenshield, Trans Mountain Expansion Project

EP - 104 -

GStanese

Text Box

8005360

October 31, 2013.

Kinder Morgan Canada 2844 Bainbridge Avenue P.O. Box 84028 Burnaby, BC, V5A 4T9

Attention: Michael Davies, Director, Marine Development

Dear Mr. Davies,

Re: Post-Mortem on the 2007 Oil Spill Response

This has reference to KMC’s October 20th response to Belcarra’s July 29th letter regarding the post-mortem review by Kinder Morgan Canada (KMC) on the response by Western Canada Marine Response Corporation (WCMRC) to the 2007 oil spill into Burrard Inlet. While we appreciate KMC’s answers to some of the questions that were posed, there are a number of questions and issues that have not been addressed by KMC. KMC’s Post-Mortem

Although KMC undertook its own post-mortem review following the 2007 oil spill, KMC still has not publicly disclosed its review of the incident. Your letter references some outcomes from the review, but does not discuss the problems and issues encountered during the oil spill response or identify the lessons learned from the incident. Trust is founded on transparency and open information sharing, and by openly addressing the problems and issues encountered during the 2007 oil spill, KMC can help build trust with its neighbouring communities. WCMRC Response

We continue to have questions regarding the WCMRC response to the 2007 oil spill. Although WCMRC is located immediately adjacent to the Westridge Marine Terminal (WMT), it took WCMRC an exceptionally long time to get its vessels on the water and respond to the spill. On the day of the oil spill Rod MacVicar received a telephone call at approximately 1330 hours from the supervisor of the ‘Open Water Sea Lion Project’ located just east of the Barnet Beach, who reported that an oil spill was potentially endangering the research station. Rod drove from his home to the research station, boarded their research vessel along with technicians from the facility and proceeded to the scene of the oil spill. By that time it was almost 1500 hours, and they were first on scene. It is our understanding that WCMRC was not on the scene because the road was closed and the WCMRC crews could not get to the response vessels. Has WCMRC implemented appropriate emergency response protocols to prevent such a reoccurrence?

WCMRC says it can respond to oil spills within the Burrard Inlet harbour in six hours — the duration of a full tidal cycle — which is an unacceptably long response time. There is something wrong with the emergency response plan if WCMRC vessels cannot respond to oil spills in Burrard Inlet within one hour of a spill being reported. Rod MacVicar was on scene in less than an hour and he was not the first to know about the oil spill. How can KMC suggest that the WCMRC response to the 2007 oil spill was either timely or adequate when the WCMRC response was not assessed by an independent third party?

…page two

EP - 105 -

http://www.belcarra.ca/reports/KMC_Response_Re_Oil_Spill_Post-Mortem.pdf

http://www.belcarra.ca/reports/KMC_Letter_Re_2007_Oil_Spill_Post-Mortem.pdf

http://www.kindermorgan.com/business/canada/

http://wcmrc.com/

http://wcmrc.com/

GStanese

Text Box

5.7 Attachment 5

Michael Davies, Director, Marine Development October 31st, 2013. Kinder Morgan Canada Page two, continued Oil Containment Booms

The oil spill containment booms used by WCMRC did not fully contain the spilled oil in 2007, and Rod MacVicar and others have photographs of gaps in the booms and escaping oil. The oil containment booms also were inadequate in sealing spills on the rocky tidal shore, another issue that we have previously raised that neither KMC nor WCMRC have acknowledged or addressed. The summer weather, daylight conditions and proximity to WCMRC response vessels during the 2007 oil spill incident could not have been any better for a spill response, yet there was a considerable amount of unrecovered fugitive oil that contaminated the beaches of Burrard Inlet. We are still waiting for assurances that KMC and WCMRC will utilize the “best available technology” for all oil containment booms used both at the WMT facility and for any oil spill response in Burrard Inlet. Incident Command

It is our understanding that KMC brought-in a consultant from the USA to handle the oil spill response and provide needed expertise that KMC did not have available “in-house”. While expertise in “Incident Command” is important, it is equally important to have expert knowledge of the Burrard Inlet locale and the roles of the regional emergency response agencies. Does KMC plan to develop its own expertise for oil spill incident command, or will KMC continue to rely on outside consultants?

It is also our understanding that after the first day of the oil spill, all direction of spill response was assumed by KMC and its consultant. What were the roles of KMC, WCMRC and the Canadian Coast Guard during the 2007 oil spill incident? Who had responsibility for directing the WCMRC response, and ensuring that clean-up measures were comprehensive and adequate? Were the oil spill response measures undertaken on Burrard Inlet during the first week assessed by an independent third party, and is there a report of the assessment?

As always, Kinder Morgan’s fullsome response to the foregoing would be appreciated by all of the communities located around Burrard Inlet. Sincerely,

Ralph Drew, Mayor Village of Belcarra

RED/

cc: Ian Anderson, President, Kinder Morgan Canada

Greg Toth, Senior Project Director, TMEP, Kinder Morgan Canada

Lexa Hobenshield, Manager, External Relations, Kinder Morgan Canada

Kevin Gardner, President, WCMRC

Robin Silvester, President and CEO, Port Metro Vancouver

Darrell Desjardin, Director, Sustainable Development, Port Metro Vancouver

Laura Strand, Manager, Aboriginal Affairs, Port Metro Vancouver

Naomi Horsford, Manager, Community Affairs, Port Metro Vancouver

Environment and Parks Committee, Metro Vancouver


EP - 106 -

GStanese

Text Box

8003077

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner Erik Blair, Planning Data Analyst Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: October 22, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Letter of Request for Continuation of LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program RECOMMENDATION That the Board: a) send a letter to the B.C. Minister of Energy and Mines requesting continued funding of the

LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program in 2014/15; and b) forward a copy of this report to the Mayor and Council of each member municipality for their

consideration in making a similar request. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to request that the Board send a letter to the Minister of Energy and Mines in support of continued funding for the LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program, which has played an important role in helping small businesses in Metro Vancouver reduce their energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. BACKGROUND Since 2011, the LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program (the “Program”) has helped thousands of BC small businesses make improvements that save energy, money, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This Program has directly created 94 jobs in BC, and the Business Energy Advisors have delivered over 3600 free business energy assessments. To date, this Program has saved small businesses $12 million in on-going utility costs, and cumulatively the Program has saved over 150 gigawatt-hours of electricity (enough to power 13,500 homes for one year) and over 3,200 tonnes of GHG emissions (the equivalent of taking 604 vehicles off of the road). Over 50% of participants in the Program said they would not have moved forward with energy saving upgrades when they did if it had not been for the support from their Business Energy Advisor. This program ends March 31, 2014, and there are no announced plans to renew. Due to the importance of this program in supporting Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan and member municipality Community Energy and Emissions Plans (CEEPs), staff recommend that the Board urge the Minister to continue this program in future years. Additionally, at its October 2013 meeting, the Regional Engineers Advisory Committee Climate Protection Sub-Committee (REAC CPS) discussed the benefits of the Program and expressed support for its continuation beyond March 2014. DISCUSSION Small and medium-sized businesses represent about 20% of the region’s greenhouse gas emissions. In spite of being substantial contributors, this audience is often overlooked; they are not eligible for

5.8

EP - 107 -

Letter of Request for Continuation of LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 2 programs targeting larger energy users and they face constraints in staff resources and access to capital that make investing in measures to save energy, emissions and money impractical. Developed in partnership with BC Hydro, Fortis BC, and industry associations, the LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program addresses this gap by providing small businesses with Business Energy Advisor (BEA) services. The role of the BEA is to recruit businesses for free energy and GHG assessments. These assessments involve, at no cost to the businesses, a one-hour walkthrough audit followed by a report with suggestions for actions, incentives, and referrals to certified contractors. BEAs serve as a one-stop-shop by combining the myriad of incentives into a single window. There are currently 15 BEAs in the Province. In March 2013, Metro Vancouver received $96,000 in funding from the Province to host a BEA. Metro Vancouver contracted CityGreen (a non-profit energy efficiency company) to implement this program, and has been actively working with municipalities throughout the region to recruit businesses. A unique feature of Metro Vancouver’s BEA program is the involvement of a multicultural outreach services company to target ethnic-owned businesses. This innovative marketing approach is critical considering the diversity of business audiences in the Metro Vancouver region. The aim of Metro Vancouver’s BEA program will be to have 300 businesses in the region complete an assessment and begin reducing their energy consumption and GHG emissions. To date over 75 assessments have been completed. The continuation of funding for the Program would help increase the uptake of the Program in the Metro Vancouver region which would result in energy and cost savings as well as GHG reductions for small businesses in our region. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Board:

a) send a letter to the B.C. Minister of Energy and Mines requesting continued funding of the LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program in 2014/15; and

b) forward a copy of this report to the Mayor and Council of each member municipality for their consideration in making a similar request.

2. That the Environment and Parks Committee provide alternate direction to staff. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The funding for the LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program is awarded as a grant to host organizations from the BC Provincial Government, through the Ministry of Energy and Mines. Under Alternative 1, the Program would be continued, and Metro Vancouver could apply to be a host organization, which results in potential grants and opportunities to leverage contributing funding from municipalities and/or industry associations and businesses. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION While small and medium-sized businesses are the engine of our regional economy, they are also significant contributors to regional greenhouse gas emissions. With limited staff resources and time, these businesses need direct-intervention programs such as the LiveSmart BC: Small Business Program to help them save money and reduce their impact on the environment. This program ends March 31, 2014, and there are no announced plans to renew. Alternative 1 is recommended, calling for the continuation of the LiveSmart Business Energy Advisory beyond March 2014. 7965532

EP - 108 -

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Eve Hou, Air Quality Planner Erik Blair, Planning Data Analyst Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: October 22, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Update on Electric Vehicle Charging Station Deployment RECOMMENDATION That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated October 22, 2013, titled “Update on Electric Vehicle Charging Station Deployment”. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to provide an update on Metro Vancouver’s experience with electric vehicle charging stations (EVSE), both at our regional parks and more broadly across the region, and information on the path forward. BACKGROUND In May 2012, the Environment and Parks Committee received a report from staff titled “Regional Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Project” and the Committee and Board endorsed the report recommendation: “That the Board direct staff to apply for all pertinent Provincial grant opportunities that support the deployment of electric vehicles in our region”. Subsequently in 2012, Metro Vancouver was awarded two grants from the Province pertaining to electric vehicle charging stations: 1) a planning grant to facilitate installations of public chargers throughout the region, 2) an infrastructure grant to complete the installation of 6 charge points at three Metro Vancouver regional parks. DISCUSSION Metro Vancouver’s support for electric vehicles and associated infrastructure stems from our role in air quality management, recognizing the harmful effects of traffic-related air contaminants, and our commitment to mitigating climate change. With no tailpipes, electric vehicles are superior to internal combustion engines from an air quality standpoint, and with a mostly hydroelectric power grid, EVs offer significant greenhouse gas reductions. Supporting the provision of public charging stations reduces “range anxiety” in prospective EV owners and thus encourages uptake of electric vehicle technology. Electric Vehicle Charging Stations at Regional Parks Metro Vancouver installed a dual-headed charger at each of three regional parks: Boundary Bay (Centennial Beach lot), Capilano River (Cleveland Dam lot) and Pacific Spirit (West 16th Street lot). The process took several months and all units were operational by the provincial deadline of March 2013. Key learnings from this process to inform future installations are described below.

5.9

EP - 109 -

Update on Electric Vehicle Charging Station Deployment Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 4 • Equipment and installation costs were higher than

estimated: Original budget estimates for equipment were based on the cost of equipment purchased for our corporate fleet; however, due to a miscommunication on the part of a supplier, the selected equipment was no longer eligible under the Provincial grant program. After evaluating several units, Metro Vancouver selected three dual-headed

units from Coulomb Technologies at a higher cost (including a network subscription for 5 years). Installation costs were also slightly higher than estimated; although this project managed to cost-share with a water supply project occurring at Capilano River Regional Park.

EVSE in Metro Vancouver Parks Budget

Cost Items Pacific Spirit Boundary Bay Capilano TOTAL EVSE (and 5 year network subscription $ 9,589 $ 9,589 $ 9,589 $ 28,767 Installation $ 9,489 $ 10,000 $ 19,000 $ 38,489 Signage $ 667 $ 667 $ 667 $ 2,000 Total Project Costs $ 19,745 $ 20,256 $ 29,256 $ 69,256 TOTAL $ (24,000) Provincial Grant $ 45,256 Cost to MV $ 32,000 Budgeted $ (13,256) Over-budget • Network costs need to be considered: Subscription costs need to be paid for the “networked”

units in our parks. These “smart” chargers collect and provide data which can be viewed online and have functionality such as credit card payment. Costs for a 5-year network plan work out to approximately $136 / head / year.

• Vandalism/theft concerns were not proven to be an issue: Vandalism was also a key concern during site selection and led to a decision not to proceed with the site originally proposed at Tynehead, shortly after a number of thefts affected that park. To date, there have been no incidences of theft, vandalism or misuse at the three park sites selected.

• Most electrical contractors can do the job: Installation of the charging stations is straight-forward and most electrical contractors are capable of completing the task. This project used two electrical contractors under Metro Vancouver’s Standing Offer Agreement.

• Chargers are seeing use but need to be promoted more: In total, between January 1 and September 30, the stations were accessed 230 times, resulting in 562 kWh of electricity being

EP - 110 -

Update on Electric Vehicle Charging Station Deployment Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013

Page 3 of 4

consumed which offsets about 800 kilograms of CO2. Usage was especially high when the units were first installed, but has over time dropped and remained steady.

• Negligible impact on park maintenance and costs: At current usage rates, the consumption

from these units is less than 1% of the overall park electricity use. The cumulative electricity cost for 563 kWh is roughly $56.30. Park staff also report no added maintenance requirements.

• Positive public response: Members of the visiting public have expressed positive feedback to park staff about the charging stations and appear supportive of Metro Vancouver’s initiative.

Regional Electric Vehicle Charging Station Planning Project In 2012, Metro Vancouver, 14 member municipalities undertook a project to increase the availability of public EVSE throughout the region. This Provincially-funded project involved:

1) mapping the optimal locations for public charging stations,

2) an intense recruitment campaign targeting businesses and property owners within the identified high impact areas,

3) free site visits to prospective host locations to perform budget estimates, and

4) follow-up to assist prospective hosts in applying for Provincial grants.

This project successfully added 67 new public charge-points to the regional network in a span of under 3 months, bringing the total number of charge points to 235 in our region. Some findings from this project include: • High degree of interest from private sector: The recruitment phase of this project involved

cold contacting a variety of businesses. Recruiters found that about roughly one in ten businesses contacted had some interest in learning more about installing charging stations.

• Pro-active marketing was key to success: Although the “planning” process is important to ensure that good locations are prioritized, the outreach component, which requires intensive

EP - 111 -

Update on Electric Vehicle Charging Station Deployment Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 4 of 4

active contact (in addition to passive information and awareness-building), is the key determinant of success. This involves: coaching, working to familiarize potential hosts with the fundamentals of the technology, site-assessments and pro-active marketing of the unique benefits of charging stations to businesses.

• Allow more time. This project had less than 3 months from initiation to completion. More time would have allowed more uptake, as many businesses required head office approval out of Province. Potential site hosts that are undergoing retrofit projects or are constructing a new building/facility were among the most interested groups in the charging station incentive, but most could not meet the Provincial grant funding deadline.

Next Steps In 2013, Metro Vancouver partnered with City of Vancouver, City of Surrey and the Fraser Basin Council to undertake the next steps of communication and outreach. Edelman, a public relations firm, has been contracted to develop an outreach strategy to promote both EVs and the EVSE network in the region and Province-wide. In early 2014, an outreach campaign will be launched in this region based on this strategy. Staff are exploring mechanisms to require installation of electric vehicle charging stations, or to make provisions for charging stations (such as placing conduit to facilitate future electrical cabling), when Metro Vancouver parking facilities are developed or redeveloped, when cost effective. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Metro Vancouver used $24,000 and $75,000 in grant funding from the Provincial government to develop publicly accessible electric vehicle charging stations in Metro Vancouver facilities, and plan for almost 70 additional stations throughout the region. The first grant was used for installation of charging stations within Regional Parks sites, and was conducted as a pilot project; it provided information on the costs of retrofitting to an existing site (compared to new construction), and costs associated with data tracking. The second grant was used in partnership with municipalities and also leveraged additional funding for hosts of charging stations. Additional funding in the 2013 budget has been leveraged with other organizations to develop an outreach strategy to promote both EVs and the EVSE network. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION Over the 2012-2013 period, Metro Vancouver utilized Provincial grant funding to gain experience with electric vehicle charging stations. Today there are about 235 public charge points available across Metro Vancouver - the beginning of a network which will fill in over time with increased EV uptake. Communicating this network to increase the uptake of EVs in the region is a logical next step, while simultaneously continuing to grow the network where cost effective. Attachment and Reference: -Licensed electric vehicles in the Metro Vancouver region - July 2012-October 2013 (Doc. #7958793) -Metro Vancouver’s Electric Vehicle Charging Station Program webpage: www.metrovancouver.org/services/air/whatsMVdoing/Pages/EVChargingStationProgram.aspx 7890211

EP - 112 -

http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/air/whatsMVdoing/Pages/EVChargingStationProgram.aspx�

Licensed electric vehicles in the Metro Vancouver region

July 2012-October 2013

Oct-13 Jul-13 Oct-12 Jul-12 Chevy Volt 122 117 61 42 Mitsubishi iMiev 41 37 22 15 Nissan Leaf 121 97 45 38 Tesla S 111 89 0 0 Misc* 57 49 38 30 452 389 166 125

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Jul-1

2

Aug-

12

Sep-

12

Oct

-12

Nov

-12

Dec-

12

Jan-

13

Feb-

13

Mar

-13

Apr-

13

May

-13

Jun-

13

Jul-1

3

Aug-

13

Sep-

13

Oct

-13

Lice

nsed

Veh

icle

s

Licensed Electric Vehiclesin Metro Vancouver

Chevy Volt

Mitsubishi iMiev

Nissan Leaf

Tesla S

Misc*

5.9 Attachment

7958793

EP - 113 -

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Ken Reid, Superintendent of Environmental Sampling and Monitoring Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: November 5, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Monitoring Air Quality and Coal Dust RECOMMENDATION That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated November 5, 2013, titled “Monitoring Air Quality and Coal Dust”. PURPOSE To provide correspondence received from the Corporation of Delta dated October 28, 2013, titled “Coal Dustfall Monitoring”, and highlight the Council resolutions related to Metro Vancouver. BACKGROUND Concerns have been expressed by members of the public, health authorities, academics and member municipalities about the air quality impacts related to the movement and handling of coal in Metro Vancouver. These concerns have been amplified with the potential for expansion of coal shipment activity within the region. DISCUSSION Delta staff undertook dustfall monitoring from June 28, 2013 to July 29, 2013. Dustfall canisters were used to collect samples at four locations in Tsawwassen and one location immediately north of the Boundary Bay Airport (North 40 area of Delta). Samples were analyzed by Acuren Group Inc. for the presence of coal. Metro Vancouver supported this project by conducting concurrent sampling for airborne particulate at the Tsawwassen Air Quality Monitoring Station operated by Metro Vancouver, located adjacent to Delta’s dustfall canister in Pebble Hill Park. Metro Vancouver also aided in the review of all sampling data collected during the period and the Acuren reports. The attached Delta council report dated October 8, 2013 includes results for both Delta and Metro Vancouver monitoring. Results show that airborne inhalable particulate (PM10) and respirable particulate (PM2.5) concentrations were low in Tsawwassen. Similarly, the four dustfall monitoring locations in Tsawwassen measured relatively low dustfall. The fraction of coal in the PM10, PM2.5 and dustfall samples was estimated by Acuren to be approximately 5% for each sample. The sample sites range from 4.5 to 5.5 kilometres from the Westshore Terminals coal facility. In addition, the Tsawwassen sample sites are all at least 4 kilometres from the railway line that services Westshore. The dustfall sample collected near the Boundary Bay Airport measured approximately 30 times more particulate matter than the samples collected at the four locations in Tsawwassen, and was estimated by Acuren to be approximately 65% coal. This location was situated 15 metres from a railway line used by coal trains en-route to Westshore Terminals.

5.10

EP - 114 -

Monitoring Air Quality and Coal Dust Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 2 Delta staff note that the sampling was conducted during a very dry period, and may not necessarily be indicative of year-round conditions. The Delta council report makes several recommendations, including “THAT Metro Vancouver be requested to conduct further investigations of coal dust in airborne particulate matter to assess the background levels of coal particles throughout the regional airshed”. Metro Vancouver has the necessary monitoring equipment to undertake additional particulate monitoring and analysis for coal content, including the use of the Mobile Air Monitoring Unit (MAMU). Deployment of MAMU to the Moodyville area in the City of North Vancouver is currently being planned to address air quality concerns raised by local residents related to transportation projects and nearby industries, including the coal handling facility at Neptune Terminals. This specialized air quality monitoring study will include monitoring and analysis for coal particles at up to two locations – the MAMU site and an additional nearby site. A more complete understanding of the background levels of coal particles throughout Metro Vancouver and in communities located near to coal handling facilities can be used to better inform environmental and health risk assessments, and assist in making regulatory decisions. ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No alternatives are presented.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Air quality monitoring, through the network of permanent monitoring stations as well as the Mobile Air Monitoring Unit, is included in the 2014 budget. The modification of existing instruments and the requirement for specialized laboratory testing to characterize coal particles may present additional costs, but it is expected that these can be accommodated within existing budgets. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Corporation of Delta, with assistance from Metro Vancouver, has conducted a four week study to quantify the amount of coal in dustfall and airborne particulate samples collected at several locations in Delta. Sampling adjacent to rail lines where coal is being shipped indicates higher levels of coal (estimated at 65% of the total particulate), compared to other sites in the community farther from rail lines or the Westshore Terminals coal facility (estimated at approximately 5%). Delta has requested additional assistance from Metro Vancouver, to do additional monitoring at other sites throughout the regional airshed, which may be impacted by coal terminals or coal transport. Metro Vancouver has already made plans to carry out additional monitoring for coal, including near Low Level Road in the City of North Vancouver, which is adjacent to the Neptune Terminals facility, which has announced plans to increase coal handling capacity. Attachment: Correspondence dated October 28, 2013, titled “Coal Dustfall Monitoring” from Mayor Lois E. Jackson, Corporation of Delta addressed to Chair Greg Moore and Metro Vancouver Board of Directors (Doc. #8002100). 8030468

EP - 115 -

EP - 116 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.10 Attachment

GStanese

Text Box

EP - 117 -

EP - 118 -

EP - 119 -

EP - 120 -

EP - 121 -

EP - 122 -

EP - 123 -

EP - 124 -

EP - 125 -

EP - 126 -

EP - 127 -

EP - 128 -

EP - 129 -

EP - 130 -

EP - 131 -

EP - 132 -

EP - 133 -

EP - 134 -

EP - 135 -

EP - 136 -

EP - 137 -

EP - 138 -

GStanese

Text Box

8002100

To: Environment and Parks Committee From: Roger Quan, Director, Air Quality and Environment Planning, Policy and Environment Department Date: November 7, 2013 Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Subject: Manager’s Report - Environment RECOMMENDATION That the Environment and Parks Committee receive for information the report dated November 7, 2013, titled “Manager’s Report – Environment”. Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan - Environment Attachment 1 to this report sets out the Committee’s Workplan for 2013 – Environment. The matrix is updated to include new issues that arise, items requested by the Committee, and changes in the schedule. Items highlighted in bold identify completed work program elements. Ecological Health Action Plan (EHAP) Update The Ecological Health Action Plan (EHAP) was adopted by Board in October 2011. Significant progress has been made on most of the twelve projects outlined in the Action Plan. Last month at Environment and Parks Committee there was a report on the Sensitive Ecosystems Inventory. This dataset is now used to inform the creation of a strategy for the Regional Green Infrastructure Network. Each of the four sections of river that were selected for improvement of salmon habitat, have now had significant planning undertaken, as well as work on the ground to enhance the habitat. The other six projects all focus on supplementing ecosystem services. Work ranging from increasing native pollinators to developing rainwater detention sites, is underway at Metro Vancouver sites. Update on Environment and Parks Committee Climate Change Workshop At its September 12, 2013 meeting, the Committee received a staff report providing an update on Metro Vancouver’s climate change program, providing context, background and discussion points for a climate change workshop with the Environment and Parks Committee. While staff had planned to conduct the workshop in November, it is now being planned for early in 2014. In recognition of the cross-cutting nature of climate change and energy issues, across numerous aspects of the planning, service delivery and collaborative work throughout the region – the intent is to hold the workshop with representation from other Committees, possibly as a joint session with the Intergovernmental and Administration Committee.

5.11

EP - 139 -

Manager’s Report - Environment Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 5 The agenda is under development, but will be structured along the lines of:

1. Introduction and Objectives 2. Overview of Climate Change Program – greenhouse gas emission trends, targets, key

sources, regional and municipal plans and policies, current climate program streams and status.

3. Business and Industry 4. Buildings 5. Transportation 6. Waste 7. Enabling Tools 8. Final Discussion and Wrap-Up.

Sections 3 through 6 on the proposed agenda deal with specific greenhouse gas emission sectors and sources. Cross-cutting themes will be applied to each sector: collaboration, leveraging, prioritizing, co-benefits, proven solutions and innovative approaches. Within each section there will be a brief presentation on:

• past project highlights, and progress to date; • a discussion of future projects and directions; and • a facilitated discussion to get feedback from the Committee on key strategic issues and

considerations. Additional details on the workshop will be provided as they become available. WHO Announces that Outdoor Air Pollution Is a Leading Environmental Cause of Cancer Deaths The specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization (WHO), the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), announced in October that outdoor air pollution has been classified as carcinogenic to humans. The IARC press release is included in Attachment 2. The review by IARC also classified particulate matter, a key component of outdoor air pollution, as carcinogenic to humans. In 2012, the IARC previously classified diesel exhaust as carcinogenic. The IARC evaluation indicated that the risk of lung cancer increases with increasing levels of exposure to air pollution and particulate matter, and that emission sources like transportation, power generation, industrial and agricultural emissions, and residential heating and cooking are key contributors to the increased cancer risk. The Metro Vancouver Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan includes strategies and actions for all of these emission sources, with an aim to continuously improve air quality and reduce health risks for residents. For example, Metro Vancouver has specifically targeted diesel exhaust because of its carcinogenicity, and is working to reduce exposure to diesel emissions from sources like non-road engines and heavy-duty diesel trucks. The Plan also includes emissions requirements for industrial and agricultural boilers and heaters, and development of options to address residential wood smoke. To help characterize air quality and emissions in the region, Metro Vancouver has established health-based air quality objectives and standards, and has prepared an air emissions inventory that allows for assessment of priority emission sources and tracking of performance towards air quality improvement goals.

EP - 140 -

Manager’s Report - Environment Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013

Page 3 of 5 Canadian Medical Association Journal Article on Traffic-Related Air Pollution and Health Following closely on the World Health Organization announcement described above, an article published in the CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal) on October 21, 2013 conveyed the findings of a team of U.B.C. researchers in the School of Population and Public Health. A key finding was that chronic exposure to air pollution causes nearly nine times more premature deaths in Canada than motor vehicle accidents. Attachments 3a and 3b provide a news release from the CMAJ and related coverage in the Vancouver Sun. The study describes the importance of traffic-related air contaminants in the air pollution mix, and how it is increasingly shown to have negative health effects. About one third of the Canadian population (10 million people) live within 500 metres of highways or 100 metres from major urban roads, leading to exposure to elevated levels of traffic-related air pollution. The authors highlight several strategies to help mitigate the effects of traffic-related air pollution, including programs to reduce or retrofit high-emitting vehicles, expand infrastructure for electric cars, improve infrastructure to minimize human exposure, and encouraging behavioural change. A number of these strategies are underway in the region, including the work on reducing emissions of and exposure to harmful diesel particulate matter emissions from on-road vehicles and non-road engines, and work that has been reported to the Committee in the past on reducing exposure to traffic emissions. On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Program – Update In April 2013, the Metro Vancouver Board directed staff to forward the report dated March 8, 2013, titled “On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Program – Update and 2013 Work Plan” to the BC Minister of Environment with the request that the Province work with Metro Vancouver and other agencies in the development and evaluation of policy and program options to address air emissions from on-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles supported by the findings of the 2012 remote sensing device study. Since this report, staff initiated a consulting study to undertake a “Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle Policy Options Evaluation”. This project is funded by the Province and guided by the Diesel Vehicle Subcommittee (DVS) of the AirCare Steering Committee, which has participation from the BC Ministry of Environment, BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, AirCare, Port Metro Vancouver, Fraser Valley Regional District, Fraser Basin Council and Metro Vancouver. This project has as its objectives:

1. Develop a comprehensive list of program and policy options that will reduce emissions from heavy-duty diesel vehicles;

2. Describe and rank the objectives of regulatory authorities in Metro Vancouver and the Fraser Valley Regional District in addressing emissions from medium and heavy-duty diesel vehicles; and

3. Evaluate policy and program options against objectives and determine a preferred option or set of preferred options for reducing emissions.

The consultant began work in July and developed a potential list of policy options, such as inspection and maintenance, phase-out of older vehicles, and differential registration rates.

EP - 141 -

Manager’s Report - Environment Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 4 of 5 Following an evaluation process, the prioritized options will be presented to the AirCare Steering Committee in December. Update on Assessment of Potential Air Quality and Environmental Impacts from the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project At its October 10, 2013 meeting, the Environment and Parks Committee received a report titled “Deas Island Regional Park – Massey Tunnel – Replacement Bridge Announcement” and directed staff to report back with a comprehensive analysis of potential impacts to the environment and regional parks, including potential dredging activities associated with tanker traffic, from the George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project. This issue was also discussed by the Transportation Committee at its meeting of October 9, 2013. At its October 25, 2013 meeting, the Board adopted a recommendation to:

“That the Board: a) request the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure to demonstrate how the project

scope, design, and performance of the proposed bridge to replace the George Massey Tunnel takes into careful consideration the effects on the implementation of the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, and Regional Transportation Strategy, and that measures be included to support, and not detract from, regional objectives.

b) request the TransLink Board provide Metro Vancouver with technical analysis and commentary on the potential transportation and emissions implications of expanding transportation capacity on the George Massey Tunnel corridor and effects with proximate Fraser River watercrossings, including tolling and non-tolling scenarios, and the degree of consistency and support the proposed bridge would have on the Regional Growth Strategy, Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan, the Regional Transportation Strategy, and Regional Goods Movement Strategy.

c) direct staff to investigate in relation to the George Massey Tunnel replacement project the following:

i. the business plan; ii. the role of the port; iii. the balance of phase 2 of the Gateway Program; iv. the potential for an LRT d) request the Corporation of Delta and other municipalities to provide Metro Vancouver with

technical analysis and commentary on the work they have done on the matter”. Staff will work to obtain technical information from the B.C. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, TransLink and Delta, with respect to potential impacts on the environment and regional parks, and will report back to the Environment and Parks Committee with a comprehensive analysis. It is expected that an analysis would include an assessment of the impacts on air quality. Fraser Surrey Docks Environmental Impact Assessment As reported to the Environment and Parks Committee earlier this year, Fraser Surrey Docks has submitted a project permit application to Port Metro Vancouver, to develop a new direct transfer coal facility. On June 14, 2013, the GVRD Board adopted a resolution to express opposition to the shipment of coal from the Fraser River Estuary other than the existing Robert Banks coal port.

EP - 142 -

Manager’s Report - Environment Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013

Page 5 of 5 The Board also: requested detailed information from the Port on their review processes for expanded and new coal handling facilities; supported the call from the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority and Fraser Health Authority to include health impact assessment in the review processes for these facilities; and advocated that the Port, Transport Canada and Environment Canada require the necessary mitigation measures for coal handling sources that are not within Metro Vancouver’s jurisdiction. Subsequent to the Board resolution, Port Metro Vancouver announced on September 12, 2013 that, in response to public concerns, they were requiring Fraser Surrey Docks to do additional work to assess the health and environmental impacts of the proposed facility. This review was expected to address coal dust emissions, increased rail traffic, barge traffic, noise and other issues. When first announced, it was expected that the assessment report would be completed in October. From discussions with the Port, it now appears that a November release is possible. Metro Vancouver staff have been working closely with the health authorities on this issue, and will report back to the Committee on the findings of the assessment. Coquitlam River Watershed Roundtable Funding Request At its meeting of July 11, 2013, the Environment and Parks Committee heard a delegation from the Coquitlam River Watershed Roundtable on phase 1 of the Lower Coquitlam River Watershed Plan, with a request for additional funding as the group moves to Phase 2 of their work. The Roundtable’s request, for $20,000, was included as part of a report on funding to a number of external organizations in 2014, as presented to the Intergovernmental and Administration Committee on October 10, 2013, for approval by the Board in its consideration of the 2014 budget. If the funding is approved by the Board, staff will report back on the Roundtable’s work as part of the 2014 work program. Attachments: 1. Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan – Environment (Doc. # 7956967). 2. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Press Release: Outdoor air pollution a

leading environmental cause of cancer deaths (Doc. #7981299). 3. Study on Traffic-Related Air Pollution and Health:

a) Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) News Release: Traffic-related air pollution a substantial public health concern (Doc. #8028986). b) Air pollution nine-times deadlier than car crashes, UBC researchers say – Vancouver Sun article dated October 21, 2013 by Pamela Fayerman (Doc. #8029278).

7956961

EP - 143 -

Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan Environment

1st Quarter Priorities • 2013 Committee orientation • Establish scope of work for a program to reduce emissions from on-road heavy-duty

diesel vehicles • First annual report on the Non-Road Diesel Engine Emissions Regulation

2nd Quarter Priorities

• Update prioritization of air contaminants with respect to health impacts • Report on options for creating a regional fund to support greenhouse gas reduction

projects in residential and private sectors • Publish second annual “caring for the air” report

3rd Quarter Priorities • Complete identification of a Regional Green Infrastructure Network • Report on public consultation on Open Burning Smoke Control Regulation • Status report on the Regional Green Infrastructure Network and Sensitive

Ecosystem Inventory

5.11 Attachment 1

EP - 144 -

Environment and Parks Committee 2013 Workplan - Environment Environment and Parks Committee Meeting Date: November 14, 2013 Page 2 of 2

4th Quarter Priorities • Review 2014 Programs and Priorities • Adopt new ambient air quality objectives for sulphur dioxide • Adopt a plan to implement a regional fund to support greenhouse gas reduction

projects in residential and private sectors • Implement a greenhouse gas reduction program focusing on prioritized business

types in the private sector • Status report on Ecological Health Action Plan, including Lower Brunette Restoration

Work and Lower Seymour Estuary Restoration Program

Note: Bold – completed items 7956967

EP - 145 -

EP - 146 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.11 Attachment 2

EP - 147 -

EP - 148 -

EP - 149 -

GStanese

Text Box

7981299

News Release Embargoed until Monday, October 21, 2013, noon ET

Please credit CMAJ, not the Canadian Medical Association. CMAJ is an independent medical journal; views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of its owner, the CMA.

Traffic-related air pollution a substantial public health concern

Traffic-related air pollution is increasingly shown to have negative health effects according to a growing body of epidemiologic evidence and is a substantial public health concern in Canada, argues a commentary published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).

Mounting evidence indicates a causal effect between exposure to air pollution from traffic and the development of asthma in children and adults. Diesel exhaust causes lung cancer.

Despite generally good air quality in Canadian cities, approximately 21 000 people die prematurely from air pollution each year in Canada, about 9-fold more than the number killed in traffic accidents. About 10 million people — 32% of the population of Canada — live within 500 m of highways or 100 m from major urban roads, areas in which they are exposed to elevated levels of traffic-related air pollution.

"This high prevalence of exposure, in addition to evidence of associated health problems, suggests that traffic-related air pollution is a substantial public health concern in Canada," writes Michael Brauer, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver, BC, with coauthors.

The authors highlight four overlapping strategies with short- and long-term options to help mitigate the effects of traffic-related air pollution:

■

Reducing vehicle emissions: introducing programs to remove or retrofit high-emission vehicles; reducing traffic congestion; expanding infrastructure for electric cars

■

Modifying current infrastructure: limiting heavy truck traffic to specific routes; separating active commuting zones (e.g. cycle and walking routes) from busy roads

■

Better land-use planning and traffic management: locating buildings such as schools, daycares and retirement homes at least 150 m away from busy streets

■

Encouraging behavioural change: creating policies to reduce traffic congestion in specific areas and encouraging alternative commuting behaviours.

The authors cite growing evidence that indicates that these types of interventions are successful. For example, the introduction of a fee for drivers to enter a "congestion charge zone" in London, UK, reduced traffic volume and

Page 1 of 2CMAJ news release: Traffic-related air pollution a substantial public health concern

11/7/2013http://www.cmaj.ca/site/misc/pr/21oct13_pr.xhtmlEP - 150 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.11 Attachment 3a

congestion that resulted in "an estimated gain of 183 years of life per 100 000 residents within the zone over a 10-year period."

"Although these interventions alone benefit health, combining strategies can result in more cost-effective policies and greater improvements to population health," the authors conclude.

MEDIA NOTE: Please use the following public links after the embargo lift:

Research http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/doi/10.1503/cmaj.121568

Contact for interviews: Brian Lin, Senior media relations specialist, Public Affairs Office, UBC, tel: 604-822-2234, [email protected] for Michael Brauer

Page 2 of 2CMAJ news release: Traffic-related air pollution a substantial public health concern

11/7/2013http://www.cmaj.ca/site/misc/pr/21oct13_pr.xhtmlEP - 151 -

GStanese

Text Box

8028986

true

Air pollution nine-times deadlier than car crashes, UBC researchers say

BY PAMELA FAYERMAN, VANCOUVER SUN OCTOBER 21, 2013

VANCOUVER - Chronic exposure to air pollution causes nearly nine times as many premature deaths in Canada as traffic crashes, University of B.C. researchers say in an article published Monday in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

About 21,000 Canadians die prematurely from the ill effects of air pollution each year, compared to 2,400 from traffic crashes.

The article is timely, coming as it does on the heels of last week’s declaration by the World Health Organization that air pollution is a carcinogen. Diesel fumes were previously deemed cancer-causing, but this is the first time air pollution as a whole has been classified as carcinogenic.

In their provocative commentary in CMAJ, Michael Bauer and co-researchers Conor Reynolds and Perry Hystad said there’s an accumulating body of evidence showing negative health effects from traffic-related air pollution. They suggest various actions that may be taken, including copying European cities that levy fees on cars in congested areas to reduce traffic.

Brauer, a professor in UBC’s school of population and public health, has spent years doing research on traffic-related air pollution and its effect on human health; much of it supported by grants from Health Canada.

Air pollution is mainly associated with asthma, other lung conditions and cardiovascular diseases. Exhaust fumes from diesel, a known carcinogen, are tied to lung cancer. A 2008 federal report estimated that on an annual basis, there are 306 premature deaths, 1,158 hospital admissions, and 8,763 emergency department visits related to air pollution in B.C.

Nearly a third of the country’s population lives within 500 metres of a highway or 100 metres from a major urban road, exposing them to toxic fumes from more than 15,000 cars per day, according to the CMAJ report. Such air pollution triggers “inflammation, oxidative stress and imbalance in the autonomic nervous system” which includes heart rhythm disturbances.

The commentary highlights various options to help reduce the ill effects of traffic-related air pollution:

• Reduce emissions by reducing traffic congestion and expanding infrastructure for electric cars.

• Limit truck traffic to specific routes and separate cycling or walking routes from busy roads.

• Improve land-use planning and traffic management by placing schools, daycares and retirement homes at least 150 metres from busy streets.

Page 1 of 2Air pollution nine-times deadlier than car crashes, UBC researchers say

11/7/2013http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print.html?id=9061897&sponsor=trueEP - 152 -

GStanese

Text Box

5.11 Attachment 3b

GStanese

Text Box

Cities across Europe are leading the way when it comes to improving air quality and reducing vehicle emissions. London was the first major city in the world to introduce a congestion zone fee of 10 to 12 pounds for vehicles entering the city centre on weekdays. The fee has reportedly resulted in “an estimated gain of 183 years of life per 100,000 residents within the zone over a 10-year period,” Brauer said.

Those who fail to pay the fee face a fine of 130 pounds.

In Rome, the establishment of low emission zones has been estimated to have resulted in an even greater benefit: 921 years of life gained per 100,000 residents living near major roads over ten years. Brauer said Vancouver’s downtown area isn’t as congested as many large cities around the world but there are streets such as West Georgia, Knight and Kingsway that have plenty of congestion affecting air quality.

“Situations like that are certainly of no benefit to anyone, whether we’re talking about drivers or residents,” he said in an interview.

Asked to comment on the CMAJ article, Mayor Gregor Robertson agreed that reducing car congestion to improve air quality is an important goal.

“Building a rapid transit line along Broadway is the key to reducing vehicle congestion and improving air quality in Vancouver. There are over 150,000 daily car trips along central Broadway and it is the busiest bus corridor in North America,” Robertson said in an email.

“With a million more people moving to the Metro region in the coming decades, we simply can’t accommodate future growth by adding new cars and roads.”

Dr. Menn Biagtan, program manager for the B.C. Lung Association, said in a previous interview: “We breathe 20,000 times a day, that’s 10,000 litres of air passing through our lungs — much of it a toxic soup of pollutants.”

The WHO’s cancer agency, International Agency for Research on Cancer — said in 2010, there were more than 220,000 lung cancer deaths associated with air pollution around the world. The most polluted cities are in China and India where people often wear masks for protection.

Sun Health Issues Reporter

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

Page 2 of 2Air pollution nine-times deadlier than car crashes, UBC researchers say

11/7/2013http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print.html?id=9061897&sponsor=trueEP - 153 -

GStanese

Text Box

8029278

SUMMARY OF EVENTS - NOVEMBER 2013

Note: This page links to the Metro Vancouver website. Events may have been updated since this page was created.

6.1

EP - 154 -

http://www.metrovancouver.org/region/calendar/Pages/default.aspx

GStanese

Text Box

7950775

GStanese

Text Box

6.1a

SUMMARY OF EVENTS - DECEMBER 2013


6.1

EP - 155 -


GStanese

Text Box

6.1b

GStanese

Text Box

8001052

SUMMARY OF EVENTS - JANUARY 2014


6.1

EP - 156 -


GStanese

Text Box

6.1c

GStanese

Text Box

8002118

Documents

GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT ENVIRONMENT AND PARKS ...€¦ · November 8, 2013 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT . ENVIRONMENT AND PARKS COMMITTEE . REGULAR MEETING . Thursday,